content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model and the flux-tube model are two phenomenological models of quantum chromodynamics (QCD). The NJL model can handle very well the symmetry feature of QCD (see e.g. Refs. \cite{Hatsuda, Klevansky} for review) --- there are a lot of symmetries and some of them are broken in different ways. One of important symmetry issues is the breaking of chiral symmetry. The NJL model enjoys phenomenological success for hadrons. As shown in Ref. \cite{Hatsuda}, the NJL model agrees to all the empirical facts within a 10-20 \% level. Nevertheless, the NJL model also has well-known shortcomings. Firstly it is not a renormalizable theory, hence, one has to take care of the cutoff issue; secondly, it cannot address the confinement problem. This is probably more serious than the non-renormalizability since some relevant physics for quarks and hadrons could be missing.
The QCD flux-tube model or QCD string, on the other hand, provides a phenomenological description for quark confinement \cite{KS74, Casher}. For mesons, the color electric field lines are collimated into a flux tube connecting the quark and anti-quark pair, resulting in a linear potential. In this picture the confinement problem is to explain why these field lines are collimated, which will not be investigated in the present article. (Also the chiral symmetry breaking does not seem to be relevant in the flux-tube picture.) Instead we incorporate the flux-tube model into the NJL theory. Of course this cannot be a simple medley of two phenomenological models. Our approach is based on the Cho-Faddeev-Niemi decomposition of the gauge fields of QCD \cite{Cho, Faddeev, DuanGe, Cho99, Kondo08}, which is quite convenient in selecting an Abelian sector of QCD.
What do we obtain from combining these two models? We will show that the QCD string can be made axionic (its meaning will be clarified in the next section), and the 't Hooft vertex, or the 't Hooft determinant term \cite{'tHooft:1976, Schafer:1996} could be obtained from the flux-tube configuration, hence the $U_A (1)$ problem can be studied and solved in the quark sector. If QCD with a $\theta$-term is the fundamental theory of the NJL model, it is hard to imagine that such a small, dimensionless parameter $\theta < 10^{-10}$ could play a role in determining those NJL couplings.
In this paper we follow the same strategy as in Ref. \cite{XC, XC1}. The $\theta$ parameter is replaced by the phase of the quark condensate $\alpha(x)$, which is topologically nontrivial due to the existence of axionic QCD string. Applying the anomaly-inflow mechanism \cite{Callan-Harvey, XC} to the string configuration, we found that it is possible to obtain the 't Hooft vertex from the NJL side and a topological coupling $\partial_{\mu} \alpha K^{\mu} $, which can be considered as a superfluid current $\partial_{\mu} \alpha$ coupled to a Chern-Simons current $K^{\mu}$, from the QCD-string side. Technically we first modify the original flux-tube model\cite{KS74} so it can describe an axionic QCD string. We then construct a gauged NJL model based on this string model and QCD. A new scheme of solving the strong CP problem is proposed in the last section.
\section{Gauged NJL and axionic QCD string}
We start with a system consisting of a complex scalar $\phi$, an Abelianized gluon potential $Z_{\mu} $ and quark fields $\psi^{ia}$, where the indices $i$ and $a$ are flavor and color indices, respectively. We will work within the SU(2) QCD and two flavors ($N_f = 2$) for simplicity. The complex scalar
\begin{equation}
\phi \equiv \textrm{Re}\phi + i \, \textrm{Im}\phi = |\phi| \,e^{i \alpha}
\end{equation}
is related to the quark condensate as
\begin{equation}
\left\langle \bar{\psi}^i_R \psi^j_L \right\rangle = - \phi \, \delta^{ij} = - |\phi| \,e^{i \alpha} \, \delta^{ij}
\end{equation}
which would be real if the vacuum has a definite parity. However, we will show the importance of introducing the phase field $\alpha = \alpha (x)$. Note that the quark condensates have different values, e.g. $\left\langle \bar{u} u \right\rangle = - (245 \, \textrm{MeV})^3$, while $\left\langle \bar{s} s \right\rangle \approx 0.78 \left\langle \bar{u} u \right\rangle$ \cite{Hatsuda}. In our case $N_f =2$ we simply use one value; in $N_f > 2$ cases there may be more than one phenomenological scalar field, in which case we may regard the $\phi$ field as a column matrix with different scalar fields as its components.
The symmetry group of the NJL model that we will study is
${SU}_V(2) \otimes {SU}_A(2) \otimes U_V(1) \otimes U_A(1) $.
Note that under the $U_A(1)$ transformation the quarks transform as
\begin{equation}
\psi_L \rightarrow e^{ - i \xi /2} \psi, ~~~\psi_R \rightarrow e^{ i \xi /2} \psi_R,
\end{equation}
hence the scalar fields $\phi$ and $\phi^*$ transform as
\begin{equation}
\phi \rightarrow e^{- i \xi} \phi, ~~~ \phi^* \rightarrow e^{ i \xi} \phi^*
\end{equation}
The abelianized gluon potential $Z_\mu$ comes from the Cho-Faddeev-Niemi decomposition (CFN) \cite{Cho, Faddeev, DuanGe, Cho99, Kondo08}. There could be other abelianizing approaches and we choose the CFN decomposition since it can reveal the Abelian sector of QCD and the associated topological defects in a gauge-independent way. A detailed explanation will be given later in this section.
With the system $(\phi, Z_\mu, \psi)$ we will construct a generalization of the original flux-tube model by Kogut and Susskind \cite{KS74}. As in \cite{KS74} we introduce a dielectric function of the vacuum, $\chi(\phi, \phi^*)$ and an effective potential $V(\phi, \phi^*)$ whose expression will be given later. The exact form of the function $\chi$ is not important, e.g. could be a fourth-order polynomial in $(\phi \phi^*)^{1/2}$ as in Ref. \cite{KS74}. It is required that $\chi \rightarrow 0$ when $\phi \rightarrow 0$ and $\chi \rightarrow 1$ for large $|\phi|$.
The Lagrangian is written as
\begin{eqnarray} \label{preNJL}
\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{eff}} &=& -\frac{1}{4} \chi(\phi, \phi^*) ~Z_{\mu\nu} Z^{\mu\nu} + \partial_{\mu} \phi \partial^{\mu} \phi^* - V(\phi, \phi^*) - j_{\mu} J^{\mu} - j_{\mu} K^{\mu} \cr
&+& \bar{\psi} \big[ i \gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu} - i g Z_{\mu}) - g_Y ( \textrm{Re}\phi + i \gamma^5 \textrm{Im}\phi ) + \cdots \big]\, \psi.
\end{eqnarray}
The function $\chi(\phi, \phi^*)$ describes the color electric and magnetic polarization properties of the vacuum as a physical medium. The currents
\begin{equation}
j_{\mu} \equiv -\frac{i}{2 |\phi|^2}\left( \phi^{\ast}\partial_{\mu}\phi-\phi\partial_{\mu}\phi^{\ast}\right) = \partial_{\mu} \alpha
\end{equation}
and $J_\mu$ represents some external current. We also include a topological current
\begin{equation}
K^{\mu} = \epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\tau} Z_{\nu} Z_{\rho\tau}
\end{equation}
which is the Chern-Simons current. Note that if the $\phi$ field is used as the order parameter for describing superfluid, the current $j_{\mu}$ is actually related to the superfluid velocity. One may wonder if the phase of the $\phi$ field can be removed away by some rotation of the quark phases. This cannot be done if the $(\phi, Z_\mu, \psi)$ system has nontrivial topological configurations. The phase of the $\phi$ field could be quite complicated (see the Fig. 3 in Ref. \cite{XC2} for an example of the phase distribution of a vortex lattice) and such a rotation does not exist due to the topological obstruction. Nevertheless if the phase distribution is topologically trivial it is possible for the $\phi$ field to be real.
In that case and if we also set $g_Y =0$, the current $j_\mu$ vanishes and the couplings $ j_{\mu} J^{\mu}$ and $ j_{\mu} K^{\mu}$ drop out and the Lagrangian (\ref{preNJL}) reduces to
\begin{equation} \label{KS}
\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{KS}} = -\frac{1}{4} \chi(\phi) ~Z_{\mu\nu} Z^{\mu\nu} + \frac{1}{2} \partial_{\mu} \phi \partial^{\mu} \phi - V(\phi) + \bar{\psi} \big[ i \gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu} - i g Z_{\mu}) \big]\, \psi
\end{equation}
which is the original flux-tube model constructed by Kogut and Susskind in Ref. \cite{KS74}, where they show that dynamical nonlinearities, described by the scalar field $\phi$ and the associated dielectric and potential functions, can trap electric flux lines into tube-like configurations (see \cite{KS74} for details). We stress on that our flux-tube, or axionic QCD string, is different from \cite{KS74} in the following aspects:
\begin{itemize}
\item[1)] We use a complex field $\phi$ whose magnitude is related to the quark condensate;
\item[2)] The gradient of the phase of $\phi$ is coupled to a topological current (Chern-Simons current);
\item[3)] The complex field has a Yukawa-type coupling to the quark fields;
\item[4)] The Abelian gauge field comes directly from QCD -- Abelianized gluon potential from the CFN decomposition;
\end{itemize}
plus other insignificant differences (like the $j_\mu J^\mu$ coupling to some external current). We have explained 1) at the beginning of this section; About 3), it makes the string ``axionic" (similar to the Callan-Harvey axion-string \cite{Callan-Harvey}); Now we show how 4) proceeds and then move on to 2) which plays a very important role in our model.
The CFN decomposition splits the gluon potential $A_\mu$ into two new gauge potentials
\begin{equation} \label{CFN}
A_{\mu} = \tilde{A}_{\mu} + B_{\mu}
\end{equation}
where the new variables $\tilde{A}_{\mu}$ and $B_{\mu}$ are defined as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{A}_{\mu} = (A_{\mu} \cdot {\bf n}) {\bf n} + i g^{-1} [ {\bf n}, \partial_{\mu} {\bf n} ], ~~~
B_{\mu} = i g^{-1} [ \nabla_{\mu} {\bf n}, {\bf n}]
\end{equation}
with $\nabla_{\mu} {\bf n} = \partial_{\mu} {\bf n} - i \, g [A_{\mu}, {\bf n}]$ and a unit vector ${\bf n}$ in the color space. Under the gauge transformation $ \tilde{A}_{\mu}$ transforms like the original gauge field $A_{\mu}$, while $B_{\mu}$ and ${\bf n}$ transform covariantly in the adjoint representation.
The Abelian character of the potential $\tilde{A}_{\mu}$ can be shown manifestly by introducing a basis $({\bf n}^1, {\bf n}^2, {\bf n}^3)$ in the SU(2) color space \cite{Cho99}, plus a chromoelectric potential
\begin{equation}
C_{\mu} = A_{\mu} \cdot {\bf n}^3
\end{equation}
and a chromomagnetic potential
\begin{equation}
H^a_{\mu} \equiv - \frac{1}{2g} \epsilon^{abc} {\bf n}^b \partial_{\mu} {\bf n}^c
\end{equation}
Then the gauge potential $\tilde{A}_{\mu}$ can be rewritten as
\begin{equation} \label{U1}
\tilde{A}_{\mu} = \Omega^{\textrm{\tiny{vac}}}_{\mu} + Z_{\mu} {\bf n}^3
\end{equation}
where $\Omega^{\textrm{\tiny{vac}}}_{\mu}$ represents a classical QCD vacuum since the corresponding field strength vanishes, i.e. $\Omega_{\mu\nu}^{\textrm{\tiny{vac}}}=0$ and $Z_{\mu} $ is the Abelianized gluon potential that we look for.
\begin{equation}
\Omega^{\textrm{\tiny{vac}}}_{\mu} \equiv - H^a_{\mu} {\bf n}^a, ~~~Z_{\mu} \equiv C_{\mu} + H^3_{\mu}
\end{equation}
Then it is easy to see that the field strength $\tilde{F}_{\mu\nu}$
\begin{equation} \label{CHmunu}
\tilde{F}_{\mu\nu} \equiv \partial_{\mu} \tilde{A}_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu} \tilde{A}_{\mu} - i \,g [\tilde{A}_{\mu}, \tilde{A}_{\nu}]= Z_{\mu\nu} \,{\bf n}^3,~~~~ Z_{\mu\nu}= \partial_\mu Z_\nu - \partial_\nu Z_\mu
\end{equation}
has an Abelian feature as expected \cite{Cho99}. Now the Yang-Mills action becomes
\begin{equation} \label{YM}
S_{\textrm{YM}} = \int d^4 x \big[ - \frac{1}{4} Z_{\mu\nu}^2 - \frac{1}{4} B_{\mu\nu}^2 -\frac{1}{2} B^{\mu} Q_{\mu\nu} B^{\nu} \big]
\end{equation}
where the kinetic term of the Abelianized gluon potential $Z_\mu$ has been separated from the other part, and $Q_{\mu\nu}$ is an operator with second-order derivatives and mixes the $Z_\mu$ and $B_\mu$. The quark sector of the QCD action in terms of the new variables becomes
\begin{equation}
S_{\textrm{quark}} = \int d^4x [ \bar{\psi} ( i \gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu} - i g \tilde{A}_{\mu}) - \mathcal{M}_Q ) \psi + g \bar{\psi} \gamma^{\mu} t_a \psi B_{\mu}^a ].
\end{equation}
Integrating out $B_{\mu}$ yields the {\it gauged} NJL effective action \cite{Kondo08, XC}
\begin{equation}
S_{\textrm{\tiny{gNJL}}} = \int d^4x \bigg(\bar{\psi} [ i \gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu} - i g \tilde{A}_{\mu}) - \mathcal{M}_Q ] \psi +\int d^4 y \,G(y) [ \bar{\psi}(x+y) \Gamma_{A} \psi(x - y)\,\bar{\psi}(x-y) \Gamma_{A} \psi(x + y)] \bigg)
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_A$ are matrices in Dirac, color and flavor spaces. The double integrals reflect the non-local feature of the four-fermion couplings. However, here we are only interested in a local NJL model. This can be readily done by taking $G(x) = G \, \delta(x)$ ($G$ is the NJL coupling constant). After this simplification one obtain a local, gauged NJL action which can be parametrized as
\begin{equation} \label{eff}
\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{\tiny{eff}}} = \bar{\psi} \big[ i \gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu} - i g \tilde{A}_{\mu}) - G ( \sigma + i \gamma^5 \vec{\pi} \cdot \vec{\tau} ) + \cdots \big] \psi
\end{equation}
where the $\sigma$-terms and $\pi$-terms represent the scalar channel and the pseudoscalar channel respectively as in \cite{Hatsuda}. The ellipsis includes contributions from the vector and pseudovector channels.
Comparing (\ref{preNJL}) with (\ref{eff}) plus (\ref{YM}), we can find some correspondence except for the topological term $j_{\mu} K^{\mu}$ in (\ref{preNJL}) which will emerge in a more sophisticated way.
One may obtain meson spectra as collective excitations in the vacuum, and collective excitations are fluctuations of the mean fields. Now the question is, can the mean fields or condensates allow a vortex configuration, as required by an axionic string model? Comparing (\ref{eff}) and (\ref{preNJL}) we have
\begin{equation}
\phi \sim \sigma + i \vec{\pi} \cdot \vec{\tau} = f e^{i \alpha}.
\end{equation}
In order to describe, say a single straight vortex configuration with winding number $m$, one takes the amplitude and the phase of $\phi$ to be, respectively,
\begin{equation} \label{alpha-theta}
f = f(\rho), ~~~~\alpha = m \theta, ~~ m = \pm 1, \pm 2, \cdots
\end{equation}
with boundary condition
\begin{equation} \label{vortexbc}
f (0) = 0, ~ (\infty) = \textrm{constant} .
\end{equation}
Following the standard route of computing the effective potential, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\phi, \phi^*) & \equiv & \mathcal{V}_{\textrm{eff}} ( \sigma, \pi) \cr
&=& - \frac{1}{4 G} ( \sigma^2 + \pi^2) - \frac{i }{2} \textrm{Tr} \ln \bigg( (\partial_{\mu} - i g \tilde{A}_{\mu}) ^2 - \frac{g}{2} \sigma_{\mu\nu} \tilde{F}_{\mu\nu} + \sigma^2 + \pi^2 - i\epsilon \bigg).
\end{eqnarray}
Suganuma and Tatsumi \cite{Suganuma} have studied this type of potential and found a critical strength for the restoration of chiral symmetry
\begin{equation}
E_{\textrm{c}} \approx 4 ~ \textrm{GeV/fm}.
\end{equation}
Ref. \cite{Klevansky} estimated the strength of the color electric field in the flux tube using results from \cite{Casher}
\begin{equation}
E \approx 5.3 ~\textrm{GeV/fm} > E_{\textrm{c}}
\end{equation}
which suggests that chiral symmetry should be restored inside the flux tube or the interior of mesons. Hence the boundary condition (\ref{vortexbc}) can be satisfied and vortex configurations are allowed.
Now we choose a longitudinal variation of gauge potential with respect to $ \hat{\Omega}^{\textrm{\tiny{vac}}}_{\mu} $ (note that its field strength $\Omega_{\mu\nu}^{\textrm{\tiny{vac}}}=0$)
\begin{equation} \label{Az}
Z_{\mu} = ( Z_{0}, Z_{1}, 0, 0),
\end{equation}
the Dirac equation becomes \cite{Callan-Harvey}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{Dirac4D}
i \gamma^i (\partial_i - ig Z_i) \psi_L + i( \gamma^2 \cos \theta + \gamma^3 \sin \theta ) \partial_{\rho} \psi_L+ f(\rho) e^{- i \theta} \psi_R &=&0, \cr
i \gamma^i (\partial_i - ig Z_i) \psi_R + i( \gamma^2 \cos \theta + \gamma^3 \sin \theta ) \partial_{\rho} \psi_R + f(\rho) e^{+ i \theta} \psi_L &=& 0,
\end{eqnarray}
where $i = 0, 1$. The appearance of fields $Z_i$ does not affect the main features of the solution --- it is chiral and has the same exponential profile as in Ref.\cite{Callan-Harvey}
\begin{equation} \label{4Dpsi}
\psi_L = \chi_{L} \, \exp \big[- \int_0^{\rho} f(\rho') d\rho' \big]
\end{equation}
where the two-dimensional spinor $\chi_{L} (x_0, x_1)$ satisfies $i \gamma^i (\partial_i - ig Z_i) \chi_{L} = 0$.
It is interesting to compare this localization of chiral zero modes in the flux-tube with the instanton case. 't Hooft has shown that chiral zero modes are located in the instanton \cite{'tHooft:1976} with a profile $\lambda^{3/2}/[(x-a)^2+\lambda^2 ]^{3/2}$ ($\lambda$ and $a$ are the instanton parameters). Noticing that the instanton configuration leads to an effective fermion interaction vertex, so-called 't Hooft vertex, one may ask whether the flux-tube configuration might lead to a similar effective vertex, due to the localization of chiral zero modes. Let us apply a general method in Ref. \cite{Creutz2007} by including fermionic source terms into the partition functional
\begin{eqnarray}
Z (\eta, \bar{\eta}) &=& \int [\mathcal{D}A] [\mathcal{D}\bar{\psi}] [\mathcal{D} \psi] e^{ - S_A - (\bar{\psi}, ~(\slashed{D}+m) \psi) - (\bar{\psi}, ~\eta) - (\bar{\eta},~ \psi)}\cr
&=& \int [\mathcal{D}A] e^{ - S_A +~ (\bar{\eta}, ~(\slashed{D}+m)^{-1} \eta)} \prod_i (\lambda_i + m)
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda_i$ are eigenvalues of the operator $\slashed{D}$ in a flux-tube background, and $m$ is a small explicit mass introduced for the infrared issue of massless quarks. Suppose that the quark sources have overlaps with the chiral zero mode, say $(\bar{u} \cdot \psi_{0L}) \neq 0$, then a factor of $m^{-1}$ in the source term cancels a factor of $m$ from the determinant part, so the flux-tube configuration can contribute to the correlation functions. Consequently an effective interaction $\sim (\bar{u} \cdot \psi_{0L}) ( \psi^{\dagger}_{0L} \cdot u) \sim \bar{u} (1 \pm \gamma_5 )u $ will appear (note that the zero modes are chiral). For $N_f \geq 2$ flavors, each flavor has to contribute for the cancellation of mass factors and because of Fermi statistics, this leads to an effective $2 N_f$ vertex which is in the form of a determinant, i.e. the 't Hooft vertex
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\textrm{tHooft}} \sim \textrm{det}[ \bar{\psi_i} (1- \gamma_5) \psi_j] + h.c.
\end{equation}
which should be added to the NJL effective Lagrangian (\ref{eff}). Then it has no problem in addressing the U(1) problem and produces the correct mass for the $\eta'$ meson \cite{Hatsuda}.
The 't Hooft vertex was originally derived in the instanton scenario. However Greutz's argument above seems to work as well in the flux-tube case, mainly because localization and chirality of the zero modes in such a configuration. Therefore the flux-tube induced quark interaction adds the 't Hooft vertex term to the NJL action.
This completes our construction of the NJL effective action based on a QCD string model. Now we need to show the emergence of the topological coupling in the Lagrangian (\ref{preNJL})
\begin{equation} \label{cc}
j_{\mu} K^{\mu} \sim \partial_{\mu} \alpha K^{\mu}.
\end{equation}
The chiral zero modes are also coupled to the Abelianized gluon potential $Z_{\mu}$, therefore a gauge anomaly appears in the vortex $\mathcal{D}^k J_k = \frac{1}{2 \pi} \epsilon^{ij} \partial_i Z_j, ~(i,j,k = 0,3).$ This can be cancelled by an effective action \cite{Callan-Harvey}
\begin{equation} \label{cseff}
S_{\textrm{\tiny{C-S}}} = -\frac{ g^2 N_f}{16 \pi^2}\int d^4 x \, \partial_{\mu} \theta \, K^{\mu}
\end{equation}
which is exactly the new topological coupling (\ref{cc}) that we proposed ($\alpha = \theta$ as we are considering a static, straight flux tube). This cancellation happens because the massive quark modes which live off the vortex mediate an effective interaction between the quark condensate and the gluon field, which induces a vacuum current \cite{Callan-Harvey}
\begin{equation}
J^{\textrm{\tiny{ind}}}_{\mu} = \frac{g^2 N_f}{8 \pi^2} \epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\tau} Z^{\rho\tau} \partial^{\nu} \theta.
\end{equation}
Converting it to an effective action we obtain (\ref{cseff}). Therefore a topological term which reflects the axial anomaly can be derived from the axionic QCD string model, which is not a pure Yang-Mill configuration like the instanton.
\section{Discussions and outlook}
As we have shown two phenomenological models -- the NJL model and the flux tube model, can be combined and studied directly from QCD. We make some assumptions, like assuming that the QCD string is axionic, and some simplifications, like neglecting the non-local feature in deriving the NJL effective Lagrangian. Also we have no idea about how to derive the dielectric function $\chi(\phi)$ from a first principle. These are the limitations of our approach. What's new is the topological coupling $ j_{\mu} K^{\mu} \sim \partial_{\mu} \alpha K^{\mu} $ and the related physics. Note that this coupling emerges at the quantum level and is neither gauge-invariant nor CP-invariant. However its gauge-variance is what is exactly needed for cancelling the gauge-anomaly localized in the flux-tube. On the other hand, a constant flux tube configuration seems to be CP-violating, which motivates us to propose that in QCD we should have, schematically,
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta|_{\textrm{\tiny{gauge}}} ( \partial_{\mu}\alpha \, K^{\mu}+ \textrm{flux-tube}) &=& 0, \cr
\delta|_{\textrm{\tiny{CP}}} ( \partial_{\mu}\alpha \, K^{\mu} + \textrm{flux-tube}) &=& 0.
\end{eqnarray}
Moreover, if the quark condensate has a non-trivial phase distribution, it will lead to a lot of interesting phenomenologies which have been observed in condensed matter physics, like those in superfluids, superconductors and Bose-Einstein condensates. In fact superfluid or two-fluid models for quark-gluon plasma have been studied recently in Refs.\cite{Chernodub, Kalaydzhyan}. The Josephson effect in QCD has also been considered long time ago in Ref. \cite{Minkowski} and recently in Ref. \cite{XC1}.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The author thanks Kerson Huang and Peter Minkowski for valuable discussions. He also thanks the hospitality of the Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Bern where this work was partially done. The author is supported by the research funds from the Institute of Advanced Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
|
\section{A \emph{Useful lemma}}
Before presenting this lemma, we need some additional notation. {\sl Block graph} of a graph $G$, denoted by $BC(G)$, is the graph whose vertex set
consists of all blocks and cut vertices of $G$, and two vertices are adjacent in $BC(G)$ if one of them is a block of $G$ and the second one is its vertex.
It is easy to see that $BC(G)$ is a tree for a connected graph $G$. Note that for any tree, we may choose any vertex as its root. Hence without loss of
generality, we may assume that $B_1, \ldots, B_t$ be all blocks of $G$ such that $B_1$ corresponds to the root of $BC(G)$. For a cut-vertex $v$ of $G$,
{\sl the parent block} of $v$ is the block containing $v$ and its corresponding vertex in $BC(G)$ has the smallest distance to the root of $BC(G)$.
The remaining blocks containing $v$ are called {\sl children blocks} of $v$ with respect to the root of $BC(G)$.
The following lemma, we call it a \emph{Useful lemma}, is a key for proofs of main results (Theorem~\ref{Main-} and Theorem~\ref{Main++}).
\begin{lemma}(Useful lemma)
\label{Main}
Let $G$ be a connected graph without non-trivial bridges and without bad leaves (except $K_{1,2}, K_{1,3}$) and $u$ be a vertex of $G$ that is neither
a cut vertex nor a leaf (if any).
\noindent
Then $G^{2}$ has a $[2,4]$-factor $F$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item [a)] $d_F(x)=2$, where $x$ is not a cut vertex of $G$;
\item [b)] both edges of $F$ incident with $u$ belong to $G$;
\item [c)] for each cut vertex $y$ of $G$ it holds that $d_F(y)=4$ and at least two edges of $F$ incident with $y$ belong to $G$,
moreover if $y$ is a trivial cut vertex, then these two edges are trivial bridges;
\item [d)] for any cut vertex $y$ of $G$, the two edges incident with $u$ in $F$ are distinct from the two edges incident with $y$ in $F$
as specified in (c);
\item [e)] for any two cut vertices $y_1$ and $y_2$ of $G$, the two edges of $F$ incident with $y_1$ as specified in $(c$) are distinct
from those with $y_2$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $G$ is $K_{1,s}$, for $s\geq4$, then the result is obvious. Now we assume that $G$ contains at least one cyclic block and $G'=G-M$,
where $M$ is a set of all leaves adjacent with all trivial cut vertices of $G$.
Let $\mathbb{O}=B_{1}, B_{2}, ..., B_{k}$ be an ordering of all blocks of $G'$ such that either $u\in V(B_{1})$, if any, or we choose arbitrary cyclic block
as $B_{1}$, satisfying the following properties:
- for any cut vertex $v$ of $G'$, all children blocks of $v$ with respect to the root $r$ of $BC(G')$ corresponding to $B_{1}$ appear consecutively
in $\mathbb{O}$ such that bridges containing $v$ are in $\mathbb{O}$ before cyclic blocks containing $v$;
- $\mbox{dist}_{BC(G')}(r, v_{i})<\mbox{dist}_{BC(G')}(r, v_{j})$ implies $i<j$, where $v_{i}, v_{j}$ are vertices of $BC(G')$ corresponding
to $B_{i}, B_{j}$, respectively.
\medskip
Then $G'$ is a connected graph without non-trivial bridges and without bad leaves and we prove by induction on $k$ that $(G')^{2}$ contains
a $[2,4]$-factor $F'$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item[1)] $d_{F'}(x)=2$, where $x$ is not a cut vertex of $G'$;
\item[2)] both edges of $F'$ incident with $u$, if any, belong to $B_{1}$;
\item[3)] for each cut-vertex $y$ of $G'$, it holds that $d_{F'}(y)=4$ and at least two edges of $F'$ incident with $y$ belong to $G'$. Moreover:
\begin{itemize}
\item[-] if $y$ belongs to exactly two blocks of $G'$, then at least two edges of $F'$ incident with $y$ are edges from the children block of $y$
with respect to $r$ (the root of $BC(G')$ corresponding to $B_{1}$);
\item[-] if $y$ belongs to more than two blocks of $G'$, then at least two edges of $F'$ incident with $y$ are edges from two different children blocks
of $y$ with respect to $r$.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
For $k=1$, $G'=B_{1}$ and $(G')^{2}$ has even a hamiltonian cycle $C$ such that both edges of $F'$ incident with $u$, if any, belong to $B_{1}$
by Theorem~\ref{Fleischner}.
Let $k>1$ and assume that lemma is true for all integers less than $k$. By the definition of $G'$ and $\mathbb{O}$, $B_{k}$ is an end cyclic block of $G'$
and let $v_{0}$ be the cut vertex of $G'$ with $v_{0}\in V(B_{k})$.
If $B_{k-1}=v_{0}l$ (i.e. $B_{k-1}$ is a bridge) and $B_{k-1}, B_{k}$ are only children blocks of $v_{0}$ with respect to $r$, then
we set $G_{1}=G' - \{V(B_{k})\cup\{l\}\setminus\{v_{0}\}\}$, otherwise we set $G_{2}=G' - \{V(B_{k})\setminus\{v_{0}\}\}$. Hence $G_{1}, G_{2}$ are
connected graphs without non-trivial bridges and without bad leaves and have $k-2, k-1$ blocks, respectively. Hence by the induction hypothesis,
$(G_{1})^{2}, (G_{2})^{2}$ have a $[2,4]$-factor $F_{1}, F_{2}$ with properties 1), 2), and~3), respectively.
By Theorem~\ref{Fleischner}, there is a Hamiltonian cycle $C$ in $(B_{k})^{2}$ such that two edges $f_{1}, f_{2}$ of $C$ incident with $v_{0}$ belong
to $B_{k}$ and thus belong to $G'$.
\medskip
\noindent
\emph{Case 1:} $G_{1}$ exists.
Let $f_{1}=v_{0}v_{k}$. Then $F'=(F_{1}\cup C)+\{v_{0}l,v_{k}l\}-\{f_{1}\}$ is the $[2,4]$-factor of $(G')^{2}$ with properties 1), 2), and 3).
\medskip
\noindent
\emph{Case 2:} $G_{1}$ does not exist and $v_{0}$ is not a cut vertex in $G_{2}$.
Hence $v_{0}$ belongs to exactly two blocks of $G'$ and $F'=F_{2}\cup C$ is the $[2,4]$-factor of $(G')^{2}$ with properties 1), 2), and 3).
\medskip
\noindent
\emph{Case 3:} $G_{1}$ does not exist and $v_{0}$ is a cut vertex in $G_{2}$.
Let $f_{1}=v_{0}v_{k}$. We consider two possibilities depending on the property~3).
If exactly two blocks of $G_{2}$ contain $v_{0}$, then by the induction hypothesis $d_{G_{2}}(v_{0})=4$ and there are two edges of $F_{2}$ incident
with $v_{0}$ from a children block $B_{k-1}$ of $v_{0}$. (Note that $B_{k-1}$ is a cyclic block, since $G_{1}$ does not exist.) Let $e_{k-1}=v_{0}v_{k-1}$
be such an edge of $F_{2}$. Since $\mbox{dist}_{G'}(v_{k-1},v_{k})=2$, the edge $v_{k-1}v_{k}$ is an edge of $(G_{2})^{2}$.
Thus $F'=(F_{2} \cup C)+\{v_{k-1}v_{k}\}-\{e_{k-1},f_{1}\}$ is the $[2,4]$-factor of $(G')^{2}$ with properties 1), 2), and 3).
If there are more than two blocks of $G_{2}$ containing $v_{0}$, then by the~induction hypothesis $d_{G_{2}}(v_{0})=4$ and there are two edges
$e_{k-2},e_{k-1}$ of $F_{2}$ incident with $v_{0}$ in $B_{k-2},B_{k-1}$, respectively. Let $e_{k-2}=v_{0}v_{k-2}$. Since
$\mbox{dist}_{G'}(v_{k-2},v_{k})=2$, the edge $v_{k-2}v_{k}$ is an edge of $(G_{2})^{2}$. Thus $F'=(F_{2}\cup C)+\{v_{k-2}v_{k}\}-\{e_{k-2},f_{1}\}$ is
the $[2,4]$-factor of $(G')^{2}$ with properties 1), 2), and 3).
\medskip
Now we extend $F'$ to a $[2,4]$-factor $F$ in $G^{2}$ with required properties. Note that the properties 1), 2), and 3) imply the
properties a)-e) in Lemma~\ref{Main}.
Let $u_{1},u_{2},...,u_{t}$ be all trivial cut vertices of $G$ and $l_{i}^{1},l_{i}^{2},...,l_{i}^{s_{i}}$ be all leaves incident with $u_{i}$,
for $i=1,2,...,t$. Note that $s_{i}\geq2$, otherwise we have a bad bridge in $G$, a contradiction. For $i=1,2,...,t$, let
$C_{i}=u_{i}l_{i}^{1}l_{i}^{2}...l_{i}^{s_{i}}u_{i}$ be cycles in $G^{2}$ and $C'=\cup_{j=1}^{t}C_{j}$. Since $d_{F'}(u_{i})=2$ and
$u_{i}l_{i}^{1}, l_{i}^{s_{i}}u_{i}$ are edges from $G$, $F=F'\cup C'$ is the $[2,4]$-factor of $G^{2}$ with properties a)-e).
\end{proof}
Note that clearly the square of $K_{1,2}$, $K_{1,3}$ is hamiltonian but there is no $[2,4]$-factor with a vertex of degree 4 in the square of $K_{1,2}$,
$K_{1,3}$, respectively.
\section{Proofs of main results}
In this section we prove Theorem~\ref{Main-} and Theorem~\ref{Main++}. The proof of Theorem~\ref{Main-} is made to be convenient for finding an infinite
class of graphs.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\label{Figure2}
$$\beginpicture
\setcoordinatesystem units <1mm,1mm>
\setplotarea x from 0 to 0, y from 0 to 30
\put{$\bullet$} at -20 0
\put{$\bullet$} at 20 0
\circulararc 360 degrees from -20 0 center at -25 0
\put{$G_{1}$} at -25 0
\circulararc 360 degrees from 20 0 center at 25 0
\put{$G_{2}$} at 25 0
\put{$\bullet$} at 0 -15
\put{$v_{1}$} at 3 -15
\put{$\bullet$} at 0 -10
\put{$\bullet$} at 0 -5
\put{$v_{2}$} at 3 -5
\put{$\bullet$} at 0 0
\plot 0 -15 0 -10 -20 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 20 0 0 -10 /
\put{$\vdots$} at 0 6.25
\put{$\bullet$} at 0 10
\put{$\bullet$} at -25 5
\put{$\bullet$} at 25 5
\circulararc -180 degrees from -25 5 center at 0 5
\put{$v_{4s+1}$} at 6 15
\put{$\bullet$} at 0 15
\plot -20 0 0 10 0 15 0 10 20 0 /
\endpicture$$
\caption{Essentially 2-edge connected graphs such that their square contains no $[2,2s]$-factor, where $G_{1}$ and $G_{2}$ are
any essentially 2-edge connected graphs.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
It is easy to see that the square of all essentially 2-edge connected graphs on Fig.~2 does not contain $[2,2s]$-factor for any fixed positive integer~$s$.
\end{proof}
Finally we prove Theorem~\ref{Main++}.
\begin{proof}
Firstly if $G$ is $K_{1,2}$ or $K_{1,3}$, then clearly $G^{2}$ is even hamiltonian.
Now let $X$ be a set of all bad leaves of $G$ and $G'=G-X$. For $x_{i}\in X$, we denote $y_{i}$ its unique neighbor in $G$.
By Lemma~\ref{Main}, there is a [2,4]-factor $F'$ of $(G')^2$ with properties a)-e). Note that $d_{F'}(y_{i})=2$ for each $y_{i}$.
By the definition, any two bad leaves have a distance at least 3. Let $X_{0}\subseteq X$ be the set of all bad leaves that has a bad leaf
at the distance exactly~3 in $G$. Then, for all $x_{i}\in X_{0}$, corresponding $y_{i}$'s induce a subgraph of $G'$ in which all components (denoted by
$H_{1},H_{2},...,H_{s}$) are complete graphs, otherwise we have in $G$ two bad leaves at distance 4, a contradiction.
Let $V(H_{i})=\{y_{i,1},y_{i,2},...,y_{i,t_{i}}\}$, $t_{i}\geq 2$ for $i=1,2,...,s$. Then we set
$$M_{i}=\bigcup_{j=1}^{t_{i-1}}\{x_{i,j}y_{i,j+1}, x_{i,j+1}y_{i,j}\}~\bigcup~\{x_{i,1}y_{i,1}, x_{i,t_i}y_{i,t_i}\}.$$
All bad leaves of $X\setminus X_{0}$ are pairwise at distance at least 5 and we order them in a sequence
$x_{1},x_{2}, ...,x_{k_{1}},x_{k_{1}+1},...,x_{k_{1}+k_{2}},x_{k_{1}+k_{2}+1}, ...,x_{k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}}$ in the following way
(see Fig.~\ref{Figure3} for illustration):
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\label{Figure3}
$$\beginpicture
\setcoordinatesystem units <1mm,1mm>
\setplotarea x from -30 to 0, y from -10 to 10
\put{$1)$} at -65 10
\put{$2)$} at -25 10
\put{$3)$} at 25 10
\circulararc 360 degrees from -40 0 center at -50 0
\circulararc 360 degrees from -20 0 center at -10 0
\circulararc 360 degrees from 30 0 center at 40 0
\put{$y_{i}$} at -47 5
\put{$\bullet$} at -50 5
\put{$x_{i}$} at -47 15
\put{$\bullet$} at -50 15
\put{$z_{i}$} at -42 0
\put{$\bullet$} at -45 0
\put{\tiny{in$F$and$G'$}} at -53 1
\put{$y_{i}$} at -7 5
\put{$\bullet$} at -10 5
\put{$x_{i}$} at -7 15
\put{$\bullet$} at -10 15
\put{$z_{i}$} at -2 0
\put{$\bullet$} at -5 0
\put{\tiny{no cut vertex}} at 8 0
\put{$y_{i}$} at 43 5
\put{$\bullet$} at 40 5
\put{$x_{i}$} at 43 15
\put{$\bullet$} at 40 15
\put{$z_{i}$} at 48 0
\put{$\bullet$} at 45 0
\put{\tiny{cut vertex}} at 57 0
\put{$z'_{i}$} at 37 0
\put{$\bullet$} at 40 0
\put{$z''_{i}$} at 42 -7
\put{$\bullet$} at 45 -5
\put{\tiny{in $G'$}} at 42 -2.5
\plot -45 0 -50 5 -50 15 /
\plot -5 0 -10 5 -10 15 /
\plot 45 0 40 5 40 15 /
\plot 40 0 45 0 45 -5 /
\endpicture$$
\caption{Three cases in an ordering of all bad leaves of $X\setminus X_0$ in $G$.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item[1)] for $i=1,2, ..., k_{1}$, there exists $y_{i}z_{i}\in E(F)\cap E(G')$ for some $z_{i}\in V(G')$;
\item[2)] for $i=k_{1}+1, k_{1}+2, ..., k_{1}+k_{2}$, it does not hold 1) and there exists no cut vertex $z_{i}$ of $G'$ such that $y_{i}z_{i}\in E(G')$;
\item[3)] for $i=k_{1}+k_{2}+1, k_{1}+k_{2}+2, ..., k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}$, it does not hold 1) and 2). It means that there exists only a cut vertex $z_{i}$
of $G'$ such that $y_{i}z_{i}\in E(G')$.
\end{itemize}
Note that by Lemma~\ref{Main} we have $d_{F'}(z_{i})=2$, for $i=k_{1}+1, k_{1}+2, ..., k_{1}+k_{2}$, and $d_{F'}(z_{i})=4$ and at least two edges (namely
$z_{i}z'_{i}, z_{i}z''_{i}$) of $F'$ incident with $z_{i}$ belong to $G'$, for $i=k_{1}+k_{2}+1, k_{1}+k_{2}+2, ..., k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}$.
We set
$$E_0=\bigcup _{i=1}^{s}M_{i},~~~ E_{1}=\bigcup_{i=1}^{k_{1}}\{x_{i}y_{i}, x_{i}z_{i}\},~~~ E'_{1}=\bigcup_{i=1}^{k_{1}}\{y_{i}z_{i}\},$$
$$E_{2}=\bigcup_{i=k_{1}+1}^{k_{1}+k_{2}}\{x_{i}y_{i}, x_{i}z_{i}, y_{i}z_{i}\},$$
$$E_{3}=\bigcup_{i=k_{1}+k_{2}+1}^{k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}}\{x_{i}y_{i}, x_{i}z_{i}, y_{i}z'_{i}\},~~~
E'_{3}=\bigcup_{i=k_{1}+k_{2}+1}^{k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}}\{z_{i}z'_{i}\}.$$
For $i=1, 2, ..., k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}$, all $z_{i}$'s are different, otherwise if $z_{i}=z_{j}$, for $i\neq j$, then $x_{i}y_{i}z_{i}(=z_{j})y_{j}x_{j}$ is
a path of length 4 in $G$ joining two bad leaves, a contradiction. Similarly, none of $z_{i}$'s is a neighbor of a bad leaf in $G$.
Possibly, $z_{i_{1}}z_{i_{2}}...z_{i_{k}}$ is a path in $F'$ for $i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{k}\in\{k_{1}+k_{2}+1, k_{1}+k_{2}+2, ..., k_{1}+k_{2}+k_{3}\}$.
In order to have different edges in $E_{3}$ and $E'_{3}$ we set $z'_{j}=z_{j+1}$, for $j=i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{k-1}$, and $z'_{i_{k}}$ as arbitrary neighbor
of $z_{i_{k}}$ in $F'$ and in $G$ different from $z_{i_{k-1}}$. Note that by 3) and Lemma~\ref{Main} such a vertex exists and could be some $z_{j}$,
for $j\in \{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{k-2}\}$.
Hence we conclude that $F=F'+(E_{0}\cup E_{1}\cup E_{2}\cup E_{3})-(E'_{1}\cup E'_{3})$ is a~[2,4]-factor of $G^2$.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}
The following corollaries are immediate consequences of Theorem~\ref{Main++}.
\begin{corollary}
\label{Cor1}
If $G$ is a 2-edge connected graph, then $G^2$ contains a $[2,4]$-factor.
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}
\label{Cor2}
If $G$ is an essentially 2-edge connected graph without bad leaves, then $G^2$ contains a $[2,4]$-factor.
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}
\label{Main+}
Let $G$ be a connected graph without non-trivial bridges. If any two bad leaves have distance at least 5 in $G$, then $G^{2}$ has a $[2,4]$-factor.
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
The graph in Fig.~2 also shows that the distance 5 in Corollary~\ref{Main+} can not be replaced by distance 4.
\end{remark}
Now we could answer the question from Introduction. By Theorem~\ref{Fleischner} we know that the square of 2-connected graph has a $[2,2s]$-factor
for $s=1$. In this paper we prove that the square of 2-edge connected graph has a $[2,2s]$-factor for $s=2$ (Corollary~\ref{Cor1})
and that the square of essentially 2-edge connected graph without bad leaves has a $[2,2s]$-factor also for $s=2$ (Corollary~\ref{Cor2}).
In general, there exist essentially 2-edge connected graphs whose square have no $[2,2s]$-factor for every $s$. Such an example $G$ even exists under an
additional condition that the graph obtained from $G$ by deleting all leaves is 2-connected (Theorem~\ref{Main-}).
\medskip
\noindent {\bf Acknowledgements}.
This work was supported by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), project NTIS - New Technologies for Information Society,
European Centre of Excellence, CZ.1.05/1.1.00/02.0090.
The first author was supported by project GA14-19503S of the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic.
The second author was supported by NSFC (No.11161046) and by Xinjiang Talent Youth Project (No.2013721012).
The third author was supported by NSFC (No.11471037 and No.11171129) and by Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher
Education (No.20131101110048).
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
The famous matrix-tree theorem of Kirchhoff gives a combinatorial formula for the invariant measure of a finite Markov chain in terms of covering trees of the state space of the chain. One can provide a probabilistic interpretation of Kirchhoff's formula by lifting the Markov chain to the set covering trees of its state space, see e.g. \cite{AT} or \cite{LP}, \S 4.4. This yields a new Markov chain, whose transition matrix can be constructed from the transition matrix of the original Markov chain. In this paper, we investigate the first minors of this new matrix, which are polynomials in the entries of the original transition matrix. We will see that in a simple case, that of a Markov chain evolving on a ring, these polynomials exhibit a remarkable factorisation. We expect that such factorisations hold in a much more general context. This paper is organized as follows: we start in section 2 by recalling some general facts about finite Markov chains and their invariant measure. In section 3 we describe how to lift the Markov chain to its set of covering trees. In section 4 we introduce a polynomial associated to the Markov chain, and show that in the case of a Markov chain with three states it has a nice factorisation.
We generalize this observation to the case of Markov chains on a ring in section 5, which contains the main result of the paper.
I would like to thank Jim Pitman for pointing out reference \cite{LP} to me.
\section{Finite Markov chains and invariant measures}
We start by recalling some well known facts about finite Markov chains.
\subsection{Transition matrix}
We consider a continuous time Markov chain $M$ on a finite set $X$.
Let $Q=(q_{ij})_{i,j\in X}$ be its matrix of transition rates:
$q_{ij}\geq 0$ if $i\ne j\in X$ and $\sum_jq_{ij}=0$ for all $i$.
\subsection{Invariant measure}
An invariant measure for $M$ (more exactly, for $Q$) is a nonzero vector $\mu(i),i\in X$, with nonnegative entries such that
$\sum_i\mu(i)q_{ij}=0$ for all $j\in X$. An invariant measure always exists, it is unique up to a multiplicative constant if the chain is irreducible.
\subsection{Projection of a Markov chain}
Let $N$ be a Markov chain on a finite state space $Y$, with transition matrix $R=(r_{kl})_{k,l\in Y}$, and $p:Y\to M$ be a map such that, for all $i,j\in X$ and all $k\in Y$ such that $p(k)=i$, one has
\begin{equation}
q_{ij}=\sum_{l\in p^{-1}(j)}r_{kl}
\end{equation}
then $p(N)$ is a Markov chain on $X$ with transition rates $q_{ij}$. Furthermore, if $\nu$ is an invariant measure for $R$, then $\mu$ defined as
\begin{equation}\label{invmeas}
\mu(i)=\sum_{k\in p^{-1}(i)}\nu(k)
\end{equation}
is an invariant measure for $Q$.
\subsection{Oriented graph and covering trees.}
To the matrix $Q$ is associated a graph $(X,E)$ with $X$ as vertex set, and $E$ as edge set, such that there is an edge from $i$ to $j$ if and only if $q_{ij}>0$. This graph is oriented, has no multiple edges, and no loops (edges which begin and end at the same vertex). Let $i\in X$, a {\sl covering tree of $(X,E)$, rooted at $i$} is an oriented subgraph of $(X,E)$ which is a tree and such that, for every $j\in X$, there is a unique path from $j$ to $i$ in the graph (paths are oriented).
The Markov chain is irreducible if and only if for all $i,j\in X$ there exists a path from $i$ to $j$ in the graph $(X,E)$.
If this is the case then for every vertex $i\in X$ there exists a covering tree rooted at $i$.
Figure 1 shows an oriented graph, together with a covering tree rooted at the shaded vertex (beware that a Markov chain corresponding to this graph is not irreducible).
\medskip
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {};
\node[main node] (4) [ right of=3] {};
\node[main node] (5) [ right of=4] {};
\node[main node] (6) [below of=4] {};
\node[main node] (7) [below of=3] {};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (5) edge(2)
(2) edge (1) edge (3) edge (4)
(3) edge (4)
(4) edge (1) edge (2) edge (3) edge(6)
(5) edge(1) edge(4)
(6) edge (4)
(7) edge(3)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\hskip 2cm
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {};
\node[main node] (4) [ right of=3] {};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (5) [ right of=4] {};
\node[main node] (6) [below of=4] {};
\node[main node] (7) [below of=3] {};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (5)
(2) edge (1)
(3) edge (4)
(4) edge (2)
(6) edge (4)
(7) edge(3)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{An oriented graph, and a covering rooted tree}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Kirchhoff's matrix tree theorem}
We assume that the Markov chain is irreducible.
For $i\in X$ let $Q^{(i)}$ be the matrix obtained from $Q$ by deleting row and column $i$ and let $\mu(i)=\det(-Q^{(i)})$, then it is well known, and easy to see that $\mu$ is an invariant measure for $Q$. Indeed, if $Q^{(ij)}$ is obtained by deleting row $i$ and column $j$, then $\det(-Q^{(ij)})=\det(-Q^{(ii)})=\det(-Q^{(i)})$, since the sum of each line is 0, and
$\det(-Q)=\sum_i q_{ij}\det(-Q^{(ij)})=0$ for all $j$, by expanding the determinant along columns. That $\mu$ has positive entries follows from irreducibility and Kirchhoff's formula:
\begin{equation}\label{kirch}
\mu(i)=\sum_{t\in T_i} \pi(t)
\end{equation}
where the sum is over the set $T_i$ of oriented covering trees of $X$, rooted at $i$, and
$\pi(t)$ is the product of the $q_{kl}$ over all oriented edges $(k,l)$ of the tree $t$.
See \cite{LP}, \S 4.
More generally, if $\{i_1,\ldots,i_k\}\subset X$, then Kirchhoff's formula also applies to the determinant of the matrix obtained from $Q$ by deleting columns and rows indexed by
$i_1,\ldots,i_k$. This determinant is equal, up to a sign, to the sum over oriented covering forests, rooted at $i_1,\ldots,i_k$, of the product over edges of the forest.
\section{Lifting the Markov chain to its covering trees}
\subsection{The lift}Notations are as in the preceding section furthermore
we assume that $Q$ is irreducible. The set of oriented covering rooted trees of $(X,E)$ is
$T=\cup_{i\in X}T_i$. Let the map $p:T\to X$ assign to each tree $t$ its root (i.e. $p$ maps $T_i$ to $i$).
There exists an irreducible Markov chain on $T$ whose image by $p$ is a Markov chain on $X$ with transition rates $Q$, and the vector $(\pi(t))_{t\in T}$ is an invariant measure for this Markov chain. In particular by (\ref{invmeas}) the invariant measure $\pi$ projects by $p$ to the invariant measure $\mu$ and this construction provides a probabilistic interpretation of Kirchhoff's formula (\ref{kirch}).
This Markov chain can be described by its transition rates $r_{st}, s,t\in T$.
Let $s$ be a covering tree of $X$, rooted at $i$, and let $j\in X$ be such that
$q_{ij}>0$. There is a unique edge of $s$ coming out of $j$. Take out this edge from $s$ and then add the edge $(i,j)$. One obtains a new oriented tree $t$, rooted at $j$ (see Figure 2 for an example). One puts then $r_{st}=q_{ij}$. For all pairs $s\ne t$ which are not obtained by this construction, one puts $r_{st}=0$. This defines a unique matrix of transition rates
$(r_{st})_{s,t\in T}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {};
\node[main node] (2) [below right of=1] {j};
\node[main node] (3) [below left of=2] {};
\node[main node] (4) [below right of=2] {};
\node[main node, ] (5) [ right of=4] {};
\node[main node] (6) [ right of=5] {};
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (7) [above right of=5] {i};
\node[main node] (8) [above right of=2] {};
\node[main node] (9) [right of=8] {};
\node[circle](10)[below of =4]{The tree $s$};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (4)
(3) edge (4)
(4) edge (5)
(5) edge (7)
(6) edge(5)
(8) edge (2)
(9) edge (8)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\hskip 1cm
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {};
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (2) [below right of=1] {j};
\node[main node] (3) [below left of=2] {};
\node[main node] (4) [below right of=2] {};
\node[main node ] (5) [ right of=4] {};
\node[main node] (6) [ right of=5] {};
\node[main node] (7) [above right of=5] {i};
\node[main node] (8) [above right of=2] {};
\node[main node] (9) [right of=8] {};
\node[circle](10)[below of =4]{The tree $t$};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(7) edge (2)
(3) edge (4)
(4) edge (5)
(5) edge (7)
(6) edge(5)
(8) edge (2)
(9) edge (8)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Lifting a transition between $i$ and $j$}
\end{figure}
It is clear that these transitions define a Markov chain which projects onto $M$ by the map $p$.
\begin{theorem} The Markov chain with transition rates $R$ is irreducible, and the vector $\pi$ is an invariant measure for this Markov chain.
\end{theorem}
The proof can be found in \cite{AT}.
\subsection{An example}\label{ex}
Let $X=\{1,2,3\}$ and
$$Q=\begin{pmatrix}\lambda&a&w\\u&\mu&b\\c&v&\nu\end{pmatrix}$$
with $\lambda=-a-w$, $\mu=-b-u$, $\nu=-c-v$. We assume that $a,b,c,u,v,w>0$.
The graph $(X,E)$ looks as follows:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.15]
\draw (0,0) circle(3);\draw (0,0) node{${\bf 1}$};
\draw (20,0) circle(3);\draw (20,0) node{${\bf 3}$};
\draw (10,17.3) circle(3);\draw (10,17.3) node{$ {\bf 2}$};
\draw[->,thick] (3.8,-0.6) -- (16.2,-0.6);\draw (10,-2) node{$w$};
\draw[<-,thick] (3.8,0.6) -- (16.2,0.6);\draw (10,2) node{$c$};
\draw[->,thick] (18.6,3.4) -- (12.8,14.1);\draw (16.5,10) node{$v$};
\draw[<-,thick] (17.3,2.8) -- (11.8,13.5);\draw (13,8.5) node{$b$};
\draw[<-,thick] (1.4,3.4) -- (7.2,14.1);\draw (3.5,10) node{$u$};
\draw[->,thick] (2.7,2.8) -- (8.2,13.5);\draw (7,8.5) node{$a$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
Each covering rooted tree $t$ can be indexed by the monomial $\pi(t)$. There are nine such covering trees: first
$cu,uv,bc$ rooted at $1$, then $av,ac,vw$ rooted at $2$, and finally $uw,bw, ab $ rooted at $3$.
With this ordering of $T$, the transition matrix for the lifted Markov chain is
$$R=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}
\lambda&0&0&\ &0&a&0&\ &w&0&0\\
0&\lambda&0&\ &a&0&0&\ &w&0&0\\
0&0&\lambda&\ &0&a&0&\ &0&w&0\\
\
0&u&0&\ &\mu&0&0&\ &0&0&b\\
u&0&0&\ &0&\mu&0&\ &0&0&b\\
0&u&0&\ &0&0&\mu&\ &0&b&0\\
\\
c&0&0&\ &0&0&v&\ &\nu&0&0\\
0&0&c&\ &0&0&v&\ &0&\nu&0\\
0&0&c&\ &v&0&0&\ &0&0&\nu
\end{array}\right)$$
Figure 3 shows the oriented graph. We have shown, for each vertex, its projection onto $X$ (namely $\bf 1$, $\bf 2$, or $\bf 3$) and for each oriented edge, its weight ($a,b,c,u,v$ or $w$).
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.55]
\draw (0,0) circle(.8);\draw (0,0) node{$uv\ {\bf 1}$};
\draw(16,0) circle(.8);\draw (16,0) node{$uw\ {\bf 3}$};
\draw(8,13.9) circle(.8);\draw (8,13.9) node{$vw\ {\bf 2}$};
\draw (6,3) circle(.8);\draw (6,3) node{$ab\ {\bf 3}$};
\draw(10,3) circle(.8);\draw (10,3) node{$ac\ {\bf 2}$};
\draw(8,6.5) circle(.8);\draw (8,6.5) node{$bc\ {\bf 1}$};
\draw(8,10.2) circle(.8);\draw (8,10.2) node{$bw\ {\bf 3}$};
\draw (3,1.5) circle(.8);\draw (3,1.5) node{$av\ {\bf 2}$};
\draw(13,1.5) circle(.8);\draw (13,1.5) node{$cu\ {\bf 1}$};
\draw[->,thick] (1.3,-0.4) -- (14.7,-0.4);\draw (7.5,0.2) node{$w$};
\draw[->,thick] (15.5,1.3) -- (8.7,13);\draw (12.5,8) node{$v$};
\draw[->,thick] (7.3,13) -- (0.5,1.3);\draw (3.5,8) node{$u$};
\draw[<-,thick] (7.1,3) -- (8.9,3) ;\draw (8,3.5) node{$b$};
\draw[->,thick] (8.6,5.5) -- (9.7,3.9);\draw (9.7,4.8) node{$a$};
\draw[<-,thick] (7.4,5.5) -- (6.3,3.9) ;\draw (6.3,4.8) node{$c$};
\draw[->,thick] (0.7,0.6) -- (2.1,1.3) ;\draw (1.1,1.2) node{$a$};
\draw[<-,thick] (0.8,0.3) -- (2.2,1) ;\draw (1.8,0.5) node{$u$};
\draw[->,thick] (3.7,2.1) -- (5.1,2.8) ;\draw (4.1,2.7) node{$b$};
\draw[<-,thick] (3.8,1.8) --(5.2,2.5) ;\draw (4.8,2) node{$v$};
\draw[->,thick] (15.3,0.6) -- (13.9,1.3) ;\draw (14.9,1.2) node{$c$};
\draw[<-,thick] (15.2,0.3) --(13.8,1) ;\draw (14.2,0.5) node{$w$};
\draw[->,thick] (12.3,2.1) -- (10.9,2.8) ;\draw (11.9,2.7) node{$a$};
\draw[<-,thick] (12.2,1.8) -- (10.8,2.5) ;\draw (11.2,2) node{$u$};
\draw[<-,thick] (7.85,7.5) -- (7.85,9.2) ;\draw (8.5,8.3) node{$w$};
\draw[->,thick] (8.15,7.5) -- (8.15,9.2) ;\draw (7.35,8.3) node{$c$};
\draw[<-,thick] (7.85,11.2) --(7.85,12.9) ;\draw (8.5,12) node{$v$};
\draw[->,thick] (8.15,11.2) --(8.15,12.9) ;\draw (7.35,12) node{$b$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The graph $T$ }
\end{figure}
\medskip
\section{A polynomial associated to the Markov chain}
\subsection{The polynomial}
We consider, as in the previous sections, an irreducible Markov chain on a finite set $X$ with transition matrix $Q$ and its canoncial lift to $T$, with transition matrix $R$.
For $t\in T$, consider the matrix $R^{(t)}$ obtained from $R$
by taking out row and column $t$, and let $\rho(t)=\det(-R^{(t)})$, then $\rho$ is an invariant measure for $R$, and gives a generating function for covering trees of the graph $T$.
If we fix the graph $(X,E)$, then $\rho(t)$ is a polynomial in the variables $q_{ij}$, where we keep only the pairs $(i,j)$ forming an edge in $E$.
Since $\pi$ and $\rho$ are invariant measures of the lifted Markov chain, they are proportional so that there exists
there exists a function, $\Psi(q_{ij})$, independent of $t$, such that
for all $t\in T$,
$$\rho(t)=\pi(t)\Psi$$
Actually it is not difficult to see that $\Psi(q_{ij})$ is a polynomial.
Indeed one has $\Psi=\rho(t)/\pi(t)$, and $\pi(t)$ is a monomial so that, by reducing,
$\Psi=P/m$ with $P$ a polynomial and $m$ a monomial prime with $P$. In particular,
$\rho(t)=\pi(t)P/m$ is a polynomial for all $t$, hence $m$ divides $\pi(t)$ for all $t$. But the $\pi(t)$ have no common divisor, since a variable $q_{kl}$ cannot divide $\pi(t)$ is $t$ is rooted at $k$, therefore $m=1$.
\subsection{Some examples}
If $|X|=3$, with the notations of section \ref{ex}, one can compute
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Psi(a,b,c,u,v,w)&
=&(bc+cu+uv)(av+ac+vw)(ab+bw+uw)\\
&=&\prod_{i\in X}\left(\sum_{t\in T_i}\pi(t)\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
so that $\Psi$ is the product of all symmetric rank two minors of the matrix $-Q$
(a {\sl symmetric minor of rank $k$} of a matrix of size $n$, is the determinant of a submatrix obtained by deleting $n-k$ rows and the $n-k$ columns with the same indices).
I have computed the polynomial $\Psi$ for various graphs with $4$ vertices and found in many cases that $\Psi$ can be written as a product of symmetric minors of the matrix $-Q$. I could not compute in the case of
$|X|=4$ and the graph $(X,E)$ is a complete graph, but by putting some of the variables equal to $1$ to make the determinant easier to compute, the results suggest that the formula for $\Psi$ in this case should be
$$\Psi=m_2(Q)^3m_3(Q)^2$$
where $m_k(Q)$ is the product of all symmetric minors of rank $k$ of $-Q$.
Based on this small evidence it seems natural to conjecture that for any irreducible graph $(X,E)$ the polynomial $\Psi$ should be a product of symmetric minors of the matrix $-Q$. Which minors appear, and what are their exponents, should depend on the graph and encode some of its geometry.
By symmetry,
in the case of a complete graph on $n$ vertices, the result should be a product $\prod_{k=1}^{n-1}m_k^{v_k^n}$ for some exponents $v_k^n$.
Guillaume Chapuy \cite{C} has done some further computations for $n=5$ and conjectured that
$v_k^n=(k-1)(n-1)^{n-k-1}$.
One can check that, at least, this gives the correct degree. In general the degree of $\Psi$ is $|T|-n$, and in the case of a complete graph, $|T|=n^{n-1}$, moreover there are $\binom{n}{k}$ symmetric minors of rank $k$, which are polynomials of degree $k$, and
$$\sum_{k=2}^{n-1}\binom{n}{k}k(k-1)(n-1)^{n-k-1}=n^{n-1}-n$$
as follows easily from the binomial formula.
In the following I obtain a result for the case where the graph is a ring: $X=\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ and the edges are $(i,i\pm 1)$ (where $i\pm 1$ is taken modulo $n$).
\begin{theorem}\label{th} If $(X,E)$ is a ring of size $n\geq 3$, then $\Psi$ is the product of the symmetric minors of size $n-1$:
$$\Psi=m_{n-1}(Q)$$
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem \ref{th}, which is the main result of this paper, occupies the next section.
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{th}}
In this section, $(X,E)$ denotes a ring, namely, $X=\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ and the edges are $(i,i\pm 1)$ (here and in the sequel $i\pm 1$ is always taken modulo $n$). I will illustrate this with $n=4$, as in Figure 4.
\medskip
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2) edge (4)
(2) edge (1) edge (3)
(3) edge (2) edge (4)
(4) edge (1) edge (3);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The ring $(X,E)$ with $n=4$}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\subsection{Structure of the graph $T$}
For each pair $(i,j)\in X^2$ there exists a unique covering tree of $(X,E)$, rooted at $i$, which has no edge between $j$ and $j+1$. Let us denote this covering rooted tree by $[i,j]$.
For example, if $n=4$ here are the trees denoted by, respectively, $[2,3]$ and $[3,3]$ (here and in the sequel the roots are shaded):
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(3) edge (2)
(4) edge (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\hskip 1.5cm
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (3)
(4) edge (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\medskip
It is easy to check that these are all covering rooted trees of $(X,E)$, in
particular $|T|=n^2$. Let us now describe the structure of the graph on $T$ induced by the lifting of the Markov chain.
First consider
the trees indexed by the pairs $[i,i]$. The trees $[i,i]$ and $[i+1,i+1]$ are connected by an edge labelled $q_{i,i+1}$ e.g.
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (3)
(4) edge (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
$\qquad\begin{matrix} \bf q_{34}\\ \longrightarrow\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \end{matrix}\qquad$
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (3)
(3) edge (4);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
These trees form an oriented ring in $T$:
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {[1,1]};
\node[main node] (2) [ left of=1] {[2,2]};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {[3,3]};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {[4,4]};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (3)
(3) edge (4)
(4) edge (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\medskip
The trees indexed by pairs $[i,i-1]$ are connected by edges labelled $q_{i,i-1}$:
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (4)
(2) edge (1)
(4) edge (3);
\end{tikzpicture}
$\qquad\begin{matrix}\bf q_{32}\\ \longrightarrow\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\\end{matrix}\qquad$
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (4)
(4) edge (3)
(3) edge (2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
They form another oriented ring:
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {[1,4]};
\node[main node] (2) [ left of=1] {[2,1]};
\node[main node] (3) [below of=2] {[3,2]};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {[4,3]};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (4)
(2) edge (1)
(3) edge (2)
(4) edge (3);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\medskip
There are also edges in the two directions between $[i,j]$ and $[i+1,j]$, labelled by $q_{i,i+1}$ and $q_{i+1,i}$:
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node, ] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(4) edge (3)
(3) edge (2);
\end{tikzpicture}
$\qquad\begin{matrix} \bf q_{23}\\ \longrightarrow\\ \longleftarrow\\\bf q_{32} \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \end{matrix}\qquad$
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1.5cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\Large\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {1};
\node[main node] (2) [left of=1] {2};
\node[main node, fill=blue!20] (3) [below of=2] {3};
\node[main node] (4) [below of=1] {4};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (3)
(4) edge (3);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
These form lines of length $n$:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\small\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {$[2,1]$};
\node[main node] (2) [right of=1] {$[3,1]$};
\node[main node] (3) [right of=2]{$[4,1]$};
\node[main node] (5) [ right of=3] {$[1,1]$};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (1)
edge (3)
(3) edge (2)
edge (5)
(5)edge (3)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
One can represent the graph $T$ by putting two concentric oriented rings of size $n$, with opposite orientations,
and joining the vertices of the rings by sequences of vertices connected by double edges, see Figure 3 for $n=3$ and Figure 5 for $n=4$:
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {};
\node[main node] (2) [below right of=1] {};
\node[main node] (3) [below right of=2] {};
\node[main node] (4) [below right of=3] {};
\node[main node] (5) [ right of=4] {};
\node[main node] (6) [above right of=5] {};
\node[main node] (7) [above right of=6] {};
\node[main node] (8) [above right of=7] {};
\node[main node] (9) [below of=4] {};
\node[main node] (10) [below left of=9] {};
\node[main node] (11) [below left of=10] {};
\node[main node] (12) [below left of=11] {};
\node[main node] (13) [below of=5] {};
\node[main node] (14) [below right of=13] {};
\node[main node] (15) [below right of=14] {};
\node[main node] (16) [below right of=15] {};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(1)edge (8)
(2) edge (1)
(2) edge (3)
(3) edge (2)
(3) edge (4)
(4) edge (3)
(4) edge (9)
(5) edge (4)
(5) edge (6)
(6) edge (5)
(6) edge (7)
(7) edge (6)
(7) edge (8)
(8) edge (7)
(8) edge (16)
(9) edge (10)
(9) edge (13)
(10) edge (9)
(10) edge (11)
(11) edge (10)
(11) edge (12)
(12) edge (11)
(12) edge (1)
(13) edge (14)
(13) edge (5)
(14) edge (13)
(14) edge (15)
(15) edge (16)
(15) edge (14)
(16) edge (15)
(16) edge (12);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The graph of $T$ for $n=4$}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The symmetric $n-1$ minors of $-Q$}
We will use the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}The symmetric $n-1$ minors of $-Q$ are prime polynomials.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $i\in Q$, then $\det(-Q^{(i)})$, the symmetric $n-1$ minor corresponding to $i$ is a polynomial with degree at most one in each variable. More precisely, using Kirchhoff's formula this minor is the generating function of covering trees rooted at $i$ and it can be written as
$\alpha q_{i-1,i}+\beta$ where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are polynomials of degree $0$ in $q_{i-1,i}$. Moreover $\beta$ is a monomial since there exists a unique covering tree of $(X,E)$ rooted at $i$ which does not contain the edge $(i-1,i)$. It follows that any nontrivial factorisation of this polynomial can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{factor}
\alpha q_{i-1,i}+\beta=(\gamma q_{i-1,i}+\delta)\eta
\end{equation}
where $\gamma,\delta,\eta$ have degree $0$ in $q_{i-1,i}$ and $\eta\delta=\beta$. In particular, $\eta$ is a nontrivial monomial, therefore there exists a variable $q_{kl}$ which divides $\alpha q_{i-1,i}+\beta$, and this means that the edge $(k,l)$ belongs to all covering trees rooted at $i$. Clearly this is not possible, therefore a nontrivial factorisation such as (\ref{factor}) does not exist, and the symmetric minor is a prime polynomial.
\end{proof}
\subsection{A preliminary lemma}
Consider the restriction of the graph $T$ to the sets of vertices $$G=\{[1,n],[2,1],[3,1],\ldots,[n,1],[1,1]\}$$
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\small\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {$[2,1]$};
\node[main node] (2) [right of=1] {$[3,1]$};
\node[circle] (3) [right of=2]{$\ldots$};
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (5) [ right of=3] {$[1,1]$};
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (6) [above of=1]{$[1,n]$};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
edge (6)
(2) edge (1)
edge (3)
(3) edge (2)
edge (5)
(5)edge (3)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\medskip
and $$H=
\{[1,n],[2,n],[3,n],\ldots,[n,n],[1,1]\}$$
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\small\bfseries}]
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (6){$[1,n]$};
\node[main node] (7) [right of=6]{$[2,n]$};
\node[circle] (8) [right of=7]{$\ldots$};
\node[main node] (10) [right of=8]{$[n,n]$};
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (11) [below of=10]{$[1,1]$};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(6) edge (7)
(7) edge (8)
edge (6)
(8) edge (7)
edge (10)
(10) edge (8)
edge(11)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
We will need the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{covfor}
The generating function of the set of covering forests
of $G$, rooted at $[1,n]$ and $[1,1]$ is equal to $\det(-Q^{(1)})$, the generating function for the set of covering trees of $X$, rooted at 1.
The same is true with $H$ instead of $G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
One can check easily that the restriction of the projection $p$ to $G$ induces a bijection between the covering forests of $G$ rooted at $[1,n]$ and $[1,1]$ and the covering trees of $X$ rooted at $1$ (observe that $[1,n]$ and $[1,1]$ both project to $1$), and this bijection preserves the labels of the edges. The same is true for $H$ and the lemma follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{}
We will now prove that the symmetric minor $\det(-Q^{(i)})$ divides the symmetric minor
$\det(-R^{([i,i])})$. By symmetry it is enough to prove this for $i=1$. By Kirchhoff's formula, we know that the polynomial $\det(-R^{([1,1])})$
is the generating polynomial of the covering trees of $T$ rooted at vertex $[1,1]$.
Let $K=G\cup H$ and let $L=T\setminus K$.
The part of the graph $T$ containing $K$ looks like
\medskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\sffamily\small\bfseries}]
\node[main node] (1) {$[2,1]$};
\node[main node] (2) [right of=1] {$[3,1]$};
\node[circle] (3) [right of=2]{$\ldots$};
\node[main node] (5) [ right of=3] {$[1,1]$};
\node[main node] (6) [above of=1]{$[1,n]$};
\node[main node] (7) [right of=6]{$[2,n]$};
\node[circle] (8) [right of=7]{$\ldots$};
\node[main node] (10) [right of=8]{$[n,n]$};
\node[circle] (11) [above of=6]{};
\node[circle] (12) [above of=10]{};
\node[circle] (13) [below of=1]{};
\node[circle] (14) [below of=5]{};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
edge (6)
(2) edge (1)
edge (3)
(3) edge (2)
edge (5)
(5)edge (3)
edge (14)
(6) edge (7)
edge (11)
(7) edge (8)
edge (6)
(8) edge (7)
edge (10)
(10) edge (8)
edge (5)
(12) edge (10)
(13) edge (1)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\medskip
Observe that
the only way one can enter the set $K$ by a path coming from $L$ is through the vertices $[2,1]$ or $[n,n]$.
Let now $\tau$ be a covering tree of
$T$, rooted at $[1,1]$. If we consider the set of vertices $L\cup\{[2,1],[n,n]\}$ together with the edges of $\tau$ coming out of elements of $L$, we obtain two disjoint trees, rooted respectively at $[n,n]$ and $[2,1]$. Let us now fix such a pair of trees $A$ and $B$, and consider the set of covering trees $\tau$ of $T$, rooted at $[1,1]$, which induce the pair $(A,B)$. There are three possibilities for the edge coming out of $[1,n]$ in such a tree:
\medskip
$i)$ it connects to $[2,n]$
$ii)$ it connects to $[n,n-1]$ which belongs to $A$
$iii)$ it connects to $[n,n-1]$ which belongs to $B$.
\medskip
If we are in the first case then the restriction of the tree to $G$ forms
a covering forest of $G$, rooted at $[1,n]$ and $[1,1]$. Furthermore any such forest can occur, independently of the trees $A$ and $B$. It follows that the generating function of trees in case $i)$ is a multiple of the generating function of such covering forests, which is $\det(-Q^{(1)})$ by Lemma \ref{covfor}.
In case $ii)$ the same argument as in $i)$ can be applied, so we conclude again that the generating function of such trees is a multiple of $\det(-Q^{(1)})$.
Finally in case $iii)$ the edge $([2,1],[1,n])$ cannot belong to the tree, but a similar reasoning, this time with $H$ instead of $G$, shows that
the generating function of such trees is a again multiple of $\det(-Q^{(1)})$.
From this, summing over all three cases, and all pairs $(A,B)$ we conclude that $\det(-R^{([1,1])})$, the generating function of the set of covering trees of $T$, rooted at $[1,1]$, is a multiple of $\det(-Q^{(1)})$. Since $\det(-R^{([1,1])})=\pi([1,1])\Psi$ and $\pi([1,1])$ is a monomial which is prime with $\det(-Q^{(1)})$ it follows that $\det(-Q^{(1)})$ divides the polynomial $\Psi$. By symmetry, this is true of all the $\det(-Q^{(i)})$, for $i\in X$ and since these are distinct prime polynomials, we conclude that $\Psi$ is a multiple of $m_{n-1}=\prod_i\det(-Q^{(i)})$. The degree of the polynomial $\det(-R^{([1,1])})$ is $n^2-1$, the degree of $m_{n-1}$ is $n(n-1)$ and the degree of $\pi([1,1])$ is $n-1$. It follows that $\Psi$ and $m_{n-1}$ are proportional.
In order to find the constant of proportionality, we consider the generating function of the covering trees of $T$, rooted at $[n,n]$. This generating function is
$\det(-R^{([n,n])})=\pi([n,n])\Psi$. I claim that the
coefficient of the monomial
\begin{equation}\label{monom}
q_{n1}^{n-1}\prod_{i=1}^{n-1} q_{i,i+1}^{n}
\end{equation}
in $\det(-R^{([n,n])})$ is 1. Indeed for each $i\leq n$ there are exactly $n$ edges in $T$ which are labelled $q_{i,i+1}$, and one of the edges labelled $q_{n1} $ goes out of $[n,n]$ so it cannot belong to a tree rooted at $[n,n]$, therefore there exists at most one covering tree rooted at $[n,n]$ whose product over labelled edges is equal to (\ref{monom}). On the other hand, one can check that, taking the graph formed with all these edges, one obtains a covering tree rooted at $[n,n]$, see e.g. Figure 6 for the case of $n=4$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{tikzpicture}[->,>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=1cm,
thick,main node/.style={circle,draw,font=\bf}]
\node[main node] (1) {};
\node[main node] (2) [below right of=1] {};
\node[main node] (3) [below right of=2] {};
\node[main node] (4) [below right of=3] {};
\node[main node] (5) [ right of=4] {};
\node[main node] (6) [above right of=5] {};
\node[main node] (7) [above right of=6] {};
\node[main node] (8) [above right of=7] {};
\node[main node] (9) [below of=4] {};
\node[main node] (10) [below left of=9] {};
\node[main node] (11) [below left of=10] {};
\node[main node] (12) [below left of=11] {};
\node[main node,fill=blue!20] (13) [below of=5] {};
\node[main node] (14) [below right of=13] {};
\node[main node] (15) [below right of=14] {};
\node[main node] (16) [below right of=15] {};
\path[every node/.style={font=\sffamily\small}]
(1) edge (2)
(2) edge (3)
(3) edge (4)
(4) edge (9)
(8) edge (7)
(7) edge (6)
(5) edge (4)
(12) edge (11)
(6) edge (5)
(11) edge (10)
(10) edge (9)
(9) edge (13)
(16) edge (15)
(15) edge (14)
(14) edge (13);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The covering tree for $n=4$}
\end{figure}
It remains now to check that the coefficient of $\pi([n,n])\prod_i\det(-Q^{(i)})$ is 1. This follows from the fact that for each $i$ there exists a unique covering tree of $X$ rooted at $i$, whose labels are all of the form $q_{k,k+1}$. Taking the product over these trees one recovers the product (\ref{monom}).
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{th}.\qed
\subsection{Final remark}
If we look at formula
$$\det(-R^{([n,n])})=\pi([n,n])\prod_{i=1}^n\det(-Q^{(i)})$$
there is a combinatorial significance for both sides of the equality. The left hand sides is the generating function for covering trees of $T$ rooted a $[n,n]$ whereas the right hand side is the generating function of the $n$-tuples of rooted covering trees of $(X,E)$ rooted at $1,2,\ldots,n$. It would be interesting to tranform our proof of this formula into a bijective proof by exhibiting a bijection between these two sets which respects the weights. This could shed some light on the general case.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $k$ be a global or non-archimedean local field. Let $G(k)$, or simply $G$,
be the group of $k$-points of a reductive algebraic group defined over $k$,
or a central extension of finite degree.
Let $\frak{g}$ be the Lie algebra of $G$ and $u$ a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$. We assume that the characteristic of $k$ is large, so that
the Jacobson-Morozov theorem holds, i.e. there exists a homomorphism $\varphi : \frak{sl}_2 \rightarrow \frak{g}$ such that
\[
u=\varphi \left(\begin{matrix}
0 & 0\\
1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right).
\]
Now assume that $k$ is a local field. Fix a non-trivial character $\psi$ of $k$. There is a
unipotent subgroup $N_u\subseteq G$ and a character $\psi_u$ of $N_u$, corresponding to $u$ (see Section 5 for definitions). For example, if $u$ belongs to a regular orbit, then $N_u$ is a maximal
unipotent subgroup and $\psi_u$ is a Whittaker character. Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $G$, not necessarily admissible.
The {\it wave-front set} of $\pi$ is the set of nilpotent orbits
$\mathcal O$ such that the space of twisted co-invariants $\pi_{N_u, \psi_u}$ is nontrivial, for $u\in \mathcal O$. Our main result, Corollary \ref{cor:local}, concerns the structure of orbits in the wave-front set. More precisely, let $\mathcal O$ be contained in the wave-front set of $\pi$. Then, under certain conditions, a slightly larger orbit $\mathcal O'$ is also contained in the wave-front set of $\pi$.
Assume, for example, that $G$ is a classical group and $\mathcal O$ corresponds to
a partition $\underline{p}$. Then the conditions are automatically satisfied if $\underline{p}$ is not special, in the sense of Lusztig and Spaltenstein. The larger orbit
$\mathcal O'$ corresponds to a partition $\underline{p}'$ obtained from $\underline{p}$ by replacing a pair $(i,i)$ in $\underline{p}$ by $(i-1,i+1)$. This process can be continued until we arrive to a nilpotent element whose corresponding partition is special, more precisely, the special expansion $\underline{p}^G$ of $\underline{p}$.
In particular, the maximal orbits in the wave-front set, with respect to the closure ordering, are special. This result, if $k$ has characteristic zero, was previously obtained by M\oe glin in \cite{Mo96} for irreducible representations using the relationship of degenerate Whittaker models and the character expansion of (irreducible) representations obtained in the work of M\oe glin and Waldspurger in \cite{MW87}.
We also have analogous results if $k$ is a global field. Let $\mathbb A$ be the corresponding ring of ad\` eles. Let $\psi$ be a non-trivial character
of $\mathbb A$, trivial on $k$. Let $\Pi$ be a space of smooth functions on $G(k)\backslash G(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of $G(\mathbb A)$ by right translations. Every nilpotent element $u$ in $\frak{g}$ defines a character $\psi_u$ of $N_u(k)\backslash N_u(\mathbb A)$ and functional on $\Pi$ by
\[
\int_{N_u(k)\backslash N_u(\mathbb A)} f(n) \bar{\psi}_u(n) dn
\]
where $f\in \Pi$. The set of nilpotent $G(k)$-orbits such that this functional is non-trivial is a {\it (global) wave-front set} of $\Pi$.
Let $\mathcal O$ be an orbit contained in the wave-front set of $\Pi$.
Corollary \ref{cor:global}, proved by an argument analogous to the one in the local setting, states that, under certain conditions, a slightly larger orbit $\mathcal O'$ is also contained in the wave-front set of $\Pi$. As a consequence, if $G$ is classical, only special orbits are maximal in the wave-front set of $\Pi$.
For a background of the global result the reader can consult \cite{GRS03}, \cite{G06} or \cite{JL15}. In fact, the basic idea of this paper is already contained in
these papers, for example, in Theorem 3.1 of \cite{G06}.
Finally, we consider split exceptional groups. In this case there are
several non-special orbits that cannot be eliminated, as maximal elements in the wave-front set, by either our or M\oe glin's method.
These orbits are completely odd, non-special orbits, as conjectured by Nevins \cite{N02}, and are denoted by
$\ast\ast$ in the tables given in Sections \ref{S:G_2} - \ref{S:E_8}.
The first example of such orbit is the minimal orbit for the exceptional group ${\mathrm {G}}_2$. However, this orbit cannot be a maximal element in the wave front set by a more
elaborate argument contained in \cite{LS}. Thus, it is still reasonable to expect that, for algebraic groups, only special orbits appear as the maximal elements in the wave-front set of a representation of $G$.
\section{Heisenberg group}
Assume, from now on, that the characteristic of $k$ is not $2$. Let $\frak{h}$ be a Heisenberg Lie algebra over $k$ with the center $\frak{z}$.
Let $H=\exp(\frak{h})$ be the Heisenberg group. As a set, $H=\frak{z}$, but the multiplication
in $H$ is given by the Campbell-Hausdorff formula,
\[
x\cdot y=x+y + \frac{1}{2}[x,y].
\]
The center of $H$ is $Z=\exp(\frak{z})$.
A polarization of $H$ is a decomposition of the Lie algebra
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
\frak{h} = \log(X)\oplus \log (Y) \oplus \frak{z}
\end{equation}
such that $X=\exp(\log X)$ and $Y=\exp(\log Y)$ are abelian subgroups of $H$.
The group $XZ$ is a maximal abelian subgroup of $H$.
Assume now that $k$ is a local field. Fix a non-trivial character $\psi$ of $k$. By choosing an identification $Z$ with $k$ we view $\psi$ as a character of $Z$.
For every $y\in Y$ we have a character
$\psi_y: X\rightarrow \mathbb C^{\times}$ given by
\[
\psi_{y}(x)= \psi([y,x]) \text{ for every } x\in X
\]
where $[x,y]=xyx^{-1}y^{-1}$. Let $\rho_{\psi}$ be the representation of $H$ obtained by the smooth induction of the character $1\boxtimes \psi$ of $XZ$.
The representation $\rho_{\psi}$ is realized on the space $S(Y)$ of Schwartz functions on $Y$. The action on $f\in S(Y)$ is given by
\[
\rho_{\psi}(y) (f)(u) = f(uy)\text{ for every } y\in Y
\]
and
\[
\rho_{\psi}(x)(f)(u) = \psi_u(x) f(u) \text{ for all } x\in X.
\]
The same formulae also define the action of $H$ on $L^2(Y)$. This is the Schr\" odinger model of the unique irreducible unitary representation of $H$ with the central character $\psi$. The subspace of $H$-smooth vectors in $L^2(Y)$ is $S(Y)$.
\begin{prop} \label{P1:local}
Let $k$ be a non-archimedean field. Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $H$ such that $Z$ acts on $\pi$ as the character $\psi$. The bilinear map
${\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)\times \rho_{\psi} \rightarrow \pi$ given by $(A,v) \mapsto A(v)$ descends to a canonical isomorphism
\[
{\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)\otimes \rho_{\psi} \cong \pi.
\]
If ${\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)\neq 0$ then $\pi_{X, \psi_y}\neq 0$, for every $y\in Y$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} The first part, the isomorphism given by $A\otimes v \mapsto A(v)$, is in \cite{W03}.
If $\ell$ is an arbitrary functional on ${\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)$ and $\ell_y$ the functional on
$S(Y)$ given by evaluating functions $f\in S(Y)$ at $y$, then $\ell\otimes \ell_y$ transforms under the action of $X$ as $\psi_y$. This proves the second part.
\end{proof}
Now assume that $k$ is a global field. Let $k_v$ denote either a local non-archimedian completion of $k$, or $k_{\infty}=k\otimes_{\mathbb Q} \mathbb R$.
Let $\mathbb{A}$ be the corresponding ring of ad\` eles. It is a restricted product of all $k_v$.
Let $\psi$ be an additive character of $\mathbb A$ trivial on $k$.
As in the local case, every $y\in Y(\mathbb A)$, defines a character $\psi_y$ of $X(\mathbb{A})$. If $y\in Y(k)$ the the character $\psi_y$ is trivial on $X(k)$.
The group $H(\mathbb A)$ has an irreducible
unitary representation with the central character $\psi$. This representation is unique up to isomorphism.
It is realized on $L^2(Y(\mathbb A))$.
The subspace of $H(\mathbb A)$-smooth vectors in this realization
is $S(Y(\mathbb A))$. This space is isomorphic to the restricted tenor product of $S(Y(k_v))$.
The unique irreducible representation of $H(\mathbb A)$ has another realization on
$L^2_{\psi}(H(k)\backslash H(\mathbb{A}))$, where the subscript $\psi$ denotes the subspace of
functions transforming as $\psi$ under the action of $Z(\mathbb{A})$.
This is the lattice model. In this realization,
the subspace $\Theta_{\psi}$ of $H(\mathbb A)$-smooth vectors is the space of smooth functions on $H(k)\backslash H(\mathbb{A})$
transforming as $\psi$ under the action of $Z(\mathbb{A})$.
For every $\theta \in \Theta_{\psi}$ and $u\in Y(\mathbb A)$, let
\[
f_{\theta}(u)=
\int_{X(k)\backslash X(\mathbb{A})} \theta(xu) dx.
\]
Then $\theta \mapsto f_{\theta}$ is an isomorphism of $\Theta_{\psi}$ and $S(Y(\mathbb A))$, the spaces of $H(\mathbb A)$-smooth vectors in the two models of the Heisenberg representation.
\begin{prop} \label{P1:global}
Let $k$ be a global field. Let $\Pi$ be a non-zero subspace of $\Theta_{\psi}$, stable under the action of $H(\mathbb A)$ by the right translations.
Then, for every $y\in Y(k)$, there exists $\theta\in \Pi$ such that
\[
\int_{X(k)\backslash X(\mathbb{A})} \theta(x) \bar{\psi}_y(x) dx \neq 0.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} Since the map $\theta \mapsto f_{\theta}$ is injective, there exists $u'\in Y(\mathbb A)$ and $\theta'\in \Pi$ such that
$f_{\theta'}(u')\neq 0$. Let $\theta$ be the right translate of $\theta'$ by $y^{-1}u'$. Then
\[
\int_{X(k)\backslash X(\mathbb{A})} \theta(xy) dx \neq 0.
\]
Next, we have the following easy sequence of equalities,
\[
\theta(xy)=\theta([x,y]yx)=\theta(yx) \bar{\psi}_y(x)=\theta(x)\ \bar{\psi}_y(x)
\]
where, for example, the last identity holds since $\theta$ is left $H(k)$-invariant. Substituting $\theta(x)\ \bar{\psi}_y(x)$ for $\theta(xy)$ in the integral yields
the proposition.
\end{proof}
\section{Jacobi group}
In this section we first introduce a type of Jacobi group that we shall need, and then define a notion of generic characters of certain abelian,
unipotent subgroups of the Jacobi group.
For our purposes, a Jacobi group $J$ is a semi-direct product of $M$, a central extension of ${{\mathrm{SL}}}_2$, and the Heisenberg group $H$.
Let $\frak{sl}_2$ be the Lie algebra of $M$. We assume that, under the adjoint action of $\frak{sl}_2$, the Lie algebra $\frak{h}$ of $H$ decomposes as $m V_2 \oplus \frak{z}$, where $V_2$ is the irreducible 2-dimensional representation of $\frak{sl}_2$.
Let
\[
s=\left(\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1\end{matrix}\right).
\]
This assumption implies that there is a polarization (\ref{eq2}) of $\frak{h}$
where $\log X$ and $\log Y$ are the spaces of $s$-weight 1 and -1, respectively. In particular, $\log X\oplus \frak{z}$ is a maximal abelian subalgebra of $\frak{h}$.
Let $\frak{n}$ be the unipotent subgroup of upper triangular matrices in
$\frak{sl}_2$, i.e. elements in $\frak{sl}_2$ of $s$-weight 2. Then
\[
\frak{u}=\frak{n} \oplus \log X \oplus\frak{z}
\]
is an abelian sub-algebra of the Lie algebra of $J$. Let $U=\exp(\mathfrak u)$.
In order to discuss characters of $U$, it
will be convenient to work with an explicit realization of $J$.
Let $e_0, \ldots , e_{m}, f_{m}, \ldots , f_0$ be a basis of a vector space of dimension $2m+2$.
Let $\langle,\rangle$ be a symplectic form such that
\[
\langle e_i, e_j\rangle =0, \langle f_i, f_j\rangle =0\text{ and } \langle e_i, f_j\rangle =\delta_{ij}.
\]
Let ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m+2}$ be the group of linear transformations preserving the form $\langle,\rangle$, and $\frak{sp}_{2m+2}$ the corresponding Lie algebra.
If $A$ is a square matrix, let $A^{\top}$ denote the transpose of $A$ with respect to the opposite diagonal.
The Lie algebra $\frak{sp}_{2m+2}$, in the basis $e_0, \ldots e_{m}, f_{m}, \ldots f_0$, consists of block matrices
\[
\left(\begin{matrix} A & B \\
C & D \end{matrix}\right)
\]
where $B=B^{\top}$, $C=C^{\top}$ and $D=-A^{\top}$. In this identification, the Killing form on the Lie algebra is given by the trace pairing.
In this setting the Heisenberg group $H$ is the unipotent radical of the maximal parabolic subgroup $P$ of ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m+2}$ stabilizing the line through $e_0$.
A Levi factor of $L$ of $P$ is given as the subgroup of all elements in $P$ stabilizing the line through $f_0$. The derived group of $L$ is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m}$, the subgroup
of ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m+2}$ fixing $e_0$ and $f_0$. The conjugation action
of ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m}$ on $H$ gives an isomorphism of ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m}$ and the group of outer automorphisms of $H$. In order to write down $J$, we need to choose an embedding of
${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ into ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m}$. Roughly speaking, we embed ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ diagonally into $m$ long-root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$'s. Up to conjugation, all such embeddings can be described as follows.
Fix an $m$-tuple $(a_1, \ldots , a_{m})$ of non-zero elements in $k^{\times}$.
Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ be the subgroup of ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m}$ such that, for every $i\neq 0$, it acts on the plane spanned by $e_i,f_i$ in the standard way with respect to the basis $a_i e_i, f_i$. We let $J$ be the semi direct product of $H$ with $M$, a central extension of this ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
The algebra $\frak{u}=\frak{n}\oplus \log X \oplus\frak{z}$ now
consists of all matrices such that $A=C=D=0$ and (in the case $m=2$)
\[
B=\left(\begin{matrix} x_2 & x_1 & z \\
0 & n_1 & x_1 \\
n_2 & 0 & x_2 \end{matrix}\right)
\]
where $n_i=a_i n$, for some $n\in k$.
Thus, we identify $\frak{u}$ with triples $(n,x,z)$ where $x=(x_1, \ldots , x_{m})$. Using the Killing form on $\frak{sp}_{2m+2}$
the dual space of $\frak{u}$ is identified with the quotient $\frak{sp}_{2m+2}/\frak{u}^{\perp}$. As a complement of
$\frak{u}^{\perp}$ in $\frak{sp}_{2m+2}$ we can take the set of all matrices such that $A=B=D=0$ and (in the case $m=2$)
\[
C=\left(\begin{matrix} x^*_2 & 0 & n^*_2 \\
x^*_1 & n^*_1 & 0 \\
z^*& x^*_1 & x^*_2 \end{matrix}\right)
\]
where $n^*_i=a^{-1}_i n^*$, for some $n^*\in k$.
Thus, we identify the dual $\frak{u}^*$ with the set of triples $(n^*,x^*,z^*)$, where $x=(x^*_1, \ldots , x^*_{m})$.
Now the natural pairing $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle$ between $\frak{u}$ and $\frak{u}^*$ is explicitly given by
\[
\langle (n,x,z), (n^*,x^*,z^*) \rangle= Tr(BC)= zz^* +2\sum_{i=1}^{m}x_ix^*_i +m nn^*.
\]
The commutative sub algebra $\log Y$ consists of matrices such that $B=C=0$ and (in the case $m=2$)
\[
A=\left(\begin{matrix} 0 & y_2 & y_3 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \end{matrix}\right).
\]
Thus, any element in $\log Y$ is identified with an $m$-tuple $y=(y_1, \ldots , y_m)$. The group $Y$ normalizes $U$. Hence $Y$ acts, by conjugation, on
$\frak{u}$ and we have a co-adjoint action of $Y$ on $\frak{u}^*$. A short calculation shows that $\exp(y)$ acts on $(n^*,x^*, z^*)\in \frak{u}^*$ by
\[
(n^*,x^*, z^*) \mapsto (n^* - 2x^*\cdot y +z^* y\cdot y , x^*-z^*y, z^*)
\]
where the dot product on $k^m$ is the one weighted by $a_i$'s, i.e.
\[
y\cdot y=\sum_{i=1}^{m} a_i y_i y_i .
\]
It follows that the homogeneous polynomial $\Delta : \frak{u}^* \rightarrow k$
\[
\Delta(n^*,x^*,z^*)=n^*z^*-x^*\cdot x^*
\]
is invariant under the action of $Y$. Note that $(n^* ,x^*, z^*)$ is in the $Y$-orbit of $(\Delta/z^*, 0, z^*)$, if $z^*\neq 0$
. We record this in the following proposition.
\begin{prop} \label{P3:generic} The polynomial $\Delta(n^*,x^*, z^*)=n^*z^* -x^*\cdot x^*$ on the linear space $\frak{u}^*$
is invariant under the co-adjoint action of $Y$. Any element
$(n^* ,x^*, z^*)$ with $z^*\neq 0$ is the $Y$-orbit of $(\Delta/z^*, 0,z^*)$.
\end{prop}
If $\psi$ is a nontrivial character of $k$ then any $u^*\in \frak{u}$ defines a character $\psi_{u^*}$ of $U$ by
\[
\psi_{u^*}(\exp(u)) =\psi(\langle u,u^*\rangle).
\]
\begin{defn} \label{D:generic}
The character $\psi_{u^*}$ of $U$ is \underline{generic} if $\Delta(u^*)\neq 0$.
\end{defn}
\section{Fourier-Jacobi models}
In this section we define local and global Fourier-Jacobi models of representations of the Jacobi group $J$ with non-trivial action of the center $Z$. The
Fourier-Jacobi model is a representation of $M$. If the Fourier-Jacobi model is Whittaker generic, then the original representation of $J$ is generic in the sense of
Definition \ref{D:generic}.
Fix a non-trivial character
$\psi$ of $Z$. Realize $J$ as a subgroup of ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{2m+2}(k)$, as in the previous section.
In particular, we have fixed an identification of $Z$ and $k$. In this way, $\psi$ can be viewed as
a character of $k$. Now every $u^*\in \frak{u}$ gives a character $\psi_{u^*}$ of $U$.
\smallskip
Assume now that $k$ is a local field. Then, by Weil, the representation $\rho_{\psi}$ extends to $J$. We shall need the following about this extension.
The group of upper triangular matrices in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(k)$ canonically splits in any central extension. In particular any element $n$ in $N=\exp(\mathfrak{n})\subset J$ is
uniquely represented by a matrix $\left(\begin{smallmatrix}
1 & x\\
0 & 1
\end{smallmatrix}\right)$. Now for every $f \in S(Y)$ and $y=\exp(y_1, \ldots , y_{m}) \in Y$,
\[
(\rho_{\psi}(n) f)(y)= \psi(x \sum_{i=1}^{m} a_iy_i^2) f(y) ,
\]
where $a_i$'s are as in Section 3.
Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $J$ such that the center $Z$ of $H$ acts on $\pi$ by $\psi$.
Then there is a representation $\sigma$ of $J$ on $FJ_{\psi}(\pi):= {\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)$ defined by
\[
A \mapsto \sigma(g)(A)= {\pi}(g) \cdot A \cdot \rho_{\psi}(g^{-1}).
\]
for every $g\in J$ and $A\in {\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)$.
Now the isomorphism in Proposition \ref{P1:local} is an isomorphism of $J$-modules.
Note that the subgroup $H$ acts \underline{trivially}.
Hence $(\sigma, FJ_{\psi}(\pi))$ is a representation of $M$.
\begin{prop}\label{P2:local}
Let $k$ be a non-archimedean field.
Let $\pi$ be a smooth $J$-module such that $Z$ acts on $\pi$ by the character $\psi$.
If $(\sigma, FJ_{\psi}(\pi))$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M$,
then $\pi_{U, \psi_{u^*}}\neq 0$ for $u^*=(n^*,0,1)$ for some $n^*\in k^{\times}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Since ${\mathrm{Hom}}_H(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)$ is Whittaker-generic, as a representation of $M$, there is $n^* \in k^{\times}$ and a
a non-zero functional $\ell$ on ${\mathrm{Hom}}_H(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)$ such that
\[
\ell(\sigma(n) A) = \psi(n^*x) \ell(A)
\]
for all $A\in {\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi}, \pi)$ and $n \in N$, where $n$ is represented by $\left(\begin{smallmatrix}
1 & x\\
0 & 1
\end{smallmatrix}\right)$.
Recall that we have a decomposition
\[
\pi= \sigma\otimes \rho_{\psi},
\]
where $\rho_{\psi}$ acts on $S(Y)$. Let
\[
\ell_1: S(Y) \rightarrow \mathbb C
\]
be the functional given by evaluating functions at $1\in Y$. Then $\ell\otimes \ell_1$ is a functional of $\pi$ that transforms as $\psi_{u^*}$ under the action of $U$,
where $u^*=(n^*,0,1)$.
\end{proof}
Let $k$ be a global field, and fix a non-trivial character $\psi$ of $Z(\mathbb A)/Z(k)$.
Let $\rho_{\bar{\psi}}$ (note the complex conjugate!) be the Weil representation of $J({\mathbb {A}})$ on $S(Y({\mathbb {A}}))$.
For any function $\phi \in S(Y({\mathbb {A}}))$ define a theta series
\[
\theta^{\phi}_{\bar{\psi}}(hg)= \sum_{\xi \in Y(k)} \rho_{\bar\psi}(hg)\phi(\xi)= \sum_{\xi \in Y(k)} \rho_{\bar{\psi}}(\xi hg)\phi(1)
\]
where $h \in H({\mathbb {A}})$ and $g \in M({\mathbb {A}})$.
Let $\Pi$ be a space of smooth functions on $J(k) \backslash J(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of $J(\mathbb A)$ by right translations and such that $Z(\mathbb A)$ acts by the character $\psi$. For every $\phi \in S({\mathbb {A}})$ and $f\in \Pi$, the function $h\mapsto f(hg) \theta_{\phi}(hg)$, where $h\in H({\mathbb {A}})$, is left $Z({\mathbb {A}})$-invariant, hence it can be viewed as a function on $V=H/Z$.
Let ${\mathrm{FJ}}_{\psi}(\Pi)$ be the representation of $M({\mathbb {A}})$ spanned by the functions
\[
F_{f,\phi}(g) := \int_{V(k) \backslash V({\mathbb {A}})} f(vg)\theta^{\phi}_{\bar\psi}(vg)dv,
\]
where $f$ runs over $\Pi$, $\phi$ runs over $S(Y({\mathbb {A}}))$. Using the definition of $\theta^{\phi}_{\bar{\psi}}$ and that $f$ is left $\xi$-invariant for all
$\xi\in Y(k)$, the expression for $ F_{f,\phi}(g)$ can be made more explicit as
\[
F_{f,\phi}(g) = \int_{X(k) \backslash V({\mathbb {A}})} f(vg)[\rho_{\bar\psi}(vg) \phi](1)dv.
\]
The following is a global analogue of Proposition \ref{P2:local}.
\begin{prop} \label{P2:global}
Let $k$ be a global field.
Let $\Pi$ be a space of smooth functions on $J(k) \backslash J(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of $J(\mathbb A)$ by right translations and such that $Z(\mathbb A)$ acts by the character $\psi$.
If $FJ_{\psi}(\Pi)$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M({\mathbb {A}})$,
then there exists $f\in \Pi$ and $u^*=(n^*, 0,1)$ where $n^*\in k^{\times}$ such that
\[
\int_{U(k)\backslash U(\mathbb{A})} f(u) \bar{\psi}_{u*}(u) du \neq 0.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} For every $n^*\in k$ let $\psi_{n^*}$ be a character of $N({\mathbb {A}})$ defined by $\psi_{n^*}(n)=\psi(n^*x)$ where
$n=\left(\begin{smallmatrix} 1 & x \\ 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix}\right)$.
Since $FJ_{\psi}(\Pi)$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M({\mathbb {A}})$, there is $f' \in \Pi$, $\phi \in S(Y({\mathbb {A}}))$ and $n^* \in k^{\times}$, such that the following integral is non-vanishing:
\[
\int_{N(k) \backslash N({\mathbb {A}})} \int_{X(k) \backslash V({\mathbb {A}})} f'(vn) [\rho_{\bar\psi}(vn) \phi](1) \overline{\psi}_{n*}(n)dv dn \neq 0.
\]
Since $X(k)\backslash V({\mathbb {A}})$ is a union of $X(k)\backslash X({\mathbb {A}}) \cdot y$, where $y$ runs over $Y({\mathbb {A}})$, there exists $y\in Y({\mathbb {A}})$ such that
\[
\int_{N(k) \backslash N({\mathbb {A}})} \int_{X(k) \backslash X({\mathbb {A}})} f'(xyn)[{\rho}_{\bar\psi}(xyn)\phi](1)\overline{\psi}_{n*}(n)dx dn \neq 0.
\]
Since $yn=x'ny$, for some element $x'\in X({\mathbb {A}})$, after changing the variable $x$, the previous expression is equivalent to
\[
\int_{N(k) \backslash N({\mathbb {A}})} \int_{X(k) \backslash X({\mathbb {A}})} f'(xny)[{\rho}_{\bar\psi}(xny)\phi](1)\overline{\psi}_{n*}(n)dx dn \neq 0.
\]
Since $[{\rho}_{\bar\psi}(xny)\phi](1)= \phi(y)$, it follows that
\[
\int_{N(k) \backslash N({\mathbb {A}})} \int_{X(k) \backslash X({\mathbb {A}})} f'(xny)\overline{\psi}_{n*}(n)dx dn \neq 0.
\]
Let $f$ be the right translate of $f'$ by $y$. The conclusion of the proposition holds for this $f$.
\end{proof}
\section{Nilpotent orbits}
Let $G$ be a central extension of a reductive group over a local field $k$.
Let $\frak{g}$ be the Lie algebra of $G$. Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$.
Let $\varphi : \frak{sl}_2 \rightarrow \frak{g}$ be a homomorphism corresponding to $u$ by the Jacobson-Morozov theorem.
Let $\psi$ be a smooth character of $k$ and $\kappa$ the Killing form on $\frak{g}$. Then $u$ defines a function
\[
\psi_u: \frak{g} \rightarrow \mathbb C^{\times}
\]
by
\begin{equation}\label{eq1}
\psi_u(x) =\psi (\kappa (u, x)).
\end{equation}
Let $\frak{n}$ be a nilpotent subalgebra of $\frak{g}$. If $\kappa(u,[x,y])=0$ for all $x,y\in \frak{n}$ then $\exp(x) \mapsto \psi_u(x)$ defines a character of
$N=\exp(\frak{n})$. Abusing notation, we shall use $\psi_u$ to denote this character of $N$.
One prominent example arises as follows. Let
\[
s = \varphi \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -1
\end{matrix}\right).
\]
Let $\frak{g}(j)=\{ x\in \frak{g} ~|~ [s,x]= j\cdot x\}$ be the $s$-{\em weight $j$ space}. Let
\[
\frak{n}_u=\oplus_{j\geq 2} \frak{g}(j).
\]
Since $u\in \frak{g}(-2)$ and two weight spaces are perpendicular unless the weights are opposite, it follows that $\kappa(u,[x,y])=0$ for all $x,y\in \frak{n}_u$. Hence $\psi_u$ defines a character of $N_u=\exp(\frak{n}_u)$. The pair $(N_u, \psi_u)$ is
precisely the one discussed in the introduction.
In a similar fashion, if $k$ is a global field and $\psi$ a smooth character of $\mathbb A$ trivial on $k$, then any
nilpotent element $u$ in $\frak{g}$ defines a character $\psi_u$ of $N_u(\mathbb A)$ trivial on $N_u(k)$.
\section{Raising nilpotent orbits} \label{S:raising}
We continue with the set up of the previous section.
Let $\mathfrak c \subseteq \mathfrak g$ be the centralizer of
$\varphi(\mathfrak{sl}_2)$ in $\mathfrak g$. Assume we have a non-trivial map
\[
\varphi_{\mathfrak c} : \mathfrak{sl}_2 \rightarrow \mathfrak c.
\]
Let
\[
s_{\mathfrak c} =\varphi_{\mathfrak c} \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -1
\end{matrix}\right)
\text{ and }
u_{\mathfrak c} =\varphi_{\mathfrak c} \left(\begin{matrix}
0 & 0 \\
\nu & 0
\end{matrix}\right)
\]
for some $\nu \neq 0$. The map $\varphi_{\mathfrak c}$ lifts to a map $\varphi_{\mathfrak c} : \widetilde{{\mathrm{SL}}}_2 \rightarrow G$ where $\widetilde{{\mathrm{SL}}}_2$ is a central extension
of ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Let $\mathfrak g(j,l)$ be the subspace of $\mathfrak{g}$ of all elements of
$s$-weight $j$ and $s_{\mathfrak c}$-weight $l$.
Let $u'=u+u_{\frak{c}}$. Note that $\frak{n}_u$ is a sum of $\frak{g}(j,l)$ such that $j\geq 2$, while
$\frak{n}_{u'}$ is a sum of $\frak{g}(j,l)$ such that $j+l\geq 2$.
Assume that
\begin{enumerate}
\item The $s_{\mathfrak c}$-weights $l$ are bounded by 2.
\item Under the action of $\varphi_{\mathfrak c}(\frak{sl}_{2})$
\[
\mathfrak g(1)= \mathfrak g(1)^{\varphi_{\mathfrak c}(\frak{sl}_{2})} \oplus m V_2.
\]
\item $\dim \mathfrak g(0,2) = \dim \frak{g}(2,2) + 1$.
\end{enumerate}
Here $V_2$ denotes the irreducible $2$-dimensional representation of $\frak{sl}_{2}$.
Let $\log X=\frak{g}(1,1)$ and $\log Y=\frak{g}(1,-1)$. Let
$\frak{h}= \log X\oplus \log Y \oplus \frak{n}_u$
and $H=\exp(\frak{h})$.
Let $N'_u$ be the co-dimension one subgroup of $N_u$ such that $\psi_u$ is trivial on $N'_u$.
Then $H/ N'_u$ is a Heisenberg group with the center $N_u/N'_u$. Let $J$ be the semi direct product of $H/ N'_u$ and $M$ where $M$ is (a central extension of)
$\varphi_{\mathfrak c}(\widetilde{{\mathrm{SL}}}_{2})$.
It is a Jacobi group. Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $G$. Then $\pi_{N_u, \psi_u}$ is a representation of $J$.
Assume that $\pi_{N_u, \psi_u}\neq 0$.
If the natural action of $M$ on $FJ_{\psi_u}(\pi_{N_u, \psi_u})={\mathrm{Hom}}_{H}(\rho_{\psi_u}, \pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ is Whittaker-generic, i.e. not a multiple of the trivial
representation, then we can raise the orbit. More precisely, we have the following:
\begin{prop}\label{P5:local}
Assume that $k$ is a non-archimedean local field. Assume that the conditions (1-3) above are all satisfied.
Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $G$ such that $\pi_{N_u, \psi_u}\neq 0$. Assume that $FJ_{\psi_u}(\pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$
is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M$. Then $\pi_{N_{u'}, \psi_{u'}}\neq 0$, where $u'=u+u_{\mathfrak c}$,
for some choice of nilpotent $u_{\mathfrak c}\neq 0$ in $\varphi_{\mathfrak c}(\frak{sl}_{2})$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathfrak{n} \subset \varphi_{\mathfrak c}( \mathfrak{sl}_{2})$ be the subspace of
elements of $s_{\mathfrak c}$-weight 2 and let $N= \exp (\mathfrak{n}) \subset M$.
Let $\frak{u}= \frak{n} \oplus \log X \oplus \mathfrak{n}_{u}$ and $U=\exp(\frak{u})$.
Since $FJ_{\psi_u}(\pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M$, by Proposition \ref{P2:local},
$\pi_{U, \tilde{\psi}}\neq 0$ for some character $\tilde{\psi}$ of $U$, equal to $\psi_u$ on $N_u$, trivial on $X$ and equal to
$\psi_{u_{\mathfrak c}}$ on $N$ for some choice of
nilpotent $u_{\mathfrak c}\neq 0$ in $\varphi_{\mathfrak c}(\frak{sl}_{2})$. In the remainder of the proof we shall ``transfer'' the character $\tilde{\psi}$ from $U$ to $N_{u'}$ using a Heisenberg group that appears as a quotient of $UN_{u'}$.
Consider the sum $\oplus_j \frak{g}(j,2)$ over all $j$. It is an $\varphi(\frak{sl}_2)$-module. By representation theory of
$\frak{sl}_2$, the map $x \rightarrow [u,x]$ is an injection of $\frak{g}(2,2)$ into $\frak{g}(0,2)$ and the complement of the image is spanned by
$\varphi(\frak{sl}_2)$-fixed vectors. Since $\mathfrak{n}_{\mathfrak c}$ is fixed by $\varphi(\frak{sl}_2)$ and
$\dim \mathfrak g(0,2) = \dim \frak{g}(2,2) + 1$ it follows that
\[
\mathfrak g(0,2) = \mathfrak{n}_{\mathfrak c} \oplus [u, \frak{g}(2,2)].
\]
Let $\frak{u}'$ be the space obtained from $\frak{u}$ by removing
the summand $\frak{g}(2,-2)$ and adding $[u, \frak{g}(2,2)]$, so $\frak{u}'$ is a direct sum of
$\frak{g}(0,2)$, $\frak{g}(1,1)$ and $\frak{g}(j,l)$ for all $j\geq 2$ but not $(j,l)=(2,-2)$.
Since $\frak{n}_{u'}$ is a sum of $\frak{g}(j,l)$ with $j+l \geq 2$, and $|l| \leq 2$ by the first assumption, it follows that $\frak{u}'$ is a subalgebra containing
$\frak{n}_{u'}$.
\begin{lem} \label{L5:char} Let $U'=\exp(\frak{u}')$. Then $\psi_{u'}$ is a character of $U'$, equal to $\tilde{\psi}$ on $U'\cap U$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} To prove that $\psi_{u'}$ is a character, we need to check $\kappa(u',[x,y])=0$ for all $x,y\in \frak{u}'$. Clearly, It suffices to prove vanishing when $x\in\frak{g}(j,l)$ and $y\in\frak{g}(j',l')$.
Recall that $u\in \frak{g}(-2,0)$ and $u_{\mathfrak c}\in \frak{g}(0,-2)$. If $\kappa(u_{\mathfrak c}, [x,y])\neq 0$, then $j+j'=0$. Hence $j=j'=0$ and $x,y\in \frak{g}(0,2)$. But then $[x,y]=0$, a
contradiction. If $\kappa(u, [x,y])\neq 0$, then $j+j'=2$ and $l+l'=0$. Hence up to permutation, $x\in\frak{g}(0,2)$ and $y\in\frak{g}(2,-2)$.
Again a contradiction, since $\frak{g}(2,-2)$ is not in $\frak{u}'$. Hence $\psi_{u'}$ is a character of $U'$.
Note that $U'\cap U= N_{\mathfrak c}X ( N_u \cap U')$. Since both, $\psi_{u'}$ and $\tilde{\psi}$, are equal to
$\psi_{u_{\mathfrak c}}$, $1$ and $\psi_u$ on the three factors, respectively, it follows that $\psi_{u'}= \tilde{\psi}$ on $U'\cap U$, as desired.
\end{proof}
Let $\frak{z}'=\frak{u} \cap \frak{u}'$ and let
\[
\frak h' = \frak{u} + \frak{u}' = [u, \frak{g}(2,2)] \oplus \frak{g}(2,-2) \oplus \frak{z}'.
\]
\begin{lem} \label{L:non-deg}
The pairing $\kappa(u',[x,y])$ where $x\in [u, \frak{g}(2,2)]$ and $y\in \frak{g}(2,-2)$ is non-degenerate.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Since $[x,y]\in \frak{g}(2)$ and $u_i \in \frak{g}(0)$,
$\kappa(u',[x,y]) =\kappa(u,[x,y])$. By the invariance of the Killing form, we have
\[
\kappa(u,[x,y]) =\kappa(y,[u,x]).
\]
The pairing is non-degenerate since $[u,[u, \frak{g}(2,2)]]=\frak{g}(-2,2)$, and the Killing form gives a non-degenerate paring between opposite weight spaces.
\end{proof}
Let $H'=\exp(\frak{h}')$ and $Z'=\exp(\frak{z'})$, i.e. $Z'=U\cap U'$.
Let $Z''$ be the co-dimension one subgroup of $Z'$ where the character $\psi_{u'}=\tilde{\psi}$ is trivial.
Lemma \ref{L:non-deg} implies that $H'/Z''$ is a Heisenberg group. Since $\pi_{U,\tilde{\psi}}\neq 0$, it follows that
\[
\pi_{Z',\tilde{\psi}}= \pi_{Z',\psi_{u'}}\neq 0.
\]
Proposition \ref{P1:local} implies that
$\pi_{U', \tilde{\psi}'}\neq 0$ for any character $\tilde{\psi}'$ of $U'$ extending $\psi_{u'}$ on $Z'$, in particular $\psi_{u'}$.
Since $N_{u'} \subseteq U'$, the proposition follows.
\end{proof}
Recall that $G$ is a central extension of a linear group. The map $\varphi_{\mathfrak c}$ lifts to a map $\varphi_{\mathfrak c} : \widetilde{{\mathrm{SL}}}_2 \rightarrow G$ where
$\widetilde{{\mathrm{SL}}}_2$ is a central extension
of ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ by $\mu_d$, the group of $d$-th roots of 1. A representation of $\widetilde{{\mathrm{SL}}}_2$ is called {\em genuine} if $\mu_d$ acts faithfully.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:local}
Assume that $k$ is a non-archimedean local field.
Assume that the conditions (1-3) above are all satisfied.
Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $G$ such that $\pi_{N_u, \psi_u}\neq 0$.
Assume, furthermore, that the restriction of $\pi$ to $\varphi_{\mathfrak c}(\widetilde{{\mathrm{SL}}}_2)$ is genuine.
If $d$ is $1$ and $m$ is odd, or $d$ is $2$ and $m$ is even, or $d > 2$ and $m$ is arbitrary, then
$\pi_{N_{u'}, \psi_{u'}}\neq 0$, where $u'=u+u_{\mathfrak c}$, for some choice of
nilpotent $u_{\mathfrak c}\neq 0$ in $\varphi_{\mathfrak c}(\frak{sl}_{2})$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} By properties of representations of Jacobi groups, the group $M$ acts on $\rho_{\psi_u}$ by its linear quotient if $m$ is even, or 2-fold central extension if $m$ is odd. Thus the conditions assure that
$FJ_{\psi_u}(\pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ is a genuine representation of non-trivial central extension of ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Hence, it is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M$ and Corollary follows from Proposition \ref{P5:local}.
\end{proof}
Now assume that $k$ is a global field. Let $\Pi$ be a space of smooth functions on $G(k) \backslash G(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of
$G(\mathbb A)$ by right translations. Let $\Pi_{N_u, \psi_u}$ be the space of smooth functions on $J(k) \backslash J(\mathbb A)$ consisting of
\[
\tilde{f}(g)= \int_{N_u(k)\backslash N_u(\mathbb A)} f(ng) \bar{\psi}_u(n) dn
\]
where $f$ runs through $\Pi$. Similarly one can define $\Pi_{U, \tilde{\psi}}$, where $\tilde{\psi}$ is a character of $U$.
Recall from Section 5 that one then can define $FJ_{\psi_u}(\Pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ which is the representation of $M({\mathbb {A}})$.
The following global version of Proposition \ref{P5:local} is proved
using Propositions \ref{P1:global} and \ref{P2:global} (instead of Propositions \ref{P1:local} and \ref{P2:local}). We omit the details.
\begin{prop} \label{P5:global}
Assume that $k$ is a global field.
Assume that the conditions (1-3) above are all satisfied.
Let $\Pi$ be a a space of smooth functions on $G(k) \backslash G(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of
$G(\mathbb A)$ by right translations such that
$\Pi_{N_u, \psi_u}\neq 0$.
Assume that $FJ_{\psi_u}(\Pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M({\mathbb {A}})$.
Then $\Pi_{N_{u'}, \psi_{u'}} \neq 0$,
where $u'=u+u_{\frak{c}}$, for some choice of
nilpotent $u_{\mathfrak c}\neq 0$ in $\frak{sl}_{2,{\mathfrak c}}$.
\end{prop}
We also have the following global analogue of Corollary \ref{cor:local}, with a similar argument (using Proposition \ref{P5:global} instead of Proposition \ref{P5:local}).
\begin{cor}\label{cor:global}
Assume that $k$ is a global field and $G({\mathbb {A}})$ is a $d$-fold central extension of a connected reductive group.
Assume that the conditions (1-3) above are all satisfied.
Let $\Pi$ be a a space of smooth functions on $G(k) \backslash G(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of
$G(\mathbb A)$ by right translations such that
$\Pi_{N_u, \psi_u}\neq 0$.
Assume further that either $d$ is $1$ and $m$ is odd, or $d$ is $2$ and $m$ is even, or $d > 2$ and $m$ is arbitrary.
Then $\Pi_{N_{u'}, \psi_{u'}} \neq 0$,
where $u'=u+u_{\frak{c}}$, for some choice of
nilpotent $u_{\mathfrak c}\neq 0$ in $\frak{sl}_{2,{\mathfrak c}}$.
\end{cor}
\section{Symplectic-orthogonal groups}
Let $W$ be a vector space over a $p$-adic field $k$ equipped with a non-degenerate symmetric or skew-symmetric bilinear form $\langle , \rangle$.
Let $\frak{g}$ be the Lie algebra of endomorphisms of $W$ preserving the bilinear form. Let
\[
i : W \otimes W \rightarrow {\mathrm{End}}(W)
\]
be a map defined by
\[
i(x\otimes y)(z) = \langle y,z\rangle x - \langle z, x\rangle y
\]
for all $x,y,z\in W$.
If $\langle , \rangle$ is symmetric then $i$ gives a bijection between $\wedge^2 W$, the exterior square of $W$, and $\frak{g}$.
If $\langle , \rangle$ is skew-symmetric then then $i$ gives a bijection between $S^2 (W)$, the symmetric square of $W$, and $\frak{g}$.
Let $V_j$ be irreducible representation of
$\frak{sl}_2$ of dimension $j$. Then $V_j$ admits a unique, up to a non-zero scalar, $\frak{sl}_2$-invariant bilinear form $\langle , \rangle_j$.
This form is symmetric if $j$ is odd, and skew-symmetric if $j$ is even. We normalize $\langle , \rangle_j$ as follows.
Let $v_j\in V_j$ be a non-zero highest weight vector. Let $u=\left(\begin{smallmatrix} 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 \end{smallmatrix}\right)$.
Then $u^{j-1} v_j$ is a lowest weight vector. Hence the number
\[
a=\langle v_j, u^{j-1} v_j\rangle_j
\]
is non-zero. This number depends on the choice of $v_j$, however, its square class does not.
In order to distinguish the forms, we shall write $\langle,\rangle_j^a$ for this form or simply $\langle , \rangle_j$ if $a$ is in the class of 1. This normalization differs from the one in \cite{W01} by the factor $(-1)^{[(i-1)/2]}$.
Let $\varphi : \frak{sl}_2 \rightarrow \mathfrak g$.
Then, under the action of $\varphi(\frak{sl}_2)$, the symplectic space $W$ can be decomposed as
\begin{align}\label{eq3}
\begin{split}
W & = \oplus_j V_j \otimes U_j,\\
\langle , \rangle & =\oplus_j \langle,\rangle_j \otimes ( , )_j
\end{split}
\end{align}
where
\[
U_j = {\mathrm{Hom}}_{\frak{sl}_2}(V_j,V)
\]
with the form $(,)_j$. The nilpotent orbit of $u$ gives a partition $\underline{p}$ of $\dim(W)$ in which $j$ appears with multiplicity $\dim U_j$.
If the form on $W$ is symmetric then the forms $(,)_j$ and $\langle , \rangle_j$ have the same signs. Otherwise the two forms have
different signs. If $(,)_j$ is skew-symmetric then $\dim(U_j)$ is even. Thus $j$ in $\underline{p}$ must have even multiplicity. The conjugacy class of $u$ is determined
by the partition $\underline{p}$ and isomorphism classes of $(U_j, (,)_j)$.
Put $W_j=U_j\otimes V_j$, in the decomposition (\ref{eq3}).
If $\langle , \rangle$ is symmetric, then
\begin{align}\label{eq4}
\begin{split}
\frak{g}\cong \wedge^2(W) \cong (\oplus_j\wedge^2(W_j)) \oplus (\oplus_{i<j} W_i \otimes W_j),\\
\wedge^2(W_j)\cong \wedge^2(V_j) \otimes S^2(U_j)\oplus S^2(V_j) \otimes \wedge^2(U_j).
\end{split}
\end{align}
If $\langle , \rangle$ is skew-symmetric, then
\begin{align}\label{eq5}
\begin{split}
\frak{g}\cong S^2(W) \cong (\oplus_i S^2(W_j)) \oplus (\oplus_{i<j} W_i \otimes W_j), \\
S^2(W_j)\cong S^2(V_j) \otimes S^2(U_j)\oplus \wedge^2(V_j) \otimes \wedge^2(U_j).
\end{split}
\end{align}
If the decomposition \eqref{eq3} of $W$ contains a non-trivial summand such that the form $(,)_i$ is skew-symmetric, then
${\mathrm{Sp}}(U_i)$ acts naturally on $W$ preserving the form $\langle, \rangle$. This gives an inclusion of ${\mathrm{Sp}}(U_i)$ into $G$. The adjoint action of
${\mathrm{Sp}}(U_i)$ on $\mathfrak g$ commutes with $\varphi(\mathfrak{sl}_2)$. In particular, ${\mathrm{Sp}}(U_i)$ acts on each $s$-weight space $\mathfrak g(j)$.
\begin{lem}\label{L:decomposition}
Assume that the decomposition \eqref{eq3} of $W$ contains a non-trivial summand such that the form $(,)_i$ is skew-symmetric.
Let $\varphi_{\frak{c}} : {\mathrm{SL}}_2 \rightarrow {\mathrm{Sp}}(U_i)$ be a map corresponding to a long root of ${\mathrm{Sp}}(U_i)$.
Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$ be the image of $\varphi_{\frak{c}}$.
Then, under the adjoint action of ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$, $\frak{g}(1)$ decomposes as
$$\frak{g}(1)\cong \frak{g}(1)^{{\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}} \oplus m V_2,$$
where, if $i$ is odd,
\[
m=i(\sum_{j>i, j \text{ even}} \dim U_j) \oplus (\sum_{j < i, j \text{ even}} j \dim U_j)
\]
and, if $i$ is even,
\[
m=i(\sum_{j>i, j \text{ odd}} \dim U_j) \oplus (\sum_{j < i, j \text{ odd}} j \dim U_j).
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Under the action of ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$, the space $U_i$ decomposes as $V_2\oplus V_2^c$ where ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$ acts on $V_2^c$ trivially.
It follows from (\ref{eq4}) and (\ref{eq5}) that
\[
\oplus_{j\neq i} ((V_i \otimes V_j) (1))\otimes (V_2 \otimes U_j)
\]
is the complement of $\frak{g}(1)^{{\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}}$ in $\frak{g}(1)$.
On the other hand, $(V_i \otimes V_j) (1)\neq 0$ only for $i$ and $j$ of different parity, and then
\[
\dim ((V_i\otimes V_j )(1)) =\min\{i,j\}.
\]
The lemma follows.
\end{proof}
If the decomposition \eqref{eq3} of $W$ contains a non-trivial summand such that the form $(,)_i$ is symmetric, then
$\mathrm{O}(U_i)$ acts naturally on $W$ preserving the form $\langle, \rangle$. This gives an inclusion of $\mathrm{O}(U_i)$ into $G$. The adjoint action of
$\mathrm{O}(U_i)$ on $\mathfrak g$ commutes with $\varphi(\mathfrak{sl}_2)$. In particular, $\mathrm{O}(U_i)$ acts on each $s$-weight space $\mathfrak g(j)$.
\begin{lem}\label{L:decomposition-2}
Assume that the decomposition \eqref{eq3} of $W$ contains a non-trivial summand for $i$ such that the form $(,)_i$ is symmetric with dimension $\geq 4$, and has a two-dimensional isotropic sub-space.
Then $\mathrm{O}(U_i)$ has a parabolic subgroup fixing this sub-space with Levi subgroup isomorphic to ${\mathrm{GL}}_2 \times \mathrm{O}(U_i')$.
Let $\varphi_\frak{c} : {\mathrm{SL}}_2 \rightarrow \mathrm{O}(U_i)$ be a map corresponding to the roots of ${\mathrm{GL}}_2$.
Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$ be the image of $\varphi_{\frak{c}}$.
Then the structure of the ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$-module $\frak{g}(1)$ is given by
$$\frak{g}(1)\cong \frak{g}(1)^{{\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}} \oplus 2m V_2,$$
where, if $i$ is odd,
\[
m=i(\sum_{j>i, j \text{ even}} \dim U_j) \oplus (\sum_{j < i, j \text{ even}} j \dim U_j)
\]
and, if $i$ is even,
\[
m=i(\sum_{j>i, j \text{ odd}} \dim U_j) \oplus (\sum_{j < i, j \text{ odd}} j \dim U_j).
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Under the action of ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$, the space $U_i$ decomposes as $(V_2 \otimes U_2) \oplus (V_2 \otimes U_2)^c$ where ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$ acts on $(V_2 \otimes U_2)^c$ trivially, and $\dim(U_2)=2$.
It follows from (\ref{eq4}) and (\ref{eq5}) that
\[
\oplus_{j\neq i} ((V_i \otimes V_j) (1))\otimes ((V_2 \otimes U_2) \otimes U_j)
\]
is the complement of $\frak{g}(1)^{{\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}}$ in $\frak{g}(1)$.
On the other hand, $(V_i \otimes V_j) (1)\neq 0$ only for $i$ and $j$ of different parity, and then
\[
\dim ((V_i\otimes V_j )(1)) =\min\{i,j\}.
\]
The lemma follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Raising nilpotent orbits from symplectic stabilizers}
Let $G={\mathrm{Sp}}(W)$ or $\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$, if $W$ is a symplectic space, or $G=\mathrm{O}(W)$ if $W$ is an orthogonal space.
Assume that we are in the situation as in Lemma \ref{L:decomposition}, that is, the decomposition \eqref{eq3} of $W$ contains a non-trivial summand for $i$ such that the form $(,)_i$ is skew-symmetric.
Let $\varphi_{\frak{c}} : \frak{sl}_2 \rightarrow \frak{sp}(U_i)$ be a map corresponding to a long root of $\frak{sp}(U_i)$. Let
\[
\varphi'=\varphi\oplus \varphi_{\frak{c}} : \frak{sl}_2 \rightarrow \frak{g}
\]
and $u'=u+u_{\frak{c}}$, a nilpotent element corresponding to $\varphi'$. Since the orbit of $u_{\frak{c}}$ in $\frak{sl}_{2,{\frak{c}}} = \varphi_{\frak{c}} (\frak{sl}_{2})$ contains 0 in its closure, it follows that the closure of the orbit of $u'$ contains the orbit of $u$.
We shall now determine the partition $\underline{p}'$ corresponding to $u'$.
From the decomposition (\ref{eq3}) of $W$ under the action of $\varphi(\frak{sl}_2)$ one can easily obtain a similar decomposition for
$\varphi'(\frak{sl}_2)$. Indeed, under the action of $\varphi_{\frak{c}}(\frak{sl}_2)$, the symplectic space $U_i$ decomposes $U_i=V_2 \oplus V_2^c$ where $V_2$ is the irreducible 2-dimensional representation of $\frak{sl}_2$, and $\varphi_{\frak{c}}(\frak{sl}_2)$ acts on the complement $V_2^c$ trivially.
Now the Clebsch-Gordan formula $V_i\otimes V_2\cong V_{i-1} \oplus V_{i+1}$ implies that the partition $\underline{p'}$ is obtained from the partition $\underline{p}$, corresponding to $u$, by replacing a pair $(i,i)$ by $(i+1,i-1)$.
A more refined information about the conjugacy class of $u'$ is given by the following proposition.
\begin{prop} \label{P:forms} Let $U_j$ be the spaces in the decomposition of $W$ under the action of $\varphi(\frak{sl}_2)$. Then
the spaces $U'_j$ in the decomposition of $W$ under the action of $\varphi'(\frak{sl}_2)$ are
\[
U'_i= V_2^c, \, U'_{i+1}= U_{i+1}\oplus \langle b\rangle, \, U'_{i-1}= U_{i-1}\oplus \langle b\rangle ,
\]
for some $b\in k^{\times}$, and $U'_j=U_j$ otherwise. Here $\langle b\rangle$ is the one-dimensional orthogonal space with the form $bx^2$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $v_2\in V_2 \subseteq U_i$ be a highest weight vector. Let $a=(v_2, u_{\frak{c}} v_2)_i$, so that the restriction of $(,)_i$ to $V_2$ is the form previously denoted as
$\langle, \rangle_2^a$. Proposition follows from the following lemma, with $b=ai$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem} \label{L:forms}
With respect to the Clebsh-Gordan decomposition $V_i\otimes V_2\cong V_{i-1} \oplus V_{i+1}$, the form $\langle, \rangle_i \otimes \langle, \rangle^a_2$
decomposes as
\[
\langle, \rangle_i \otimes \langle, \rangle^a_2= \langle, \rangle_{i+1} ^{ai} \oplus \langle, \rangle_{i-1} ^{ai}
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Let $v_i\in V_i$ be a highest weight vector such that $\langle v_i, u^{i-1} v_i\rangle =1$. Then
\[
v_{i+1}= v_i \otimes v_2
\] is a highest weight vector of $V_{i+1}$. Using the Newton-Leibniz rule,
\[
(u+u_{\frak{c}})^i v_{i+1} = i \cdot (u^{i-1} v_i \otimes u_{\frak{c}} v_2).
\]
It follows that the pairing $\langle, \rangle_i \otimes \langle, \rangle^a_2$ evaluated at $v_{i+1}$ and $(u+u_{\frak{c}})^i v_{i+1}$ gives $ai$. Similarly,
\[
v_{i-1}= (i-1) \cdot (v_{i}\otimes u_{\frak{c}} v_2) - u v_i \otimes v_2
\] is a highest weight vector of $V_{i-1}$. Then
\[
(u+u_{\frak{c}})^{i-2} v_{i-1} = u^{i-2} v_i \otimes u_{\frak{c}} v_2 - u^{i-1} v_i \otimes v_2.
\]
Next, using $\langle -u v_i , u^{i-2} v_i\rangle_i = \langle v_i, u^{i-1} v_i\rangle_i =1$, the pairing $\langle, \rangle_i \otimes \langle, \rangle^a_2$ evaluated at
$v_{i-1}$ and $(u+u_{\frak{c}})^{i-2} v_{i-1}$ also gives $ai$.
\end{proof}
We shall now describe $\frak{g}(j,l)$.
Using the decompositions (\ref{eq4}), (\ref{eq5}) and $U_i=V_2\oplus V_2^c$ we see that $\frak{g}(j,l)\neq 0$ only for $|l|\leq 2$. In particular,
$\frak{g}(1,1)$ and $\frak{g}(0,2)$ are the only two such spaces contained in $\frak{n}_{u'}$ but not in $\frak{n}_{u}$.
Let
\[
E_i= \begin{cases} \wedge^2 V_i \text{ if $i$ is even} \\
S^2 V_i \text{ if $i$ is odd.}
\end{cases}
\]
Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq10}
\frak{g}(j,\pm 2) \cong E_i(j) \otimes S^2(V_2)(\pm 2).
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq10}, one can easily see that $\dim \frak{g}(0,2) = \dim \frak{g}(2,2) +1$, that is, the condition (3) in Section \ref{S:raising} is satisfied. Therefore, by Lemma \ref{L:decomposition}, all conditions (1-3) in Section \ref{S:raising} are satisfied.
The following proposition follows from Proposition \ref{P5:local}.
\begin{prop}\label{proplocal:sym}
Assume that we are in the situation as in Lemma \ref{L:decomposition} and $k$ is a non-archimedean local field. Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $G$. If $G=\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$ assume that $\pi$ is a
genuine representation. Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$ such that $\pi_{N_u,\psi_u}\neq 0$.
Assume that $FJ_{\psi_u}(\pi_{N_u, \psi_u})={\mathrm{Hom}}_{H_{u, \frak{c}}}(\rho_{\psi_u}, \pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M$.
Then $\pi_{N_{u'},\psi_{u'}}\neq 0$ for a nilpotent element $u'$ whose partition is obtained from the partition corresponding to $u$ via replacing a pair $(i,i)$ by $(i+1, i-1)$.
\end{prop}
There is also a global version of Proposition \ref{proplocal:sym}, which follows from Proposition \ref{P5:global}.
\begin{prop}\label{propglobal:sym}
Assume that we are in the situation as in Lemma \ref{L:decomposition} and $k$ is a global field. Let $\Pi$ be a space of smooth functions on
$G(k)\backslash G(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of $G(\mathbb A)$ by right translations. If $G=\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$ assume that $\Pi$ consists of
genuine functions. Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$ such that $\Pi_{N_u,\psi_u}\neq 0$.
Assume that $FJ_{\psi_u}(\Pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ (see Section 5 for definition) is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M({\mathbb {A}})$.
Then
$\Pi_{N_{u'},\psi_{u'}}\neq 0$
for a nilpotent element $u'$ whose partition is obtained from the partition corresponding to $u$ via replacing a pair $(i,i)$ by $(i+1, i-1)$.
\end{prop}
\section{Raising nilpotent orbits from orthogonal stabilizers}
Let $G={\mathrm{Sp}}(W)$ or $\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$, if $W$ is a symplectic space, or $G=\mathrm{O}(W)$ if $W$ is an orthogonal space.
Assume that we are in the situation as in Lemma \ref{L:decomposition-2}, that is, the decomposition \eqref{eq3} of $W$ contains a non-trivial summand for $i$ such that the form $(,)_i$ is symmetric with dimension $\geq 4$, and has a two-dimensional isotropic sub-space.
Then $O(U_i)$ has a parabolic subgroup fixing this sub-space with Levi subgroup isomorphic to ${\mathrm{GL}}_2 \times O(U_i')$.
Let $\varphi_\frak{c} : {\mathrm{SL}}_2 \rightarrow O(U_i)$ be a map corresponding to the roots of ${\mathrm{GL}}_2$.
Let
\[
\varphi'=\varphi\oplus \varphi_{\frak{c}} : \frak{sl}_2 \rightarrow \frak{g}
\]
and $u'=u+u_{\frak{c}}$, a nilpotent element corresponding to $\varphi'$. Since the orbit of $u_{\frak{c}}$ in $\frak{sl}_{2,{\frak{c}}} = \varphi_{\frak{c}} (\frak{sl}_{2})$ contains 0 in its closure, it follows that the closure of the orbit of $u'$ contains the orbit of $u$.
By the Clebsch-Gordan formula
$$V_i\otimes (V_2 \otimes U_2)\cong V_{i-1}\otimes U_2 \oplus V_{i+1}\otimes U_2,$$
which implies that the partition $\underline{p'}$ corresponding to $u'$ is obtained from the partition $\underline{p}$, corresponding to $u$, by replacing a quadruple $(i,i,i,i)$ by $(i+1,i+1,i-1,i-1)$.
Next, let
\[
E_i= \begin{cases} \wedge^2 V_i \text{ if $i$ is even} \\
S^2 V_i \text{ if $i$ is odd,}
\end{cases}
\]
\[
F_i= \begin{cases} S^2 V_i \text{ if $i$ is even} \\
\wedge^2 V_i \text{ if $i$ is odd.}
\end{cases}
\]
Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq10-2}
\frak{g}(j,\pm 2) \cong E_i(j) \otimes \wedge^2(V_2 \otimes U_2)(\pm 2) \oplus F_i(j) \otimes S^2(V_2 \otimes U_2)(\pm 2).
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq10-2}, one can easily see that
$\dim \frak{g}(0,2) = \dim \frak{g}(2,2) +1$, that is, the condition (3) in Section \ref{S:raising} is satisfied. Therefore, by Lemma \ref{L:decomposition-2}, all conditions (1-3) in Section \ref{S:raising} are satisfied.
The following proposition follows directly from Proposition \ref{P5:local} and the discussion at the beginning of this section.
\begin{prop}\label{proplocal:ortho}
Assume that we are in the situation as in Lemma \ref{L:decomposition-2} and $k$ is a non-archimedean local field.
Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $G$.
If $G=\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$ assume that $\pi$ is a
genuine representation.
Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$ such that $\pi_{N_u,\psi_u}\neq 0$.
Assume that $FJ_{\psi_u}(\pi_{N_u, \psi_u})={\mathrm{Hom}}_{H_{u, \frak{c}}}(\rho_{\psi_u}, \pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M$.
Then $\pi_{N_{u'}, \psi_{u'}}\neq 0$
for a nilpotent element $u'$ whose partition is obtained from the partition corresponding to $u$ via replacing a quadruple $(i,i,i,i)$ by $(i+1,i+1,i-1,i-1)$.
\end{prop}
There is also a global version of Proposition \ref{proplocal:ortho}, which follows directly from Proposition \ref{P5:global} and the discussion at the beginning of this section.
\begin{prop}\label{propglobal:ortho}
Assume that we are in the situation as in Lemma \ref{L:decomposition-2} and $k$ is a global field. Let $\Pi$ be a space of smooth functions on
$G(k)\backslash G(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of $G(\mathbb A)$ by right translations. If $G=\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$ assume that $\Pi$ consists of
genuine functions.
Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$ such that $\Pi_{N_u,\psi_u}\neq 0$.
Assume that $FJ_{\psi_u}(\Pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ (see Section 5 for definition) is a Whittaker-generic representation of $M({\mathbb {A}})$.
Then
$\Pi_{N_{u'},\psi_{u'}}\neq 0$ for a nilpotent element $u'$ whose partition is obtained from the partition corresponding to $u$ via replacing a quadruple $(i,i,i,i)$ by $(i+1,i+1,i-1,i-1)$.
\end{prop}
\section{Special orbits of classical groups}
In this section we recall well known definitions of special orbits and introduce a notion of metaplectic-special orbits for $G=\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$.
\begin{defn}
A symplectic orbit is called \textbf{symplectic special} if the number of even parts bigger than every odd $i$ appearing in the corresponding partition is even.
A symplectic orbit is called \textbf{metaplectic special} if the number of even parts bigger than every odd $i$ appearing in the corresponding partition is odd.
An orthogonal orbit is called \textbf{orthogonal special} if the number of odd parts smaller than every even $i$ appearing in the corresponding partition is even.
\end{defn}
\begin{prop}\label{P:special}
A symplectic orbit is \textbf{symplectic special} if the number $m$ given by Lemma \ref{L:decomposition} is even for every odd $i$ appearing in the corresponding partition.
A symplectic orbit is \textbf{metaplectic special} if the number $m$ given by Lemma \ref{L:decomposition} is odd for every odd $i$ appearing in the corresponding partition.
An orthogonal orbit is \textbf{orthogonal special} if the number $m$ given by Lemma \ref{L:decomposition} is even for every even $i$ appearing in the corresponding partition.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} In the first two cases, when $i$ is odd, then the parity of $m$ depends on the parity of
\[
\sum_{j>i, j \text{ even }} \dim U_j
\]
but this number is exactly the number of even parts greater than $i$. In the third case, when $i$ is even, than the parity of $m$ depends on the parity of
\[
\sum_{j<i, j \text{ odd }} \dim U_j
\]
but this number is exactly the number of odd parts less than $i$
\end{proof}
Given a symplectic partition $\underline{p}$ of $2n$, one easily checks that $\underline{p}$ is metaplectic special if and only if the transpose of $\underline{p}$
is an orthogonal partition of $2n$. Conversely, it is known that an orthogonal partition of $2n$ is special if and only if its transpose is a symplectic partition. Summarizing we have the following:
\begin{prop} The transpose of partitions defines a bijection between metaplectic-special partitions of $2n$ and special orthogonal partitions of $2n$.
\end{prop}
\begin{defn}
Given any symplectic partition $\underline{p}$ of $2n$, its \textbf{special expansion} $\underline{p}^{{\mathrm{Sp}}}$ is defined to be the smallest symplectic special partition which is bigger than $\underline{p}$.
Given any symplectic partition $\underline{p}$ of $2n$, its \textbf{metaplectic special expansion} $\underline{p}^{\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}}$ is defined to be the smallest metaplectic special partition of $2n$ which is bigger than $\underline{p}$.
Given any orthogonal partition $\underline{p}$ of $m$, its \textbf{special expansion} $\underline{p}^{\mathrm{O}}$ is defined to be the smallest orthogonal special symplectic partition of $m$ which is bigger than $\underline{p}$.
\end{defn}
Lemma 6.3.9 in \cite{CM93} gives a recipe for calculating special expansions.
In the following proposition, we give a recipe for calculating the metaplectic-expansion. The proof of this proposition is very similar to that of Lemma 6.3.9 in \cite{CM93} and will be omitted.
\begin{prop}[Recipe for calculating metaplectic expansion]\label{recipe}
Given a symplectic partition $\underline{p}$ of $2n$, we may write $\underline{p}=[p_1 p_2 \cdots p_r]$
with $p_1 \geq p_2 \geq \cdots \geq p_r >0$. Enumerate the
indices $i$ such that $p_{2i-1} = p_{2i}$ is odd and
$p_{2i-2} \neq p_{2i-1}$ or $2i-2=0$ as $i_1 < \cdots < i_t$ (the set of indices $\{i_1, \ldots, i_t\}$ might be empty). Then
the metaplectic expansion of $\underline{p}$ can be obtained by
replacing each pair of parts $(p_{2i_j-1}, p_{2i_j})$
by $(p_{2i_j-1}+1, p_{2i_j}-1)$, respectively,
and leaving the other parts alone.
\end{prop}
\section{Wave-front sets of classical groups}
Let $G={\mathrm{Sp}}(W)$ or $\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$, if $W$ is a symplectic space, or $G=\mathrm{O}(W)$ if
$W$ is an orthogonal space. Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$, and $\underline{p}$ the corresponding partition of $\dim(W)$.
We shall say that $\underline{p}$ is special if it is metaplectic, symplectic or orthogonal special, respectively.
\begin{thm}\label{thm1} Let $k$ be a non-archimedean local field. Let $\pi$ be a smooth representation of $G$. If $G=\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$ assume that $\pi$ is a
genuine representation. Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$ such that $\pi_{N_u,\psi_u}\neq 0$. Let $\underline{p}$ be the partition corresponding to $u$.
Then $\pi_{N_{u'},\psi_{u'}}\neq 0$ for a nilpotent element $u'$ whose partition is the special expansion $\underline{p}^G$ of $\underline{p}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} Assume first that $\pi$ is a genuine representation of $\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$. If the partition $\underline{p}$ is not metaplectic-special then,
by Proposition \ref{P:special}, there is an odd integer $i$ such that the number $m$ given in Lemma \ref{L:decomposition} is even.
So, we are in the situation as in Corollary \ref{cor:local} and $FJ_{\psi_u}(\pi_{N_u, \psi_u})={\mathrm{Hom}}_{H_{u, \frak{c}}}(\rho_{\psi_u}, \pi_{N_u, \psi_u})$ is a Whittaker-generic representation of ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak{c}}$.
Hence by Proposition \ref{proplocal:sym}, $\pi_{N_{u'},\psi_{u'}}\neq 0$ for a nilpotent element $u'$ whose partition is obtained from the partition of $u$ by replacing a pair $(i,i)$ by $(i+1,i-1)$.
We can repeat this procedure until the partition is metaplectic special. The cases when $\pi$ is a representation of
${{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$ or $\mathrm{O}(W)$ are proved analogously. The theorem is proved.
\end{proof}
Using Proposition \ref{propglobal:sym} (instead of Proposition \ref{proplocal:sym}) we can prove a global version of Theorem \ref{thm1}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm2} Let $k$ be a global field. Let $\Pi$ be a space of smooth functions on
$G(k)\backslash G(\mathbb A)$ stable under the action of $G(\mathbb A)$ by right translations. If $G=\widetilde{{\mathrm{Sp}}}(W)$ assume that $\Pi$ consists of
genuine functions. Let $u$ be a nilpotent element in $\frak{g}$ such that $\Pi_{N_u,\psi_u}\neq 0$. Let $\underline{p}$ be the partition corresponding to $u$. Then $\Pi_{N_{u'},\psi_{u'}}\neq 0$ for a nilpotent element $u'$ whose partition is the special expansion $\underline{p}^G$ of $\underline{p}$.
\end{thm}
A more refined information about the conjugacy class of $u'$ is given by repeated application of Proposition \ref{P:forms}.
\section{Wave-front sets of exceptional groups}
We assume that $G$ is a split, simply connected exceptional group. Let $(u,s,v)$ be an $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-triple in $\frak{g}$ where $s$ is a semi-simple element.
The index of the orbit of $u$ is the value $\kappa(s,s)$ where the Killing form has been normalized so that the index of the orbit corresponding to the
long root $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ is 1, as in \cite[Section 10]{Dyn52}. For exceptional groups this invariant essentially determines the orbit over a separable closure.
Let $C(s)$ be the centralizer of $s$ in $G$. It is a Levi subgroup of $G$.
The centralizer $C$ in $G$ of the $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-triple coincides with the stabilizer in $C(s)$ of $v\in \frak{g}(2)$.
The absolute type of $C$ is well known, however, a particular choice of $v$ defines a $k$-rational form of $C$.
Let $L$ be the derived group of $C(s)$. It is somewhat easier to work with $L$. We determine
the stabilizer $S$ in $L$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$, on a case by case basis, for all non-special orbits using the explicit structure of the $L$-module $\frak{g}(2)$ given in \cite{JN}. Our computation works over most fields. Assuming that the characteristic of $k$ is not a bad prime for $G$ appears to be enough.
Once we have $S$, we check whether the raising conditions in Propositions \ref{P5:local} and \ref{P5:global} (see also Corollaries \ref{cor:local} and \ref{cor:global})
are met for an ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c} \subseteq S$.
If so, we enter the corresponding value of $m$ in the table. In all but three cases (Sections 14.3, 17.15 and 17.23), ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ is a long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 $ in $G$, so the conditions (1)-(3) are trivially to check and we do not include any additional explanation in these cases. The index of the raised orbit is increased by 1.
If our method fails, we consider the method of M\oe glin. Now $k$ is a $p$-adic field.
M\oe glin's result states that if the orbit is not admissible, in the sense of Duflo, then it cannot be a leading term in a wave-front set. The question which orbits of $p$-adic groups are admissible has been studied by Nevins.
According to Theorem 3.2 in \cite{N02}, the orbit of $u$ is not admissible if there exists ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$ such that
$\frak{g}(1)$, when decomposed as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\frak{c}}$-module, satisfies the property that the total number of irreducible summands of dimensions $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$
is odd. (In particular,
all orbits that satisfy our raising conditions are not admissible.) If only the method of M\oe glin applies, we write $\ast$. If both fail, we write $\ast\ast$.
These are precisely completely odd, non-special orbits. In particular, we have proved that only completely odd orbits can be admissible, as conjectured by Nevins.
In the following five sections we tabulate our data.
Notation is mostly self-explanatory, for example, $V_n$ denotes the standard representation of ${\mathrm{SL}}_n$ or ${\mathrm{Sp}}_{n}$, if $n$ is even, or the irreducible $n$-dimensional representation of ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
\section{$\rm G_2$} \label{S:G_2}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c |}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Non-Special Nilpotent Orbits in Type $\rm G_2$}\\
\hline
Label & Diagram & $S$& $m$ \\
& $\circ \Rrightarrow \circ$ & &\\ \hline
$A_1$ & 1 \ \ \ 0 & $ {\mathrm{SL}}_2 $ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
$\widetilde{A}_1$ & 0 \ \ \ 1 & $ {\mathrm{SL}}_2 $ & 1\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsection{$A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&={\mathrm{Sym}}^3 V_2=V_4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1.
\end{align*}
Here $S=L$. Neither method works.
\subsection{$\widetilde{A}_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1.
\end{align*}
Here $S=L$, and $m=1$.
\section{$\rm F_4$}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | }
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Non-Special Nilpotent Orbits in Type $\rm F_4$}\\
\hline
Label & Diagram & $S$ & $m$ \\
& $\circ$ | $\circ$ $\Longrightarrow$ $\circ$ | $\circ$ & &\\ \hline
$A_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6$ & 5 \\ \hline
$A_2 + \widetilde{A}_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast$ \\ \hline
$B_2$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(K) $ & 2\\ \hline
$\widetilde{A}_2 + A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
$C_3(a_1)$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 3\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsection{$A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{Sp}}_6,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=\wedge^3(V_6)/V_6,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1.
\end{align*}
Here $S=L$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ correspond to a long root in ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6$, then $V_6=V_2 \oplus 4V_1$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module.
It follows that $\frak{g}(1) = 4V_1 \oplus 5V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, so $m=5$.
\subsection{$A_2+\widetilde{A_1}$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_3 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_3 \otimes V_2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_3^* \otimes {\mathrm{Sym}}^2 V_2.
\end{align*}
Here $\frak{g}(2)$ can be identified with the space of $3\times 3$ matrices so that determinant is a relative invariant.
The stabilizer $S$ of a generic point is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, diagonally embedded in $L$, where ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\rightarrow {\mathrm{SL}}_3$ is given by the natural action of
${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ on ${\mathrm{Sym}}^2 V_2$.
Then $\frak{g}(1) = V_4 \oplus V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, only the method of M\oe glin works.
\subsection{$B_2$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{Sp}}_4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&= V_4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1\oplus \wedge^2(V_4)/V_1.
\end{align*}
Here $V_5=\wedge^2(V_4)/V_1$ is the standard representation of ${\mathrm{SO}}_5\cong {\mathrm{Sp}}_4/\mu_2$. In particular, there is a degree $2$ relative invariant
$\Delta$. The stabilizer $S$ of a generic point is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$ where $K=k(\sqrt{\Delta})$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2(k)\subseteq {\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$. Then the conditions
(1)-(3) are satisfied with $m=2$. Since $2$ is even, Corollaries \ref{cor:local} and \ref{cor:global} do not apply i.e.
the Fourier-Jacobi model in Propositions \ref{P5:local} and \ref{P5:global} is not a genuine representation of a 2-fold central extension of ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2, \mathfrak c}$.
However, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$-module, $\frak{g}(1)=V_2^K$
where $V_2^K$ is the standard 2-dimensional representation over $K$. In particular, the Fourier-Jacobi model in Propositions \ref{P5:local} and \ref{P5:global} is a genuine representation of 2-fold central extension of ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$ and hence it is Whittaker generic as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module. Thus the orbit can be raised using Propositions \ref{P5:local} and \ref{P5:global}.
\subsection{$\widetilde{A_2}+A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^2 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes {\mathrm{Sym}}^2 V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2.
\end{align*}
Here $V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2$ can be identified with the space of $2\times 2$ matrices so that determinant is a relative invariant.
Hence the stabilizer $S$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, diagonally embedded in $L$.
Then $\frak{g}(1) = 2V_2 \oplus V_4$,
as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module. Neither method works.
\subsection{$C_3(a_1)$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_2^2 \oplus {\mathrm{Sym}}^2V_2^2.
\end{align*}
The space ${\mathrm{Sym}}^2V_2^2$ has a degree 2 pseudo-invariant. Hence, the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ of a generic point here is ${\mathrm{SO}}_2$. Since the stabilizer in
${\mathrm{SO}}_2$ of a generic point in $V_2^2$ is trivial, it follows that the stabilizer $S$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$.
Hence, $\frak{g}(1) = 3V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, and $m=3$.
\section{$\rm E_6$}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c |}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Non-Special Nilpotent Orbits in Type $\rm E_6$}\\
\hline
Label & Diagram & $S$ & $m$\\
& $\circ$ & &\\
& $|$ & &\\
& $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ & &\\ \hline
& 0 & &\\
$3A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_3\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 9 \\ \hline
& 0 & &\\
$2A_2 + {A}_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
& 1 & &\\
$A_3 + A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 $ & 5\\ \hline
& 1 & &\\
$A_5$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 2 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 3\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsection{$3A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_3^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_3^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_3^1 \otimes V_2 \otimes V_3^{2,*},\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_3^{1,*} \otimes V_3^2.
\end{align*}
The space $V_3^{1,*} \otimes V_3^2$ can be identified with the spaces of $3\times 3$ matrices, so that determinant is a relative invariant. Hence the stabilizer $S$ in $L$ of a generic point
in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_3\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ where ${\mathrm{SL}}_3$ is diagonally embedded in ${\mathrm{SL}}_3^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_3^2$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be the second factor of $S$.
Then $\frak{g}(1) = 9V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, so $m=9$.
\subsection{$2A_2+A_1$}\label{ss:2A_2+A_1,E_6}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^3 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2\oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3 .
\end{align*}
The spaces $V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2$ and $V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3$ can be identified with the spaces of $2\times 2$ matrices. Hence $S={\mathrm{SL}}_2$, embedded
diagonally into the three ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, and $\frak{g}(1) = 4V_2 \oplus V_4$. Neither method works.
\subsection{$A_3 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^2 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^3 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^3.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3$ of a generic point in $V_2^1\otimes V_2^3$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ diagonally embedded. The stabilizer in
this ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ of a generic point in $V_2^1\oplus V_2^3$ is trivial. Hence $S={\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$, and $\frak{g}(1) = 5V_2$, so $m=5$.
\subsection{$A_5$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \oplus V_2 \oplus V_2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=5V_1.
\end{align*}
Here $L=S$. Hence $\frak{g}(1) = 3V_2$, so $m=3$.
\section{$\rm E_7$}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c |}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Non-Special Nilpotent Orbits in Type $\rm E_7$}\\
\hline
Label & Diagram & $S$ & $m$\\
& $\ \ \ \ \ \ \circ$ & &\\
& $\ \ \ \ \ \ |$ & &\\
& $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ & &\\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$(3A_1)'$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 15 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$4{A}_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6$ & 7 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$2A_2 + A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$(A_3+A_1)'$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2\times{\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 9 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_3+2A_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 5 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$D_4+A_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 2 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$ & 3 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$(A_5)'$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 5\\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_5+A_1$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$D_6(a_2)$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 5 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$D_6$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 2 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 3\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsection{$(3A_1)'$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_6 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=\wedge^2 V_6 \otimes V_2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=\wedge^2 V_6^*.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer $S$ of generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$
is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$. We let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be the second factor of $S$. Then $\frak{g}(1) = 15V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, so $m=15$.
\subsection{$4A_1$} \label{ss:4A_1}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_6,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_6^* \oplus \wedge^3V_6,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus \wedge^2 V_6.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer $S$ of generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$
is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^c$ be a long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Then $V_6 = V_2 \oplus 4V_1$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, and $\frak{g}(1) = 12 V_1 \oplus 7V_2$, so $m=7$.
\subsection{$2A_2+A_1$}\label{ss:2A_2+A_1}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \otimes V_4^* \oplus \wedge^2 V_4 \otimes V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_4 \otimes V_2^2.
\end{align*}
The group ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1\times{\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ acting on $V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2$ gives an identification of $({\mathrm{SL}}_2^1\times{\mathrm{SL}}_2^2)/\mu_2\cong {\mathrm{SO}}_4$. Hence the second
summand of $\frak{g}(2)$ can be identified with the space of $4\times 4$ matrices. In this way the determinant is a relative nvariant, and the stabilizer $S$ of a
generic point of $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times{\mathrm{SL}}_2$ embedded diagonally into $L$. It is the tensor product embedding into ${\mathrm{SL}}_4$, so $V_4=V_2^1\otimes V_2^2$,
under the restriction.
(Case 1) Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be the factor of $S$ isomorphic to ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$. Then $\frak{g}(1)=8V_1 \oplus 4V_3$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module,
hence neither method works.
(Case 2) Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be the factor of $S$ isomorphic to ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$. Then $\frak{g}(1)=8V_2 \oplus V_4$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module,
hence neither method works.
\subsection{$(A_3+A_1)'$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^2 \oplus V_4 \otimes V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_4\otimes V_2^1 \oplus \wedge^2 V_4.
\end{align*}
Since ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ acts trivially on $\frak{g}(2)$, it is a factor of the stabilizer $S$. The stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$ of a generic point in
$\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$. This will be discussed in the next case, as it is not needed here. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$.
Then $\frak{g}(1) = 9V_2$, so $m=9$.
\subsection{$A_3+2A_1$}\label{ss:A_3+A_1}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \oplus V_4 \oplus V_2\otimes \wedge^2 V_4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus \wedge^2 V_4 \oplus V_2 \otimes V_4^*.
\end{align*}
A generic element in $V_2\otimes V_4^*$ is contained in $V_2\otimes V_2^1$ where $V_2^1\subset V_4^*$ is a 2-dimensional subspace.
A generic element in $\wedge^2 V_4$ is a non-degenerate
symplectic form $\omega$ on $V^*_4$. Let ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4\subset {\mathrm{SL}}_4$ be the stabilizer of $\omega$. Now we have two cases. The restriction of $\omega$ to $V_2^1$ is
trivial or the restriction of $\omega$ to $V_2^1$ is non-trivial, hence non-degenerate as $\omega$ is a symplectic form. This is the generic case. In this case we can write
$V_4^*=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^2$ where $V_2^2$ is the orthogonal complement of $V_2^1$. Now we have corresponding inclusions
$$
{\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \subset {\mathrm{Sp}}_4 \subset {\mathrm{SL}}_4.
$$
Hence the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{Sp}}_4$ of a generic point in $V_2\otimes V_2^1$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^3\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ where ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^3$ is diagonally embedded in
${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$. This is the stabilizer $S$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$. Then, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, $\frak{g}(1)=\ 8 V_1 \oplus 5 V_2$,
so $m=5$.
\subsection{$D_4+A_1$} \label{ss:D_4+A_1}.
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=2V_4 \oplus V_4^*,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=3V_1 \oplus \wedge^2 V_4.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer $S$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be the long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ in ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$. Then
$V_4^* = V_2 \oplus 2V_1$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module. Hence $\frak{g}(1) = 3V_2 \oplus 6 V_1$, so $m=3$.
\subsection{$(A_5)'$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3 \times{\mathrm{SL}}_2^4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^4 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3 \otimes V_2^4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1\oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer $S$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^4$ where ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ is diagonally embedded into the first three ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$'s. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2^4$.
Then, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, $\frak{g}(1) = 5V_2^4$, so $m=5$.
\subsection{$A_5+A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^3 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=2V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3.
\end{align*}
The same as Section \ref{ss:2A_2+A_1,E_6}.
\subsection{$D_6(a_2)$} \label{ss:D_6(a_2)}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^2 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3 ,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=2V_2^1 \oplus V_2^3 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^3.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3$ of a generic point in $V_2^1 \otimes V_2^3$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ embedded diagonally. The stabilizer in
this ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ of a generic point in $ V_2^1 \oplus V_2^3$ is trivial. Hence $S={\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$. Then, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, $\frak{g}(1) = 5V_2$, so $m=5$.
\subsection{$D_6$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \oplus V_2 \oplus V_2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=6V_1.
\end{align*}
Here $S=L$. Hence $\frak{g}(1) = 3V_2$, so $m=3$.
\section{$\rm E_8$} \label{S:E_8}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c |}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Non-Special Nilpotent Orbits in Type $\rm E_8$}\\
\hline
Label & Diagram & $S$ & $m$\\
& $\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \circ$ & & \\
& $\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ |$ & & \\
& $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ & & \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & & \\
$3A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & $\mathrm{F}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 27 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$4{A}_1$ &0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_8$ & 15 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_2 + 3A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & $\mathrm{G}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 21 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$2A_2+A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & $\mathrm{G}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_3+A_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & $B_3\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2 $ & 17 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$2A_2+2A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | }
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Non-Special Nilpotent Orbits in Type $\rm E_8$(continued)}\\
\hline
Label & Diagram & $S$ & $m$\\
& $\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \circ$ & &\\
& $\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ |$ & &\\
& $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ | $\circ$ & &\\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_3+2A_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 9 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_3+A_2+A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times A_1$ & 15 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$D_4+A_1$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6$ & 7 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$2A_3$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$ & $\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_5$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 2 & $\mathrm{G}_2\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 9 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_4+A_3$ &0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_5+A_1$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 5 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$D_5(a_1)+A_2$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$D_6(a_2)$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$ & 10 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$E_6(a_3)+A_1$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$E_7(a_5)$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times {\mathrm{Aut}}^1(E)$ & 9 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$D_5+A_1$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 5 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$D_6$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 2 & ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$ & 3 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$A_7$ & 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 & &\\
$E_6+A_1$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & $\ast\ast$ \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$E_7(a_2)$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 5 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$D_7$ & 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 2 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 5 \\ \hline
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 & &\\
$E_7$ & 2 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ 2 & ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ & 3\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsection{$3A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times E_6,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \otimes V_{27}^*,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_{27}.
\end{align*}
The generic stabilizer $S$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times F_4$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2$, the first factor.
Then $\frak{g}(1) = 27V_2$, so $m=27$.
\subsection{$4A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_8,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=\wedge^3 V_8,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=\wedge^2 V_8^*.
\end{align*} The stabilizer $S$ is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_8$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be a long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ in ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6$. Then
$V_8 = V_2 \oplus 6 V_1$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module. Hence $\frak{g}(1)= 26 V_1 \oplus 15 V_2$, so $m=15$.
\subsection{$A_2 + 3 A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_7 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&= \wedge^2 V_7\otimes V_2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=\wedge^3 V_7^*.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_7$ of a generic point in $\wedge^3 V_7^*$ is $G_2$. Hence the stabilizer $S$ is $G_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2$, the second factor in $S$.
Then, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, $\frak{g}(1)=21 V_2$, so $m=21$.
\subsection{$2A_2 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L &={\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{Spin}}_{10},\\
\frak{g}(1)&=\ V_2 \otimes V_{10} \oplus V_{16}^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus V_2 \otimes V_{16}^1.
\end{align*}
Here $V_{16}^i$ ($i=1,2$) denote two inequivalent spin representations. A generic element in
$V_2 \otimes V_{16}^1$ is contained in $V_2\otimes V_2^1$ for some 2-dimensional subspace $V_2^1\subset V_{16}^1$.
The point-wise stabilizer in ${\mathrm{Spin}}_{10}$ of a generic $V_2^1$ is $G_2$. The centralizer of $G_2$ in ${\mathrm{Spin}}_{10}$ is
${\mathrm{Spin}}_3$. Since ${\mathrm{Spin}}_3$ acts on $V_2^1$, we have an identification ${\mathrm{Spin}}_3\cong {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$. It follows that the stabilizer $S$ of
generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2\times G_2$ where ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ is embedded diagonally.
(Case 1) Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be the first factor of $S$. Then $V_{10}=V_3 \oplus 7V_1$ and $V_{16}^2=8V_2$ as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-modules.
Then $\frak{g}(1)= 16V_2 \oplus V_4$, hence neither method works.
(Case 2) Take the ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ corresponding to a long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ in $G_2$. It is a root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ in ${\mathrm{Spin}}_{10}$.
Then $V_{10}= 2V_2 \oplus 6V_1$ and $V_{16}=4 V_3 \oplus 8 V_1$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-modules, and
$\frak{g}(1)= 20 V_1 \oplus 8 V_2$. Hence neither method works.
\subsection{$A_3 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{Spin}}_{10},\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \oplus V_2\otimes V_{16},\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_{16} \oplus V_{10}.
\end{align*}
Here $V_{16}$ denotes a spin representation. Note that ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, the first factor of $L$, is always in
$S$. So we let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be this ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Then $\frak{g}(1)=17 V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, so $m=17$.
\subsection{$2A_2 + 2A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_5,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_4 \otimes \wedge^2 V_5^*,\\
\frak{g}(2)&= \wedge^2 V_4 \otimes V_5.
\end{align*}
Write $V_6=\wedge^2 V_4$. The action of ${\mathrm{SL}}_4$ on $V_6$ gives an isomorphism ${\mathrm{SL}}_4/\mu_2\cong {\mathrm{SO}}_6$. A generic element in $V_6\otimes V_5$ is
contained in $V_5^1\otimes V_5$ for a 5-dimensional non-degenerate subspace $V_5^1\subset V_6$.
Note that $V_5^1$ is a split quadratic space, as $V_6$ is. The stabilizer $S$ of
a generic point is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4\cong {\mathrm{Spin}}(V_5^1)$ embedded diagonally in ${\mathrm{SL}}_4\times {\mathrm{SL}}_5$. Let
${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be a long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ in ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$. Then $V_4 = V_2 \oplus 2V_1$, and $V_5 = 2V_2 \oplus V_1$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-modules, and
$\frak{g}(1)= 8V_1 \oplus 8 V_2 \oplus 4 V_3 \oplus V_4$. Hence neither method works.
\subsection{$A_3 + 2A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_6 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_6^* \oplus \wedge^2 V_6 \otimes V_2, \\
\frak{g}(2)&= V_6\otimes V_2 \oplus \wedge^2 V_6^*.
\end{align*}
A generic element in $\wedge^2 V_6^*$ is a non-degenerate symplectic form $\omega$ on $V_6$. Let ${\mathrm{Sp}}_6$ be the stabilizer of
$\omega$ in ${\mathrm{SL}}_6$. A generic element in
$V_6\otimes V_2$ is contained in $V_2^1\otimes V_2$ where $V_2^1$ is a 2-dimensional subspace of $V_6$. We are in a generic
situation when $\omega$ restricts to a non-trivial form on $V_2^1$. In this case we can decompose $V_6=V_2^1\oplus V_4$. This gives an
embedding ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1\times {\mathrm{Sp}}_4 \subset {\mathrm{Sp}}_6$. The centralizer $S$ of a generic element in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$
where ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ is diagonally embedded in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$ and the second factor of $L$. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be a long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ in
${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$. Then $V_6^* \cong V_6 = V_2 \oplus 4V_1$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-modules, and $\frak{g}(1)=18 V_1 \oplus 9 V_2$,
so $m=9$.
\subsection{$A_3 + A_2 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_5 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_3,\\
\frak{g}(1)&= V_5 \otimes V_2 \otimes V_3^*,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=\wedge^2 V_5\otimes V_3 .
\end{align*}
We take ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ to be the second factor of $L$, it is clearly contained in $S$.
Then $\frak{g}(1)=15V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, so $m=15$.
\subsection{$D_4 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_6,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_6^* \oplus \wedge^3 V_6,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=2V_1 \oplus \wedge^2 V_6.
\end{align*}
The same as Section \ref{ss:4A_1}.
\subsection{$2A_3$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_4^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_4^2 \oplus V_4^1 \otimes \wedge^2 V_4^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_4^1 \otimes V_4^{2,*} \oplus \wedge^2 V_4^1.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer of a generic point in $V_4^1\otimes V_4^{2,*}$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_4$ embedded diagonally. The stabilizer of a generic point in
$ \wedge^2 V_4^1$ is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4^2$. Hence $S={\mathrm{Sp}}_4$ embedded diagonally. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be a long root ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ in ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$. Then,
as ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^c$-modules, $V_4^1=V_4^2=V_2 + 2V_1$. Hence $\frak{g}(1)= 8V_1 \oplus 7V_2 \oplus 2V_3$ and the method of M\oe glin works.
\subsection{$A_5$}
\begin{align*}
L&= {\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{Spin}}_8,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \oplus V_2 \otimes V_8,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_8 \oplus V_1 \oplus V_8'.
\end{align*}
Here we can proclaim $V_8$ in $\frak{g}(1)$ be the standard representation, then $V_8'$ is a spin representation.
Note that ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, the first factor of $L$, is always in $S$.
So we let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ be this ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Then $\frak{g}(1)=9 V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module, so $m=9$.
\subsection{$A_4 + A_3$}
\begin{align*}
L &={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_3^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_3^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \otimes V_3^{1,*} \oplus V_3^{1} \otimes V_2^2 \otimes V_3^{2,*},\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \otimes V_3^{2,*} \oplus V_3^{1,*} \otimes V_3^2.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, diagonally embedded into all factors of $L$, where we use the symmetric square embedding into
two ${\mathrm{SL}}_3$'s. Then $\frak{g}(1)= 3 V_2 \oplus 3V_4 \oplus V_6$ and neither method works.
\subsection{$A_5 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^2 \oplus V_4^* \oplus V_4 \otimes V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_4 \otimes V_2^1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus \wedge^2 V_4.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer of a generic element in $V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, diagonally embedded into the last two factors of $L$.
The stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_4$ of a generic element in $\wedge^2 V_4$ is ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4$. As in Section \ref{ss:A_3+A_1}, one can write
$V_4 = V_2^3 \oplus V_2^4$, such that the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{Sp}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$ of a generic element in $V_4 \otimes V_2^1$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^3 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$, where the second ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ is diagonally embedded to ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^4$ and ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$.
Hence $S={\mathrm{SL}}_2^3 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$, where the second ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ is diagonally embedded in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^4$, ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$ and ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$.
Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2^3$.
Then $\frak{g}(1)=12 V_1 \oplus 5 V_2$, so $m=5$.
\subsection{$D_5(a_1) + A_2$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4\times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_4^* \oplus \wedge^2 V_4\otimes V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus V_4^* \oplus V_2^1\otimes V_4 \otimes V_2^2 .
\end{align*}
As in Section \ref{ss:2A_2+A_1}, the stabilizer of a generic element in $V_2^1 \otimes V_4 \otimes V_2^2$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$, diagonally embedded in $L$, where
embedding into ${\mathrm{SL}}_4$ is given by the tensor product. The stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2$ of a generic element in $V_4^*$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$, diagonally embedded.
Hence, $S$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ and, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ module, $\frak{g}(1)= 3V_2 \oplus 2V_3 \oplus V_4$. Hence, only the method of M\oe glin works.
\subsection{$D_6(a_2)$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_4 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_4^* \oplus V_4\otimes V_2^2 ,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus \wedge^2 V_4 \otimes V_2^2.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ of a generic element in $V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ diagonally embedded. The action of
${\mathrm{SL}}_4$ on $\wedge^2 V_4$ gives an isomorphism ${\mathrm{SL}}_4/\mu_2 \cong {\mathrm{SO}}_6$. A generic element in $\wedge^2 V_4 \otimes V_2^2$ is contained in
$V_2^3\otimes V_2^2$ where $V_2^3 \subset \wedge^2 V_4 $ is a non-degenerate 2-dimensional quadratic subspace. Write $\wedge^2 V_4= V_2^3\oplus V_4^3$.
Hence the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SO}}_4 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ of a generic element in $\wedge^2 V_4 \otimes V_2^2$ is
${\mathrm{SO}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SO}}(V_4^3)$ where ${\mathrm{SO}}_2$ is diagonally embedded in ${\mathrm{SO}}(V_2^3)$ and ${\mathrm{SO}}_2\subset {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$.
Next, the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ of a generic element in $V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ diagonally embedded. Furthermore, the stabilizer in
${\mathrm{SO}}_2$ of a generic point in $V_2^1$ is trivial. Hence the stabilizer $S$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$ is
${\mathrm{Spin}}(V_4^3)\cong {\mathrm{SL}}_2(K) \subset {\mathrm{SL}}_4$, where $K$ is a quadratic algebra. Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}={\mathrm{SL}}_2(k)\subseteq {\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$. Then the conditions
(1)-(3) are satisfied with $m=10$. Since $10$ is even, Corollaries \ref{cor:local} and \ref{cor:global} do not apply i.e.
the Fourier-Jacobi model in Propositions \ref{P5:local} and \ref{P5:global} is not a genuine representation of a 2-fold central extension of ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2, \mathfrak c}$.
However, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$-module, $\frak{g}(1)=5V_2^K$
where $V_2^K$ is the standard 2-dimensional representation over $K$. In particular, the Fourier-Jacobi model in Propositions \ref{P5:local} and \ref{P5:global} is a genuine representation of 2-fold central extension of ${\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$ and hence it is Whittaker generic as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module. Thus the orbit can be raised using Propositions \ref{P5:local} and \ref{P5:global}.
\subsection{$E_6(a_3)+A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus V_4 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes \wedge^2 V_4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_4^* \oplus V_2^1 \otimes\wedge^2 V_4.
\end{align*}
This is somewhat similar to the previous case, so let ${\mathrm{SO}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SO}}(V_4^3)$ be the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SO}}_6$. Ignoring the
factor ${\mathrm{SO}}_2$, we must compute the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$ of a generic point in $V_2^2 \otimes V_4^*$.
It is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ diagonally embedded into ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2(K)$. (This is evident when $K=k\oplus k$, and by Galois descent in general.)
Hence ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ is embedded into
${\mathrm{SL}}_2^2$ and ${\mathrm{SL}}_4$, so that $V_4=2V_2$, as ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$-module. Hence $\frak{g}(1)=8V_2 \oplus V_4$. Hence neither method works.
\subsection{$E_7(a_5)$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_3^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_3^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_3^1\otimes V_2^1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2\otimes V_3^{2,*},\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_3^2 \oplus V_3^1 \otimes V_2^2 \otimes V_3^{2,*}.
\end{align*}
It is clear that ${\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$ is always in $S$. (The 18-dimensional summand in $\frak{g}(2)$ is the Bhargava $3\times 2 \times 3$ cube.
A generic cube corresponds to a cubic separable algebra $E$ over $k$, and the stabilizer in ${\mathrm{SL}}_3^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_3^2$ is
isomorphic to $E^1 \rtimes {\mathrm{Aut}}^1(E)$ where $E^1$ is the torus of norm one elements in $E^{\times}$ and ${\mathrm{Aut}}^1(E)$ the group of
$k$-automorphism of $E$ of determinant 1.)
Let ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c} = {\mathrm{SL}}_2^1$.
Then, as an ${\mathrm{SL}}_{2,\mathfrak c}$ module,
$\frak{g}(1)=9V_2^1$.
Hence, $m=9$.
\subsection{$D_5 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \oplus V_4 \oplus V_2\otimes \wedge^2 V_4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=2V_1 \oplus \wedge^2 V_4 \oplus V_2\otimes V_4^*.
\end{align*}
The same as Section \ref{ss:A_3+A_1}.
\subsection{$D_6$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_4^* \oplus 2 V_4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=4V_1 \oplus \wedge^2 V_4.
\end{align*}
The same as Section \ref{ss:D_4+A_1}.
\subsection{$A_7$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^4,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^1 \oplus V_2^2 \oplus V_2^4 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3 \otimes V_2^4,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2\oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3 \oplus V_2^3 \otimes V_2^4 .
\end{align*}
The stabilizer $S$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ embedded diagonally in the four ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Hence $\frak{g}(1)= 5V_2 \oplus V_4$, and the method of M\oe glin works.
\subsection{$E_6 + A_1$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^3 \oplus V_2^1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=3V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2 \oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3.
\end{align*}
The same as Section \ref{ss:2A_2+A_1,E_6}.
\subsection{$E_7(a_2)$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^3,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2^2 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2\oplus V_2^2 \otimes V_2^3 ,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=V_1 \oplus 2V_2^1 \oplus V_2^3 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^3.
\end{align*}
The same as Section \ref{ss:D_6(a_2)}.
\subsection{$D_7$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2^1 \times {\mathrm{SL}}_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=2V_2^1 \oplus 3V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=5V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(3)&=2V_2^1 \oplus 3V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(4)&=4V_1 \oplus V_2^1 \otimes V_2^2,\\
\frak{g}(5)&=2V_2^1 \oplus 2V_2^2.
\end{align*}
The stabilizer $S$ of a generic point in $\frak{g}(2)$ is ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$ embedded diagonally in the two ${\mathrm{SL}}_2$.
Hence $\frak{g}(1)=5V_2$, so $m=5$. Note that $\dim \frak{g}(0,2)=2$ and $\dim \frak{g}(2,2)=1$, and the $s_{\mathfrak c}$-weights are bounded by $2$.
\subsection{$E_7$}
\begin{align*}
L&={\mathrm{SL}}_2,\\
\frak{g}(1)&=V_2 \oplus V_2 \oplus V_2,\\
\frak{g}(2)&=7V_1.
\end{align*}
Here $S=L$. Hence $\frak{g}(1) = 3V_2$, so $m=3$.
\section{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank Peter Trapa for a crystalizing conversation concerning the definition of metaplectic special orbits, Joseph Hundley for bringing attention to a paper of Monica Nevins and Monica Nevins for a correspondence on that paper. A part of this paper was written during
the program on New Geometric Methods in Number Theory at MSRI, Berkeley. The authors have been partially supported by grants from NSF, DMS--1301567,
DMS-1302122 and DMS-1359774, respectively. The second named author was also supported by a postdoctoral research fund from the Department of Mathematics, University of Utah.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
In recent decades, the emergence of phenomenological braneworld models \cite{RubakovPLB1983136}--\cite{1004.3962} suggested the existence of extra compact and extended dimensions. Within the framework of these models it was possible to geometrically reformulate the gauge hierarchy problem \cite{ADD}--\cite{rs}, to address
the cosmological constant problem (see, \cite{RubakovPLB1983136},\cite{CosmConst}, for instance) and to localize the known matter fields of the standard model in braneworld scenarios with a simple dimensional reduction \cite{BajcPLB2000}--\cite{corradini}, among other issues. Afterwards, due to the intrinsic singularities that braneworld models possess at the position of the branes, there were proposed several scenarios in which the fifth dimension was modeled by bulk scalar fields, extending the idea of thin branes to thick brane configurations \cite{deWolfe}--\cite{HRMGR}. Recently, thick brane models have been proposed in gravity minimally or non-minimally coupled to scalar fields originating from supergravity theories which can be modeled by sigma models, opening thereby the possibility of linking the phenomenology of thick branes to more fundamental theories \cite{Nejat}. This research line pretends to
understand the standard model physics from a higher dimensional point of view in order to address, reformulate and/or solve several open problems such as the gauge hierarchy problem. As a primary requirement of consistency, these models need to localize not only gravity, but also scalar, vector (gauge), and spinor fields on the brane.
In this work we will focus on studying the localization of spin--$1/2$ fermions on the braneworld generated by a tachyonic condensate scalar field along with 5D gravity (see \cite{NonLocalizedFermion2},\cite{NonLocalizedFermion3},\cite{HRMGR} for braneworld models of this type) using the conventional mechanism that employs a Yukawa coupling between the fermion and the background scalar field, with the interaction term restricted to be an odd function, and will present positive results. Noteworthy recent works reported a new mechanism for localizing fermions with a different Yukawa interaction between the background scalar fields and the bulk fermion, where the scalar function can be an even function \cite{YXuFWei}--\cite{HQuChu}. The action for the tachyonic scalar field which models the fifth dimension of our work was originally proposed in \cite{sen}--\cite{sen3}. The introduction of this tachyonic field in the thin braneworld paradigm was proposed in \cite{NonLocalizedFermion2}, however, the corresponding 5D spacetime possesses physical singularities at the place where the branes are positioned. A further development of this model was presented in \cite{NonLocalizedFermion3}, where it was shown that it is not possible to localize both gravity and matter fields on the braneworld due to the shape of the used warp factor. A thick braneworld generalization of this model was presented in \cite{HRMGR} and it was shown that 4D gravity can be localized on it. Moreover, it was proved that the relevant field configuration which gives rise to the braneworld model is \emph{stable} under small scalar fluctuations when the gradient of the tachyonic field is small. The scalar curvature which corresponds to this model is positive definite and asymptotically approaches a 5D Minkowski space-time, in contrast with all of the models, to the best of our knowledge, previously reported in the literature. Thus, this model is completely regular and asymptotically flat, instead of (A)dS$_5$. Quite recently it was also reported that in this braneworld it is possible to localize different matter fields as gauge vector fields \cite{AHAgauge} and massive (self--interacting) scalar fields \cite{AHAscalar}. In both of these cases the spectrum for the massive KK modes presents a mass gap which allows us to study in a better way the physics of the massless bound states, specially within the context of computing the higher dimensional corrections to the Coulomb's law that come from the interaction between fermions and gauge bosons localized on the same brane. Thus, the present tachyonic scalar field braneworld turns out to be interesting from the phenomenological viewpoint compared to previous works since it allows us to localize gravity as well as massive scalars, gauge vector fields and fermions.
The paper is organized as follows: Section II contains a brief review of the
tachyonic scalar field braneworld model \cite{HRMGR}; Section III presents four cases where we discuss the problem of fermion
localization on the brane; in Section IV we compute corrections to Coulomb's law coming from the extra dimensional
world for two point fermions interacting with a gauge boson localized on the brane. Finally, we conclude in Section
V with a general discussion of our results.
\section{The thick braneworld model }
The 5D action for the thick braneworld model generated by a tachyon condensate scalar field reads
\cite{HRMGR}
\begin{equation}
S = \int d^5 x \sqrt{-g} \left(\frac{1}{2\kappa_5^2} R -
\Lambda_5\right) - \int d^{5}x \sqrt{-g}
V(T(w))\sqrt{1+g^{AB}\partial_{A} T(w)\partial_{B} T(w)}, \label{action}
\end{equation}
where $R$ is the 5D scalar curvature, $\Lambda_{5}$ is the bulk
cosmological constant, and $\kappa_5^2=8\pi G_5$ with $G_5$ being the 5D Newton constant. Here we use the signature
$(-++++)$ and the Riemann tensor, defined as follows
$R_{MNPQ}=\frac{\Lambda_5}{6}\left(g_{MP}g_{NQ}-g_{MQ}g_{NP}\right)$,
gives rise to the Ricci one $R_{NQ}=R^M_{NMQ}$ upon contraction of
its first and third indices, where $M,N,P,Q=0,1,2,3,5.$ The corresponding Einstein equations with a cosmological constant in five
dimensions are
\begin{eqnarray}\label{EinsteinEq_5d}
G_{AB} = - \kappa_5^2 ~\Lambda_5 g_{AB} + \kappa_5^2
~T_{AB}^\emph{{bulk}}.
\end{eqnarray}
The 5D metric ansatz compatible with an induced flat FRW metric on the 3--brane
has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{metricw}
ds^2 = e^{2f(w)} \left[- d t^2 + a^2(t) \left(d x^2 + d y^2 + d
z^2 \right)+ d w^2 \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where $\text{e}^{2f(w)}$ and $a(t)$ are the warp factor and the
scale factor of the brane, respectively, and $w$ stands for the extra extended
dimensional coordinate. The matter field equation is obtained by
variation of the 5D action (\ref{action}) with respect to the condensate tachyonic field. It is expressed
as follows:
\begin{equation}
\partial_{M}\left[\frac{\sqrt{-g} V(T) \partial^M T}{\sqrt{1+ (\nabla T)^2}}
\right ]
- \sqrt{-g} \sqrt{1+ (\nabla T)^2} \frac{\partial V(T)}{\partial T}
= 0.
\end{equation}
The solution for the metric coefficients in (\ref{metricw}), i.e. for
the scale and warp factor, respectively reads
\begin{equation}
a(t)=e^{H\,t}, \qquad \qquad
f(w)=-\frac{1}{2}\ln\left[\frac{\cosh\left[\,H\,(2w+c)\right]}{s}\right],
\label{scalewarpfactors}
\end{equation}
indicating a de Sitter symmetry induced on the 3--brane; the tachyon condensate scalar field has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
T(w) &=& \pm \ b\
\mbox{arctanh}\left[\frac{\sinh\left[\frac{H\,\left(2w+c\right)}{2}\right]}
{\sqrt{\cosh\left[\,H\,(2w+c)\right]}}\right] \nonumber \\
&=& \pm \ b~\mbox{arcsinh}\left[\text{tanh}(Hw) \right], \label{Tw}
\end{eqnarray}
while the tachyon condensate potential is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&V(T) = - \Lambda_5\
\mbox{sech}\left(T/b\right)
\sqrt{6\ \mbox{sech}^2\left(T/b\right)-1} = \nonumber \\
&& - \Lambda_5\ \sqrt{\Big(1+\mbox{sech}\left[\,H\,(2w+c)\right]\Big)\left(1+\frac{3}{2}\ \mbox{sech}\left[\,H\,(2w+c)\right]\right)},
\label{VT}
\end{eqnarray}
where $H$ and $c$ are integration constants, and we have set
\begin{equation}
s=-\frac{6H^2}{\kappa_5^2\,\Lambda_5}
\qquad \quad
\mbox{and}
\qquad \quad
b=\sqrt{\frac{-3}{2\,\kappa_5^2\,\Lambda_5}},
\label{s}
\end{equation}
with an arbitrary negative bulk cosmological constant $\Lambda_5<0$.
\section{Localization of Spin--1/2 fermion fields}
In this section we shall investigate the localization of spin--1/2 fermion
bulk matter fields on a tachyon condensate de Sitter thick braneworld model by considering a very weak
gravitational interaction between gravity and the fermionic fields, so that the brane solution given in the
previous section remains valid even in the presence of generalized 5D bulk matter. As a generic feature,
the 5D profile of the fermion fields obey a Schr\"{o}dinger equation when assuming that the corresponding
4D Dirac equations are satisfied.
The mass spectra of the fermion fields on the de Sitter thick brane will also be discussed by analyzing the
potential of, and by analytically solving the corresponding Schr\"{o}dinger equation for their KK massive
modes related to the 4D fermionic fields in four different cases.
In 5D spacetime fermions are four--component spinors and their Dirac structure can be
described by $\Gamma^M= e^M_{~\bar{M}} \Gamma^{\bar{M}}$ with $e^M_{~\bar{M}}$ being the vielbein
and $\{\Gamma^M,\Gamma^N\}=2g^{MN}$. In this section $\bar{M}, \bar{N}, \cdots =0,1,2,3,5$ and
$\bar{\mu}, \bar{\nu}, \cdots =0,1,2,3$ denote the 5D and 4D local
Lorentz indices, respectively, and $\Gamma^{\bar{M}}$ are the gamma matrices in 5D
flat spacetime. In our set-up, the vielbein is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
e_M ^{~~\bar{M}}= \left
\begin{array}{ccc}
\text{e}^{f} \hat{e}_\mu^{~\bar{\nu}} & 0 \\
0 & \text{e}^{f} \\
\end{array
\right),\label{vielbein_e}
\end{eqnarray}
$\Gamma^M=\text{e}^{-f}(\hat{e}^{\mu}_{~\bar{\nu}}
\gamma^{\bar{\nu}},\gamma^5)=\text{e}^{-f}(\gamma^{\mu},\gamma^5)$,
where $\gamma^{\mu}=\hat{e}^{\mu}_{~\bar{\nu}}\gamma^{\bar{\nu}}$,
$\gamma^{\bar{\nu}}$ and $\gamma^5$ are the usual flat gamma
matrices in the 4D Dirac representation. The generalized Dirac
action of a spin--1/2 fermion with a mass term can be expressed as
\cite{OdaPLB2000113}
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{\frac{1}{2}} = \int d^5 x \sqrt{-g} \left[\bar{\Psi} \Gamma^M
\left(\partial_M+\omega_M\right) \Psi
- M \bar{\Psi}F(T)\Psi\right]. \label{DiracAction}
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\omega_M$ is the spin connection defined as $\omega_M=
\frac{1}{4} \omega_M^{\bar{M} \bar{N}} \Gamma_{\bar{M}}
\Gamma_{\bar{N}}$ with
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_M ^{\bar{M} \bar{N}}
&=& \frac{1}{2} {e}^{N \bar{M}}\left(\partial_M e_N^{~\bar{N}}
- \partial_N e_M^{~\bar{N}}\right)
- \frac{1}{2} {e}^{N\bar{N}}\left(\partial_M e_N^{~\bar{M}}
- \partial_N e_M^{~\bar{M}}\right) \nonumber \\
&& - \frac{1}{2} {e}^{P \bar{M}} {e}^{Q \bar{N}}\left(\partial_P e_{Q
{\bar{R}}} - \partial_Q e_{P {\bar{R}}}\right) {e}_M^{~\bar{R}},
\end{eqnarray}
and $F(T)$ is an arbitrary general scalar function of the tachyon condensate scalar field.
We will discuss about the properties of the scalar
function $F(T)$ later in the context of the localization of KK
fermion modes. The non--vanishing components of the spin connection
$\omega_M$ for the background metric (\ref{metricw}) has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_\mu =\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{w}f) \gamma_\mu \gamma_5
+\hat{\omega}_\mu, \label{spinConnection}
\end{eqnarray}
here $\hat{\omega}_\mu=\frac{1}{4} \bar\omega_\mu^{\bar{\mu}
\bar{\nu}} \Gamma_{\bar{\mu}} \Gamma_{\bar{\nu}}$ is the spin
connection derived from the metric
$\hat{g}_{\mu\nu}(x)=\hat{e}_{\mu}^{~\bar{\mu}}(x)
\hat{e}_{\nu}^{~\bar{\nu}}(x)\eta_{\bar{\mu}\bar{\nu}}$. Thus, the
equation of motion corresponding to the variation of the action (\ref{DiracAction}) whit respect to $\bar\Psi$
can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{5Ddiracequation}
\left[ \gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu}+\hat{\omega}_\mu)
+ \gamma^5 \left(\partial_w +2 \partial_{w} f \right)
-\text{e}^f MF(T)
\right ] \Psi =0, \label{DiracEq1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu}+\hat{\omega}_\mu)$ is the 4D Dirac
operator on the brane.
Next, we will investigate the KK modes for the 5D Dirac equation
(\ref{DiracEq1}), and write the spinor in terms of 4D
effective fields. On account of the fifth gamma matrix $\gamma^{5}$,
we anticipate the left-- and right--handed projections of the
4D part to behave differently. We shall consider the following ansatz for the general chiral decomposition
in (\ref{DiracEq1}):
\begin{equation}
\label{varsep}
\Psi= \text{e}^{-2f}\left(\sum_n\Psi_{Ln}(x) L_n(w)
+\sum_n\Psi_{Rn}(x) R_n(w)\right),
\end{equation}
where $\Psi_{Ln}(x)=-\gamma^5 \Psi_{Ln}(x)$ and
$\Psi_{Rn}(x)=\gamma^5 \Psi_{Rn}(x)$ are the left-handed and
right-handed components of a 4D Dirac field, respectively. Further, we shall
assume that $\Psi_{Ln}(x)$ and $\Psi_{Rn}(x)$ satisfy the 4D Dirac
equations. Therefore the KK modes $L_{n}(w)$ and $R_{n}(w)$ should
satisfy the following coupled equations:
\begin{subequations}\label{CoupleEq1}
\begin{eqnarray}
\Big(\partial_w
+ \text{e}^f MF(T) \Big)L_n(w)
&=& ~~m_n R_n(w), \label{CoupleEq1a} \\
\Big(\partial_w
- \text{e}^f MF(T) \Big)R_n(w)
&=& - m_n L_n(w). \label{CoupleEq1b}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
where $m_n$ is the fermionic 4D mass arising from the separation of variables (\ref{varsep}). From the above coupled
equations, we can obtain the Schr\"{o}dinger--like equations for the left-- and right--chiral KK modes of fermions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Big(-\partial^2_w + V_L(w) \Big)L_n
&=&m_{n}^{2} L_n,~~
\label{SchEqLeftFermion} \\
\Big(-\partial^2_w + V_R(w) \Big)R_n
&=&m_{n}^{2} R_n,
\label{SchEqRightFermion}
\end{eqnarray}
where the corresponding left and right potentials read
\begin{subequations}\label{Vfermion}
\begin{eqnarray}
V_L(w)&=& \text{e}^{2f} M^{2}F^{2}(T)
- \text{e}^{f} f' M F(T) -\text{e}^{f}M\partial_{w}F(T), \label{VL}\\
V_R(w)&=& \text{e}^{2f} M^{2}F^{2}(T)
+ \text{e}^{f} f' M F(T) + \text{e}^{f}M\partial_{w}F(T). \label{VR}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
We can perform a dimensional reduction on (\ref{DiracAction}) in order to obtain the standard model 4D action for
a massless fermion and a series of massive chiral fermions
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{\frac{1}{2}} &=& \int d^5 x \sqrt{-g} ~\bar{\Psi}
\left[ \Gamma^M (\partial_M+\omega_M)
-MF(T)\right] \Psi \nonumber \\
&=&\sum_{n}\int d^4 x \sqrt{-\hat{g}}
~\bar{\Psi}_{n}
\left[\gamma^{\mu}(\partial_{\mu}+\hat{\omega}_\mu)
-m_{n}\right]\Psi_{n},~~~
\end{eqnarray}
where the following orthonormalization conditions for $L_{n}$ and $R_{n}$ need to be satisfied in order to perform the dimensional reduction:
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} L_m L_ndw
&=& \delta_{mn}, \label{orthonormalityFermionL} \\
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} R_m R_ndw
&=& \delta_{mn}, \label{orthonormalityFermionR}\\
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} L_m R_ndw
&=& 0. \label{orthonormalityFermionLR}
\end{eqnarray}
It is easy to see that if one sets $m_n=0$ in the expressions (\ref{CoupleEq1a}) and (\ref{CoupleEq1b}), then one gets an easy way to
calculate the zero modes for the left an right--chiral fermions
\begin{subequations}\label{zero}
\begin{eqnarray}
L_0&\propto & e^{-M \int e^{f} F(T(w)) dw}, \label{zerol}\\
R_0&\propto & e^{M \int e^{f} F(T(w)) dw}. \label{zeror}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
In the next subsections we will investigate four different profiles of the function $F(T)$ in order to localize the 4D fermions on the thick 3-brane.
To achieve this goal we require the effective potentials $V_L $ and $V_R $ to possess a minimum and to be symmetric with respect to their
position on the thick brane along the extra dimension. Therefore we will demand the function $ F (T(w))$ to be an odd function in $w$.
\subsection{case I: $F(T)=T/b$}
In this case we shall investigate a simple interaction in the action (\ref{DiracAction}) between the 5D fermionic fields and the tachyon condensate scalar field by taking $F(T)=T/b$,
where we divide the $T$ field by $b=\sqrt{\frac{-3}{2\,\kappa_5^2\,\Lambda_5}}$ in order to make the function $F(T)$ adimensional and make the parameter $M$ to encode all the relevant units for the interaction term of the 5D action.
For this field configuration we have the following potentials for $L_n$ and $R_n$ 5D Dirac fermions
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
V_L&=& M s H\,\text{sech}(H w)\Biggl[\frac{M}{H}\frac{\text{sech}(H w)\,\text{arcsinh}^2[\text{tanh}(H w)] }{1+\text{tanh}^2(H w)} \nonumber \\
&+& \frac{1}{\sqrt{s }}\left(\text{arcsinh}[\text{tanh}(H w)] \frac{\text{tanh}(2 H w)}{\sqrt{1+\text{tanh}^2(H w)}} - 1\right)\Bigg]\,, \\
V_R&=& M s H\,\text{sech}(H w)\Biggl[\frac{M}{H}\frac{\text{sech}(H w)\,\text{arcsinh}^2[\text{tanh}(H w)] }{1+\text{tanh}^2(H w)} \nonumber \\
&-& \frac{1}{\sqrt{s }}\!\left(\text{arcsinh}[\text{tanh}(H w)]
\frac{\text{tanh}(2 H w)}{\sqrt{1+\text{tanh}^2(H w)}} - 1\right)\Bigg]\,.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
Both potentials have the same asymptotic behavior $V_{R,L}(w\rightarrow \pm\infty)\rightarrow0$, the critical value (maximum and minimum) of the right and left potentials when $w=0$ are, respectively, $V_{R}(w=0)=\sqrt{s}\, H M^2$ and $V_{L}(w=0)=-\sqrt{s}\, H M^2$.
Both of the potentials have a very complicated form and it is impossible to find an explicit solution for the Dirac fermion fields when trying to analytically solve the
Schr\"odinger equations (\ref{SchEqLeftFermion})--(\ref{SchEqRightFermion}). However, these potentials do not allow us to localize the fermion zero modes, the form of the $L_0$ can easily be found numerically as show in Fig. \ref{VL}.
While the potential is of volcano type, which allows, in principle, the existence of bound states, the zero mode is not localized on the 3--brane because it asymptotically tends to a positive definite constant, indicating that the bottom of the volcano potential is not deep enough to localize fermion fields.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VLpotencialc1.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_L$ potential (solid black line) and the non--localized left--chiral zero mode $L_0$ (dashed black line) along the
fifth dimension for the case I. Here we have set $H=1/2$, $M=1$ and $s=1$.} \label{VL}
\end{figure}
The shape of the potential $V_R$ predicts the lack of localized right bound states since it constitutes a barrier potential.
Fig. \ref{VR} shows the shape of this potential and the massless KK zero mode of the spectrum.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VRpotencialc1.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_R$ potential (solid black line) and the non--localized right--chiral massless fermion zero mode $R_O$ (dashed black line)
along the extra dimension for the case I. Here $H=1/2$, $M=1$ and $s=1$ as well.} \label{VR}
\end{figure}
Thus, for the above analyzed case I there are no, neither left nor right, fermionic bound states localized on the considered 5D braneworld model generated by gravity
in complicity with the bulk tachyonic scalar field. Therefore, we need to explore more complicated functions $F(T)$ in order to achieve the desired fermion field localization
on the aforementioned braneworld model.
\subsection{case II: $F(T)=\frac{\text{sinh}(2T/b)}{2\left[1-\text{sinh}^{2}(T/b)\right]}
$}
We shall now propose one case in which the left KK ground state is localized in our braneworld model.
Therefore, we shall consider a new $ F(T)$ for which we obtain the following expressions for the left and right potentials
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
V_L &=&MH^2G [MG\,\text{sinh}^2 (H w)-\cosh (H w)], \\
V_R &=&MH^2G [MG\,\text{sinh}^2 (H w)+\cosh (H w)],
\label{potentialsc4}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
where $G=\sqrt{\frac{-6}{\kappa^{2}_{5}\Lambda_5}}=\frac{\sqrt{s}}{H}$.
Both of these potentials have the same asymptotic behaviour $V_{R,L}(w\longrightarrow \pm\infty)\longrightarrow\infty$, giving rise to infinitely high well potentials, which means in turn that the mass spectra of both left-- and right--chiral fermions consists of an infinite set of discrete massive bound states localized on the thick 3--brane.
The critical values of the right and left potentials take place when $w=0$ and are given by $V_{R}(w=0)=H^2 MG$ and $V_{L}(w=0)=-H^2 MG$, respectively. Thus, both of the potentials possess a tower of discrete KK bound states, the only essential difference is that the left--chiral KK fermionic ground state is massless (see Fig. \ref{VL4}), while the right--chiral KK fermionic ground state is a massive one.
The general solution for both the left and right KK bound states can be expressed in terms of confluent Heun functions as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
&&L_{n}=e^{MG\, \cosh (H w)} \left[K_1\, \text{HeunC}\left(4MG,-\frac{1}{2},-\frac{1}{2},2MG,\Omega_{n_-} ,\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2} \cosh (H w)\right)\right.+\nonumber\\
&& \left. K_2\, \sqrt{2+2\cosh (H w)}\, \text{HeunC}\left(4MG,\frac{1}{2},-\frac{1}{2},2MG,\Omega_{n_-} ,\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2} \cosh (H w)\right)\right],
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&R_{n}=e^{MG\, \cosh (H w)} \left[k_1\, \text{HeunC}\left(4MG,-\frac{1}{2},-\frac{1}{2},-2MG,\Omega_{n_+} ,\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2} \cosh (H w)\right)\right.+\nonumber\\
&& \left. k_2\, \sqrt{2+2\cosh (H w)}\, \text{HeunC}\left(4MG,\frac{1}{2},-\frac{1}{2},-2MG,\Omega_{n_+} ,\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2} \cosh (H w)\right)\right],
\end{eqnarray}
where $K_1,K_2,k_1,k_2$ are arbitrary constants and $\Omega_{n_\pm}=\frac{(3 \pm 8 MG) H^2+8 m_n^2}{8H^2}$.
Returning to our goal, we need to know, in particular, the explicit expression for the left and right KK ground states. By proceeding to calculate these expressions as usual we get
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
L_0&\propto & e^{-MG\,\text{cosh}(H w)}, \label{zerolf2F4}\\
R_0&\propto & e^{MG\,\text{cosh}(H w)}, \label{zerorf2F4}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
implying that just the massless left--chiral fermionic zero mode is localized on the 3--brane.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VLpotencialc4.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_L$ potential (solid black line) and the localized left--chiral zero mode $L_0$ scaled by a factor of 10 (dashed black line) along the
fifth dimension for case II. Here we have set $H=1$, $M=1/2$ and $s=1/2$.} \label{VL4}
\end{figure}
We must emphasize that the shape of the potential $V_R$ predicts the existence of an infinite tower of discrete massive bound states localized on the brane along with the presence of a non--localized massless zero mode. Fig. \ref{VR4} shows the shape of the right potential and the delocalized massless zero mode from the brane.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VRpotencialc4.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_R$ potential (solid black line) and the non--localized right--chiral zero mode $R_O$ (dashed black line) along the
extra dimension in case II. Here we have set $H=1.0$, $M=1/2$ and $s=1/2$,} \label{VR4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{case III: $F(T)=\frac{\text{arctanh}\left[\text{sinh}\left(T/b \right)\right]}{\sqrt{2\, \text{sech}^2\left(T/b \right)-1}\ \left(1+\text{arctanh}^2\left[\text{sinh}\left(T/b\right)\right]\right)
$}
In general, the localization of spin--$\frac{1}{2}$ fermions is obtained in a more artisanal way when compared to the localization of gravity, scalar and/or gauge vector fields. This is why we shall undertake the task of finding field configurations with a little whimsical $F(T)$, like the one considered here in case III, that allows us to localize fermion fields on the 3--brane.
For the configuration corresponding to case III we get again a left potential $V_L$ of volcano type (see Fig. \ref{VLC2}), while the shape for the right potential $V_R$ is conceived as a barrier potential as shown in Fig. \ref{VRC2}. The expression for both the left and right potentials reads
\begin{subequations}\label{Vfermion}
\begin{eqnarray}
V_L(w)&=& \frac{H^2MG\left[(MG+1)H^2w^2-1\right]}{\left(1+H^2 w^2\right)^2}, \label{VLf}\\
V_R(w)&=& \frac{H^2MG\left[(MG-1)H^2w^2+1\right]}{\left(1+H^2 w^2\right)^2}. \label{VRf}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
where the constant $G$ is defined as in the case II. This two potentials have the same vanishing asymptotic behavior $V_{R,L}(w\longrightarrow \pm\infty)=0$, indicating the lack of a mass gap in their corresponding mass spectra;
the critical values (maximum and minimum) of the right and left potentials is achieved when $w=0$ and are respectively given by $V_{R}(w= 0)=H^2MG $ and
$V_{L}(w=0)=-H^2MG$.
Only the left potential supports a left--chiral zero mode $L_0$ localized on the brane. The volcano potential $V_L$ supports a tower of continuous KK massive modes non--localized
on the 3-brane. On the other hand, the right potential $V_R $ represents a barrier potential, a fact which indicates that right--chiral fermions cannot be localized on the 3--brane.
By making use of the relations given by (\ref{zero}) we can easily find expressions for the massless zero modes $R_0$ and $L_0$ supported by the potentials (\ref{Vfermion})
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
L_0&\propto & e^{-M \int\frac{H w \sqrt{s }}{\left(1+H^2 w^2\right) } dw}=\left(1+H^2 w^2\right)^{-\frac{MG}{2}}, \label{zerolf2}\\
R_0&\propto & e^{M \int\frac{H w \sqrt{s }}{\left(1+H^2 w^2\right) } dw}=\left(1+H^2 w^2\right)^{\frac{MG}{2}}. \label{zerorf2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
Moreover, by solving the Schr\"odinger equation corresponding to the left potential $V_L$ (\ref{VLf}) we can also obtain the general solution for the KK excitations with
arbitrary mass and see that the continuous spectrum of KK massive modes can be expressed in terms of confluent Heun functions in the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{n}&=&C_1 \left(1+H^2 w^2\right)^{1+\frac{MG}{2}} \text{HeunC}\left(0,-\frac{1}{2} ,1+MG ,-\frac{1}{4} \frac{m_{n}^2}{H^2} ,\eta_n ,-H^2 w^2\right)+\nonumber\\
&&C_2 \left(1+H^2 w^2\right)^{1+\frac{MG}{2}} w\, \text{HeunC}\left(0,\frac{1}{2} ,1+MG ,-\frac{1}{4} \frac{m_{n}^2}{H^2} ,\eta_n ,-H^2 w^2\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are arbitrary constants, and the parameters $\eta_n$ is given by $\eta_n =\frac{(2+MG)H^2+m_{n}^2}{4H^2}$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VLpotencialc2.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_L$ potential (solid black line) and the localized left--chiral ground state $L_0$ (dashed black line) along the
fifth dimension for case III. Here $H=1/2$, $M=1$ and $s=2$.} \label{VLC2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VRpotencialc2.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_R$ potential (solid black line) and the non--localized right--chiral zero mode $R_0$ (dashed black line) along the
extra dimension for case III. Here we have set $H=1$, $M=1/2$ and $s=1$.} \label{VRC2}
\end{figure}
We can conclude that case III yields a left--chiral massless fermion zero mode localized on the 3--brane of our model, along with a continuum
of massive KK fermionic excitations delocalized from the brane, whereas all right--chiral KK fermionic modes are non--localized on the brane.
\subsection{case IV: $F(T)=\frac{2\,\text{tanh}(T/b)}{\sqrt{1-\text{sinh}^{2}(T/b)}}
$}
In this case we have for both the left and right potentials a modified P\"oschl--Teller configuration which has been carefully studied in several
modern physics scenarios. This function $F(T)$ allows us to have KK discrete and continuous mass spectra separated by a mass gap from the
massless zero mode. The size of these mass gaps largely depend on the value of 4D and 5D parameters as shown by the following expressions:
\begin{subequations}\label{Vfermion2}
\begin{eqnarray}
V_L(w)&=& M \left[M s \tanh^2 (2H w)-2H \sqrt{s}\, \text{sech}^2(2H w)\right], \label{VLf2}\\
V_R(w)&=& M \left[M s \tanh^2 (2H w)+2H \sqrt{s}\, \text{sech}^2(2H w)\right]. \label{VRf2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
By substituting the value of $s$ in (\ref{Vfermion2}) and recalling that $b=\sqrt{\frac{-3}{2\kappa^{2}_{5}\Lambda_{5}}}$ according to (\ref{s}), we can
recast the potentials $V_{R,L}$ as
\begin{subequations}\label{Vfermion2D}
\begin{eqnarray}
V_L(w)&=& 4 M H^2 b\left[ M b \tanh^2 (2H w)- ~\text{sech}^2(2H w)\right], \label{VLf2D}\\
V_R(w)&=& 4 M H^2b \left[ M b \tanh^2 (2H w)+ ~\text{sech}^2(2H w)\right]. \label{VRf2D}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
The asymptotic behaviour for the potentials has the form $V_{R,L}(w\longrightarrow \pm\infty)= M^2\,s=4 M^2 H^2 b^2$ and is positive definite, a fact which in general ensures the
existence of a mass gap between the bound states of the corresponding mass spectra. The critical values (maximum and minimum) of the right and left potentials when $w=0$ are respectively $V_{R}(w=0)=4 M H^2 b$ and $V_{L}(w=0)=- 4 M H^2 b$.
The massless zero modes for both potentials can be written as follows
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
L_0&\propto & \text{sech}^{Mb}(2H w), \label{zerolf2D}\\
R_0&\propto & \cosh^{Mb}(2H w). \label{zerorf2D}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VLpotentialc3.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_L$ potential
(solid black line) and the localized left--chiral ground state $L_0$ (dashed black line) along the
fifth dimension for case IV. Here we have set $H=1/4$, $M=1$ and $s=1$.} \label{VLC3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{VRpotentialc3.eps}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The profile of the $V_R$ potential (solid black line), the localized right--chiral massive ground state $R_{m_0}$ (gray line), and the non--localized massless zero mode $R_0$ (dashed black line) along the extra dimension for case IV. Here we have also set $H=1/4$, $M=1$ and $s=1$.} \label{VRC3}
\end{figure}
From these expressions it is clear that just the left--chiral fermion field possesses a localized zero mode on the 3--brane.
The general solution for the $L_{n}$'s is given in terms of hypergeometric functions $_{2}\text{F}_{1}$ and reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{LnCaseIIIEven}
L_{n}&\propto& \cosh^{1+M b}(2Hw)~_{2}\text{F}_{1}
\left(s_{n},r_{n};\frac{1}{2};-\sinh^{2}(2Hw)\right),
\end{eqnarray}
for even $n$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{LnCaseIIIOdd}
L_{n}&\propto& \cosh^{1+M b}(2Hw)\sinh(2Hw)~_{2}\text{F}_{1}
\left(s_{n}+\frac{1}{2},r_{n}+\frac{1}{2};\frac{3}{2};-\sinh^{2}(2Hw)\right),
\end{eqnarray}
for odd $n$, where the parameters $s_{n}$ and $r_{n}$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
s_{n}=\frac{1}{2}(n+1), ~~~~~~~~
r_{n}=M b-\frac{1}{2}(n-1).
\end{eqnarray}
The number of bound states for the left--chiral fermion $L_n$ is finite, they are labeled by $n=0,1,2,...,< M b$ and
the corresponding KK mass spectrum is described by
\begin{eqnarray}
m^{2}_{L_{n}}=4H^2\left(M b-n \right)n.
\label{mnIV}
\end{eqnarray}
If we take into account that, by definition, $b>0$, we can infer that when $ M b< 1 $ there is a single left--chiral bound state, the massless zero $L_0$, as depicted in Fig. \ref{VLC3}, and therefore it is only possible to localize left--chiral fermions on the 3--brane. On the contrary, in order to obtain a finite number of massive KK excited modes we must impose the condition $ M b > 1 $.
For the potential of right-chiral fermions, as shown in (\ref{VRf2D}), it is not possible to localize the massless zero mode. Thus, the only way to ensure the existence of a finite number of
localized bound states for the right--chiral massive fermions consists in imposing the condition $ M b > 1 $.
The general expression for the KK right--chiral bound states in this case is given by \begin{eqnarray}
\label{RnCaseIIIEven}
R_{n}\propto \cosh^{M b}(2Hw)~_{2}\text{F}_{1}
\left(\frac{1+n}{2},M b-\frac{1+n}{2};\frac{1}{2};-\sinh^{2}(2Hw)\right),
\end{eqnarray}
for even $n$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{RnCaseIIIOdd}
R_{n}\propto \cosh^{M b}(2Hw)\sinh(Hz) ~_{2}\text{F}_{1}
\left(1+\frac{n}{2},M b-\frac{n}{2};\frac{3}{2};-\sinh^{2}(2Hw)\right),
\end{eqnarray}
for odd $n$.
It is worth emphasizing that the massless zero mode $R_0$ given in (\ref{zerorf2D}) is not a localized fermionic bound state, therefore the ground state for right--chiral fermions corresponds to the first massive bound state (with $n=0$), as illustrated in Fig. \ref{VRC3}, and is denoted by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{BSm0}
R_{m_0}\propto \text{sech}^{M b-1}(2Hw),
\end{eqnarray}
where the mass of the first right--chiral KK bound state obeys the following inequality $m^{2}_{R_0}=4H^{2}\left(2M b-1\right)>0$.
The number of bound states for the right--chiral fermion fields inferred from the canonical form of the $V_R$ potential is $n=0,1,2,...,<M b-1$.
For this set of eigenvalues we have the following mass spectrum for the right--chiral fermions $m^{2}_{R_n}=4H^2\left[2M b-\left(n+1\right) \right]\left(n+1\right)$.
We should finally mention that both of the potentials $V_R$ and $V_L$ have a continuous mass spectrum that is achieved when $m_{Ln,Rn}>4M^2H^2b^{2}=M^2\,s$, as it is evident from the asymptotic behaviour of these potentials.
In Fig. \ref{fig_FermionIII_LnRn} we present the profile of left and right--chiral KK massive modes respectively for $n=1,2$ in the above studied case IV.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[$n=1$]{\label{fig_FermionIII_L1}
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{LIC3.eps}}
\subfigure[$n=2$]{\label{fig_FermionIII_L2}
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{L2C3.eps}}
\subfigure[$n=1$]{\label{fig_FermionIII_R2}
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{RIC3.eps}}
\subfigure[$n=2$]{\label{fig_FermionIII_R3}
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{R2C3.eps}}
\end{center}\vskip -5mm
\caption{The shape of the left-- and right--chiral KK massive modes respectively for $n=1,2$ in case IV. The parameters are set to $M=2$, $b=4$
and $H=1/4$.}
\label{fig_FermionIII_LnRn}
\end{figure*}
\section{Corrections to Coulomb's law}
\label{CCL}
In this section we shall compute the Coulomb's law modifications that come from the contribution of the KK massive modes of the bulk gauge vector field. In order to achieve this aim, we shall consider a Yukawa interaction between 5D fermions and gauge bosons which constitutes a generalization of the 4D quantum interacting potential given by
$L_I= -e \bar{\psi}(x) \gamma^{\mu} A_{\mu}(x) \psi(x)$ with the vertex factor $-i e \gamma^{\mu}$ \cite{peskin}.
Hence, the generalized 5D interaction between fermions and gauge boson reads
\cite{HuangPRD2004}
\begin{eqnarray}
S_I= -e_5{\int} d^4 x dw~ \sqrt{-g}~ \bar{\Psi}(x,w) \Gamma^M A_M(x,w) \Psi(x,w),
\end{eqnarray}
where $e_5$ is a 5D coupling constant and $A_M(x,w) $ represents the generalized 5D gauge vector field that mediates the interaction between the fermion fields under the gauge condition $A_5=0$ and the KK vector modes decomposition
\begin{equation}
A_\mu(x,w) = \sum_n a^{(n)}_\mu(x)\rho_n(w)e^{-f/2},
\label{KKdecompAmu}
\end{equation}
where $\rho_n(w)$ is the profile of the massive gauge boson along the fifth dimension.
We shall suppose as well that the 4D fermions are associated to the left--chiral KK massless zero mode $L_0$ of the last three cases considered in the previous section.
The zero mode of this gauge field has recently been shown to be localized on our braneworld model given by (\ref{action})--(\ref{s}) in \cite{AHAgauge}.
Then, by performing the dimensional reduction we can confirm the similarity between the Newton potential for two point particles
interacting with massive KK tensor modes and the Coulomb potential for two point charges
interacting with massive KK gauge vector field modes. Let us tart by considering the following action:
\begin{eqnarray}
S_I&\supset& \sum \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! {\int_n} {\int} d^4 x dw~\sqrt{-\hat{g}}~\text{e}^{5f}
(-e_5)\text{e}^{-2f} \bar{\psi}_0(x) L_0(w)
\text{e}^{-f}\gamma^{\mu} a_{\mu}^{(n)}(x)
\text{e}^{-f/2} \rho_n(w)
\text{e}^{-2f}\psi_0(x) L_0(w) \nonumber \\
&=& -e_5 \sum \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! {\int_n} {\int} dw~\text{e}^{-f/2}~\rho_n(w) L_0^2(w)
{\int} d^4 x \sqrt{-\hat{g}}~
\bar{\psi}_0(x) \gamma^{\mu} a_{\mu}^{(n)}(x) \psi_0(x) \nonumber \\
&=& {\int} d^4 x~ \sqrt{-\hat{g}} ~
\Big\{ -e\bar{\psi}_0(x) \gamma^{\mu} a_{\mu}^{(0)}(x) \psi_0(x)
-\sum \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! {\int_{n\ne 0}}~~e_n \bar{\psi}_0(x) \gamma^{\mu} a_{\mu}^{(n)}(x) \psi_0(x)
\Big\},
\end{eqnarray}
where the $\sum
\!\!\!\!\!\!{\int}\,_n$ stands for summation or integration (or both) with respect to $n$, depending on the respective discrete or continuos (or mixed) character of the $a_{\mu}^{(n)}(x)$ and $e_n(w)$. By taking into account the form of the gauge vector modes $\rho_{0}(w)$ and $\rho_{n}(w)$ from \cite{AHAgauge}
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{0}(w)&=&\frac{\sqrt{H}(\pi/2)^{1/4}}{2\Gamma(5/4)}\text{sech}^{1/4}(2Hw),\\
\rho_{n}(w)&=&\left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma)
P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(\text{tanh}(2Hw)\right)\right],\label{rhon}
\end{eqnarray}
where $P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}$ are associated Legendre functions of first kind of degree $1/4$ and order $\pm i\,\sigma$
with $\sigma=\sqrt{\frac{m^2}{4H^2}-\frac{1}{16}}$, which imposes the condition $m\ge H/2$, we find the next relations between the couplings $e$, $e_{5}$ and $e_n(w): $
\begin{eqnarray}
e&=&e_5 {\int} dw~\text{e}^{-f/2} ~\rho_0(w) L_0^2(w)
=e_5\frac{ \left(2\pi\right)^{1/4}}{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)b^{1/2}}
{\int} dw~ L_0^{2}(w) = e_5\frac{ \left(2\pi\right)^{1/4}}{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)b^{1/2}},
\label{chare4d}
\end{eqnarray}
where $e$ is the usual 4D charge of the fermion localized on the brane and
$e_n$'s are 4D effective couplings defined as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
e_n &\equiv & e_5 {\int} dw~\text{e}^{-f/2} ~\rho_n(w) L_0^2(w) = e \frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)b^{1/2}}{\left(2\pi\right)^{1/4}}{\int} dw~\text{e}^{-f/2} ~\rho_n(w) L_0^2(w).
\label{epsilon_n}
\end{eqnarray}
In the non--relativistic limit the Coulomb potential (and its corrections) between two charged fermions is determined by the KK
photon exchange process and turns out to be
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Potcomplet}
V(r) &=& \frac{e^2}{4{\pi}r}+ \int_{m_0}^{\infty}
dm \frac{e_n^2}{4{\pi}r}\text{e}^{-m r}\noindent\nonumber\\
&=& \frac{1}{4{\pi}r}
\left[ e^2 + e^{2}_5 \int_{m_0}^{\infty} dm\ \text{e}^{-m r}
\left({\int} dw~\text{e}^{-f(w)/2} ~\rho_n(w) L_0^2(w)\right)^2
\right],\label{potentialCoulomb}
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_0=H/2$ is the first excited KK massive mode of the gauge vector field. In this way it is easy to see that the Coulomb
potential arises from the vector zero mode, while its corrections come from the massive KK vector excitations.
If we pay attention to the formula (\ref{chare4d}) we realize that the existing relationship between the 4D charge $ e $ and the coupling constant $e_5$ does not depend on the form of the left--chiral KK ground state $L_0$ since it is normalized to unity. On the other hand, the integral in the rhs of the expression (\ref{potentialCoulomb}) for the extra dimensional corrections to the Coulomb potential will always render a constant (which depends on the mass $m$ of the KK gauge field) as far as we suitably define a Dirac delta function with the aid of the left--chiral zero mode $L_0$ in the thin brane limit (see further subsections for concrete examples). Thus, under this definition of the delta function, the squared integral with respect to $w$ in (\ref{potentialCoulomb}), with the prefactor $\text{e}^{-f(w)/2} ~\rho_n(w)$ multiplying a Dirac delta function, will lead to the value $\rho_n(0)^2$ since the Dirac delta function is located at the origin of the fifth dimension $w=0$.
This circumstance makes us conclude, despite the heuristic proposals employed for the function $F(T)$, that the corrections to Coulomb's law associated with the massive KK gauge vector modes in the thin brane limit do not depend on the explicit form of the function $F(T)$ and are, in this sense, model independent as it will be shown in the following examples.
In the following subsections we will analytically compute the Coulomb potential $V(r)$ in the thin brane limit, which is not an easy task, but is still affordable for the three previously studied cases in which the left--chiral massless fermion localization on the 3--brane is feasible.
\subsection{Corrections to Coulomb's law in case II}
In order to compute the Coulomb's law corrections for the case II, let us begin by calculating the 4D effective coupling constants $e_n$. To do that we shall make use of the fermionic localization mechanism described above with the odd function $F(T)=\frac{\text{sinh}(2T/b)}{1-\text{sinh}^{2}(T/b)}.$ In this case the normalized fermion zero mode reads
\begin{equation}
L_{0}(w) =\left(\frac{H}{\rm{K_{0}}\left(2MG\right)}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{-MG\,\text{cosh}(H w)},
\end{equation}
where K$_{0}$ is the modified Bessel function of second kind. By substituting the warp factor (\ref{scalewarpfactors}) and the
expression for $\rho_n(w)$ in (\ref{epsilon_n}) we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
e_n &=& e\frac{\sqrt{H}\, \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)}{\sqrt{2}\,(2 \pi )^{1/4}\,\rm{K_{0}}\left(2MG\right)}
{\int} dw~\text{cosh}^{\frac{1}{4}}(2Hw)\,e^{-2MG\, \text{cosh}(H w)}\times\nonumber\\
& & \left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma)
P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(\text{tanh}(2Hw)\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
By making use of the following definition of the Dirac delta function\footnote{It is straightforward to check that this definition possesses all the properties of the normalized to unity delta distribution function.} which corresponds to the thin brane limit when $H\to\infty$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta (w) = \lim_{H\to\infty} ~\frac{H e^{-2MG\,\text{cosh}(H w)}}{\rm{K_{0}}\left(2MG\right)}, \label{delta4}
\end{eqnarray}
we finally get the following expression for the $ e_n$'s
\begin{eqnarray}
e_n &=& e \frac{ \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)}{\sqrt{2H}\,(2 \pi )^{1/4}\,}
\left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma)
P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(0\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Once we have these 4D effective couplings at hand we can write the Coulomb potential as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r) &=& \frac{e^2}{4{\pi}r}\left[1 + \frac{\left[ \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)\right]^2}{2H\,\sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{m_0}^{\infty}
dm\ \text{e}^{-m r} \left|\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma) P_{1/4}^{\pm
i\sigma}\left(0\right)\right|^2\right]
\noindent\nonumber\\
&=& \frac{e^2}{4{\pi}r}\left[1 + \frac{\left[\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)\right]^2}{\sqrt{2\pi}\,H} \int_{m_0}^{\infty}
dm\ \text{e}^{-m r}
\left|\frac{\Gamma\left(1+i\sigma\right)}{\Gamma\left(\frac{3}{8}-
\frac{i\sigma}{2}\right)\Gamma\left(\frac{9}{8}-\frac{i\sigma}{2}\right)}\right|^2\right],
\noindent\label{CCl_Gammas}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have taken into account the fact that the normalization constants for the associated Legendre functions are given by
$C_{\pm}(\sigma)=\frac{\left|\Gamma(1\mp i\sigma)\right|}{\sqrt{2\pi}}$, as well as the following relation
\begin{eqnarray}
P_{\nu}^{\mu}(0)=
\frac{2^{\mu}\sqrt{\pi}}{\Gamma\left(\frac{1-\nu-\mu}{2}\right)\Gamma\left(1+\frac{\nu-\mu}{2}\right)}.
\label{Legendre_0}
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the Coulomb potential can be written in the form
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r) = \frac{e^2}{4{\pi}r}\left[1 + \Delta V\right],
\label{VCCl2}
\end{eqnarray}
where the correction $\Delta V$ reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta V = \frac{\left[\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)\right]^2}{\sqrt{2\pi}\,\Gamma \left(\frac{3}{8}\right)^2 \Gamma
\left(\frac{9}{8}\right)^2}
\frac{e^{-Hr/2}}{Hr}\left(1+{\cal
O}\left(\frac{1}{Hr}\right)\right). \label{CCptl2}
\end{eqnarray}
When performing this computation, in (\ref{CCl_Gammas}) we have expanded the prefactor that multiplies the exponential
function in the integrand with respect to $m_0=H/2$ (which
corresponds to $\sigma=0$) since the corrections to the Coulomb
potential are dominated by the sector of small massive KK vector
modes \cite{PRD0709.3552}.
\subsection{Corrections to Coulomb's law in case III}
We now will calculate the explicit form of the Coulomb potential $V(r)$ following the same procedure as in case II.
Here $F(T)=\frac{\text{arctanh}\left[\text{sinh}\left(T/b \right)\right]}{\sqrt{2\, \text{sech}^2\left(T/b \right)-1}\,
\left[1+\text{arctanh}^2\left(\text{sinh}\left(T/b\right)\right)\right]}$ and for this function the normalizable left--chiral KK massless zero mode is
\begin{equation}
L_{0}(w) =\left[\frac{H~\Gamma\left(MG\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}\,\Gamma\left(MG-\frac{1}{2}\right)}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(1+w^2H^2\right)^{-\frac{MG}{2}},\qquad MG>\frac{1}{2},
\end{equation}
where the inequality condition follows in order to render a convergent integral.
By taking into account the expressions for the warp factor (\ref{scalewarpfactors}) and the gauge function $\rho_n(w)$ (\ref{rhon}) we
can compute the expression for the coupling constants $e_n$'s (\ref{epsilon_n}) and get the same result as in the previous case:
\begin{eqnarray}
e_n &=& e \frac{ \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)}{\sqrt{2H}\,(2 \pi )^{1/4}\,}
\left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma) P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(0\right)\right],
\label{e_nIII}
\end{eqnarray}
when defining the Dirac delta function as shown below, in the thin brane limit, when $H\to\infty$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta (w) = \lim_{H\to\infty} ~\frac{H~\Gamma\left(MG\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}\,\Gamma\left(MG-\frac{1}{2}\right)}
\left(1+w^2H^2\right)^{-MG}.
\label{delta}
\end{eqnarray}
By substituting the expression (\ref{e_nIII}) into equation (\ref{potentialCoulomb}) we get the same form for the Coulomb potential (\ref{VCCl2}),
where its correction is again defined as in (\ref{CCptl2}), obtaining the same result as in the above studied case II.
\subsection{Corrections to Coulomb's law for case IV}
We shall further proceed to perform the analytical calculation of $V(r)$ for case IV. Let us compute first the 4D effective couplings $e_n$. In order to achieve this goal we shall make
use of the function $F(T) = \frac{2\,\text{tanh}(T/b)}{\sqrt{1-\text{sinh}^2(T/b)}}$ in the fermionic localization mechanism for which the normalizable left--chiral zero mode reads
\begin{equation}
L_{0}(w) =\left[\frac{2H\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}{\pi ^{1/2} \Gamma\left(M b\right)}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}\text{sech}(2Hw)^{M b}.
\end{equation}
By substituting the expression for the warp factor (\ref{scalewarpfactors}) and the expression for $\rho_n(w)$ in (\ref{epsilon_n}) we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
e_n &=& e\frac{2^{1/4}\sqrt{H}\, \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}{\pi^{3/4} \Gamma\left(M b\right)}
{\int} dw\,\text{sech}(2H w)^{2M b-\frac{1}{4}}\left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma)
P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(\text{tanh}(2Hw)\right)\right]\nonumber\\
&=&e \frac{ \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)\Gamma\left(M b-\frac{1}{8}\right)\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}{2^{3/4}\pi ^{1/4}\sqrt{H}\, \Gamma\left(M b\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{3}{8}+M b\right)}
\left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma) P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(0\right)\right],
\label{enIV}
\end{eqnarray}
where now we have applied the following definition for the normalized Dirac delta function
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta (w) = \lim_{H\to\infty} ~\frac{2H\Gamma\left(\frac{3}{8}+M b\right)}{\pi ^{1/2} \Gamma\left(M b-\frac{1}{8}\right)}
\text{sech}(2Hw)^{2M b - \frac{1}{4}}, \qquad M b>\frac{1}{8} \label{delta3}
\end{eqnarray}
in the thin brane limit when $H\to\infty$.
The above result leads us to the following form of the Coulomb potential
\begin{eqnarray}
&V(r)&\!=\! \frac{e^2}{4{\pi}r}\!\!\left[\!1\! + \!\frac{1}{2^{\frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{\pi } H}\!\!\left(\!\!\frac{\Gamma\!\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)\!\Gamma\!\left(M b\!-\!\frac{1}{8}\right)\!
\Gamma\!\left(\frac{1}{2}\!+\!M b\right)}{\!\Gamma\!\left(M b\right) \!\Gamma\!\left(M b\!+\!\frac{3}{8}\right)}\!\!\right)^2 \!\!\!\!\int_{m_0}^{\infty}
\!\!\!\!\!\!dm\ \!\text{e}^{-m r} \left|\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma) P_{1/4}^{\pm
i\sigma}\left(0\right)\right|^2\right]
\noindent\nonumber\\
\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\! \frac{e^2}{4{\pi}r}\!\!\left[\!1\! + \!\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi\, } H} \!\!\left(\!\!\frac{\Gamma\!\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)\!\Gamma\!\left(M b\!-\!\frac{1}{8}\right)\!\Gamma\!\left(\!\frac{1}{2}\!+\!Mb\!\right)}
{\!\Gamma\!\left(M b\right) \!\Gamma\left(M b\!+\!\frac{3}{8}\right)}\!\!\right)^2 \!\!\!\!\int_{m_0}^{\infty}
\!\!\!\!\!\!dm\ \!\text{e}^{-m r}\!
\left|\frac{\Gamma\left(\!1\!+\!i\sigma\right)}{\!\Gamma\!\left(\frac{3}{8}\!-\!\frac{i\sigma}{2}\right)\!\Gamma\!\left(\frac{9}{8}\!-\!\frac{i\sigma}{2}\right)}\right|^2\right]\!.
\noindent\label{CCl_Gammas3}
\end{eqnarray}
After replacing the integration constants $\left|C_{\pm}(\sigma)\right|$ and using the formula (\ref{Legendre_0}) in the expression for the Coulomb potential (\ref{CCl_Gammas3}), it can be written in the form of (\ref{VCCl2}), where the correction $\Delta V$ now reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta V =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\left(\frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)\Gamma\left(M b-\frac{1}{8}\right)\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}
{\Gamma\left(M b\right) \Gamma\left(M b\!+\!\frac{3}{8}\right)\Gamma \left(\frac{3}{8}\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{9}{8}\right)}\right)^2
\frac{e^{-Hr/2}}{Hr}\left(1+{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{Hr}\right)\right). \label{CCptl3}
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, for all the above considered cases, the corrections to Coulomb's law are exponentially suppressed in the thin brane limit $H\to\infty$. This result is due to the existence of a mass gap in the spectrum of KK gauge field excitations reported in \cite{AHAgauge}.
\subsection{Corrections to Coulomb's law in a thick brane scenario, case IV }
At this point the corrections made for the different cases discussed above are valid only in the limit of thin branes, in which we assumed that the first massive mode of the gauge bosons $m=\frac{H}{2}$ predicted in \cite{AHAgauge} is very large.
However, in some cases we can also analyze the corrections to Coulomb's law from another more realistic point of view, i.e. within another valid approximation for thick brane scenarios.
Let us start by performing the integral (\ref{enIV}) for $e_{n}$ without the thin brane limit assumption
\begin{eqnarray}
e_n &=& e\frac{2^{1/4}\sqrt{H}\, \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}{\pi^{3/4}\, \Gamma\left(M b\right)}
{\int} dw\,\text{sech}(2H w)^{2M b-\frac{1}{4}} \nonumber\\
&\times& \left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma) P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(\text{tanh}(2Hw)\right)\right]\,.
\end{eqnarray}
In order to facilitate this integration it is convenient to introduce the following variable $w=\frac{\text{arctanh}(x)}{2H}$, which leads to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{int5d}
e_n &=& e\frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}{\sqrt{H}\,(2\pi)^{3/4}\, \Gamma\left(M b\right)}
{\int} dx\,\left(1-x^2\right)^{M b-\frac{9}{8}}
\left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma)
P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(x\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
When we integrate over the entire fifth dimension using formula $\text{ET II 316(6})$ of the Gradshteyn and Ryzhik handbook \cite{Gradshteyn},
the expression for (\ref{int5d}) results in
\begin{eqnarray}\label{int52d}
&e_n& = \!e\frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}{\sqrt{H}\,(2\pi)^{3/4}\, \Gamma\left(M b\right)}
{\int^{1}_{-1}} dx\,\left(1-x^2\right)^{M b-\frac{9}{8}}\left[\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma) P_{1/4}^{\pm i\sigma}\left(x\right)\right] = \nonumber\\
& & \!\!
e\frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)}{\sqrt{H}\,(2\pi)^{3/4}\, \Gamma\left(M b\right)}
\!\left(\! \sum_{\pm}\! C_{\pm}(\sigma)
\frac{\pi\,2^{\pm i\sigma}\Gamma(2Mb\!-\!\frac{1}{4}\!\pm\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})\Gamma(2Mb\!-\!\frac{1}{4}\!\mp\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})}{\Gamma(2Mb\!-\!\frac{3}{8})\Gamma(2Mb\!+\!\frac{3}{8})\Gamma(\frac{3}{8}\!\mp\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})\Gamma(\frac{9}{8}\!\mp\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})}\!\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $M b>\frac{1}{8}$. We then need to square the couplings $e_{n}$ and integrate this expression over all continuous KK massive modes along the lines of (\ref{Potcomplet})
\begin{equation}
\int^{\infty}_{m_{0}} dm |e_{n}|^2 e^{-mr}.
\end{equation}
Before making this calculation, we will perform the following change of variable $m=\frac{H}{2} \sqrt{1+16 \sigma ^2}$, then the above integral reads
\begin{eqnarray}
& &e^{2}\frac{2^{3/2}\,\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)^{2} \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)^{2}}{\pi^{3/2}\, \Gamma\left(M b\right)^{2}}
\int_{0}^{\infty} d\sigma\ \frac{e^{-\frac{1}{2}Hr \sqrt{1+16 \sigma ^2}} }{\sqrt{\frac{1}{\sigma ^2}+16 }}\times \nonumber\\
& &\left|\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma)
\frac{\pi\,2^{\pm i\sigma}\Gamma(2Mb-\frac{1}{4}\pm i\frac{\sigma}{2})\Gamma(2Mb-\frac{1}{4}\mp i\frac{\sigma}{2})}{\Gamma(2Mb-\frac{3}{8})\Gamma(2Mb+\frac{3}{8})\Gamma(\frac{3}{8}\mp i\frac{\sigma}{2})\Gamma(\frac{9}{8}\mp i\frac{\sigma}{2})} \right|^2\ .
\label{int_m}
\end{eqnarray}
It seems impossible to do this integral analytically, however, as we have previously assumed when computing (\ref{CCptl2}), we shall consider that the contribution to the mass integral (\ref{int_m}) is dominated by the first KK continuous excitation modes. Therefore we can expand the prefactor of the exponential around $\sigma=0$, using $C_\pm(\sigma)=\frac{\left|\Gamma(1\mp i\sigma)\right|}{\sqrt{2\pi}}$, and we obtain the following approximate result for the above integral
\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
& &\!\!\!e^{2}\frac{2^{3/2}\, \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)^{2} \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+M b\right)^{2}}{\pi^{3/2}\, \Gamma\left(M b\right)^{2}}\!\!\int_{0}^{\infty}
\!\!\!\!d\sigma\ \!\!\frac{e^{-\frac{1}{2}Hr \sqrt{1+16 \sigma ^2}} }{\sqrt{\frac{1}{\sigma ^2}+16 }} \times \\
& &\left|\sum_{\pm} C_{\pm}(\sigma)
\frac{\pi\,2^{\pm i\sigma}\,\Gamma\!(2Mb\!-\!\frac{1}{4}\!\pm\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})\Gamma\!(2Mb-\frac{1}{4}\!\mp\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})}{\Gamma\!(2Mb\!-\!\frac{3}{8})\Gamma\!(2Mb\!+\!\frac{3}{8})\Gamma\!(\frac{3}{8}\!\mp\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})\Gamma\!(\frac{9}{8}\!\mp\! i\frac{\sigma}{2})} \right|^2\ \!\!\!\!\sim\\\nonumber
& &\!e^{2}\left(\frac{2^6\, \Gamma\!\left(\frac{1}{4}\right)^{2} \Gamma\!\left(\frac{1}{2}\!+\!M b\right)^{2} \Gamma \!\left(2Mb\!-\!\frac{1}{4}\right)^4}{(2\pi)^{\frac{1}{2}}\Gamma \!\left(\frac{3}{8}\right)^2 \Gamma \!\left(\frac{1}{8}\right)^2 \Gamma\!\left(M b\right)^{2} \Gamma \!\left(2Mb-\frac{3}{8}\right)^2 \Gamma \!\left(2Mb+\frac{3}{8}\right)^2} \!\right)\frac{\text{e}^{-\frac{1}{2} H r}}{Hr}
\!\left(\!1+\!{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{Hr\!}\right)\!\right),
\end{eqnarray}
finally the expression for the corrected Coulomb's potential reads
\begin{eqnarray}\label{c4a}
V = \frac{e^{2}}{4\pi r}\left[1+ \Delta V \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where the correction is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{c4}
\Delta V = \gamma\left(Mb\right)\frac{e^{-\frac{1}{2} H r}}{ H r}
\left(1+{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{Hr}\right)\right),
\end{eqnarray}
and the constant function $\gamma(Mb)$ explicitly depends on the 5D parameters $M$ and $b$ and possesses the form
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\gamma\left(Mb\right)=\left(\frac{8~\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}\right) \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+Mb\right) \Gamma \left(2Mb-\frac{1}{4}\right)^2}
{(2\pi)^{\frac{1}{4}}\Gamma \left(\frac{3}{8}\right) \Gamma \left(\frac{1}{8}\right) \Gamma\left(Mb\right) \Gamma \left(2Mb-\frac{3}{8}\right) \Gamma \left(2Mb+\frac{3}{8}\right)} \right)^{2}.
\end{equation}
This result is particularly relevant when directly compared to the one obtained in the thin brane limit (\ref{CCptl3}), because the corrections to Coulomb's law hold their shape for large and small mass scales dictated by the Hubble parameter $H$ since the first excited state possesses $m=H/2$.
Furthermore, we can set the value of the constant $\gamma(Mb)\sim H$ implying that the product $Mb\sim 5$. Thus, by making this assumption we ensure that the 5D parameter $b$ (which depends on $\Lambda_5$ and $\kappa_5$) and the coupling constant $M$ have the same order of magnitude, simplifying indeed the potential as follows
\begin{eqnarray}\label{c4b}
V = \frac{e^{2}}{4\pi r}\left(1+ \frac{e^{-\frac{1}{2} H r}}{ r} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
It is worth mentioning that the corrections to this potential are still far beyond the upper experimental bound observed on the photon mass, making the present braneworld model phenomenologically viable. In fact, by confronting our results to actual experimental observations, we can consider a realistic scenario by setting the Hubble parameter to its present value $H=H_0=1\times 10^{-33}\, \text{eV}$, leading to an estimation of the order $m_\gamma\sim 5\times 10^{-34}\, \text{eV}$, while the experimental estimation reported by Ryutov is of the order $m_\gamma\sim 5\times 10^{-18}\, \text{eV}$ according to \cite{terrestial}-\cite{GN}.
\section{Conclusions and discussion}
With this work we contribute to the program of localization of various matter fields in the tachyonic de Sitter thick braneworld constructed in \cite{HRMGR}. The primary goal was to localize fermion fields in the 3--brane since gravity, as well as scalar and gauge vector fields were already localized in this expanding braneworld scenario. A second goal consisted in computing the corrections to Coulomb's law coming from the extra dimensional nature of the KK massive gauge vector excitations. These aims were successfully achieved for three different discussed cases.
This work was carried out by considering four different functions $F(T)$, which establish the concrete 5D Yukawa interaction between fermions and the tachyon condensate scalar field.
In the first case we set $F(T)$ proportional to the field $T$. However, for this configuration neither left-- nor right--chiral fermions are localized in the 3--brane (although the left Schr\"odinger potential is of volcano type) since the left--chiral zero mode asymptotically tends to a positive constant and is therefore delocalized from it.
For case II we have field configurations endowed with left and right Schr\"odinger potentials with infinitely high walls which have discrete mass spectra for the KK modes. The left--chiral fermionic massless zero mode, as well as an infinite number of discrete massive bound states are localized on the brane, whereas the right--chiral zero mode is delocalized from it.
For the case III we found a Schr\"odinger potential of volcano type for left--chiral fermions, where only the ground state corresponding to the KK massless zero mode is localized and glued to the continuous KK massive spectrum. On the other hand, the corresponding right Schr\"odinger potential does not localize any right--chiral fermions on the 3--brane.
In the case IV we got modified P\"oschl--Teller potentials with mass gaps which allows us to localize both left-- and right--chiral fermions on the brane and to get discrete KK mass spectra where the left--chiral massless zero mode is separated from the continuous massive spectrum of KK excitations; for this scenario the right--chiral KK massless zero mode is non--localized on the 3--brane.
As mentioned above, after localizing the fermion fields, our second objective was to make use of the results presented here and in \cite{AHAgauge}, which show that it is possible to localize gauge fields in our braneworld model, in order to study the interaction between photons and fermions localized on the brane. We further performed the computation of the corrections to the Coulomb's law coming from the massive gauge vector modes by considering the aforementioned cases II, III and IV. The computed corrections to the Coulomb's potential exponentially decay due to the presence of a mass gap in the spectrum of the gauge vector fields. Thus, these corrections decay much faster than $1/r$ due to the exponential function that quickly removes all small contributions from the KK massive gauge vector modes in the limit of thin branes.
Moreover, for case IV, it is possible to obtain a novel result that displays the corrections to Coulomb's law in a tachyonic de Sitter braneworld scenario of arbitrary thickness, allowing us to get an idea of what would be the effects of the electromagnetic interaction between localized fermions, due to non--localized massive gauge bosons. When confronting the estimated correction to the Coulomb law with the experimental upper bound on the photon mass we find the our prediction is far away from being detected in the near future.
\acknowledgments
AHA is grateful to ICF, UNAM and UAM-I for hospitality, as well as to ``Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigaci\'on e
Innovaci\'on Tecnol\'ogica'' (PAPIIT) UNAM, IN103413-3, Teor{\'i}as de Kaluza-Klein, inflaci\'on y perturbaciones gravitacionales.
RRML acknowledges a postdoctoral grant from CONACyT at ICF-UNAM. All authors thank SNI for support.
|
\section{Introduction}
In astrophysics, abundance calculations are based on available atomic data
that often are insufficient to make definite identifications of spectroscopic
lines \cite{cardelli1993}.
In planetary nebulae, the known emission lines are used to identify a
characteristic element resulting from the process of nucleosynthesis in
stars \cite{sharpee2007,sterling2007}.
The study of the photoionization of sulfur is of considerable
interest because of its abundance in space and interstellar media.
Sulfur has been discovered in the plasma of the
Jupiter satellite Io and its occurrence in the solar atmosphere
makes it of high astrophysical relevance \cite{Broadfoot1981,Shem1981,Symth1988}.
It is known that Io is the source of Na, K, S, and O clouds observed
in the near-Io spatial environment and in extended regions throughout
the Jovian magnetosphere \cite{Summers1989}.
Spectroscopic measurements indicate
that sulfur and oxygen dominate the torus plasma
of the Jupiter satellite Io. Sulfur has also been discovered in Comet Comae as
has CS with abundances of 10$^{-3}$ of water \cite{Meier1997}.
Sulfur chemistry is also of importance
in theoretical studies of interstellar shocks \cite{Roueff1986}.
Photoabsorption and photoionization processes in the
vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) region play an important role in
determining solar and stellar opacities \cite{Kohl1973,Dupree1978,Kurucz1981}.
Determining accurate abundances for atomic sulfur is of great importance in
understanding extragalactic H II regions \cite{Garnett1989}.
The photoionization spectrum of sulfur has been studied
in detail both theoretically and experimentally.
On the experimental side, the sulfur absorption spectrum was reported by
Tondello \cite{Tondello1972} for the energy regions below and above the
ionization
threshold. Absolute values of the cross section for the photoionization of the
ground state ($3s^23p^4~^3P$)
of sulfur for photon energies from the threshold at 119.67 nm to 90 nm (10.38
-- 13.8 eV)
using the flash-pyrolysis method, i.e. irradiating the sample with a strong
flux of light from a discharge flash lamp.
Sarma and Joshi \cite{Sarma1984} studied the photoionization
spectrum of sulfur using a method similar to Tondello's.
They modified and extended Tondello's spectrum,
particularly in the region between 109 and 100 nm (11.39 -- 12.42 eV).
Gibson {\it et al.} \cite{Gibson1986} observed the photoionization
spectrum of sulfur in the region between the first ionization
threshold and 95 nm {(13.05~eV)}. They found that the
autoionization
features of the $3s^23p^3 (^2D^{\circ})nd~^3D^{\circ}$ levels are broad
while that of the $3s^23p^3 (^2D^{\circ})nd~^3S^{\circ}, ^3P^{\circ}$ levels
are narrow.
Their results are in good agreement with the measurements
of Tondello. However, they reversed the
designation given by Tondello to the $3s^23p^3 (^2D^{\circ})nd~^3S^{\circ}$
and $3s^23p^3 (^2D^{\circ})ns~^3D^{\circ}$ and supported these assignment
of the levels mainly on the basis of the quantum defects of the two series.
Experimental measurements published by Joshi {\it et al.} \cite{Joshi1987}
contained
the photoabsorption spectrum of sulfur in the wavelength
122 -- 84 nm range (10.18 -- 14.79 eV ) giving a detailed comparison of
the line list obtained in their measurement with that of
Tondello \cite{Tondello1972}, Sarma and Joshi \cite{Sarma1984},
and Gibson {\it et al.} \cite{Gibson1986}.
The emission spectrum of sulfur has been studied by a number
of experimental groups in the energy regions below
and above the first ionization limit. Kaufman \cite{Kaufman1979} measured
114 lines of atomic sulfur in the wavelength region
216.9 -- 115.7 nm (5.73 eV - 10.73 eV) involving
transitions to the levels of the ground state configuration.
Recent experiments performed by Jackson and co-workers
\cite{Jackson2004,Jackson2005,Jackson2008a,Jackson2008b} measured the
single-photon
excitation spectra from the lowest $3s^23p^4~^1D_2$ and $3s^23p^4~^1S_0$
metastable levels of sulfur atoms
recorded with a tunable vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) radiation source generated
by frequency tripling in noble gases. Various new lines were observed
in the spectra which have not been previously reported.
The photoionization efficiency (PIE) spectra of metastable sulfur (\ce{S}) atoms
in the ($3s^23p^4~^1D_2$) and ($3s^23p^4~^1S_0$) states have been recorded
in the 73 350 -- 84 950 $\rm cm^{-1}$ frequency range (9.094 -- 10.532 eV)
by using a velocity-map ion imaging apparatus that
uses a tunable VUV laser as an ionization source.
In experiments carried out by Pan and co-workers \cite{Pan2008}
they recorded the photoionization spectra of sulfur atoms in transitions
from the $3s^23p^4~^1D_2$ state in the energy range of
75 800 -- 89 500 $\rm cm^{-1}$ (9.4 - 11.1 eV).
They recorded and assigned the Rydberg series
$3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{3/2})nd[3/2]$ and $3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{3/2})nd[5/2]$
with $n$ extending to 16 and 32, respectively, to the $^2D^{\circ}$ series limit.
In addition, new Rydberg series $3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{3/2})nd[1/2]$,
$3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{5/2})nd[5/2]$
and $3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{3/2})nd[5/2]$ with $n$ ranging from 5 -- 9 for the
former two series
and 7 -- 13 for the latter were able to be assigned.
The present paper uses a technique that was applied to photoionization and
autoionization of atomic singlet oxygen O($^{1}$D) previously \cite{Ruhl2000,
Ruhl2008}. Suitable photochemical
precursors of electronically excited atomic or molecular species are
photolyzed using a pulsed,
tunable laser. Photodissociation products are subsequently photoionized using
a pulsed, tunable VUV light source. Investigations are facilitated in
systems where the primary photoproduct occurs in well-defined quantum
states.
Carbon disulfide (\ce{CS2}) is used as a source of atomic sulfur in both the
$^{3}P$
ground state and the first excited ($^{1}D$) metastable state. The ultraviolet
photoabsorption cross section of \ce{CS2} has been investigated previously
\cite{Leroy1981, Wu1981, Xu1993,Chen1995}. Between 180~nm
{(6.89~eV)} and
220~nm {(5.64~eV)}
there is an intense band system that corresponds to the
$X\;^{1}\Sigma_{g}^{+} \to\; ^{1}B_{2} (^{1}\Sigma_{u}^{-})$
transition with photoabsorption cross
sections as high as $>$ 500~Mb for bands around 200~nm.
The $^{1}B_{2}$ state is predissociated by
(\ce{CS + S(^{3}P)}) and a (\ce{CS + S(^{1}D)}) continuous states.
At 193~nm (6.424~eV) the
photoabsorption cross section is estimated to be $\sigma \approx 290\;{\rm Mb}$
using interpolated data reported in Ref. \cite{Chen1995}.
At this wavelength photolysis can be carried out
conveniently by a pulsed ArF laser (see Section II).
Hence, atomic sulfur species S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$
were received in mixture by photolysis of \ce{CS2}.
The branching ratio of both species at 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} has
been the subject of several investigations. Recently, the value of the branching
ratio of 1.66 $\pm$ 0.3 for S$(^3P)/S(^1D)$
was published \cite{Jackson2004}. The present work yields a similar value of 2.8
$\pm$ 0.4 (c.f. ref \cite{barthel2009}), as will be discussed further below.
Additionally, a photolytical source of \ce{S(^{3}P)} is needed in order to
separate photoionization features of \ce{S(^{3}P)} from those of \ce{S(^{1}D)}.
Disulfur monoxide (\ce{S2O}) is chosen as a reference system. Photoabsorption
and photodissociation of \ce{S2O} have been investigated in the past
\cite{Lakshminarayana1975, Hallin1977, Chiu1982, Clouthier1987}. In the near
ultraviolet (280-350~nm) a band system is observed that predissociates into
\ce{S(^{3}P)} and \ce{SO}. Photolysis of \ce{S2O} within this band system
is a source of atomic sulfur in only one well-defined quantum state, i.e.
$^{3}P$. Radiation from a \ce{XeCl} excimer laser ($\lambda=308\;{\rm nm}$(4.025 eV))
can be used to photolyze the precursor (see Section II).
On the theoretical side, photoionization cross sections calculations
of the sulfur atom have previously been made
by Conneely {\it et al.} \cite{Conneely1970} using the close-coupling
approximation.
These authors reported the parameters for the resonance
series in the photoionization of sulfur from the ground state.
Mendoza and Zeippen \cite{Mendoza1988} using the {\it R}-matrix method (in the $LS$
coupling scheme)
calculated the photoionization cross sections of the ground states of \ce{Si},
\ce{P}, and \ce{S}.
Tayal \cite{Tayal1988} using the {\it R}-matrix method (in the $LS$ coupling scheme)
calculated the total and partial cross sections for the photoionization
of the $3s^23p^4~^3P$ ground state of the sulfur atom for photon energies from
the first
S$^{+}(3s^23p^3~^4S^{\circ})$ ionization threshold to about 25 eV.
Photoabsorption cross sections of the ground state of four oxygen-group atoms
were calculated
using the eigenchannel {\it R}-matrix method by Chen and Robicheaux
\cite{Robicheaux1994}
within an $LS$ - $jj$ frame transformation to approximately include spin-orbit
coupling effects.
Tondello's \cite{Tondello1972} assignment of the
$3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ} )ns~^3D^{\circ}$ and
$3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ} )nd~^3S^{\circ}$ series was reversed by Gibson {\it et
al.} \cite{Gibson1986} based
on their considerations of the quantum defects of the two series.
Tayal \cite{Tayal1988} suggested that these two series
should not be reversed and agreed with the assignment of
Tondello \cite{Tondello1972}.
Mendoza and Zeippen \cite{Mendoza1988} and Altun \cite{Altun1992} did
not give a conclusion about this disagreement. However, the calculations
of Chen and Robicheaux \cite{Robicheaux1994} strongly confirmed
that the assignment made by Tondello \cite{Tondello1972} was the correct one.
The layout of this paper is as follows. In Section II we give a brief
overview of the experimental
procedure. In Section III we outline the theoretical methods employed in our
work. Section IV presents
our experimental and theoretical results. The experimental setup was
used to determine the
photoionization cross
section of atomic sulfur [S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$] in a broad energy range.
{Section} V gives a brief discussion of them. Finally in
Section VI we give a summary of our findings.
\section{Experiment}
Single-photon-ionization in combination with time-of-flight mass spectrometry
is used to measure state-selectively the photoion yields of atomic sulfur
species in the gas phase. The experimental setup has been described in detail elsewhere
\cite{Flesch2000}.
Briefly, the experimental setup consists essentially of the following components:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A tunable, pulsed VUV light source based on a laser-produced
plasma \cite{Turcu1998}.
The plasma is generated by focusing a Nd:YAG-Laser
(Spectron Laser Systems, SL 400; 1064 nm, 500 mJ/pulse, 10 Hz, 6 ns pulse
length)
onto a tungsten wire target. A glass capillary is used to transfer the plasma
radiation on the entrance slit of a normal incidence monochromator
(McPherson, Model Nova 225). Plasma radiation is dispersed by a
gold coated spherical reflection grating (1200 lines/mm).
The absolute number of VUV photons is estimated to be of the
order of $10^8$ photons per pulse, corresponding to
$10^9$ photons per second at 10 Hz operation of the lasers, which is similar
to previous work
\cite{Ruhl2000, Ruhl2001,Ruhl2002,Ruhl2004,Ruhl2008}. The typical bandwidth
of the dispersed VUV photons is set to $\Delta\lambda~\approx$ 2.4 - 5.9 $\AA$,
depending on the spectral features to be resolved in the respective energy
regime.
Calibration of the VUV source and its photon energy scale is performed by
taking ion yields of molecular oxygen \cite{Flesch2000, Berkowitz1979}. The
well-known vibrationally resolved transitions in the energy range
between 12.19 and 13.78 eV are used for this purpose \cite{Berg1991}.
\item Pulsed ultraviolet lasers are used to photolyze precursor molecules. An
\ce{ArF} excimer laser (Lambda Physics, OptexPro, $\lambda=193\;{\rm nm}$,
10~mJ/pulse, 10~Hz, 10~ns pulse length)
serves to photolyze {\ce{CS2}}.
The pulse energy is reduced to approximately 50 $\mu$J due to the occurrence
of strong multi-photon ionization signals from the photolysis laser.
\ce{S2O} photoexcitation is carried out by a \ce{XeCl} Laser (Lambda Physik LPX 202i;
200~mJ/Pulse, 10~Hz, 10~ns pulse length). The laser radiation is not attenuated
since multiphoton processes are not observed for \ce{S2O}.
The photolysis laser is time-correlated with the VUV-system by an external
pulse generator. The delay time between
the 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} pulse and the VUV pulse in of the order of 100--400~ns.
\item A time-of-flight mass spectrometer is used to detect cations resulting
from photoionization by tunable VUV-radiation. The mass
spectrometer works according to the Wiley-McLaren energy- and space
focusing conditions
with a typical mass resolution of $m/\Delta m \approx 100$
\cite{Wiley1955,Ruhl1991}.
Typical pressures in the ionization region of the time-of-flight mass
spectrometer are of the order
of $5 \cdot 10^{-6}\;{\rm mbar}$.
\end{enumerate}
\ce{CS2} is used in commercial quality (Sigma Aldrich) without further
purification. It is effusively introduced into the high vacuum chamber by a
needle valve.
Disulfur monoxide (\ce{S2O}) is synthesized
using the method of Schenk and
Steudel \cite{Schenk1966,Schenk1964a,Schenk1964b}:
\ce{SOCl2 + Ag2S $\rightarrow$ S2O + 2 AgCl}.
\noindent
\ce{S2O} is introduced into the ionization region in a mixture with rare gases,
such as argon or helium, which is due to the synthesis procedure.
Pump-probe photoionization mass spectra are recorded at constant VUV-photon energy.
Photoion yields of specific masses, such as $m/z=32$ (sulfur) are obtained
from selecting the corresponding time-of-flight signal in a set of mass spectra
that are recorded as a function of the VUV-photon energy.
Ion yields are normalized with respect to the photon flux by using a
photomultiplier that is coated by sodium salicylate as a quantum converter
\cite{Samson1967}.
\section{Theory}
The study of the photo-absorption spectrum of atomic sulfur is interesting
due to the open-shell features of this atom and the role played by
electron correlation effects. In order to gauge the quality of our theoretical work we performed
large-scale close-coupling calculations and compared them to the present
experimental measurements. We have used an extended large-scale close-coupling
model in our calculations on this system compared to our previous preliminary Breit-Pauli calculations \cite{barthel2009}.
In the present theoretical work we include 512 levels of the residual \ce{S^+} ion in the close-coupling calculations
and perform all the cross section calculations within the relativistic Dirac Coulomb {\it R}-matrix approximation.
\begin {figure} [htp]
\vspace{.2in}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{sfig1}
\vspace{.2in}
\caption { Time-of-flight mass spectra of carbon disulfide
(\ce{CS2}) recorded at different excitation conditions. (A) photoionization at
$\lambda$=115.87~nm (10.70~eV); (B) primary photoexcitation 193~nm {(6.424~eV)}
and subsequent photoionization (10.70~eV); (C) photoexcitation 193~nm {(6.424~eV)}
without subsequent photoionization, indicating multi-photon ionization
caused by 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} radiation; (D) difference (B)-(C); (E) similar to (D), but
photoionization at 10.25~eV. \label {picTOFMS}}
\end {figure}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.5,width=\textwidth]{sfig2}
\caption{\label{3P} (Color online) Photoionization of S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ in the energy range from threshold up to 30 eV.
The various Rydberg series limits are illustrated, namely
S$^+[3s^23p^3 (^2D^{\circ}_{3/2,5/2})]$ and S$^+[3s^23p^3 (^2P^{\circ}_{1/2,3/2})]$
by vertical dashed lines. The prominent window resonances are clearly visible. (a) The experimental
cross section data are taken at a nominal energy resolution of 44 meV. (b) Theoretical cross sections
for {100\% of} the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ initial state from the 512-level DARC calculations (level averaged), convoluted
with a Gaussian profile having a FWHM of 44 meV.
The corresponding series limits $E_{\infty}$ of Equation (2) for each series are
indicated by vertical-dashed lines. }
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Dirac-Coulomb {\it R}-matrix}
Recently developed Dirac Atomic {\it R}-matrix Codes (DARC) for parallel computing architectures
\cite{norrington87,norrington91,darc,ballance06,Ballance2012,McLaughlin2012} were used
to treat photon interactions with this neutral atomic system. This suite of collision codes has the capability to
cater for hundreds of levels and thousands of scattering channels
\cite{venesa2012,Ballance2012,McLaughlin2012}.
Metastable states are populated in the present sulfur atom experiments and require
additional theoretical calculations. We note that our work is
of prime interest to astrophysics as outlined in the Introduction.
{High quality photoionization cross section calculations have
been made on several complex systems (Fe-peak elements and Mid-Z atoms)
of prime interest to astrophysics and plasma applications,
indicating suitable agreement with high resolution measurements made at leading synchrotron light sources
\cite{Ballance2012,McLaughlin2012,Hino2012,Mueller2014,Kennedy2014}}.
To benchmark theoretical results with the experimental measurements,
photoionization cross sections calculations on this sulfur atom were
performed for both the ground and the excited metastable levels
associated with the $3s^23p^4$ configuration.
Hibbert and co-workers have shown that two-electron
promotions are important to include to get accurate
energies, $f$-values and Einstein coefficients \cite{Ohja1989,Keenan1993} which
are included in the present study.
In our photoionization cross-section calculations for
this element, all 512 levels arising from the eight configurations:
$3s^23p^3$, $3s3p^4$, $3s^23p^23d$, $3s^23p3d^2$,
$3s3p^33d$, $3p^33d^2$, $3p^5$, $3s3p^23d^2$ of the residual sulfur singly ionized ion
were included in the close-coupling expansion.
PI cross section calculations with this 512-level model were performed in
the Dirac Coulomb approximation using the recently developed parallel version of the DARC
codes \cite{Ballance2012,McLaughlin2012}.
The {\it R}-matrix boundary radius of 13.28 Bohr radii was sufficient to envelop
the radial extent of all the $n$ = 3 atomic orbitals of the residual S$^{+}$ ion.
A basis of 16 continuum orbitals was sufficient to span the incident experimental photon energy
range from threshold up to 50 eV. This resulted in generating a maximum of 2,696 coupled
channels in the close-coupling calculations with dipole and Hamiltonian
matrices of the order of $\sim$ 32,525 in size. Similarly, here for the
ground-state configuration, photoionization out of the $3s^23p^4~^3P_{2,1,0}$ levels require the
bound-free dipole matrices, $J^{\pi}=2,1,0^{e} \rightarrow J^{\pi}=0^{\circ}, 1^{\circ}, 2^{\circ}, 3^{\circ}$
and for the excited $3s^23p^4~^1D_2$ and $3s^23p^4~^1S_0$ metastable states,
the bound-free dipole matrices, $J^{\pi}=0^{e}, 2^{e} \rightarrow J^{\pi}=1^{\circ}, 2^{\circ}, 3^{\circ}$.
The current state-of-the-art parallel DARC codes running on high performance computers (HPC)
world-wide, allows one to concurrently form and diagonalize
large-scale Hamiltonian and dipole matrices \cite{McLaughlin2014a,McLaughlin2014b} required for
electron or photon collisions with atomic systems. This allows large-scale computations to be
completed in a timely manner.
\subsection{Photoionization}
In our calculations for the ground and metastable levels, the outer region electron-ion collision
problem was solved with a fine mesh of 5$\times$10$^{-7}$ Rydbergs ($\approx$ 6.8 $\mu$eV)
to fully resolve the extremely narrow resonance features in the appropriate photoionization cross sections.
The $jj$-coupled Hamiltonian diagonal matrices were adjusted so that the theoretical term
energies matched the recommended experimental values of NIST \cite{nist}. We note that this energy
adjustment ensures more reliable positioning of the resonances relative to all thresholds included in
the calculations. Finally, in order to compare with experimental measurements, the theoretical
cross-section calculations were convoluted with a Gaussian having
a profile of width similar to the experiment resolution (44 meV FWHM).
\subsection{Resonance structure}
The energy levels tabulated from
references \cite{sugar1991,saloman2007}
and from the NIST tabulations \cite{nist} were
used as a helpful guide for the present assignments.
The resonance series identification can be made from Rydberg's formula:
%
\begin{equation}
\label{rydberg}
\epsilon_n = \epsilon_{\infty} - \frac{{\cal~Z}^2} { \nu^{2}}
\end{equation}
%
\noindent
where in Rydbergs $\epsilon_n$ is the transition energy,
$\epsilon_{\infty}$ is the ionization potential of the excited electron
to the corresponding final state ($n = \infty$), i.e. the resonance
series limit \cite{Seaton1983} and $n$ being the principal quantum number.
The relationship between the principal quantum number $n$,
the effective quantum number $\nu$ and the quantum defect $\mu$
for an ion of effective charge ${\cal Z}$ is given by $\nu$ = $\rm n - \mu$.
Converting all quantities to eV we can represent the Rydberg resonance series as;
%
\begin{equation}\label{eV}
E_n = E_{\infty} - \frac{{\cal{Z}}^2 {\rm R}}{(n - \mu)^2} .
\end{equation}
%
\noindent
Here, $E_n$ is the resonance energy, $E_{\infty}$ the resonance series limit,
$\cal{Z}$ is the charge of the core (in this case $\cal{Z}$ = 1), $\mu$ is the quantum defect, being zero for a pure
hydrogenic state, and the Rydberg constant R is 13.6057 eV.
The multi-channel {\it R}-matrix eigenphase derivative (QB) technique, which is
applicable to atomic and molecular complexes, of Berrington and
co-workers \cite{qb1,qb2,qb3} was used to locate and determine the
resonance positions in Tables \ref{meta-1D} and \ref{meta-1S}.
The resonance width $\Gamma$ is determined from
the inverse of the energy derivative of the eigenphase sum $\delta$ at the resonance energy $E_r$ via
%
\begin{equation}
\Gamma = 2\left[{\frac{d\delta}{dE}}\right]^{-1}_{E=E_r} = 2 [\delta^{\prime}]^{-1}_{E=E_r} \quad.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.5,width=\textwidth]{sfig3}
\caption{\label{thres3P} (Color online) An overview of the present single photoionization cross-sections
measurements as a function of the photon energy below 13.5 eV.
The experimental measurements were made at a nominal energy resolution of 44 meV.
The assigned Rydberg series limits are indicated as vertical lines grouped by horizontal lines.
The corresponding series limits $E_{\infty}$ of Equation \ref{eV} for each series are
indicated by vertical-dashed lines in the end of the line groups. See text for
a discussion of these resonance features. }
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\section{Results}
\subsection {Experimental Results}
Fig. \ref{picTOFMS} shows time-of-flight mass spectra of carbon disulfide
(\ce{CS2}) recorded at different excitation conditions. The top
spectrum (Fig. \ref{picTOFMS}(A)) shows the photoionization of \ce{CS2} where 10.70~eV radiation is
used. This photon
energy is well above the photoionization threshold of
10.076~eV of \ce{CS2} \cite{Coppens1979}. The parent
cation \ce{CS2^{+}} ($m/z=76$) is observed at t=4.64~$\mu$s. Additional weak intensity
above t=4.64~$\mu$s comes from isotopomers such as \ce{C^{32}S^{34}S}. Weak signals
occur at t=2.51~$\mu$s ($m/z=32$ ) and at t=3.18~$\mu$s ($m/z=44$).
They are assigned to \ce{S^{+}} and \ce{CS^{+}} , respectively.
These do not come from 10.70~eV photoionization of \ce{CS2} since the
threshold of ionic fragmentation of \ce{CS2} is 14.80~eV \cite{Coppens1979}.
Rather, these ions are due to dissociative photoionization of \ce{CS2} that is caused by
second-order radiation from the monochromator (E= 21.4~eV, see Section II.). A weak
signal at $t=4.48\;\mu$s is attributed to impurities in the sample.
Fig. \ref{picTOFMS}(B) shows the mass spectrum for primary photolysis of \ce{CS2}
(193~nm {(6.424 eV)}) with subsequent ($\Delta t$=400~ns) photoionization at 10.70~eV. This
spectrum is drawn on the same scale as Fig. \ref{picTOFMS} (A). The
\ce{CS2^{+}}-signal is much weaker, whereas additional broad signals are
observed around 2.1~$\mu$s, 2.8~$\mu$s, and 4.25~$\mu$s, respectively. These are due
to dissociative multiphoton ionization of \ce{CS2}. They are time-shifted
by $\approx$ 0.4~$\mu$s, which is the delay time between the 193-nm photolysis and subsequent
photoionization by a 10.70~eV photon pulse. This delay facilitates the assignment of
signals that come from multiphoton ionization. The width of these signals
is due to (i) a jitter in the delay time between the laser pulses and (ii)
a kinetic energy release during the multiphoton ionization process that
is not discussed further.
The main feature of mass spectrum (B) regarding the formation of atomic sulfur by photolysis
is an enhanced intensity of the \ce{S^{+}} signal at $t=$2.51~$\mu$s.
This is apparently {\em not} due to
multiphoton ionization since the signal is absent if {\em exclusively} 193-nm
radiation is used (cf. Fig. \ref{picTOFMS} (C)).
The difference between the spectra \ref{picTOFMS} (C) and (B) is shown in
Fig. \ref{picTOFMS} (D). The only signal that remains after the
subtraction is \ce{S^{+}}. It implies that the
\ce{S^{+}} signal comes from a two-step process:
\noindent
(i) photolysis of neutral \ce{CS2} (193~nm {(6.424 eV)} radiation), leading to the formation of atomic sulfur according to
\ce{CS2 ->[193~\rm{nm}][] S + CS}
\noindent
(ii) photoionization of atomic sulfur generated in step (i):
\ce{S ->[10.70~{\rm eV}][] S^{+}}.
The ionization energy of atomic sulfur in its ground state S$(^{3}P_{2})$,
leading to \ce{S^{+}}$\left(^{4}S^{0}_{3/2}\right)$ is 10.36001~eV \cite{Martin1990}, so
that \ce{S^{+}} from photoionization of S($^{3}P_{2}$) is a source of
\ce{S^{+}}. Electronically excited \ce{S(^{1}D2)} has an excitation energy of
1.145~eV \cite{Martin1990} {so that the ionization energy
of this state is reduced to 9.215~eV. Photoionization of the \ce{S(^{1}D)}
state into the $^{4}S$ continuum is possible from an energetic point of view; however, }
\ce{S(^{1}D)} can only be autoionized at this photon energy, since direct photoionization into the
$^{4}S^o$ ground state of \ce{S^{+}} is spin-forbidden.
The \ce{S^{+}} signal may therefore contain contributions from both \ce{S(^{3}P)}
and \ce{S(^{1}D)}. Selecting this signal and recording its intensity
as a function of the VUV energy leads to the \ce{S^{+}} ion yield of
photolyzed \ce{CS2} which may come from both quantum states produced in \ce{CS2}
photolysis, i.e. \ce{S(^{3}P)} and \ce{S(^{1}D)}. There are two difficulties
connected with the \ce{S^{+}} ion yield from 193 nm {(6.424 eV)}
photolysis of \ce{CS2}:
(i)
Atomic sulfur is produced in a mixture of it lowest-lying $^{3}P$ and
{$^{1}D$} states, as outlined in Section I.
In order to separate the $^{1}D$ yield from the $^{3}P$
yield, \ce{S2O} is used as a reference system, which exclusively yields \ce{S(^{3}P)} upon photolysis.
The experimental procedure is similar to that described above for \ce{CS2}. Photolysis
and subsequent photoionization yields \ce{S^{+}}. By recording the \ce{S^{+}}
intensity as a function of VUV photon energy we obtain the yield for
photoionization and autoionization of pure \ce{S(^{3}P)}.
The \ce{S^{+}} ion yield from \ce{S2O} is scaled with respect to the \ce{S^{+}}
yield from \ce{CS2} so that the relative intensities of resonant features that
come from photoioization of \ce{S(^{3}P)} have the same intensity in both spectra. The
\ce{S^{+}} yield originating from \ce{S2O} is subsequently subtracted from the \ce{S^{+}} yield
which is obtained from \ce{CS2}. This provides the ionization yield of pure \ce{S(^{1}D)}, provided that other
sources of \ce{S^{+}} are of negligible importance.
(ii)
We note that there are indeed additional channels at higher VUV photon energy
leading to the formation of \ce{S^{+}}, so that the \ce{S^{+}} yield may have other origins than \ce{S(^{1}D)}.
These are listed in Table \ref{tabAppErg}, where channels (3) and (4) from \ce{CS2} as well as (6) and (7) from
\ce{S2O} need to be considered.
As a result, additional subtraction processes have to be carried out in order
to remove such additional \ce{S^{+}} intensity, originating from other sources besides \ce{S(^{1}D)},
as indicated in Table \ref{tabAppErg}.
Specifically, the \ce{S^{+}} yield that is attributed to ionization of
\ce{S(^{1}D)} likely contain contributions from such channels, as will also be outlined in the following
in comparison with the modeling results.
\begin {table*}[htbp]
\footnotesize
\centering
\caption{Threshold energy (TE) in eV of \ce{S+} from \ce{CS2} and \ce{S2O} precursors. The product channels
are sorted by increasing threshold energy (eV) for each precursor. Secondary
photodissociation products of primary photofragments, such as S from CS or SO
photodissociation with subsequent photoionization are
considered to be of minor intensity, so that they are not listed. Calculated threshold energies (eV) are based on
data taken from Ref. \cite{Darwent1970}. Transition probabilities and selection rules are not taken into account.}
\label{tabAppErg}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{m{1cm}m{1cm}m{10cm}m{1cm}} \hline\hline
Source & $\frac{\rm TE}{\rm (eV)}$ & Pathway to \ce{S+} & \\ \hline
\ce{CS2} & ~~9.21 & \ce{CS2 ->[\ce{photolysis}][]} \ce{S($^{1}$D)}+\ce{CS} \ce{->[VUV]} \ce{S+} + \ce{CS} &(1) \\
\ce{CS2} & 10.36 & \ce{CS2 ->[\ce{photolysis}][]} \ce{S($^{3}$P)}+\ce{CS} \ce{->[VUV]} \ce{S+} + \ce{CS} &(2) \\
\ce{CS2} & 14.80 & \ce{CS2 ->[\ce{VUV}][]} \ce{CS} \ce{+} \ce{S+} &(3) \\
\ce{CS2} & 18.21 & \ce{CS2 ->[\ce{photolysis}][]} \ce{S($^{3}$P}, $^{1}$D)\ce{+ CS} \ce{->[VUV]} \ce{S} + \ce{CS+} \ce{->[{\textrm {ionic}}][\textrm{fragm.}] S + C + S+} &(4) \\ \hline
\ce{S2O} & 10.36 & \ce{S2O ->[\ce{photolysis}][]} \ce{S($^{3}$P)}+\ce{SO} \ce{->[VUV]} \ce{S+} + \ce{SO} &(5) \\
\ce{S2O} & 13.76 & \ce{S2O ->[\ce{VUV}][]} \ce{SO} \ce{+} \ce{S+} &(6) \\
\ce{S2O} & 15.72 & \ce{S2O ->[\ce{photolysis}][]} \ce{S($^{3}$P)}+\ce{SO} \ce{->[VUV]} \ce{S} + \ce{SO+} \ce{->[{\textrm {ionic}}][\textrm{fragm.}] S + S+ + O} &(7) \\ \hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\raggedright
\begin{flushleft}
\vspace{2mm}
Notes: (1-2, 5): taken from Ref. \cite{Martin1990}; (3): cf. Ref. \cite{Coppens1979}; (4, 7):
calculated by using the dissociation energy of \ce{CS} and \ce{SO} according
to Ref. \cite{Darwent1970} and the ionization energy of \ce{S}$\left(^{3}P\right)$
according to Ref. \cite{Martin1990}; (6): taken from Ref. \cite{barthel2009}.
\end{flushleft}
\end{table*}
\normalsize
\subsection{Cross-Sections}
The electronic ground state of atomic sulfur is $(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ having the electron configuration
$3s^23p^4$ and by spin-orbit effects splits into the three fine-structure states namely, $3s^23p^4~^3P_{2,1,0}$.
The difference in energy between the ground state $3s^23p^4~^3P_2$,
$3s^23p^4~^3P_1$, and the $3s^23p^4~^3P_0$ states is 49 and 71 meV \cite{nist}, respectively.
Note, at room temperature the sulfur atom is primarily in the $3s^23p^4~^3P_2$ state,
which is why contributions from the other two states may be neglected.
Similarly, the electronic configuration of the positively charged sulfur ion (S$^+$)
in the $3s^23p^3$ configuration can form the states $^4S^o$, $^2D^o$, and $^2P^o$.
The continuum states are energetically located at
10.36 eV, 12.20 eV, and 13.40 eV above the electronic
ground state of the neutral atom \cite{nist}. The states formed are
analogous to isoelectronic atomic oxygen, taking into account
the emitted photoelectron terms that are relevant to the optical transitions.
The uni-positive $^4S^o$ state with spin $S =3/2$, together with
the electron spin $s$ = $\pm$ 1/2 gives a total spin of 1 or 2, hence
triplet and quintet terms may arise. An analogous procedure results for
the case of the $^2D^o$ and $^2P^o$ excited states,
where both singlet and triplet terms are formed.
Optical excitation from the ground state of the $3s^23p^4~^3P_2$
sulfur atom in the sense of the spin selection rule $\Delta ~S = 0$ then
makes all three continuum states allowed.
Few experimental measurements have been performed
for the absolute photoionization cross section
of the ground state of atomic sulfur. As pointed out in the Introduction,
Tondello \cite{Tondello1972} measured the absorption spectrum of atomic
sulfur giving the first values for the ionization cross section.
Absolute photoionization cross sections
at a photon energy of 14.76 eV were published by Innocenti et al. \cite{Innocenti2007}
who found a cross section value of 75 Mb. Extrapolation of these results to a photon energy of 16.7 eV, gave
a value of 68.7 Mb having a 50\% absolute error and larger than the 50 Mb estimated from the
absolute measurements of Joshi and co-workers \cite{Joshi1987} which are estimated to have a 25\% error.
This photon energy was chosen as theoretical work is available
from the Hartree-Fock-Slater method by Yeh and Lindau \cite{Yeh1985}
which gave a cross-section value of 18.2 Mb.
The accuracy of the measurements carried out by Tondello \cite{Tondello1972}
are 50\% higher than these very approximate calculations.
In the present work the absolute photoionization
cross section for S$(^3P)$ at a photon energy of 16.7 eV
yields a value of 43.5 $\pm$ 10 Mb.
Preliminary calculations using the Breit-Pauli approximation (in the framework of the {\it R}-matrix method
at this photon energy) produces a value of 42.8 Mb \cite{barthel2009}.
The present level averaged DARC calculations produces a value of 33 Mb. These theoretical values
are in accord with both the {\it R}-matrix $LS$-coupling results of Tayal \cite{Tayal1988}
and the many-bodied perturbation estimates carried our by Altun \cite{Altun1992}.
The present photoionization cross-section calculations are greatly extended
within the confines of the Dirac {\it R}-matrix method. We investigated the photon energy region from
thresholds up to 30 eV. All the resonance structure converging
to the S$^+(^2D^o_{3/2,5/2})$ and S$^+(^2P^o_{1/2, 3/2})$ thresholds
and the associated window resonances converging to the S$^+(3s3p^4~^{2,4}P_J)$
ionic thresholds is analyzed and discussed.
\subsection{Photoionization of S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$}
Photoionization of the ground state of atomic sulfur S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ was examined
using the photodissociation of \ce{S2O}, which is initiated by photolysis with 308 nm (4.025 eV) radiation, yielding \ce{S(^{3}P)}. Detection
is accomplished by one-photon ionization using VUV radiation from a laser produced plasma. Using the
observed autoionization resonances in the photon energy range below 13.40 eV and the window
resonances converging to the $^4P$ threshold at 20.20 eV, allows us to identify S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ as the sole photolysis
product from \ce{S2O}. The experimental technique of the present work is a
valuable alternative to that used by other authors who used \ce{H_2S} with
hydrogen and fluorine radicals in a flow system \cite{Gibson1986,Berkowitz1994}.
An overview of the experimental photoionization spectrum from the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ ground state taken at an energy resolution
of $\Delta E$=44 meV is show in Figure \ref{3P} (a) and the results from the DARC calculations
are illustrated in Figure \ref{3P} (b). The theoretical cross sections
were convoluted with a Gaussian having a width of 44 meV
in order to simulate the experimental results. We note that strong resonance features are observed
in the cross section below 13 eV and there is a prominent window resonance located at approximately 18 eV.
Figure \ref{thres3P} illustrates the experimental cross section for the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$
ground state in the photon energy region
from threshold to approximately 13.9 eV. The intensity of the resonant structures
{in the cross sections below 12 eV in}
comparison with the continuous region 14 -- 17 eV appear to be more prominent in the theoretical spectrum
than in the experimental results, due to the limited energy resolution available in the experimental results.
In addition to the direct photoionization, there are a number of partial auto-ionizing Rydberg series that are optically allowed.
We note, from the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ ground state of atomic sulfur, excitation into the $ns$
and $nd$ Rydberg states are possible giving the $3s^23p^3(^2D^o)n\ell~^3L^o$ and $3s^23p^3(^2P^o)n\ell~^3L^o$ Rydberg
resonance series, where $\ell$ is $s$ or $d$. In the case of the $^2D^o$ kernel, four Rydberg
series are possible: $^3D^o$ from the $ns$-Rydberg orbitals and $^3S^o$, $^3P^o$, and $^3D^o$
from the $nd$ Rydberg orbitals. For the $^2P^o$ core there are three optically allowed series;
$^3P^o$ from the $ns$-Rydberg orbitals and $^3P^o$, $^3D^o$ from the $nd$-Rydberg orbitals.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.5,width=\textwidth]{sfig4}
\caption{\label{1D} (Color online) An overview of the experimental measurements on S$(^1D)$
as a function of the photon energy; (a) experiment for the S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ metastable state
over the energy range from threshold to 30 eV. Primary photolysis of \ce{CS2} was carried out
at $\lambda$ =193 nm {(6.424 eV)}. Contributions from ionic fragmentation
photolysis of \ce{CS2} are not subtracted. The curve is
normalized to the VUV-photon flux.
(b) Theoretical cross section results for {100\% of} the S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ metastable state
from the DARC calculations convoluted at 44~meV.
The resonance series limits $E_{\infty}$ of Equation (2) for each series are
indicated by vertical-dashed lines in the end of the line groups.
Resonance features from this Figure are tabulated in Table II.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Rydberg resonance series of S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$}
As illustrated in Figure \ref{thres3P}, the first ionic continuum $^4S^o$
manifests itself in the cross section for S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$, as obtained from the photolysis of \ce{S2O}. There is a sudden
increase in ion yield at a photon energy of 10.35 $\pm$ 0.02 eV, although there is a relatively weak continuum.
This is particularly evident in the decrease in the photoionization cross section value
around 11 eV similarly observed by Gibson and co-workers \cite{Gibson1986}.
The S$^+(^2D^o)$ and S$^+(^2P^o)$ ionic thresholds (respectively at 12.20 eV and 13.40 eV),
are partially overlaid with autoionizing Rydberg states.
In the present work, detailed measurements were made up to the photon energy of 13.40 eV,
for the case of resonance series converging to the S$^+(^2P^o)$ threshold from the
initial S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ state.
For the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ state, shown in Figure \ref{thres3P},
strong resonance series are observed in the photon energy range 12.20 - 13.4 eV, i.e.
below the $S^+(^2P^o)$ threshold.
The assignments and positions of these Rydberg resonance
series are in suitable agreement with the NIST tabulations \cite{nist}.
It is expected that all members of $3s^33p^3(^2P^o)n\ell$ Rydberg resonance
series (with the exception of the $3s^33p^3(^2P^o)ns~^3P^o$ series),
converging to the S$^+(^2P^o)$ threshold are observed.
Members of this group were seen in the early work of Gibson and co-workers \cite{Gibson1986}
as shoulders of the $3s^33p^3nd~^3P^o$ series but are not observed in the present work
which is primarily due to the limited energy resolution of the tunable VUV plasma source.
Individual members of the various $3s^23p^3(^2D^o)n\ell$ series;
$nd~^3D^o$, $ns~^3D^o$, $nd~^3S^o$ and $nd~^3P^o$ series can be identified.
At photon energies of 10.557 eV, 10.561 eV, and 10.646 eV
we find the triplet Rydberg states $3s^23p^3 (^2D^o) 3d ~^3P^o$,
$3s^23p^3 (^2D^o) 5d ~^3P^o$, and $3s^23p^3 (^2D^o) 6d ~^3P^o$.
However, due to the narrow line width of the resonances and the
limited energy resolution (44 meV FWHM), many of the
resonances were not resolved. A similar situation
occurred for the resonances associated with the
$3s^33p^3(^2P^o)nd~^3P^o$ and
the $3s^33p^3(^2P^o)nd~^3D^o$ Rydberg resonance series.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.5,width=\textwidth]{sfig5}
\caption{\label{thres1D} (Color online) Single photon ionization of sulfur as a
function of the photon energy.
{(a)} The experimental cross section is recorded with a nominal
energy resolution of 44 meV.
The assigned Rydberg series are indicated by vertical lines grouped by
horizontal or inclined lines.
The corresponding series limits $E_{\infty}$ of Equation \ref{eV} for
each series are indicated by vertical-dashed lines at the end of the line
groups.
The first few values of $n$ for each series is displayed close to its
corresponding vertical
line in each group. {(b)
Single photoionization of atomic sulfur as a
function of the photon energy in the $3s^23p^4~^1D$ metastable state from threshold to 12.5 eV.
Theoretical cross section were carried out with the DARC codes,
and convoluted with a Gaussian having a profile of 44 meV.
The assigned Rydberg series are indicated as vertical lines grouped by horizontal or inclined lines.
The corresponding series limits $E_{\infty}$ of Equation \ref{eV} for
each series are indicated by a vertical-dashed lines in the end of the line groups.
Resonance energies and quantum defects for
the series lying below the S$^+(^2D^o_{3/2, 5/2})$ thresholds
are tabulated in Table \ref{meta-1D}.} }
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Window resonances of S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$}
In atomic sulfur, the $3s3p^4~^4P$ and $3s3p^4~^2P$ ionization states
(occurring from a 3s vacancy state)
are located at 19.056 eV and 22.105 eV, respectively. In the observed
photoionization spectra
of atomic sulfur for the $(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ ground state (in the photon energy
range 17.8 -- 20.2 eV)
we observe two prominent members of a Rydberg series of window resonances.
These features were also seen in the early theoretical work of Altun and
co-workers \cite{Altun1992}.
These dip-like structures were first observed in this photon region by
Innocenti and co-workers \cite{Innocenti2007}
using constant ionic state (CIS) spectroscopy. Innocenti and co-workers
\cite{Innocenti2007}
showed that these window resonance originate from the $3s^23p^4$ parent
configuration and are
due to the $3s \rightarrow np$ excitation being members of the $3s3p^4np$
Rydberg resonance series.
The ground state electronic configuration of the sulfur atom is
$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$, i.e.
valence shell photoionization from this state produces the ionic continuum
states S$^+(^4S^o)$, S$^+(^2D^o)$ and S$^+(^2P^o)$, which have
ionization potentials of 10.36 eV, 12.20 eV, and 13.40 eV \cite{nist}.
Inner-shell $3s$ ionization results in the S$^+$ ionic $3s3p^4~^4P$ and
$3s3p^4~^{ {2}}P$ hole states that
have ionization potentials of 20.20 eV and 23.45 eV, respectively \cite{nist,Innocenti2007}.
The window resonances occur due to excitation first into a
Rydberg resonance state caused by autoionization,
then into the energetically accessible $^4S^o$, $^2D^o$, and $^2P^o$ continua
transitions.
The Rydberg states involved are triplet states, so the oscillator strengths
for transitions
violate the spin-selection rule $\Delta S$ = 0, which in the case of atomic
sulfur is very low.
The most intense transitions occur for $\Delta L$ = 0, $\pm$ 1, in this case
$ns \rightarrow np$ transitions are expected to occur.
{The dipole selection rule ($\Delta L$ = 0, $\pm$ 1) limit the allowed Rydberg
resonance states to the
$3s3p^4 (^4P) np~^3D^o$, $3s3p^4 (^4P) np~ ^3P^o$ and $3s3p^4 (^4P) np~ ^3S^o$
resonance series,
where the assignments are based on earlier work of Innocenti et al. \cite{Innocenti2007}.
Their experimental
work
has already revealed the position of members of these resonance
series.
In the present study the first two members of the resonance series were
observed at
17.82 $\pm$ 0.09 eV (69.57 $\pm$ 0.35 nm) and 19.02 $\pm$ 0.09 eV (65.19 $\pm$
12.35 nm), respectively, which is in good agreement
with the experimental
work of Innocenti et al. \cite{Innocenti2007}. }
Our present theoretical estimates are also in respectable agreement with the
present experimental work.
The resonances are very intense and couple to the $^2D^o$ and $^2P^o$ continuum.
Other members of this Rydberg resonance series are {obtained}
at 19.55 $\pm$ 0.09 eV and 19.78 $\pm$ 0.09 eV
which agree well with the results of Innocenti et al. \cite{Innocenti2007}.
Innocenti and co-workers \cite{Innocenti2007} observed that both of the $n$=3
and 4 members
of this Rydberg resonance series have a spectral line-width just below the
experimental resolution.
In the present work, the window resonances are observed
by detection of the S$^+$ ions from photoionization of atomic sulfur in the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ ground state.
{Similar types of structures were observed previously
by Angel and Samson \cite{Samson1988} for atomic oxygen.
Window resonances were also observed for atomic selenium, by
Gibson et al. \cite{Gibson1986} and atomic tellurium, by Berkowitz et al. \cite{Berk1981}.}
However, in all these previous studies, the structures
are clearly less intense than in the present case of atomic sulfur.
\subsection{Photoionization of metastable S$(3s^23p^4~^1D~ {\rm and}~ ^1S)$}
The photoion yield of atomic sulfur in the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ state,
using \ce{CS2} as a precursor,
allows us to obtain photoion yield curves of atomic sulfur, in the S
$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ states.
By subtraction means, the excited metastable state of atomic sulfur S
$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ is then accessible.
The excited S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ metastable state of atomic sulfur is of
fundamental spectroscopic interest because here the behavior
of electronically excited states of systems can be analyzed.
The S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ metastable state of atomic sulfur is located at 1.145 eV
above
the S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ ground electronic state, where the first three
ionization energies (for the
$^4S^o$, $^2D^o$ or $^2P^o$ continuum) are located at 9.215 eV, 11.060 eV, and
12.25 {5} eV, respectively.
Previous experimental studies on the photoionization of atomic sulfur in the
first electronically excited metastable
state S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ are rather limited in energy range. The work of Pan
and co-workers \cite{Pan2008}
studied the energy 75 800 -- 89 500 cm$^{-1}$ (9.4 - 11.1 eV), using
dissociation of \ce{CS2} after photolysis
at 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} produced sulfur atoms in a singlet excited states which were
subsequently ionized by synchrotron radiation.
A resolution of up to 3 cm$^{-1}$ (0.37 meV) was attainable at the NSRRC
beamline U9CGM in China.
Several Rydberg resonances series were detected and analyzed converging to the
S$^+(^2D^o_{3/2, 5/2})$
thresholds.
On the theoretical side several studies of atomic sulfur dealing with the
transitions and energies
of the ground $3s^23p^4~^3P_2$ and metastable $3s^23p^4~^1D_2$ states
are available in the literature as mentioned in the Introduction.
Experiments were first performed by Joshi and co-workers \cite{Joshi1987}
for the case of the sulfur atom in the $3s^23p^4~^1D_2$ state for the energy
range
below the S$^+(^2P^o)$ threshold, which is located at 12.255 eV. Two Rydberg series
were detected in the gas phase absorption spectrum.
The photon energy range studied in previous experiments carried out
below the S$^+(^2D^o)$ threshold (located at 11.060 eV) is rather limited.
The work of Qi et al. \cite{Qi2002} investigated photoionization
of atomic sulfur in the initial S$(3s^23p^4\;^1D)$ state,
from the 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} excitation of thiethane (\ce{C3H6S})
up to a photon energy of 13.5 eV using synchrotron radiation
at 200~meV FWHM resolution. However, the energies of their observed Rydberg resonances series
neither agree with the findings of other authors nor with the present work.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.5,width=\textwidth]{sfig6}
\caption{\label{all} (Color online)
Theoretical cross sections from the 512 level DARC calculations for sulfur $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_{2,1,0}$,
and $3s^23p^4~ ^1D_{2}$, and $3s^23p^4~ ^1S_{0}$ initial states convoluted with a Gaussian profile of 44 meV.
Single photoionization cross sections of the sulfur atom as a function of energy over the photon energy from thresholds to 30 eV
illustrating strong resonance features in the spectra below 14 eV.
(a) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_2$, (b) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_1$ (c) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_0$, (d) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P$
level averaged, (e) metastable $3s^23p^4~ ^1D_2$
and (f) metastable $3s^23p^4~ ^1S_0$ cross sections.
The corresponding series limits $E_{\infty}$ of Equation \ref{eV} for the window resonances converging
to $3s3p^4~ ^4P$ and $3s3p^4~ ^2P$ sulfur ion thresholds
are indicated by vertical-dashed lines.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
In the photon energy region below 11.060 eV, the use of the $^2D^o$ continuum
relative to the energy of S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$, has been studied
by a variety of different authors where the known
autoionizing Rydberg resonances series were resolved.
Experiments were primarily carried out by tunable VUV radiation
employing frequency tripling of UV laser radiation. The high resolving power permitted to determine
the lifetimes of some
of the excited Rydberg states. A disadvantage of this approach though
is the very limited frequency (energy) range investigated, as it excludes photoionization studies
at higher photon energies and broad tuning of the radiation.
\begin{table*}
\caption{\label{meta-1D} Principal quantum numbers $n$, resonance energies (eV), and
quantum defects $\mu$ of the prominent S$(3s^23p^3 [^2D^{\circ}_{5/2,3/2}] ) ns,nd$ Rydberg series seen in the
S$(3s^23p^4~^1D_2)$ photoionization spectra converging to the S$^+(3s^23p^3 [^2D^{\circ}_{3/2,5/2}])$ and
S$^+(3s^23p^3 [^2P^{\circ}])$ thresholds.
The experimental resonance energies are calibrated to $\pm$20 meV and
quantum defects $\mu$ are estimated to within an error of 20\%.
The assignments are shown in Fig. \ref{thres1D}. The theoretical results are obtained from the 512-level DARC
calculations performed within the Dirac Coulomb {\it R}-matrix approximation. The experimental spectral assignments,
from the thesis work of Barthel \cite{barthel2009}, are uncertain for entries in parentheses.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
Sulfur & &$E_{n}$ (eV) &$E_{n}$ (eV) &$\mu$ & $\mu$ & $E_n$ (eV) & $E_n$ (eV) &$\mu$ & $\mu$ \\
(Initial state) & & (Expt) &(Theory) &(Expt) &(Theory) &(Expt) & (Theory) &(Expt) &(Theory)\\
\hline \\
& $ns$ & &$3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{3/2})ns$ & [$3/2$] & & & $3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{5/2})ns$ & [$5/2$] & \\
$3s^23p^4~^1D_{2}$ & & & & & & & & & \\
& 5 & (\;9.5300)$^{a}$ &\;9.5515 &2.02 $\pm$ 0.40 &1.99 &-- & -- & -- & \\
& 6 & (10.2046)$^{a}$ &10.2399 &2.01 $\pm$ 0.40 &1.93 &-- &10.2192 & &0.98\\
& 7 & (10.5136)$^{a}$ &10.5125 &2.00 $\pm$ 0.40 &2.01 &-- &10.5115 & &2.02\\
& 8 & -- &10.6848 &-- &1.98 &-- &10.6785 & -- &2.03\\
& 9 & -- &10.7840 &-- &1.98 &-- &10.7793 & -- &2.04\\
& 10 & -- &10.8485 &-- &1.98 &-- &10.8442 & -- &2.07\\
& 11 & -- &10.8929 &-- &1.97 &-- &10.8891 & -- &2.08\\
& $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &-- & $\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$\\
& $\infty$ & 11.0599$^{b}$ &11.0599$^{b}$ &-- & &11.0603$^{b}$ &11.0603$^{b}$& & \\
\\
\\
& $nd$ & &$3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{3/2})nd$ &[$3/2$] & & &$3s^23p^3(^2D^{\circ}_{5/2})nd$ &[$5/2$] & \\
$3s^23p^4~^1D_{2}$ & & & & & & & & & \\
& 3 & (\;9.4690)$^{a}$ &\;9.4722 &0.08 $\pm$ 0.02 &0.07 & -- &-- & & \\
& 4 & (10.1715)$^{a}$ &10.1739 &0.09 $\pm$ 0.02 &0.08 & (10.08762)$^{a}$&10.1112 &0.26 $\pm$ 0.05 &0.21 \\
& 5 & (10.4926)$^{a}$ &10.4778 &0.10 $\pm$ 0.02 &0.16 & -- &10.4759 &-- &0.18 \\
& 6 & (10.6706)$^{a}$ &10.6575 &0.09 $\pm$ 0.02 &0.18 &-- &10.6548 &-- &0.21 \\
& 7 & (10.7736)$^{a}$ &10.7674 &0.11 $\pm$ 0.02 &0.18 &-- &10.7634 &-- &0.23 \\
& 8 & (10.8406)$^{a}$ &10.8338 &0.12 $\pm$ 0.03 &0.24 &-- &10.8363 &-- &0.21 \\
& 9 & -- &10.8842 & -- &0.20 &-- &10.8823 &-- &0.26 \\
& 10 & -- &10.9179 & -- &0.21 &-- &10.9161 &-- &0.28 \\
& 11 & -- &10.9430 & -- &0.21 &-- &10.9415 &-- &0.29\\
& $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ &$\cdots$ & -- & $\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$\\
& $\infty$ & 11.0599 &11.0599 $^{b}$ & & &11.0603 $^{b}$ &11.0603 $^{b}$ & & \\
\\
\\
& $n$ & &$3s^23p^3(^2P^{\circ})ns$ &[$^1P^o$] & & &$3s^23p^3(^2P^{\circ})nd$ &[ {$^1P^o$}] & \\
$3s^23p^4~^1D_{2}$ & & & & & & & & &\\
&3 & & & & &10.741359$^{c}$ &10.7397 &0.007 &0.008 \\
& & & & & &10.741393$^{d}$ &-- &0.007 &-- \\
&4 &-- & &-- & &-- &11.2587 &-- &0.30 \\
&5 &10.712359$^{a}$ &10.71400 &2.03 &2.03 &-- &11.6536 &-- &0.26\\
& &10.712257$^{b}$ &-- &2.03 &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- \\
&6 &-- &11.1675 &-- &2.02 &-- &11.8519 &-- &0.22\\
&7 &-- &11.4017 &-- &2.06 &-- &11.9688 &-- &0.16\\
&8 & &11.7017 &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- \\
&$\cdots$ & &$\cdots$ &-- &-- &$\cdots$ &-- &-- &$\cdots$ \\
& $\infty$ & &12.2598$^{b}$ &-- &-- &12.2598$^{b}$ &12.2598$^{b}$& & \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\begin{flushleft}
$^{a}$Experimental work from the thesis of Barthel \cite{barthel2009}.\\
$^{b}$Rydberg series limits $E_{\infty}$ for the sulfur ion (S$^+$) are from the NIST tabulations \cite{nist}.\\
$^{c}$NIST tabulations \cite{nist}.\\
$^{d}$Experimental work of Pan and co-workers \cite{Pan2008}.\\
\end{flushleft}
\end{table*}
In the present work, by appropriate subtraction of the photo-ion yield curve,
from the photolysis process of \ce{CS2}, both states of the sulfur species,
S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ can be studied.
The photo-ion yield curve of atomic singlet sulfur S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$
was determined in the photon energy range up to 30 eV.
The analysis of the relative intensities of the autoionization resonances,
originating from S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$
states that are formed by photolysis of \ce{CS2},
aids to determine both sulfur states ($3s^23p^4~^3P$ and $3s^23p^4~^1D$).
{
From our experimental studies, Rydberg resonances associated with the S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$
initial atomic state are found to be located at 9.47 $\pm$ 0.02 eV and at 10.21 $\pm$ 0.02 eV, respectively.
Similarly for the $S(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ state, resonances are found located at 10.72 $\pm$ 0.02 eV,
11.34 $\pm$ 0.07 eV and 11.66 $\pm$ 0.07 eV.
The relatively high margin of error arises from the uncertainty in
the scaling of the absolute photoionization cross-section to the theoretically
calculated values. }
{
The branching ratio of these atomic sulfur species
formed by photolysis can be reliably determined.
Under the present experimental conditions we find
the branching ratio ${\rm S}(^1D_J)/{\rm S}(^3P_J)$ = 2.8 $\pm$ 0.4
at a photolysis wavelength of 193 nm {(6.424 eV)}.
}
The ratio of 2.8 $\pm$ 0.4 found in favor of
of S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ is in clear contradiction to earlier work, where S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$
is the more abundant species.
Waller et al. reported a branching ratio ${\rm S}(^3P_J)/{\rm S} (^1S_J)$ = 2.8 $\pm$ 0.3 \cite{Waller1987}
and 1.6 $\pm$ 0.3 was reported by Xu et al. \cite{Jackson2004}, also in favor of S$(^3P)$.
However, the present value of 2.8 $\pm$ 0.4 in favor of the S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ state
agrees with that found by Yang et al \cite{Jackson2008a,Jackson2008b}.
There is no plausible explanation for the large discrepancy
in the experimental values for the branching ratio of S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ to
S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ from the 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} photolysis of \ce{CS2}. It is assumed
that likely different pulse energies of the laser photolysis produce different
product distributions.
Note, a high photon density would lead to multi-photon effects, with a branching ratio
that may differ significantly from that of one-photon excitation conditions.
Pulse energies of 1-2 $mJ/cm^2$ \cite{Jackson2004} may cause
additional contributions of S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ by the dissociation of vibrationally excited \ce{CS}.
The pulse energy of the 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} excitation radiation, used in the present work,
is about 0.4 ${\rm mJ/cm^2}$, so we safely assume that multi-photon effects play a minor role.
In Figure \ref{thres1D} the energies of the $^4S^o$, $^2D^o$ and $^2P^o$
thresholds for the \ce{S^+} ion relative to the S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ threshold
are located at 9.215 eV ($^4S^o$), 11.060 eV ($^2D^o$), and 12.256 eV ($^2P^o$), respectively.
These thresholds are indicated in Figure \ref{thres1D} by vertical dashed lines. It should be noted that direct
photoionization is spin-forbidden in the $^4S^o$ - continuum because of the
totality of the $^4S^o$-continuum and the emitted photoelectron.
In the energy range below 12.5 eV, autoionizing Rydberg series are observed,
converging to the energetically higher lying ionic continua.
These two allowed ionic continua S$^+ (^2D^o)$ and
S$^+ (^2P^o)$ are located at 11.060 eV and 12.256 eV, respectively.
A significant increase in photoionization efficiency is recorded
above a photon energy of about 14.6 eV (c.f. Figure \ref{1D} (a)).
There is a wide maximum structure stretching to about 17 eV with a shoulder at about 15.4 eV.
This would appear to be due to residual molecular effects from the photolysis process, as outlined in
Table \ref{tabAppErg} (cf. Section IV B). Evidence for this assumption comes from the fact that
these features do not show up in the corresponding theoretical work on atomic sulfur from the excited
$3s^23p^4~^1D_2$ metastable state as illustrated in Figure \ref{1D} (b).
In the energy region below the $S^+ (^2P^o)$ threshold
the assignment of the resonance features in the photoionization spectra
are in good agreement with those available in the literature. The respective Rydberg states
couple via the process of autoionization to the ionic $^4S^o$ continuum.
Between the individual resonances, the $S^+$ yield falls almost to zero.
The present study gives resonant structures assignment
for the Rydberg series converging to the S$^+(^2D^o_{3/2, 5/2})$ ionic thresholds.
Autoionizing resonance states are observed for the main Rydberg series, converging to
the S$^+(^2D^o)$ ionic continuum shown in Figure \ref{thres1D} (a) and (b). The most intense of
the resonance series is the $3s^23p^3 (^2D^o) nd~ ^1D^o$. Here, the transitions can
be resolved for the $n$ = 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 members of the Rydberg resonance series
(see Table \ref{meta-1D}).
The higher members are not observed due to the low intensity and the limited experimental
resolution of the VUV radiation. Theoretical predictions from the 512-level DARC
calculations (given in Table \ref{meta-1D}) are seen to be in good
agreement with the experimental measurements and with the
measurements of Pan and co-workers \cite{Pan2008} (i.e., Series II).
All the autoionizing Rydberg transitions occurring in atomic sulfur from the $3s^23p^4~^1D_2$
excited metastable state, at energies below the $^2D^o_{3/2, 5/2}$ thresholds, are seen
to be in good agreement with the values available from the literature \cite{nist,Pan2008}.
Rydberg series members are observed for the $3s^23p^3 (^2D^o) ns~ ^1D^o$
resonances series with principal quantum numbers $n$ = 5, 6, and 7. This series
was also observed by Pan and co-workers \cite{Pan2008} (i.e. Series I).
We note that the $n$ = 6 and $n$ = 7 Rydberg members partially overlap.
The resonance found at 10.59 $\pm$ 0.02 eV is from the
$3s^2 3p^3 (^2D^o) nd~ ^1P^o$ Rydberg series where $n$ = 6.
This transition appears unusually intense and there
are no other members of this group observed. The unusually
high intensity of this transition is due to the energetic proximity
explained by the triplet Rydberg states and the interference with the singlet state.
In the present work we observe for the first time
autoionizing Rydberg resonance states above the $^2D^o$ threshold
and lying below the $^2P^o$ continuum. These resonances are also seen in the
DARC photoionization cross section calculations for the ground
and metastable states (see Figure \ref{all}).
The excited Rydberg resonance states in the cases discussed so far are all
$^1D^o$ and $^1P^o$ states. The ionic continuum to which these states
couple in autoionization to is a $^4S^o$ continuum. The
spin $S_J$ of the ionic core is 3/2. Secondly, if one considers the
totality of the ionic core and the emitted electron with spin $s$ =$\pm$1/2,
a total spin $S$ of 1 or 2 is possible.
This will give rise to triplet and quintet-terms, while the
autoionizing Rydberg states form singlet terms.
Taking into account the selection rules for autoionization
$\Delta S=0$ appears initially banned for this transition. Under
spin-orbit coupling we can expand the selection rule of the autoionization
however, to $\Delta S$ = 0, $\pm$1, $\pm$2. For transitions of this type,
due to the spin-orbit coupling, large resonances appear
having relatively narrow width.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.5,width=\textwidth]{sfig7}
\caption{\label{window} (Color online) Theoretical cross sections results
from the 512 level DARC for the sulfur $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_{2,1,0}$,
and $3s^23p^4~ ^1D_{2}$, and $3s^23p^4~ ^1S_{0}$ initial states,
in the photon energy region 17 -- 24 eV,
convoluted with a Gaussian having a profile of 44 meV.
(a) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_2$, (b) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_1$ (c) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P_0$,
(d) $3s^23p^4~ ^3P$ level averaged, (e) metastable $3s^23p^4~ ^1D_2$,
and (f) metastable $3s^23p^4~ ^1S_0$ cross sections.
In this energy region the prominent window resonances converging to the singly ionized sulfur ion threshold
$3s3p^4~ ^4P$ (lowest vertical dashed line) are clearly visible in the cross sections. See text for further details.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
The autoionization resonance occurs with a maximum at a photon energy of
10.11 $\pm$ 0.02 eV. However, it appears broadened
and can be assigned to the $3s^23p^3(^2D^o) nd~ ^3D^o$ series.
Here, for the process of autoionization, the selection rule
$\Delta S=0$ follows, as no spin-orbit coupling effects are involved.
The lifetime will therefore be significantly reduced and the autoionization resonances
appear much broadened. It should be noted that the
excitation of the $3s^23p^4~^1D$ state in a $3s^23p^4~^3D$ Rydberg state to the
spin-selection rule in the context of one-photon processes is contrary, illustrated by
the relatively low intensity. This transition was also observed
by Yang and co-workers \cite{Jackson2008a,Jackson2008b}
who indicated that spin-spin and spin-orbit interactions in the case of atomic sulfur may play a role.
\begin{table*}
\caption{\label{meta-1S} Principal quantum numbers $n$, resonance energies (eV), and
quantum defects $\mu$ of the prominent S$(3s^23p^3 [^2P^{\circ}] ) ns,nd$ Rydberg series seen in the
S$(3s^23p^4~^1S_0)$ photoionization spectra converging to the S$^+(3s^23p^3 [^2P^{\circ}])$ thresholds.
The assignments are shown in Figure \ref{thres1S-theory}.
The theoretical results were obtained from the 512-level DARC
calculations performed within the Dirac Coulomb {\it R}-matrix approximation.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
Sulfur & &$E_{n}$ (eV) &$E_{n}$ (eV) &$\mu$ & $\mu$ & $E_n$ (eV) & $E_n$ (eV) &$\mu$ & $\mu$ \\
(Initial state) & & (Expt) &(Theory) &(Expt) &(Theory) &(Expt) & (Theory) &(Expt) &(Theory)\\
\hline \\
\\
& $n$ & &$3s^23p^3(^2P^{\circ})ns$ &[$^1P^o$] & & &$3s^23p^3(^2P^{\circ})nd$ &[$^1P^o$] & \\
$3s^23p^4~^1S_{0}$ & & & & & & & & & \\
& 3 &-- &-- &-- &-- &\;9.1366$^{a}$ &\;9.1361 &0.004$^{a}$ &0.005\\
& 4 & -- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- \\
& 5 &\;9.1075$^{a}$ &9.02574 &2.033$^{a}$ &2.109 & -- &-- &-- &-- \\
& 6 & -- &9.75287 &-- &2.114 &-- & &-- &-- \\
& 7 & -- &10.0852 &-- &2.108 &-- & &-- &-- \\
& 8 & -- &10.2592 &-- &2.127 &-- & &-- &-- \\
& 9 &-- &10.3743 &-- &2.021 &-- & & &--\\
& 10 &-- &-- &-- &-- &-- & & &--\\
& $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ &$\cdots$ & -- & $\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$ &$\cdots$\\
& $\infty$ & 10.65363 &10.65363$^{b}$ & & &10.65363$^{b}$ &10.65363$^{b}$& & \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\begin{flushleft}
$^{a}$Experimental work of Yang et al. \cite{Jackson2008a}.\\
$^{b}$Rydberg series limits $E_{\infty}$ for the sulfur ion (S$^+$) are from the NIST tabulations \cite{nist}.\\
\end{flushleft}
\end{table*}
The autoionization resonance, located at a photon energy of 9.40 $\pm$ 0.02 eV,
may be assigned to {a} known atomic transition of singlet sulfur.
This structure was also observed by Pan and co-workers \cite{Pan2008} at a wavenumber
of 75 821 $cm^{-1}$ (corresponding to 9.401 eV) and by Yang et al. \cite{Jackson2008a,Jackson2008b}
for a wavenumber of 75 818 $cm^{-1}$ (corresponding to 9.400 eV). Pan
et al. \cite{Pan2008} discussed an assignment to a $^1G$ series, but because of
$\Delta J = 2$ this was excluded. Yang and co-workers \cite{Jackson2008a,Jackson2008b} suggested the transfer of excitation
to a $3s^23p^3 (^2D^o) 3d$ state, without the corresponding term symbol.
{The energy of the photon \ce{ArF} laser
{(6.42~eV)} is insufficient to
form atomic sulfur in the excited state S$(^1S)$, since the photodissociation
energy of \ce{CS2} is 397~kJ/mol = 4.114~eV \cite{Darwent1970} and the excitation energy of
S($^{1}$S) is 2.7499637~eV \cite{nist} so that this electronic state is
excluded as the cause of the resonance.} The resonance lies energetically above the
$^4S^o$ continuum of S$(^3P)$, so the resonance in the photoionization
of the ground-state sulfur is not observed. Against this background and
given the relatively low excitation energy of 9.40 $\pm$ 0.02 eV, tentatively
assigning this feature to a $3s^23p^3 (^2D^o)3d$ state appears straightforward.
Rydberg series converging to the $^2P^o$ continuum are observed
to be members of the $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) nd ~^1P^o$
and the $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) ns ~^1P^o$ resonance series.
The autoionizing $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) 5s ^1P^o$ resonance state occurs at an energy
of 10.70 $\pm$ 0.02 eV, the $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) 3d~ ^1P^o$
state at a photon energy of 10.75 $\pm$ 0.02 eV.
These energies are in good agreement with the values from the
NIST tabulations \cite{nist} of 10.7123 eV and 10.7414 eV.
We note that both resonances were observed by Pan and co-workers \cite{Pan2008}.
The quantum defect $\mu$ of the $5s$ resonance at an energy
of 10.70 $\pm$ 0.02 eV is 2.03, while that for the $3d$ resonance
(at an energy of 10.75 $\pm$ 0.02 eV), is approximately zero.
Extrapolating with the Rydberg formula using {(see equation \ref{eV})} and converting all quantities to eV
one {could straight forwardly} locate further members of {the} Rydberg resonance series.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.5,width=\textwidth]{sfig8}
\caption{\label{thres1S-theory} (Color online)
Single photoionization of atomic sulfur as a
function of the photon energy in the $3s^23p^4~^1D$ metastable state from threshold to 12.5 eV.
Theoretical cross section were carried out with the DARC codes,
and convoluted with a Gaussian having a profile of 44 meV.
The assigned Rydberg series are indicated as vertical lines grouped by horizontal or inclined lines.
The corresponding series limits $E_{\infty}$ of Equation \ref{eV} for
each series are indicated by a vertical-dashed lines in the end of the line groups.
The first few values of $n$ for each series is displayed close to its corresponding vertical
line in each group. Resonance energies and quantum defects for
the various series are tabulated in Table \ref{meta-1D}.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
For the energy of the higher lying members of the
$3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) ns~^1P^o$ and the $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) nd ~^1P^o$ resonance series,
experimental values of approximately, 11.393 eV for the $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) 6s~^1P^o$ state and
11.406 eV for the $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o)4d~^1P^o$ state are obtained.
These values agree well with the energies of the
structures observed at 11.37 $\pm$ 0.02 eV and 11.40 $\pm$ 0.02 eV. For this
reason we assign these resonances to the $3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) 6s ~^ 1P^o$ and the
$3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) 4d ~^1P^o$ states.
The resonance state located at an photon energy of 11.16 $\pm$ 0.02 eV
is not available from the NIST tabulations \cite{nist} since
in the energy range above the $^2D^o$ - threshold
no singlet resonance states are listed.
The photon energy of 11.291 eV is the closest lying triplet state, namely,
$3s^23p^3 (^2P^o) 4d ~^3P^o$. However,
{as illustrated in Figure \ref{thres1D} (b)},
the DARC cross section calculations in the region above the S$^+(^2D^o)$ - threshold
and below the S$^+(^2P^o)$ - threshold, intense singlet resonance states are seen including
shoulder resonances located at approximately similar positions (see Table \ref{meta-1D}).
To the best of the authors knowledge the only experimental study from the S$(3s^23p^4~^1S)$ metastable
state is that of the work of Yang et al. \cite{Jackson2008b} where the S$(^1D)$
and S$(^1S)$ atoms are produced by 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} photodissociation of \ce{CS2}.
{ As
mentioned above, the photon energy of a 193~nm (6.424 eV) laser is insufficient to produce
S($^{1}$S) from \ce{CS2} photodissociation. The formation of atomic S in its
$^{1}$S state is likely connected with two-photon absorption processes.}
To complete our study on this system we performed large-scale
DARC calculations on this metastable state for the photon energy range from threshold (7.61 eV) up to 30 eV.
Figure \ref{all} (f) shows the cross section for this metastable state as a function photon energy.
Similar to the work presented earlier we have
convoluted the theoretical cross sections with a Gaussian having a profile of 44 meV. Here again in the energy region below
12 eV {(see Figures \ref{thres1S-theory} (a) and (b))},
strong resonance features are found in the cross section which will be discussed in the following Sections.
\subsection{Resonances: S$(3s^23p^4~^1D~ {\rm and} ~^1S)$}
The electronic configuration $ns^2 np^4$ belongs to the atomic species
O~$(n=2)$ and S~$(n = 3)$ which we use as the basis to interpret the present results.
Due to the different principal quantum numbers these states will have different
energies. However, in general the energies of the sulfur atom appear
lower by several eV. In the following, the observed
photoionization efficiency of the atomic structure in the singlet
sulfur S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ are interpreted in the region around 17 eV.
If one compares the photoion yield of atomic sulfur with that
of atomic oxygen, it is remarkable that in both cases, the respective
electronic ground state S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and O$ (2s^22p^4~^3P)$ series of the autoionizing
Rydberg transitions are observed converging to the respective $^4P$-threshold
at 20.20 eV (S$^+$) and 28.48 eV ($O^+$) relative to the electronic ground state.
For the two electronically excited species $S(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ and O$ (2s^22p^4~^1D)$
a broad autoionization resonance occurs at photon energies
below the respective energetic position of the $^4P$-continuum.
In the case of sulfur S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ metastable state, it has a shoulder on the low energy side.
The resonance in the case of the metastable atomic oxygen O$ (2s^22p^4~^1D)$ state is a Coster-Kronig
process and may be assigned to the $2s^22p^4 ~^1D \rightarrow 2s2p^5 ~^1P^o$
transition with subsequent autoionization.
The analog $3s3p^5~ ^1P^o$ state of atomic sulfur occurs energetically
at significantly lower energy of 8.95 eV relative to S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ state.
This value is below the ionization energy and represents the reason why autoionization
of this state is not observed.
The window resonance may be depicted by a Fano profile, leading to
a profile index $q$ of 0.21 $\pm$ 0.01, a half-width $\Gamma$ of 0.60 $\pm$ 0.005 eV
located at an energy of 17.44 $\pm$ 0.006 eV.
The observed intense structure in the experimental data
is found at a photon energy of 16.92 $\pm$ 0.1 eV (c.f. Figure \ref{1D} (a)).
An interpretation of this intense structure seen at 16.92 $\pm$ 0.10 eV may be given.
We have already discussed that the $3s3p^5~ ^1P^o$ state is due to $3s$-valence
excitation of atomic sulfur at higher excitation energies,
an expected analog excitation of a $3s$-electron to the $np$ orbitals with $n> 3$ can occur.
The electron configuration in the case of inner-shell excitation
$3s3p^4 np$ forms a multiple of terms.
Atomic sulfur has the terms $^3P$, $^1D$, $^1S$ resulting from the $3s^23p^4$ configuration.
Term energies for the $3s$ excited states with the exception of the
$3s3p^4 np~ ^5P^o$ and $3s3p^4 nd~^5D$ Rydberg series are unpublished,
but calculations are available from the OPACITY project \cite{OPACITY}.
The $^5P$-states can be considered as an indication
that the appropriate $3s$ excited singlet terms with similar energies are expected.
An intense autoionization resonance is observed at a photon energy of 16.92 $\pm$ 0.10 eV
Although it may occur in the autoionizing Rydberg resonances below the $^2D^o$-continuum
a resonance is observed, corresponding to a spin-forbidden
$3s^23p^4~^1D$ transition, and assigned to a $^3D$ Rydberg state.
However this resonance relative to the spin-allowed singlet-singlet transitions is significantly less intense.
A broad resonance is observed (c.f. Figure \ref{1D} (a)) with the peak at a photon energy of
16.92 $\pm$ 0.10 eV and the shoulder at 15.45 $\pm$ 0.10 eV, due to
$3s^23p^4~ ^1D \rightarrow 3s3p^4np$ excitation associated with subsequent autoionization.
The averaged half-widths are 0.55 $\pm$ 0.05 eV for the state located
at 15.45 $\pm$ 0.10 eV and 1.35 $\pm$ 0.25 eV for
the state located at 16.92 $\pm$ 0.10 eV. These correspond to lifetimes
of 1.20 $\pm$ 0.10 fs and 0.49 $\pm$ 0.08 fs, respectively.
Both these values are larger than that of the corresponding atomic oxygen case
which has an observed lifetime of 0.30 $\pm$ 0.02 fs for the $2s2p^5~^1P^o$ state.
As already indicated by the Fano profile indices $q$ of the resonances
located at 15.45 $\pm$ 0.10 eV and 16.92 $\pm$ 0.10 eV (see Figure \ref{1D} (a)),
with lifetimes of 3.85 $\pm$ 0.42 fs and 2.15 $\pm$ 00.15 fs respectively.
Both these states have lower values than the atomic oxygen case of 4.25 $\pm$ 0.80 fs.
Accordingly, in the case of the smaller profile, the index $q$ for
sulfur indicates a less efficient coupling.
At a photon energy of 16.92 $\pm$ 0.10 eV a broad autoionization
resonance is observed with an absolute photoionization cross section
of 23.6 $\pm$ 2.5 Mb and a shoulder at 15.45 $\pm$ 0.10 eV with a
cross section value of 9.0 $\pm$ 1.2 Mb. The structures are due to
$3s^23p^4~ ^1D \rightarrow 3s3p^4 np~^1P^o,^1D^o,^1F^o$
transitions with $n > 3$. The fitted experimental data
yield a Fano profile $q$ value of 2.15 $\pm$ 0.15.
We note for the case of the $3s^23p^4~ ^1S$ metastable state, the $3s^23p^3(^2P^o)5s~^1P^o$ resonance state
lies below the S$^+(^2D^o)$ threshold and is therefore an interloping resonance \cite{qb3},
as illustrated in Figure \ref{thres1S-theory}, which disrupts the regular Rydberg pattern. Above the S$^+(^2D^o)$ threshold
region and below the S$^+(^2P^o)$ threshold the $3s^23p^3(^2P^o)ns~^1P^o$ series follows it normal Rydberg pattern
as no interlopers are present. Only the lowest member $3s^23p^3(^2P^o)3d~^1P^o$ of the
$3s^23p^3(^2P^o)nd~^1P^o$ resonance series was found. Our theoretical values for the positions and quantum defects
are seen from Table \ref{meta-1S} to be in suitable agreement with the measurements of Yang and co-workers \cite{Jackson2008a}.
The $3s^23p^3(^2P^o)3d~^1S^o$ resonance found by Yang and
co-workers \cite{Jackson2008a}, located at 9.2035 eV, is forbidden by dipole selection rules in $LS$-coupling
but shows up as a very faint resonance feature at approximately 9.2096 eV in our theoretical cross section.
\section{Discussion}
Photodissociation of \ce{CS2} at an excitation wavelength
of 193 nm {(6.424 eV)} with subsequent photoionization of the neutral, formed
photofragments in the photon energy range between 9.25 and 30 eV is reported.
For atomic sulfur formed in the electronic states S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$
measurements are performed up to 30 eV for both states.
Autoionizing Rydberg resonances in the energy below 13.40 eV
are observed and a detailed analysis is carried out for them.
Subtracting the proportion of S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ from the photo-ion yield curves above
that of S$^+$ from S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$, provides atomic
triplet sulfur S$(^3P)$ from the photodissociation of \ce{S2O}
for photon energies in the range 10.25 eV to 30 eV.
This allows photoionization measurements to be made on the triplet
state of atomic sulfur for photon energies over this photon energy range.
For S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$, autoionization resonances occurring in
the experimental and theoretical investigations, i.e. in the photon energy range
between 12 -- 25 eV, intense window
resonances are observed, that converge to the fourth ionization at 20.20 eV, as
shown in Figure \ref{3P} and Figure \ref{1D}
and illustrated more vividly in Figure \ref{window}.
Similarly, the photoion yield curve of electronically excited atomic
sulfur S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$ is determined by subtracting
the amounts of S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ from the S$^+$ yield
curves determined in the pump-probe experiments
in the energy regime up to 30 eV for \ce{CS2} molecule.
Here, the first few members of the autoionizing Rydberg resonances series below
the $^2D^o$ threshold (located at 11.06 eV) and the $^2P^o$ threshold (located 12.256 eV) are observed.
At a photon energy of 16.92 $\pm$ 0.10 eV, a highly intense and a strongly broadened autoionization resonance is found.
This resonance has a shoulder at 15.45 $\pm$ 0.10 eV and may be due to 3s-inner shell excitation.
The large Auger width of 1.35 $\pm$ 0.25 eV for this resonance dominates
the photoionization spectra of the electronically excited S$ (3s^23p^4~^1D)$ in this photon energy region.
Over the photon energy range 16 -- 20 eV the cross section
is dominated by remnants of the molecular precursors from the photolysis process.
The origin of these processes is discussed in Section IV. A.
This enhancement is not observed in the corresponding calculated atomic photoionization cross section
so we conclude they are due to molecular effects.
\section{Summary}
The photoionization cross sections for atomic sulfur in the states S$(3s^23p^4~^3P)$ and S$(3s^23p^4~^1D)$,
are an important basis for atmospheric and astrophysical models. Broad autoionizing resonances,
observed in the case of electronically excited sulfur atoms are found by pump-probe experiments starting from molecular precursors.
Numerous autoionization resonances are observed which facilitate the assignment of the sulfur species under study.
Specifically, experimental measurements and large-scale photoionization cross sections calculations are presented
for the ground and metastable states of atomic sulfur. A detailed analysis has been performed
for the resonance features observed in the corresponding cross sections and the Rydberg series
assigned spectroscopically. Below 13.5 eV similar resonance features are seen in the
experimental measurements and the theoretical work, which have been analyzed and compared.
Overall the resonance features observed in this photon energy region show
suitable agreement between experiment and theory.
For the photon energy range 16 -- 20 eV the experimental cross section
is dominated by the remnants of the molecular precursor from the photolysis process not
present in the theoretical calculations for this atomic species. The possible origin of these processes is discussed.
\begin{acknowledgments}
Financial support by the German Research Foundation (DFG) is gratefully acknowledged (RU 420/7-1).
B. M. McL. acknowledges support by the US National Science Foundation under the visitors program through a grant to ITAMP
at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Queen's University Belfast through a visiting research fellowship (VRF) and
the hospitality of ER and the Physikalische Chemie Department of the Freie Universit\"{a}t of Berlin, during a recent research visit.
This research used resources of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center,
which is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department
of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.
The computational work was performed at the National Energy Research Scientific
Computing Center in Oakland, CA, USA
and at The High Performance Computing Center Stuttgart (HLRS)
of the University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
This research also used resources of the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility
at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which is supported by the Office of Science
of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725.
\end{acknowledgments}
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{Introduction}
In this paper, we continue the study of correlation functions of the operators in the stress-tensor supermultiplet $\mathcal T$ in $\mathcal N = 4$ SYM
initiated in \cite{Eden:2011we,Eden:2012tu}. This supermultiplet plays a privileged role since it comprises all local conserved currents as well as the
Lagrangian of the theory. Its correlation functions have a number of remarkable properties.
The two- and three-point functions are protected by superconformal symmetry and do not receive quantum corrections. The four-point function $G_4=\vev{\mathcal T(1) \mathcal T(2) \mathcal T(3) \mathcal T(4)}$
is the first non-protected quantity. At strong coupling it has been thoroughly
studied via the AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Freedman:1998tz,Arutyunov:2000py} whereas at weak coupling it has been computed at one loop \cite{GonzalezRey:1998tk}, at two loops \cite{Eden:2000mv,Bianchi:2000hn} and recently at three loops \cite{Eden:2011we,Drummond:2013nda}. The operator product expansion of this correlation function has provided valuable data about the spectrum of anomalous dimensions of twist-two operators \cite{Dolan:2000ut}.
The interest in these correlation functions, for an arbitrary number of points, has been renewed in the context of the recent studies of scattering amplitudes in $\mathcal N = 4$ SYM. The correlation functions have been found to
be dual to the scattering amplitudes in a special light-like limit \cite{Alday:2010zy,Eden:2010zz,Mason:2010yk}.
Computing the weak coupling corrections to these correlation functions
within the conventional Feynman diagram approach turned out to be a difficult task, even at low levels of the perturbative expansions. Already the evaluation of the two-loop correction to the four-point function needed judicious use of ${\cal N}=1$ or ${\cal N}=2$ supersymmetry \cite{Eden:2000mv,Bianchi:2000hn}. Going to higher orders became possible by using the Lagrangian insertion method combined with the recently discovered hidden permutation symmetry of $G_4$ that mixes integration and external points \cite{Eden:2011we,Eden:2012tu}. More precisely, since the (on-shell chiral) Lagrangian of $\mathcal N=4$ SYM
appears as the top component in the chiral sector of the stress-tensor supermultiplet, the order $O(g^{2\ell})$ correction to $G_4$ can be related to the
Born-level correlation function $G_{4+\ell}$ involving the insertion of $\ell$ additional chiral stress-tensor supermultiplets, integrated over their positions in the chiral
superspace. The permutation symmetry follows from the Bose symmetry of the correlation function $G_{4+\ell}$.
This point illustrates the importance of the general multi-point correlation functions $G_n=\vev{\mathcal T(1)\dots \mathcal T(n)}$
of the stress-tensor supermultiplet in the chiral sector. Another reason to study these is the above mentioned duality with scattering amplitudes. Knowing $G_n$ allows us to predict the general $n-$point tree-level superamplitude as well as the integrands of its perturbative corrections.
The goal of the present paper is to develop a new approach to computing the correlation functions $G_n$ which makes efficient use of ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal symmetry\footnote{Throughout the paper we always mean the {\it chiral half }of ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal symmetry.}. Viewed as a function of the chiral odd variables $\theta$, $G_n$ admits
the expansion
\begin{align}\label{G-mod4}
G_n = G_{n;0} + G_{n;1} + \dots + G_{n; n-4} \,,
\end{align}
where $G_{n;p}$ is a homogenous polynomial in $\theta$ of degree $4p$. Notice that the expansion
terminates at $p=n-4$ (instead of the maximally allowed $p=n$) due to $\mathcal N=4$ superconformal symmetry.
An important consequence of \re{G-mod4} is that for $n=4$ the correlation function coincides with its lowest
component, $G_4=G_{4;0}$, and so it does not depend on the Grassmann variables.
Each term on the right-hand side of \re{G-mod4} should respect the ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal symmetry. As a consequence, it can be expanded over a set of invariants $\mathcal I_{n;p}$ of this symmetry. As was shown in \cite{Eden:2011we}, for the bottom ($p=0$) and top ($p=n-4$) components the invariant is unique (up to an arbitrary function of conformal cross-ratios). For the remaining components in \re{G-mod4} the number of invariants varies with $p$ and they have not been studied in the literature. One of the main goals of this paper is to provide a convenient basis for such invariants in twistor superspace.
Note that the expansion \re{G-mod4} is very similar to that of the $n-$particle scattering super-amplitude in $\mathcal N=4$ SYM. In fact, the two
quantities are related to each other in the limit in which the operators $\mathcal T(i)$ are located at the vertices of light-like
$n-$gon \cite{Alday:2010zy,Eden:2010zz,Eden:2011yp,Eden:2011ku,Mason:2010yk,Adamo:2011dq}. This duality yields non-trivial relations between the invariants $\mathcal I_{n;p}$ and their on-shell
counter-parts defining the scattering amplitudes. It is in this sense that we can think of $\mathcal I_{n;p}$ as the off-shell generalisation
of the on-shell (amplitude) invariants. In particular, in the simplest non-trivial case $p=1$, in the light-like
limit the off-shell invariants $\mathcal I_{n;1}$ are related to the NMHV $R-$invariants \cite{Drummond:2008vq,Mason:2009qx}.
Computing the higher components $G_{n;p}$ in \re{G-mod4} and finding the corresponding off-shell superconformal invariants $\mathcal I_{n;p}$
proves to be a very non-trivial problem. In the conventional approach, the Born approximation to $G_{n;p}$ is given
by a set of Feynman diagrams
with many interaction vertices and the associated Feynman integrals. The number of diagrams and their complexity rapidly increase with the Grassmann
degree $p$. Moreover, the contribution of each individual diagram is neither gauge invariant nor (super)conformally covariant. The ${\cal N}=4$
superconformal symmetry is only restored in the sum of all diagrams.
In this paper we demonstrate that these difficulties can be avoided by employing the reformulation of ${\cal N}=4$ SYM in twistor space \cite{Boels:2006ir}.
We find a representation of the chiral part of the stress-tensor supermultiplet ${\cal T}$ as a four-fold fermionic integral of the main interaction term in the twistor Lagrangian. In the judiciously chosen axial gauge, the self-dual sector of SYM is free and has no interaction vertices. Furthermore, all the interaction vertices are comprised in the non-polynomial expression for ${\cal T}$ in terms of the twistor superfield. As a result, the correlation function $G_{n;p}$ is given in the Born approximation by a new type of Feynman diagram which only involves free propagators of twistor superfields but no interaction vertices. The calculation of the twistor space Feynman diagrams is drastically simplified (no Feynman integrals!) and yields very
concise expressions for $G_{n;p}$. We check by an explicit calculation that the results for $G_{n;1}$ obtained by the new method agree with those of the conventional Feynman diagram approach.
Analysing the Feynman diagrams in twistor space, we introduce a new class of ${\cal N}=4$ off-shell superconformal invariants and study their properties.
The simplest invariant $R(1;234)$ is given by a nilpotent Grassmann polynomial of degree two in the odd variables $\theta$. It depends on four points and an
auxiliary (reference) supertwistor defining the axial gauge for the twistor action. This invariant serves as an elementary building block for constructing higher-point
invariants. Namely, the general $n-$point invariant $\mathcal I_{n;p}$ factorises into a product of $(n-2)$ elementary $R-$invariants. We show that the correlation
function \re{G-mod4} is given in the Born approximation by a linear combination of such off-shell invariants with rational coefficient functions
of the distances $x_{ij}^2\equiv (x_i-x_j)^2$. Although each invariant
depends on the reference supertwistor, this dependence drops out in their sum.
The paper is organised as follows. In Section 2 we define the correlation function of the stress-tensor multiplet in the chiral sector and
summarise its properties. In Section 3 we reformulate this correlation function in twistor space and develop a diagram technique
for computing its components $G_{n;p}$ of a given Grassmann degree $4p$. In Section 4 we present an explicit calculation of the
first non-trivial component $G_{n;1}$ and show that it satisfies all necessary consistency conditions (operator product expansion
and duality with the NMHV amplitude in the light-like limit). In Section 5, we apply the conventional Feynman diagram technique to
compute the five-point correlation function $G_{5;1}$ in the Born approximation. In Section 6 we match the two approaches and demonstrate
that they lead to the same expressions for various components of the four- and five-point correlation functions. Section 7 contains
concluding remarks. Some technical details are summarised in four appendices.
\section{Correlation functions of the stress-tensor multiplet}
In this section, we define the correlation functions of the operators in the stress-tensor supermultiplet
in $\mathcal N=4$ SYM and discuss their general properties. A distinctive feature of this multiplet is
that it comprises the stress-energy tensor (hence the name) and
the Lagrangian of the theory. They appear as coefficients in the expansion of the corresponding
superfield $\mathcal T(x,\theta^A,\bar\theta_A)$ in powers of the odd coordinates $ \theta_{\alpha}^A$ and
$\bar\theta^{\dot\alpha}_{A }$ (with Lorentz spinor indices $\alpha=1,2$, $\dot\alpha=\dot 1,\dot 2$ and $SU(4)$ index $A=1,\dots,4$). In addition, this
superfield is annihilated by half of the Poincar\'e supercharges and, as a consequence, it depends on
half of the odd variables, both chiral and anti-chiral:
\begin{align}\label{eq:2}
\mathcal T = \mathcal T(x ,\theta^+,\bar\theta_{-},u)
\,,\qquad\quad
\theta_{\alpha}^{+a} = \theta_{\alpha}^A u_A^{+a} \,,\qquad\quad
\bar\theta^{\dot\alpha}_{-a' } = \bar\theta^{\dot\alpha}_{A } \bar u^A_{-a'}\,.
\end{align}
Here the odd coordinates $\theta^A$ and $\bar\theta_A$ appear projected with auxiliary bosonic
variables $u_A^{+a}$ and $\bar u^A_{-a'}$ with $a=1,2$, $a'=1',2'$ (see Appendix \ref{app:conv} for details), or `harmonics' on the coset $SU(4)/(SU(2)\times SU(2)'\times U(1))$. The harmonics allow us to define the so-called Grassmann analytic (or just `analytic') superspace with odd coordinates $\theta^+$ and $\bar\theta_{-}$, without breaking the $R-$symmetry $SU(4)$. More details can be found in Refs.~\cite{HSS,HH,HH2} (see also footnote \ref{f5}).
For our purposes in this paper we shall restrict $ \mathcal T$ to its purely chiral sector by setting $\bar\theta^{\dot\alpha}_{-a' }=0$.
Then the expansion of the superfield in powers of $\theta^+$ has the form\footnote{Here we use the notation $ (\theta^+)^2_{\alpha\beta} = \theta_{\alpha}^{+a}\theta_{\beta}^{+b}\epsilon_{ab}$, $
(\theta^+)^{2\, ab}= \theta_{\alpha}^{+a}\theta_{\beta}^{+b}\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}$, $
(\theta^+)^{3\, a}_\alpha = \theta_{\alpha}^{+b}\theta_{\beta}^{+c}\theta_{\gamma}^{+a}\epsilon_{bc}\epsilon^{\beta\gamma}$ and $(\theta^+)^4 = \theta_{\alpha}^{+a}\theta_{\beta}^{+b}\theta_{\gamma}^{+c}\theta^{+d}_\delta \epsilon_{bc}\epsilon_{ad} \epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\epsilon^{\gamma\delta}$.}
\begin{align}\notag\label{T-dec}
\mathcal T(x,\theta^+,0,u) & {}= O^{++++} (x) + \theta_\alpha^{+a} O^{+++,\alpha}_a(x)
+ (\theta^+)^2_{\alpha\beta}O^{++,\alpha\beta}(x)
\\[2mm] &{}
+ (\theta^+)^{2\, ab}O^{++}_{ab}(x)
+ (\theta^+)^{3\, a}_\alpha O^{+,\alpha}_a (x)+ (\theta^+)^4\mathcal L(x)\,,
\end{align}
where the lowest component (or superconformal primary) $O^{++++} =\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits(\phi^{++}\phi^{++})$ is a half-BPS operator
built from the scalar fields $\phi^{++} = \phi^{AB} u_A^{+a}u_B^{+b}\epsilon_{ab}$
and the top component $\mathcal L(x)$ is the chiral form of the $\mathcal N=4$ SYM on-shell Lagrangian. The remaining components
can be obtained by successively applying the chiral $\mathcal N=4$ supersymmetry transformations to the lowest component \cite{Eden:2011yp}. Their explicit expressions are given in Eq.~\re{t4c} below. Notice that $\mathcal T$ carries four units of harmonic $U(1)$ charge, as indicated by the number of pluses in each term on the right-hand side.
In this paper we propose a new approach to evaluating the correlation functions of the stress-tensor multiplet
\begin{align}\label{Gn}
G_n = \vev{0| \mathcal T(1) \dots \mathcal T(n) |0}\,,
\end{align}
where we used the short-hand notation $\mathcal T(i) = \mathcal T(x_i,\theta_i^+,0,u_i)$ so that $G_n$ depends
on $n$ copies of the chiral superspace coordinates $(x_i, \theta_i^+,u_i)$. $\mathcal N=4$ superconformal symmetry imposes
strong constraints on $G_n$. In particular, for $n=2$ and $n=3$, the super-correlation function \re{Gn}
is a protected quantity, independent of the coupling constant. Moreover, it does not depend on the chiral odd
variables and coincides with the correlation function of the lowest component $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[\phi^{++}\phi^{++}]$ evaluated at Born level.
For $n\ge 4$ the correlation function \re{Gn} depends on the coupling constant $g^2$. This dependence can be controlled
through the Lagrangian insertion method which relies on the following relation
\begin{align}\notag\label{LI}
{\partial\over\partial g^2} G_n &{} = \int d^4 x_{n+1}\, \vev{0| \mathcal T(1) \dots \mathcal T(n)\mathcal L(x_{n+1}) |0}
\\\notag
&{}=\int d^4 x_{n+1}d^4\theta^+_{n+1}\,\vev{0| \mathcal T(1) \dots \mathcal T(n)\mathcal T({n+1}) |0}
\\
&{}
\equiv\int d^4 x_{n+1}d^4\theta^+_{n+1}\,G_{n+1}\,.
\end{align}
Here in the second line we made use of the relation between the on-shell action of $\mathcal N=4$ SYM and the stress-tensor multiplet
\begin{align}
S_{\mathcal N=4} = \int d^4 x \,\mathcal L(x) = \int d^4 x\int d^4\theta^+ \,{\mathcal T}(x,\theta^+,0,u)
\end{align}
that follows from \re{T-dec}. Expanding the correlation functions in \re{LI} in the powers
of the coupling constant, we find from \re{LI} that the order $O( g^{2\ell})$ correction to $G_n$ is determined
by the order $O( g^{2\ell-2})$ correction to $G_{n+1}$, integrated over the position of the $(n+1)-$th point. Successively
applying \re{LI} we can express the $O(g^{2\ell})$ integrand of $G_n$ in terms of the correlation function $G_{n+\ell}$
evaluated at the lowest order in the coupling, i.e., in the Born approximation.
This property shows that in order to find any quantum correction to the above correlation function it is sufficient to evaluate \re{Gn} at Born level and for an arbitrary number of points $n$.
In this approximation $G_n$ is a rational function of the distances $x_{ij}^2\equiv (x_i-x_j)^2$.
This function can be reconstructed if we known the form of its singularities
corresponding to null separations $x_{ij}^2=0$ between the operators in \re{Gn}.
The various components of the correlation
function \re{G-mod4} have different dependence on the coupling constant $g^2$ and on the number of colours $N$.
As follows from \re{Gn} and \re{T-dec}, the lowest component $G_{n;0}$ is given by the correlation function of
scalar operators $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits(\phi^{++} \phi^{++})$ and reduces, in the Born approximation, to a product of free scalar propagators.
Therefore, it does not depend on the coupling constant and scales as $G_{n;0}\sim {\rm dim} (SU(N))= N^2-1$.
The higher components $G_{n;p}$ in \re{G-mod4} are given by more complicated correlation functions involving other members
of the supermultiplet \re{T-dec}. As we show later in the paper, their perturbative expansion necessarily involves
interaction vertices whose number increases with $p$. Each vertex is accompanied by a power of the coupling constant $g$, so that
$G_{n;p}$ scales in the Born approximation as
\begin{align}\label{planar}
G_{n;p} = {N^2-1\over (2\pi)^{2n} } \left(g^{2} N \over 4\pi^2 \right)^p \widehat G_{n;p}\,,
\end{align}
with $\widehat G_{n;p}$ depending on the $n$ superspace points and on the parameter $1/N^2$ controlling
the non-planar corrections. According to \cite{Eden:2012tu}, non-planar corrections only exist for $p\ge 4$ due to the
occurrence of the higher Casimir operators of the gauge group $SU(N)$ in the individual Feynman diagrams.~\footnote{The simplest
example is the quartic Casimir operator $d^{abcd} d^{abcd}/(N^2-1) =(N^4-6N^2+18)/(96 N^2)$ that first appears for $p=4$.}
The correlation function $G_{n;p}$ involves an overall factor which is a product of free scalar propagators, each
bringing a factor of $1/(2\pi)^2$. For the sake of simplicity of the formulae, in what follows we shall not display the normalisation factor in \re{planar}.
By construction, the correlation functions $G_{n;p}$ have to respect (the chiral half of) ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal
symmetry and to satisfy the corresponding Ward identities. The general solution to these identities is given by a linear
combination of ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal nilpotent invariants $\mathcal I_{n;p}$ whose number depends on the Grassmann degree
$p$. As was shown in \cite{Eden:2011we}, for the top component of the correlation function with $p=n-4$ the corresponding invariant
$\mathcal I_{n;n-4}$ is unique leading to
\begin{align}\label{G-max}
G_{n,n-4} = {\mathcal I_{n;n-4} \over \prod_{1\le i<j\le n} x_{ij}^2}\,.
\end{align}
The explicit expression for $ \mathcal I_{n;n-4} $ can be found in \cite{Eden:2011we}.
In this paper, we extend the relation \re{G-max} to the remaining components $G_{n;p}$ of the correlation function \re{G-mod4}
with $p<n-4$. Namely, we shall construct the set of ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal invariants $\mathcal I_{n;p}$ and determine
their contributions to $G_{n;p}$.
\section{Correlation functions on twistor space}
In this section, we present a new approach to computing the correlation functions \re{Gn} that relies on the
reformulation of $\mathcal N=4$ SYM as a gauge theory on twistor space based on a twistor action. The twistor space Feynman diagrams that arise from this twistor action provide an off-shell generalization of the MHV diagrams of \cite{Cachazo:2004kj} that give rise to scattering amplitudes. The framework extends to null polygonal Wilson loops \cite{Bullimore:2010pj,Mason:2010yk} and other correlators \cite{Adamo:2011dq,Adamo:2011pv} giving dual conformal invariant versions of MHV diagrams for the amplitude or standard ones for the Wilson loop.
Here we show how to obtain Feynman rules on twistor space for the correlation functions \re{Gn} that avoid many of the
difficulties of conventional space-time Feynman diagrams.
The main advantage of the twistor rules as opposed to the conventional ones
is that the contribution of each diagram manifests the $\mathcal
N=4$ superconformal symmetry up to the choice of a reference twistor that has been used to define the axial gauge. Its contribution remains invariant under a superconformal transformation acting on all external data, if we in addition transform the reference supertwistor linearly. In the sum over all diagrams, dependence on the reference supertwistor drops out as we shall prove below.
There are also relatively few diagrams compared to the conventional ones, particularly at low MHV degree.
\subsection{Twistor space approach}
Non-projective twistor space
is the fundamental representation space of the complexified spinor covering of the super conformal group $SL(4|4;\mathbb{C})$. We first explain how the bosonic conformal group in this form acts on space-time and how it relates to bosonic twistor space and then build up to the full supersymmetric correspondence.
As mentioned above, the correlation functions \re{Gn} at Born level are rational functions of the distances $x_{ij}^2$. Therefore, they admit analytic continuation to complex space-time coordinates. This is an advantage because the action of the complexified conformal group $SL(4;\mathbb{C})$ on the correlation functions can be greatly simplified by employing the embedding formalism, in which complexified compactified Minkowski space is realised as a light-cone in complex projective space $\mathbb{CP}^5$ with homogenous coordinates $X^{IJ} \sim c X^{IJ}$
(with $I,J=1,\dots,4$)
\begin{align}
(X\cdot X) \equiv X_{IJ} X^{IJ} =0\,, \label{quadric}
\end{align}
where $X_{IJ} =\frac12 \epsilon_{IJKL} X^{KL}$ and $X^{IJ} = - X^{JI}$. The complex coordinates $x_{\alpha\dot\alpha}$
define a particular parameterisation of $X^{IJ}$
\begin{align}\label{X-x}
X^{IJ} = \left[\begin{array}{cc} \epsilon_{\alpha\beta} & -i x_\alpha^{\dot\beta} \\ i x_\beta^{\dot\alpha} & -\frac12 x^2 \epsilon^{\dot\alpha\dot\beta} \end{array}\right] ,
\end{align}
with $x_\alpha^{\dot\beta}= x_{\alpha\dot\alpha}\epsilon^{\dot\alpha\dot\beta}$ and $x^2=\frac12 x_\alpha^{\dot\beta} x^\alpha_{\dot\beta}$.
Conformal transformations of $x_{\alpha\dot\alpha}$ correspond to global $SL(4;\mathbb{C})$ transformations of $X^{IJ}$.
Bosonic twistor space is the complex projective space $\mathbb{CP}^3$ whose homogenous
coordinates $Z^I\sim c Z^I$ (with $I=1,\dots,4$) transform in the fundamental representation of the cover $SL(4;\mathbb{C})$ of the conformal group. A space-time point $X^{IJ}$ corresponds to a line in twistor space given by the incidence relation
\begin{align}\label{inc}
X_{IJ} Z^J = 0\,.
\end{align}
For a given point $X^{IJ}$ this relation defines a line in twistor space since \eqref{quadric} is the condition that $X_{IJ}$ has rank two. Choosing two arbitrary points on this line, $Z_1^J$ and $Z_2^J$, we
can reconstruct $X^{IJ}$ as
\begin{align}\label{X-Z}
X^{IJ} = Z_1^I Z_2^J - Z_1^J Z_2^I = \epsilon^{ab} Z_a^I Z_b^J \, .
\end{align}
Combining \re{X-x} and \re{X-Z} we obtain that each point in complexified Minkowski space-time $x_{\alpha\dot\alpha}$ is mapped into
a line $X_{IJ} Z^J(\sigma) = 0$ in twistor space~\footnote{More precisely this is a line in projective twistor space $\mathbb{CP}^3$ or equivalently a two-plane in (non-projective) twistor space $\mathbb{C}^4$. So Minkowski space is the Grassmannian of two-planes in $\mathbb{C}^4$, $Gr(2,4)$.}
\begin{align}
Z^I(\sigma) = Z_1^I \sigma^1 + Z_2^I \sigma^2 \equiv Z_a^I \sigma^a\,,
\end{align}
with $\sigma^a=(\sigma^1,\sigma^2)$ being local coordinates on the line.
For $n$ points $x_i$, defining the space-time coordinates of the
operators in the correlation function \re{Gn}, the corresponding configuration in twistor space consists of $n$ (non-intersecting) lines
whose moduli are determined by the corresponding projective coordinates $X_i^{IJ}$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-sample} below. Then, the (square of the) distance between two operators is given by
\begin{align}\notag
x_{ij}^2 \sim \frac12 (X_i\cdot X_j) &{} = \frac14 \epsilon_{IJKL} X_i^{IJ} X_j^{KL}
\\
& {}= \frac14 \epsilon_{IJKL} \epsilon^{ab} Z_{i,a}^I Z_{i,b}^J
\epsilon^{cd} Z_{j,c}^K Z_{j,d}^L \equiv \langle Z_{i,1} Z_{i,2} Z_{j,1} Z_{j,2}\rangle\,,
\end{align}
where $Z_{i,a}$ and $Z_{j,a}$ (with $a=1,2)$ are two pairs of points belonging to two lines with moduli $X_i$ and $X_j$, respectively.
If two lines intersect, we can choose $Z_{i,2}^I=Z_{j,1}^I$ leading to $x_{ij}^2=0$. Thus, the light-like limit of the correlation function, $x_{ij}^2\to 0$,
corresponds to the limit of intersecting lines.
To deal with correlation functions in $\mathcal N=4$ SYM in the chiral sector, we have to extend the twistor space to include four odd
coordinates
\begin{align}\label{ZZ}
\mathcal Z = (Z^I,\chi^A)\,,\qquad\qquad \text{(with $I,\, A=1,\dots,4$)}\,,
\end{align}
subject to the equivalence relation $\mathcal Z \sim c \mathcal Z $. The odd twistor
coordinates $\chi^A$ satisfy an incidence relation analogous to \re{inc}. Using the parameterisation \re{X-x} we
can rewrite the relation between a point in chiral Minkowski (super)space-time $(x^{\dot\alpha\alpha},\theta^{A\alpha})$
and a line in twistor superspace as
\begin{align}\label{line}
Z^I = (\lambda_\alpha, i x^{\dot\alpha\beta}\lambda_\beta)\,,\qquad\qquad \chi^A = \theta^{A,\beta} \lambda_\beta\,,
\end{align}
with $\lambda_\alpha$ being homogeneous coordinates on the line in
twistor space.\footnote{Again, more precisely this identifies chiral Minkowsksi superspace with the space of lines in {\em{projective}} supertwistor space $\mathbb{CP}^{3|4}$, or equivalently the space of two-planes in non-projective supertwistor space $\mathbb{C}^{4|4}$, that is the Grassmannian $Gr(2,4|4)$. Similarly analytic superspace, on which the stress-energy tensor naturally sits, is the super-Grassmannian of $(2|2)$ planes in $\mathbb{C}^{4|4}$, $Gr(2|2,4|4)$~\cite{HH}. The modding out of a super-plane accounts for the halving of the odd degrees of freedom (for example in~\eqref{eq:2}). \label{f5}}
{The ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal transformations correspond to global $GL(4|4)$ rotations of the supertwistor $\mathcal Z$.}
\subsection{$\mathcal N=4$ SYM on twistor space}
The fields of $\mathcal N=4$ SYM theory are described on projective twistor space $\mathbb{PT}$ by a superfield $\mathcal{A}$ that takes values in $(0,1)$-forms with values in the Lie algebra of the gauge group. Expanding in the fermionic coordinates $\chi^A$ we obtain
\begin{align}\notag
\mathcal A(Z,\bar Z,\chi) &{}= a(Z,\bar Z) + \chi^A \tilde \gamma_A(Z,\bar Z) + \frac12 \chi^A\chi^B \phi_{AB}(Z,\bar Z)
\\
&{}+ \frac1{3!} \epsilon_{ABCD}\chi^A\chi^B\chi^C \gamma^{D}(Z,\bar Z)
+\frac1{4!} \epsilon_{ABCD}\chi^A\chi^B\chi^C\chi^D g(Z,\bar Z) \, .
\end{align}
The coefficients in front of $\chi^n$ are antiholomorphic $(0,1)-$differential forms on the supertwistor space $\mathbb{CP}^{3|4}$, homogeneous of degree $n$ that are
related to the various component fields of $\mathcal N=4$ SYM by the Penrose transform: $g$ and $a$ give
rise to self-dual and anti self-dual part of the field strength tensor, $\tilde \gamma_A$ and $\gamma^{D}$ are mapped
into gaugino fields and $\phi_{AB}$ produce the scalar fields.
The twistor action of $\mathcal N=4$ SYM takes the form
\begin{align} \label{S-tw}
&{} S[\mathcal A] = \int_{\mathbb{CP}^{3|4}} \mathcal D ^{3|4} \mathcal Z \wedge \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\left(\frac12 \mathcal A \,\bar{\partial}\mathcal A
- \frac13 \mathcal A^3 \right) + \int d^{4} x \,d^8 \theta \, L_{\rm int}(x,\theta)\,,
\end{align}
where $\mathcal D ^{3|4} \mathcal Z = \frac1{4!} \epsilon_{IJKL} Z^I d Z^J d Z^K d Z^L d^4 \chi$ is the integration measure on the complex
projective space and
\begin{align}\label{logdet}
L_{\rm int}(x,\theta)=g^2 \left[ \ln \det (\bar{\partial} - \mathcal A ) -\ln \det \bar{\partial} \right].
\end{align}
The separation of the action $S[\mathcal A]$ into the sum of two terms corresponds to expansion of $\mathcal N=4$ theory around
the self-dual sector. Indeed, the holomorphic Chern-Simons action is equivalent, in the appropriate gauge, to the self-dual part of the $\mathcal N=4$ action.
The second term on the right-hand side of \re{S-tw} describes the interaction induced by the non self-dual part of the action.
It involves the logarithm of the chiral determinant of the Dirac operator evaluated on the line in twistor space defined in \re{line}, and then integrated over all lines.
To perform calculations using \re{S-tw} it is convenient to choose an axial gauge in which the component of $\mathcal{A}$ in the direction of a fixed reference twistor $\mathcal{Z}_*$ vanishes. In this gauge, the cubic term in the holomorphic Chern-Simons action
vanishes and the remaining quadratic term defines the propagator
\begin{align}\label{A-prop}
\vev{\mathcal A^a (\mathcal Z_1)\mathcal A^b (\mathcal Z_2)} = \bar{\delta}^{2|4}(\mathcal Z_1,\mathcal Z_2,\mathcal Z_*)\delta^{ab}\,,
\end{align}
where we have displayed the $SU(N)$ indices of the fields $\mathcal A=\mathcal A^a T^a$ (with $T^a$ being the $SU(N)$ generators in the fundamental representation) and explicitly denoted the supertwistor $\mathcal Z_*$ that defines the axial gauge.
Here
\begin{align}\label{bar-delta}
\bar{\delta}^{2|4}(\mathcal Z_1,\mathcal Z_2,\mathcal Z_*) = \int {ds\over s} {dt\over t} \bar\delta^{4|4} (s\mathcal Z_1+t\mathcal Z_2+\mathcal Z_*)
\end{align}
is a projective delta function. It is a homogenous $(0,2)-$form on twistor space that enforces the condition for its arguments to be collinear in the
projective space. In the axial gauge, all interaction vertices are produced by $L_{\rm int}$. Its expansion in powers of superfields looks like
\begin{align}\notag\label{Sint}
L_{\rm int} (x,\theta) &{}= - g^2 \sum_{n\ge 2} {1 \over n} \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\left[\bar{\partial}^{-1}\mathcal A\dots \bar{\partial}^{-1}\mathcal A \right]
\\
&{} =- g^2 \sum_{k\ge 2} {1 \over k} \int { \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\left[\mathcal A(\mathcal Z(\sigma_1))\wedge D \sigma_1 \dots \mathcal A(\mathcal Z(\sigma_k))\wedge D \sigma_k \right] \over \vev{\sigma_1\sigma_2}\dots
\vev{\sigma_k\sigma_1}}\,,
\end{align}
where $D\sigma_i = \vev{\sigma_i, d\sigma_i}\equiv \epsilon_{ab}\sigma_i^a d\sigma_i^b$ is the projective measure and
\begin{align}\label{bra}
\vev{\sigma_i \sigma_j} = \epsilon_{ab} \sigma_i^a \sigma_j^b\,.
\end{align}
In the second relation in \p{Sint} the superfields are integrated along the line in twistor space
$\mathcal Z(\sigma_i)=\mathcal Z_1 \sigma_i^1 + \mathcal Z_2 \sigma_i^2$ parameterised by coordinates $\sigma_i^a\equiv (\sigma_i^1,\sigma_i^2)$
with two reference points $\mathcal Z_1$ and $\mathcal Z_2$ of the form \re{ZZ} and \re{line} with the same $x^{\alpha\dot\alpha}$ and $\theta^{A\alpha}$
but different $\lambda_\alpha$.
Making use of \re{Sint} and \re{A-prop} we can apply the conventional Feynman diagram technique to compute the correlation functions of operators built
from supertwistor fields at weak coupling. To establish the correspondence with \re{Gn} we have to work out the representation of the stress-tensor superfield $\mathcal T(x,\theta^+,u)$ in twistor space.
Our main contention is that
\footnote{Previous works discussing composite operators within the twistor framework are the proof of the correlator/amplitude duality for the Konishi multiplet \cite{Adamo:2011dq} and the recent paper \cite{Koster:2014fva} where the ${\cal N}=4$ one-loop dilatation operator in the $SO(6)$ sector is rederived. In either case the realisation of the operators is necessarily different from our approach because they are not connected to the Lagrangian by supersymmetry, which we use extensively.}
\begin{align}\label{T-conven}
\mathcal T(x,\theta^+,u)=\int d^4 \theta^- L_{\rm int}(x,\theta)\,,
\end{align}
where $\theta^{-a' \alpha}=\theta^{A\alpha}u^{-a'}_A$ and $\theta^{+a \alpha}=\theta^{A\alpha}u^{+a}_A$ are the projected fermionic coordinates required in the definition of $\mathcal{T}$. We first remark that, although $L_{\rm int}$ is not gauge invariant because of the chiral gauge anomaly in $\ln \det (\bar{\partial} - \mathcal A )$ in \re{logdet}, the fermionic integration in \re{T-conven} annihilates the anomalous gauge variation.\footnote{This is a refinement of the discussion following Eq.(3.6) of \cite{Boels:2006ir}. There, the variation of $L_{\rm int}$ under a gauge transformation is seen to be quintic in the $\theta$'s. A more detailed examination shows that the Grassamann integral in \p{T-conven} does not find a matching $\theta-$structure in this gauge variation. }
To justify \re{T-conven}, denote the corresponding operator as $\mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(x,\theta^+,u)$
and examine another equivalent representation for the correlation function \re{Gn}
\begin{align}\label{Gn-tw}
G_n=\vev{0|\mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(1) \dots \mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(n) |0}_{\mathcal A}\,,
\end{align}
where we inserted the subscript ${\mathcal A}$ to indicate that the expectation value is evaluated with the action given by \re{S-tw}.
To determine the explicit expression for $\mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(x,\theta^+,u)$ we shall require that, in the twistor space approach, the
derivative of the correlation function \re{Gn-tw} with respect to the coupling constant $\partial G_n/\partial {g^2}$ has to be related
to $G_{n+1}$ as in the last relation in \re{LI}.
Since the dependence of the twistor action \re{Sint} on the coupling constant only resides in $L_{\rm int}$ we obtain
\begin{align}\label{Gn-A}
{\partial\over\partial g^2} G_n &{} =\int d^4 x_{n+1} d^8\theta_{n+1} \vev{0| \mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(1) \dots \mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(n)
L_{\rm int}(x_{n+1},\theta_{n+1})
|0}_{\mathcal A}\,.
\end{align}
This relation is remarkably similar to \re{LI}. However, an important difference is that, in distinction to $ L_{\rm int}(x_{n+1},\theta_{n+1})$ the stress-tensor superfield $\mathcal T(x_{n+1},\theta^+_{n+1}, u_{n+1})$ entering the second line in \re{LI} only depends on half of the $\theta_{n+1}^{A\alpha}$ variables while it has an additional dependence on the harmonic variables $u_{n+1}$. To match the sets of variables these two operators depend on, we employ the harmonics to decompose $\theta_{n+1}^{A\alpha}$ into the two projections
\begin{align}\label{halves}
\theta_{n+1}^{+a,\alpha} = \theta_{n+1}^{A\alpha}u_{n+1,A}^{+a}\,,\qquad\qquad \theta_{n+1}^{-a',\alpha} = \theta_{n+1}^{A\alpha}u_{n+1,A}^{-a'}\,,
\end{align}
with $A=(+a,-a')$, and then integrate out $\theta_{n+1}^{-a',\alpha}$ using the identity $\int d^8\theta_{n+1} = \int d^4 \theta_{n+1}^+ \int d^4 \theta_{n+1}^-$. Appealing to the analogy with \re{LI} we identify the resulting
operator as representing the stress-tensor superfield in twistor space
\begin{align}\label{TA}
\mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(n+1) = \int d^4 \theta_{n+1}^{-}\, L_{\rm int}(x_{n+1},\theta_{n+1})\,,
\end{align}
whereby \re{Gn-A} takes the same form as \re{LI}. Notice that the dependence of $\mathcal T_{\mathcal A}(n+1)$ on the harmonic variable
$u_{n+1}$ enters through the integration measure $\int d^4 \theta_{n+1}^{-}$.
We combine the relations \re{TA} and \re{Gn-tw} to obtain
the following representation for the correlation function in twistor space
\begin{align}\label{G-int}
G_n = \int d^4 \theta_{1}^{-}\dots d^4 \theta_{n}^{-} \,\vev{0|L_{\rm int}(1) \dots L_{\rm int}(n) |0}_{\mathcal A}\,,
\end{align}
where $L_{\rm int}(i)\equiv L_{\rm int}(x_{i},\theta_{i})$ and $\theta_i^{-a',\alpha} = \theta_i^{A\alpha} (u_i)_A^{-a'}$. As before, we
will be interested in computing this correlation function to lowest order in the coupling constant. In this approximation, we can neglect
the dependence of the twistor action \re{S-tw} on the coupling constant and retain only the first (Chern-Simons) term on the right-hand
side of \re{S-tw}. In addition, we recall that in the axial gauge the Chern-Simons term reduces to the kinetic term, quadratic in
twistor superfield $\mathcal A$. As a consequence, calculating \re{G-int} we can treat $\mathcal A$ as a free field. In this way, replacing
$L_{\rm int}(i)$ by its expression \re{Sint} we have to perform all possible Wick contractions of the superfields $\mathcal A$ and
express the correlation function \re{G-int} as a product of propagators defined in \re{A-prop}. This leads to the set of Feynman rules
formulated in the next subsection.
\subsection{Feynman rules from twistor space}
According to the definition \re{Sint}, each operator $L_{\rm int}(x_i,\theta_i)$ lives on a line in twistor space
\begin{align}
\mathcal Z_i(\sigma) = \mathcal Z_{i,1} \sigma^{1}+ \mathcal Z_{i,2} \sigma^{2}\equiv \mathcal Z_{i,\alpha} \sigma^{\alpha}\,,
\end{align}
with two reference points $\mathcal Z_{i,1}$ and $\mathcal Z_{i,2}$ satisfying the incidence relations involving $x_i$ and $\theta_i$.
Then, each term in the sum in the second relation in \re{Sint} can be viewed as a line in twistor space; the $k$ legs attached to it represent the twistor superfields $\mathcal A(\mathcal Z_i(\sigma))$. For our purposes it will also be
convenient to treat the same diagram as defining a new effective interaction vertex as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules}.
\medskip
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\psfrag{Z1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{i,1}$} \psfrag{Z2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{i,2}$}
\psfrag{Z3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{j,1}$} \psfrag{Z4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{j,2}$}
\psfrag{i}[cc][cc]{$i$} \psfrag{j}[cc][cc]{$j$} \psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$3$} \psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$4$} \psfrag{n}[cc][cc]{$n$}
\psfrag{j1}[cc][cc]{$j_1$} \psfrag{j2}[cc][cc]{$j_2$} \psfrag{j3}[cc][cc]{$j_3$} \psfrag{j4}[cc][cc]{$j_k$}
\psfrag{vertex}{$\displaystyle {\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_2}}\cdots T^{a_{j_k}}] \over \vev{\sigma_{i j_1}\sigma_{i j_2}}\vev{\sigma_{i j_2}\sigma_{i j_3}}\cdots \vev{\sigma_{i j_k}\sigma_{i j_1}} }$ }\psfrag{dots}[cc][cc]{$\dots$}
\psfrag{propagator}{$\displaystyle \delta^{a_{i}a_{j}} \delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* + \sigma_{ij}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{i,\alpha}+ \sigma_{ji}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{j,\alpha})$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width = 0.65 \textwidth]{rules1.eps}}
\caption{\small Propagators and vertices in twistor space.}
\label{fig-rules}
\end{figure}
\noindent
Then, the correlation function \re{G-int}
is given by a set of diagrams in which an arbitrary number of propagators are stretched between $n$ lines, or equivalently connect
$n$ effective vertices (see Fig.~\ref{fig-sample}).
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$} \psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$} \psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$} \psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$} \psfrag{n}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle n$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width = 0.65 \textwidth]{sample.eps}}
\caption{\small Feynman diagram on twistor space contributing to an $n-$point correlation function. A double line with label $i$ represents
a line in twistor space with moduli $(x_i,\theta_i)$. Solid lines stand for propagators of twistor superfields and dots denote
effective interaction vertices. }
\label{fig-sample}
\end{figure}
Let us consider the propagator connecting two lines with indices $i$ and $j$.
Denoting the local parameters of the points on these two lines by $\sigma_{ij}^\alpha$ and $\sigma_{ji}^\alpha$, respectively, we can write its contribution as
\begin{align}\notag
& {}\int \vev{\sigma_{ij} d\sigma_{ij}} \int \vev{\sigma_{ji} d\sigma_{ji}} \, \delta^{2|4}(\mathcal Z_i(\sigma_{ij}),\mathcal Z_j(\sigma_{ji}),\mathcal Z_*)
(\dots)
\\ \notag
&{} \qquad = \int \vev{\sigma_{ij} d\sigma_{ij}} \int \vev{\sigma_{ji} d\sigma_{ji}} \int {ds\over s} {dt\over t} \, \delta^{4|4}(s\mathcal Z_i(\sigma_{ij})+t\mathcal Z_j(\sigma_{ji})+\mathcal Z_*)
(\dots)
\\
&{}\qquad= \int d^2\sigma_{ij} \int d^2 \sigma_{ji} \, \delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* + \sigma_{ij}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{i,\alpha}+ \sigma_{ji}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{j,\alpha})
(\dots)\,,
\end{align}
where the expression inside $(\dots)$ corresponds to the rest of the diagram and we made use of \re{bar-delta} in the second relation.
Here in the third relation we replaced the integration variables $\sigma^\alpha_{ij} \to s \sigma^\alpha_{ij} $ and $ \sigma^\alpha_{ji} \to t \sigma^\alpha_{ji}$
taking into account that the expression inside $(\dots)$ is a homogenous function of $\sigma_{ij}$ and $\sigma_{ji}$ of degree $(-2)$.
Then, the Feynman rules taking us from a graph as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-sample} to a contribution to the correlation function \re{G-int} are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item To each line connecting vertices $i$ and $j$ we
associate two pairs of spinor variables $\sigma_{ij}^\alpha$ and $\sigma_{ji}^\alpha$ (with $\alpha=1,2$). They define the coordinates
of the end points $\sigma_{ij}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{i,\alpha}$ and $\sigma_{ji}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{j,\alpha}$ belonging
to the $i$th and $j$th lines, respectively, in projective twistor space~\footnote{Such an assignment of the $\sigma_{ij}$ variables would be ambiguous if two vertices were connected
by more than one line. As we show below (see Eq.~\re{more}), this never happens for $n-$point correlation functions if $n>2$.};
\item A propagator connecting vertices $i$ and $j$ produces a graded delta function
$\delta^{a_ia_j}\delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* + \sigma_{ij}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{i,\alpha}+ \sigma_{ji}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{j,\alpha})$ with $a_i$ and $a_j$ being $SU(N)$ colour
indices;
\item Each vertex comes with a Parke-Taylor-like denominator
accompanied by the $SU(N)$ colour factor, $-\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_2}}\cdots T^{a_{j_k}}]/\prod_{\ell=1}^{k}
\vev{\sigma_{ij_\ell}\sigma_{ij_{\ell+1}}}$ (with $j_{k+1}\equiv j_1$
and
$\vev{\sigma_{ij_\ell}\sigma_{ij_{\ell+1}}} $ given by \re{bra}).
In virtue of $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits T^{a_j}=0\phantom{^\beta}$, we must have at least two lines coming from each vertex;
\item Finally, at each vertex $i=1,\dots,n$ we have to perform an integration $\int d^2 \sigma_{ij_1}\dots d^2 \sigma_{ij_{k}}$ over the $\sigma-$parameters of all lines attached
to that vertex and, in addition, integrate out half of the Grassmann variables by $\int d^4 \theta_{i}^{-}$.
\end{itemize}
These rules are summarised in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules2}.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\psfrag{Z1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{i,1}$} \psfrag{Z2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{i,2}$}
\psfrag{Z3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{j,1}$} \psfrag{Z4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{j,2}$}
\psfrag{i}[cc][cc]{$i$} \psfrag{j}[cc][cc]{$j$} \psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$3$} \psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$4$} \psfrag{n}[cc][cc]{$n$}
\psfrag{j1}[cc][cc]{$j_1$} \psfrag{j2}[cc][cc]{$j_2$} \psfrag{j3}[cc][cc]{$j_3$} \psfrag{j4}[cc][cc]{$j_k$}
\psfrag{vertex}{$-\displaystyle {\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_2}}\cdots T^{a_{j_k}}] \over \vev{\sigma_{i j_1}\sigma_{i j_2}}\vev{\sigma_{i j_2}\sigma_{i j_3}}\cdots \vev{\sigma_{i j_k}\sigma_{i j_1}} }$ }\psfrag{dots}[cc][cc]{$\dots$}
\psfrag{propagator}{$\displaystyle \delta^{a_{i}a_{j}} \delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* + \sigma_{ij}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{i,\alpha}+ \sigma_{ji}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{j,\alpha})$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width = 0.35 \textwidth]{rules2.eps}\hspace*{50mm}}
\caption{\small Feynman rules for propagators and vertices in twistor space.}
\label{fig-rules2}
\end{figure}
To compute an $n-$point correlation function using these Feynman rules we have to examine all diagrams with exactly $n$ vertices and an arbitrary number of propagators.
Since each vertex has at least two lines attached to it, the minimal number of propagators is $n$. Let us denote the total number of propagators as $n+p$ (with $p\ge 0$)
and examine the Grassmann degree of the corresponding diagram. Each propagator increases the Grassmann degree by four units whereas each vertex reduces
it by four units due to the integration $\int d^4 \theta_{i}^{-}$. Thus, the Grassmann degree of a diagram containing $n$ vertices and $n+p$ propagators is $4 \, p$.
This counting is in perfect agreement with the general form of the correlation function \re{G-mod4}. It also allows us to identify each term in the expansion \re{G-mod4}
with the contribution of a particular class of diagrams:
\begin{align}\label{rule}
G_{n;p} = \text{Sum of diagrams with $n$ vertices and $n+p$ propagators}
\end{align}
\subsection{Lowest component}
To illustrate the formalism, we apply the Feynman rules formulated in the previous subsection to compute the simplest $G_{n;0}$ component of the correlation
function \re{G-mod4}. According to \re{rule}, $G_{n;0}$ is given by the sum of diagrams with $n$ vertices and $n$ propagators. A distinctive feature
of such diagrams is that all vertices are bivalent. In what follows we shall only consider connected twistor
diagrams.~\footnote{The disconnected twistor diagrams describe contributions to the correlation function which reduce to products of correlators with lower number of points.}
A particular example of such a diagram is the graph in which vertices $i$ and $i+1$ are connected by a single line. All remaining diagrams can be obtained by permuting the labels of the vertices. According to the Feynman rules in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules}, the contribution of the $i$th vertex involves $-1/(\vev{\sigma_{i,i-1}\sigma_{i,i+1}}\vev{\sigma_{i,i+1}\sigma_{i,i-1}})=1/\vev{\sigma_{i,i-1}\sigma_{i,i+1}}^{2}$. We combine it with the propagators to obtain
\footnote{{Here we do not display the factor $(N^2-1)$ coming from the contraction of the $SU(N)$ colour indices since it is included in \re{planar}.} \label{foot}}
\begin{align}\label{G-MHV}
G_{n;0} = \prod_{i=1}^{n}\int d^4 \theta_{i}^{-} \int {d^2 \sigma_{i,i-1} d^2 \sigma_{i,i+1} \over \vev{\sigma_{i,i-1}\sigma_{i,i+1}}^2} \delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* + \sigma_{i,i-1}^{\beta} {\cal Z}_{i,\beta}+ \sigma_{i-1,i}^{\beta} {\cal Z}_{i-1,\beta}) + \text{($S_n-$perm)},
\end{align}
where ($S_n-$perm) denotes the additional terms needed to restore the Bose symmetry of the correlation function.
We recall that ${\cal Z}_{i,1}$ and ${\cal Z}_{i,2}$ denote two points on a line in supertwistor space. They have the general form \re{ZZ} and \re{line} with the local
coordinates $\lambda_{1,\beta}$ and $\lambda_{2,\beta}$, respectively. The correlation function \re{G-MHV} should not depend on the choice of these coordinates.
Indeed, the change of the local coordinates corresponds to the $GL(2)$ rotation $\lambda_{\gamma,\beta}\to g_\gamma{}^\delta \lambda_{\gamma,\beta}$, or
equivalently ${\cal Z}_{i,\beta}\to g_\gamma{}^\delta{\cal Z}_{i,\delta}$. This variation can be compensated in \re{G-MHV} by the change of the integration variable
$\sigma_{ik}^\beta \to (g^{-1})^\beta{}_\delta \sigma_{ik}^\delta$. We can make use of this symmetry to choose ${\cal Z}_{i,\beta}$ in the following form
\begin{align}\label{Z-gauge}
{\cal Z}_{i,\beta} = (Z_{i,\beta}^{\,I},\ \theta^{\,A}_{i,\beta})\,,\qquad\qquad Z_{i,\beta}^{\,I}=(\epsilon_{\alpha\beta},\ i x_{i,\beta} ^{\,\dot\alpha})\,,
\end{align}
with $I=(\alpha,\dot\alpha)$.
It is also convenient to parameterise the axial gauge supertwistor as
\begin{align}\label{Z*}
{\cal Z}_{* } = (Z_{* }^{\,I},\ \theta^{\,A}_{*}) \,.
\end{align}
We substitute \re{Z-gauge} into \re{G-MHV} and perform the integration over $\theta_{i}^{-}$ to obtain (see Eq.~\re{dd} below)
\begin{align}
G_{n;0} = \prod_{i=1}^{n}\,y_{i,i+1}^2 \int {d^2 \sigma_{i,i-1} d^2 \sigma_{i,i+1} } \delta^{4 }( Z_* + \sigma_{i,i-1}^{\beta} Z_{i,\beta}+ \sigma_{i-1,i}^{\beta} Z_{i-1,\beta}) + \text{($S_n-$perm)}\,.
\end{align}
Here $ y_{i,i+1} = y_i - y_{i+1}$ with $y_i$ being the local coordinates on the harmonic coset introduced in \p{u-y}. We notice that the total number of delta functions in this integral matches the number of integration variables. Therefore, the integral is localised at the values of the $\sigma-$parameters
satisfying $Z_* + \sigma_{i,i-1}^{\beta} Z_{i,\beta}+ \sigma_{i-1,i}^{\beta} Z_{i-1,\beta}=0$. Equivalently
\begin{align}\notag\label{si}
& \sigma_{i,i-1}^{\alpha} = \epsilon^{\alpha\beta} { \vev{Z_{i,\beta} Z_* Z_{i-1,1}Z_{i-1,2} } \over \vev{Z_{i-1,1}Z_{i-1,2}Z_{i,1}Z_{i,2}} }\,,
\\
& \sigma_{i-1,i}^{\alpha} = \epsilon^{\alpha\beta} { \vev{Z_{i-1,\beta} Z_* Z_{i,1}Z_{i,2} } \over \vev{Z_{i-1,1}Z_{i-1,2}Z_{i,1}Z_{i,2}} }\,,
\end{align}
where we used the notation $\vev{Z_1 Z_2 Z_3 Z_4} =\epsilon_{IJKL} Z_1^I Z_2^J Z_3^K Z_4^L$.
In this way, we finally obtain
\begin{align}\label{Gn0}
G_{n;0} = \prod_{i=1}^{n}\,{y_{i,i+1}^2\over x_{i,i+1}^2}+ \text{($S_n-$perm)}\,.
\end{align}
Notice that the dependence on the reference supertwistor ${\cal Z}_*$ disappeared in $G_{n;0}$ as it should for a gauge invariant quantity.
The result \re{Gn0} perfectly meets our expectations. In the conventional approach, $G_{n;0}$ coincides with the correlation function of $n$ operators
$\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[\phi^{++}\phi^{++}]$, the lowest component of the stress-tensor multiplet \re{T-dec}. Then, to lowest order in the coupling constant, $G_{n;0}$ is
given by a product of $n$ free scalar propagators $\vev{\phi^{++}(i)\phi^{++}(j)} = y_{ij}^2/x_{ij}^2$, properly symmetrised to respect Bose symmetry.
\subsection{Twistor Feynman rules for higher components}
\label{sec:twist-feynm-rules}
To compute higher components of the correlation function $G_{n;p}$ we have to examine all diagrams containing $n$ vertices and $n+p$ propagators.
We can apply the Feynman rules formulated in the previous sections to write down their contribution as a productsof $n+p$ graded
delta functions of the form $\delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* + \sigma_{ij}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{i,\alpha}+ \sigma_{ji}^{\alpha} {\cal Z}_{j,\alpha})$. However, this approach
is not very efficient in that it involves integrating a function of Grassmann degree $4(n+p)$
over $4n$ odd variables $\int d^4 \theta_{i}^{-}$ to arrive at the function $G_{n;p}$ of Grassmann degree $4p$. So, in this subsection we instead perform the explicit integration over the variables $\theta_{i}^{-}$ at the
level of the twistor Feynman rules and thus derive a simpler set of rules.
To begin with, we split each propagator up into a product of bosonic and fermionic delta functions,
\begin{align}\label{eq:1}
\delta^{4 }( Z_* + \sigma_{ij}^{\alpha} Z_{i,\alpha}+ \sigma_{ji}^{\alpha} Z_{j,\alpha}) \delta^4(\theta_*+\sigma_{ij}^\alpha\theta_{i,\alpha} + \sigma_{ji}^\alpha\theta_{j,\alpha})\,.
\end{align}
To integrate over $\theta_{i}^{-}$, we employ the harmonics $u_i$ to decompose the variables $\theta_{i}$ into two halves \re{halves} (see Appendix~\ref{app:conv}),
\begin{align}
\theta^A_{i} = \theta_{i}^{+a} \bar u_{i,+a}^A+\theta_{i}^{-a'}\bar u_{i,-a'}^A\,.
\end{align}
Then, multiplying the argument of the fermionic delta function by the $4\times 2$ matrices $u_{i,A}^{+a}$ and $u_{j,A}^{+a}$ we find after some
algebra
\begin{align}\label{dd}
\delta^4(\theta_*+\vev{\sigma_{ij}\theta_{i}} + \vev{\sigma_{ji} \theta_{j}}) = y_{ij}^2\,\delta^2 \left(\vev{\sigma_{ij}\theta_i^-} + A_{ij}\right) \delta^2 \left(\vev{\sigma_{ji}\theta_j^-} + A_{ji}\right)\,,
\end{align}
with $y_{ij}^2=\frac14 \epsilon^{ABCD} u_{i,A}^{+a}\epsilon_{ab}u_{i,B}^{+b} u_{j,C}^{+c}\epsilon_{cd}u_{j,D}^{+d}$.
Here the functions
\begin{align}\label{A-mat}
A_{ij}^{a'} = \left[\vev{\sigma_{ji}\theta_j^{+b}} +\vev{\sigma_{ij}\theta_i^{+c}}(U_{ij})_{+c}^{+b}+\theta_*^A u_{j,A}^{+b}\right] (U_{ij}^{-1})_{+b}^{-a'}
\end{align}
depend only on $\theta^+_i$ and $\theta^+_j$, and the matrices $U_{ij}$ are defined as
\begin{align}
(U_{ij})_{+c}^{+b} = \bar u_{i,+c} ^A u_{j,A}^{+b}\,,\qquad\qquad (U_{ij})_{-a'}^{+b} = \bar u_{i,-a'} ^A u_{j,A}^{+b}
\,.
\end{align}
The function $A_{ji}^{a'}$ can be obtained from $A_{ij}^{a'}$ by exchanging the indices $i\leftrightarrow j$.
It is often convenient to use a parameterisation of the harmonic variables $u_i$ in terms of the local coordinates $y_i$ on the harmonic coset defined in \re{u-y}. In this case, $(U_{ij})_{+c}^{+b}=\delta_c^b$ and $ (U_{ij})_{-a'}^{+b}=(y_{ij})_{a'}^{b}$, so that the
expression \re{A-mat} significantly simplifies,
\begin{align}\label{A-y}
A_{ij}^{a'} = \left[\vev{\sigma_{ji}\theta_j^{+b}} +\vev{\sigma_{ij}\theta_i^{+b}} +\theta_*^A u_{j,A}^{+b}\right] (y_{ij}^{-1})_{b}^{a'}\,.
\end{align}
Notice that the dependence on $\theta^-_i$ and $\theta^-_j$ on the right-hand side of \re{dd} resides in the first and second
delta functions, respectively. This suggests associating the first delta function with the vertex $i$ and the
second one with the vertex $j$. Then, if the vertex $i$ has $k$ propagators attached to it, we take into account the additional $\sigma-$dependent factor
coming from the Feynman rules in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules2} to arrive at the integral
\begin{align}\label{22}
R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)=-\int d^4{\theta^-_i} { \delta^2(\vev{\sigma_{ij_1} \theta^-_i}
+ A_{ij_1})\delta^2(\vev{\sigma_{ij_2}\theta^-_i} +A_{ij_2})
\dots \delta^2(\vev{\sigma_{ij_k} \theta^-_i} +A_{ij_k}) \over \vev{\sigma_{i j_1} \sigma_{i j_2}} \,\vev{\sigma_{i j_2} \sigma_{i j_3}}\,\dots \,\vev{\sigma_{i j_k} \sigma_{i j_1}} }\ .
\end{align}
Here the index $i$ labels the vertex and the indices $j_1,\dots,j_k$ enumerate the outgoing lines. By construction, this integral has Grassmann degree $(2k-4)$.
As we shall see in the next section, the quantity $R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)$ plays a crucial
role in our analysis.
Relation \re{22} depends on the parameters $\sigma_{ij}^\alpha$ and $\sigma_{ji}^\alpha$. Their values can be determined using
the bosonic part of the propagator \re{eq:1}. Namely, solving the equation $Z_*^I + \vev{\sigma_{ij} Z_i^I}+ \vev{\sigma_{ji} Z_j^I} =0$ we obtain
\begin{align}\label{sigma}
\sigma_{ij}^\alpha = \epsilon^{\alpha\beta}{\vev{Z_{i,\beta} Z_*Z_{j,1} Z_{j,2}} \over \vev{Z_{i,1} Z_{i,2} Z_{j,1} Z_{j,2}}} \,,\qquad\qquad
\sigma_{ji}^\alpha = \epsilon^{\alpha\beta}{\vev{Z_{j,\beta} Z_*Z_{i,1} Z_{i,2}} \over \vev{Z_{i,1} Z_{i,2} Z_{j,1} Z_{j,2}}} \,,
\end{align}
c.f. \re{si}.
Finally, for each propagator \re{eq:1} the bosonic delta function allows us to do the $\sigma-$integration yielding
\begin{align}\label{eq:22}
y_{ij}^2 \int d^2\sigma_{ij} d^2\sigma_{ji} \, \delta^{4|0} (Z^*+\sigma_{ij} Z_{i}^{}+\sigma_{ji} Z_{j}^{})
= {y_{ij}^2\over \vev{Z_{i,1} Z_{i,2} Z_{j,1} Z_{j,2}}}= {y_{ij}^2 \over x_{ij}^2}\ ,
\end{align}
where the additional factor of $y_{ij}^2$ comes from \re{dd}.
In summary, we arrive at the following twistor Feynman rules shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules3}:
\begin{itemize}
\item A line connecting vertices $i$ and $j$ is associated with the propagator $d_{ij}=y_{ij}^2 / x_{ij}^2$;
\item Bivalent vertices are associated with $R(i;j_1 j_2)\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_2}}]=R(i;j_1 j_2)\delta^{a_{j_1}a_{j_2}}$;
\item Higher valency vertices are associated with
$ R(i;j_1\dots j_{k})\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}}\dots T^{a_{j_k}}]$ evaluated for the $\sigma-$parameters given by \re{sigma}.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\psfrag{Z1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{i,1}$} \psfrag{Z2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{i,2}$}
\psfrag{Z3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{j,1}$} \psfrag{Z4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle Z_{j,2}$}
\psfrag{i}[cc][cc]{$i$} \psfrag{j}[cc][cc]{$j$} \psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$3$} \psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$4$} \psfrag{n}[cc][cc]{$n$}
\psfrag{j1}[cc][cc]{$j_1$} \psfrag{j2}[cc][cc]{$j_2$} \psfrag{j3}[cc][cc]{$j_3$} \psfrag{j4}[cc][cc]{$j_k$}
\psfrag{vertex}{$\displaystyle \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_2}}\cdots T^{a_{j_k}}] R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)$ }\psfrag{dots}[cc][cc]{$\dots$}
\psfrag{propagator}{$\displaystyle \delta^{a_{i}a_{j}} d_{ij} = \delta^{a_{i}a_{j}} {y_{ij}^2\over x_{ij}^2}$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width = 0.35 \textwidth]{rules2.eps}\hspace*{50mm}}
\caption{\small Feynman rules for propagators and vertices in analytic superspace.}
\label{fig-rules3}
\end{figure}
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Properties of the $R-$vertices}
Let us summarise the properties of $R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)$. In twistor diagrams, this function is accompanied by the colour factor
$\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}}\dots T^{a_{j_k}}]$ with the same ordering of external lines.
As follows from the representation \re{22}, $R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)$ is invariant under a cyclic shift of the $j-$indices and changes sign under a `mirror' exchange of the indices, $j_\ell\to j_{k-\ell+1}$,
\begin{align}\label{sym}
R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_{k-1} j_k) = R(i;j_2j_3\dots j_{k}j_1) = (-1)^k R(i;j_{k}j_{k-1}\dots j_2 j_1) \,.
\end{align}
For $k=3$ external lines, this relation implies that $R(i;j_1j_2 j_3)$ is completely antisymmetric under the exchange of external legs,
\begin{align}\label{anti}
R(i;j_1j_2 j_3) = -R(i;j_1j_3 j_2) = - R(i;j_3j_2 j_1) = R(i;j_2 j_3,j_1)\,.
\end{align}
In the special case $j_2=j_3$, corresponding to a graph in which the two external legs are attached to the same vertex, this relation implies
\begin{align}\label{R3=0}
R(i;j_1j_2 j_2) =0\,.
\end{align}
Let us examine the explicit expression for $ R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)$ for the lowest values of $k$.
For a bivalent vertex, $k=2$, the integration in \re{22} yields
\begin{align}\label{R-2pt}
R(i;j_1j_2)=1\,.
\end{align}
For a valency three vertex, $k=3$, we can make use of the Schouten identity
\begin{align}
\label{eq:6}
\sigma_{ij_1}^\alpha \langle \sigma_{ij_2} \sigma_{ik}\rangle +
\sigma_{ij_2}^\alpha\langle \sigma_{ik} \sigma_{ij_1}\rangle+
\sigma_{ik}^\alpha\langle \sigma_{ij_1} \sigma_{ij_2}\rangle = 0 \
\end{align}
to rewrite the argument of one of the three delta functions on the support of the other two
in such a way that it becomes $\theta^-_i$ independent. In this way, we obtain
\begin{align}\label{eq:10}
R(i;j_1j_2j_3)= -{\delta^2\Big(\langle\sigma_{ij_1}\sigma_{ij_2}\rangle
A_{ij_3}+\langle\sigma_{ij_2}\sigma_{ij_3}\rangle
A_{ij_1}+\langle\sigma_{ij_3}\sigma_{ij_1}\rangle A_{ij_2}\Big) \over \vev{\sigma_{i j_1} \sigma_{i j_2}} \,\vev{\sigma_{i j_2} \sigma_{i j_3}}\,\vev{\sigma_{i j_3} \sigma_{i j_1}}}\ .
\end{align}
For vertices of higher valency, we can recursively apply the same trick, reducing a $k-$valent vertex to a product of $3-$ and $(k-1)-$valent vertices.
Specifically, we rewrite the last delta function on the right-hand side of \re{22} as a combination of the first and the $(k-1)$st to get
\begin{align}\label{eq:28}
R(i;j_1j_2 \dots j_k)=R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_{k-1})\, R(i;j_1j_{k-1}j_k)\ .
\end{align}
Continuing recursively we can express the $k-$valent vertex as a product of $(k-2)$ copies of $3-$valent vertices
\begin{align}\label{eq:11}
R(i;j_1j_2 \dots j_k)=R(i;j_1j_2j_3)\, R(i;j_1j_3j_4)\,\dots\,R(i;j_1j_{k-1}j_k)\ .
\end{align}
Note that the index $j_1$ plays a special role here as it appears in every factor on the right-hand side. We can obtain another equivalent representation for
$R(i;j_1j_2 \dots j_k)$ by making use of the symmetry properties \re{sym}. Combining \re{eq:11} with \re{R3=0} we find that the $R-$vertex vanishes if two indices
of external lines coincide
\begin{align}\label{more}
R(i;j_1j_1j_3 \dots j_k)= R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_1 \dots j_k)=0\,.
\end{align}
In terms of twistor diagrams this relation implies that diagrams with (at least) two propagators stretched between any two twistor lines do not contribute
to the correlation function.
We observe that the denominator in \re{22} has the same form as in the Parke-Taylor MHV amplitude upon identifying the variables $\sigma_{ij}$ with the holomorphic
variables $\lambda_j$ that define the on-shell momenta of the particles. As a consequence, we can use the properties of the MHV amplitude to obtain non-trivial relations for
$R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)$. In particular, the $U(1)$ decoupling relation for MHV amplitudes \cite{Dixon:1996wi} translates into
\begin{align}\label{U(1)}
R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_{k-1} j_k) + R(i;j_1j_3\dots j_{k}j_2) +\dots + R(i;j_1j_k\dots j_{k-2}j_{k-1}) =0\,,
\end{align}
where the sum runs over cyclic permutations of the indices $j_2,\dots,j_{k-1},j_k$. This relation can be verified using the Schouten identity \re{eq:6}.
The $R-$vertices satisfy another set of non-trivial relations. In the simplest case of three-point vertices it takes the form
\begin{align}\label{3pt-new}
R(i;j_1j_2j_3) = R(i;j_4j_2 j_3) + R(i; j_1 j_4j_3) + R(i;j_1 j_2 j_4) \,,
\end{align}
with $j_1,\dots,j_4$ being arbitrary. The proof of this relation can be found in Appendix~\ref{App:R}. We can then use \re{3pt-new} and
\re{eq:11} together to obtain an analogous relation for four points
\begin{align}\notag\label{4pt-cyc}
R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_4) {}& =R(i;j_5j_2j_3j_4) +R(i;j_1j_5j_3j_4) + R(i;j_1j_2j_5j_4) +R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_5)
\\[2mm]
{}& + R(i;j_5j_1j_2) R(i;j_5j_3j_4) + R(i;j_5j_2j_3) R(i;j_5j_4j_1)\,.
\end{align}
It is straightforward to generalise it to an arbitrary number of points
\begin{align}\label{npt-cyc}
R(i;j_1j_2\dots j_k)= R(i;j_{k+1}j_2\dots j_k)+\frac12\sum_{p=2}^{k-2} R(i;j_{k+1}j_1\dots j_p)R(i;j_{k+1}j_{p+1}\dots j_k) +\text{cyclic($j_1 j_2\dots j_k$)}\,,
\end{align}
where the expression on the right-hand side is symmetrised with respect to cyclic permutations
of the indices $j_1,j_2,\dots,j_k$.
\section{Next-to-lowest component}
As we have shown in the previous section, the lowest component of the correlation function \re{G-mod4} reduces to a product
of free scalar propagators \re{Gn0}. In this section, we shall compute the first component $G_{n;1}$ of \re{G-mod4} with non-trivial
dependence on the Grassmann variables. We recall that $G_{n;1}$ is a homogenous function of $\theta_i^+$ (with $i=1,\dots,n$) of
degree four.
In the conventional approach, to obtain $G_{n;1}$ we have to replace the superfields $\mathcal T(i)$ in \re{Gn} by their expansion \re{T-dec} in powers
of $\theta^+_i$ and to single out the contribution involving products of four Grassmann variables. In this way, $G_{n;1}$ is given by a
sum of $n-$point correlation functions involving various components of the stress-tensor supermultiplet. Each of these component correlation functions has conformal symmetry, but ${\cal N}=4$ supersymmetry is not manifest. The main advantage of the twistor
space approach is to offer an efficient way of finding $G_{n;1}$ without the need of computing individual component correlation functions; ${\cal N}=4$ supersymmetry is manifest.\footnote{We recall that the price to pay for this is the presence of the reference twistor ${\cal Z}_*$, in addition to the external data. The important point however is that ${\cal Z}_*$ drops out from the final expressions, due to gauge invariance.}
According to \re{rule}, the correlation function $G_{n;1}$ is given by the sum of all twistor diagrams containing $n$ vertices and $(n+1)$ edges.
Since each vertex is at least $2-$valent, such diagrams may have either two $3-$valent vertices, or a single $4-$valent
vertex with the remaining vertices being $2-$valent. Thus, we distinguish different topologies of
twistor diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}. The last three diagrams correspond to different embeddings of the colour-ordered quartic vertex.
\medskip
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\psfrag{i}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle i$}
\psfrag{j}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j$}
\psfrag{a}[cc][cc]{(a)} \psfrag{b}[cc][cc]{(b)} \psfrag{c}[cc][cc]{(c)} \psfrag{d}[cc][cc]{(d)} \psfrag{e}[cc][cc]{(e)}
\psfrag{j1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_1$} \psfrag{j2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_2$} \psfrag{j3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_3$} \psfrag{j4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_4$}
\psfrag{k1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle k_1$} \psfrag{k2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle k_2$}
\psfrag{l1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle l_1$} \psfrag{l2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle l_2$}
\psfrag{m1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle m_1$} \psfrag{m2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle m_2$}
\psfrag{dots}[cc][cc]{$\vdots$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{topologies1.eps}}
\caption{\small Topologies of twistor diagrams that contribute to $G_{n;1}$.}
\label{fig-topos}
\end{figure}
Let us first consider the contribution of the diagram shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(a). It involves two chains of propagators
attached to two cubic vertices with indices $i$ and $j_3$. Applying the Feynman rules, we find that the contribution
of this diagram to the correlation function vanishes
\begin{align}\label{Ga}
G_{n;1}^\text{(a)} \sim \delta^{a_{j_1}a_{j_2}}\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_2}}T^{a_{j_3}}] R(i;j_1j_2j_3) = 0 \,,
\end{align}
where $\delta^{a_{j_1}a_{j_2}}$ comes from the product of propagators connecting $2-$valent vertices $j_1$ and $j_2$.
Here we took into account that $ T^{a} T^{a}=C_F=(N^2-1)/N$ is the quadratic Casimir of the gauge group $SU(N)$
and, as a consequence, the colour trace in the above relation vanishes, $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits T^{a_{j_3}} =0$.
The diagram shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(b) contains three chains of propagators attached to two vertices with indices $i$
and $j$. Explicitly, its contribution is
\begin{align}\notag
{\rm Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(b)}={}& R(i; k_1l_1m_1) \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{k_1}} T^{a_{l_1}}T^{a_{m_1}}]
\times
R(j; k_2 l_2 m_2) \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{k_2}} T^{a_{l_2}}T^{a_{m_2}}]
\\
\times
& \delta^{a_{k_1}a_{k_2}}
\left( {y_{ik_1}^2 \over x_{ik_1}^2} \dots {y_{k_2j}^2 \over x_{k_2j}^2} \right)
\times
\delta^{a_{l_1}a_{l_2}}\left( {y_{il_1}^2 \over x_{il_1}^2} \dots {y_{l_2j}^2 \over x_{l_2j}^2} \right)
\times
\delta^{a_{m_1}a_{m_2}}\left( {y_{im_1}^2 \over x_{im_1}^2} \dots {y_{m_2j}^2 \over x_{m_2j}^2} \right) \,,
\end{align}
where the dots stand for the product of the remaining propagators constituting the three chains.
As opposed to the previous case, the colour factor of this diagram is different from zero. In the correlation function, the above expression should be symmetrised with respect to the indices of all vertices in order to respect the Bose symmetry. In particular, since the cubic vertex is antisymmetric under the exchange of external legs,
$R(i; k_1l_1m_1)= - R(i; l_1k_1m_1)$, its colour factor $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[T^{a_{k_1}} T^{a_{l_1}}T^{a_{m_1}}]$ should also have the same property for the contribution of the diagram to be Bose symmetric. This allows us to replace $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits(T^{a_{k_1}} T^{a_{l_1}}T^{a_{m_1}}) \to
\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits([T^{a_{k_1}} ,T^{a_{l_1}}]T^{a_{m_1}})$ yielding
\begin{align}
\delta^{a_{k_1}a_{k_2}}\delta^{a_{l_1}a_{l_2}}\delta^{a_{m_1}a_{m_2}}\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\left([T^{a_{k_1}}, T^{a_{l_1}}]T^{a_{m_1}}\right)\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\left([T^{a_{k_2}}, T^{a_{l_2}}]T^{a_{m_2}}\right) = -2(N^2 -1) N\,,
\end{align}
where we used $ [T^a, T^b] = i \sqrt{2} f^{abc} T^c$ with $f^{abc} f^{abc'} =N \delta^{cc'} $ for the gauge group $SU(N)$ and $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits(T^a T^b) = \delta^{ab}$. In this way, we find the contribution of the diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(b) (see footnote \ref{foot})
\begin{align}\label{Gb}
G_{n;1}^{\rm (b)}=- R(i; k_1l_1m_1)
R(j; k_2 l_2 m_2)
d_{ik_1\dots k_2 j}d_{il_1\dots l_2 j}d_{im_1\dots m_2 j} + \text{($S_n-$perm)}\,,
\end{align}
where the notation was introduced for the product of
scalar propagators
\begin{align}\label{D-fun}
d_{ik_1\dots k_2 j} = {y_{ik_1}^2 \over x_{ik_1}^2} \dots {y_{k_2j}^2 \over x_{k_2j}^2}\,.
\end{align}
The diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(c)--(e) contain two chains of propagators that are attached to the quartic vertex in three different ways. Their contribution to the correlation function is
\begin{align} \label{cde}
\text{Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(c+d+e)}= d_{ij_1\dots j_2 i} {}& d_{ij_4\dots j_3 i} \big[ C_{\rm c}\, R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_4)
+C_{\rm d}\, R(i;j_1j_3j_4j_2)
+C_{\rm e}\, R(i;j_1j_4j_2j_3) \big] \, .
\end{align}
The colour factors are
\begin{align}\notag\label{CC}
C_{\rm c} &= \delta^{a_{j_1}a_{j_2}}\delta^{a_{j_3}a_{j_4}} \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\lr{T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_2}}T^{a_{j_3}}T^{a_{j_4}}} =N C_F^2 \, ,
\\ \notag
C_{\rm d} &= \delta^{a_{j_1}a_{j_2}}\delta^{a_{j_3}a_{j_4}} \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\lr{T^{a_{j_2}} T^{a_{j_1}}T^{a_{j_3}}T^{a_{j_4}}} =N C_F^2 \, ,
\\
C_{\rm e} &= \delta^{a_{j_1}a_{j_2}}\delta^{a_{j_3}a_{j_4}} \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\lr{T^{a_{j_1}} T^{a_{j_4}}T^{a_{j_2}}T^{a_{j_3}}}
=N C_F(C_F-N) \, ,
\end{align}
where $C_F=(N^2-1)/N$ is the quadratic Casimir of $SU(N)$ in the fundamental representation.
Notice that $C_{\rm e}$ is suppressed at large $N$ by a factor of $1/N^2$, compared to $C_{\rm c}$ and $C_{\rm d}$. This reflects the fact that the former diagram is non-planar whereas the latter two are planar.
Substituting \re{CC} into \re{cde} we expect to encounter both planar and non-planar
contributions. It turns out that the non-planar diagram \ref{fig-topos}(e) cancels against the $1/N^2$ suppressed contributions of the diagrams in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(c)+(d) in such a way that their total sum remains planar in the large $N$ limit, in perfect agreement with \re{planar}. To show this, we apply the relation \re{U(1)} for $k=4$ to replace
$R(i;j_1j_4j_2j_3)=-R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_4) -R(i;j_1j_3j_4j_2) $ in \re{cde} leading to
\begin{align}\notag\label{planar1}
{}& C_{\rm c}\, R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_4)
+C_{\rm d}\, R(i;j_1j_3j_4j_2)
+C_{\rm e}\, R(i;j_1j_4j_2j_3)
\\[2mm]\notag
{}& \qquad =(C_{\rm c}-C_{\rm e})R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_4) + (C_{\rm d}-C_{\rm e})R(i;j_1j_3j_4j_2)
\\[2mm]
{}& \qquad = (N^2-1) N \big[ R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_4) + R(i;j_2j_1j_3j_4) \big]\,,
\end{align}
where in the last relation we made use of the identity $R(i;j_1j_3j_4j_2)=R(i;j_2j_1j_3j_4)$, Eq.~\re{sym}. Comparing with \re{CC} we
observe that all terms proportional to $C_F^2$ cancel out in the sum over all diagrams and the only terms that survive are those involving
the colour factor $C_F N$. This property is reminiscent of the so-called non-abelian exponentiation of Wilson loops~\cite{Gatheral:1983cz,Frenkel:1984pz}.
We combine \re{cde} and \re{planar1} to obtain the contribution of the diagrams Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(c),(d),(e) to the correlation function
(see footnote \ref{foot})
\begin{align}\label{Gc}
G_{n;1}^\text{(c)+(d)+(e)} = R(i;j_1j_2j_3j_4)\,d_{ij_1\dots j_2 i} {}& d_{ij_4\dots j_3 i}+ \text{($S_n-$perm)}\,.
\end{align}
This expression involves a quartic vertex which can be expressed in terms of cubic vertices using \re{eq:11}
\begin{align}\label{4vertex}
R(i;j_1j_2 j_3 j_4)=R(i;j_1j_2j_3)\, R(i;j_1j_3j_4) = R(i;j_2j_4j_1)\, R(i;j_2j_3j_4)\ .
\end{align}
Finally, we combine relations \re{Ga}, \re{Gb} and \re{Gc} to obtain the following representation for
the next-to-lowest component of the correlation function:
\begin{align}\notag\label{Gn1}
G_{n;1} = {}& - R(i; k_1l_1m_1)
R(j; k_2 l_2 m_2)
d_{ik_1\dots k_2 j}d_{il_1\dots l_2 j}d_{im_1\dots m_2 j}
\\
{}& + R(i;j_1j_2j_3)\, R(i;j_1j_3j_4)d_{ij_1\dots j_2 i} d_{ij_4\dots j_3 i} + \text{($S_n-$perm)} \,.
\end{align}
Here the indices $i,j,k,l,m$ label $n$ different points and the sum runs over their permutations.
The following comments are in order concerning the properties of \re{Gn1}.
A remarkable feature of \re{Gn1} is that the whole dependence on the Grassmann variables is encoded in the simple cubic $R-$vertex given by \re{eq:10}. According to its definition, Eqs.~\re{eq:10} and \re{A-y}, the function $R(i;j_1j_2j_3)$ is a homogenous polynomial in $\theta_i^+$ of degree $2$, so that $G_{n;1}$ has Grassmann degree $4$ as it should be.
Recall that the dependence of the correlation function \re{Gn1} on the super-coordinates of the operators
$(x_i,\theta_i^+)$ enters into $R(i;j_1j_2j_3)$ through the commuting spinors $\sigma_{ij}$ and the function $A_{ij}$
given by \re{sigma} and \re{A-y}, respectively. They depend in turn on the supertwistor coordinates
defined in \re{Z-gauge} as well as on the reference supertwistor $\mathcal Z_*$. Notice that each term
on the right-hand side of \re{Gn1} depends on $\mathcal Z_*$ but this dependence should cancel in the total
sum in order for $G_{n;1}$ to be gauge invariant. We demonstrate the independence of the correlation function
\re{Gn1} of the reference supertwistor $\mathcal Z_*$ in the next section.
For $n=4$ the relation \re{Gn1} takes the form
\begin{align}\notag\label{G4-exp}
G_{4;1} {}& = - \prod_{1\le i<j\le 4} d_{ij}
\left[ R(1;324) R(2;314)/d_{34}+ R(1;234) R(3;214)/d_{24}+ R(1;243) R(4;213)/d_{23} \right.
\\
{}& \ \ + R(2;134) R(3;124)/d_{14} + R(2;143) R(4;123)/d_{13} + R(3;142) R(4;132)/d_{12} \big],
\end{align}
with $d_{ij}=y_{ij}^2/x_{ij}^2$. However, $G_{4;1}$ should vanish due to ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal
symmetry (see Eq.~\re{G-mod4}). Therefore, the linear combination inside the square brackets in this relation should vanish. We demonstrate this in Sect.~\ref{sec:example-component-} by an explicit calculation.
\subsection{The light-like limit}
\label{sec:lightlike-limit}
As another test of \re{Gn1} we consider the limit of the correlation function $G_n$ in which the $n$ operators become sequentially light-like separated. In chiral superspace, this corresponds to $x_{i,i+1}^2\to 0$ and $\theta_{i,i+1}^{A,\alpha} (x_{i,i+1})_{\alpha\dot\alpha}\to 0$ for $i=1,\ldots,n$ and the periodic boundary condition $i+n\equiv i$ is assumed.
In this limit we expect the correlation function to be related to
the square of the $n-$particle superamplitude~\cite{Eden:2011yp,Adamo:2011dq,Eden:2011ku}
\begin{align}
G_n \stackrel{x_{i,i+1}^2 \to 0}{\sim} G_{n;0} \left(1 + R_n^{\rm NMHV} + \ldots + R_n^{\rm \overline{MHV}}\right)^2\,,
\end{align}
where $R_n^{\rm NMHV}$ is given by the ratio of the NMHV and MHV $n-$particle amplitudes and similarly for the other components. For $G_n$ computed in the Born approximation, the amplitudes can be replaced by their tree level expressions. In this way, we find for the next-to-lowest component
\begin{align}\label{G-R}
\lim_{x_{i,i+1}^2 \to 0} G_{n;1}/G_{n;0}= 2 R_n^{\rm NMHV} \,.
\end{align}
The NMHV ratio function $R_n^{\rm NMHV}$ is known to have an enhanced dual (super)conformal symmetry
\cite{Drummond:2008vq} and is given by a sum of five-point on-shell invariants (see Eq.~\re{sum-NMHV} below).
The duality relation \re{G-R} then suggests that the ratio of the correlation functions $G_{n;1}/G_{n;0}$
should also have an enhanced symmetry, at least in the light-like limit.
Let us first examine the asymptotic behaviour of the lowest component $G_{n;0}$ in the light-like limit.
It is easy to see from \re{Gn0} that, in the sum over all $S_n$ permutations, only one term provides the
leading singularity,
\begin{align} \label{Gn0-lim}
G_{n;0} \stackrel{x_{i,i+1}^2 \to 0}{\sim} \prod_{i=1}^{n}\,{y_{i,i+1}^2 \over x_{i,i+1}^2}
\equiv d_{12\dots n}\,,
\end{align}
where the $d-$function was introduced in \re{D-fun}.
For the next-to-lowest component $G_{n;1}$
the light-like limit can be imposed diagram by diagram.
Since each edge $(ij)$ connecting the vertices with the corresponding
labels comes with a factor $y^2_{ij}/x^2_{ij}$, we observe that only those graphs containing the edges
$(12), (23) ,\dots, (n1)$ provide the leading contribution in the light-like limit
$x_{i,i+1}^2\to 0$; all other graphs will be subleading. So in this limit only graphs containing a simply connected $n-$gon will survive. This $n-$gon clearly yields the same product of free scalar propagators
$y^2_{i,i+1}/x^2_{i,i+1}$ as the leading term in $G_{n;0}$, and therefore it provides a non-vanishing contribution to the ratio $G_{n;1}/G_{n;0}$ in the light-like limit.
Examining the diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}(b) -- (e) we notice that, since the total number of vertices in the diagrams equals $n$, graphs (c), (d) and (e) cannot contain a simply connected $n-$gon and are thus subleading in the light-like limit. For graph (b) to contain an $n-$gon, one of the chains connecting the cubic vertices $i$ and $j$ should not contain any vertices. In other words, the graphs that contribute to $G_{n;1}$ in the light-like limit have the form of an $n-$gon with one additional propagator stretched between vertices $i$ and $j$. Using \re{Gn1} their contribution is brought to the form
\begin{align} \label{Gn1-lim}
G_{n;1} \stackrel{x_{i,i+1}^2 \to 0}{\sim} d_{12\dots n} \sum_{i\neq j} R_{ij*} \,,
\end{align}
where $R_{ij*}$ is given by the product of two cubic vertices
\begin{align}\label{RR}
R_{ij*} = {y_{ij}^2\over x_{ij}^2} R(i; j-1\, j j+1)
R(j; i-1 \, i i+1)\,.
\end{align}
Here we explicitly indicated the dependence of $R_{ij*}$ on the reference supertwistor $\mathcal Z_*$.
Taking into account \re{Gn0-lim} and \re{Gn1-lim}, we find for the ratio of correlation functions in the light-like limit
\begin{align}\label{G-rat}
\lim_{x_{i,i+1}^2 \to 0} G_{n;1}/G_{n;0}= 2 \sum_{i<j} R_{ij*} \, .
\end{align}
To simplify the expression for $R_{ij*}$ it is convenient to return to the integral representation of $G_{n;1}$ based
on the Feynman rules in twistor space in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules2}. Then,
\begin{align} \label{Gn1-new}
R_{ij*} =
\int \frac{d^2 \sigma_{ij}d^2
\sigma_{ji} \,\vev{\sigma_{ii-1}\sigma_{ii+1}} \vev{\sigma_{jj-1}\sigma_{jj+1}}}{\vev{\sigma_{ii-1}\sigma_{ij}}\vev{\sigma_{ij} \sigma_{ii+1}} \vev{\sigma_{jj-1}\sigma_{ji}}\vev{\sigma_{ji} \sigma_{jj+1}}}
\delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* +
\sigma_{ij}^{\alpha}{\cal Z}_{i,\alpha} +
\sigma_{ji}^{\alpha}{\cal Z}_{j,\alpha}) \, .
\end{align}
To reproduce \re{RR} it suffices to split the delta function in this relation into bosonic and fermionic parts, Eq.~\re{eq:1},
and to apply relations \re{dd} and \re{eq:22}.
The parameters $\sigma_{ii-1}$ and $\sigma_{i-1 i}$ in \re{Gn1-new} are given
by the general expressions \re{si} which become singular in the light-like limit since $\vev{Z_{i-1,1}Z_{i-1,2}Z_{i,1}Z_{i,2}}=x_{i-1,i}^2 \to 0$.
Nevertheless, we can use the invariance of \re{Gn1-new} under rescalings of $\sigma$ to put
\begin{align}\label{spec}
& \sigma_{i,i-1}^{\beta} = \epsilon^{\beta\alpha} \vev{Z_* Z_{i-1,1}Z_{i-1,2} Z_{i,\alpha}} \,,
\qquad\qquad \sigma_{i,i+1}^{\beta} = \epsilon^{\beta\alpha} \vev{Z_* Z_{i+1,1}Z_{i+1,2} Z_{i,\alpha}} \,,
\end{align}
and similarly for $\sigma_{j,j-1}$ and $\sigma_{j,j+1}$.
We recall that in twistor space the light-like limit, $x_{ii+1}^2\rightarrow 0$ and $\theta_{i,i+1}^{A,\alpha}(x_{i,i+1})_{\alpha\dot\alpha}\to 0$, is equivalent to the intersection of the
corresponding twistor lines ${\cal Z}_{i\alpha}$ and ${\cal Z}_{i{+}1\,\alpha}$. The local $GL(2)$ invariance (corresponding to the reparameterisation freedom on each twistor line) allows us to choose this intersection to occur in the following convenient manner
\begin{align}
\label{eq:33}
{\cal Z}_{i,2}={\cal Z}_{i+1,1} \equiv {\cal Z}_i \,, \qquad\qquad (\text{$i=1\dots n$})\,,
\end{align}
where ${\cal Z}_i = (Z_i, \chi_i^A)$ with $Z_i=(\lambda_i^\alpha, x_i^{\dot\alpha\beta}\lambda_{i\beta})$ and
$\chi_i^A=\theta_i^{A,\beta}\lambda_{i\beta}$. Substituting the bosonic part of this relation into \re{spec} we find
\begin{align}
\label{eq:34}
\sigma_{i\, i{+}1}^{\a=1}= \sigma_{ i\,i-1}^{\a=2} =0\,, \qquad\qquad \sigma_{i\,
i{+}1}^{\a=2} =- \sigma_{i{+}1\,i}^{\a=1} \ .
\end{align}
Denoting $\sigma_{ij}^\alpha=(s_1,s_2)$ and $\sigma_{ji}^\alpha=(t_1,t_2)$ we finally obtain from \re{Gn1-new}
\begin{align}\notag
R_{ij*} {}& =\int {ds_1 ds_2 dt_1 dt_2\over s_1 s_2 t_1 t_2} \delta^{4|4}({\cal Z}_* +
s_1 {\cal Z}_{i-1} +s_2 {\cal Z}_i +t_1 {\cal Z}_{j-1} +t_2 {\cal Z}_j)
\\
{}& = {\delta^4(\chi_* \vev{i-1 i j-1 j}+ \chi_{i-1} \vev{ i j-1 j *} + \ldots + \chi_j \vev{* i-1 i j-1} ) \over \vev{i-1 i j-1 j}\vev{ i j-1 j *}
\vev{j -1 j * i-1} \vev{ j * i-1 i}\vev{* i-1 i j-1}}\,,
\end{align}
with $\vev{i-1 i j-1 j}\equiv \vev{Z_{i-1}Z_ iZ_{j-1} Z_j}$,
which is precisely the invariant defining the NMHV tree-level amplitude \cite{Drummond:2008vq,Mason:2009qx}
\begin{align}\label{sum-NMHV}
R_n^{\rm NMHV} = \sum_{i<j} R_{ij*} \,.
\end{align}
Comparing this relation with \re{G-rat} we observe perfect agreement with \re{G-R}. In addition, \re{RR}
yields the factorisation of the NMHV (on-shell) invariant $R_{ij*}$ into a product of two (off-shell) cubic vertices in the light-like limit.
\subsection{Independence of the reference twistor}
\label{sec:canc-spur-poles}
In the previous section we have shown that the correlation function $G_{n;1}$ can be built from the cubic vertices $R(i;j_1j_2 j_3)$. These
vertices depend on the four supertwistors corresponding to the external points $i,j_1,j_2,j_3$ as well as on the reference supertwistor $\mathcal Z_*$.
They are constructed using the Feynman rules in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules2} that have manifest $\mathcal N=4$ superconformal covariance as long as
we transform the reference twistor too. In this sense the symmetry of $R(i;j_1j_2 j_3)$ is actually broken by the presence of the fixed constant reference supertwistor. However,
the symmetry is restored in $G_{n;1}$ since it must not depend on the reference twistor (that is, on the gauge choice). In this section we confirm that this is indeed the case.
As follows from \re{eq:10}, the dependence of $R(i;j_1j_2 j_3)$ on the reference twistor enters through the parameters $\sigma_{ij}$ given by \re{sigma}.
Viewed as a function of $\mathcal Z_*$, the vertex $R(i;j_1j_2 j_3)$ has spurious poles located at
$ \vev{\sigma_{i j_1} \sigma_{i j_2}} \,\vev{\sigma_{i j_2} \sigma_{i j_3}}\,\vev{\sigma_{i j_3} \sigma_{i j_1}}=0$.
We shall argue that the absence of spurious poles is equivalent to the $\mathcal Z_*-$independence of $G_{n;1}$.
Let us show how the spurious poles cancel in the sum of all twistor diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos}.
More specifically, consider a particular spurious pole located at $\vev{\sigma_{12} \sigma_{13}}=0$.
\footnote{Of course we can choose any three points for the spurious pole condition.}
We can use \re{sigma} to verify the following
identity
\begin{align}\label{66}
\vev{\sigma_{12} \sigma_{13}} x_{12}^2x_{13}^2
=\vev{\sigma_{23} \sigma_{21}} x_{23}^2x_{21}^2 =\vev{\sigma_{31} \sigma_{32}}
x_{13}^2x_{23}^2 \equiv (123) \,,
\end{align}
where $(123)$ is totally antisymmetric under the exchange of any pair of points.
It implies that the same spurious pole corresponds to $\vev{\sigma_{12} \sigma_{13}}=\vev{\sigma_{23} \sigma_{21}}=\vev{\sigma_{31} \sigma_{32}} =0$,
or equivalently
\begin{align}\label{la}
(\sigma_{13})^\alpha=z_1 (\sigma_{12})^\alpha\,,\qquad
(\sigma_{21})^\alpha=z_2 (\sigma_{23})^\alpha\,,\qquad
(\sigma_{32})^\alpha=z_3 (\sigma_{31})^\alpha\,.
\end{align}
The complex parameters $z_i$ in this relation are not independent however. We take into account the identity (see Eq.~\re{Iden1} in Appendix~\ref{D} for its
derivation)
\begin{align}\label{iden1}
{(\sigma_{13}^\alpha \sigma_{21}^\beta)}+{
(\sigma_{12}^\alpha \sigma_{23}^\beta)}-{
(\sigma_{13}^\alpha \sigma_{23}^\beta)} = 0 \,,\qquad \text{for $(123)=0$}
\end{align}
and substitute \re{la} to get
\begin{align}
z_1 + 1/z_2 - z_1/z_2 = 0\,.
\end{align}
To obtain an analogous relation between $z_1$ and $z_3$ we permute the indices $2$ and $3$ on both sides of \re{iden1} and
take into account that $(132)=-(123)$. In this way, we obtain
\begin{align}
\label{eq:43}
z_2 = \frac{z_1-1}{z_1}\,, \qquad\qquad z_3 =
\frac1{1-z_1}\ .
\end{align}
Examining the expression for the cubic vertex \re{eq:10} for different values of the indices, we find that the spurious pole at $(123)=0$
appears in three different vertices,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:38}
R(1;23i),\qquad\qquad R(2;31j),\qquad\qquad R(3;12k),
\end{align}
where $i$, $j$ and $k$ are arbitrary points (different from $1,2,3$). We use \re{eq:10} and \re{la} to compute the residues at the spurious
pole
\begin{align}\notag\label{eq:44}
\lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) {y_{12}^2\over x_{12}^2}
{y_{13}^2\over x_{13}^2}R(1;23i) {}& = \frac1z_1 y_{12}^2 y_{13}^2 \delta^2(z_1 A_{12}
- A_{13}) \, ,
\\\notag
\lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) {y_{12}^2\over x_{12}^2}
{y_{23}^2\over x_{23}^2}R(2;31j) {}&= \frac1z_2 y_{12}^2 y_{23}^2 \delta^2(z_2 A_{23}
- A_{21})\, ,
\\
\lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) {y_{13}^2\over x_{13}^2}
{y_{23}^2\over x_{23}^2}R(3;12k) {}&= \frac1z_3 y_{13}^2 y_{23}^2 \delta^2(z_3 A_{31}
- A_{32})\, ,
\end{align}
where $A_{ij}$ are given by \re{A-y} and \re{A-mat}.
Let us show that the sum of the three residues \re{eq:44} vanishes. To simplify
the calculation, we make use of the superconformal symmetry of the $R-$vertex to fix the gauge
\begin{align}
\label{eq:39}
\theta^+_1=\theta^+_2=\theta^+_3=0\,, \qquad\qquad y_1=0,\ y_2=1,\ y_3\to\infty\ .
\end{align}
The generic values of these coordinates can be restored via a finite $\mathcal N=4$ superconformal transformation.
In this gauge, the $A_{ij}$ in \re{eq:44} simplify to $A_{ij}^{a'} = \theta_*^A u_{j,A}^{+b} (y_{ij}^{-1})_{b}^{a'}$.
Splitting $\theta_*^A = (\theta_*^a, \theta_*^{a'})$ and expressing
$ u^+_j$ in terms of the variables $y_j$ as described in \re{u-y}, we find
\begin{align} \notag
A_{12}&= \theta'_*-\theta_*\,, && A_{23} = -\theta_*\,, && A_{31} = -\theta'_* y_3^{-1}\,,
\\[2mm]
A_{13}&=-\theta_*\,, && A_{21} = -\theta'_*\,, && A_{32} = (\theta_*-\theta'_*)y_3^{-1}\,.
\end{align}
Substituting these relations into \re{eq:44} and taking into account \re{eq:43}, we find that the delta functions on the right-hand side of \re{eq:44} are proportional to
\begin{align}\label{r}
r_{123} = y_{3}^2
\delta^2\big(\Theta_* \big)\,,\qquad\qquad \Theta_*=(1-z_1) \theta_*+z_1 \theta'_* .
\end{align}
Next, we evaluate the sum of the residues of the three $R-$vertices at the spurious pole $(123)=0$
and find that it vanishes,
\begin{align}\notag\label{zero}
\lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123)\bigg[ {y_{12}^2\over x_{12}^2}
{y_{13}^2\over x_{13}^2}R(1;23i)+{y_{12}^2\over x_{12}^2}
{y_{23}^2\over x_{23}^2}R(2;31j)+{y_{13}^2\over x_{13}^2}
{y_{23}^2\over x_{23}^2}R(3;12k)\bigg]{}&
\\
= r_{123}\bigg[\frac1{z_1} - \frac1{z_1(1-z_1)} + \frac1{(1-z_1)}\bigg] {}& = 0\,.
\end{align}
Here the three terms in the second relation correspond to the three terms in the first line. Notice that the residues of the vertices \re{eq:38} at the spurious pole do not depend on the choice of the points $i$, $j$, $k$ and are proportional
to each other.
We can now apply \re{zero} to show the cancellation of spurious poles in the sum of the diagrams contributing
to the correlation function $G_{n}$. As we explained in Sect.~\ref{sec:twist-feynm-rules}, these diagrams involve vertices of
different valency. According to \re{eq:11}, they can all be expressed in terms of the cubic $R-$vertices. Examining
all possible vertices we find that the spurious pole at $(123)=0$ is only present in the vertices of the following types:
$R(1;23a.. b)$, $R(2;31c.. d)$ and $R(3;12e.. f)$ with indices $a,b,c,d,e,f$ labeling the other external points. Indeed,
we can use \re{eq:28} to obtain the following representation
\begin{align}\label{eq:50}
R(1;23a.. b)&=R(1;3a.. b)R(1;23b)=R(1;2a.. b)R(1;23a)\,, \notag\\
R(2;31c.. d)&=R(2;1c.. d)R(2;31d)=R(2;3c.. d)R(2;31c)\,, \notag\\
R(3;12e.. f)&=R(3;2e.. f)R(3;12f)=R(3;1e.. f)R(3;12e)\,,
\end{align}
where the cubic vertices are of the form \re{eq:38} and thus contain a spurious pole at $(123)=0$.
Let us consider the graphs shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}. They can be viewed as part of a bigger diagram in which points $a,b,c,d,e,f,\dots$
label other vertices. The first three graphs in Fig.~\ref{fig2} have the same number of propagators, hence their contribution
to the correlation function has the same Grassmann degree. A special feature of these graphs is that they involve vertices
of the form \re{eq:50} and thus have spurious poles. Moreover, these are the only diagrams that are singular for $(123)=0$.
There is however another graph (see Fig.~\ref{fig2}(d)) that contains the same singular vertices \re{eq:50}. We will show below
that its contribution remains finite for $(123)=0$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}
\psfrag{a}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle a$}\psfrag{b}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle b$}\psfrag{c}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle c$}
\psfrag{d}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle d$}\psfrag{e}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle e$}\psfrag{f}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle f$}
\psfrag{A}[cc][cc]{(a)}\psfrag{B}[cc][cc]{(b)}\psfrag{C}[cc][cc]{(c)}
\psfrag{D}[cc][cc]{(d)}
\centering
\includegraphics{spurious}
\caption{All subgraphs with a potential spurious pole at
$(123)=0$. The spurious pole is present in
graphs (a), (b) and (c) but cancels in their sum. The
graph (d) in fact has no spurious pole at
$(123)=0$. In the above
diagrams the number of legs coming out of each of the vertices
1,2,3 is arbitrary and we can even have just one leg coming out.
For example, we can have $a=b$ or $c=d$ etc. In the
graph (d) we can even have no additional legs from the vertices. }
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
The total contribution of the graphs shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2} (a)-(c) is
\footnote{Here we assume the planar limit.}
\begin{align}\label{eq:51}
& d_{12}d_{13} R(1;23a.. b) R(2;1c.. d) R(3;1e.. f)+ d_{12}d_{23} R(1;2a.. b) R(2;31c.. d) R(3;2e.. f)\notag \\
& + d_{13}d_{23} R(1;3a.. b) R(2;3c.. d) R(3;12e.. f)\,,
\end{align}
where $d_{ij}=y_{ij}^2/x_{ij}^2$ is a scalar propagator. We apply \re{eq:50} to rewrite the first term in the last relation as
\begin{align}\notag
R(1;23a.. b) R(2;1c.. d) R(3;1e.. f) {}&= R(1;2a.. b)R(1;23a)R(2;1c.. d) R(3;1e.. f)
\\[2mm]
{}& = R(1;2a.. b)R(1;23a)R(2;3c.. d) R(3;1e.. f) + \text{(reg.)}\,,
\end{align}
where `reg' denotes terms regular for $(123)=0$. Here in the second relation we took into account that the residues of $R(1;23a)$
and $R(2;31d)$ at $(123)=0$ are proportional to each other and are independent of the points $a$ and $d$ (see Eq.~\re{zero}), leading to
\begin{align}\notag
\lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) R(1;23a)R(2;1c.. d) {}&= \xi \lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) R(2;31d)R(2;1c.. d)
\\ \notag
{}&= \xi \lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) R(2;31c)R(2;3c.. d)
\\
{}&= \lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) R(1;23a)R(2;3c.. d),
\end{align}
where $\xi= (z_1-1) d_{23}/d_{13}$ and we applied \re{eq:50} in the second line.
The remaining terms in \re{eq:51} can be simplified likewise. In this way, we evaluate the residue of \re{eq:51} at $(123)=0$ and find that it is proportional to the same linear combination of cubic vertices as in \re{zero},
\begin{align}\notag \label{zero1}
\lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) {}&\times \text{Eq}.\re{eq:51} = R(1;2a..b)R(2;3c..d)R(3;1e..f)
\\
{}& \times \lim_{(123)\rightarrow 0} (123) \big[d_{12} d_{13} R(1;23a) +d_{12} d_{23} R(2;31c) +d_{13} d_{23} R(3;12e) \big] = 0\,.
\end{align}
We conclude that the spurious pole is indeed absent in the sum of all diagrams in
Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a)-(c).
Finally, there exists the possibility of having a subgraph of the type shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(d). Its contribution contains the
product of three vertices
\begin{align}
d_{12} d_{23} d_{13} R(1;23a..b) R(2;31c..d) R(3;12e..f)\,,
\end{align}
each of which having a spurious pole at $(123)=0$. Denoting $(123)=\epsilon$ we find for $\epsilon\to 0$
\begin{align}\label{3R}
R(1;23a..b)\sim R(1;23 a) \sim {1\over \epsilon} \delta^2\big(\Theta_* +\epsilon f_1
+ O(\epsilon^2) \big)\,.
\end{align}
Here in the first relation we applied \re{eq:50} and in the second relation made use of \re{eq:44} and \re{zero}.
As compared with \re{r}, we included in \re{3R} the subleading $O(\epsilon)$ correction parameterised
by some odd function $f_1$ whose explicit form will not be important for our purposes. For $\epsilon=0$, the
delta function on the right-hand side of \re{3R} coincides with $r_{123}$ defined in \re{r}. The two remaining $R-$vertices
in \re{zero1} also satisfy \re{3R} with $f_1$ replaced by some functions. Then, for the product of three $R-$vertices
we find for $\epsilon\to 0$
\begin{align}\notag
\text{Eq.\re{3R}} {}&\sim {1\over \epsilon^3} \delta^2\big(\Theta_* +\epsilon f_1) \big)\delta^2\big(\Theta_* +\epsilon f_2
\big)\delta^2\big(\Theta_* +\epsilon f_3\big)
\\
{} &={1\over \epsilon^3}\delta^2\big(\Theta_* +\epsilon f_1) \big)\delta^2\big(\epsilon (f_1-f_2)
\big)\delta^2\big(\epsilon (f_1-f_3)\big) \sim O(\epsilon)\,,
\end{align}
so that the contribution of the graph in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(d) vanishes for $(123)\to 0$.
Note that the above discussion is not sensitive to the number of legs attached to vertices $1,2$ and $3$
(see Fig.~\ref{fig2}). In particular, it also applies when there is only one additional line coming out of each vertex,
e.g. we could have $a=b$ and/or $c=d$ and/or $e=f$. In this case, $R(1;2a..b)$, $R(2;3c..d)$ and $R(3;1e..f)$ in
\re{zero1} describe bivalency vertices which equal 1 according to \re{R-2pt}.
\medskip
\begin{figure}[h!]
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}
\centering
\includegraphics{example}
\caption{Example of diagrams contributing to $G_{n;1}$ and having a spurious pole at $(123)=0$.
This pole cancels in the sum of three diagrams.}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
The mechanism of cancellation of spurious poles described in this subsection is rather general as it applies to
any component of the correlation function $G_n$. In application to the next-to-lowest component $G_{n;1}$
defined by the diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-topos} given by \re{Gn1}, we can restrict ourselves to the graphs in
Fig.~\ref{fig2} containing vertices of valency $2$, $3$ and $4$ only. As an example, we show in Fig.~\ref{fig:example}
the set of diagrams which contribute to $G_{n;1}$ and whose sum is free from spurious pole at $(123)=0$.
It is straightforward to extend the analysis of spurious poles to the higher components of $G_{n}$.
In this subsection we have demonstrated that the correlation function $G_n$ is free from spurious poles depending on the reference supertwistor $\mathcal Z_*$.
This property combined with the fact that $G_n$ is a rational homogeneous function of $\mathcal Z_*$ of degree $0$ implies that it is $\mathcal Z_*$ independent.
\subsection{Short-distance limit}
In the previous subsection we have shown that all spurious poles cancel in the correlation function $G_n$.
As a consequence, the only singularities that $G_n$ can have are those coming from short distances $x_i\to x_j$.
We shall refer to them as physical poles.
The short distance asymptotics of $G_n$ is controlled by the operator product expansion of the stress-tensor
multiplets $\mathcal T(1)\mathcal T(2)$. Each operator depends on the set of coordinates $(x_i,\theta_i^+,u_i(y_i))$
and the short distance Euclidean limit $1\to 2$ amounts to $x_1\to x_2$, $\theta_1^+\to \theta_2^+$ and $y_1\to y_2$.
In this limit we have
\begin{align}\label{OPE}
\mathcal T(1) \mathcal T(2) = {N^2-1\over 2} \lr{y_{12}^2\over x_{12}^2}^2 \mathcal I + 2\,{y_{12}^2\over x_{12}^2} {\mathcal T}(1) + \dots\,,
\end{align}
where the dots denote terms suppressed by powers of $x_{12}^2$ and $y_{12}^2$. The first term on the right-hand side
of \re{OPE} involves the identity operator and it describes the disconnected contribution to the correlation function
$G_n$ for $1\to 2$. Applying \re{OPE}, we find the leading asymptotic behaviour of the connected part of the correlation
function $G_n$ for $1\to 2$ to be
\begin{align}\label{lim}
G_{n}\stackrel{1\to 2}{\sim} 2 {y_{12}^2\over x_{12}^2} \,G_{n-1} \,.
\end{align}
Examining the twistor diagrams contributing to $G_n$, we find that the physical pole $y_{12}^2/x_{12}^2$ only comes from the
diagrams in which vertices $1$ and $2$ are connected by a propagator. Then, in order to verify \re{lim}
it is sufficient to show that in the short-distance
limit the product of two $R-$vertices at points $1$ and $2$ reduces to a single $R-$vertex.
\begin{figure}[th!]
\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{$2 d_{12}$}\psfrag{cyclic}[cc][cc]{cyclic}\psfrag{+}[cc][cc]{$+$}
\psfrag{to}[cc][cc]{$\stackrel{1\to 2}{\sim}$}
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}
\psfrag{a}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_1$} \psfrag{b}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_2$}\psfrag{c}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_3$} \psfrag{d}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle j_4$}
\centerline {\includegraphics[width = 0.75 \textwidth]{OPE.eps}}
\caption{\small The OPE relations for $3-$ and $4-$point vertices. The expressions on the left-hand side are symmetrised with respect to cyclic shifts of the labels of the external legs.}
\label{fig-OPE}
\end{figure}
For the lowest component $G_{n;0}$, the relation
\re{lim} follows immediately from \re{Gn0}. For the next-to-lowest component $G_{n;1}$, we have to examine different
contributions where the vertices $1$ and $2$ have valency $2$, $3$ and $4$. If both vertices have valency $2$, the contribution
of the corresponding graph to $G_{n;1}$ automatically verifies \re{lim}. When one of the vertices has valency $2$ and
the other has valency $3$, the corresponding contribution to $G_{n;1}$ reads (see Fig.~\ref{fig-OPE})
\begin{align}\label{OPE3}
d_{12}\big[ R(1;2j_1)R(2;1j_2 j_3) + R(1;2j_1 j_2)R(2;1j_3) + \text{cyclic($j_1 j_2 j_3$)} \big] \,,
\end{align}
where $d_{12}=y_{12}^2/x_{12}^2$. This expression is invariant under cyclic shifts of the indices of the external legs $j_1,j_2$ and $j_3$.
It can be simplified using \re{3pt-new} and \re{R-2pt},
\begin{align}
\text{Eq.~\re{OPE3}} = d_{12} \left[ R(1;j_1j_2j_3) + R(2;j_1j_2j_3)\right] \stackrel{1\to 2}{\sim} 2 d_{12} R(1;j_1j_2j_3) \,,
\end{align}
where in the last relation we took into account that the difference $R(1;j_1j_2j_3) - R(2;j_1j_2j_3)$ vanishes in the limit $1\to 2$.
Thus, in the short-distance limit the product of two vertices of valency $2$ and $3$ reduces to a single
valency $3$ vertex leading to \re{lim}.
Finally, we have to examine the product of two vertices of total valency $6$ (see the second line in Fig.~\ref{fig-OPE}). Their contribution to the correlation
function is given by the expression
\begin{align}\label{OPE4}
d_{12}\big[ R(1;2j_1)R(2;1j_2 j_3 j_4) + R(1;2 j_1 j_2 j_3)R(2;1j_4) + R(1;2j_1 j_2) R(2;1j_3 j_4)+\text{cyclic($j_1 j_2 j_3 j_4$)}\big],
\end{align}
which is symmetric under cyclic shifts of the external legs $j_1,\dots,j_4$. Using \re{22} it is straightforward to verify that
each term in the square brackets remains finite for $1\to 2$. Moreover, the resulting expression can be simplified
with the help of \re{4pt-cyc} (applied for $i=j_5=1$)
\begin{align}
\text{Eq.~\re{OPE4}} \stackrel{1\to 2}{\sim} 2 d_{12} R(1; j_1 j_2 j_3 j_4)\,,
\end{align}
in perfect agreement with \re{lim}.
The above relations can be extended to the product of vertices of an arbitrary total valency $k$. In this case,
\re{OPE3} and \re{OPE4} should be generalised to include the sum of products of vertices of valency $(p+1)$ and
$(k-p+1)$ with $p=1,\dots,k-1$. Then, in the short distance limit $1\to 2$, we can apply the identity \re{npt-cyc} for
$i=j_{k+1}=1$ to show that the sum collapses into $2 d_{12} R(1;j_1\dots j_k)$,
leading to \re{lim}.
To conclude, in this section we have demonstrated that the expressions for the correlation function $G_n$
obtained within the twistor space approach satisfy two consistency conditions: they are independent of
the reference supertwistor and have the correct asymptotic behaviour in the light-like and short distance limits.
In the following two sections, we shall compare these results with the analogous expressions for $G_n$ computed
using the conventional Feynman rules in Minkowski space and shall demonstrate
their perfect agreement.
\section{Correlation functions from Feynman diagrams}
In this section we outline the calculation of the correlation function $G_n$ in the conventional
Feynman diagram approach. More precisely, we shall concentrate on computing the next-to-lowest
component $G_{n;1}$ in the Born approximation. As was explained above, $G_{n;1}$ has
Grassmann degree $4$ and its perturbative expansion starts at order $O(g^2)$.
\subsection{Next-to-lowest component}
To evaluate $G_{n;1}$, we use the superfield expansion \re{T-dec} of the stress-tensor multiplet $\mathcal T$ in \re{Gn} and retain the contributions of Grassmann degree $4$. This yields a representation
for $G_{n;1}$ as a collection of correlation functions involving various components of $\mathcal T$. Each
correlation function has conformal symmetry but not the $\mathcal N=4$ supersymmetry. The latter
is realised in the form of Ward identities that these correlation functions satisfy.
The stress-tensor multiplet has the form \re{T-dec} with components given by the following gauge invariant composite operators \cite{Eden:2011yp}
\begin{align} \notag \label{t4c}
{}&O^{++++} = \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits(\phi^{++}\phi^{++}),
\\[1.5mm] \notag
{}&O^{+++,\alpha}_a =2\sqrt{2} i \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\big(
\psi^{+\alpha}_a \phi^{++}\big),
\\[1.5mm] \notag
{}&O^{++,\alpha\beta}= \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits \left(
\psi^{+c(\alpha}\psi_c^{+\beta)}-
i {\sqrt{2}} F^{\alpha\beta}\phi^{++}\right),
\\ \notag
{}&O^{++}_{ab}=- \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits \left(\psi^{+\gamma}_{(a}\psi^{+}_{b)\gamma}
- {g}{\sqrt{2}} [\phi_{(a}^{+C},\bar\phi_{+b,C)}]\phi^{++}\right),
\\ \notag
{}&O^{+,\alpha}_a=-\frac{4}3 \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits\left(F_\beta^\alpha \psi_a^{+\beta}
+ ig [\phi_a^{+B}, \phi_{BC}]\psi^{C\alpha}\right),
\\
{}& \mathcal L = \frac13\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits \left\{ -\frac12 F_{\alpha\beta}F^{\alpha\beta} + {\sqrt{2}} g \psi^{\alpha A} [\phi_{AB},\psi_\alpha^B] - \frac18 g^2 [\phi^{AB},\phi^{CD}][\phi_{AB},\phi_{CD}] \right\}\,,
\end{align}
where the shorthand notations were introduced for the scalar and gaugino fields projected with $SU(4)$ harmonic variables
\begin{align}\notag
{}&
\phi^{+\, B}_a =\epsilon_{ab} u^{+b}_A\phi^{A B}\,,&&
\bar\phi_{+b,A} = \bar{u}^{B}_{+b}\phi_{AB} \,, && \phi^{++} = - \frac{1}{2} u^{+a}_A \epsilon_{ab} u^{+b}_B \phi^{AB} \,,
\\
{}& \psi^{+\,\a}_a = \epsilon_{ab} u^{+b}_A \psi^{\a A}\,,&& \psi^{+\,a\a} = u^{+a}_A \psi^{\a A} \,.
\end{align}
Here $\phi^{AB} = \frac12 \epsilon^{ABCD}\phi_{CD}$,
and we adopt the conventions for the raising-lowering of indices summarised in Appendix~\ref{app:conv}. We also use weighted symmetrisation $A_{(\alpha\beta)} = \frac12(A_{\alpha \beta} + A_{\beta \alpha})$.
The correlation function $G_{n;1}$ depends on the analytic superspace Grassmann variables $\rho_i\equiv \theta_i^+$ with $i=1,\dots,n$.
It can be expanded over eight different nilpotent polynomials in $\rho_i$ of degree $4$, covariant under Lorentz and $R-$symmetry
transformations,
\begin{align} \notag \label{14}
G_{n;1}{}&=\sum_i \rho^{4}_i f(i) +
\sum_{i \neq j} \rho_{i\a}^{a} (\rho^{3}_j)_\b^{b} f^{\a\b}_{ab}(i,j) +
\sum_{i \neq j} (\rho^{2}_i)^{(\a \b)} (\rho^{2}_j)^{(\gamma \delta)} f_{(\a\b)(\gamma \delta)}(i,j)
\\ \notag
{}&+ \sum_{i \neq j} (\rho^{2}_i)^{(\a \b)} (\rho^{2}_j)^{(cd)} f_{(\a\b)(cd)}(i,j) +
\sum_{i \neq j} (\rho^{2}_i)^{(ab)} (\rho^{2}_j)^{(cd)} f_{(ab)(cd)}(i,j)
\\ \notag
{}&+\sum_{i \neq j \neq k} \rho_i^{\a a} \rho_j^{\b b} (\rho^{2}_k)^{(\gamma\delta)} f_{\a\b(\gamma\delta),ab}(i,j,k)
+ \sum_{i \neq j \neq k} \rho_i^{\a a} \rho_j^{\b b} (\rho^{2}_k)^{(cd)} f_{\a\b,ab(cd)}(i,j,k)
\\
{}&+\sum_{i \neq j \neq k \neq l} \rho_i^{\a a} \rho_j^{\b b} \rho_k^{\gamma c} \rho_l^{\delta d} f_{\a\b\gamma\delta,abcd}(i,j,k,l)\,,
\end{align}
where we introduced the notation for
\begin{align}\label{3.33}
(\rho^3){}_{\a}^{\, a} = \rho^{b}_\a \rho^{\b}_b \rho^{a}_\b\,, \qquad \rho^4 = \rho^{b}_\a \rho^{\b}_b \rho^{c}_\b \rho^{\a}_c\,,
\qquad
(\rho^2){}_{(\a \b)} = \rho_\alpha^{a}\epsilon_{ab}\rho_\beta^{b}\,, \qquad
(\rho^2){}^{(ab)} = \rho_\alpha^{a}\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\rho_\beta^{b}\,.
\end{align}
The functions $f$, $f_{\a\b,ab}$, $f_{(\a\b)(\gamma \delta)}$, $ f_{(\a\b)(cd)}$, $f_{(ab)(cd)}$,
$f_{\a\b(\gamma\delta),ab}$, $f_{\a\b,ab(cd)}$, $f_{\a\b\gamma\delta,abcd}$ are polynomials in the
variables $y_i$ and are rational functions in the variables $x_i$. They correspond to the
correlation functions of the operators \re{t4c}, e.g.
\begin{align}\notag\label{f-ex}
f(1) {}&= \vev{0| {\cal L}(1) O^{++++}(2) \dots O^{++++}(n)|0} \,,
\\[2mm]
f^{\a\b}_{ab}(1,2) {}& = \vev{0| O^{+++,\alpha}_a(1)O^{+,\beta}_b(2) O^{++++}(3) \dots O^{++++}(n) |0}\,.
\end{align}
In what follows we shall calculate the eight coefficient functions in \re{14} at order $O(g^2)$ by means of the standard ${\cal N}=4$ SYM Feynman rules.
\subsection{$T-$block approach}
We use the explicit component field form of the Lagrangian
of ${\cal N}=4$ SYM \footnote{The operator ${\cal L}$ in \re{t4c} coincides (up to a normalisation factor) with the chiral form of the ${\cal N}=4$ SYM {\it on-shell} Lagrangian.}
\begin{align}\notag
\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{N}=4}= \mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits \left\{ -\frac14 \left(F_{\alpha\beta}F^{\alpha\beta} + \bar{F}_{\dot\alpha\dot\beta}\bar{F}^{\dot\alpha\dot\beta}\right) +
\frac14 D_{\alpha\dot\alpha} \phi^{AB} D^{\dot\alpha\alpha} \phi_{AB} + \frac18 g^2 [\phi^{AB},\phi^{CD}][\phi_{AB},\phi_{CD}] + \right. \\
\left. + 2 i\bar{\psi}_{\dot\alpha A} D^{\dot\alpha\alpha} \psi^{A}_{\alpha} - {\sqrt{2}} g \psi^{\alpha A} [\phi_{AB},\psi_\alpha^B] +
{\sqrt{2}} g \bar{\psi}_{\dot\alpha A} [\phi^{AB},\bar{\psi}^{\dot\alpha}_B] \right\}\,, \label{fLa}
\end{align}
where all fields are in the adjoint representation of the gauge group $SU(N)$ , e.g. $\phi_{AB} = \phi_{AB}^a T^a$,
$F_{\alpha\beta}=F_{\alpha\beta}^a T^a$, $\psi^{\alpha A}=\psi^{\alpha A a} T^a$, with the generators $T^a$
being $N\times N$ traceless matrices normalised as $\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits( T^a T^b)= \delta^{ab}$.
We do the calculation in coordinate space. The scalar and gaugino propagators have the form
\begin{align}\notag
{} & \langle\phi^{++}(x_1,u_1)\;\phi^{++}(x_2,u_2) \rangle = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{y_{12}^2}{x_{12}^2}\,,
\\
{}& \langle\psi^{A}_{\a}(x_1)\;\bar{\psi}^{B}_{{\dot\alpha}}(x_2) \rangle = - \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \partial_{\a {\dot\alpha}}\frac{1}{x_{12}^2} \delta^{AB} \,,
\end{align}
with the $SU(N)$ indices suppressed. It is convenient to introduce the normalisation factor
\begin{align}
c_{n} = \frac{g^2 N(N^2-1)}{(2\pi)^{2n+2}}\,.
\end{align}
As we will see in a moment, it appears in the expression for the individual diagrams. The same normalisation factor enters \re{planar} for $p=1$.
To illustrate our approach, we first compute the coefficient function $f^{\a\b}_{ab}(1,2)$ for $n=4$ points. According to \re{f-ex},
it is given by the four-point correlation function involving two scalar operators $O^{+++}$ and the operators $O^{+++,\alpha}_a$ and $O^{+,\beta}_b$
defined in \re{t4c}. To lowest order in the coupling, $f^{\a\b}_{ab}(1,2)$ receives contribution from the following Feynman diagrams
(and their permutations $3 \rightleftarrows 4$)
$$\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}
\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\begin{array}{c}\includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag1a.eps} \\ (\Gamma_{4;1}) \end{array}
\begin{array}{c}\includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag2a.eps} \\ (\Gamma_{4;2}) \end{array}
\begin{array}{c} \vspace*{-2.5mm} \includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag4a.eps} \\ (\Gamma_{4;3}) \end{array}
\begin{array}{c} \vspace*{-2mm} \includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag3a.eps} \\ (\Gamma_{4;4}) \end{array}
$$
$$\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}
\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\begin{array}{c}\includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag5a.eps} \\ (\Gamma_{4;5}) \end{array}
\begin{array}{c} \vspace*{-2mm} \includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag7a.eps} \\ (\Gamma_{4;6}) \end{array}
\begin{array}{c}\vspace*{-2mm} \includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag6a.eps} \\ (\Gamma_{4;7}) \end{array}
$$
Here the diagrams in the first and the second lines correspond to the two terms in the expression \re{t4c} for the operator $O^{+,\beta}_b$
at point $2$.
The above diagrams involve interaction vertices. We can significantly simplify the calculations of the corresponding
Feynman integrals by defining two simple building blocks which are called bosonic and fermionic $T-$blocks.
The former represents the interaction of a gluon in the Feynman gauge with a pair of scalars,
\begin{align} \label{T1}\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}
\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\begin{array}{c}\includegraphics[width = 4 cm]{diag15.eps}\end{array} =
\langle \phi^{a,++}(1) \, F_{\alpha\beta}^{b}(3) \,\phi^{c,++}(2) \rangle
= \frac{2g}{(2\pi)^4} f^{abc} y_{12}^2 \frac{ (x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32})_{(\alpha\beta)} }{x_{12}^2 x^2_{13} x^2_{23}}\,,
\end{align}
and the latter stands for the Yukawa interaction of a scalar with a pair of chiral fermions,
\begin{align} \label{T2}\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}
\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\begin{array}{c}\includegraphics[width = 3.5 cm]{diag20a.eps}\end{array} =
\langle \psi^{a,A}_{\alpha}(1) \, \phi^{b,++}(3) \,\psi^{c,B}_{\beta}(2) \rangle
= -\frac{i \sqrt{2} g}{(2\pi)^4} f^{abc} (\bar{3}^{A}_{-a'} \epsilon^{a'b'} \bar{3}^{B}_{-b'}) \frac{ (x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32})_{\alpha\beta} }{x_{12}^2 x^2_{13} x^2_{23}}\,.
\end{align}
Here $f^{abc}$ are the $SU(N)$ structure constants and we use the shorthand notation $\bar{3}^{A}_{-a'}\equiv \bar u_{3,-a'}^A$.
We then observe that diagrams $(\Gamma_{4;3})$ and $(\Gamma_{4;4})$ involve a product of the two $T-$blocks supplemented by scalar propagators
$d_{ij}=y_{ij}^2/x_{ij}^2$, e.g.
\begin{align}
(\Gamma_{4;4}) \sim \langle \phi^{++}(3) F^{\beta\gamma}(2) \phi^{++}(4) \rangle \langle \psi^{A,\alpha}(1) \, \phi^{++}(3) \,\psi^{B}_{\gamma}(2) \rangle
u_{1,A}^{+a} u_{2,B}^{+b} \,d_{14}\,,
\end{align}
where we suppressed the $SU(N)$ indices.
Going through the calculation of $ (\Gamma_{4;4})$ we find
\begin{align} \label{G44}
(\Gamma_{4;4}) = -\frac43 c_4\,
y_{14}^2 y_{34}^2 (y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{32})^{ab}
\frac{(x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{24} \widetilde{x}_{23} - x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{23} \widetilde{x}_{24})^{\alpha\beta}}
{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 x_{23}^4 x_{24}^2 x_{34}^2}\,.
\end{align}
Note that this expression is gauge dependent and, as a consequence, it is not conformally covariant.
Conformal symmetry is restored in the sum of diagrams that is gauge invariant.
Similarly, diagrams $(\Gamma_{4;6})$ and $(\Gamma_{4;7})$ involve only a
single fermionic $T-$block \p{T2}, e.g.
\begin{align} \label{G47}
(\Gamma_{4;7}) = \frac43 c_4 \,
y_{14}^2 y_{34}^2 (y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{32})^{ab}
\frac{(x_{13} \widetilde{x}_{32} )^{\alpha\beta}}
{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 x_{23}^4 x_{24}^2}\,.
\end{align}
This expression is gauge invariant and, as a consequence, it is conformally covariant. It contains however
the factor of $1/x_{23}^4$ which should disappear in the sum of all Feynman diagrams in order to restore
the expected $1/x_{23}^2$ asymptotic behavior \re{lim} of the correlation function in the short-distance limit $2\to 3$.
The remaining diagrams $(\Gamma_{4;1})$, $(\Gamma_{4;2})$ and $(\Gamma_{4;5})$ cannot be reduced
to products of $T-$blocks. Moreover, they involve more complicated Feynman integrals that are potentially
ultraviolet divergent and, in addition, produce a contribution that is not a rational function of $x_{ij}^2$. We recall
however that the correlation function in the Born approximation should be a rational function of $x_{ij}^2$. This suggests that
the non-rational pieces from the above mentioned diagrams should disappear in the sum of all diagrams.
Indeed, there exists an efficient way to organise the calculation so that we do not actually need
to compute these complicated integrals. Instead of considering the `difficult' diagrams one by one, we shall combine
them into sums that are explicitly rational.
To identify such rational sums, we return to \re{G-mod4} and notice that, in virtue of ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal
symmetry, the correlation function for $n=4$ only involves the lowest component $G_{n;0}$ given by
\re{Gn0}. This means that $G_{4;1}=0$, so that all coefficient functions in \re{14} vanish for $n=4$.
In particular, $f^{\a\b}_{ab}(1,2)=0$ for $n=4$. In other words, the sum of all diagrams $\Gamma_{4;k}$ (with $k=1,\dots,7$), symmetrised with respect to the exchange of points $3\leftrightarrow 4$, should vanish.
Since the diagrams $(\Gamma_{4;k})$ have a harmonic structure $y_{13}^2 y_{34}^2 (y_{14} \widetilde{y}_{42})_{ab}$
that is not invariant under the exchange of points $3$ and $4$, this yields the condition
\begin{align}\label{sum-zero}
\sum_{k=1}^7 (\Gamma_{4;k}) = 0\,.
\end{align}
This relation allows us to express the sum of `difficult' diagrams in terms of `easy' diagrams $(\Gamma_{4;3})$, $(\Gamma_{4;4})$, $(\Gamma_{4;6})$, $(\Gamma_{4;7})$ that are reduced to fermionic and bosonic $T-$blocks, Eqs.~(\ref{T1}) and (\ref{T2}). It is convenient to represent \re{sum-zero} in the following diagrammatic form
\begin{equation}\label{BB} \psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}
\begin{array}{c}\includegraphics[width = 2.2 cm]{diag21a.eps}\end{array} = (\Gamma_{4;1}) + (\Gamma_{4;2}) + (\Gamma_{4;3}) + (\Gamma_{4;5}) + (\Gamma_{4;6})
= - (\Gamma_{4;4}) - (\Gamma_{4;7})
\end{equation}
where the graph on the left-hand side has a shaded block with a free propagator attached to points $3$ and $4$.
This block stands for the sum of diagrams containing interaction vertices and we shall refer to it as a `black box'.
It is expressed in terms of the easy diagrams $(\Gamma_{4;4})$ and $(\Gamma_{4;7})$ given by \p{G44} and \p{G47}
and, therefore, it is a rational function.\footnote{If we were to reproduce \re{BB} without appealing to
$G_{4;1}=0$, we would need to choose a particular regularisation and to calculate several non-trivial integrals which are not rational. Their sum is rational however.} The main reason for introducing the `black box' is that, as
we show in the next subsection,
it naturally appears as a non-trivial core of higher-point diagrams.
\subsection{The $O(\rho_1 \rho_2^3)$ component for $5$ points}\label{sect:warm}
We are now ready to compute the coefficient function $f^{\a\b}_{ab}(1,2)$ for the $n=5$ correlation function.
We recall that it defines the $\rho_1 \rho_2^3-$component in the expansion \re{14} of $G_{5;1}$. Unlike the $n=4$ case examined above, $f^{\a\b}_{ab}(1,2)$ is different from zero for five points.
Let us first identify the relevant Feynman diagrams. Compared to the $n=4$ case, these diagrams involve the
additional vertex $5$ with two scalar propagators attached:
\begin{align*}
& \psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}\psfrag{5}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 5$}\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag8a.eps}
&&
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}\psfrag{5}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 5$}\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag9a.eps}
&&
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}\psfrag{5}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 5$}\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\includegraphics[width = 2.75 cm]{diag12a.eps}
&&
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}\psfrag{5}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 5$}\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag11a.eps}
&&
\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$}\psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$}\psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}\psfrag{5}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 5$}\psfrag{g}[cc][cc]{ }
\includegraphics[width = 3 cm]{diag10a.eps}
\\
& \qquad\quad (\Gamma_{5;1}) &&
\qquad\quad (\Gamma_{5;2}) &&
\qquad\quad (\Gamma_{5;3}) &&
\qquad\quad (\Gamma_{5;4}) &&
\qquad\quad (\Gamma_{5;5})
\end{align*}
Here the shaded block has the same meaning as in \re{BB}. Namely, it denotes the sum of graphs $ (\Gamma_{4;1}) + (\Gamma_{4;2}) + (\Gamma_{4;3}) + (\Gamma_{4;5}) + (\Gamma_{4;6}) $ with the scalar line between points $3$
and $4$ removed. As a result, the contribution of the diagram $(\Gamma_{5;3})$ can be obtained from \re{BB} by replacing
the scalar propagator $d_{34}$ with the product of two propagators $d_{34} d_{45}$ in the sum of two `easy' diagrams
$- [(\Gamma_{4;4}) + (\Gamma_{4;7})]$:
\begin{align}\label{G53}
(\Gamma_{5;3}) = \frac43 c_5\, y_{15}^2 y_{34}^2 y_{45}^2
(y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{32} )^{ab}
\frac{(x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{25} \widetilde{x}_{23} - x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{23} \widetilde{x}_{25})^{\alpha\beta}
- x_{35}^2 (x_{13} \widetilde{x}_{32})^{\alpha \beta}}
{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{15}^2 x_{23}^4 x_{25}^2 x_{34}^2 x_{45}^2}\,.
\end{align}
The calculation of $(\Gamma_{5;1})$ and $(\Gamma_{5;2})$ is similar to that of $(\Gamma_{4;4})$. They are given
by products of fermionic and bosonic $T-$blocks \p{T1} and \p{T2} resulting in
\begin{align}\notag\label{G51}
& (\Gamma_{5;1}) = -\frac43 c_5\, y_{15}^2 y_{34}^2 y_{45}^2 (y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{32})^{ab}
\frac{(x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{24} \widetilde{x}_{23} - x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{23} \widetilde{x}_{24})^{\alpha \beta}}
{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{15}^2 x_{23}^4 x_{24}^2 x_{34}^2 x_{45}^2} \,,\notag \\
& (\Gamma_{5;2}) = -\frac43 c_5\, y_{15}^2 y_{34}^2 y_{45}^2 (y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{32})^{ab}
\frac{(x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{25} \widetilde{x}_{24} - x_{31} \widetilde{x}_{32} x_{24} \widetilde{x}_{25})^{\alpha \beta}}
{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{15}^2 x_{23}^2 x_{24}^2 x_{25}^2 x_{34}^2 x_{45}^2}\,.
\end{align}
We note that $(\Gamma_{5;3})$ contains a double pole $1/(x_{23}^{2})^2$ which should disappear
in the sum of all Feynman diagrams. In addition, the expressions in \re{G53} and \re{G51} do not transform
covariantly under the conformal transformations. In order to recover the conformal symmetry we have to
examine the sum of all three diagrams. We find after some algebra
\begin{align}\label{id5}\notag
\sum_{k=1,2,3} (\Gamma_{5;k}) {}& = -\frac43 c_5\, y_{15}^2 y_{34}^2 y_{45}^2
(y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{32} )^{ab}
\\
{}& \times { x_{25}^2 x_{34}^2 (x_{13} \widetilde{x}_{32})^{\alpha \beta}
- x_{23}^2 (x_{13} \widetilde{x}_{35} x_{54} \widetilde{x}_{42} - x_{13} \widetilde{x}_{34} x_{45} \widetilde{x}_{52})^{\alpha \beta} \over x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{15}^2 x_{23}^4 x_{24}^2 x_{25}^2 x_{34}^2 x_{45}^2}\,.
\end{align}
This example shows that in a order to obtain a conformal result we have to assemble together
a gauge invariant set of diagrams with all possible attachments of the gluon propagators.
The two remaining diagrams $(\Gamma_{5;4})$ and $(\Gamma_{5;5})$ are conformally covariant.
The diagram $(\Gamma_{5;4})$ can be obtained from $(\Gamma_{4;7})$ by replacing the scalar propagator
$d_{41} \to d_{45} d_{51}$ in \re{G47}. When combined together with \re{id5}, it cancels the first term
in the numerator in the second line of \p{id5}. The resulting expression does not have a double pole $1/(x_{23}^2)^2$
but only a simple pole $1/x_{23}^2$. The diagram $(\Gamma_{5;5})$
is the $5-$point analogue of $(\Gamma_{4;6})$, however its harmonic structure is more complicated due to the higher number of
points,
\begin{align}
(\Gamma_{5;5}) = \frac43 c_5\, y_{15}^2 y_{34}^2
(y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{34} y_{45} \widetilde{y}_{52} - y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{35} y_{54} \widetilde{y}_{42} )^{ab}
\frac{(x_{13} \widetilde{x}_{32})^{\alpha \beta}}{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{15}^2 x_{23}^2 x_{24}^2 x_{25}^2 x_{34}^2}\,.
\end{align}
Finally, to obtain $f^{\a\b}_{ab}(1,2)$ we add together the contributions of all diagrams $(\Gamma_{5;k})$ (at $k = 1, 2 , \cdots, 5$) and symmetrise over all permutations of the points $3,4,5$
in order to restore the Bose symmetry of the correlation function. The result takes the remarkably simple form
\begin{align}\label{f1}
f^{\a\b,ab}(1,2) =
\frac{8}{3}c_5 \frac{ x_{14}^2 x_{35}^2 y_{15}^2 y_{34}^2 }{\prod_{1\le i< j\le 5} x^2_{ij}} \ \biggl[
y_{45}^2 (y_{13} \widetilde{y}_{32})^{ab}
(x_{13} \widetilde{x}_{35} x_{54} \widetilde{x}_{42})^{\alpha \beta}
-
(x\leftrightarrow y)\biggr] +
\text{perm}_{345}.
\end{align}
Notice that the product $f^{\a\b,ab}(1,2) \prod_{i<j} x^2_{ij}$ is symmetric under the exchange
of spatial and harmonic coordinates $x_i \rightleftarrows y_i$ (see Appendix~\ref{5ptcomp} for explanation of this property).
Thus, we were able to compute the $O(\rho_1\rho_2^3)$ component of $G_{5;1}$ by using only the
$T-$blocks \p{T1} and \p{T2} combined with the `black box' relation \re{BB}. We can apply the same approach
to computing the remaining components of the $5-$point correlation function $G_{5;1}$. Their explicit expressions
can be found in Appendix~\ref{5ptcomp}.
\subsection{Consistency checks}
In this subsection, we compare the obtained result for $G_{5;1}$ with the analogous expression found in \cite{Eden:2011we}.
As was shown in that paper, the ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal symmetry allows us to predict the form of the $5-$point
correlation function up to an overall normalisation factor
\begin{align}\label{G-I}
G_{5;1} = c \,\frac{\mathcal{I}_{5;1}(x,\rho,y)}{\prod_{1\le i<j\le 5} x_{ij}^2}\,,
\end{align}
where the dependence on the Grassmann and harmonic variables resides in the function $\mathcal{I}_{5;1}$. It is
a polynomial in $\rho$ of Grassmann degree $4$, invariant under $Q$ and $\bar{S}$ superconformal transformations.
Its explicit form has been found in \cite{Eden:2011we}
\begin{align} \label{inv5}\notag
\mathcal I_{5;1} {}& = Q^8 \bar S^8 \prod_{i=1}^5 \delta^4(\rho_i)
\\ \notag
{}&= \int d^4 \epsilon \, d^4 \epsilon' d^4 \bar \xi \, d^4 \bar \xi'
\prod_{i=1}^5 \delta^{(4)}\big(\rho_i -(\epsilon + y_i \epsilon' )-x_i ( \bar \xi+ y_i\bar \xi') \big)
\\
{} &=x_{23}^2 x_{24}^2 x_{25}^2x_{34}^2 x_{35}^2 x_{45}^2\times R(2345) \times \bigg( \rho_1 + \sum_{i=2}^5 R_{1i} \, \rho_i \bigg)^4\,,
\end{align}
where $ \delta^4(\rho_i) \equiv \rho_i^4$.
Here $(R_{1i} \, \rho_i)^{\alpha a}= R_{1i}^{\alpha\beta,a b} \, (\rho_i)_{\beta b}$ involves the matrix $R_{1i}^{\alpha\beta,a b}$ (see Eq.~\re{A-f} below) and the function $R(2345)$ is polynomial in $y_{ij}^2$ and rational in $x_{ij}^2$,
\begin{align}\notag
R(2345) = \frac{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 x_{15}^2}{\prod_{1\le i < j\le 5} x^2_{ij}}
\biggl[{}&
(y^2_{23} y_{45}^2 x_{25}^2 x_{34}^2 - x^2_{23} x_{45}^2 y_{25}^2 y_{34}^2)
(y^2_{23} y_{45}^2 x_{24}^2 x_{35}^2 - x^2_{23} x_{45}^2 y_{24}^2 y_{35}^2)
\\ \notag
+{}& (y^2_{24} y_{35}^2 x_{25}^2 x_{34}^2 - x^2_{24} x_{35}^2 y_{25}^2 y_{34}^2)
(y^2_{24} y_{35}^2 x_{23}^2 x_{45}^2 - x^2_{24} x_{35}^2 y_{23}^2 y_{45}^2)
\\
+{}&
(y^2_{25} y_{34}^2 x_{23}^2 x_{45}^2 - x^2_{25} x_{34}^2 y_{23}^2 y_{45}^2)
(y^2_{25} y_{34}^2 x_{24}^2 x_{35}^2 - x^2_{25} x_{34}^2 y_{24}^2 y_{35}^2)
\biggr].
\end{align}
Expanding \re{G-I} in powers of the Grassmann variables and matching the result with \re{14} we can express
the $f-$coefficient functions in terms of $R(2345)$ and $R_{1i}-$matrices.
In this way, we examine the $O(\rho_1^4)$ component and obtain
\begin{align}
f(1) = c\, \frac{R(2,3,4,5)}{x_{12}^2 x_{13}^2 x_{14}^2 x_{15}^2} \,.
\end{align}
Comparing this relation with \re{f(1)}, we observe perfect agreement and fix the normalisation constant,
$c=2c_5/3$. In a similar manner, for the $O(\rho_2 \rho_1^3)$ component we find
\begin{align}\label{A-f}
f^{\alpha\beta,ab}(2,1) = - 4 R_{12}^{\alpha\beta,a b} f(1) \,.
\end{align}
Together with \re{f1} this relation leads to a definite prediction for the matrix $R_{12}$ that we could match
against the integral representation for the same matrix, Eq.~\re{inv5}. Going through the calculation we find agreement.
The same analysis can be repeated for the other components of $G_{5;1}$. We verified that for $n=5$
the relation \re{14} with the coefficient functions given in Appendix~\ref{5ptcomp} coincides with \re{G-I}.
\section{Matching the two approaches}
\label{sec:example-component-}
In the preceding section we employed the conventional Feynman diagram technique to compute the
five-point correlation function $G_{5;1}$. In this section we show that the relation \re{Gn1} obtained
in the twistor approach correctly reproduces this result. To save space, here we consider the matching of one component only, $(\rho_1^2)^{(ab)} (\rho_3 ^2)^{(cd)}$ in \re{14}, and leave the more detailed discussion
for a future publication.
\subsection{Four points}
As a simpler illustration, let us first consider the component $(\rho_1^2)^{ab} (\rho_3 ^2)^{cd}$ in the
four-point correlation function $G_{4;1}$. As was already mentioned, it should vanish in virtue of ${\cal N}=4$
superconformal symmetry. At the same time, the twistor approach leads to the expression \re{G4-exp}
that involves the product of $3-$point $R-$vertices. In this subsection we demonstrate that the
$(\rho_1^2)^{(ab)} (\rho_3 ^2)^{(cd)}$ contribution to \re{G4-exp} does indeed vanish.
At four points there is only one topology of twistor graphs that contributes to $G_{4;1}$. It is given by:
\begin{align} \label{I1234}\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$} \psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}
\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$} \psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$}
I_{1234}\ =\ \vcenter{\hbox{\includegraphics[width = 0.15 \textwidth]{four}}} \ =\
d_{12}d_{23}d_{34}d_{41}d_{13}R(1;234)R(3;412)
\end{align}
and is obviously symmetric under the exchange of points $1\leftrightarrow 3$ and $2\leftrightarrow 4$.
The correlation function is given by the sum over the non-trivial permutations of this graph,
\begin{align}\label{G-sum-I}
G_{4;1} \sim I_{1234} + I_{1243} + I_{2134}+ I_{2143} + I_{1324} + I_{3142} \,.
\end{align}
To extract the contribution $(\rho_1^2)^{(ab)} (\rho_3 ^2)^{(cd)}$, we have to replace the $R-$invariants
in \re{I1234} by their expansion (see \re{eq:12} in Appendix~\ref{App:R}) and truncate the resulting expression
to the component we are looking for. In this way, we find after some algebra
\begin{align} \notag
\label{eq:19}
& I_{1234}=\Big[ \frac{d_{34}d_{14}(y_{123})_{ab}(y_{123})_{cd}}{x_{12}^{2}x_{23}^{2}x_{13}^{2}y_{13}^{2}}
-\frac{d_{23}d_{14}(y_{123})_{ab}(y_{341})_{cd}}{x_{12}^{2}x_{13}^{2}x_{34}^{2}y_{13}^{2}}
\\\notag
& \hspace*{20mm}+\frac{(y_{12341})_{ac}(y_{34123})_{bd}}{2x_{12}^{2}x_{14}^{2}x_{34}^{2}x_{13}^{2}x_{23}^{2}y_{13}^{2}}
+(2\leftrightarrow
4)
\Big](\rho_{1}^{2})^{ac}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{bd}+ \ldots\,,
\\ \notag
&
I_{1243}=-\frac{(124)}{(123)}\frac{d_{24}(y_{123})_{ab}(y_{341})_{cd} }{x_{12}^{2}x_{34}^{2}x_{13}^{2}x_{14}^{2}}
(\rho_{1}^{2})^{ad}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{bc} + \ldots\,,
\\
&
I_{2143}=\frac{(124)(324)}{(413)(231)}\frac{d_{24}(y_{321})_{ab}(y_{143})_{cd} }{x_{14}^{2}x_{12}^{2}x_{43}^{2}x_{32}^{2}}
(\rho_{1}^{2})^{bc}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{ad}+ \ldots\,,
\end{align}
where the dots denote the remaining terms and we used the shorthand notations for
\begin{align}
y_{ijk}&= y_{ij} \tilde y_{jk}\,,\qquad y_{ijklm}=y_{ij} \tilde y_{jk} y_{kl} \tilde y_{lm}\,,\qquad
(ijk) = \vev{\sigma_{ij} \sigma_{ik}} x_{ij}^2 x_{ik}^2 \ .
\label{eq:171}
\end{align}
The expressions for the remaining terms on the right-hand side of \re{G-sum-I} can be obtained from \re{eq:19}
through permutation of the indices, e.g. $I_{2134}=I_{1243}[1\leftrightarrow 3,2\leftrightarrow 4]$, $I_{1324}=I_{1243}[{2\leftrightarrow 4}]$ and $I_{3142}=I_{1243}[{1\leftrightarrow 3}]$.
Note that the contribution to \re{G-sum-I} from $I_{1234}$ is independent of the reference twistor. It is straightforward
to verify that the same is true for the sum of the remaining five terms on the right-hand side of \re{G-sum-I}. Finally, substituting \re{eq:19} into \re{G-sum-I} we find after some algebra
\begin{align}\label{eq:4pntsrhorho}\notag
&
G_{4;1}\sim
\frac{1}{x_{12}^{2}x_{23}^{2}x_{13}^{2}x_{34}^{2}x_{14}^{2}y_{13}^{2}}\Big[y_{34}^{2}y_{14}^{2}(y_{123})_{ab}(y_{321})_{cd}-y_{23}^{2}y_{12}^{2}(y_{143})_{ab}(y_{134})_{cd}-y_{23}^{2}y_{41}^{2}(y_{123})_{ab}(y_{341})_{cd}
\\
&
-y_{43}^{2}y_{21}^{2}(y_{143})_{ab}(y_{321})_{cd}-y_{24}^{2}y_{13}^{2}(y_{123})_{ab}(y_{341})_{cd}+(y_{12341})_{ad}(y_{34123})_{bc}\Big](\rho_{1}^{2})^{ad}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{bc} +\ldots
\end{align}
The expression inside the square brackets vanishes via a non-trivial $y-$identity.
The easiest way to see this is to use the $SU(4)$ covariance of \re{eq:4pntsrhorho} in order
to fix the $y-$variables at the four points as:
\begin{align}\label{eq:yfixing}
y_{1}\rightarrow \begin{pmatrix} 1&0\\ 0&1\\ \end{pmatrix}\,,\qquad y_{2}\rightarrow \infty\,,\qquad y_{3}\rightarrow 0\,,\qquad y_{4}\rightarrow \begin{pmatrix}y&0\\ 0&\bar{y}\\ \end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{align}
Implementing this choice sets (\ref{eq:4pntsrhorho}) to zero. Hence, the $(\rho_{i}^{2})^{ab}(\rho_{j}^{2})^{cd}$ component of $G_{4;1}$ vanishes
\begin{align}
G_{4;1}\sim 0\times (\rho_{1}^{2})^{ad}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{bc} +\ldots
\end{align}
as it should be.
\subsection{Five points}
At five points, the correlation function $G_{5;1}$ receives contributions from twistor graphs of three different
topologies:
\begin{align*}\psfrag{1}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 1$} \psfrag{2}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 2$}
\psfrag{3}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 3$} \psfrag{4}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 4$} \psfrag{5}[cc][cc]{$\scriptstyle 5$}
\psfrag{A}[cc][cc]{$A_{12345}$} \psfrag{B}[cc][cc]{$B_{12345}$} \psfrag{C}[cc][cc]{$C_{12345}$}
\includegraphics[width = 0.65 \textwidth]{five}
\end{align*}
Applying the Feynman rules shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-rules3} we find
\begin{align}\notag\label{ABC}
& A_{12345} = d_{12} d_{23} d_{13} d_{15} d_{45} d_{34} R(1;235) R(3;412) \,,
\\ \notag
& B_{12345} = d_{14} d_{34} d_{15} d_{35} d_{12} d_{23} R(1;452) R(3;254) \,,
\\
& C_{12345} = d_{12} d_{13} d_{14} d_{15} d_{23} d_{45} R(1;345) R(1;234)\,.
\end{align}
$G_{5;1}$ is given by their total sum symmetrised with respect to the permutations of the five
points.
Let us examine the contribution of each topology to the component $(\rho_1^2)^{ab} (\rho_3 ^2)^{cd}$.
Replacing the $R-$invariants in \re{ABC} by their expansion in powers of the Grassmann variables (see Eqs.~\re{eq:18} and
\re{eq:12})
we find that this component does not receive contributions from graphs of type $C$ for all possible
relabelings of the points. The total set of contributing graphs is
\begin{align}\label{eq:graphss}
G_{5;1}\sim A_{12345}+ \frac12\left(A_{51342}+
A_{53142}+ A_{41352} +
A_{43152}+ B_{53412}\right)+\frac16\,B_{12345} +\text{perm}_{245}\ .
\end{align}
Here each inequivalent graph appears with coefficient 1, and the numerical factors are introduced to account
for over-counting in the sum over permutations. We split the computation up in this way, since, as we will see
in a moment, the linear combination in the parentheses on the right-hand side of \re{eq:graphss} is independent of the
reference twistor.
Going through calculations similar to those performed in the
four-point case, we obtain the following expressions for the component $(\rho_1^2)^{ab} (\rho_3 ^2)^{cd}$
\begin{align}&\notag \label{AB-comp}
A_{12345}=-\frac{y_{45}^{2}(y_{15243})_{ab}(y_{123})_{dc}}{x_{12}^{2}x_{23}^{2}x_{13}^{2}x_{34}^{2}x_{45}^{2}x_{15}^{2}} (\rho_{1}^{2})^{ad}(\rho^{2}_{3})^{bc} +\ldots,
\notag
\\[10pt]
&A_{51342}=\frac{(345)}{(341)}\frac{ y_{24}^2y_{25}^2(y_{153})_{ab}(y_{341})_{cd} }{x_{15}^{2}x_{35}^{2}x_{34}^{2}x_{13}^{2}x_{24}^2x_{25}^2}
(\rho_{1}^{2})^{ad}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{bc} + \ldots,
\notag\\[10pt]
&\notag
B_{12345}=\frac{(y_{12541})_{ab}(y_{34523})_{cd} }{x_{12}^{2}x_{23}^{2}x_{34}^{2}x_{41}^{2}x_{15}^{2}x_{35}^{2}}
(\rho_{1}^{2})^{ab}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{cd}+ \ldots,
\\[10pt] &
B_{53412}=\frac{(345)(145)}{(431)(513)}\frac{y_{24}^2y_{25}^2 (y_{341})_{ab}(y_{153})_{cd} }{x_{15}^{2}x_{14}^{2}x_{35}^{2}x_{34}^{2}x_{24}^2x_{25}^2}(\rho_{1}^{2})^{bc}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{ad}+ \ldots
\end{align}
The remaining graphs can be obtained by permuting the indices in these expressions.
Notice that the expressions for $A_{12345}$ and $B_{12345}$ do not depend on the reference twistor and have the correct
conformal and $SU(4)$ properties. Then, we examine the sum of graphs in the parentheses in \re{eq:graphss}
\begin{align}\label{eq:secondterm}
\notag A_{51342}{}& +
A_{53142}+ A_{41352} +
A_{43152}+ B_{53412}=
\frac{y_{25}^{2}y_{24}^{2}}{\prod_{1\leq i<j\leq
5}x_{ij}^{2}}\frac{x_{12}^{2}x_{23}^{2}x_{45}^{2}}{(431)(513)} (y_{341})_{ab}(y_{153})_{cd}(\rho_{1}^{2})^{bc}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{ad}
\\&\notag
\times \Big[(345)(145)x_{13}^{2}+(451)(351)x_{34}^{2}+(134)(534)x_{15}^{2}+(345)(531)x_{14}^{2}+(451)(143)x_{35}^{2}\Big] +\dots
\notag\\
&= -\frac{y_{25}^{2}y_{24}^{2}}{\prod_{1\leq i<j\leq 5}x_{ij}^{2}}x_{12}^{2}x_{23}^{2}x_{45}^{4}(y_{341})_{ab}(y_{351})_{dc}(\rho_{1}^{2})^{bc}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{ad}\,,
\end{align}
where in the second relation we made use of the six-term identity \re{eq:id}. We observe that the dependence on
the reference twistor disappears in the sum of graphs.
Finally, we substitute \re{AB-comp} and \re{eq:secondterm} into \re{eq:graphss} and obtain
the following expression for the component $(\rho_{1}^{2})^{ac}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{bd}$ of the correlation function
\begin{align}\notag
G_{5;1} =\frac{1}{\prod_{1\leq i<j\leq
5}x_{ij}^{2}}\bigg[ {}& -\frac12 x_{12}^{2}x_{23}^{2}x_{45}^{4}y_{25}^{2}y_{24}^{2}(y_{143})_{ab}(y_{153})_{cd}-x_{14}^{2}x_{24}^{2}x_{25}^{2}x_{35}^{2}y_{45}^{2}(y_{15243})_{ab}(y_{123})_{cd}
\\
&
+\frac16 x_{13}^{2}x_{24}^{2}x_{25}^{2}x_{45}^{2}(y_{12541})_{ac}(y_{34523})_{bd}+\text{perm}_{245}\bigg](\rho_{1}^{2})^{ac}(\rho_{3}^{2})^{bd} + \ldots
\end{align}
We compare this expression with the analogous result \re{su2su25} obtained in the standard Feynman diagram approach
and find perfect agreement (after appropriate permutations of indices). \footnote{
Note that the harmonic $y-$structure that comes out of the Feynman graph approach for this component is graphically identical to the twistor graph.}
To summarise, we demonstrated by an explicit calculation of a particular component of $G_{5;1}$ that
the expression \re{Gn1} for the correlation function in the twistor approach matches that
obtained in the conventional Feynman diagram approach.
\section{Conclusions}
We have developed a new approach to computing the correlation function $G_n$ of the chiral part of the stress-tensor supermultiplet in the Born
approximation. It relies on the reformulation of ${\cal N}=4$ SYM in twistor space and gives $G_n$ as a sum of effective diagrams on twistor
space which only involve propagators and no integration vertices. We have used this unusual feature of the twistor diagrams to decompose them into simple building blocks, the ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal invariants $R(i;j_1j_2j_3)$. However, the price to pay for the relative simplicity of the twistor diagrams is the
dependence of these invariants on the reference supertwistor $\mathcal Z_*$ defining the axial gauge condition. This dependence
cancels in the sum of all twistor diagrams, due to the gauge invariance of $G_n$ but it is present in the contribution of each individual diagram. The situation here is similar to that of the tree-level scattering superamplitudes in planar $\mathcal N=4$ SYM.
The relation to the scattering amplitudes can be made more precise by examining the asymptotic behaviour of $G_n$ in the light-like
limit. As we have shown, in the simplest case of the NMHV amplitude and the next-to-lowest component $G_{n;1}$, the on-shell NMHV
invariants are given by the product of two off-shell $R-$invariants evaluated in the light-like limit. The on-shell invariants are known to
possess a larger, dual superconformal symmetry \cite{Drummond:2008vq} which is promoted to a Yangian symmetry \cite{Drummond:2009fd} when combined with the
conventional ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal symmetry. As a consequence, the off-shell invariants also have this extended symmetry, in the
light-like limit at least. Whether this symmetry survives away from the light-like limit is a very interesting question which requires further investigation.
Knowing $G_n$ in the Born approximation allows us to predict the quantum corrections to the same correlation function using the Lagrangian
insertion method. Namely, integrating the correlation function $G_{n+1}$ over the position of one of the operators,
$\int d^4 x_{n+1}\, d^4 \theta_{n+1}^+\, G_{n+1}$, produces the order $O(g^2)$ correction to the correlation function $G_{n}$. Continuing this
procedure, we can interpret $G_{n+\ell}$ in the Born approximation as the $O(g^{2\ell})$ integrand for the quantum corrections to the correlation function $G_{n}$.
For $n=4$ this procedure, combined with the uniqueness of the top superconformal invariant $\mathcal I_{\ell+4,\ell}$, has been used in \cite{Eden:2011we} to reveal a new permutation symmetry of the four-point correlation function. Starting from $n=5$, the quantum corrections to $G_n$ receive
contributions from several superconformal invariants $\mathcal I_{\ell+n,p}$ (with $p=\ell,\dots,\ell+n-4$) whose explicit form can be found
using the approach presented in this paper. It remains to be seen what these invariants can tell us about the properties of the corresponding integrands. It would be interesting to establish the relationship with the Grassmannian approach to the integrand of the amplitude \cite{ArkaniHamed:2010gh} and with the recent `amplituhedron' construction \cite{Arkani-Hamed:2013jha}.
When computing the correlation function $G_n$, we restricted our analysis to the chiral sector. By putting the antichiral Grassmann variables $\bar\theta$ to zero we explicitly broke half of the supersymmetry. We could ask what happens if we include the dependence of $G_n$ on $\bar\theta$, thus recovering the full ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal symmetry. In the simplest case $n=4$ the dependence on $\bar\theta$ can be
restored unambiguously \cite{Belitsky:2014zha}, whereas for $n\ge 5$ the ${\cal N}=4$ superconformal symmetry is not powerful enough to lift the correlation function
from the chiral sector to the full superspace. It would be interesting to extend the twistor space approach to this case.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
B.E. is supported by DFG (``Eigene Stelle" Ed 78/4-2). D.C. is supported by the ``Investissements d'avenir, Labex ENIGMASS'' and partially supported by the RFBR grant 14-01-00341. R.D. acknowledges support from an STFC studentship, P.H. from the STFC Consolidated Grant ST/L000407/1. R.D., P.H. and B.E. also acknowledge support from the Marie Curie network GATIS (gatis.desy.eu) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2013/ under REA Grant Agreement No 317089. G.K. and E.S. acknowledge partial support by the French National Agency for Research under contract BLANCSIMI-4-2011.
|
\section{Introduction and Main Result}\label{sec:intro}
\subsection{Transportation Problem with Market Choice}
The transportation problem with market choice (TPMC), introduced in the paper~\cite{DDK14}, is a transportation problem in which suppliers with limited capacities have a choice of which demands (markets) to satisfy. If a market is selected, then its demand must be satisfied fully through shipments from the suppliers. If a market is rejected, then the corresponding potential revenue is lost. The objective is to minimize the total cost of shipping and lost revenues. See~\cite{geunes,levi,vanDenHeuvel} for approximation algorithms and heuristics for several other supply chain planning and logistics problems with market choice.
Formally, we are given a set of supply and demand nodes that form a bipartite graph $G(V_1 \cup V_2, E)$. The nodes in set $V_1$ represent the supply nodes, where for $i\in V_1$, $s_i\in \mathbb{N}$ represents the capacity of supplier $i$. The nodes in set $V_2$ represent the potential markets, where for $j\in V_2$, $d_j\in \mathbb{N}$ represents the demand of market $j$. The edges between supply and demand nodes have weights that represent shipping costs $w_{ij}$, where $(i,j) \in E$.
For each $j \in V_2$, $r_j$ is the revenue lost if the market $j$ is rejected. Let $x_{ij}$ be the amount of demand of market $j$ satisfied by supplier $i$ for $(i,j)\in E$, and let $z_{j}$ be an indicator variable taking a value 1 if market $j$ is rejected and 0 otherwise. A mixed-integer programming (MIP) formulation of the problem is given where the objective is to minimize the transportation costs and the lost revenues due to unchosen markets:
\begin{align} \label{TPSL:objective}
\min_{x \in \mathbb{R}^{|E|}_{+}, z \in \{0, 1\}^{|V_2|}} &\quad \sum_{(i,j)\in E} w_{ij}x_{ij} + \sum_{j \in V_2} r_{j}z_{j} \\ \label{TPSL:demandcons}
\textup{s.t.} & \quad \sum_{i: (i,j)\in E} x_{ij} = d_j (1-z_j) & \forall j \in V_2\\
\label{TPSL:supplycons} & \quad \sum_{j: (i,j)\in E} x_{ij} \leq s_i & \forall i \in V_1.
\end{align}
We refer to the formulation \eqref{TPSL:objective}-\eqref{TPSL:supplycons} as TPMC. The first set of constraints \eqref{TPSL:demandcons} ensures that if market $j\in V_2$ is selected (i.e., $z_j=0$), then its demand must be fully satisfied. The second set of constraints \eqref{TPSL:supplycons} model the supply restrictions.
TPMC is strongly NP-complete in general~\cite{DDK14}. The paper \cite{AB14} give polynomial-time reductions from this problem to the capacitated facility location problem~\cite{KH63}, thereby establishing approximation algorithms with constant factors for the metric case and a logarithmic factor for the general case.
\subsection{TMPC with $d_j \in \{1,2\}$ for all $j \in V_2$ and the Matching Polytope}
When $d_j \in \{1,2\}$ for each demand node $j \in V_2$, TPMC is polynomially solvable~\cite{DDK14}. This is proven through a reduction to a minimum weight perfect matching problem on a general (non-bipartite) graph $G'=(V',E')$; see~\cite{DDK14}. We call this special class of the problem, the {\it simple TPMC problem} in the rest of this note.
\begin{observation}[Simple TPMC generalizes Matching on General Graphs]\label{mathobs}
The matching problem can be seen as a special case of the simple TPMC problem. Let $G(V,E)$ be a graph with $n$ vertices and $m$ edges. We construct a bipartite graph {$\hat{G}(\hat{V}^1 \cup \hat{V}^2, \hat{E})$} as follows: {$\hat{V}^1$} is a set of $n$ vertices corresponding to the $n$ vertices in $G$, and {$\hat{V}^2$} corresponds to the set of edges of $G$, i.e., {$\hat{V}^2$} contains $m$ vertices. We use $(i,j)$ to refer to the vertex in {$\hat{V}^2$} corresponding to the edge $(i,j)$ in $E$. The set of edges in {$\hat{E}$} are of the form $(i, (i,j))$ and $(j, (i,j))$ for every $i, j \in V$ such that $(i,j) \in E$. Now we can construct (the feasible region of) an instance of TPMC with respect to {$\hat{G}(\hat{V}^1 \cup \hat{V}^2, \hat{E})$} as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{match1}Q= \{ (x, z) \in \mathbb{R}^{2m} \times \mathbb{R}^{m} \, |\, x_{i, (i,j)} + x_{j, (i,j)} {+ 2z_{(i,j)}} = 2 \ \forall (i,j) \in {\hat{V}^2} \\
\label{match2}\sum_{j:(i,j) \in E} x_{i, (i,j)} \leq 1 \ \forall i \in {\hat{V}^1} \\
\label{match3} z_{(i,j)} \in \{0,1\} \ \forall (i,j) \in {\hat{V}^2} \}.
\end{eqnarray}
Clearly there is a bijection between the set of matchings in $G(V,E)$ and the set of solutions in $Q$. Moreover, let $$H: = \{ (x,z,y) \in \mathbb{R}^{2m} \times \mathbb{R}^{m} \times \mathbb{R}^{m}\,|\, (x,z) \in Q, y = e - z\},$$ where $e$ is the all ones vector in $\mathbb{R}^m$. Then we have that the incidence vector of all the matchings in $G(V,E)$ is precisely the set $\textup{proj}_y(H)$.
Note that the instances of the form of (\ref{match1})-(\ref{match3}) are special cases of simple TPMC instances, since in these instances all $s_i$'s are restricted to be exactly $1$ and all $d_j$'s are restricted to be exactly $2$.
\end{observation}
\subsection{Simple TPMC with Cardinality Constraint: Main Result}
An important and natural constraint that one may add to the TPMC problem is that of a service level, that is the number of rejected markets is restricted to be at most $k$. This restriction can be modelled using a \emph{cardinality constraint}, $\sum_{j\in V_2} z_j \le k$, appended to \eqref{TPSL:objective}-\eqref{TPSL:supplycons}. We call the resulting problem cardinality-constrained TPMC (CCTPMC). If we are able to solve CCTPMC in polynomial-time, then we can solve TPMC in polynomial time by solving CCTPMC for all $k \in \{0, \dots, |V_2|\}$. Since TPMC is NP-hard, CCTPMC is NP-hard in general.
In this note, we examine the effect of appending a cardinality constraint to the simple TPMC problem.
\begin{theorem}\label{conjectureintproperty} Given an instance of TPMC with $V_2$, the set of demand nodes, and $E$, the set of edges, let $X \in \mathbb{R}^{|E|}_{+} \times \{0,1\}^{|V_2|}$ be the set of feasible solutions of this instance of TPMC. Let $k \in \mathbb{Z}_{+}$ and $k \leq |V_2|$. Let $X^k := \textup{conv}(X \cap \{ (x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{|E|}_{+} \times \{0, 1\}^{|V_2|}\,| \sum_{j \in V_2} z_j \leq k\}).$ If $d_j\leq2$ for all $j \in V_2$, then $X^k = \textup{conv} (X) \cap \{ (x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{|E|}_{+} \times [0, 1]^{|V_2|}\,|\, \sum_{j \in V_2} z_j \leq k\}.$
\end{theorem}
Our proof of Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty} is presented in Section 2. We note that the result of Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty} holds even when $X^k$ is defined as $\textup{conv}(X \cap \{ (x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{|E|}_{+} \times \{0, 1\}^{|V_2|}\,| \sum_{j \in V_2} z_j \geq k\})$ or $\textup{conv}(X \cap \{ (x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{|E|}_{+} \times \{0, 1\}^{|V_2|}\,| \sum_{j \in V_2} z_j = k\})$.
By invoking the ellipsoid algorithm and the use of Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty} we obtain the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{corrolary1}
Cardinality constrained simple TPMC is polynomially solvable.
\end{corollary}
We note two other consequences of Theorem~\ref{conjectureintproperty}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Special class of minimum weight perfect matching problem with a cardinality constraint on a subset of edges can be solved in polynomial time: As discussed in the previous section, simple TPMC can be reduced to a minimum weight perfect matching problem on a general (non-bipartite) graph $G'=(V',E')$~\cite{DDK14}. Therefore, it is possible to reduce CCTPMC with $d_j \leq 2$ for all $j\in V_2$ to a \emph{minimum weight perfect matching problem with a cardinality constraint on a subset of edges}.
Hence, Corollary \ref{corrolary1} implies that a special class of minimum weight perfect matching problem with a cardinality constraint on a subset of edges can be solved in polynomial time.
Note that the intersection of the perfect matching polytope with a cardinality constraint on a strict subset of edges is not always integral.
\begin{example}\label{example:pefectmatch} Consider the bipartite graph $G(V_1\cup V_2,E)$ with $V_1 = \{1, 2, 3\}, V_2=\{ 4, 5, 6\}$, $E = \{(1,4), (1,5), $ $ (2,4), (2, 5), (2,6), (3,5), (3, 6)\}$, and the cardinality constraint $x_{14} + x_{25} \leq 1$. It is straightforward to show that $x_{14} = x_{15} =x_{24} =x_{25} =0.5, x_{26} = x_{3 5} =0, x_{36} = 1$ is a fractional extreme point of the intersection of the perfect matching polytope with the cardinality constraint.
\end{example}
To the best of our knowledge, the complexity status of minimum weight perfect matching problem on a general graph with a cardinality constraint on a subset of edges is open. This can be seen by observing that if one can solve minimum weight perfect matching problem with a cardinality constraint on a subset of edges in polynomial time, then one can solve the exact perfect matching problem in polynomial time; see discussion in the last section in~\cite{bergerbogrsc2011}.
\item Generalization of the matching cardinality result: A well-known result is that the intersection of the matching polytope with a cardinality constraint is integral~\cite{schrijver}. It is straightforward to verify that this result follows from Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty} applied to instances of TPMC constructed in Observation \ref{mathobs} (See Appendix A). However as mentioned in Observation \ref{mathobs}, the instances (\ref{match1})-(\ref{match3}) are special cases of simple TPMC instances. Therefore, Theorem~\ref{conjectureintproperty} represents a generalization of the classical result of integrality of the intersection of matching polytope and a cardinality constraint.
\end{enumerate}
Finally we ask the natural question: Does the statement of Theorem 1 hold when $d_j \leq 2$ does not hold for every $j$? The next example illustrates that the statement of Theorem 1 does not hold in such case.
\begin{example}\label{ex:CounterExample1}
Consider an instance of TPMC where $G(V_1 \cup V_2, E)$ is a bipartite graph with $V_1 = \{1,2,\ldots,6\}$, $V_2 = \{1,2,3,4\}$, $E=\{(1,1), (2,2), (3,3), (4,1), $ $ (4,4), (5,2), (5,4), (6,3), (6,4)\}$, $s_i=1$, $i \in V_1$, $d_j=2$, $j = \{1,2,3\}$, $d_4=3$. For $k=2$ we it can be verified that we obtain a non-integer extreme point of $\textup{conv}(X) \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k \}$, given by $x_{11}=x_{22}=x_{33}=x_{41}=x_{44}=x_{52}=x_{54}=x_{63}=x_{64}=z_{1}=z_{2}=z_{3}=z_{4}=\frac{1}{2}$. Therefore, $X^k\ne \textup{conv}(X) \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k \}$ in this example.
\end{example}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty}}\label{sec:cardinality}
To prove Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty}, one approach could be to appeal to the reduction to minimum weight perfect matching problem and then use the well-known adjacency properties of the vertices of the perfect matching polytope. However, as illustrated in Example \ref{example:pefectmatch}, the integrality result does not hold for the perfect matching polytope on a general graph with a cardinality constraint on any subset of edges. Therefore a generic approach considering the perfect matching polytope appears to be less fruitful. We use an alternative approach to prove this result. In particular, we apply a technique similar to that used in~\cite{aghezzaf}. Consider the following property:
\begin{definition}[Edge Property]\label{edgeproperty}
Let $T \subseteq \mathbb{R}_{+}^{p} \times \{0,1\}^{n}$ be some mixed integer set. We say that $T$ satisfies the \emph{edge property} if for all $(w,r) \in \mathbb{R}^{p+n}$ such that $\textup{min} \{w^{\top}x + r^{\top}z\,|\, (x,z) \in T\}$ is bounded and has at least two optimal solutions, $(x^{1}, z^1)$ and $(x^2, z^2)$ where $\sum_{j=1}^{n} z^1_j = k^1$, $\sum_{j=1}^{n} z^2_j = k^2$ and $k^1 \leq k^2 - 2$, then there is an optimal solution $(x^3,z^3)$ such that $\sum_{j=1}^{n} z^3_j = k^3$ and $ k^1 < k^3 < k^2$.
\end{definition}
\begin{proposition}\label{edgproperty-convexhull}
Let $T \subseteq \mathbb{R}_{+}^{p} \times \{0,1\}^{n}$ be a mixed integer set such that $\textup{conv}(T)$ is a pointed polyhedron and let $T^{k} := \textup{conv}(T \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times \{0,1\}^{n} \,|\, \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k \}).$ If $T$ satisfies the edge property, then $T^{k} = \textup{conv}(T) \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k \}$.
\end{proposition}
We present the proof of the Proposition~\ref{edgproperty-convexhull} for completeness. See also~\cite{aghezzaf}.
\begin{proof}
Assume by contradiction that $$T^k \not =\textup{conv}(T) \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k \},$$ for some $k=k' \in \{0,1,\ldots,n\}$. By definition $T^{k} = \textup{conv}(T \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times \{0,1\}^{n} | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k \})$ so $T^k \subseteq \textup{conv}(T) \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k \}$ holds for all $k \in \{0,1,\ldots,n\}$. By assumption we obtain $T^{k'} \subset \textup{conv}(T) \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k' \}$. Since $\textup{conv}(T)$ is pointed this implies that there exists a vertex $(x',z')$ of $ \textup{conv}(T) \cap \{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j \leq k' \}$ such that $(x',z') \not \in T^{k'}$.
Therefore $z'$ is fractional and $\sum_{j=1}^{n}z_{j}'=k'$ (if $\sum_{j=1}^{n}z_{j}'<k'$, then this point is also a vertex of $\textup{conv}(T)$, therefore integral and belonging to $T^{k'}$ - a contradiction).
Since $(x',z')$ is not a vertex of $\textup{conv}(T)$, there exists $(w,r)$ such that the vertex $(x',z') $ is the intersection of the face defined by $\{(x,z) \in \mathbb{R}^{p}_{+} \times [0,1]^n | \sum_{j=1}^{n} z_j = k' \}$ and an edge of $\textup{conv}(T)$ defined as:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn:theedge}
\{(x,z) \in \textup{conv}(T) \,|\, w^{\top}x + r^{\top}z = \gamma\},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\gamma = \textup{min} \{w^{\top}x + r^{\top}z\,|\, (x,z) \in \textup{conv}(T)\} = w^{\top}x'+ r^{\top}z'$. Let $(x^1,z^1)$ and $(x^2,z^2)$ be two feasible points of $T$ that belong to the edge (\ref{eqn:theedge}) such that $(x',z')$ is a convex combination of $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^2, z^2)$. Note that $\gamma = w^{\top}x'+ r^{\top}z' = w^{\top}x^1+ r^{\top}z^1 = w^{\top}x^2+ r^{\top}z^2$. Hence, $(x^1,z^1)$ and $(x^2,z^2)$ are two optimal solutions corresponding to the objective function $(w,r)$. Furthermore, due to our selection of $\gamma$, $\sum_{j \in V_2} z_{j}^{1} < k' < \sum_{j \in V_2} z_{j}^{2} $. The edge property ensures that there exists an integral optimal solution $(x^3,z^3)$ with $k^3=\sum_{j \in V_2} z_{j}^{3}=k'$ such that $\sum_{j \in V_2} z_{j}^{1} < k^3 < \sum_{j \in V_2} z_{j}^{2}$. However, this implies that $(x^3,z^3)$ belongs to the edge defined by (\ref{eqn:theedge}). Thus, $(x^3,z^3)$ must be a convex combination of $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^2, z^2)$ or equivalently, we must have $(x^3,z^3)=(x',z')$ with $z'$ integral, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
Next we will verify that the edge property holds for the polytope corresponding to the instances of simple TPMC. If $s_i > 1$ for some $i \in V_1$, we can construct a new instance of simple TPMC where we replace the node with $s_i$ identical nodes each with a capacity of $1$. Note that this is a polynomial construction, because the supply, $s_i$, is at most $2|V_2|$ for any $i\in V_1$. It is straightforward to show that the edge property holds for the polytope corresponding to the first instance of simple TPMC if and only if the edge property holds for the polytope corresponding to new instance of simple TPMC. Therefore, in order to prove Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty} it is sufficient to verify the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{keyprop}
The edge property holds for simple TPMC instances with $s_i = 1$ for all $i \in V_1$.
\end{proposition}
The rest of this note is a proof of Proposition \ref{keyprop}.
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim0}
Suppose that $(x^{1}, z^1)$ and $(x^2, z^2)$ are optimal solutions to $\textup{min} \{w^{\top}x + r^{\top}z\,|\, (x,z) \in X\}$. Let $k^1= \sum_{j \in V_2}z^1_j$, $k^2= \sum_{j \in V_2}z^2_j$ and $k^1 \leq k^2 - 2$. If there exists two feasible solutions of $X$, namely $(x^3, z^3)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$, such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\sum_{j \in V_2}z^3_j = k^1 + 1$ and $\sum_{j \in V_2}z^4_j = k^2 - 1$ and \label{claim0-1}
\item The objective function value of $(x^3, z^3)$ is $\rho - \delta$ and that of $(x^4, z^4)$ is $\rho + \delta$, where $\rho$ is the objective function value of the solution $(x^1, z^1)$ and $\delta \in \mathbb{R}$,
\end{enumerate}
\end{myclaim}
then the edge property holds. \\
\begin{proof} Since $\rho$ is the optimal objective function value, we obtain that $\delta = 0$ since otherwise the objective function value of either $(x^3, z^3)$ or $(x^4, z^4)$ is better than that of $(x^1, z^1)$. Therefore $(x^3, z^3)$ is an optimal solution with $ k^1 < \sum_{j \in V_2} z^3_j < k^2$.
\end{proof}
In what follows we assume that if $(x^1, z^1)$ is an optimal solution to $\textup{min} \{w^{\top}x + r^{\top}z\,|\, (x,z) \in X\}$, then $x^1$ is integral. Otherwise, we can solve a simple transportation problem with the set of demand nodes $j$ such that $z^1_j = 0$. Since all data are integral, there exists an optimal solution with integral flows. Therefore, we may assume that $x^1$ is integral.
Given an integral point $(\tilde{x}, \tilde{z})$ of $X$, let $S(\tilde{z}) := \{j \in V_2\,|\, \tilde z_j = 0\}$ be the set of nodes in $V_2$ whose demands are met. For $j \in S(\tilde{z})$, let $I_j(\tilde{x}, \tilde{z}) = \{ i \in V_1\,|\, \tilde{x}_{ij} > 0 \} = \{ i \in V_1\,|\, \tilde{x}_{ij} = 1 \}$ be the set of suppliers that sends one unit to $j$.
Given the optimal solutions $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^2, z^2)$, let $F := \left( S(z^1) \setminus S(z^2) \right) \cup \left( S(z^2) \setminus S(z^1) \right)$, $P:= S(z^1) \cap S(z^2)$ and $R:= V_2 \setminus (F \cup P)$. For $j \in F$, observe that only the set $I_j(x^1, z^1)$ or the set $I_j(x^2, z^2)$ is defined. So for $j \in F$, we define $I_j$ as:
\begin{eqnarray}
I_j := \left\{\begin{array}{rl} I_j(x^1, z^1) & \textup{if } j \in S(z^1) \setminus S(z^2) \\
I_j(x^2, z^2) & \textup{if } j \in S(z^2) \setminus S(z^1). \\
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
As a first step towards constructing $(x^3, z^3)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ required in Claim \ref{claim0}, we construct a bipartite (conflict) graph $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$. The set of nodes is constructed as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $j \in S(z^1) \setminus S(z^2)$, then $j \in U_1$ and $j$ is called a \emph{full node}. Let $W_1 = S(z^1) \setminus S(z^2)$ be the set of full nodes of $U_1$.
\item Similarly, if $j \in S(z^2) \setminus S(z^1)$, then $j \in U_2$ and $j$ is called a \emph{full node}. Let $W_2 = S(z^2) \setminus S(z^1)$ be the set of full nodes of $U_2$.
\item If $j \in S(z^1) \cap S(z^2)$ and $d_j=2$, then we place two copies of node $j$ in $U_1$ (call these $j_1$ and $j_2$) and two copies of $j$ in $U_2$ (call these $j_3$ and $j_4$). These nodes are called \emph{partial nodes} of $j$. Each partial node of $j$ is distinct: If $I_j(x^1, z^1) = \{t_1, t_2\}$, then associate (WLOG) $t_1$ with $j_1$ and $t_2$ with $j_2$, that is define $I_{j_1}: = \{t_1\}$ and $I_{j_2}: = \{t_2\}$. Similarly if $I_j(x^2, z^2) = \{t_3, t_4\}$, then associate (WLOG) $t_3$ with $j_3$ and $t_4$ with $j_4$, that is define $I_{j_3} := \{t_3\}$ and $I_{j_4}:= \{t_4\}$. If {$j \in S(z^1) \cap S(z^2)$} and $d_j=1$, then we place one copy of node $j$ in $U_1$ (call this $j_1$) and one copy of $j$ in $U_2$ (call this $j_3$). Similar to the $d_j=2$ case these nodes are called \emph{partial nodes} of $j$. If $I_{j}(x^1, z^1) = \{t_1\}$ and $I_{j}(x^2, z^2) = \{t_3\}$, then set $I_{j_1} = \{{t}_1\}$ and $I_{j_3} = \{t_3\}$. Let $P = P^1 \cup P^2$, where $P^1 = \{ j \in P: d_j = 1\}$ and $P^2 = \{ j \in P: d_j = 2\}$.
\end{enumerate}
Thus, $U_1 = W_1\cup \left( \bigcup_{j \in P^2} \{j_1, j_2\} \right) \cup \left(\bigcup_{j \in P^1} \{j_1\}\right)$ and for each element $a \in U_1$ the set $I_a$ is well-defined and non-empty. Similarly, $U_2 = W_2 \cup \left(\bigcup_{j \in P^2} \{j_3, j_4\}\right) \cup \left(\bigcup_{j \in P^1} \{j_3\}\right)$ and for each element $b \in U_2$ the set $I_b$ is well-defined and non-empty. Now we construct the edges $\mathcal{E}$ as follows: For all $a \in U_1$ and $b \in U_2$, there is an edge $(a,b) \in \mathcal{E}$ if and only if $a$ and $b$ have at least one common supplier, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{sanegraph}
I_a \cap I_b \neq \emptyset \textup{ iff } (a, b) \in \mathcal{E}.
\end{eqnarray}
Let $G'(V', E')$ be a subgraph of $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$. Since the elements in $V' \cap (W_1 \cup W_2)$ correspond to unique elements in $V_2$, whenever required we will (with slight abuse of notation) treat $V' \cap (W_1 \cup W_2) \subseteq V_2$.
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim1}
Let $G'(V', E')$ be a subgraph of $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$ satisfying the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item There are no edges in $G^*$ between the nodes in $V'$ and the nodes in $\left(U_1 \cup U_2 \right)\setminus V'$. \label{property1}
\item For each $j \in P^1$, $| V' \cap \{j_1\}| = | V' \cap \{j_3\}| $ and for each $j \in P^2$, $| V' \cap \{j_1, j_2\}| = | V' \cap \{j_3, j_4\}|$. \label{property2}
\item $|W_1 \cap V'| = |W_2 \cap V'| + 1$. \label{property3}
\end{enumerate}
\end{myclaim}
Now construct
\begin{eqnarray}\label{swapdemand}
z^3_j &=& \left\{\begin{array}{cl} z^1_j & \textup{if } j \in V_2 \setminus (V' \cap F) \\
1 & \textup{if } j \in V' \cap W_1\\
0 & \textup{if } j \in V' \cap W_2.
\end{array}\right.\\
\label{swapdemandx} x^3_{ij} &=& \left\{\begin{array}{cl} 1 & \textup{if } j \in F, z^3_j = 0, i \in I_j \\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_1 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V', i \in I_{j_1} \\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_2 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V', i \in I_{j_2} \\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_3 \in V', i \in I_{j_3} \\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_4 \in V', i \in I_{j_4} \\
0 & \textup{otherwise}.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{swapdemand1}
z^4_j &=& \left\{\begin{array}{cl} z^2_j & \textup{if } j \in V_2 \setminus (V' \cap F)\\
0 & \textup{if } j \in V' \cap W_1\\
1 & \textup{if } j \in V' \cap W_2.
\end{array}\right.\\
\label{swapdemand1x} x^4_{ij} &=& \left\{\begin{array}{cl} 1 & \textup{if } j \in F, z^4_j = 0, i \in I_j\\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_3 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V', i \in I_{j_3} \\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_4 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V', i \in I_{j_4} \\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_1 \in V', i \in I_{j_1}\\
1 & \textup{if } j \in P, j_2 \in V', i \in I_{j_2}\\
0 & \textup{otherwise}.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
Then $(x^3, z^3)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ are feasible solutions of $X$ that satisfy the requirements of Claim \ref{claim0}.\\
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item We verify that $(x^3, z^3)$ is a valid solution to $X$. A similar proof can be given for the validity of $(x^4, z^4)$. Clearly $x^3$ and $z^3$ satisfy the variable restrictions. We verify that the constraint $\sum_{i : (i,j) \in E}x^3_{ij} + d_j z_j = d_j$ is satisfied for all $j \in V_2$. If $j \in R$, then $z^3_j = z^1_j = 1$ and $x^3_{ij} = 0$ for all $(i,j) \in E$; therefore the constraint is satisfied. If $j \in F$, then using the first and last entry in (\ref{swapdemandx}), we have $\sum_{i : (i,j) \in E}x^3_{ij} + d_jz^3_j = d_j$. If $j \in P$, then $j \in V_2\setminus (V' \cap F)$. Therefore $z^3_j = z^1_j = 0$. Now it is straightforward to verify that $\sum_{i: (i,j) \in E}x^3_{ij} = 2 = d_j$ for each $j \in P^2$ since $| V' \cap \{j_1, j_2\}| = | V' \cap \{j_3, j_4\}| $ and by the use of the second, third, fourth and fifth entries in (\ref{swapdemandx}). For $j \in P^1$ we have $\sum_{i: (i,j) \in E}x^3_{ij} = 1 = d_j$ since $| V' \cap \{j_1\}| = | V' \cap \{j_3\}| $ and by the use of the second and fourth entries in (\ref{swapdemandx}).
Now we verify that the constraint $\sum_{j:(i,j) \in E} x_{ij} \leq 1$ is satisfied for all $i \in V_1$. Given $i \in V_1$, assume for contradiction that $x^3_{i g} = x^3_{i h} = 1$ for some $g, h \in V_2$ and $g \neq h$. By construction of $(x^3, z^3)$, $x^3_{ij} = 0$ for all $j \in R$. Thus, $g, h \notin R$. Moreover since $\sum_{i : (i,j) \in E}x^3_{ij} + d_j z_j = d_j$ is satisfied for all $j \in V_2$, we have $z^3_g = z^3_h = 0$.
Now, there are three cases to consider:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $g, h \in F$. By construction of $x^3$ we have $i \in I_{g} \cap I_{h}$. Now if $g \notin V'$ and $h \notin V'$, then by construction of $z^3$ (first entry in (\ref{swapdemand})) we have $z^1_g = z^3_g = 0 = z^3_h = z^1_h$ and thus $g, h \in S(z^1)$. Therefore by the validity of $(x^1, z^1)$ we have $I_g \cap I_h = \emptyset$. This contradicts $i \in I_g \cap I_h$. Now consider the case where $g \in V'$ and $h \in V'$. Since $i \in I_g \cap I_h$ by (\ref{sanegraph}) there is an edge between $g$ and $h$ in $G^*(U_1\cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$. Thus we may assume without loss of generality that $g \in V' \cap W_1$ and $h \in V' \cap W_2$. However, this implies that $z^3_g =1$, a contradiction. Now, without loss of generality, assume that $g \in V'$ and $h \notin V'$. Since $i \in I_g \cap I_h$ by (\ref{sanegraph}) there is an edge between $g$ and $h$ in $G^*(U_1\cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$. On the other hand, by assumption there is no edge between nodes in $V'$ and those not in $V'$, which is the required contradiction.
\item $g \in F$ and $h \in P$. We assume that $g \in W_1$ (the proof when $g \in W_2$ is similar). If $g \in V'$, then $z^3_g = 1$, a contradiction. Therefore, we have $g \notin V'$. Thus $z^1_g = z^3_g = 0$. Therefore by validity of $(x^1, z^1)$ we have $i \notin I_{h}(x^1, z^1)$ or equivalently $i \in I_{h}(x^2, z^2)$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $i \in I_{h_3}$. Note that $h_3$ belongs to $V'$ (by the construction of $x^3$ and the fact that $x^3_{ih} = 1$ and $i \in I_{h_3}$). Since $i \in I_g$, there exists an edge between $g$ and $h_3$. However, since $g \notin V'$ and $h_3 \in V'$, we get a contradiction to the fact that there are no edges between the nodes in $V'$ and the nodes in $(U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$.
\item $g, h \in P$. In this case, we may assume without loss of generality that $i \in I_g(x^1, z^1)$ and $i \in I_h(x^2, z^2)$. Therefore without loss of generality, we may assume that $i \in I_{g_1}$ and $i \in I_{h_3}$. Since $x^3_{ig} = x^3_{ih} = 1$, we have $g_1 \notin V'$ and $h_3 \in V'$. By assumption on $G'$, this implies that there is no edge between $g_1$ and $h_3$. On the other hand, since $i \in I_{g_1} \cap I_{h_3}$ by (\ref{sanegraph}) we have an edge $(g_1, h_3) \in \mathcal{E}$, a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
\item Next we verify that the objective function value of $(x^3, z^3)$ is $\rho - \delta$ and that of $(x^4, z^4)$ is $\rho + \delta$ where $\rho$ is the objective function value of the solution $(x^1, z^1)$ and $\delta \in \mathbb{R}$. This result is verified by showing that $(x^3,z^3)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ are obtained by `symmetrically' updating demands from $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^2, z^2)$ respectively. In particular, we examine each demand node and examine the cost of either satisfying it or not satisfying it in each solution. We consider the different cases next:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $j \in R$. Then $z^4_j = z^3_j = z^1_j = z^2_j = 1$.
\item $j \in V' \cap W_1$. Then $z^1_j = 0$ and $z^3_j=1$. On the other hand $z^2_j=1$ and $z^4_j=0$. Notice that in each solution where $d_j$ is satisfied, this is done by using the same set of input nodes (and thus using the same arcs). Therefore the difference in objective function value between $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^3, z^3)$ due to demand node $j$ is $-\sum_{i \in I_j}w_{ij} + r_j$ and the difference in objective function value between the solutions $(x^2, z^2)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ due to demand node $j$ is $\sum_{i \in I_j}w_{ij} - r_j$.
\item $j \in V' \cap W_2$. Similar to the above case the difference in objective function value between $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^3, z^3)$ due to demand node $j$ is $\sum_{i \in I_j}w_{ij} - r_j$ and the difference in objective function value between $(x^2, z^2)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ due to demand node $j$ is $-\sum_{i \in I_j}w_{ij} + r_j$.
\item $j \in F\setminus V' $, then $z^1_j = z^3_j$ and $x^1_{ij} = x^3_{ij}$ for all $(i, j)\in E$. Similarly $z^2_j = z^4_j$ and $x^2_{ij} = x^4_{ij}$ for all $(i, j)\in E$.
\item $j \in P^2$ such that $j_1, j_2 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$ and $j_3, j_4 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$. Then the demand $d_j$ is satisfied by the nodes in $I_{j}(x^1, z^1)$ in $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^3, z^3)$. Therefore there is no difference in objective function value between $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^3, z^3)$ with respect to demand node $j$. Similarly, the demand $d_j$ is satisfied by the nodes in $I_{j}(x^2, z^2)$ in $(x^2, z^2)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ and there is no difference in objective function value between $(x^2, z^2)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ with respect to demand node $j$. We can make a similar argument for $j \in P^1$ such that $j_1 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$ and $j_3\in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$.
\item $j \in P^2$ such that $j_1 \in V'$, $j_2 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$, $j_3 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$, $ j_4 \in V'$ without loss of generality. Then the demand $d_j$ is satisfied by the nodes in $(I_{j_1} \cup I_{j_2})$ in $(x^1, z^1)$ and by nodes $(I_{j_2} \cup I_{j_4})$ in $(x^3, z^3)$. Therefore the difference in objective function value between $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^3, z^3)$ with respect to demand node $d_j$ is $\sum_{i \in I_{j_1}}w_{ij} - \sum_{i \in I_{j_4}}w_{ij}$. The demand $d_j$ is satisfied by the nodes in $(I_{j_3} \cup I_{j_4})$ in $(x^2, z^2)$ and by the nodes in $(I_{j_1} \cup I_{j_3})$ in $(x^4, z^4)$. Therefore the difference in objective function value between $(x^2, z^2)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ with respect to demand node $j$ is $\sum_{i \in I_{j_4}}w_{ij} - \sum_{i \in I_{j_1}}w_{ij}$. We can make a similar argument for the cases: $j_1 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$, $j_2 \in V'$, $j_3 \in V'$, $ j_4 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$; $j_1 \in V'$, $j_2 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$, $j_3 \in V'$, $ j_4 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$ and $j_1 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$, $j_2 \in V'$, $j_3 \in (U_1 \cup U_2) \setminus V'$, $ j_4 \in V'$.
\item $j \in P^2$ such that $j_1 \in V'$, $j_2 \in V'$, $j_3 \in V'$, $ j_4 \in V'$. Then the demand $d_j$ is satisfied by the nodes in $(I_{j_1} \cup I_{j_2})$ in $(x^1, z^1)$ and by the nodes in $(I_{j_3} \cup I_{j_4})$ in $(x^3, z^3)$. Therefore, the difference in the objective function value between $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^3, z^3)$ with respect to satisfying demand $d_j$ is $\sum_{i \in (I_{j_1} \cup I_{j_2})}(w_{ij} + w_{ij}) - \sum_{i \in (I_{j_3} \cup I_{j_4})}(w_{ij} + w_{ij}) $. The demand $d_j$ is satisfied by the nodes in $(I_{j_3} \cup I_{j_4})$ in $(x^2, z^2)$ and by the nodes in $(I_{j_1} \cup I_{j_2})$ in $(x^4, z^4)$. Therefore, the difference in the objective function value between $(x^2, z^2)$ and $(x^4, z^4)$ with regards to satisfying demand $d_j$ is $-\sum_{i \in (I_{j_1} \cup I_{j_2})}(w_{ij} + w_{ij}) + \sum_{i \in (I_{j_3} \cup I_{j_4})}(w_{ij} + w_{ij})$. For $j \in P^1$, we can similarly consider $j_1$ and $j_3$ with $j_1 \in V'$, $j_3 \in V'$.
\end{enumerate}
Therefore, the objective function value of $(x^3, z^3)$ is $\rho - \delta$ and that of $(x^4, z^4)$ is $\rho + \delta$ where $\rho$ is the objective function value of the solution $(x^1, z^1)$ and $(x^2, z^2)$ and $\delta \in \mathbb{R}$.
\item Finally we verify that $\sum_{j \in V_2}z^3_j = k^1 +1$ and $\sum_{j \in V_2}z^4_j = k^2 - 1$. We prove this for $(x^3, z^3)$. The proof is similar for the case of $(x^4, z^4)$. Observe that if $j \in R$, then $z^1_j = z^3_j = 1$. If $j \in P$, then $z^1_j = z^3_j = 0$. If $j \in F\setminus V'$, then $z^1_j = z^3_j$. If $j \in W_1 \cap V'$, then $z^1_j = 0$ and $z^3_j = 1$ and if $j \in W_2 \cap V'$, then $z^1_j = 1$ and $z^3_j = 0$. Thus $\sum_{j \in V_2}z^1_j - \sum_{j \in V_2}z^3_j = |V' \cap W_2| - |V' \cap W_1| = -1$, where the last equality is by assumption (\ref{property3}) of $G'$. Thus, $\sum_{j \in V_2}z^3_j = k^1 +1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
Now the proof of Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty} is complete by showing that a subgraph $G'(V',E')$ of $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$ always exists that satisfies the conditions of Claim \ref{claim1}. In order to prove this, we verify a few results.
\begin{myclaim} \label{claim2}
Connected components of $G^*$ are paths or cycles of even length and all the cycles involve only full nodes.
\end{myclaim}
\begin{proof} This is evident from the fact that $G^*$ is bipartite and degree of $a \in (U_1 \cup U_2)$ is bounded from above by $|I_a|$.\hfill
\end{proof}
We associate a value $v_j$ to each node $j \in U_1 \cup U_2$. In particular:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $j \in W_1$, then $v_j = 1$.
\item If $j \in U_1$ and $j$ is a partial node, then $v_j = \frac{1}{2}$.
\item If $j \in U_2$ and $j$ is a partial node, then $v_j = -\frac{1}{2}$.
\item If $j \in W_2$, then $v_j = -1$.
\end{enumerate}
For a { subgraph} $\tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E})$ { of $G^{*}$} we call $v(\tilde{V}) = \sum_{j \in \tilde{V}}v_j$ the \emph{value of the path}.
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim3}
$v(U_1 \cup U_2) = k^2 - k^1 \geq 2$.
\end{myclaim}
\begin{proof} $\sum_{j \in U_1 \cup U_2}v_j = \sum_{j \in W_1}v_j + \sum_{j \in P^2} (v_{j_1} + v_{j_2}) + \sum_{j \in P^1} v_{j_1} + \sum_{j \in W_2}v_j + \sum_{j \in P^2} (v_{j_3} + v_{j_4}) + \sum_{j \in P^1} v_{j_3} = |S(z^1) \setminus S(z^2)| - |S(z^2) \setminus S(z^1)| = |S(z^1)| - |S(z^2)| = k^2 - k^1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim4}
If $\tilde{G}(\tilde{V},\tilde{E})$ is a cyclic subgraph of $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$, then $v(\tilde{V}) = 0$.
\end{myclaim}
\begin{proof} By Claim \ref{claim2}, a cycle has only full nodes. Moreover, since a cycle is of even length, it contains equal number of nodes from $W_1$ and $W_2$.
\end{proof}
In the rest of this note, when we refer to a path in $G^*$, we refer to a connected component of $G^*$ which is a path (that is any node not belonging to the path does not share an edge with any node of the path).
Note that a partial node must be a leaf node in a path. Using this observation and by some simple case analysis the following three claims can be verified.
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim5}
If $\tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E})$ is a path containing exactly one partial node, then $v(\tilde{V}) \in \{-\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2}\}$.
\end{myclaim}
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim6}
If $\tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E})$ is a path containing two partial nodes, then $v(\tilde{V}) = 0$.
\end{myclaim}
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim7}
If $\tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E})$ is a path containing only full nodes, then $v(\tilde{V}) \in \{-1, 0, 1\}$.
\end{myclaim}
\noindent For the subgraph {$\tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E})$, consider a $k \in \tilde{V} \setminus F$} such that $k = j_t$ where $t \in \{1, 2, 3, 4\}$ and $j \in P^2$. Suppose $k = j_1$ or $j_2$, then we say that a path $\check{G}(\check{V}, \check{E})$ is a \emph{mirror path} for $j$, if $\check{V}$ contains either $j_3$ or $j_4$. Moreover we call one of $j_3$ or $j_4$ (whichever belongs to $\check{V}$ or arbitrarily select one of these if both belong to $\check{V}$) as the \emph{mirror node}. Similarly if $k = j_3$ or $j_4$, then we say that a path $\check{G}(\check{V}, \check{E})$ is a \emph{mirror path} for $j$, if $\check{V}$ contains either $j_1$ or $j_2$. \emph{Mirror node} is similarly defined in this case. For $j \in P^1$ we consider $k=j_1$ and $k=j_3$. Suppose $k=j_1$, then we say that a path $\check{G}(\check{V}, \check{E})$ is a \emph{mirror path} for $j$, if $\check{V}$ contains $j_3$ and we call $j_3$ the \emph{mirror node}. Similarly if $k=j_3$, then we say that a path $\check{G}(\check{V}, \check{E})$ is a \emph{mirror path} for $j$, if $\check{V}$ contains $j_1$ and we call $j_1$ the \emph{mirror node}.
Algorithm \ref{algotable} constructs $G'(V', E')$ that satisfies all the properties of Claim \ref{claim1}. We next verify that Algorithm \ref{algotable} is well-defined, that is all the steps can be carried out. Moreover, we show that the algorithm generates a subgraph $G'(V', E')$ that satisfies the conditions of Claim \ref{claim1}.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Construction of $G'(V', E')$}
\label{algotable}
\noindent \textbf{Input:} $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$.\\
\noindent \textbf{Output:} $G'(V', E')$ that satisfies all conditions of Claim \ref{claim1}.\\
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{cleansol}If there exists a path $\tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E})$ in $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$ containing only full nodes with $v(\tilde{V}) = 1$, then set $G':= \tilde{G}$. STOP.
\item Tag all paths in $G^*(U_1 \cup U_2, \mathcal{E})$ as `unmarked.'
\item \label{atzero}Select a path $\tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E})$ from the set of `unmarked' paths containing a partial node such that $v(\tilde{V}) = \frac{1}{2}$. Tag this path as `marked.' Note that by Claim \ref{claim5} and Claim \ref{claim6}, $\tilde{V}$ contains a unique partial node $j^{*}$.
\item \label{athalf} Select a path from the list of `unmarked' paths, such that it is a mirror path for $j^{*}$. Tag this path as `marked.'
\item \label{decision} There are three cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The mirror path tagged as `marked' in (\ref{athalf}) contains a unique partial node and its value is $\frac{1}{2}$. \newline GO TO Step \ref{laststep}.
\item The mirror path tagged as `marked' in (\ref{athalf}) contains a unique partial node and its value is $-\frac{1}{2}$. \newline GO TO Step \ref{atzero}.
\item The mirror path tagged as `marked' in (\ref{athalf}) contains two partial nodes (then its value is $0$): \newline One of the partial nodes {corresponds to} the mirror node. Set $j^{*}$ to be the other partial node. GO TO Step \ref{athalf}.
\end{enumerate}
\item \label{laststep} Set $G'(V', E')$ to be disjoint union of the paths tagged as `marked.' STOP.
\end{enumerate}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim8}
Algorithm \ref{algotable} is well-defined.
\begin{enumerate}
\item At the beginning of Step (\ref{atzero}), the total value of all marked paths is $0$.
\item Let $\hat{V} := \bigcup_{ \tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E}) \textup{ is marked before Step (\ref{atzero})} } \tilde{V} $. Then $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1, j_2 \}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3, j_4 \}|$ for all $j \in P^2$ and $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1\}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3\}|$ for all $j \in P^1$.
\item Step (\ref{atzero}) is well-defined, that is as long as the algorithm does not terminate, Step (\ref{atzero}) can be carried out.
\item At the end of Step (\ref{atzero}), the total value of all marked paths is $\frac{1}{2}$.
\item Step (\ref{athalf}) is well-defined, that is as long as the algorithm does not terminate, Step (\ref{athalf}) can be carried out.
\end{enumerate}
\end{myclaim}
\begin{proof} We prove Claim \ref{claim8} by induction on the iteration number ($n$) of the algorithm visiting Step (\ref{decision}). When $n = 0$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item At the beginning of Step (\ref{atzero}) there are no `marked' paths and therefore the total value of all marked paths is $0$.
\item $\hat{V} = \emptyset$.
\item By Step (\ref{cleansol}), we know that there exists no path containing only full nodes with $v(\tilde{V}) = 1$. Moreover by Claim \ref{claim3} we have $v(U_1 \cup U_2) \geq 2$. Since by Claim \ref{claim4} all cycles have a value of $0$, there must exist at least one path with partial nodes with positive value. Since this is only possible (Claim \ref{claim5}, Claim \ref{claim6} and Claim \ref{claim7}) if there exists exactly one partial node in the path, we see that Step (\ref{atzero}) is well-defined.
\item At Step (\ref{atzero}) one path is marked which has a value of half.
\item Since one path is tagged as marked in Step (\ref{atzero}), it contains exactly one partial node, $j^*\in P$. Suppose that $j^* \in P^2$ and $j^* = {j^{*}_i}$ for some $i \in \{1, \dots, 4\}$. Then there exists paths (at least two) which contain the other three partial nodes corresponding to $j^*$. If $j^*\in P^1$ then there exists one path which contains the other partial node. Therefore this step is well-defined.
\end{enumerate}
Now for any $n \in \mathbb{Z}_{+}$, assuming by the induction hypothesis that the result is true for $n' = 0, \dots, n - 1$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Step (\ref{atzero}) is arrived at via Step (\ref{decision}b). Let $n' < n$ be the last iteration when Step (\ref{atzero}) is invoked. By the induction hypothesis, the total value of all the marked paths at the end of Step (\ref{atzero}) in iteration $n'$ is $\frac{1}{2}$.
From iterations $n' + 1, \dots, n -1$, the algorithm alternates between Step (\ref{athalf}) and Step (\ref{decision}c). The total value of all the marked paths here is $0$. Finally, the value of the last path tagged as marked in Step (\ref{athalf}) is $-\frac{1}{2}$ (since the algorithm invokes Step (\ref{decision}b)). Hence, the total value of all the marked paths is $0$ at the beginning of Step (\ref{atzero}) in iteration $n$.
\item \label{pickboth} Let $n' < n$ be the last iteration when Step (\ref{atzero}) is invoked. By the induction hypothesis $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1, j_2 \}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3, j_4 \}|$ for all $j \in P^2$ and $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1\}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3\}|$ for all $j \in P^1$ where \newline $\hat{V} := \bigcup_{ \tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E}) \textup{ is marked before Step (\ref{atzero}) \textup{ iteration } n' } } \tilde{V} $. From iterations $n' + 1, \dots, n -1$, the algorithm alternates between Step (\ref{athalf}) and Step (\ref{decision}c). Since in iteration $n -1$ at Step (\ref{athalf}), we add one path that contains only the mirror node to $j^{*}$ (the unique partial node from the previous iteration), we arrive at this result.
\item Proof is the same as that in the case where $n = 0$.
\item The total value of paths at the end of Step (\ref{atzero}) = value of marked path + total value of previously marked path $= \frac{1}{2} + 0 $.
\item Step (\ref{athalf}) is invoked after either Step (\ref{atzero}) or Step (\ref{decision}c). In case we arrive via Step (\ref{atzero}), by the induction hypothesis, $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1, j_2 \}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3, j_4 \}|$ for all $j \in P^2$ and $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1\}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3\}|$ for all $j \in P^1$ where $\hat{V} := \bigcup_{ \tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E}) \textup{ is marked before Step (\ref{atzero}) \textup{ iteration } n' } } \tilde{V} $. Moreover the path marked in Step (\ref{atzero}) contains exactly a unique partial node $j^{*}$, then there must exist an unmarked path containing a mirror node to $j^{*}$. In case of we arrive via Step (\ref{decision}c), again the proof is essentially the same by observing that at the start of Step (\ref{athalf}), there is a unique partial node $j^{*}$ that is not paired with a mirror partial node.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim9}
Algorithm \ref{algotable} terminates in finite time.
\end{myclaim}
\begin{proof} This is true since there are a finite number of edges and at each iteration of the algorithm at least one unmarked path is tagged as marked.
\end{proof}
\begin{myclaim}\label{claim10}
Algorithm \ref{algotable} generates a subgraph $G'(V', E')$ that satisfies the properties of Claim \ref{claim1}.
\end{myclaim}
\begin{proof} First observe that since the output $G'(V', E')$ of the algorithm is a disjoint union of paths, there exists no edge between $V'$ and $(U_1 \cup U_2)\setminus V'$ in $\mathcal{E}$, so property \ref{property1} is satisfied.
By Claim \ref{claim8}, 2. we have $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1, j_2 \}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3, j_4 \}|$ for all $j \in P^2$ and $|\hat{V} \cap \{j_1\}| = |\hat{V} \cap \{j_3\}|$ for all $j \in P^1$ where $$\hat{V} := \bigcup_{ \tilde{G}(\tilde{V}, \tilde{E}) \textup{ is marked before Step (\ref{atzero})} } \tilde{V}.$$
Therefore, it is easily verified that in the last iteration before termination, a path with a unique partial node, which is a mirror node to $j^{*}$, is marked in Step (\ref{athalf}). This is because before termination we arrive at Step (\ref{decision}a) implying that the value of the path marked in Step (\ref{athalf}) is $\frac{1}{2}$. Hence Claim \ref{claim5} and Claim \ref{claim6} imply that there is a unique partial node in this path. Thus, $|V' \cap \{j_1, j_2 \}| = |V' \cap \{j_3, j_4 \}|$ for all $j \in P^2$ and $|V' \cap \{j_1\}| = |V' \cap \{j_3\}|$ for all $j \in P^1$, so property \ref{property2} is satisfied.
Finally, since $v(V') = 1$ and $|V' \cap \{j_1, j_2 \}| = |V' \cap \{j_3, j_4 \}|$ for all $j \in P^2$ and $|V' \cap \{j_1\}| = |V' \cap \{j_3\}|$ for all $j \in P^1$ we have $$\sum_{j \in V' \cap W_1}v_j + \sum_{j \in V' \cap W_2}v_j = 1.$$ As a result, $|V' \cap W_1| = |V' \cap W_2| + 1$, so property \ref{property3} is satisfied.
\end{proof}
We showed that the set of solutions to TPMC satisfies the edge property. Theorem \ref{conjectureintproperty} then follows from Proposition \ref{edgproperty-convexhull}.
\section*{Acknowledgements.} Pelin Damc\i-Kurt and Simge K\"u\c{c}\"ukyavuz are supported, in part, by NSF-CMMI grant 1055668. Santanu S. Dey gratefully acknowledges the support of the AIR Force Office of Scientific Research grant FA9550-12-1-0154.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Our Milky Way consists of the Galactic disk, which has a few spiral
arms, the extended Galactic halo, the Galactic bulge, and a central
bar. However, a detailed picture of the Milky Way is not yet clear.
Spiral structures have been observed only in the closest half of our
Milky Way, and the pitch angles of only a few arm segments have
been determined \citep[see][]{hh14}. Embedded in these large-scale
structures, the interstellar medium (ISM) consists of diffuse neutral
hydrogen (H\,\textsc{i}) gas and H\,\textsc{i} clouds, higher density
regions of molecular clouds, diffuse ionized gas (H\,\textsc{ii})
and extended or compact H\,\textsc{ii} regions. In turn, the ISM is
permeated by magnetic fields, and the magnetized interstellar plasma
is known as the magnetoionic medium. Although the magnetoionic medium
occupies a significant fraction ($\sim 0.2$) of the volume of the ISM,
we have only limited knowledge of its distribution in the disk and
halo.
A considerable amount of energy is required to keep the ISM ionized,
roughly 15--20\% of the luminosity of all O/B stars in the Galaxy.
Accordingly, ionized gas traces the energy input into the ISM, which
is dominated by supernova remnants and the stellar winds of bright
young stars. Therefore, in the Galactic disk, more ionized gas and
more disturbed small-scale structures are expected to be associated
with the spiral arms (as opposed to the interarm regions). However,
the origin of hot gas in the Galactic halo, where very few hot stars
exist, is not clear.
Magnetic fields are ubiquitous throughout the Universe. The magnetic
fields in our Galaxy play a crucial role in numerous astrophysical
processes: they affect the propagation of cosmic rays, impact the
evolution of molecular clouds and star formation, and facilitate
the transport of heat, angular momentum and energy. Measurements of
the magnetic structure of the Milky Way are sparse, especially at
distances greater than several kiloparsecs from the Sun and on length
scales shorter than tens of parsecs. Zeeman splitting measurements
probe the in situ magnetic fields of small-scale star formation
regions, which are evidently related to the large scale structure of
the Galactic magnetic field (\citealp{hz07}; see also \citealp{g+14}
and \citealp{rob14} in this volume).
Faraday rotation measurements probe the integrated magnetic field
along the line of sight to pulsars and extragalactic radio sources.
Because pulsars are distributed throughout the Milky Way, their
compact nature and short-duration, highly-polarized radio pulses make
them ideal probes of the three-dimensional structure of the diffuse
magnetoionic medium in our Galaxy. Extraction of the common
contribution to Faraday rotation measures of extragalactic radio
sources yields the total Faraday rotation due to the Galactic
magnetoionic medium (\citealp{xh14a,xh14b,ha+14} in this volume).
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=270,width=70mm]{fig1a.ps} \hspace{5mm}
\includegraphics[angle=270,width=70mm]{fig1b.ps}
\caption{Distance distribution of known pulsars in the Galactic disk
($|b|<8^{\circ}$) and in the Galactic halo $|b| \ge 8^{\circ}$. The
green histograms correspond to pulsars with available RMs. }
\label{psrdist}
\end{figure}
To date, 2300 pulsars have been discovered using single dish
telescopes \citep[see the updated catalog of][]{mhth05}. Most
of the known pulsars are in the Galactic disk, and about 20\% of them
are in the Galactic halo (see Figure \ref{psrdist}). The distribution
of pulsars at low Galactic latitudes occupies about half of the
Galactic disk; at high latitudes, the distribution is limited to about
4 kpc from the Sun. A large spatial volume of the Milky Way is left
for future pulsar discovery by the next generation of radio telescopes
with extremely high sensitivity, such as FAST \citep{nan11},
LOFAR \citep{cvh+14} and the SKA \citep{kbk+14}.
According to the current SKA1 Baseline Design \citep{dtm+13},
Phase 1 of the SKA will consist of three arrays: a low-frequency array
(SKA1-LOW), a mid-frequency array (SKA1-MID), and a wide-field survey
array (SKA1-SUR). SKA1-LOW will be able to observe the
$-67^{\circ}<\mathrm{Dec}<13^{\circ}$ sky in the frequency range of
50-350 MHz. The core array with a maximum baseline of 50 km will have
a resolution of $11''$, and its collecting area of 800,000 m$^2$ will
reach a flux density limit of $2\mu \mathrm{Jy}\;
\mathrm{hr}^{-1/2}$. In 10-min integrations, the 600 m core array can
reach 0.05 mJy. It is predicted that SKA1-LOW will find about 7,000
normal pulsars and about 900 millisecond pulsars \citep{kbk+14},
mostly in the closest half of the Galactic halo. SKA1-MID will operate
in 5 different frequency bands; of relevance to this study are the
three bands that overlap with those of SKA1-SUR: band-1: 350--1,050
MHz (MID) or 350--900 MHz (SUR); band-2: 950--1,760 MHz (MID) or
650--1,670 MHz (SUR); and band-3: 1,650--3,050 MHz (MID) or
1,500--4,000 MHz (SUR). Band-1 will be used to survey the halo pulsars
at high Galactic latitudes, band-2 will be used at mid latitudes and
to reach pulsars in the furthest reaches of the Galactic disk, and
band-3 will be used at very low latitudes (e.g.\,$|b|<10^{\circ}$).
According to simulations, SKA1-MID will find about 9,000 normal pulsars
and about 1400 millisecond pulsars (see Fig.\ 3 of \citealp{kbk+14})
distributed in about $2/3$ of the Galactic disk and reaching 5 kpc
farther than the Galactic center.
With approximately 50\% of the sensitivity of SKA1, the early phase
SKA1 will discover only 1/4 or 1/3 of the above predicted numbers of
pulsars (assuming that similar surveys are done).
SKA2-LOW is expected to discover 11,000 pulsars, including 1500
millisecond pulsars, and SKA2-MID will find 24,000 -- 30,000 pulsars,
of which 2,400 -- 3,000 will be millisecond pulsars. The most distant
pulsars will be about 10 kpc beyond the Galactic center in the other
half of the disk.
The large numbers of pulsars discovered by SKA1 and SKA2 can be used to
constrain the structure of the magnetoionic medium with unprecedented
detail.
Using pulsar dispersion measure (DM) and scattering measure (SM)
estimates, combined with parallax distance estimates, we will
construct the three-dimensional electron density distribution of the
Milky Way, especially the poorly-explored region around the Galactic
center and in the halo, as discussed in Section 2.
Furthermore, the small-scale structure of the magnetoionic medium will
be illuminated by high quality scintillation data and the dynamic
spectra of many bright pulsars.
Pulsar Faraday rotation measure (RM) estimates, combined with pulsar
DM estimates, will be used to reveal the detailed three-dimensional
structure of the Galactic magnetic field, as shown in Section 3.
In fact, the high sensitivity of SKA1 and SKA2 should also
enable the discovery of a large number of pulsars in nearby galaxies,
which opens the window for the study of the intergalactic medium
(IGM), as discussed in Section 4. The conclusions of this chapter are
presented in Section 5.
\section{SKA1 for electron density distribution}
A better understanding of the electron-density distribution is crucial
for estimating distances to large numbers of distant pulsars and
deriving the magnetic field from Faraday rotation measurements (see
Sect. 3). The ionized gas in the ISM is not uniformly distributed. In
the Galactic disk, high density clumps are associated with
H\,\textsc{ii} regions and bright stars, such that the distribution of
higher density ionized gas follows the spiral arms. There are also
many voids that are associated with bubbles or superbubbles. The
ionized gas can be directly imaged by H$\alpha$ surveys \citep{fin03},
but its distribution throughout the Galactic disk is difficult
to ascertain owing to our location near the edge of the Galactic
disk. Measurements of ionized gas in the Galactic halo and
in the area around the Galactic center are limited.
\subsection{Pulsar distances and the electron density distribution}
The dispersion measure (DM) of a pulsar is the integral of the free
electron density between the pulsar and us, $ {\mathrm
DM}=\int_\mathrm{us}^\mathrm{PSR} n_e\, d l$.
The DMs of a large number of widely distributed pulsars can be used to
construct a model of the electron density distribution, as long as the
distances to these pulsars can be independently measured. However, pulsar
distances are difficult to measure. Available methods include 1)
measuring annual parallax using Very Long Baseline Interferometry
(VLBI) astrometry, pulsar timing, or even by direct multi-epoch high
resolution optical images; 2) establishing an association between a
pulsar and a supernova remnant (SNR) that has an estimated distance;
3) observing HI absorption and deriving the kinematic distance with
the Galactic rotation curve. Only with an accurate distance can a
pulsar dispersion measure be converted to an average electron density
along the line of sight, and a large number of such sight-lines (of
different length and in different directions) are necessary to
construct a suitably detailed model of the ionized ISM of the Milky
Way.
Currently, the most widely used model for the electron density
distribution in the Milky Way is the NE2001 model (\citealp{cl02};
see the yellow background in Fig. \ref{rm_psr_egr}), which has
received over 800 citations and is an essential reference model
for Galactic studies. At the time it was constructed, distance
estimates were available for $\sim$100 pulsars: 19 via parallax (13
via VLBI, 5 via timing and 1 via optical imaging), 74 via HI
absorption, 8 via SNR associations, 16 via globular cluster
associations, and 8 pulsars in the Magellanic clouds.
In order to improve our understanding of the ionized ISM, it is
crucial to accurately estimate the distance to as many pulsars as
possible. Since NE2001 was finalized, a wealth of new information on
pulsar distances has been obtained, with the number of measured
parallaxes\footnote{see e.g.\,
http://www.astro.cornell.edu/research/parallax/} increasing
five-fold. In particular, the number of precise measurements made with
Very Long Baseline Interferometry has exploded, predominantly due to
careful work with the Very Long Baseline Array \citep{bbgt02,cbv+09,dbc+11}.
Using pulsars at known
distances, which come from either parallax measurements or by
association with Galactic globular clusters or the Magellanic Clouds,
\citet{gmc+08} found that the ionized thick
disk in the Milky Way could have a scale height of
$1.8^{+0.1}_{-0.2}$~kpc, which is almost a factor of two larger than
the scale height used in NE2001 and its predecessor, the TC93 model by
\citet{tc93}. By also including other model
components from TC93 and NE2001 when fitting for the scale height of
the thick disk, \citet{sch12} subsequently showed
that the difference in scale height is probably not so large. These
results demonstrate that measuring geometric parallaxes for a large
sample of pulsars has the potential to considerably change our
understanding of the structure of the ionized Milky Way. A revised
"NE2014" model incorporating the latest distance and scattering
constraints would already form a considerable advance in our knowledge
of the ionized ISM.
However, despite the recent advances in VLBI precision (where parallax
errors of 0.02 mas and better are now attainable; see e.g.\,\citealp{dbl+13}),
most pulsars with a geometric distance
measurement are still in the local Galactic neighbourhood; the
existing VLBI and timing parallaxes span 6.4 to 0.2 mas, and the
median of 64 distances measured by parallax is just $\sim$0.9 kpc. To
make a truly Galactic-scale model, many new constraints at larger
distances are required.
Fortunately, in addition to discovering many new pulsars, the SKA will
also excel in the measurement of their distances. Precision timing of
millisecond pulsars with SKA1 will yield a significant number of
timing parallax distances widely distributed across the Galaxy \citep{kbk+14}.
The exact number will depend on the observing time
allocated to pulsar timing programs, but observations for pulsar
timing arrays (\citealp{j+14} in this volume) will ensure a
moderately sized sample.
SKA1-VLBI observations (in which SKA1-mid and SKA1-survey are used as
sensitive phased-array elements in a VLBI array; \citealp{pgr+14})
will provide even greater parallax precision, capable of measuring
distances across the Galaxy. This technique will also be more widely
applicable because all radio pulsars can be targeted, not only
millisecond pulsars. Observing time will likely limit the number of
sources for which VLBI parallaxes can be obtained with SKA1, but it
will remain possible to obtain a sample of sources that cover a
representative region of the Galaxy. Both timing and VLBI parallaxes
will be possible with early-phase SKA1 at 50\% sensitivity, although
in each case they will be unable to access the faintest members of the
population.
With SKA2, the situation improves further. The increase in collecting
area will make even higher precision timing parallaxes possible for
fainter sources; for imaging observations, the addition of several
thousand km baselines to the SKA will make VLBI-style observations
possible with SKA2 alone. \citet{stw+11} estimated that of order
10,000 pulsar distances could be measured by SKA2, with the majority
obtained via imaging observations.
\subsection{Wide-band observations of pulsar scattering}
The emission region of pulsars is very small (less than a few hundred
kilometers), such that pulsars are effectively point radio sources (with
angular sizes of nanoarcseconds). When pulsed radio emission from a
point source passes through the inhomogeneous interstellar plasma, two
manifestations of multi-path propagation effects can be
observed: pulse broadening in the time domain and a scattering disk in
the image domain. With the SKA, the inhomogeneous interstellar plasma will
produce observable effects on lines of sight to thousands of
pulsars. These effects will be most significant in the SKA1-LOW band,
and combination with the wide frequency range in the two lower bands
of SKA1-MID and SKA1-SUR will enable the unprecedented use of
interstellar scattering to study the properties of the intervening
medium.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{fig2.eps}
\caption{The time scales of pulse broadening are related to pulsar DM,
in addition to the frequency dependence $\nu^{-\alpha}$ (see \citealp{brc+04}
for details: the filled dots denote measurements from
multifrequency profiles presented in that paper, crossed circles
denote measurements based on pulsar decorrelation bandwidths, and
open circles denote previous measurements in the literature. The
line is the best fit of equation 2.1 to the data).}
\label{tauDM}
\end{figure}
To date, pulse broadening has been measured at several frequencies for
only about 150 pulsars \citep[e.g.][]{lkm+01,lmg+04,brc+04,ldkk13}.
For nearby pulsars (within a few
kpc) the pulse broadening time scale varies with radio frequency as
$\tau \sim \nu^{-\alpha}$, where $\alpha\sim4.4$, which is consistent
with a Kolmogorov spectrum of electron density fluctuations. For
distant pulsars, the $\alpha$ values deviate from a single thin screen
model. Because ISM irregularities are associated with spiral arms,
the most distant pulsars with sight-lines passing through several spiral arms
should exhibit very different scattering behaviour that is not as simple
as the Kolmogorov spectrum \citep{ldkk13}. The time scale
of pulse broadening is related to the pulsar DM by
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:t_scat}
\log \tau\simeq a + b (\log \mathrm{DM}) +
c (\log \mathrm{DM})^2 -\alpha \log \nu
\end{equation}
(see Fig.2 of \citealp{brc+04}) with $a=-6.46$, $b=0.154$ and
$c=1.07$. The estimated value of $\alpha=3.86\pm0.16$ is
significantly lower than the value of 4.4 that is appropriate for a
Kolmogorov medium. However, the dispersion of $\tau$ estimates spans
one or two orders of magnitude in Fig.~\ref{tauDM}. Some pulsars with
high DMs do not show strong scattering as expected, such as PSR
B2002+31 \citep{l71} and the Galactic center pulsar PSR J1745$-$2900
\citep{sle+14}. This probably indicates a predominantly
uniform medium along these lines of sight. It is possible that the
interstellar plasmas in the Galactic halo and near the Galactic center
have fewer irregularities and are more uniformly distributed than in the
disk.
The scattering disks of only a few pulsars have been observed to date
\citep[e.g.][]{laz04}. The angular diameter of the disk depends on radio
frequency as $\theta\sim\nu^{-\beta}$, where $\beta=-2.2$ for an
electron density distribution described by a Kolmogorov spectrum.
Note that angular broadening measurements often indicate
$\beta\sim2.0$ (e.g.\,at the Galactic Centre) and decorrelation
bandwidths often scale as $\nu^{-4}$, both of which indicate that the
diffractive scale probed by pulsar observations is within the inner
scale of the turbulent cascade in the ISM.
SKA-VLBI \citep{pgr+14} will provide the sensitivity, wide
frequency coverage, high resolution, and high dynamic range required
to overcome the technical challenges associated with observations of
angular broadening.
Scattering in the ISM operates as an interferometer whose maximum
baseline is of order the size of the scattering disk, up to tens of AU
\citep[e.g.][]{pl14,pmdb14}. Pulsar longitude-resolved
SKA-VLBI observations at low frequencies can constrain source
structure on nanoarcsecond scales, which will enable us to image
pulsar magnetospheres on scales down to $\sim$10~km; for more details,
see \citet{kja+14} in this volume.
\subsection{Wide-band observations of pulsar scintillation}
Owing to the inhomogeneity of the ISM and the high relative velocities
of neutron stars, pulsars exhibit flux density modulations as a
function of radio frequency and time, known as scintillation. To
characterize the diffractive scintillation, dynamic scintillation
spectra are analyzed using a two-dimensional autocorrelation function
to obtain the temporal and spectral scales of decorrelation, which are
related to the diameter of scattering disk.
Small-scale structures in the ISM cause rapid intensity variations
(diffractive scintillation) and large-scale density structures cause
slow refractive scintillation.
Very high sensitivity is required to observe the dynamic spectrum of a
pulsar, which must be detectable in a narrow band in a short
integration time. Accordingly, dynamic spectra have been observed for
only the brightest pulsars \citep[e.g.][]{grl94}. Owing
primarily to the high velocities of pulsars, the differences between
dynamic spectra observed at different epochs probe the irregularities
of the ISM on scales ranging of $\sim10^8$ to $10^{13}$~m.
Dynamic spectra with high signal-to-noise ratio ($S/N$)
can be further analyzed via the two-dimensional Fourier transformation
to yield the power spectrum of the dynamic spectrum, known as the
secondary spectrum.
Secondary spectra typically exhibit power concentrated in parabolic
arcs, and each point on this arc arises from interference between
points in the scattered image of the source. The parabolic shape
arises from differential Doppler shift and differential delay between
points in the scattered image, which vary linearly and quadratically,
respectively, with scattering angle \citep[e.g.][]{crsc06}.
Features in the secondary spectra also vary as a function of radio
frequency and observing epoch, see e.g.\,figures~1, 2 and 3 in
\citet{crsc06} and figure 1 of \citet{sti06}. Multiple parabolic
arcs are likely produced by multiple scattering screens along the line
of sight.
The best observations of secondary spectra have been carried out at Arecibo
\citep[e.g.][]{crsc06}. Using the core array of SKA1-LOW and
SKA1-MID, high $S/N$ dynamic and
secondary scintillation spectra can be obtained for many pulsars in a
wide-range of low frequencies; these can be used to study both
the static and dynamic structure of the ISM.
\subsection{Interstellar weather}
The large collecting area and large fractional bandwidth at low
frequencies of SKA-LOW combined with bands 1 and 2 of SKA-MID or
SKA-SUR (including SKA1 and the early phase of SKA1) will provide
very accurate DM and RM estimates for thousands of known and newly
discovered pulsars.
Owing to the $\lambda^2$ dependence of dispersive and refractive
effects in the ISM, DM and RM estimates are best made at lower
frequencies using wider bandwidths, as long as the pulse profile is
not adversely affected by scattering.
Monitoring DM variations over time probes the structure of the ionized
gas on length scales of the order of $10^{8}$ -- $10^{13}$~m. The
time scale for DM variations depends on the velocity of the pulsar and
the characteristic size of clouds or filaments of ionized gas along
the line of sight. Increased sensitivity
enables the detection of DM variations on short time intervals due to
small-scale clouds.
By monitoring short-term DM variations along large numbers of pulsar
lines of sight, SKA1 will probe the physical processes acting within
the interstellar plasma that generate or maintain sub-AU density
fluctuations.
Monitoring long-term DM variations reveals large clumps of ionized gas
drifting across the lines of sight.
Such observations have been made at Parkes using timing array pulsars
over several years \citep{yhc+07,kcs+13} and a sample
of 168 young pulsars over 6 years \citep{pkj+13}. DM and RM
variations of pulsars near the ecliptic plane can also be used to
study the solar wind \citep{ychm12}.
Note, however, that correcting ionospheric Faraday rotation is
essential for such experiments \citep[e.g.][]{ssh+13}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=270,width=125mm]{fig3.ps}
\caption{The RM distribution of 736 pulsars located within $|b|<8^{\circ}$
projected onto the Galactic plane. The background shows the
approximate locations of spiral arms used in the NE2001 electron
density model \citep{cl02}. RMs of extragalactic radio
sources \citep{xh14b} located within $|b|<8^{\circ}$ are displayed in the
outer ring according to their $l$ and $b$, with the same convention
of RM symbols and limits. The derived large-scale structure of
magnetic fields in the Galactic disk are indicated by arrows. See
\citet{han13} for details.}
\label{rm_psr_egr}
\end{figure}
\section{Interstellar magnetic fields}
Pulsars are ideal probes of interstellar magnetic fields for the
following four reasons: 1) owing to the high degree of linear
polarization of pulsar signals, the RM is easily measured; 2)
intrinsic Faraday rotation in the pulsar magnetosphere is negligible,
such that the observed Faraday rotation is completely due to the
interstellar magnetoionic medium (after correcting for ionospheric
Faraday rotation); 3) the pulsar DM provides the integrated free electron
column density, allowing the line-of-sight magnetic field to be
decoupled (Eq. 3.1); and 4) there are a large number of pulsars
distributed throughout the Galaxy in both the disk and the halo,
facilitating a three-dimensional picture of the Galactic electron
density and magnetic field. For a pulsar at distance $D$ (in pc), the
RM is given by
$
\mathrm{RM} = 0.810 \int_{0}^{D} n_e\, {\bf B} \cdot d{\bf l},
$
(in rad~m$^{-2}$). With the pulsar dispersion measure,
$
\mathrm{DM}=\int_{0}^{D}\, n_e\, d l,
$
(in pc~cm$^{-3}$), we obtain a direct estimate of the magnetic field
strength parallel to the line of sight, $\langle B_{||} \rangle$ in
$\mu$G, weighted by the local free electron density:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_B}
\langle B_{||} \rangle = \frac{\int_{0}^{D} n_e\, {\bf B} \cdot d{\bf
l} }{\int_{0}^{D}\, n_e\, d l } = 1.232 \; \frac{\mathrm{RM}}{\mathrm{DM}}
.
\label{eq-B}
\end{equation}
When RM and DM data are available for multiple pulsars along similar
lines of sight, e.g.\,one pulsar at $D_0$ and one at $D_1$, the variation
of DM and RM with distance can be used to derive the field direction
and field strength in the region between $D_0$ and $D_1$,
\begin{equation}
\langle B_{||}\rangle_{D_1-D_0} = 1.232 \frac{\Delta\mathrm{RM}}{\Delta\mathrm{DM}},
\label{delta_rm_dm}
\end{equation}
where $\langle B_{||}\rangle_{D_1-D_0}$ is the mean line-of-sight
field component, $\Delta\mathrm{RM} = \mathrm{RM}_{D_1} -
\mathrm{RM}_{D_0}$ and $\Delta\mathrm{DM} =\mathrm{DM}_{D_1} -
\mathrm{DM}_{D_0}$. This derived field strength is not dependent on
the electron density model, though the pulsar distances may have to be
estimated from the electron density model if they have not been
independently measured (e.g.\ by VLBI or pulsar timing).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=105mm]{fig4a.ps} \\[3mm]
\includegraphics[width=95mm]{fig4b.eps}
\caption{The sky distribution of RMs of extragalactic radio sources
({\it top}) and the Galactic coordinates and the azimuthal
magnetic fields in the Galactic halo ({\it bottom}), see \citet{hmbb97,hmq99}
and \citet{xh14b}. Currently, pulsar data are
available only $\sim 3$~kpc from the Sun (see Fig.1). RMs of
several thousand distant pulsars to be discovered by the SKA at the high
latitudes are ultimate data to reveal the large-scale field
structure in the Galactic halo.}
\label{haloB}
\end{figure}
There are currently over 2,300 pulsars that have been discovered, and
only 30\% of these have published RM values. The RMs in the Galactic
disk have been used to reveal the magnetic field structure in the
closest half of the disk \citep{hml+06}. Over large scales, the
magnetic fields follow the spiral arms; however, many field reversals
are also observed (see Fig.\ref{rm_psr_egr}). It is clear that pulsar
RM data are scarce in many regions of the closest half of the disk;
there are only a few pulsar RM estimates in the most distant regions
of the Galaxy. The distribution of RMs of extragalactic radio
sources behind the Galactic disk (see Fig.\ref{rm_psr_egr}) can be
used to derive the field structures beyond pulsars, and also can
constrain the disk-field model \citep[e.g.][]{srwe08}.
The detailed structure of magnetic fields in the Galactic disk will be
revealed by SKA1, which will discover several thousand pulsars in the
closest half of the disk and measure their DMs and RMs, and
SKA2, which will discover at least ten thousand pulsars in the most
distant half of the disk \citep[see][]{kbk+14}.
Full-polarization observations of the newly discovered pulsars using
SKA1-LOW (50 --350 MHz), and band 1 of SKA1-MID (350 --850 MHz) and
SKA1-SUR (650-- 1,150 MHz) with high spectral resolution (up to
256,000 frequency channels in each band) will determine RMs with
unprecedented precision ($\sim 0.1$ rad~m$^{-2}$) and constrain the
detailed structure of the Galactic magnetoionic medium. Note, however,
that such RM precision is only achievable if the ionospheric
contribution is accurately corrected.
SKA1 and SKA2 will also complement the pulsar RM data by increasing
the density of extragalactic radio sources with RM estimates.
Some constraints on the large-scale structure of the Galactic magnetic
field have been derived from the RMs of extragalactic radio sources,
namely the striking antisymmetry in the inner Galaxy and the
large-scale toroidal magnetic fields in the Galactic halo with
reversed directions above and below the Galactic plane (see
Fig.\ref{haloB}). These structures were originally proposed by
\citet{hmbb97,hmq99} and later modeled by other authors
\citep[e.g.][]{ps03,srwe08,ft14}. However, the detailed properties of
the halo magnetic field
(e.g.\ the variation of field strength with radius and height) are not
yet well constrained. Thousands of distant pulsars in the Galactic
halo will be discovered by the SKA and their RMs will reveal the
large-scale magnetic field structure in the Galactic halo.
In addition to the large-scale structure of the Galactic magnetic
field, a variety of experiments probe small-scale structures in the
interstellar magnetoionic medium.
For example, compared to foreground pulsars along similar lines of
sight, pulsars behind H\,\textsc{ii} regions have significantly
different Faraday rotation measures \citep[e.g.][]{mwkj03}.
Evidence of similar small-scale fields associated with H\,\textsc{ii}
regions, supernova remnants and filaments has also been found in the
RMs of extragalactic radio sources \citep[e.g.][]{hmg11,srw+11,ssf13}.
Such regions may be explored
in greater detail by exploiting the increased density of extragalactic
radio sources detected by SKA2, SKA1, and the early phase of SKA1.
See \citet{ha+14} for details.
Clearly, interstellar magnetic fields exist over a broad range of
spatial scales, from large Galactic scales to very small dissipative
scales. Determination of the magnetic energy spectrum offers a solid
observational test for dynamo and other theories of Galactic magnetic
field origin.
The magnetic energy spectrum is currently constrained for only a small
range of wavenumbers in relatively few regions. Magnetic fields on
small spatial scales should follow the the Kolmogorov spectrum.
\citet{ms96} found that structure functions of rotation measure
and emission measure were consistent with a Kolmogorov spectrum of
three-dimensional turbulence in magnetic fields up to 4 pc, but with
two-dimensional turbulence between 4 pc and 80 pc.
Using pulsar RMs in a large region of the Galactic disk,
\citet{hfm04} obtained a power law distribution of magnetic field
fluctuations described by $E_B(k)= C \ (k / {\rm kpc^{-1}})^{-0.37\pm0.10}$
over spatial scales from $1/k=$ 0.5~kpc to 15~kpc.
An apparent turn over in the spectrum between 0.5 kpc and 80 pc
is not yet clear \citep{han09}.
In combination with the RM spectra of intervening polarised sources,
the dense grid of pulsars discovered with the SKA will probe the
energy spectrum at least down to ~100 pc scales.
\section{The extragalactic magnetoionic medium}
In addition to significantly improving our understanding of the
physics of the ISM in the Milky Way, the SKA will reveal the electron
density distribution and magnetic field structure in nearby galaxies
and the IGM. First, it will measure the DMs and RMs of extragalactic
pulsars (especially their giant pulses) and single pulses of
extragalactic origin, such as the Fast Radio Bursts
\citep[FRBs;][]{lbm+07,tsb+13,sch+14}; see \citet{m+14}
in this volume for more details. Second, the SKA will
yield high resolution observations of megamaser Zeeman splitting in
nearby galaxies \citep[e.g.][]{rqh08,mh13}; for more details,
see \citet{rob14} in this volume.
Third, the SKA will observe the polarization of all radio sources in
the sky over a wide band, yielding high precision RMs of a large
number of distant radio sources shining through galaxies, clusters of
galaxies and cosmic web in the nearby universe; see \citet{he+14},
\citet{J+14} and \citet{bbc+14} in this volume.
The high sensitivity, wide field of view, and wide bandwidth of SKA1
and SKA2 will yield a large sample of pulsars in nearby galaxies such
as M31 and M33 (see \citealp{kbk+14}, this volume). At present, DMs
of extragalactic objects have been estimated for only a handful of
pulsars in the Magellanic Clouds \citep{mfl+06} and a few
FRBs \citep{tsb+13}. Scattering has been detected and studied
for only four FRBs \citep[e.g.][]{tsb+13}; the RM of an FRB is
yet to be observed.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=270,width=60mm]{fig5a.ps} \hspace{5mm}
\includegraphics[angle=270,width=60mm]{fig5b.ps}
\caption{DM distributions of extragalactic pulsars (blue) and
Galactic pulsars (red) within a $10^{\circ}$ radius around the host
galaxy. Current data for pulsars in the large and small Magellanic
Clouds are compared with Milky Way pulsars {\it on the left} and
simulated data for pulsars in M31 are compared with simulated Milky
Way pulsars {\it on the right}. Currently a small sample of pulsars
in the Magellanic Clouds and a small sample of foreground Galactic
pulsars around the clouds are not enough to deduce the
intergalactic DM (or RM). However, the SKA will discover a much larger
sample of Galactic and extragalactic pulsars (e.g.\ in M31) for this
purpose. The DM range of extragalactic pulsars depends on the
inclination angle of the host galaxy disk.
\label{fig:IGM}}
\end{figure}
Two key steps are needed to derive intergalactic DM and RM estimates from
observations of extragalactic pulsars or pulses: 1) subtraction of the
foreground DM or RM contribution from our Milky Way; and 2)
constraining the local contribution from the host galaxy. Both steps
require a large sample of pulsars. Estimating the foreground column
density of electrons in the Milky Way requires a large sample of
Galactic pulsars in the region of sky immediately around the direction
of the host galaxy. To estimate the Galactic foreground contribution
to the measured Faraday rotation also requires a large number of
extragalactic radio sources around the direction of the host galaxy.
SKA1 will observe a large number of extragalactic RMs as part of the
cosmic magnetism project \citep[e.g.][]{J+14}; the
average RM of background radio sources, $\langle
\mathrm{RM}_\mathrm{BGS} \rangle$, in the direction of a host galaxy
represents the foreground contribution of the Milky Way to the
estimated RM of an extragalactic pulsar or pulse \citep[e.g.\,see][]{xh14b}.
For an individual extragalactic pulsar or pulse, it is difficult to
estimate the dispersion and Faraday rotation contributed by the host
galaxy. When a large sample of pulsars are discovered in a host
galaxy, the minimum DM of these pulsars,
$\min(\mathrm{DM}_\mathrm{extraPSRs})$, can be used as the upper limit
of DM$_\mathrm{IGM}$ plus the Galactic DM foreground,
$\max(\mathrm{DM}_\mathrm{GalacPSRs})$, as shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:IGM}. When averaged over a sample of extragalactic
pulsars in the same host galaxy, the mean RM contributed by the host
is likely to approach zero.
Therefore, to probe the electron density and magnetic field of the
IGM, we can estimate $\mathrm{DM}_\mathrm{IGM}=
\min(\mathrm{DM}_\mathrm{extraPSRs})-\max(\mathrm{DM}_\mathrm{GalacPSRs})$
and $\mathrm{RM}_\mathrm{IGM}= \langle \mathrm{RM}_\mathrm{extraPSRs}
\rangle - \langle \mathrm{RM}_\mathrm{BGS} \rangle$.
In addition to observing extragalactic pulsars and pulses, the SKA
will be able to reveal extragalactic magnetism in a nearby galaxy by
observing the RMs of either a large number of radio sources behind the
galaxy or diffuse emission from the galaxy \citep[see][]{he+14}.
On the other hand, when a large sample of RMs of quasars
or other objects with known redshifts are available
\citep[e.g.][]{J+14}, the residual RMs (i.e.\, the
values after subtracting the foreground RM from the observed RM
values) can be used to explore the magnetoionic medium in the cosmic
web and intervening clouds \citep[see][]{xh14a}. The distribution and
statistics of residual RMs can reveal weak magnetic fields and their
evolution over cosmological distances much greater than most
detectable extragalactic pulsars.
\section{Conclusions}
Pulsars are the best probes of the interstellar magnetoionic medium in
the Milky Way. By measuring dispersion toward a large number of
pulsars and their distances, we can construct a detailed electron
density distribution model. Scattering measurements derived from
either the extended tails of pulsar profiles at low frequencies or
from pulsar dynamic spectra will reveal the dynamics of small-scale
structures in the ionized ISM. Faraday rotation probes the large and
small scale structure of interstellar magnetic fields. Following the
discussion in previous sections, we conclude the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item SKA1: Beginning with the early phase of SKA1, wide-band
polarimetry with SKA1-LOW and SKA1-MID will provides a much better
understanding of the structure of the interstellar medium. The DMs
of several thousand newly discovered pulsars spread across the Milky
Way will dramatically improve the electron density model, especially
once independent and precise distances can be estimated for a
substantial fraction of pulsars using both SKA1 pulsar timing and
SKA1-VLBI. The distribution of pulsar RMs can be used to map out
magnetic field structures in high detail.
\item SKA2: By performing a complete census of those pulsars in our
Galaxy that are visible in the southern hemisphere, and in concert
with large telescopes in the northern hemisphere, SKA2 will complete
the model of electron density distribution and magnetic field
structure in {\it the entire Milky Way},
\item Intergalactic medium: SKA1 and SKA2 can be used to discover a
large number of pulsars in nearby galaxies. By observing the DMs
and RMs of a large sample of extragalactic pulsars and subtracting
the Galactic foreground and host galaxy contributions, we will have
the unique chance to detect the baryonic content and magnetic field
of the intergalactic medium. The high sensitivity of the SKA is
essential to this purpose. In addition, the statistics of RMs of a
large number of extragalactic radio sources can reveal the weak
magnetic fields in the cosmic web and other intervening galaxies.
\end{itemize}
\begin{acknowledgments}
JinLin Han is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
(No.11473034) and by the Strategic Priority Research Program ``The
Emergence of Cosmological Structures'' of the Chinese Academy of
Sciences, Grant No. XDB09010200. The research of Joseph Lazio was
performed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of
Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. \\
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section*{Introduction}
\label{I}
\noindent
Bertini's theorem on moving singularities, published in the last but one
decade of the nineteens century, has become a fundamental tool in Algebraic
Geometry. Nowadays, due to its similarities to Sard's theorem on differentiable
maps, it is also called the Bertini--Sard theorem. It assures that almost all fibres
of a dominant morphism between smooth algebraic varieties are smooth.
However, in the 1940s Zariski~\cite{Z1} observed that the theorem may fail in positive
characteristic. He had constructed a fibration \,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\,
by algebraic curves that admits moving singularities, though the total space $T$
is smooth. A moving singularity of
\,$\phi$\, can be viewed as a horizontal prime divisor on \,$T$\, with the
property that each of its points is a singular point of the fibre to which
it belongs.
Translated in modern language, Zariski argued that, though the generic fibre
is a regular scheme over the base field \,$k(B)$\,, it may not be smooth,
that is, the geometric generic fibre, defined by extending the base field
to its algebraic closure \,$\overline{k(B)}$, may have singularities.
This means that the function
field \,$k(T)|k(B)$\, may be non-conservative, that is, its genus $g$ may
decrease by tensoring with \,$\overline{k(B)}$.
For more explications we refer to Section~\ref{A}.
To rescue Bertini's theorem in positive characteristic \,$p$\,, we are conduced
to classify its exceptions. As follows from a theorem of Tate~\cite{T1},
Bertini's theorem can only fail if \,$p\leq 2\,g+1$\,. Non-conservative
function fields of genus $1$ were classified by Queen~\cite{Q}, and of
genus $2$ in odd characteristic by Borges Neto~\cite{Bo}. General results on
non-conservative function fields and their singular primes were developed
by Stichtenoth, Bedoya and the second author
in the papers \cite{Sti}, \cite{BS} and \cite{St1}.
In their program to extend Enriques' classification of algebraic
surfaces to arbitrary characteristic, Bombieri and Mumford~\cite{BM}
encountered \textit{quasi-elliptic fibrations}, i.e., fibrations by cuspidal
curves of arithmetic genus $1$\,.
There is a large number of recent papers on classification theory of
algebraic varieties and singularities in positive characteristic, too large
to put in our references, which can be found by starting the search with
\cite{BM} and looking successively for citations and references.
Singularities of generic fibres in positive characteristic
were analyzed by Schr\"oer~\cite{Sc}.
Fibrations by non-smooth curves of arithmetic genus $3$ in characteristic
$3$, $5$ and $7$ were studied by Salom\~ao~\cite{Sa1},\cite{Sa2}
and the second author \cite{St3},\cite{St4}.
\medskip
In the present paper we study in characteristic two the fibrations by
non-smooth curves of arithmetic genus two.
We realize the fibres by tri-canonical embeddings
as curves on a cone in $\PP^4$.
The discussion
naturally divides into two cases. If the function field of the generic fibre
is separable over its canonical quadratic rational subfield, then we prove
that almost every fibre is geometrically elliptic, i.e., its non-singular
model is an elliptic curve (see Theorem~\ref{C1}). In the second case
the fibres are rational, as discussed in Theorem~\ref{D1}.
We discover a $6$-dimensional smooth algebraic variety
\,$Z \subset \PP^4\times\mathbb{A}^5$\, such that almost all fibres of the
projection morphism \,$\pi :Z\rightarrow \mathbb{A}^5$\, are cuspidal
geometrically elliptic curves of arithmetic genus two (see Theorem~\ref{E1}).
We describe how the elliptic modular invariant of the fibres varies,
determine the singular points of all fibres, and discuss how the singularities move.
Theorem~\ref{E2} is the main result
of this paper. It states that each proper separable morphism
between smooth algebraic varieties, whose fibres are geometrically elliptic
curves of arithmetic genus two, is birational equivalent to a base
extension of the fibration \,$\pi :Z\rightarrow \mathbb{A}^5$\,.
A similar result for fibrations by rational curves of arithmetic genus
two is also obtained (see Theorem~\ref{E4}).
\section{Moving singularities of fibrations by algebraic curves}
\label{A}
\noindent
In this introductory section we present prerequisites on moving singularities
of fibrations by algebraic curves, needed to understand our paper.
Let $\phi:T \rightarrow B$ be a dominant morphism of irreducible
algebraic varieties defined over an algebraically closed field $k$.
We assume that $\dim T = \dim B + 1$\, or, equivalently, almost all fibres
are algebraic curves (see \cite[p.\ 74]{Sh}). Thus by restricting if
necessary the base variety $B$ to a dense open subvariety we get a fibration
by algebraic curves.
By identifying the rational functions on the base $B$ with rational functions
on the total space $T$ that are constant along each fibre, we can view the
field $k(B)$ of the base as a subfield of $k(T)$. We assume that almost all
fibres are integral. By a theorem of Matsusaka this means that $k(B)$ is
algebraically closed in $k(T)$ and that $k(T)$ is separable over $k(B)$
(see \cite{M}, \cite[pp.\ 256--257]{Sh}). Thus the field $k(T)$ of the total
space, which is a higher dimensional function field over the
constant field $k$, becomes a one-dimensional separable function field over
the base field $ k(B)$. In this sense, the fibrations by integral algebraic
curves over the variety $B$, up to birational equivalence, correspond
bijectively to the isomorphism classes of the one-dimensional separable
function fields over $k(B)$.
In the setting of schemes, the function field $k(T)|k(B)$ is the field of
the \textit{generic fibre} $\mathcal{T}\times_\mathcal{B}\, \operatorname{Spec} k(B)$\,, where the
calligraphic letters $\mathcal{T}$ and $\mathcal{B}$ stand for the integral schemes whose points
correspond bijectively to the closed irreducible subsets of $T$ and $B$,
respectively. The generic fibre is a geometrically integral curve over
$k(B)$. Its closed points, which are exactly its non-generic points,
correspond bijectively to the \textit{horizontal prime divisors} of the
fibration $\phi:T\rightarrow B\,$, that is, to the prime divisors of the total
space $T$ whose images are dense in the base variety $B$\,. The local ring of
the scheme $\mathcal{T}$ (and also the local ring of the generic fibre) at a closed
point of the generic fibre is equal to the local ring of the total space
$T$ along the corresponding horizontal prime divisor, and its residue field
is isomorphic to the field of rational functions on the horizontal prime
divisor.
As the \textit{non-smooth locus} of the morphism $\phi:T\rightarrow B$ (i.e.,
the union of the non-smooth loci of the fibres of $\phi$) is closed in $T$,
and as even the non-smooth locus of the corresponding morphism
$\Phi:\mathcal{T} \rightarrow \mathcal{B}$ of schemes is closed in $\mathcal{T}$
(cf.\ \cite[p.\ 224, Cor.\ 2.12]{L}), we deduce that a closed irreducible
subset $H$ of $T$ is contained in the non-smooth locus of $\phi$ if and only
if the corresponding integral scheme $\H$\, or, equivalently, its generic
point is contained in the non-smooth locus of $\Phi$\,. Applying this
remark to the horizontal prime divisors, we obtain:
\begin{prop}
\label{A1}
The horizontal prime divisors contained in the non-smooth locus of the
fibration $\phi:T\rightarrow B$ correspond bijectively to the non-smooth
closed points of the generic fibre $\mathcal{T}\times_\mathcal{B}\,\operatorname{Spec} k(B)$.
\end{prop}
These horizontal prime divisors, whose points are singular points
of the fibres to which they belong, are called the
\textit{moving singularities} of the fibration.
Here we do not consider singularities that move in subvarieties of codimension
larger than $1$\,.
We always assume that the dominant morphism $\phi:T\rightarrow B$ is proper. This
implies that its fibres are complete, that $\phi$ is surjective and that even
the restrictions of $\phi$ to the horizontal prime divisors are surjective.
We further assume that the total space $T$ is smooth. In particular, it is
regular in codimension one. Thus the generic fibre
is a regular complete geometrically integral algebraic curve over $k(B)$,
or more precisely,
\[
\mathcal{T}\times_\mathcal{B}\,\operatorname{Spec} k(B) = \mathcal{R}_{k(T)|k(B)}
\]
where $\mathcal{R}_{k(T)|k(B)}$ denotes the \textit{regular complete model} of the
one-dimensional function field $k(T)|k(B)$. The closed points of
$\mathcal{R}_{k(T)|k(B)}$ are exactly the primes $\mathfrak{p}$ of $k(T)|k(B)$, and their
local rings are the corresponding discrete valuation rings $\O_\mathfrak{p}$\,.
By Proposition~\ref{A1} a horizontal prime divisor is a moving singularity
if and only if the corresponding prime $\mathfrak{p}$ is a \textit{singular prime}
in the sense that $\mathfrak{p}$ is a non-smooth point of $\mathcal{R}_{k(T)|k(B)}$, i.e.,
the one-dimensional semi-local ring $\O_\mathfrak{p}\otimes_{k(B)}\,\ol{k(B)}$
is non-regular, i.e., over the point $\mathfrak{p}$ of the generic fibre there lies a
singular point of the \textit{geometric generic fibre}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{T}\times_\mathcal{B}\,\operatorname{Spec}\ol{k(B)}
&= (\mathcal{T}\times_\mathcal{B}\,\operatorname{Spec} k(B))\times_{\operatorname{Spec} k(B)}\,\operatorname{Spec}\ol{k(B)}
\\
& = \mathcal{R}_{k(T)|k(B)}\times_{\operatorname{Spec} k(B)}\,\operatorname{Spec}\ol{k(B)} \,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
By Rosenlicht's genus drop formula
(see Section~\ref{B})
the number of the
singular primes of $k(T)|k(B)$, counted according to their singularity degrees,
is equal to $g-\ol g$, where $g$ and $\ol g$ denote the genera of the function
fields $k(T)|k(B)$ and $k(T)\otimes_{k(B)}\ol{k(B)}\mid\ol{k(B)}\,,$
respectively.
Thus the fibration $\phi:T\rightarrow B$ admits moving
singularities if and only if $\ol g<g$\,.
As the genus remains invariant under separable base field extensions,
we obtain \textit{Bertini's theorem on moving singular points}.
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Bertini--Sard Theorem}.\
\textit{In characteristic zero the fibration \mbox{$\phi:T\rightarrow B$}
does not admit moving singularities, i.e., almost all fibres are smooth.}
\medskip
Moreover, if the characteristic is a prime $p$, then by a theorem of
Tate~\cite{T1} the genus drop
$g-\ol g$ is a multiple of $\frac{p-1}{2}$\,,
and so Bertini's theorem can only fail if $p\leq 2g+1$.
By restricting the base $B$ to a dense open subvariety, we may assume that
all fibres are of dimension one, and that not only the total space $T$ but
also the base $B$ is smooth. Then the morphism $\phi:T\rightarrow B$ is flat
(see \cite[Theorem 18.16]{E}), and so the arithmetic genus of each fibre
is equal to the arithmetic genus of the generic fibre
$\mathcal{T}\times_{\mathcal{B}}\,\operatorname{Spec} k(B)$ (see \cite[Ch.\ \textrm{III}, Theorem 9.9]{Ha}).
As the generic fibre is equal to $\mathcal{R}_{k(T)|k(B)}$\,, its arithmetic genus
is equal to the genus $g$ of the function field $k(T)|k(B)$. Moreover,
as the arithmetic genus is invariant under base field extensions, the
genus $g$ is also equal to the arithmetic genus of the geometric generic
fibre $\mathcal{R}_{k(T)|k(B)}\times_{\operatorname{Spec} k(B)}\,\operatorname{Spec} \ol{k(B)}$\,.
The geometric generic fibre is a complete integral curve over $\ol{k(B)}$
of geometric genus $\ol g$. It reflects the properties of the closed fibres
in a better way than the generic fibre. By semi-continuity, the geometric
genus of each closed fibre is smaller than or equal to $\ol g$, and equality
holds for almost all fibres.
\section{Curves of arithmetic genus $2$ on a cone in $\PP^4$}
\label{B}
\noindent
As becomes clear from the preceding section, we can apply the theory of
function fields in order to study the generic fibres of morphisms.
Let $F|K$ be a one-dimensional function field of genus $g=2$\,, and let
$\mathfrak{c}$ be a canonical divisor of $F|K$. By the Riemann--Roch theorem its
degree and the dimension of its space of global sections are equal to
\[
\deg(\mathfrak{c}) = 2g-2 =2 \quad \text{and} \quad\dim H^0(\mathfrak{c}) =g = 2 \,.
\]
As $\,H^0(\mathfrak{c})\neq 0\,,$ the canonical divisor $\mathfrak{c}$ is linearly equivalent
to a positive divisor, and so we can assume that $\mathfrak{c}$ is positive. Since
the dimension of $H^0(\mathfrak{c})$\, is larger than $1$\,, there is a function
$x \in H^0(\mathfrak{c}) \setminus K\,.$ As $\,\operatorname{div}_\infty(x) \leq \mathfrak{c}$\,, the
fundamental equality $[F:K(x)] = \deg \operatorname{div}_\infty(x)$ implies
$[F:K(x)] \leq \deg(\mathfrak{c}) = 2$\,.
Since $g \neq 0$\,, and therefore $F \neq K(x)$\,, we conclude that
\[
[F:K(x)] = 2 \quad \text{and} \quad \operatorname{div}_\infty(x) = \mathfrak{c}\,.
\]
As $\,H^0(\mathfrak{c}) = K \oplus Kx$\,, the canonical positive divisors different
from $\mathfrak{c}$ are just of the form
\[
\operatorname{div}_0(x-a)\quad\text{where} \;\; a\in K\,,
\]
and the canonical subfield of $F|K$\,, i.e., the field generated by the
global sections of any canonical positive canonical divisor, is equal to
the rational quadratic subfield $K(x)$ of $F|K$\,. Clearly
\[
H^0(\mathfrak{c}^n)\cap K(x)=Kx^0\oplus\dots\oplus Kx^n\quad\text{for each}\;\;n\geq 2\,.
\]
Moreover, by Riemann's theorem
\[
\dim H^0(\mathfrak{c}^n) =2n-1 \quad \text{for each}\;\; n\geq 2 \,.
\]
Thus there is a function $y\in H^0(\mathfrak{c}^3)\setminus K(x)$\,, and we obtain
\[
H^0(\mathfrak{c}^n)=
{\textstyle
\bigoplus\limits_{i=0}^n Kx^i
\, \oplus \,
\bigoplus\limits_{i=0}^{n-3}Kx^iy
}
\quad\text{for each}\;\;n\geq 3\,.
\]
As $y^2 \in H^0(\mathfrak{c}^6)$ there is an equation
\[
y^2 + a(x) y + b(x) = 0
\]
where $a(x)=\sum_{i=0}^3 a_i x^i$\, and
\,$b(x)=\sum_{i=0}^6 b_i x^i$\,
are polynomials with coefficients in $K$ of formal degree $3$ and $6$,
respectively. Since $[F:K(x)] = 2$ and $y\notin K(x)$ we have
\[
F = K(x,y)
\]
and the above equation is the minimal equation of $y$ over $K(x)$.
Let $\check F = K(\check x,\check y),$ where
\,$\check y^2+\check a(\check x)\check y+\check b(\check x)=0$\,,
be another genus-$2$ function field in the above normal form.
As $K(\check x)$ and $K(x)$ are the canonical subfields of $\check F|K$ and
$F|K$\,, respectively, it is easy to check that the $K$-isomorphisms
$\check F\,\tilde {\rightarrow}\,F$
are just given by the transformations
\[
\check x\longmapsto
\frac{\alpha_{11}x+\alpha_{12}}{\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}}
\quad\text{and}\quad \check y\longmapsto
\frac{\beta\,y+\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3\gamma_i x^i}
{(\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22})^3}
\]
where $(\alpha_{ij}) \in \operatorname{GL}_2(K),\ \beta \in K^*\,\text{ and }\,
\gamma_0,\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\gamma_3\in K$\, such that
\[ \! \! \! \!
\beta\,a(x) =
\left(\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}\right)^3\,\,
\check a\!\left(\frac{\alpha_{11}x+\alpha_{12}}{\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}}\right)
+ 2\, \sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3 \gamma_i x^i
\]
and
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\beta^2 \, b(x) = &
\left(\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}\right)^6\,\,
\check b\!\left(\frac{\alpha_{11}x+\alpha_{12}}{\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}}\right)
+ \left(\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3 \gamma_i x^i \right)^2
\\
&+\left(\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}\right)^3\,\,
\check a\!\left(\frac{\alpha_{11}x+\alpha_{12}}{\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}}\right)\,
\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3\gamma_i x^i\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
A $K$-isomorphism of $\check F$ onto $F$ determines the transformation
coefficients uniquely up to the $\mathbb{G}_m$-action defined for each
$c \in \mathbb{G}_m(K)=K^*$ by the assignment
{\small
\[
(\alpha_{11},\alpha_{12},\alpha_{21},\alpha_{22},\beta,\gamma_0,\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\gamma_3)
\longmapsto
(c\,\alpha_{11},c\,\alpha_{12},c\,\alpha_{21},c\,\alpha_{22},c^3\beta,c^3\gamma_0,c^3\gamma_1,c^3\gamma_2,c^3\gamma_3).
\]
}
If $p\neq 2$ then by completing the square we can normalize $a(x)=0$\,,
and the freedom to transform is restricted by the conditions
$\gamma_0=\dots=\gamma_3=0$\,.
We will always assume that the function field $F|K$ is separable,
that is, it admits a separating variable. This means that
$x$ or $y$ is a separating variable, that is, $p\neq 2$\, or\,
$a(x)\neq 0$\, or \,$b'(x)\neq 0$\,. Then the condition that the base
field $K$ is algebraically closed in $F$ means that the minimal polynomial
\[
f(X,Y) := Y^2 + a(X)Y + b(X) \in K[X,Y]
\]
is absolutely irreducible, that is, it remains irreducible over the algebraic
closure $\ol K$ of $K$\,. As $f$ is monic of degree $2$ in $Y$\,, this means
that there does not exist a polynomial $c(X) \in \ol K[X]$ such that
$f(X,c(X))=0$\,. In particular, if $a(X)=0$ then $b(X)$ is not a square in
$\ol K[X]$. As $f$ is absolutely irreducible, we can consider the base field
extension
\[
F{\cdot}\ol K := F\otimes_K\ol K = \ol K(x)[Y]/f(x,Y)\ol K(x)[Y]\,,
\]
that is, $F{\cdot}\ol K = \ol K(x,y)$\, where $x$ is transcendental over $\ol K$
and \,$f(x,y)=0$\,.
Let $\,\mathcal{R} = \mathcal{R}_{F|K}$\, be the \textit{regular complete model} of the
function field $F|K$\,. It is a regular complete curve over $K$\,,
or more precisely, a geometrically integral regular complete
one-dimensional scheme of finite type over $\operatorname{Spec}(K)$. The algebraic set
$\,R=R_{F|K}\,$ of its closed points consists of the primes $\mathfrak{p}$ of $F|K$\,,
whose local rings are the corresponding discrete valuation rings $\O_\mathfrak{p}$
of $F|K$\,. The generic point is the only non-closed point of the scheme
$\mathcal{R}$, and its local ring is the function field $F$.
The extended scheme \,$\mathcal{R}\otimes_K\ol K := \mathcal{R}\times_{\operatorname{Spec}(K)}\operatorname{Spec}(\ol K)$\,
is an integral complete curve over $\ol K$\,, whose function field is equal to
\,$F{\cdot}\ol K := F\otimes_K\ol K$\,. The points of \,$\mathcal{R}\otimes_K\ol K$\,
lying over a prime $\mathfrak{p}$ of $F|K$ correspond bijectively to the maximal
ideals of the semi-local ring \,$\O_\mathfrak{p}{\cdot}\ol K = \O_\mathfrak{p}\otimes_K\ol K$\,,
and their local rings are the corresponding localizations. Though the curve
$\mathcal{R}$ is regular, it may not be smooth, i.e., the extended curve \,$\mathcal{R}\otimes_k\ol K$\,
may have singular points (see \cite{Z2}). Recall that a prime $\mathfrak{p}$ of
$F|K$ is called \textit{singular}, if the domain \,$\O_\mathfrak{p}{\cdot}\ol K$ is
not normal, i.e., there is a singular point of the extended curve
\,$\mathcal{R}\otimes_K\ol K$\, lying over $\mathfrak{p}$\,. Since the arithmetic genus $p_a$
is preserved under base field extensions,
we have
\[
p_a(\mathcal{R}\otimes_K\ol K) = g = 2\,.
\]
As \,$\mathcal{R}\otimes_K\ol K$\, is an integral complete hyperelliptic curve of
arithmetic genus two, the global sections of the tri-canonical divisor
$\mathfrak{c}^3$ define an embedding
\[
(1:x:x^2:x^3:y): R\otimes_K\ol K \hookrightarrow \PP^4(\ol K)
\]
(see \cite[Theorem~2.1]{St2}), and so the extended curve $R\otimes_K\ol K$
can be realized as a curve on the cone
\[
S :=
\left\{
(u_0:u_1:u_2:u_3:v)\mid\rank
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
u_0 &u_1 &u_2 \\
u_1 &u_2 &u_3
\end{array}
\right)
< 2
\right\}
\]
in the $4$-dimensional projective space $\PP^4(\ol K)$.
\bigskip
In the remainder of this section, we invert the preceding considerations.
Given an absolutely irreducible polynomial
\,$f = Y^2 + a(X)Y + b(X) \in K[X,Y]$\,, where $a(X)$ and $b(X)$ are
polynomials of formal degree $3$ and $6$\,, respectively. We consider the
function field
\[
F|K=K(x,y)|K\quad\text{where }\, y^2+a(x)y+b(x)=0\,,
\]
and we assume that it is separable, that is, \,$p\neq 2$\, or \,$a(x)\neq 0$\,
or \,$b'(x)\neq 0$\,.
If $p\neq 2$\,, then it is well known that the genus $g$ of $F|K$ is not
larger than two, and equality holds if and only if the discriminant
\,$a(x)^2-4\,b(x)$\, is square-free in \,$K[x]$\, and has degree $5$ or $6$\,.
If \,$p=2$\,, then it is more difficult to determine the genus \,$g$\,.
We will consider a possibly singular projective model of \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\,
lying on the cone \,$S\subset\PP^4(\ol K)$. We note that the cone is the union
of the projective lines
\[
\qquad
L_u :=\{(1:u:u^2:u^3:v)\mid v\in\ol K\}\cup\{Q\}\quad\text(u\in\ol K)
\]
and
\[
\hspace{-11mm}
L_\infty := \{(0:0:0:1:v)\mid v\in\ol K\}\cup\{Q\}\,,
\]
which have the vertex \,$Q:=(0:0:0:0:1)$\, as their only common point.
The smooth locus \,$S\setminus\{Q\}$\, is described by the atlas
consisting of the two charts
\[
W:= S\setminus L_\infty =
\{(1:u:u^2:u^3:v)\mid(u,v)\in\ol K^{\oplus 2}\}
\,\tilde{\longrightarrow}\;\ol K^{\oplus 2}
\]
and
\[
\ \breve W:= S\setminus L_0\,\, =
\{(\breve u^3:\breve u^2:\breve u:1:\breve v)\mid(\breve u,\breve v)\in\ol K^{\oplus 2}\}
\,\tilde{\longrightarrow}\;\ol K^{\oplus 2}.
\]
Let \,$C\subset S$\, be the projective integral curve over $\ol K$ described in
the first chart $W$ by the minimal equation
\[
y^2 + a(x) y +b(x) = 0 \,,
\]
where the elements $x$ and $y$ of the function field $F$ have been realized
as the rational functions on $C$ that map each point $(1:u:u^2:u^3:v)$ of
\,$C\cap W$\, onto $u$ and $v$\,, respectively. With respect to the second
chart $\breve W$ we have the local coordinate functions
\[
\breve x:=x^{-1} \quad \text{and} \quad \breve y:=x^{-3}y \,
\]
which satisfy the minimal equation
\[
\breve y^2+(a_0\,\breve x^3+a_1\,\breve x^2+a_2\,\breve x+a_3)\breve y+b_0\,\breve x^6+b_1\,\breve x^5+\dots+b_6=0\,.
\]
Without using charts, the curve $C$ can be defined as the intersection
of the cone $S$ and the quadratic hypersurface cut out by the equation
\[
v^2+\sum_{i=0}^3 a_i u_i v + \sum_{i=0}^3 b_{2i}u_i^2
+\sum_{i=0}^2 b_{2i+1}u_i u_{i+1} = 0 \,.
\]
In particular, the vertex $Q$ does not lie on the curve. By calculating
the Hilbert polynomial of the curve \,$C\subset\PP^4$\,
(see \cite[p.\ 196]{RS}) we obtain the arithmetic genus:
\[
p_a(C) = 2\,.
\]
\begin{thm}
\label{B1}
The curve $C$ on the cone $S$ is isomorphic to the extended curve
\,$R_{F|K}\otimes_K\ol K$\, if and only if the genus $g$ of the function
field \,$F|K$\, is equal to two.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If \,$R\otimes_K\ol K\cong C$\, then a fortiori
\,$p_a(R\otimes_K\ol K) = p_a(C)$\,, that is, \,$g=p_a(C)$\, and therefore
\,$g=2$\, by the preceding equation. The opposite direction follows
from the first part of this section.
\end{proof}
By \textit{Hironaka's genus formula}~\cite{Hi} the \textit{geometric genus}
\,$p_g(C)$\, of the curve $C$\,, that is, the genus $\ol g$ of its function
field \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\,, is equal to
\[
\ol g = p_a(C) - \sum\dim
\widetilde{\O}_{C,P}/\O_{C,P}
\]
where the sum is taken over the singular points $P$ of $C$, and where
\,$\widetilde{\O}_{C,P}$\, denote the normalizations of the local rings
\,$\O_{C,P}$\,.
Applying Hironaka's genus formula to the extended curve \,$R\otimes_K\ol K$\,
and localizing, we obtain
\textit{Rosenlicht's genus drop formula}
\[
g-\ol g\; = \sum \dim
\widetilde{\O_\mathfrak{p}{\cdot}\ol K}/\O_\mathfrak{p}{\cdot}\ol K
\]
where $\mathfrak{p}$ varies over the singular primes of \,$F|K$\,
(cf.\ \cite[Theorem 11]{Ro}).
To determine the genera $\ol g$ and $g$\,, we have to compute the dimensions of
\,$\widetilde{\O}_{C,P}/\O_{C,P}$\,
and
\,$\widetilde{\O_\mathfrak{p}{\cdot}\ol K}/\O_\mathfrak{p}{\cdot}\ol K$\,,
which are called the \textit{singularity degrees} of the points $P$
and the primes $\mathfrak{p}$\,, respectively.
As the curve $C$ lies on the punctured cone
\,$S\setminus\{Q\}=W\cup\breve W$\,, which via the two charts is locally isomorphic
to the affine plane, the singular points of the curve can be computed by the
Jacobian criterion, and their singularity degrees can be determined by a
finite number of blowups.
As the genus $g$ is preserved under separable base field extensions,
in order to determine $g$\,, we may
assume that the base field $K$ is separably closed. In this case the primes
of \,$F|K$\, correspond bijectively to the primes of \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\, and hence
to the branches of the curve $C$\,. A branch of $C$ that corresponds to a
singular prime of \,$F|K$\, is necessarily a singular branch and therefore
centered at a singular point of $C$\,. As the minimal equations in the two
charts are monic of degree $2$ in $y$ and $\breve y$\,, such a singular point is
necessarily unibranch of multiplicity $2$\,. The singularity degrees of the
primes of \,$F|K$\, can be determined by an algorithm developed in \cite{BS}.
\section{Geometrically elliptic function fields of genus $2$ in characteristic $2$}
\label{C}
\noindent
Let $F|K$ be a one-dimensional separable function field of positive characteristic
$p$\,. As $F|K$ is separable, its \textit{Frobenius pullback}
\[
F_1|K := F^p K|K
\]
is the only subfield of \,$F|K$ such that the extension $F|F_1$\, is inseparable
of degree $p$\,. On the other hand, the Frobenius pullback can be realized as a
base field extension of $F|K$\,, or more precisely,
\[
F_1|K \cong FK^{\frac{1}{p}}|K^{\frac{1}{p}}.
\]
In particular, as the genus does not increase under base field extensions, we obtain
\[
g \geq g_1 \geq \ol g
\]
where $g_1$ denotes the genus of the Frobenius pullback \,$F_1|K$\,.
The function field \,$F|K$\, is called \textit{conservative} if its genus $g$
is equal to the genus $\ol g$ of \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\,. By Rosenlicht's genus drop
formula it is non-conservative (that is, $\ol g < g$) if and only if it admits
a singular prime. The function field $F|K$ is called \textit{geometrically
elliptic} (resp., \textit{geometrically rational}) if \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\, is
elliptic (resp., rational), that is, \,$\ol g =1$\, (resp., \,$\ol g =0$).
The genus-$2$ function field, written in the normal form
\,$y^2 + a(x)y + b(x) = 0$\, of Section~\ref{B}, is called of
\textit{separable type} if it is separable over its canonical quadratic
rational subfield \,$K(x)$\,, that is, \,$p\neq 2$\, or
\,$a(x)\neq 0$\,.
\begin{thm}
\label{C1}
A one-dimensional separable function field \,$F|K$\, of genus \,$g=2$\,
in characteristic \,$p=2$\, is geometrically elliptic if and only if it
is non-conservative and of separable type.
Such a function field can be put into the normal form
\[
y^2+(a_2\,x^2 +a_0)y+b_6\,x^6 +b_4\,x^4 +b_0 = 0
\]
where \,$a_2, a_0, b_6, b_4, b_0 \in K$\, and
\[
\Delta:=b_6^2\,(a_2^6\,b_0+a_0^2\,a_2^4\,b_4+a_0^3\,a_2^3\,b_6 +a_0^4\,b_6^2)\neq 0\,.
\]
The modular invariant $\ol{\jmath}$ of the elliptic function field \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\,
is equal to
\[
\ol{\jmath}\,=(j_1)^{\frac{1}{2}}\qquad \text{where}\qquad j_1 =\frac{a_2^{12}}{\Delta}
\]
is the modular invariant of the Frobenius pullback \,$F_1|K=K(x^2,y)$.
Conversely, if \,$a_2,\, a_0,\, b_6,\, b_4\ \text{and}\ b_0$\, are elements
of the base field $K$ satisfying \,$\Delta\neq 0$\,, then the above polynomial
equation defines a geometrically elliptic function field. Its genus is equal
to two, with the only exceptions that either
\,$j_1\in(K^*)^2$\, and \,$a_0 a_2\in K^2$\,, or
\,$j_1 =0$\, and \,$a_0b_6\in K^2$.
\end{thm}
In proving the theorem we will also decide when two of these function
fields are isomorphic. We start the proof by considering a separable genus-$2$
function field \,$F|K=K(x,y)|K$\, given in the normal form
\[
\textstyle{
y^2+a(x)y+b(x)=0\quad\text{where }\; a(x)=\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3 a_i\,x^i
\;\text{ and }\; b(x)=\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^6 b_i\,x^i \,.
}
\]
As \,$p=2$\, the separability of \,$F|K$\, means that \,$a(x)\neq 0$\, or
\,$b'(x)\neq 0$\,. If \,$F|K$\, is of inseparable type, i.e., \,$a(x)=0$\,,
then \,$F_1 =K(x^2,b(x))=K(x),\ \,F\ol K =\ol K(x,b(x)^{1/2})=\ol K(x^{1/2})$\,
and therefore $g_1 = \ol g =0$\,.
Now we assume that \,$F|K$\, is of separable type, i.e., \,$ a(x)\neq 0$\,.
We further assume that \,$F|K$\, is non-conservative, that is, \,$\ol g <2$\,.
Let $K'$ be the separable closure of $K$ in $\ol K$\,. As the genus is preserved
under separable base field extensions, the function field \,$F K'|K'$\,
is also non-conservative, i.e., it admits a singular prime \,$\mathfrak{p}'$\,.
Let $\ol{\mathfrak p}$ be the unique prime of \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\, lying over $\mathfrak{p}'$\, and let
$P$ be the corresponding singular point of the curve $C$ on the cone
\,$S\subset\PP^4(\ol K)$.
We first assume that $P$ does not lie on the line $L_\infty$\,, that is,
$P\in W$\,. Then by the Jacobian criterion, the coordinates
\,$\ol x=x(\ol{\mathfrak p})$\, and \,$\ol y=y(\ol{\mathfrak p})$\, of $P$ in the first chart satisfy
\[
a'(\ol x)\,\ol y + b'(\ol x) = 0\,,\;\; a(\ol x)=0\; \text{ and }\;
\ol y^2=b(\ol x)\,.
\]
Moreover, as by Section~\ref{B} the point $P$ is unibranch, we deduce
\,$a'(\ol x)=0$\, and therefore \,$b'(\ol x)=0$\,. Thus, $\ol x$ is a zero of
\,$a(x)$\, of order larger than one.
If \,$P\in L_\infty$\, then a similar reasoning in the second chart shows
that the polynomial \,$a(x)$\, of formal degree $3$ has order larger than
one at \,$\ol x=x(\ol{\mathfrak p})=\infty$\,, that is, \,$\deg a(x)\leq 1$\,.
Moreover, \,$b_5 = 0$\, by analogy with the equation \,$b'(\ol x) =0$\,
of the previous case.
In both cases the point $P$ is the only point of the curve $C$ lying on
the line \,$L_{\ol x}$\,. As the polynomial \,$a(x)$\, of formal degree $3$
can only admit one multiple zero, we deduce that \,$\mathfrak{p}'$\, is the only
singular prime of \,$FK'|K'$\,. In particular, denoting by $\mathfrak{p}$ the prime
of \,$F|K$\, lying below $\mathfrak{p}'$\,, we conclude that $\mathfrak{p}$ is the only
singular prime of \,$F|K$\,.
We will first assume that the multiple zero $\ol x$ of \,$a(x)$\, has order
two. Replacing, if necessary, $x$ and $y$ by \,$x^{-1}$\, and \,$x^{-3}\,y$\,,
respectively, we can assume that \,$\ol x\neq\infty$\,, that is, \,$\ol x\in\ol K$\,.
If \,$\deg a_3(x) =3$\,, then as \,$p=2$\,, by Vieta's formula
\,$a_1 /a_0$\, is a simple root of \,$a(x)$\, belonging to the base field
$K$\,. Hence, replacing $x$ and $y$ by \,$(x\,-\,{a_1}/{a_0})^{-1}$\, and
\,$(x\,-\,{a_1}/{a_0})^{-3}\, y$\,, respectively, we can arrange that
\,$\deg a_2(x) = 2$\,, that is, \,$a(x)=a_2\,x^2 +a_0$\, and \,$a_2 \neq 0$\,.
If $\ol x$ is a triple zero of \,$a(x)$\, and \,$\ol x\neq\infty$\,, then
\,$\ol x = a_1/a_0$\,, and so by transforming as above we can arrange that
$\infty$ is a triple zero of \,$a(x)$\,, that is, \,$\deg a(x) = 0$\,.
Thus in each of the two cases we can normalize
\[
a(x) = a_2\, x^2 + a_0 \neq 0 \,.
\]
The transformations that preserve this normalization preserve the line
\,$L_\infty$\,, and so by Section~\ref{B} they are just of the form
\[
\textstyle{
(x,y)\longmapsto (\alpha\,x+\delta\,,\,\beta\,y+\sum\limits_{i=0}^3\gamma_i\,x^i)
}
\]
where \,$\alpha,\,\beta\in K^*$\, and \,$\gamma_0,\,\gamma_1,\,\gamma_2,\,\gamma_3,\,\delta\in K$\,.
To make further normalizations, we are just allowed to substitute
\[
a(x) \longmapsto \beta^{-1}\, a(\alpha\,x+\delta)
\]
and
\[
\textstyle{
b(x)\longmapsto\beta^{-2}\left(b(\alpha\,x+\delta)
+\sum\limits_{i=0}^3\gamma_i^2\,x^{2i}
+a(\alpha\,x+\delta)\,\sum\limits_{i=0}^3 \gamma_i\, x^i \right).
}
\]
If \,$a_2\neq 0$\, then we can normalize \,$b_5 = b_3 = b_2 =0$\,, and
furthermore we get \,$b_1 = b'(\ol x)=0$\,. If \,$a_2 =0$\, then \,$b_5=0$\,
and we can normalize \,$b_5 = b_3 =b_2 = 0$\,. Thus in both cases we have
\[
b(x) = b_6\,x^6 + b_4\,x^4 + b_0\,,
\]
and the freedom to transform is restricted by the conditions
\[
\gamma_1 = \gamma_3 = 0 \quad \text{and} \quad
a_2\,\gamma_0+(a_2\,\delta^2 + a_0)\,\alpha^{-2}\,\gamma_2 = \delta^4\,b_6\,.
\]
The coefficients of the minimal equation transform as follows:
\[
\begin{array}{l}
a_2 \longmapsto \alpha^2\,\beta^{-1}\,a_2 \\ \vspace{1mm}
a_0 \longmapsto \beta^{-1}\,(a_0 + a_2\,\delta^2)\\ \vspace{1mm}
b_6 \longmapsto \alpha^6\,\beta^{-2}\,b_6\\ \vspace{1mm}
b_4 \longmapsto \alpha^4\,\beta^{-2}\,
(b_4 +\alpha^{-4}\,\gamma_2^2 + \alpha^{-2}\,\gamma_2\,a_2+\delta^2\,b_6)\\ \vspace{1mm}
b_0 \longmapsto \beta^{-2}\,(b_0 + \gamma_0^2 + \gamma_0\,a_2\,\delta^2
+\gamma_0\,a_0 + b_4\,\delta^4 + b_6\,\delta^6)\,.
\end{array}
\]
In particular, the class \,$b_6\mod (K^*)^2$\, is an invariant of the function field
\,$F|K$\,. Moreover, if \,$a_2\neq 0$\, (resp., \,$a_2 =0)$, then we can normalize
\,$a_2 =1$\, (resp., \,$a_0 =1)$, and the freedom to transform is furthermore
restricted by the condition \,$\beta = \alpha^2$\, (resp., \,$\beta =1)$. Allowing a
quadratic base field extension if necessary, we could also normalize
\,$b_4 =0$\, (resp., \,$b_0=0)$.
As a hyperelliptic function fields admits exactly one quadratic subfield of
genus zero (see~\cite[Chapter\ \textrm{IV}, Theorem 9]{Ch}) and as
\,$F|K$\, is of separable type, we conclude that the genus \,$g_1$\, of the
Frobenius pullback \,$F_1|K=F^2 K|K$\, is different from zero. As
\,$F_1 =K(x^2,y^2)$\, and \,$a(x)\neq 0$\,, we have \,$y\in F_1$\, and
therefore \,$F_1 =K(z,y)$\, where \,$z:=x^2$\, and
\[
y^2+(a_0+a_2\,z)\,y + b_6\,z^3 + b_4\,z^2 + b_0 = 0 \,.
\]
We notice that $b_6\neq 0$\,, because otherwise by the Jacobian criterion
\,$F_1|K$\, would be the function field of a plane projective smooth conic
curve (respectively, of a projective line) if \,$a_0^2\,b_4\neq a_1^2\,b_0$\,
(respectively, \,$a_0^2\,b_4 = a_1^2\,b_0$), in contradiction with \,$g_1\neq 0$\,.
Moreover, we have \,$\Delta\neq 0$\,, because otherwise \,$F_1|K$\, would be
rational as the function field of a plane projective geometrically integral
cubic curve with a rational non-smooth point. Thus \,$F_1|K$\, is an elliptic
function field and therefore \,$g_1 = \ol g = 1$\,.
Let $j_1$\, be the modular invariant of \,$F_1|K$\, as introduced in
characteristic two by Tate~\cite{T2}. To compute \,$j_1$\, we replace \,$x$\,
and \,$y$\, by \,$b_6\,x$\, and \,$b_6\,y$\,, respectively, in order to get a
minimal equation that is monic in the two coordinate functions, and then we
obtain \,$j_1=a_2^{12}/\Delta$\, from Tate's formul{\ae}. As the Frobenius map
provides an isomorphism between the function fields
\,$FK^{1/2}|K^{1/2}$\,
and \,$F_1|K$\,, we conclude that the elliptic function fields
\,$FK^{1/2}|K^{1/2}$\, and \,$F\ol K|\ol K$\, have the invariant \,$j_1^{1/2}$\,.
To prove the last part of the theorem, let be given a polynomial
\[
f(X,Y)=Y^2+(a_2\,X^2+a_0)\,Y+b_6\,X^6+b_4\,X^4+b_0 \in K[X,Y]
\]
whose coefficients satisfy \,$\Delta\neq 0$\,. Then \,$b_6\neq 0$\, and
\,$(a_0,a_2)\neq(0,0)$\,, and this implies that \,$f(X,Y)$\, is absolutely
irreducible. Indeed, if there would exist a polynomial \,$c(X)\in\ol K[X]$\,
such that \,$f(x,c(X))=0$\,, then as \,$b_6\neq 0$\, its degree would be
equal to $3$ and by comparing the terms of degree $3$ and $5$ we would get
the contradiction \,$a_0=a_2=0$\,.
Let \,$F|K = K(x,y)|K$\, be the separable function field given by the
absolutely irreducible equation \,$f(x,y)=0$\,. As \,$\Delta\neq 0$\,,
the Frobenius pullback \,$F_1|K = K(x^2,y^2)|K = K(x^2,y)|K$\, is an
elliptic function field, and so \,$g_1 = \ol g =1$\,.
To express the genus $g$ of \,$F|K$\, in terms of the coefficients, we will
apply Rosenlicht's genus drop formula. To determine the singularity degree
of a prime $\mathfrak{p}$ of \,$F|K$\,, we look for a natural number $n$ such that
the restriction \,$\mathfrak{p}_n$\, of $\mathfrak{p}$ to the $n$-th Frobenius pullback
\,$F_n := F^{2^n}K|K$\, is rational. Such an integer exists if $K$
is separably closed (see \cite[Lemma 2.1]{BS}). We write the $2^n$-power
of the separating variable $x$ as a Laurent series in a local parameter
at \,$\mathfrak{p}_n$\,. Then the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$\,, as well as other
properties of the local ring $\O_\mathfrak{p}$ can be determined from
this Laurent series expansion (see~\cite{BS}). To finish the proof of the
theorem, we divide the discussion into three cases, according to
\,$a_2=0$\,, \,$a_0/a_2\in K^2$\, and \,$a_0/a_2\in K\setminus K^2$\,,
and provide a direct proof of the following corollary.
\begin{cor}
\label{C2}
A function field over a field $K$ of characteristic $2$
is geometrically elliptic of genus $2$ if and only if it can be put
into one of the three normal forms:
\[
\begin{array}{rl}
(i) & y^2+y+b_6\,x^6+b_4\,x^4+b_0=0\quad\text{where}\;\; b_6\notin K^2 \vspace{1mm}\\
(ii) & y^2+x^2\,y+b_6\,x^6+b_4\,x^4+b_0=0\quad
\text{where }\,b_0\notin K^2\,\text{ and }\,b_6\neq 0 \vspace{1mm}\\
(iii)& y^2+(x^2+a_0)\,y+b_6\,x^6+b_4\,x^4+b_0=0 \quad
\text{where }\, a_0\notin K^2\,\text{ and }\,\Delta \neq 0\,.
\end{array}
\]
The first case happens if and only if \,$j_1=0$\,.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
(i) \ \ We assume that \,$a_2=0$\,, and normalize \,$a_0=1$\,.
Let \,$\mathfrak{p}$\, be a singular prime of \,$F|K$\,. As the only singular point of the curve \,$C$\,
lies on the line \,$L_{\infty}$\,, we conclude that $\mathfrak{p}$ is a pole of $x$. Thus, the restriction \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, of
\,$\mathfrak{p}$\, to the Frobenius pullback \,$F_1|K=K(x^2,y)|K$\, is the only pole of \,$z=x^2$. Hence
\,$\deg(\mathfrak{p}_1)=1,\,\ \operatorname{ord}_{\mathfrak{p}_1}(z)=-2,\,\ \operatorname{ord}_{\mathfrak{p}_1}(y)=-3$\, and \,$t:=z/y$\, is a local parameter at
\,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\,. To write \,$z=x^2$\, as a Laurent series in $t$, we notice that
\[
t^{-2}z^2+t^{-1}z=b_6z^3+b_4z^2+b_0
\]
and by comparing successively coefficients we obtain
\[
z=b_6^{-1}(t^{-2}+b_4t^0+b_6t^1+\cdots)
\]
where the dots stand for terms of order larger than $1$. Now we can apply \cite[Proposition 4.1]{BS}:
If \,$b_6\notin K^2$\, (resp., \,$b_6\in K^2$) then the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is
equal to one (resp., zero) and so by Rosenlicht's genus drop formula \,$g=2$\, (resp., \,$g=1$).
(ii)\ \ We assume that \,$a_2\neq 0$\, and \,$a_0/a_2\in K^2$\,, and normalize \,$a_2=1$\, and \,$a_0=0$\,.
Let $\mathfrak{p}$ be a singular prime of \,$F|K$\,. As the only singular point of the curve \,$C\subset \PP^4\,$
lies on the line \,$L_0$\,, we conclude that $\mathfrak{p}$ is a zero of \,$x$\,. Thus the restriction \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, of \,$\mathfrak{p}$\,
to \,$F_1|K=K(x^2,z)|K$\, is the only zero of \,$z=x^2$\,.
We first assume that \,$b_0$\, is a square, say \,$b_0=c^2$\, where \,$c\in K^*$.
Then \,$F_1=K(t,z)$\,
where \,$t:=y+c$\, and
\[
t^2+cz+tz+b_4z^2+b_6z^3=0\,.
\]
The prime \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is centered at the smooth rational point \,$(\ol{t},\ol{z})=(0,0)$\, of the affine
plane cubic curve, and therefore \,$\deg(\mathfrak{p}_1)=1$\,. Moreover, $t$ is a local parameter at
\,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\,. Expanding \,$z=c^{-1}t^2+c^{-2}t^3+\cdots$\, we deduce from \cite[Proposition 4.1]{BS}
that the prime $\mathfrak{p}$ is non-singular and therefore \,$g=1$\,.
Now we assume that \,$b_0\notin K^2$. Applying the preceding considerations to \,$F_2|K$\,
instead of \,$F_1|K$\,, we conclude that the prime \,$\mathfrak{p}_2$\, is rational, \,$t:=y^2+b_0$\, is a local
parameter at $\,\mathfrak{p}_2$\,, and $\,x^4=b_0^{-2}t^2+b_0^{-4}t^3+\cdots$\,. Then it follows from \cite[Proposition 4.3]{BS}
that \,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is ramified and the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to $1$\,, and therefore \,$g=2$\,.
(iii)\ \ We assume that \,$a_2\neq 0$\, and \,$a_0/a_2\notin K^2$\,, normalize \,$a_2=1\,,$ and so we have
\,$a_0\notin K^2$\,. Let $\mathfrak{p}$ be a singular prime of \,$F|K$\,. As the only singular point of $C$ lies on
the line \,$L_{a_0^{1/2}}$\,, we conclude that $\mathfrak{p}$ lies over the $(x^2+a_0)$-adic prime of the quadratic
rational subfield $K(x)$ of $F|K$. Denoting by $\ol y$ the residue class of $y \mod \mathfrak{p}$, we have
\[
\ol y=(b_6a_0^3+b_4a_0^2+b_0)^{1/2}=b_6^{-1}j_1^{-1/2}+a_0^2b_6.
\]
We will first assume that \,$\ol y\in K$\,, that is, \,$j_1\in (K^*)^2$\,. Then \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is a rational prime
of \,$F_1|K=K(x^2,y)|K$\,, and \,$t:=y+\ol y$\, is a local parameter at \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\,. To write \,$z=x^2$\,
as a Laurent series in $t$, we enter into the polynomial equation
\[
(t+\ol y)^2+(z+a_0)(t+\ol y)+b_6z^3+b_4z^2+b_0=0
\]
and obtain
\[
x^2=a_0+b_6j_1^{1/2}t^2+b_6^2j_1t^3+\cdots.
\]
It now follows from \cite[Proposition 4.1]{BS} that the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to one,
and therefore \,$g=2$\,.
Now we assume that \,$\ol y\notin K$\,, that is, \,$j_1\notin K^2$\,. As \,$F_1=K(x^2,y)$\, we obtain
\[
F_2=K(x^4,y^2)=K(x^4,t)\ \text{ where } t:=y^2+\ol y^2
\]
is a local parameter at the rational prime \,$\mathfrak{p}_2$\,. From the polynomial equation
\[
(t+\ol y^2)^2+(x^4+a_0^2)(t+\ol y^2)+b_6^2x^{12}+b_4^2x^8+b_0^2=0
\]
we get the power series expansion
\[
x^4=a_0^2+b_6^2j_1t^2+b_6^4j_1^2t^3+\cdots.
\]
By \cite[Proposition 4.1]{BS} the residue field of \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is equal to \,$K(j_1^{1/2})$\,.
If \,$a_0\notin K^2(j_1)$\, then by \cite[Proposition 4.3]{BS} the residue field of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to
\,$K(j_1^{1/2}, a_0^{1/2})$\,, the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to $1$, and therefore \,$g=2$\,.
If \,$a_0\in K^2(j_1)$\,, that is, \,$a_0\in K^2(\ol y^2)$\, say \,$a_0=\alpha^2+\beta^2\ol y^2$\, where \,$\alpha, \beta\in K$\,, then defining \,$w:=x+\alpha+\beta y$\,, we get the expansion
\[
w^4=(b_6^2j_1+\beta^4)t^2+b_6^4j_1^2t^3+\cdots\,,
\]
and so by \cite[Proposition 4.3]{BS} \,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is ramified, the singularity degree
of \,$\mathfrak{p}$\, is equal to 1, and therefore \,$g=2$\,.
\end{proof}
\section{Genus-2 function fields of inseparable type}
\label{D}
\noindent
Let \,$F|K$\, be a one-dimensional separable function field of genus $2$, written in the
normal form \,$y^2+a(x)y+b(x)=0$\, of Section~\ref{B}. We assume that \,$F|K$\, is
of \textit{inseparable type} or, equivalently, it is an inseparable extension of its canonical
quadratic rational subfield \,$K(x)$\,, that is, \,$p=2$\, and \,$a(x)=0$\,. Therefore
\[
y^2=b(x)=\sum_{i=0}^6b_ix^i\in K[x] \ \text{ and }\ b'(x)=b_5x^4+b_3x^2+b_1\neq 0\,.
\]
By Section~\ref{B} the polynomial \,$b(x)$\, is uniquely determined by the
isomorphism class of \,$F|K$\, up to the substitutions
\[
b(x)\mapsto \beta^{-2}\left(\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}\right)^6\,\,
b\!\left(\frac{\alpha_{11}x+\alpha_{12}}{\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}}\right)
+ \sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3 \gamma_i^2 x^{2i}
\]
where \,$(\alpha_{ij})\in\operatorname{GL}_2(K),\ \,\beta\in K^*$\, and \,$\gamma_0, \gamma_1, \gamma_2, \gamma_3\in K$\,. In particular,
\[
b'(x)\mapsto \beta^{-2}\det(\alpha_{ij})\left(\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}\right)^4\,\,
b'\!\left(\frac{\alpha_{11}x+\alpha_{12}}{\alpha_{21}x+\alpha_{22}}\right).
\]
Replacing if necessary $x$ by $\frac{1}{x}$ or $1+\frac{1}{x}$, we can
arrange that \,$b_5\neq 0$\,, and so we can normalize \,$b_5=1\,$.
\begin{thm}
\label{D1}
A one-dimensional separable function field of genus \,$g=2$\,
in characteristic \,$p=2$\, is geometrically rational if and only if it
is of inseparable type,
that is, it can be put into the normal form
\[
y^2=b(x)=\sum_{i=0}^6b_ix^i\quad \text{where }\, b_5=1\, \text{ and }\, b_0,b_1,b_2, b_3, b_4, b_6\in K\,.
\]
If \,$b_3\neq 0$\, and if (after an eventual quadratic separable base field extension) the two
roots of the polynomial \,$b'(T^{1/2})=T^2+b_3T+b_1$\, belongs to the base field \,$K$\,, then
the function field of inseparable type has genus two if and only if each such root $c$
satisfies \,$c\notin K^2$\, or \,$b_0+b_2c+b_4c^2+b_6c^3\notin K^2$\,.
If \,$b_3=0$\,, then the genus is equal to two if and only if one of the following three cases occurs:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]\ $b_1\in K\setminus K^2$ \smallskip
\item[(ii)]\ $b_1\in K^2\setminus K^4$\,, and \,$b_0+b_1b_4\notin K^2$\, or \,$b_2+b_1b_6\notin K^2$ \smallskip
\item[(iii)]\ $b_1\in K^4$\, and \,$\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3 b_{2i}b_1^{i/2}\notin K^2$\,.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The first part of the theorem follows from the first part of Theorem \ref{C1}.
Let \,$F|K$\, be the function field given by the equation \,$y^2=b(x)$\,. As \,$b'(x)\neq 0$\,,
the $n$-th Frobenius pullback is equal to
\[
F_n=F^{2^n}K=K(x^{2^n},y^{2^n})=K(x^{2^n},b(x)^{2^{n-1}})=K(x^{2^{n-1}})
\]
for each natural number $n$. If $\mathfrak{p}$ is a singular prime of \,$F|K$\,, then by the Jacobian
criterion it is necessarily a zero of \,$b'(x)=x^4+b_3x^2+b_1$\,.
We will first assume that \,$b_3\neq 0$\,, and that we can factorize
\[
b'(x)=(x^2+c)(x^2+d)\, \text{ where }\, c,d\in K\, \text{ and }\, c\neq d\,.
\]
Let \,$\mathfrak{p}\in \mathcal{R}_{F|K}$\, be the zero of \,$x^2+c$\,. If \,$c\in K^2$\, then \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is a rational prime, \,$t:=x+c^{1/2}$\,
is a local parameter at \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\,,
\[
y^2=(b_0+b_2c+b_4c^2+b_6c^3)t^0+\big(b_2+c^{1/2}(c+d)\big)t^2+(c+d)t^3+\cdots,
\]
and it follows from \cite[Proposition 4.1]{BS} that the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to $1$
(respectively, $0$) if \,$b_0+b_2c+b_4c^2+b_6c^3$\, does not belong (respectively, belongs)
to $K^2$.
Now we assume that \,$c\notin K^2$. Then \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is the $(x^2+c)$-adic prime of \,$F_1=K(x)$,
\,$\mathfrak{p}_2$\, is rational, \,$t:=x^2+c$\, is a local parameter at \,$\mathfrak{p}_2$\,, and
\[
y^4=(b_0+b_2c+b_4c^2+b_6c^3)^2t^0+\big(b_2^2+c(c+d)^2\big)t^2+(c+d)^2t^3+\cdots.
\]
The residue class of \,$y\! \mod \mathfrak{p}$ is equal to \,$\ol y=(b_0+b_2c+b_4c^2+b_6c^3)^{1/2}$\,.
If \,$\ol y\notin K(c^{1/2})$\, then \,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is inertial and by \cite[Theorem 3.2]{BS} the singularity
degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to $1$.
If \,$\ol y\in K(c^{1/2})$\, say \,$\ol y=\alpha+\beta c^{1/2}$\, where \,$\alpha, \beta\in K$\,, and if \,$z:=y+\alpha+\beta x$\, then
\[
z^4=(c(c+d)^2+b_0^2+\beta^4)t^2+(c+d)^2t^3+\cdots,
\]
and, as \,$c\notin K^2$\,, \,$c\neq d$\, and hence the coefficient of \,$t^2$\, is non-zero, we deduce that
\,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is ramified, \,$\operatorname{ord}_{\mathfrak{p}}(z)=1$\, and by \cite[Theorem 3.2]{BS} we again conclude that the
singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to $1$.
Thus the singularity degree of the two zeros of \,$b'(x)$\, are not larger than one,
and so by Rosenlicht's genus drop formula the genus $g$ is equal to two if and only if
the two singularity degrees are equal to one.
Now we assume that \,$b_3=0$\,. Let \,$\mathfrak{p}\in\mathcal{R}_{F|K}$\, be the zero of \,$b'(x)=x^4+b_1$\,.
(i)\ \ We assume that $\,b_1\in K\setminus K^2$. Then \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is the $(x^4+b_1)$-adic prime
of \,$F_1=K(x)$\,, \,$\mathfrak{p}_3$\, is rational, \,$t:=x^4+b_1$\, is a local parameter at \,$\mathfrak{p}_3$\,, and
\[
y^8=(b_0^2+b_2^2b_1+b_4^2b_1^2+b_6^2b_1^3)^2t^0+(b_2+b_1b_6)^4t^2+(b_1+b_4^4+b_6^4b_1^2)t^4+t^5+b_6^4t^6\,.
\]
The residue class of \,$y\! \mod \mathfrak{p}$\, is equal to \,$\ol y=(b_0^2+b_2^2b_1+b_4^2b_1^2+b_6^2b_1^3)^{1/4}$\,.
If \,$\ol y\notin K(b_1^{1/4})$\, then \,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is inertial and by \cite[Theorem 3.2]{BS} the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to two.
Now we assume that \,$\ol y\in K(b_1^{1/4})$\, say \,$\ol y^4=\alpha^4+\beta^4b_1+\gamma^4b_1^2+\delta^4b_1^3$\,
where \,$\alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta\in K$\,. Then \,$(b_0+b_4b_1+\alpha^2+\gamma^2b_1)^2=b_1(b_2+b_6b_1+\beta^2+\delta^2b_1)^2$\,. As \,$b_1\notin K^2$\,,
this means
\[
b_0=b_4b_1+\alpha^2+\gamma^2b_1\ \text{ and }\ b_2=b_6b_1+\beta^2+\delta^2b_1\,.
\]
Defining \,$z:=y+\alpha+\beta x+\gamma x^2+\delta x^3$\, we obtain
\[
z^8=(b_1+b_4^4+b_6^4b_1^2+\gamma^8b_1^2)t^4+t^5+(b_6^4+\delta^8)t^6\,.
\]
As \,$b_1$\, is not a square, the coefficient of \,$t^4$\, is non-zero, hence \,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is ramified, $z$ is a
local parameter at $\mathfrak{p}$, and by \cite[Theorem 3.2]{BS} the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is again
equal to two.
(ii)\ \ We assume that \,$b_1\in K^2\setminus K^4$\, say \,$b_1=c^2$\, where \,$c\in K\setminus K^2\,$. Then \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is
the $(x^2+c)$-adic prime of \,$F_1=K(x)$\,, \,$\mathfrak{p}_2$\, is rational, \,$t:=x^2+c$\, is a local parameter
at \,$\mathfrak{p}_2$\,, and
\[
y^4=(b_0+b_2c+b_4^2c^2+b_6c^3)^2t^0+(b_2+b_6c^2)^2t^2+(c+b_4^2+b_6^2c^2)t^4+t^5+b_6^2t^6\,.
\]
The residue class of \,$y\! \mod \mathfrak{p}$\, is equal to \,$\ol y=(b_0+b_2c+b_4c^2+b_6c^3)^{1/2}$\,.
If \,$\ol y\notin K(c^{1/2})$\, then \,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is inertial and by \cite[Theorem 3.2]{BS} the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to two.
Now we assume that \,$\ol y\in K(c^{1/2})$\, say \,$\ol y^2=\alpha^2+\beta^2c$\,, i.e., \,$b_0+b_4c^2+\alpha^2=(b_2+b_6c^2+\beta^2)c$\,
where \,$\alpha, \beta\in K$\,. Defining \,$z:=y+\alpha+\beta x$\, we obtain
\[
z^4=(b_2+b_6c^2+\beta^2)^2t^2+(c+b_4^2+b_6^2c^2)t^4+t^5+b_6^2t^6\,.
\]
If \,$b_2\neq b_6c^2+\beta^2$\,, then \,$\mathfrak{p}|\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is ramified, $z$ is a local parameter at $\mathfrak{p}$, and by \cite[Theorem 3.2]{BS}
the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is again equal to two. If \,$b_2=b_6c^2+\beta^2$\,, i.e.,
\,$b_0=b_4c^2+\alpha^2$\,, then the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to zero.
(iii)\ \ We assume that \,$b_1\in K^4$\, say \,$b_1=c^4$\, where \,$c\in K$\,. Then \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\, is rational,
\,$t:=x+c$\, is a local parameter at \,$\mathfrak{p}_1$\,, and
\[
y^2=(b_0+b_2c^2+b_4^2c^4+b_6c^6)t^0+(b_2+b_6c^4)t^2+(c+b_4+b_6c^2)t^4+t^5+b_6t^6\,.
\]
Now we can apply \cite[Proposition 4.1]{BS}: If \,$\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3 b_{2i}c^{2i}\notin K^2$\, then the singularity
degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to two. If \,$\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^3 b_{2i}c^{2i}\in K^2$\, then the singularity degree of $\mathfrak{p}$ is
equal to one (respectively, zero) if \,$b_2+b_6c^4\notin K^2$\, (respectively, \,$b_2+b_6c^4\in K^2$).
\end{proof}
\section{Fibrations by non-smooth curves of arithmetic genus $2$
in characteristic $2$.}
\label{E}
\noindent
Let $k$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $2$\,, and
\[
S = S(k) :=
\left\{
(u_0:u_1:u_2:u_3:v)\in \PP^4(k) \mid\rank
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
u_0 &u_1 &u_2 \\
u_1 &u_2 &u_3
\end{array}
\right)
< 2
\right\}
\]
be the cone that in Section~\ref{B} has been considered over the field $\ol K$.
Influenced by Section~\ref{C} we announce:
\begin{thm}
\label{E1}
The algebraic variety
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
Z := \text{{\Large \{}}
((u_0:u_1:u_2:u_3:v),(a_0,a_2,b_0,b_4,b_6))\in S\times\mathbb{A}^5\mid
\\ & \;\;\;
v^2+(a_0\,u_0 +a_2\,u_2)v+b_0\,u_0^2 +b_4\,u_2^2 +b_6\,u_3^2\, =\, 0\,
\text{{\Large \}}}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
is an irreducible smooth sixfold. The projection morphism
\[
\pi : Z \longrightarrow \mathbb{A}^5
\]
is proper and flat, and its fibres are non-smooth projective curves of
arithmetic genus $2$\,, which do not pass through the vertices.
The fibre over the point \,$(a_0,a_2,b_0,b_4,b_6)\in \mathbb{A}^5(k)$\,
is a geometrically elliptic curve (i.e., an integral curve of geometric
genus 1) if and only if
\[
\Delta:=
b_6^2\,(a_2^6\,b_0+a_0^2\,a_2^4\,b_4+a_0^3\,a_2^3\,b_6 +a_0^4\,b_6^2)\neq 0\,.
\]
In this case, the fibre has a cusp as its only singularity, and the elliptic
modular invariant of its non-singular projective model is equal to
\,$a_2^6/\Delta^{1/2}$.
\end{thm}
During the proof of the theorem we will describe the singularities
of all fibres, and discuss how they move.
We start the proof by noting that the variety $Z$ is the closed subset of
\,$S\times\mathbb{A}^5$\, contained in the smooth subvariety
\,$(S\setminus\{Q\})\times\mathbb{A}^5$\, that in the charts
\,$W\times\mathbb{A}^5\tilde{\longrightarrow}\mathbb{A}^7\,$\, and
\,$\breve W\times\mathbb{A}^5\tilde{\longrightarrow}\mathbb{A}^7\,$\,
is given by the equations
\[
v^2 +(a_0 +a_2\,u^2)\,v+b_0 +b_4\,u^4+b_6\,u^6 = 0
\]
and
\[
\breve v^2 +(a_0\,\breve u^3 +a_2\,\breve u)\,\breve v +b_0\,\breve u^6+b_4\,\breve u^2 +b_6 =0\,,
\]
respectively. Hence $Z$ is irreducible, smooth and of dimension $6$\,.
As $S$ is projective, the projection morphism $\pi$ is proper.
The fibration \,$\pi : Z\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^5$\, provides a
$5$-dimensional family of projective curves on the punctured cone
\,$S\setminus\{Q\}$\,. For each point $(a_0,a_2,b_0,b_4,b_6)$ of the base
\,$\mathbb{A}^5$\, the corresponding curve is given in the two charts
\,$W$\, and \,$\breve W$\,
by the above equations. As the base $\mathbb{A}^5$ is smooth, as the total space
$Z$ is Cohen-Macaulay as a smooth variety, and as the dimension of each
fibre is equal to \,$\dim(Z)-\dim(\mathbb{A}^5)=1$\,, we conclude that the
morphism $\pi:Z\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^5$\, is flat (see
\cite[Theorem 18.16]{E}), and so the fibres have the same arithmetic genus.
The singular points of the fibres are obtained by applying the Jacobian
criterion to the curves in the two charts of the punctured cone. The types
of the singularities can be read off from the blowup sequences. Each curve
of the family has at the point
\[
\left(a_2^{3/2}:a_0^{1/2}a_2:a_0\,a_2^{1/2}:a_0^{3/2}:
(b_0\,a_2^6+b_4\,a_0^4\,a_2^2+b_6\,a_0^6)^{1/2}\right)
\]
a singularity with double tangent line. It is a cusp if and only if the
second factor of $\Delta$ is non-zero. If the second factor vanishes and
\,$a_2\neq 0$\,,
then it is a tacnode, i.e., a two-branched point of singularity degree two.
If \,$a_2 = 0\,,\ a_0\neq 0\,,\ b_6 = 0\, \text{ and }\, b_4\neq 0$\,, then
it is a ramphoid cusp, i.e., a unibranch point of singularity degree two.
If \,$a_2 = 0\,,\ a_0\neq 0\,,\ b_6 = 0\, \text{ and }\, b_4= 0$\,, then
it is a two-branched point of multiplicity three.
If \,$a_2\neq 0$\, and \,$b_6 =0$\,, then the curve has a second
singularity, namely a node at the point $(0:0:0:1:0)$ on the line
$L_\infty$\,, which collides with the first singularity if \,$a_2$\,
tends to zero. If $(a_0,a_2)\neq (0,0)$, then there are no other
singularities on the fibre.
If $(a_0,a_2)=(0,0)$, then the fibre is a double smooth rational curve,
and so it is non-reduced and its points are singular.
If $(a_2,a_0)\neq (0,0)$, then the fibre is non-integral if and only if
\,$b_6 =0$\, and \,$a_0^2\,b_4 = a_2^2\,b_0$\,. In this case it is the
union of two smooth rational curves. If \,$a_2\neq 0$\,, then the two
components intersect at the two singular points
with the multiplicities $2$ and $1$\,.
If \,$a_2=0$\,, then the two components intersect at the only singular
point %
with multiplicity $3$\,.
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Remark.}
If by homogenizing we enlarge the base of $\pi$ from $\mathbb{A}^5$ to $\PP^5$,
then the total space acquires singularities at
\,$\{Q\}\times (\PP^5\setminus \mathbb{A}^5)$\,, and the fibres over
\,$\PP^5\setminus \mathbb{A}^5$\, pass through the vertices.
\begin{thm}\label{E2}
If \,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\, is a proper morphism of irreducible smooth
algebraic varieties such that almost all fibres are geometrically elliptic curves
of arithmetic genus $2$\,, then the fibration \,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\,
is, up to birational equivalence, a base extension of the fibration
\,$\pi:Z\rightarrow \mathbb{A}^5$\,.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Section~\ref{A}, the one-dimensional function field \,$k(T)|k(B)$\,
is geometrically elliptic of genus $2$\,, and so by Theorem~\ref{C1} it can
be put into the normal form
\[
k(T) = k(B)(x,y)\quad\text{where}\quad
y^2+(a_0+a_2\,x^2)y+b_0 +b_4\,x^4 +b_6\,x^6 = 0\,,
\]
$a_0, a_2, b_0, b_4, b_6 \in k(B)$\, and
\,$\Delta(a_0,a_2,b_0,b_4,b_6)\neq 0$\,.
Let $B'$ be the closed irreducible affine subvariety of $\mathbb{A}^5$ with the
coordinate algebra \,$k[a_0,a_2,b_0,b_4,b_6]$\,, let
\[
T':=\pi^{-1}(B')\subseteq Z\subset S\times\mathbb{A}^5
\]
and let \,$\f':T'\rightarrowB'$\, be the corresponding closed
subfibration of \,$\pi:Z\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^5$\,. By Theorem~\ref{E1}
the morphism $\f'$ is proper and its fibres are non-smooth projective curves of
arithmetic genus $2$\,. As \,$\Delta\neq 0$\,, almost every fibre is
a geometrically elliptic curve with a cusp as its only singularity. By
construction \,$k(B')=k(a_0,a_2,b_0,b_4,b_6)\,,\,\ k(T')=k(B')(x,y)$\,
and therefore
\[
k(T)\,\cong\,k(T')\otimes_{k(B')} k(B)\,.
\]
By restricting the base $B$ of the fibration \,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\, to a
dense open subset, we can arrange that the rational functions
\,$a_2,\,a_0,\,b_6,\,b_4$\, and \,$b_0$\, become regular on $B$\,, and hence
define a dominant morphism \,$B\rightarrowB'$\,. Thus we have the
fibre product \,$T'\times_{B'}B$\,, whose function field is isomorphic
to \,$k(T')\otimes_{k(B')} k(B)$\, and hence isomorphic to \,$k(T)$\,.
More precisely, the inclusion \,$k(T')\subseteq k(T)$\, induces a rational
map \,$T\dashrightarrowT'$\, and hence a rational map of $B$-schemes
\,$T\dashrightarrowT'\times_{B'}B$\,, which is birational, because
the induced homomorphism between the function fields is the above isomorphism.
\end{proof}
To diminish the dimension of the base of the fibration $\pi$\,, according to
Corollary~\ref{C2} we divide the discussion into the cases \,$\ol{\jmath} \neq 0$\,
and \,$\ol{\jmath}=0$\,, normalize \,$a_2=1$\, and \,$a_0=1$\,, respectively, and
obtain as base varieties the affine spaces $\mathbb{A}^4$\, and \,$\mathbb{A}^3$\,,
respectively. By admitting separable quadratic base extensions if necessary,
we can further normalize \,$b_4=0$\, and \,$b_0=0$\,, respectively, and
diminish the dimensions of the bases by $1$\,.
In the first case we get the irreducible smooth fourfold
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
X := \text{{\Large \{}}
((u_0:u_1:u_2:u_3:v),(a_0,b_0,b_6))\in S\times\mathbb{A}^3\mid
\\ & \;\;\;
v^2+(a_0\,u_0 + u_2)v+b_0\,u_0^2 + b_6\,u_3^2\, =\, 0\,
\text{{\Large \}}}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
equipped with the proper and flat projection morphism \,$\chi:X\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^3$\,.
If \,$\Delta:=b_6^2\,(b_0+a_0^3\,b_6+a_0^4\,b_6^2)\neq 0$\,,
then the fibre over the point $(a_0,b_0,b_6)$ is geometrically elliptic
with the modular invariant \,$\Delta^{-1}\neq 0$\,, and has a cusp as
its only singularity. This describes the generic behavior of the fibres of $\chi$.
By the discussion following Theorem~\ref{E1}, we also know the structure of the
bad fibres. If \,$b_6\neq0$\, and the second factor of $\Delta$ vanishes,
then the fibre is a rational curve with a tacnode as its only singularity.
If \,$b_6=0$\, and \,$b_0\neq0$\,, then the fibre is a rational curve with
a cusp and a node as its only singularities.
In the remaining case where \,$b_0=b_6=0$\,, the fibre is a union of two
smooth rational curves, which meet in the two singular points with intersection
multiplicities two and one.
In the second case where $\ol{\jmath}=0$\,, we get the irreducible smooth threefold
\[
Y := \text{{\Large \{}}
((u_0:u_1:u_2:u_3:v),(b_4,b_6))\in S\times\mathbb{A}^2\mid
v^2+u_0\,v+b_4\,u_2^2 + b_6\,u_3^2\, =\, 0\,
\text{{\Large \}}}
\]
and the proper and flat projection morphism \,$\eta:Z\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^2$\,.
If \,$b_6\neq0$\,, then the fibre over the point $(b_4,b_6)$ is geometrically
elliptic with the modular invariant $0$\,, and has a cusp as its only
singularity.
The bad fibres are described as follows:
If \,$b_6=0$\, and \,$b_4\neq0$\,, then the fibre is a rational curve with a
ramphoid cusp as its only singularity.
If \,$b_4=b_6=0$\,, then the fibre is a union of two smooth
rational curves, which meet in only one point with intersection
multiplicity three.
\begin{cor}
\label{E3}
Let \,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\, be a proper morphism of irreducible smooth
varieties such that almost all fibres are geometrically elliptic curves of
arithmetic genus two. If the modular invariants of the fibres are not
identically zero (respectively, equal to zero), then the fibration
\,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\,, after an eventual separable quadratic
base extension, is birational equivalent to a base extension of the
fibration \,$\chi:X\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^3$\, (respectively,
\,$\eta:Y\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^2)$.
\end{cor}
>From Section~\ref{D} we obtain by similar arguments the following result.
\begin{thm}
\label{E4}
The algebraic variety
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
V := \text{{\Large \{}}
((u_0:u_1:u_2:u_3:v),(b_0,\dots,b_4,b_6))\in S\times\mathbb{A}^6\mid
\\ & \;\;\;
v^2+b_0\,u_0^2+b_1\,u_0\,u_1+b_2\,u_1^2+b_3\,u_1\,u_2+b_4\,u_2^2+u_2\,u_3+b_6\,u_3^2\,=\,0\,
\text{{\Large \}}}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
is an irreducible smooth sevenfold. The projection morphism
\,$\mu:V\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^6$\, is proper and flat, and its fibres are rational
curves of arithmetic genus two. If \,$b_3\neq0$\, (respectively, \,$b_3=0$), then
the fibre over the point \,$(b_0,\dots,b_4,b_6)\in\mathbb{A}^6(k)$\, has two cusps
(respectively, a ramphoid cusp).
If \,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\, is a proper morphism of irreducible non-smooth
varieties such that almost all fibres are rational curves of arithmetic genus
two, then the fibration \,$\phi:T\rightarrow B$\, is, up to birational equivalence,
a base extension of the fibration
\,$\mu:V\rightarrow\mathbb{A}^6$\,.
\end{thm}
|
\section*{Introduction}
A \definedterm{reduction} of an equivalence relation $E$ on a set $X$ to an equivalence relation
$F$ on a set $Y$ is a function $\pi \colon X \to Y$ with the property that $\forall x_1, x_2 \in X
\ ( x_1 \mathrel{E} x_2 \iff \pi(x_1) \mathrel{F} \pi(x_2) )$. A topological space is \definedterm{Po\-lish\xspace}
if it is second countable and completely metrizable, a subset of such a space is \definedterm
{Bor\-el\xspace} if it is in the $\sigma$-algebra generated by the underlying topology, and a function between
such spaces is \definedterm{Bor\-el\xspace} if pre-images of open sets are Bor\-el\xspace. Over the last few
decades, the study of Bor\-el\xspace reducibility of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces has
emerged as a central theme in descriptive set theory.
The early development of this area was dominated by dichotomy theorems. There are several
trivial ones, such as the fact that if $n$ is a natural number, then for every Bor\-el\xspace equivalence
relation $E$ on a Po\-lish\xspace space, either $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to equality on $n$, or equality on
$n + 1$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$. Similarly, either there is a natural number $n$ for which $E$ is
Bor\-el\xspace reducible to equality on $n$, or equality on $\mathbb{N}$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$.
There are also non-trivial results of this form. By \cite{Silver}, either $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to
equality on $\mathbb{N}$, or equality on $\Cantorspace$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$. And by \cite
[Theorem 1.1]{HarringtonKechrisLouveau}, either $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to equality on
$\Cantorspace$, or $\mathbb{E}_0$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$, where $\mathbb{E}_0$ is the relation on
$\Cantorspace$ given by $x \mathrel{\mathbb{E}_0} y \iff \exists n \in \mathbb{N} \forall m \ge n \ x(m) = y(m)$.
Whereas the results we have mentioned thus far concern the global structure of the Bor\-el\xspace
reducibility hierarchy, \cite[Theorem 1]{KechrisLouveau} yields a local dichotomy of this form.
Namely, that for every Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $E$ on a Po\-lish\xspace space which is Bor\-el\xspace reducible
to $\mathbb{E}_1$, either $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $\mathbb{E}_0$, or $\mathbb{E}_1$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$, where
$\mathbb{E}_1$ is the relation on $\functions{\mathbb{N}}{(\Cantorspace)}$ given by $x \mathrel{\mathbb{E}_1} y \iff \exists n \in \mathbb{N}
\forall m \ge n \ x(m) = y(m)$.
At first glance, one might hope the assumption that $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $\mathbb{E}_1$ could be
eliminated, thereby yielding a new global dichotomy theorem. Unfortunately, \cite[Theorem 2]
{KechrisLouveau} ensures that if $E$ is not Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $\mathbb{E}_0$, then there is a Bor\-el\xspace
equivalence relation with which it is incomparable under Bor\-el\xspace reducibility. It follows that only the
pairs $\pair{F}{F'}$ discussed thus far (up to Bor\-el\xspace bi-reducibility) satisfy both (1) there is a Bor\-el\xspace
reduction of $F$ to $F'$ but not vice versa, and (2) for every Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $E$ on a
Po\-lish\xspace space, either $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $F$, or $F'$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$.
As the latter result rules out further global dichotomies of the sort discussed thus far, it is
interesting to note that its proof hinges upon the previously mentioned local dichotomy, as well as
Har\-ring\-ton\xspace's unpublished theorem that the family of orbit equivalence relations induced by
Bor\-el\xspace actions of Po\-lish\xspace groups on Po\-lish\xspace spaces is unbounded in the Bor\-el\xspace reducibility
hierarchy. Here we utilize strengthenings of these results to provide a substantially stronger
anti-dichotomy theorem.
Given a property $P$ of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations, we say that a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation
is \definedterm{essentially $P$} if it is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on a Po\-lish\xspace
space with the given property. A \definedterm{Wadge\xspace reduction} of a set $A \subseteq X$ to a set
$B \subseteq Y$ is a continuous function $\pi \colon X \to Y$ such that $\forall x \in X \ ( x \in A \iff
\pi(x) \in B )$. We say that a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $E$ has \definedterm{essential complexity
at least the complexity} of a set $B \subseteq \Cantorspace$ if $B$ is Wadge\xspace reducible to every
Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation to which $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible. We say that a family $\mathscr{F}$ of
Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations has \definedterm{cofinal essential complexity} if for every
Bor\-el\xspace set $B \subseteq \Cantorspace$, there is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $E \in \mathscr{F}$ with
essential complexity at least the complexity of $B$.
Much as in \cite{KechrisLouveau}, we obtain our anti-dichotomy theorem as a consequence of a
result yielding the existence of incomparable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations, albeit one considerably
stronger than that given there.
\begin{introtheorem} \label{introduction:main}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$. Then exactly
one of the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The relation $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $\mathbb{E}_0$.
\item The family of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces which are incomparable with
$E$ under Bor\-el\xspace reducibility has cofinal essential complexity.
\end{enumerate}
\end{introtheorem}
We say that a family $\mathscr{F}$ of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces is \definedterm
{dichotomical} if there is a \definedterm{minimum} Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $F$ on a Po\-lish\xspace
space which is not in $\mathscr{F}$, meaning that whenever $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on a
Po\-lish\xspace space, either $E \in \mathscr{F}$ or there is a Bor\-el\xspace reduction of $F$ to $E$. The following
consequence of Theorem \ref{introduction:main} implies that the only such families are those
associated with the dichotomies mentioned earlier.
\begin{introtheorem}
Suppose that $\mathscr{F}$ is a dichotomical class of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces of
non-cofinal essential complexity. Then every equivalence relation in $\mathscr{F}$ is smooth.
\end{introtheorem}
In \S\ref{preliminaries}, we briefly review the preliminaries needed throughout the paper. In
\S\ref{hyperfiniteoncountable}, we introduce a property of graphs $G$ ensuring that if a Bor\-el\xspace
equivalence relation $E$ on a Po\-lish\xspace space, whose classes are all countable, is Bor\-el\xspace reducible
to the equivalence relation generated by $G$, then it is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $\mathbb{E}_0$. In \S\ref{ideals},
we introduce a family of ideals on $\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}$, and show that they are cofinal under Wadge\xspace
reducibility. In \S\ref{trees}, we introduce a family of trees on $\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}$, and show that the
graphs determined by their branches interact nicely with equivalence relations induced by ideals.
In \S\ref{density}, we consider a subfamily of these trees satisfying an appropriate density
condition, and show that the graphs determined by their branches interact particularly nicely with
equivalence relations induced by the ideals introduced earlier. And in \S\ref{antibasis}, we establish
our primary results.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{preliminaries}
Two sets $M, N \subseteq \mathbb{N}$ are \definedterm{almost disjoint} if $\cardinality{M \intersection N} <
\aleph_0$.
\begin{proposition} \label{preliminaries:almostdisjoint}
There is a continuous injection $\pi \colon \Cantorspace \to \powerset{\mathbb{N}}$ into a family of pairwise
almost disjoint infinite sets.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
It is sufficient to observe that the function $\pi \colon \Cantorspace \to \powerset{\functions{<\mathbb{N}}{2}}$, given
by $\pi(c) = \set{\restriction{c}{n}}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$, is a continuous injection into a family of pairwise almost
disjoint infinite sets.
\end{propositionproof}
A set is \definedterm{comeager} if it contains an intersection of countably many dense open sets.
\begin{proposition} \label{preliminaries:continuous}
Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are Po\-lish\xspace spaces and the map $\pi \colon X \to Y$ is Bor\-el\xspace . Then
there is a comeager set $C \subseteq X$ on which $\pi$ is continuous.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
See, for example, \cite[Theorem 8.38]{Kechris}.
\end{propositionproof}
A subset of a Po\-lish\xspace space is \definedterm{analytic} if it is the continuous image of a Bor\-el\xspace subset of
a Po\-lish\xspace space. A subset of a Po\-lish\xspace space is \definedterm{co-analytic} if its complement is analytic.
\begin{theorem}[Sous\-lin\xspace] \label{preliminaries:bianalytic}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $B \subseteq X$. Then $B$ is Bor\-el\xspace if and only if $B$ is
both analytic and co-analytic.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See, for example, \cite[Theorem 14.11]{Kechris}.
\end{theoremproof}
The \definedterm{projection} from $X \times Y$ to $X$ is given by $\projection{X}(x, y) = x$. A
\definedterm{partial uniformization} of a set $R \subseteq X \times Y$ is a function whose graph
is contained in $R$. A \definedterm{uniformization} of a set $R \subseteq X \times Y$ is a partial
uniformization of $R$ whose domain is $\image{\projection{X}}{R}$.
\begin{theorem}[Lu\-sin\xspace-No\-vik\-ov\xspace] \label{preliminaries:LusinNovikov}
Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are Po\-lish\xspace spaces and $R \subseteq X \times Y$ is a Bor\-el\xspace set
whose vertical sections are all countable. Then $\image{\projection{X}}{R}$ is Bor\-el\xspace, and
$R$ is a countable union of Bor\-el\xspace uniformizations.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See, for example, \cite[Theorem 18.10]{Kechris}.
\end{theoremproof}
For each $x \in X$, the \definedterm{\textexponent{x}{th} vertical section} of a set $R \subseteq
X \times Y$ is given by $\verticalsection{R}{x} = \set{y \in Y}[x \mathrel{R} y]$. The \definedterm
{set of unicity} of $R$ is $\set{x \in X}[\cardinality{\verticalsection{R}
{x}} = 1]$.
\begin{theorem}[Lu\-sin\xspace] \label{preliminaries:unicity}
Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are Po\-lish\xspace spaces and $R \subseteq X \times Y$ is Bor\-el\xspace. Then
the set of unicity of $R$ is co-analytic.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See, for example, \cite[Theorem 18.11]{Kechris}.
\end{theoremproof}
A \definedterm{graph} on a set $X$ is an irreflexive, symmetric set $G \subseteq X \times X$.
Such a graph is \definedterm{locally countable} if its vertical sections are countable.
An \definedterm{edge $N$-coloring} of $G$ is a map $c \colon G \to N$ with $\forall
\pair{x}{y} \in G \ c(x, y) = c(y, x)$ and $\forall \pair{x}{y}, \pair{x}{z} \in G \ (y \neq z \implies
c(x, y) \neq c(x, z))$.
\begin{theorem}[Feld\-man\xspace-Moore\xspace] \label{preliminaries:coloring}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $G$ is a locally countable Bor\-el\xspace graph on $X$. Then there
is a Bor\-el\xspace edge $\mathbb{N}$-coloring of $G$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
This follows from the proof of \cite[Theorem 1]{FeldmanMoore}.
\end{theoremproof}
We say that a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation is \definedterm{smooth} if it is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to equality
on $\Cantorspace$. An \definedterm{embedding} is an injective reduction.
\begin{theorem}[Har\-ring\-ton\xspace-Kech\-ris\xspace-Lou\-veau\xspace] \label{preliminaries:Ezero}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$. Then exactly
one of the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The relation $E$ is smooth.
\item There is a continuous embedding of $\mathbb{E}_0$ into $E$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See \cite[Theorem 1.1]{HarringtonKechrisLouveau}.
\end{theoremproof}
A \definedterm{partial transversal} of an equivalence relation $E$ on $X$ is a set $B \subseteq X$
intersecting every equivalence class of $E$ in at most one point. A \definedterm{transversal} of an
equivalence relation $E$ on $X$ is a set $B \subseteq X$ intersecting every equivalence class of
$E$ in exactly one point.
Following the standard abuse of language, we say that an equivalence relation is
\definedterm{countable} if all of its equivalence classes are countable.
\begin{proposition} \label{preliminaries:countablesmooth}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a countable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$.
Then $E$ is smooth if and only if $X$ is the union of countably many Bor\-el\xspace partial transversals of
$E$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
This is a straightforward consequence of Theorem \ref{preliminaries:LusinNovikov}.
\end{propositionproof}
Again following the standard abuse of language, we say that an equivalence relation is
\definedterm{finite} if all of its equivalence classes are finite.
\begin{proposition} \label{preliminaries:finite}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a finite Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$. Then
$E$ is smooth.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
This is also a straightforward consequence of Theorem \ref{preliminaries:LusinNovikov}.
\end{propositionproof}
We say that a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation is \definedterm{hyperfinite} if it is the union of an increasing
sequence $\sequence{F_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ of finite Bor\-el\xspace subequivalence relations. By \cite[Theorem 1]
{DoughertyJacksonKechris}, a countable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation is hyperfinite if and only if it is
Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $\mathbb{E}_0$.
\begin{proposition}[Dougherty-Jackson-Kechris] \label{preliminaries:hyperfinite}
Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are Po\-lish\xspace spaces, $E$ and $F$ are countable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence
relations on $X$ and $Y$, $E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $F$, and $F$ is hyperfinite. Then $E$ is
hyperfinite.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
See \cite[Proposition 5.2]{DoughertyJacksonKechris}.
\end{propositionproof}
We say that a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation is \definedterm{hypersmooth} if it is the union of an
increasing sequence $\sequence{F_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ of smooth Bor\-el\xspace subequivalence relations. By \cite
[Propositions 1.1 and 1.3]{KechrisLouveau}, a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation is hypersmooth if and only
if it is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $\mathbb{E}_1$.
\begin{theorem}[Dough\-er\-ty\xspace-Jack\-son\xspace-Kech\-ris\xspace] \label{preliminaries:hypersmooth}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$. Then $E$
is hyperfinite if and only if $E$ is both countable and hypersmooth.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See, for example, \cite[Theorem 5.1]{DoughertyJacksonKechris}.
\end{theoremproof}
A property $P$ of subsets of $Y$ is \definedterm{$\Piclass[1][1]$-on-$\Sigmaclass[1][1]$} if
whenever $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $R \subseteq X \times Y$ is an analytic set, the
corresponding set $\set{x \in X}[\verticalsection{R}{x} \text{ satisfies } P]$ is co-analytic.
\begin{theorem} \label{preliminaries:reflection}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space, $\Phi$ is a $\Piclass[1][1]$-on-$\Sigmaclass[1][1]$ property
of subsets of $X$, and $A \subseteq X$ is an analytic set on which $\Phi$ holds. Then there is a
Bor\-el\xspace set $B \supseteq A$ on which $\Phi$ holds.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See, for example, \cite[Theorem 35.10]{Kechris}.
\end{theoremproof}
A \definedterm{path} through a graph $G$ is a sequence $\sequence{x_i}[i \le n]$ with the
property that $\forall i < n \ x_i \mathrel{G} x_{i+1}$. Such a path is a \definedterm{cycle} if
$n > 2$, $\sequence{x_i}[i < n]$ is injective, and $x_0 = x_n$. A graph is \definedterm{acyclic}
if it has no cycles.
The equivalence relation \definedterm{generated} by a graph $G$ on a set $X$ is the smallest
equivalence relation $\inducedequivalencerelation{G}$ on $X$ containing it. A \definedterm
{graphing} of an equivalence relation is a graph generating it. We say that a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence
relation is \definedterm{treeable} if it has an acyclic Bor\-el\xspace graphing.
\begin{theorem}[Hjorth\xspace] \label{preliminaries:treeable}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a treeable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$.
Then the following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The relation $E$ is essentially countable.
\item There is a Bor\-el\xspace set $B \subseteq X$ whose intersection with each equivalence class of
$E$ is countable and non-empty.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See \cite[Theorem 6]{Hjorth}.
\end{theoremproof}
\begin{theorem} \label{preliminaries:dichotomy}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$
essentially generated by a Bor\-el\xspace subgraph of an acyclic compact graph. Then exactly one
of the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The relation $E$ is essentially countable.
\item There is a continuous embedding of $\mathbb{E}_1$ into $E$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See \cite[Theorem 6.3 and Proposition 6.4]{ClemensLecomteMiller}.
\end{theoremproof}
A topological group is \definedterm{Po\-lish\xspace} if it is Po\-lish\xspace as a topological space.
\begin{theorem}[Hjorth\xspace-Kech\-ris\xspace-Lou\-veau\xspace] \label{preliminaries:groupaction}
The family of orbit equivalence relations induced by Bor\-el\xspace actions of Po\-lish\xspace groups on
Po\-lish\xspace spaces has cofinal essential complexity.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See \cite[Theorem 4.1]{HjorthKechrisLouveau}.
\end{theoremproof}
\begin{theorem}[Kech\-ris\xspace-Lou\-veau\xspace] \label{preliminaries:nonreducible}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is the orbit equivalence relation induced by a Bor\-el\xspace
action of a Po\-lish\xspace group on a Po\-lish\xspace space. Then $\mathbb{E}_1$ is not Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
See \cite[Theorem 4.2]{KechrisLouveau}.
\end{theoremproof}
\section{Partition stratifications} \label{hyperfiniteoncountable}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space, $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$, and $G$ is a
Bor\-el\xspace graph on $X$. We use $\inducedgraph{G}{E}$ to denote the graph on $X / E$ given by
\begin{equation*}
\inducedgraph{G}{E} = \set{\pair{C}{D} \in (X / E) \times (X / E)}[C \neq D \text{ and }
(C \times D) \intersection G \neq \emptyset].
\end{equation*}
We say that $G$ has \definedterm{faithful cycles} over $E$ if among all $G$-paths $\sequence{x_i}
[i \le k]$, only $G$-cycles have the property that $\sequence{\equivalenceclass{x_i}{E}}[i \le k]$ is
a $\inducedgraph{G}{E}$-cycle.
A \definedterm{partition stratification} of $G$ is a sequence of the form $\sequence{E_n, G_n}[n \in
\mathbb{N}]$, where $\sequence{E_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is a decreasing sequence of equivalence relations on $X$,
each of which having only countably many classes, whose intersection is the diagonal,
$\sequence{G_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is an increasing sequence of Bor\-el\xspace graphs whose union is $G$, and
each $G_n$ has faithful cycles on $E_n$.
\begin{proposition} \label{hyperfiniteoncountable:countablestratification}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space, $E$ is a countable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$, and
$G$ is a Bor\-el\xspace graphing of $E$. Then $E$ is hyperfinite if and only if there is a partition
stratification of $G$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
Suppose first that $E$ is hyperfinite, and fix an increasing sequence $\sequence{F_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ of
finite Bor\-el\xspace subequivalence relations whose union is $E$. As Propositions \ref
{preliminaries:countablesmooth} and \ref{preliminaries:finite} ensure that spaces underlying finite
Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations are countable unions of Bor\-el\xspace partial transversals, it follows that there
is a decreasing sequence $\sequence{E_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations such that every
$E_n$ has only countably many classes, each of which is a partial transversal of $F_n$ of diameter
at most $1 / n$. For each $n \in \mathbb{N}$, set $G_n = F_n \intersection G$, and note that if $\sequence{x_i}
[i \le k]$ is a $G_n$-path for which $\sequence{\equivalenceclass{x_i}{E_n}}[i \le k]$ is a
$(G_n)_{E_n}$-cycle, then $x_0 \mathrel{(E_n \intersection F_n)} x_k$, so $x_0 = x_k$, thus
$\sequence{x_i}[i \le k]$ is a $G_n$-cycle. It follows that each $G_n$ has faithful cycles on $E_n$,
so $\sequence{E_n, G_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is a partition stratification of $G$.
Conversely, suppose that $\sequence{E_n, G_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is a partition stratification of $G$.
By Theorem \ref{preliminaries:coloring}, there is a Bor\-el\xspace edge $\mathbb{N}$-coloring $c$ of $G$.
Let $H_n$ denote the subgraph of $G_n$ consisting of all $\pair{x}{y} \in G_n \setminus E_n$
for which $c(x, y)$ is minimal both among natural numbers of the form $c(x', y)$ where $x
\mathrel{E_n} x' \mathrel{G} y$, and those of the form $c(x, y')$ where $x \mathrel{G}
y' \mathrel {E_n} y$. Then $\sequence{H_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is an increasing sequence of Bor\-el\xspace
graphs whose union is $G$. By Theorem \ref{preliminaries:hypersmooth}, to see that
$\inducedequivalencerelation{G}$ is hyperfinite, we need only check that the relations
$F_n = \inducedequivalencerelation{H_n}$ are smooth. By Proposition \ref
{preliminaries:countablesmooth}, it is sufficient to show that for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$, every equivalence
class of $E_n$ is a partial transversal of $F_n$.
Suppose, towards a contradiction, that $k \in \mathbb{N}$ is least for which there is an injective $H_n$-path
$\sequence{x_i}[i \le k]$ beginning and ending at distinct $E_n$-related points. The definition of
partition stratification ensures that $\sequence{\equivalenceclass{x_i}{E_n}}[i \le k]$ is not a
$(G_n)_{E_n}$-cycle, so there exists $0 < i < k$ for which $x_{i-1} \mathrel{E_n} x_{i+1}$. Set
$x = x_{i - 1}$, $y = x_i$, and $x' = x_{i + 1}$. Then $c(x, y) \neq c(x', y)$, so the definition of $H_n$
ensures that $\neg x \mathrel{H_n} y$ or $\neg x' \mathrel{H_n} y$, the desired contradiction.
\end{propositionproof}
We say that properties $P$ and $Q$ of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations \definedterm{coincide}
below a given Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $F$ if the family of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on
Po\-lish\xspace spaces which are Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $F$ and satisfy $P$ is the same as the family of
Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces which are Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $F$ and satisfy $Q$.
\begin{proposition} \label{hyperfiniteoncountable:stratification}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space, $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$, and
$G$ is a Bor\-el\xspace graphing of $E$ which admits a partition stratification. Then countability and
hyperfiniteness coincide below $E$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
Fix a partition stratification $\sequence{E_n, G_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ of $G$.
\begin{lemma} \label{hyperfiniteoncountable:convexclosure}
There are only countably many injective $G$-paths between any two points.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemmaproof}
Suppose, towards a contradiction, that $k \in \mathbb{N}$ is the least natural number for which there exist
$x, y \in X$ between which there are uncountably many injective $G$-paths $\sequence{z_i}[i \le k]$
from $x$ to $y$. Then for $n \in \mathbb{N}$ sufficiently large, there are uncountably many injective
$G_n$-paths $\sequence{z_i}[i \le k]$ from $x$ to $y$ with the further property that
$\sequence{\equivalenceclass{z_i}{E_n}}[i \le k]$ is an injective $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}{E_n}$-path.
Fix such an injective $G_n$-path $\sequence{z_i}[i \le k]$ from $x$ to $y$ for which there are
uncountably many injective $G_n$-paths $\sequence{z_i'}[i \le k]$ from $x$ to $y$ inducing the
same injective $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}{E_n}$-path as $\sequence{z_i}[i \le k]$. The minimality of
$k$ then ensures that there are uncountably many injective $G_n$-paths $\sequence{z_i'}[i \le k]$
from $x$ to $y$ inducing the same injective $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}{E_n}$-path as $\sequence{z_i}
[i \le k]$ but avoiding $\set{z_i}[0 < i < k]$. Then for $n' \in \mathbb{N}$ sufficiently large, there are
uncountably many injective $G_n$-paths $\sequence{z_i'}[i \le k]$ from $x$ to $y$ inducing the
same injective $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}{E_n}$-path as $\sequence{z_i}[i \le k]$ but for which the
corresponding injective $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}{E_{n'}}$-path avoids $\set{\equivalenceclass{z_i}
{E_{n'}}}[0 < i < k]$. It follows that there is such an injective $G_n$-path $\sequence{z_i'}[i \le k]$
from $x$ to $y$ for which there are uncountably many such injective $G_n$-paths $\sequence{z_i''}
[i \le k]$ inducing the same injective $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}{E_{n'}}$-path as $\sequence{z_i'}
[i \le k]$. By one more appeal to the minimality of $k$, there are uncountably many such injective
$G_n$-paths $\sequence{z_i''}[i \le k]$ inducing the same injective $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}
{E_{n'}}$-path as $\sequence{z_i'}[i \le k]$ but avoiding $\set{z_i'}[0 < i < k]$. Fix any such injective
$G_n$-path $\sequence{z_i''}[i \le k]$, and observe that $\sequence{z_1', \ldots, z_k' = z_k, \ldots,
z_0 = z_0'', z_1''}$ is an injective $G_n$-path inducing a $\inducedgraph{(G_n)}{E_{n'}}$-cycle,
contradicting the fact that $G_{n'}$ has faithful cycles on $E_{n'}$.
\end{lemmaproof}
By Theorem \ref{preliminaries:LusinNovikov} and Proposition \ref{preliminaries:hyperfinite}, it is
sufficient to show that $E$ is hyperfinite on every Bor\-el\xspace set $B \subseteq X$ on which it is countable.
Towards this end, let $C$ denote the \definedterm{convex closure} of $B$ with respect to $G$, that
is, the set of points lying along an injective $G$-path between two points of $B$. As Theorem \ref
{preliminaries:LusinNovikov} and Lemma \ref{hyperfiniteoncountable:convexclosure} ensure that
$C$ is also a Bor\-el\xspace set on which $E$ is countable, Proposition \ref
{hyperfiniteoncountable:countablestratification} implies that $E$ is hyperfinite on $C$, thus
hyperfinite on $B$.
\end{propositionproof}
In the treeable case, we can say even more.
\begin{proposition} \label{hyperfiniteoncountable:essential}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space, $E$ is a treeable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$, and
countability and hyperfiniteness coincide below $E$. Then essential countability and essential
hyperfiniteness also coincide below $E$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
Suppose that $Y$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $F$ is an essentially countable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation
on $Y$ which admits a Bor\-el\xspace reduction $\phi \colon Y \to X$ to $E$. Fix a Po\-lish\xspace space
$Y'$ and a countable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $F'$ on $Y'$ for which there is a Bor\-el\xspace
reduction $\psi \colon Y \to Y'$ of $F$ to $F'$. Then the set $R_0 = \set{\pair{x}{\psi(y)}}[\phi(y)
= x]$ \definedterm{induces a partial injection} of $X / E$ into $Y' / F'$, in the sense that
$x_1 \mathrel{E} x_2 \iff y_1' \mathrel{F'} y_2'$, for all $\pair{x_1}{y_1'}, \pair{x_2}{y_2'} \in R_0$.
The \definedterm{product} of the equivalence relations $E$ and $F'$ is the relation on $X \times Y'$
given by $\pair{x_1}{y_1'} \mathrel{(E \times F')} \pair{x_2}{y_2'} \iff (x_1 \mathrel{E} x_2 \text{ and }
y_1' \mathrel{F} y_2')$.
\begin{lemma}
There is an $(E \times F')$-invariant Bor\-el\xspace set $R \supseteq R_0$ inducing a partial injection of
$X / E$ into $Y' / F'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemmaproof}
As the property of inducing a partial injection of $X / E$ into $Y' / F'$ is $\Piclass[1]
[1]$-on-$\Sigmaclass[1][1]$ and closed under $(E \times F')$-saturation, by repeatedly applying
Theorem \ref{preliminaries:reflection}, we obtain Bor\-el\xspace sets $R_{n+1} \supseteq \saturation{R_n}
{E \times F'}$ inducing Bor\-el\xspace partial injections of $X / E$ into $Y' / F'$. Define $R = \union[n \in \mathbb{N}]
[R_n]$.
\end{lemmaproof}
As $F'$ is countable, Theorem \ref{preliminaries:LusinNovikov} ensures that the set $C = \image
{\projection{X}}{R}$ is Bor\-el\xspace, and that there is a Bor\-el\xspace uniformization $\pi \colon C \to Y'$ of
$R$. As any such function is necessarily a reduction of $E$ to $F'$ on $C$, it follows that $E$ is
essentially countable on $C$. An application of Theorem \ref{preliminaries:treeable} then yields a
Bor\-el\xspace set $D \subseteq C$, whose $E$-saturation is $C$, on which $E$ is countable. As
countability and hyperfiniteness coincide below $E$, it follows that $E$ is hyperfinite on $D$, and
one more application of Theorem \ref{preliminaries:LusinNovikov} yields a Bor\-el\xspace reduction of
$\restriction{E}{C}$ to $\restriction{E}{D}$, so $E$ is essentially hyperfinite on $C$, thus $F$ is
essentially hyperfinite.
\end{propositionproof}
\section{Ideals} \label{ideals}
We say that a family $\mathcal{K}$ of subsets of $\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}$ is \definedterm{determined by
cardinalities on vertical sections} if $A \in \mathcal{K} \iff B \in \mathcal{K}$, whenever $\forall n \in \mathbb{N}
\ \cardinality{\verticalsection{A}{n}} = \cardinality{\verticalsection{B}{n}}$.
For each family $\mathscr{N} \subseteq \powerset{\mathbb{N}}$ of subsets of the natural numbers, we use
$\closure{\mathscr{N}}$ to denote the closure of $\mathscr{N}$ under finite unions, and we define
$\cardinalityideal{\mathscr{N}} = \union[N \in \closure{\mathscr{N}}][\cardinalityideal{N}]$, where
\begin{equation*}
\cardinalityideal{N} = \set{A \subseteq \mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}}[\forall n \in \mathbb{N} \ (\cardinality{\verticalsection{A}
{n}} = \aleph_0 \implies n \in N)].
\end{equation*}
Note that every such family is both determined by cardinalities on vertical sections and an
\definedterm{ideal}, in the sense that it is closed under containment and finite unions.
\begin{proposition} \label{ideals:continuous}
Suppose that $\mathscr{N} \subseteq \powerset{\mathbb{N}}$ is a family of pairwise almost disjoint infinite subsets
of $\mathbb{N}$. Then there is a continuous function $\pi \colon \mathscr{N} \to \powerset{\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}}$ Wadge\xspace
reducing $\mathscr{M}$ to $\cardinalityideal{\mathscr{M}}$, for all $\mathscr{M} \subseteq \mathscr{N}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
Define $\pi(N) = N \times \mathbb{N}$. Given $\mathscr{M} \subseteq \mathscr{N}$, observe first that if $M \in \mathscr{M}$, then
$\pi(M) \in \cardinalityideal{M} \subseteq \cardinalityideal{\mathscr{M}}$. Conversely, if $N \in
\mathscr{N}$ and $\pi(N) \in \cardinalityideal{\mathscr{M}}$, then there exist $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and $M_1, \ldots,
M_n \in \mathscr{M}$ such that $\pi(N) \in \cardinalityideal{M_1 \union \cdots \union M_n}$, in which
case $N \subseteq M_1 \union \cdots \union M_n$. As $\mathscr{N}$ consists of pairwise almost disjoint
infinite sets, it follows that $N = M_i$, for some $1 \le i \le n$, thus $N \in \mathscr{M}$.
\end{propositionproof}
A weak converse to this result is provided by the following.
\begin{proposition} \label{ideals:Borel}
Suppose that $\mathscr{N} \subseteq \powerset{\mathbb{N}}$ is a Bor\-el\xspace family of pairwise almost disjoint infinite
subsets of $\mathbb{N}$. Then $\cardinalityideal{\mathscr{N}}$ is also Bor\-el\xspace.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
Clearly $\cardinalityideal{\mathscr{N}}$ is analytic, so by Theorem \ref{preliminaries:bianalytic}, it is
sufficient to show that it is co-analytic. But this follows from Theorem \ref{preliminaries:unicity} and
the fact that a set $A$ is in $\cardinalityideal{\mathscr{N}}$ if and only if there exist $k \in \mathbb{N}$
and a unique subfamily $\mathscr{F}$ of $\mathscr{N}$ of cardinality $k$ for which there is a finite subset $F$
of a set in $\closure{\mathscr{N}}$ such that $\forall n \in \mathbb{N} \ (\cardinality{\verticalsection{A}{n}} = \aleph_0
\implies n \in F \union \union[\mathscr{F}])$.
\end{propositionproof}
\section{Trees} \label{trees}
Suppose that $t_{i, n} \in \Cantorspace[n]$, for all $i < 2$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Associated with
$\sequence{t_{i, n}}[i < 2, n \in \mathbb{N}]$ are the graphs $T_n$ on $\Cantorspace[n]$ obtained
recursively by letting $T_{n+1}$ be the union of the graph $\set{\pair{s \concatenation
\singletonsequence{i}}{t \concatenation \singletonsequence{i}}}[i < 2 \text{ and } \pair{s}{t}
\in T_n]$ with the singleton edge $\set{\pair{t_{i, n} \concatenation \singletonsequence{i}}
{t_{1 - i, n} \concatenation \singletonsequence{1 - i}}}[i < 2]$, as well as the set $T =
\set{\pair{\emptyset}{\emptyset}} \union \union[n \in \mathbb{N}][T_n]$.
A straightforward induction shows that each $T_n$ is a tree on $\Cantorspace[n]$. It follows that if
the set $T$ is closed under initial segments, then the set $\branches{T} = \set{\pair{x}{y} \in
\Cantorspace \times \Cantorspace}[\forall n \in \mathbb{N} \ \pair{\restriction{x}{n}}{\restriction{y}{n}} \in T_n]$ of
\definedterm{branches} through $T$ is an acyclic compact graph admitting a partition stratification,
thus all of its Bor\-el\xspace subgraphs admit partition stratifications as well. As equivalence relations induced
by acyclic Bor\-el\xspace graphs are themselves Bor\-el\xspace (by Theorems \ref{preliminaries:bianalytic} and
\ref{preliminaries:unicity}), Propositions \ref{hyperfiniteoncountable:stratification} and
\ref{hyperfiniteoncountable:essential} therefore imply that essential countability and essential
hyperfiniteness coincide below equivalence relations generated by such subgraphs.
The \definedterm{support} of a sequence $c \in \Cantorspace$ is given by $\support{c} =
\preimage{c}{1}$.
\begin{proposition} \label{ideals:symmetricdifference}
Suppose that $t_{i, n} \in \Cantorspace[n]$ for all $i < 2$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, the corresponding set
$T$ is closed under initial segments, $\pair{a}{b}, \pair{c}{d} \in \branches{T}$, and $\set{a, b} \neq
\set{c, d}$. Then $(\support{a} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{b}) \intersection (\support{c}
\mathbin{\triangle} \support{d})$ is finite.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
For each $n \in \mathbb{N}$, let $T_n$ denote the tree on $\Cantorspace[n]$ associated with $\sequence
{t_{i, n}}[i < 2, n \in \mathbb{N}]$, and note that if $n \in \support{a} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{b}$, then
the pair of restrictions $\pair{\restriction{a}{(n+1)}}{\restriction{b}{(n+1)}}$ is in $T_{n+1}$, from
which it follows that $\set{\restriction{a}{(n+1)}, \restriction{b}{(n+1)}} = \set{t_{i,n} \concatenation
\singletonsequence{i}}[i < 2]$, and therefore that $\set{\restriction{a}{n}, \restriction{b}{n}} =
\set{t_{i,n}}[i < 2]$. In particular, if $n \in \mathbb{N}$ is sufficiently large that $\set{\restriction{a}{n},
\restriction{b}{n}} \neq \set{\restriction{c}{n}, \restriction{d}{n}}$, then $n$ is not in $(\support{a}
\mathbin{\triangle} \support{b}) \intersection (\support{c} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{d})$.
\end{propositionproof}
Given a family $\mathcal{I}$ of subsets of $\mathbb{N}$, let $\inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}}$ denote the binary
relation on $\Cantorspace$ given by $c \mathrel{\inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}}} d \iff \support
{c} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{d} \in \mathcal{I}$.
\begin{proposition} \label{ideals:graphing}
Suppose that $t_{i, n} \in \Cantorspace[n]$ for all $i < 2$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, the corresponding set
$T$ is closed under initial segments, and $\mathcal{I}$ is an ideal on $\mathbb{N}$ containing all finite subsets
of $\mathbb{N}$. Then $\inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}} \intersection \branches{T}$ is a graphing of
$\inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}} \intersection \inducedequivalencerelation{\branches{T}}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
It is sufficient to show that if $n \in \mathbb{N}$, $\sequence{c_i}[i \le n]$ is an injective $\branches
{T}$-path, and $c_0 \mathrel{\inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}}} c_n$, then $\sequence{c_i}[i \le
n]$ is an $(\inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}} \intersection \branches{T})$-path. Towards this
end, appeal to Proposition \ref{ideals:symmetricdifference} repeatedly to obtain a finite set $F
\subseteq \mathbb{N}$ containing $(\support{c_i} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{c_{i+1}}) \intersection
(\support{c_j} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{c_{j+1}})$, for all $i < j < n$. Then $\support{c_0}
\mathbin{\triangle} \support{c_n}$ and $\union[i < n][\support{c_i} \mathbin{\triangle}
\support{c_{i+1}}]$ agree off of $F$, so $\support{c_i} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{c_{i+1}}
\subseteq F \union (\support{c_0} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{c_n})$, and is therefore
in $\mathcal{I}$, for all $i < n$.
\end{propositionproof}
\section{Density} \label{density}
Suppose that $t_{i, n} \in \Cantorspace[n]$, for all $i < 2$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, and the corresponding set
$T$ is closed under initial segments. Then for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$, there exist $k \in \set{0, \ldots, n}$
and $s \in \Cantorspace[n - k]$ with $t_{i, n + 1} = t_{i, k} \concatenation \singletonsequence{i}
\concatenation s$. Conversely, if $k_n \in \set{0, \ldots, n}$ and $s_n \in \Cantorspace[n - k_n]$ for
all $n \in \mathbb{N}$, then the set $T$ associated with $\sequence{t_{i,n}}[i < 2, n \in \mathbb{N}]$, where
$t_{i, 0} = \emptyset$ and $t_{i, n + 1} = t_{i, k_n} \concatenation \singletonsequence{i}
\concatenation s_n$ for $i < 2$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, is closed under initial segments. We say that
$\sequence{k_n, s_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is \definedterm{suitable} if $k_n \in \set{0, \ldots, n}$ and $s_n \in
\Cantorspace[n - k_n]$, for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
Fix an injective enumeration $\sequence{i_n, j_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ of $\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}$ with $i_0 = 0$, and
let $e$ denote its inverse. We say that $\sequence{k_n, s_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is \definedterm{dense} (with
respect to our fixed enumeration) if for all $i, k \in \mathbb{N}$ and all $s \in \functions{<\mathbb{N}}{2}$, there exists $n \in
\mathbb{N}$ such that $i = i_{n+1}$, $k = k_n$, and $s \sqsubseteq s_n$.
The \definedterm{push-forward} of a family $\mathcal{K}$ of subsets of $\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}$ through $e$ is given
by $\pushforward{e}{\mathcal{K}} = \set{\image{e}{A}}[A \in \mathcal{K}]$.
\begin{proposition} \label{density:complexity}
Suppose that $\sequence{k_n, s_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$ is dense and suitable, $T$ is the corresponding
set, $C \subseteq \Cantorspace$ is comeager, $\mathcal{K}$ is a family of subsets of $\mathbb{N} \times
\mathbb{N}$ which is determined by cardinalities on vertical sections and invariant under finite alterations
of the leftmost column, and $\mathcal{I} = \pushforward{e}{\mathcal{K}}$. Then there is a Wadge\xspace reduction
$\pi \colon \powerset{\mathbb{N}} \to \restriction{\branches{T}}{C}$ of $\mathcal{I}$ to
$\inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{propositionproof}
Fix dense open sets $U_n \subseteq \Cantorspace$ whose intersection is contained in $C$, and let
$t_{i, n}$ denote the sequences associated with $\sequence{k_n, s_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$. We will
recursively construct natural numbers $\ell_n > 0$, in addition to natural numbers $n_u < \ell_n$
and sequences $t_u \in \Cantorspace[\ell_n - n_u - 1]$ for $u \in \Cantorspace[n]$, from which we
define $\pi_{i,n} \colon \Cantorspace[n] \to \Cantorspace[\ell_n]$ by $\pi_{i, n}(u) = t_{i, n_u}
\concatenation \singletonsequence{i} \concatenation t_u$, for $i < 2$ and $u \in \Cantorspace[n]$.
We will ensure that the following conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\forall i, j < 2 \forall u \in \Cantorspace[n] \ \pi_{i, n}(u) \sqsubset
\pi_{i, n + 1}(u \concatenation \singletonsequence{j})$.
\item $\forall i < 2 \forall u \in \Cantorspace[n+1] \ \extensions{\pi_{i, n+1}(u)}
\subseteq U_n$.
\item $\forall u \in \Cantorspace[n] \ \pair{\pi_{0,n}(u)}{\pi_{1,n}(u)} \in T$.
\item $\forall u \in \Cantorspace[n] \ i_n = i_{n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}}}$.
\item $\forall u \in \Cantorspace[n] \ \support{\pi_{0, n + 1}(u \concatenation \singletonsequence{0})}
\mathbin{\triangle} \support{\pi_{1, n + 1}(u \concatenation \singletonsequence{0})}$ \\
\hspace*{45pt} $= \support{\pi_{0, n}(u)} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{\pi_{1, n}(u)}$.
\item $\forall u \in \Cantorspace[n] \ \support{\pi_{0, n + 1}(u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1})}
\mathbin{\triangle} \support{\pi_{1, n + 1}(u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1})}$ \\
\hspace*{45pt} $= (\support{\pi_{0, n}(u)} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{\pi_{1, n}(u)}) \union
\set{n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}}}$.
\end{enumerate}
We begin by setting $\ell_0 = 1$, $n_\emptyset = 0$, and $t_\emptyset = \emptyset$.
Suppose now that $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and we have already found $\ell_n$, $n_u$, and $t_u$, for $u \in
\Cantorspace[n]$. For each $u \in \Cantorspace[n]$, set $n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence
{0}} = n_u$, and fix $t_u' \in \functions{<\mathbb{N}}{2}$ with the property that $\extensions{\pi_{i, n}(u)
\concatenation t_u'} \subseteq U_n$ for all $i < 2$. By density, there exists $n_{u \concatenation
\singletonsequence{1}} > 0$ with $i_n = i_{n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}}}$,
$n_u = k_{n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}} - 1}$, and $t_u \concatenation t_u'
\sqsubseteq s_{n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}} - 1}$. Define $\ell_{n+1} = \max_{u \in
\Cantorspace[n]} n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}} + 1$, and for each $u \in \Cantorspace
[n]$, fix an extension $t_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{0}} \in \Cantorspace[\ell_{n+1} -
n_u - 1]$ of $t_u \concatenation t_u'$, as well as $t_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}} \in
\Cantorspace[\ell_{n+1} - n_{u \concatenation \singletonsequence{1}} - 1]$.
By condition (1), the function $\pi \colon \powerset{\mathbb{N}} \to \Cantorspace \times \Cantorspace$ which
is given by $\pi(A) = \pair{\pi_0(\characteristicfunction{A})}{\pi_1(\characteristicfunction{A})}$, where
$\pi_i(c) = \union[n \in \mathbb{N}][\pi_{i, n}(\restriction{c}{n})]$ for all $i < 2$, is well-defined and continuous.
Condition (2) then ensures that $\image{\pi_i}{\Cantorspace} \subseteq C$ for all $i < 2$, so
$\image{\pi}{\powerset{\mathbb{N}}} \subseteq C \times C$, thus condition (3) implies that $\image{\pi}
{\powerset{\mathbb{N}}} \subseteq \restriction{\branches{T}}{C}$. And conditions (4) - (6) ensure that for all
$N \subseteq \mathbb{N}$, the cardinalities of all but the leftmost vertical sections of $\preimage{e}
{\support{\pi_0(\characteristicfunction{N})} \mathbin{\triangle} \support{\pi_1(\characteristicfunction
{N})}}$ and $\preimage{e}{N}$ agree, whereas the cardinalities of their leftmost vertical sections differ
by at most one, thus $N \in \mathcal{I}$ if and only if $\pi(N) \in \inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}}$.
\end{propositionproof}
As a consequence, we obtain the following.
\begin{theorem} \label{density:main}
The family of treeable Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations below which essential hyperfiniteness and
the inexistence of a continuous embedding of $\mathbb{E}_1$ coincide has cofinal essential complexity.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
By appealing to Proposition \ref{preliminaries:almostdisjoint}, we obtain a continuous injection $\pi
\colon \Cantorspace \to \powerset{\mathbb{N}}$ into a family of pairwise almost disjoint infinite sets. Given a
Bor\-el\xspace set $B \subseteq \Cantorspace$, set $\mathscr{N} = \image{\pi}{B}$. Proposition \ref
{ideals:continuous} then ensures that $B$ is Wadge\xspace reducible to $\cardinalityideal{\mathscr{N}}$, and
Proposition \ref{ideals:Borel} implies that the latter is Bor\-el\xspace, thus the same holds of the ideal
$\mathcal{I} = \pushforward{e}{\cardinalityideal{\mathscr{N}}}$.
Fix a dense suitable sequence $\sequence{k_n, s_n}[n \in \mathbb{N}]$, and let $T$ be the
associated set. Proposition \ref{ideals:graphing} then ensures that the equivalence
relation $E$ on $\Cantorspace$ given by $E = \inducedequivalencerelation{\mathcal{I}} \intersection
\inducedequivalencerelation{\branches{T}}$ is generated by a Bor\-el\xspace subgraph of an
acyclic compact graph, and since it is clearly Bor\-el\xspace, by Theorem \ref{preliminaries:dichotomy}
we need only check that its essential complexity is at least the complexity of $B$.
Towards this end, suppose that $Y$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space, and $F$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on
$Y$ for which there is a Bor\-el\xspace reduction $\phi \colon X \to Y$ of $E$ to $F$. Proposition \ref
{preliminaries:continuous} then yields a comeager Bor\-el\xspace set $C \subseteq X$ on which $\phi$ is
continuous. By Proposition \ref{density:complexity}, there is a Wadge\xspace reduction $\psi \colon
\powerset{\mathbb{N}} \to \restriction{\branches{T}}{C}$ of $\mathcal{I}$ to $E$, and it follows that $(\phi \times
\phi) \circ \psi$ is a Wadge\xspace reduction of $\mathcal{I}$ to $F$, so $B$ is Wadge\xspace reducible to
$F$, thus the essential complexity of $E$ is at least the complexity of $B$.
\end{theoremproof}
\section{Anti-basis results} \label{antibasis}
We say that a family $\mathscr{F}$ of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces is \definedterm
{unbounded} if for every Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $E$ on a Po\-lish\xspace space, there is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $F \in \mathscr{F}$ which is not Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$.
We say that the non-linearity of Bor\-el\xspace reducibility is \definedterm{captured} off of a family $\mathscr{F}$ of
Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations if every non-essentially-hyperfinite Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation is
incompatible with a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation outside of $\mathscr{F}$.
\begin{theorem} \label{antibasis:nonlinearity}
Suppose that $\mathscr{F}$ is a class of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations whose complement contains
unboundedly many Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations below which essential hyperfiniteness and
the inexistence of a Bor\-el\xspace reduction of $\mathbb{E}_1$ coincide, as well as unboundedly many
Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations to which $\mathbb{E}_1$ does not admit a Bor\-el\xspace reduction. Then the
non-linearity of Bor\-el\xspace reducibility is captured off of $\mathscr{F}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
Suppose that $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation compatible with every Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation
outside of $\mathscr{F}$. Fix a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $E'$, outside of $\mathscr{F}$ and not
Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$, below which essential hyperfiniteness and the inexistence of a
Bor\-el\xspace reduction of $\mathbb{E}_1$ coincide. In addition, fix a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $E''$, outside
of $\mathscr{F}$ and not Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$, to which $\mathbb{E}_1$ does not admit a Bor\-el\xspace reduction. As
$E$ is Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E''$, it follows that $\mathbb{E}_1$ is not Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E$. As $E$ is
Bor\-el\xspace reducible to $E'$, it therefore follows that $E$ is essentially hyperfinite.
\end{theoremproof}
The following corollary strengthens \cite[Theorem 2]{KechrisLouveau}.
\begin{theorem} \label{antibasis:incompatible}
Suppose that $X$ is a Po\-lish\xspace space and $E$ is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on $X$.
Then the following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The relation $E$ is not essentially hyperfinite.
\item There is a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation on a Po\-lish\xspace space which is incompatible with $E$.
\item The family of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces which are incompatible with $E$
under Bor\-el\xspace reducibility has cofinal essential complexity.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
As $(3) \implies (2)$ is trivial and $(2) \implies (1)$ is a consequence of Theorem \ref
{preliminaries:Ezero}, it is sufficient to show $(1) \implies (3)$. Towards this end, note that
Theorem \ref{density:main} ensures that the family of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations
on Po\-lish\xspace spaces below which essential hyperfiniteness and the inexistence of a Bor\-el\xspace
reduction of $\mathbb{E}_1$ coincide has cofinal essential complexity, and Theorems \ref
{preliminaries:groupaction} and \ref{preliminaries:nonreducible} imply that the family of Bor\-el\xspace
equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces to which $\mathbb{E}_1$ does not Bor\-el\xspace reduce has cofinal
essential complexity. So, by Theorem \ref{antibasis:nonlinearity}, the family of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence
relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces which are incompatible with $E$ under Bor\-el\xspace reducibility has cofinal
essential complexity.
\end{theoremproof}
We can now establish our primary result.
\begin{theorem}
Suppose that $\mathscr{F}$ is a dichotomical class of Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relations on Po\-lish\xspace spaces of
bounded essential complexity. Then every equivalence relation in $\mathscr{F}$ is smooth.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theoremproof}
Fix a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation $F$ witnessing that $\mathscr{F}$ is dichotomical. Then $F$ is
necessarily essentially hyperfinite, since otherwise Theorem \ref{antibasis:incompatible} would
yield a Bor\-el\xspace equivalence relation outside of $\mathscr{F}$ and incompatible with $F$. But Theorem
\ref{preliminaries:Ezero} then implies that every relation in $\mathscr{F}$ is smooth.
\end{theoremproof}
\begin{acknowledgments}
We would like to express our gratitude to Renaud Bonnafoux and Jean-Marc Tomczyk,
who took over Dominique Lecomte's teaching while he spent a semester in M\"{u}nster, during
which the bulk of this work was completed. We would also like to thank Alain Louveau and
Gabriel Debs for their remarks on our work.
\end{acknowledgments}
\vfill\eject
\bibliographystyle{amsalpha}
|
\section*{Abstract}{\small
We have been searching for surviving companions of progenitors of Galactic Type-Ia supernovae, in particular SN 1572 and SN 1006. These companion stars are expected to show peculiarities: (i) to be probably more luminous than the Sun, (ii) to have high radial velocity and proper motion, (iii) to be possibly enriched in metals from the SNIa ejecta, and (iv) to be located at the distance of the SNIa remnant. We have been characterizing possible candidate stars using high-resolution spectroscopic data taken at 10m-Keck and 8.2m-VLT facilities. We have identified a very promising candidate companion (Tycho G) for SN 1572 (see \cite{rui04,gon09a,bed14}, however for a different view see \cite{ker12}) but we have not found any candidate companion for SN 1006, suggesting that SN event occurred in 1006 could have been the result of the merging of two white dwarfs (see \cite{gon12}).
Adding these results to the evidence from the other direct searches, the clear minority of cases (20\% or less) seem to disfavour the single-degenerate channel or that preferentially the single-degenerate escenario would involve
main-sequence companions less massive than the Sun. Therefore, it appears to be very important to continue investigating these and other Galactic Type-Ia SNe such as the Johannes Kepler SN 1604.
\normalsize}
\end{minipage}
\section{Introduction \label{intro}}
Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) are the best known cosmological distance indicators at high redshifts. Their use led to the discovery of the currently accelerating expansion of the universe (see \cite{riess98}, \cite{per99}). These SNe are thought to occur when a white dwarf made of carbon and oxygen accretes sufficient mass to trigger a thermonuclear explosion. The explosion could happen via accretion from a companion star (single degenerate (SD) channel) or via merging of two white dwarfs (double-degenerate (DD) channel). Therefore, a companion star will survive the explosion only in the SD channel (see these reviews \cite{how11,wan12,mao14,rui14}, for further information). Both channels might contribute to the production of Type-Ia supernovae but the relative proportions of their contributions remain unclear.
One way to investigate Type-Ia SNe is by performing direct survey of the field of historical events~\cite{rui97}. Depending on the date of the SN explosion and the distance to the SN remnant, we are able to define the region where to find the possible companion star, close to the geometrical center of the SN remnant~\cite{rui14}.
There are a few known historical Galactic Type-Ia supernova events: SN 1572 (Tycho Brahe supernova), SN 1006, SN 1604 (Kepler supernova), and three new recently identified Type-Ia supernova remnants: SN 185 (RCW86), G299.2-2.9 and G272.2-3.2. Our group have been investigating these Galactic historical SNIa, trying to search for companion stars of progenitors of historical Galactic Type-Ia SNe with the aim of clarifying the origin of these cosmological candles. We present here the results we have got in two of them, SN 1572 and SN 1006.
\section{SN 1572: Tycho Brahe supernova}
Ruiz-Lapuente et al. \cite{rui04} investigated the Type-Ia SN 1572 and found one promising candidate (called Tycho G) to be the surviving companion of the progenitor of SN 1572 remnant, thus the origin of Tycho's supernova remnant (SNR)
might be attributed to the SD channel. On the other hand, for instance, the absence of any ex-companion in the supernova remnant SNR 0509$-$67.5, in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), down to very faint magnitudes, strongly suggests that the SN explosion there was produced by a DD system.
Gonz\'alez Hern\'andez et al. \cite{gon09a} studied the star Tycho G and derived its stellar parameters and chemical abundances, using HIRES@10m-KeckI high-resolution spectra. In Fig.~\ref{fig1}, we show a re-determination of the Ni abundance in Tycho G compared with those of similar stars of the Galactic thin and thick disk. A slightly Ni enhancement is seen in Tycho G (see \cite{gon09a,bed14}), which may suggest Ni pollution from Tycho SN 1572 ejecta. We have been also improved our previous proper motion determination of Tycho G together with many other stars in the Tycho SN field using images from HST programmes GO-9729, GO-10098 and GO-12469 (PI: Ruiz-Lapuente), which span about 8 yr. In Fig.~\ref{fig1} we compare the proper motion (PM) of Tycho G, perpendicular to the Galactic plane, together with those of other stars of the SN 1572 field, in comparison with the distribution of PMs predicted by the Besan\c con model of the Galaxy \cite{rob03}. Tycho G is the only peculiar star in Fig.~\ref{fig1}, and thus possibly the only viable candidate to be the surviving companion of SN 1572~\cite{bed14}.
Several models have been proposed to evaluate the luminosity, peculiar radial velocity and proper motion, and rotational velocity of Tycho G and support this star as the possible surviving companion~\cite{pan14}.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=7.1cm,angle=0,clip=true]{gonzalez_hernandezjF1a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=7.1cm,angle=0,clip=true]{gonzalez_hernandezjF1b.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig1}
\emph{Left panel:} [Ni/Fe] abundance ratio of Tycho-G (filled triangle) in comparison with the abundances of F-, G- and K-type metal-rich dwarf stars from \cite{nev09}. Thin-disc stars are depicted as filled circles, whereas transition and thick-disc stars are the empty circles. Solar analogues are shown as empty squares from \cite{gon10, gon13}. The size of the error bars indicates the 1$\sigma$ uncertainty. The dashed-dotted lines indicate solar abundance values.
\emph{Right panel:}
The distributionof proper motions, $\mu_b$, perpendicular to the
Galactic plane, as a function of distance, in the direction of the
X-ray centroid of Tycho's SNR, for thin-disc and thick-disc stars
together (and [Fe/H]~$ > -0.14$), according to the Besan\c con model
of the Galaxy (see~\cite{rob03}). 1-$\sigma$, 2-$\sigma$ and 3-$\sigma$
regions are indicated. The position of Tycho-G is depicted as a
triangle, $D$[kpc]~$= 3.50\pm1.45$ and $\mu_b$[mas yr$^{-1}$]~$
= -3.69 \pm 0.10(0.04)$.
}
\end{figure}
\section{SN 1006: The Galactic brightest apparent stellar event}
The SN 1006 has been also investigated with the aim of finding the surviving companion of the SN progenitor (see \cite{gon12, ker12}). We selected all targets up to a limiting magnitude of $m_R=15$, and we acquired high-resolution spectroscopy using UVES@8.2m-VLT within a circle of radius 4’ around the geometrical centre of the SN 1006 remnant. In Fig.~\ref{fig2} we show UVES@VLT observed spectra of several giant stars located at distances consistent with the SN 1006 remnant. Model simulations of the impact of SNIa ejecta indicate that red giant should have been stripped off most of its hydrogen envelope and therefore, these stars, which are normal giant stars, are not expected to be the surviving companion. The stellar parameters were derived from the measurements of equivalent widths of FeI-II lines using the code StePar~\cite{tab12}.
In Fig.~\ref{fig3} we depict the abundance ratios [X/Fe] of several Fe-peak elements of the stars in the SN 1006 field compared to those in stars belonging to the Galactic disk. None of the stars reveals any remarkable abundance peculiarity.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=10.1cm,angle=0,clip=true]{gonzalez_hernandezjF2.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig2} Small portion of the high-resolution UVES spectra of giant stars at the distance of the SN 1006 remnant sorted in decreasing effective temperature order from top to bottom.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=10.1cm,angle=0,clip=true]{gonzalez_hernandezjF3.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig3} Chemical abundances of Fe-peak elements derived using the EW technique. We performed a differential analysis on a line-by-line basis, using the solar UVES spectrum of the Moon as reference. Red triangles correspond to the four giant stars whose distances are marginally compatible with that of the remnant of SN 1006. Blue squares, to the rest of the stars in the sample.
}
\end{figure}
Using optical and near-infrared photometry together with the stellar parameters we derive the distances to the stars of the SN 1006 field (see Fig.~\ref{fig4}). We clearly see that only giant stars are compatible within the error bars with the distance to the SN remnant. We inspect the 2MASS photometry catalogue and use the IRFM method (see \cite{gon09b}) to derive effective temperatures of the additional candidates, with the aim of identifying those at the distance of the SN 1006 remnant. We found no main-sequence brighter than $m_R \sim 16.4$, which brings the limit down to $M_R \sim +4.5$, corresponding to $M_V \sim +4.9$ (approximately equal to, or slightly less than, solar luminosity). Hydrodynamical simulations suggest that even if the pre-SN companion is main-sequence solar-mass star, about 1000 yr after the strong impact of the SNIa ejecta, the star does not have enough time to become dimmer than the Sun. However, Di Stefano, Voss and Claeys (\cite{diste}) have suggested that, by the time that the exploding white dwarf has reached the critical mass for explosion (within the single degenerate scneario), the companion (donor) might have become a WD. This finding deserves further investigation for its implications in the surviving companion of SNe Ia.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=10.1cm,angle=0,clip=true]{gonzalez_hernandezjF4.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig4} Distances of the target stars within the SN 1006 field as a function of their stellar parameters, metallicity and radial velocity. Giant, subgiant and dwarf stars are shown as red, green and blue filled circles, respectively. The black dashed line gives the distance of the SN 1006 remnant. The violet dashed-dotted line show the well-defined distance error range of the SN 1006 remnant.
}
\end{figure}
Several stars analyzed in \cite{gon12} are compared to model predictions, but those models gives hotter candidates than those observed (see \cite{pan14} for further details). Thus, SN 1006, the brightest event ever observed in our Galaxy, should have been possibly produced by merging of two white dwarfs. Adding this result to the evidence from the other direct searches, the single-degenerate channel appears either to happen in the minority of the cases (20\% or less), or preferentially it involves main-sequence companions with masses more probably below that of the Sun.
\small
\section*{Acknowledgments}
J.I.G.H. acknowledges financial support from the Spanish Ministry projects MINECO AYA2011-29060 and MINECO AYA2011-26244, and also from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) under the 2011 Severo Ochoa Program MINECO SEV-2011-0187. P.R.L. is grateful for the support of the Spanish Ministry project MINECO AYA2012–36353. H.M.T and D.M acknowledge financial support from the Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), the Spanish Ministry of Econ- omy and Competitiveness (MINECO) from pojects AYA2011-30147-C03-02, and The Comunidad de Madrid under PRICIT project S2009/ESP-1496 (Astro- Madrid). H.M.T also acknowledges the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) under grants BES-2009-012182 and EEBB-I-12-04038.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Propositional proof complexity} The field of propositional proof complexity aims to understand and analyze the computational resources required to prove propositional statements. The problems the field poses to us are fundamental, difficult and go back to the work of Cook and Reckhow \cite{CR79}, who showed the immediate relevance of these problems to the \NP~vs.~\coNP\ problem (and thus the \Ptime~vs.~\NP\ problem).
Among the major unsolved questions in proof complexity, is whether the standard propositional logic calculus, either in the form of the Sequent Calculus, or equivalently, in the axiomatic form of Hilbert proofs (i.e., Frege proofs), is polynomially bounded; that is, whether every propositional tautology (or unsatisfiable formula) has a polynomially bounded proof-size (refutation, resp.) in the size of the formula proved. Here, we consider the size of proofs as the number of symbols it takes to write it down, where each formula in the proof is written as a Boolean \textit{formula} (in other words we count the total number of logical gates appearing in the proof where each proof-line is a formula). It is known \cite{Rec76:PhD} that all Frege
proof-systems\footnote{Formally, a Frege proof system is any propositional proof system with a fixed number of axiom schemes and derivation rules which is also implicationally complete in which proof-lines are written as propositional formulas (see e.g., \cite{Kra95} and Definition \ref{def:Frege_system}).}~as well as the Gentzen sequent calculus (with the cut rule) are polynomially equivalent to each other, and hence it does not matter precisely which rules, axioms, and logical-connectives we use.
Complexity-wise, the Frege proof system is considered a very strong system which is also poorly understood. The qualification \textit{strong} here has several meanings: first, that no super-polynomial lower bound is known for Frege proofs. Second, that there are not even good hard candidates for the Frege system (see \cite{BBP95}, and \cite{LT13} for a further discussion on this). Third, that for most hard instances (e.g., the pigeonhole principle, Tseitin tautologies) that are known for weaker systems (e.g., resolution refutations lower bounds, cutting planes, etc.), there are known polynomial bounds on Frege proofs for these instances. Fourth, that proving super-polynomial lower bounds on Frege proofs seems to a certain extent out of reach of current techniques. And finally, that by the common (mainly informal) correspondence
between circuits and proofs---namely, the correspondence between a circuit-class $\cal C$ and a proof system in which every proof-line is written as a circuit from $\cal C$\footnote{To be more precise, one has to associate a circuit class $\cal C$ with a proof system in which a \emph{family} of proofs is written such that every proof-line in the family is a circuit family from $\cal C$.}---Frege system corresponds to the circuit class of polynomial-size $\log(n)$-depth circuits denoted \NCOne\ (equivalently, of polynomial-size formulas \cite{Spi71}), considered to be a strong computational model for which no (explicit) super-polynomial lower bounds are currently known.
As mentioned above, proving lower bounds on Frege proofs is considered an extremely hard task. In fact, the best lower bound known today is only quadratic \cite{Kra95}, which uses a fairly simple syntactic argument. If we put further impeding restrictions on Frege proofs, like restricting the depth of each formula appearing in the proofs to a certain fixed constant, exponential lower bounds can be obtained \cite{Ajt88,PBI93,PBI93}. Although these constant-depth Frege exponential-size lower bounds go back to Ajtai's result from 1988, essentially they are still the state-of-the-art in proof complexity lower bounds (beyond the important developments on weaker proof systems, such as resolution and its weak extensions). Constant-depth Frege lower bounds use quite involved probabilistic arguments, mainly specialized switching lemmas tailored for specific tautologies (namely, counting tautologies, most notable of which are the Pigeonhole Principle tautologies). Even random $k$-CNF formulas near the satisfiability threshold are not known to be hard for constant-depth Frege (let alone [unrestricted depth] Frege).
All of the above goes to emphasize the importance, basic nature and difficulty in understanding the complexity of strong propositional proof systems, while showing how little is actually known about these systems. \smallskip
\subsection{Prominent directions for understanding propositional proofs} As mentioned above, there is a guiding line in proof complexity which states a correspondence between the complexity of circuits and the complexity of proofs. This correspondence is mainly informal, but there are seemingly good indications showing it might be more than a superficial analogy. One of the most compelling evidence for this correspondence is that there is a precise formal correspondence between the first-order logical theories of bounded arithmetic (whose axioms state the existence of sets taken from a given complexity class $\mathcal C$; cf.~\cite{CN10}) to propositional proof systems (in which proof-lines are circuits from $\mathcal C$).
Another facet of the informal correspondence between circuit complexity and proof complexity is that circuit hardness can sometimes be used to obtain proof-complexity hardness.
The most notable example of this are the lower bounds on constant depth Frege proofs mentioned above: constant depth Frege proofs can be viewed as propositional logic operating with \ACZ\ circuits, and the known lower bounds on constant depth Frege proofs (cf. \cite{Ajt88,KPW95,PBI93}) use techniques borrowed from \ACZ\ circuits lower bounds. The success in moving from circuit hardness towards proof-complexity hardness has spurred a flow of attempts to obtain lower bounds on proof systems other than constant depth Frege. For example, Pudl{\'a}k \cite{Pud99} and Atserias et al. \cite{AGP01} studied proofs based on monotone circuits, motivated by known exponential lower bounds on monotone circuits. Raz and Tzameret \cite{RT06,RT07,Tza08:PhD} investigated algebraic proof systems operating with multilinear formulas, motivated by lower bounds on multilinear formulas for the determinant, permanent and other explicit polynomials \cite{Raz04a,Raz04b}. Atserias et al. \cite{AKV04}, Kraj\'{i}\v{c}ek \cite{Kra07} and Segerlind \cite{Seg07} have considered proofs operating with ordered binary decision diagrams (OBDDs), and the second author \cite{Tza11-I&C} initiated the study of proofs operating with non-commutative formulas (see Sec.~\ref{sec:comparison} for a comparison with the current work).
Until quite recently it was unknown whether the correspondence between proofs and circuits is two-sided, namely, whether proof complexity hardness (of concrete known proof systems) can imply any computational hardness.
An initial example of such an implication from proof hardness to circuit hardness was given by Raz and Tzameret \cite{RT06}. They showed that a separation between algebraic proof systems operating with arithmetic circuits and multilinear arithmetic circuits, resp., for an explicit family of polynomials, implies a separation between arithmetic circuits and multilinear arithmetic circuits. In a recent significant development about the complexity of strong proof systems, Grochow and Pitassi \cite{GP14} demonstrated a much stronger correspondence. They introduced a natural propositional proof system, called the \textit{Ideal Proof System }(IPS for short), for which \textit{any }super-polynomial size lower bound on IPS implies a corresponding size lower bound on arithmetic circuits, and formally, that the permanent does not have small arithmetic circuits. The IPS is defined as follows:
\begin{definition}[Ideal Proof System (IPS) \cite{GP14}]\label{def:orig-IPS} Let $F_1(\overline x),\ldots,F_m(\overline x)$ be a system of polynomials in the variables $x_1,\ldots,x_n $, where the polynomials $x_i^2-x_i$, for all $1\le i\le n$, are part of this system. An \emph{IPS refutation (or certificate)} that the $F_i$'s polynomials have no 0-1 solutions is a polynomial $C(\overline x,\overline y)$ in the variables $x_1,\ldots,x_n $ and $y_1,\ldots,y_{m} $, such that:\vspace{-5pt}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $F(\nx{x},\overline 0) = 0$; and \vspace{-8pt}
\item $F(\nx{x}, F_1(\overline x),\ldots, F_m(\overline x)) = 1.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
The essence of IPS is that a proof (or refutation) is a \textit{single }polynomial that can be written simply as an arithmetic \textit{circuit} or \emph{formula}. The advantage of this formulation is that now we can obtain direct connections between circuit/formula hardness (i.e., ``computational hardness'') and hardness of proofs. Grochow and Pitassi showed indeed that a lower bound on IPS written as an arithmetic circuit implies that the permanent does not have polynomial-size algebraic circuits (Valiant's $\sf{VNP}\neq\sf{VP}$ \cite{Val79:ComplClass}); And similarly, a lower bound on IPS written as an arithmetic \textit{formula }implies that the permanent
does not have polynomial-size algebraic formulas (Valiant's $\sf VNP\neq\sf VP_e$).
Under certain assumptions, Grochow and Pitassi \cite{GP14} were able to connect their result to standard propositional calculus proof systems, i.e., Frege and Extended Frege. Their assumption was the following: \textit{Frege has polynomial-size proofs of the statement expressing that the PIT for arithmetic formulas is decidable by polynomial-size Boolean circuits }(\textit{PIT for arithmetic formulas} is the problem to decide whether an input arithmetic formula computes the (formal) zero polynomial).
They showed that\footnote{We focus only on the relevant results about Frege proofs from \cite{GP14} (and not the results about Extended Frege; the latter proof system operates, essentially, with Boolean circuits, in the same way that Frege operates with Boolean formulas (equivalently \NCOne\ circuits)).}, under this assumption super-polynomial lower bounds on Frege proofs imply
that the permanent does not have polynomial-size arithmetic circuits. This, in turn, can be considered as a (conditional) justification for the apparent difficulty in proving lower bounds on strong proof systems.
\subsection{Overview of results and proofs}
\subsubsection{Sketch}
In this paper we contribute to the understanding of strong proof systems such as Frege, and to the fundamental search for lower bounds on these systems, by formulating a very natural proof system---a non-commutative variant of the ideal proof system---which we show captures \textit{unconditionally} (up to a quasipolynomial-size increase) propositional Frege proofs. A proof in the non-commutative IPS is simply a \textit{single non-commutative \textit{polynomial}} written as a non-commutative formula. This gives a fairly compelling and simple new characterization of the proof complexity of propositional Frege. Moreover, it brings new hope for achieving lower bounds on strong proof systems, by reducing the task of lower bounding Frege proofs to the following seemingly much more manageable task: proving matrix rank lower bounds on the matrices associated with certain non-commutative polynomials (in the sense of Nisan \cite{Nis91}; see below for details).
We also tighten the results in Grochow and Pitassi \cite{GP14}, in the sense that we show that in order to obtain a characterization of Frege proof in terms of an ideal proof system it is advantageous to consider non-commutative polynomials instead of commutative ones (as well as to add the commutator axioms). This shows that, at least for Frege, and in the framework of the ideal proof system, lower bounds on Frege proofs do not necessarily entail in themselves very strong computational lower bounds.
\subsubsection{Some preliminaries: non-commutative polynomials and formulas}
A \textit{non-commutative polynomial} over a given field \F\ and with the variables $X:=\{x_1,x_2,\ldots\}$ is a formal sum of monomials with coefficients from \F\ such that the product of variables is non-commuting. For example, $x_1 x_2-x_2 x_1+x_3 x_2 x_3^2-x_2 x_3^3,\ \, x_1 x_2-x_2 x_1$ and $0$ are three distinct polynomials in $\freea$.
The ring of non-commutative polynomials with variables $X$ with coefficients from \F\ is denoted \freea.
A \textit{polynomial} (i.e., a \emph{commutative}
polynomial) over a field is defined in the same way as a non-commutative
polynomial except that
now the product of variables \textit{is} commutative; that is, it
is a sum of (commutative) monomials.
A \emph{non-commutative arithmetic formula} (non-commutative formula for short; see Definition \ref{def:nonc_formula}) is a fan-in two labeled tree, with edges directed from leaves towards the root, such that the leaves are labeled with field elements (for a given field \F) or variables $x_1,\ldots,x_n, $ and internal nodes (including the root) are labeled with a plus $+$ or product $\times$ gates. A product gate has an order on its two children (holding the order of non-commutative product). A non-commutative formula computes a non-commutative polynomial in the natural way.
Exponential-size lower bounds on non-commutative formulas (over any field) were established by Nisan \cite{Nis91}. The idea (in retrospect) is quite simple: first transform a non-commutative formula into an algebraic branching program (ABP; see Definition \ref{def:ABP}); and then show that the number of nodes in the $i$th layer of an ABP computing a degree $d$ homogenous non-commutative polynomial $f$ is bounded from below by the rank of the degree $i$-partial-derivative matrix of $f$.\footnote{
The degree $i$ partial derivative matrix of $f$ is the matrix whose rows are all non-commutative monomials of degree $i$ and columns are all non-commutative monomials of degree $d-i$, such that the entry in row $ M$ and column $N$ is the coefficient of the $d$ degree monomial $M\cd N$ in $f$.} Thus, lower bounds on non-commutative formulas follow from quite immediate rank arguments (e.g., the partial derivative matrices associated with the permanent and determinant can easily be shown to have high ranks).
\subsubsection{Non-commutative Ideal Proof System}\label{sec:intro:ncIPS}
Recall the IPS refutation system in Definition \ref{def:orig-IPS} above. We use the idea introduced in \cite{Tza11-I&C}, that considered adding the commutator $x_1x_2-x_2x_1$ as an axiom in propositional algebraic proof systems, to define a refutation system that polynomially simulates Frege:
\begin{definition}[Non-commutative IPS]\label{def:intro:non-commutative-IPS}
Let $\F$ be a field. Assume that $F_1(\overline x) = F_2(\overline x) = \cdots = F_m(\overline x) = 0$ is a system of non-commutative polynomial equations from $\F\langle x_1,\ldots,x_n\rangle$, and suppose that the following set of equations (axioms) are included in the $F_i(\overline x)$'s:
\begin{description}
\item[\quad Boolean axiom:]
\ $ x_i\cd (1-x_i)\,, $ \, \, for all $\,1\le i\le n\,$;\vspace{-8pt}
\item[\quad Commutator axiom:] \ $x_i\cd x_j -x_j\cd x_i$\,, \,\, for all $\,1\le i< j\le n\,.$
\end{description}
Suppose that the $F_i(\overline x)$'s have no common $0$-$1$ solutions.\footnote{One can check that the $F_i(\overline x)$'s have no common $0$-$1$ solutions in \F\ iff they do not have a common 0-1 solution in every \F-algebra.} A \textbf{non-commutative IPS refutation} (or \emph{certificate}) that the system of $F_i(\overline x)$'s is unsatisfiable is a non-commutative polynomial $\mathfrak{F}(\overline x, \overline y)$ in the variables
$\nx{x}$ and $y_1,\ldots, y_m$ (i.e. $\mathfrak{F}\in\F\langle \overline x, \overline y\rangle)$, such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{it:1 in ncIPS def}
$\mathfrak{F}(\nx{x},\overline 0) = 0$; and \vspace{-8pt}
\item $\mathfrak{F}(\nx{x}, F_1(\overline x),\ldots, F_m(\overline x)) = 1.$ \label{it:2 in ncIPS def}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We always assume that the non-commutative IPS refutation is written as a \textit{non-commutative formula}. Hence the \emph{\textbf{size}} of a non-commutative IPS refutation is the minimal size of a non-commutative formula computing the non-commutative IPS refutation.
\medskip
The main result of this paper is that the non-commutative IPS (over either $\mathbb{Q}$ or $\mathbb{Z}_q$, for any prime $q$) polynomially simulates Frege; and conversely, Frege quasi-polynomially simulates the non-commutative IPS (over $GF(2))$, as we explain in what follows.
\newcommand{\trn}{{\rm{tr}}}
\newcommand{\pol}{\ensuremath{\widehat}}
For the purpose of the next theorem, we use a standard translation of propositional formulas $T$ into non-commutative arithmetic formulas:
\begin{definition}\label{def:trn_1}
Let $\trn(x_i):=x_i$, for variables $x_i$; $\trn(\textsf{false}):=1$; $\trn(\textsf{true}):=0$; and by induction on the size of the propositional formula: $\trn(\neg T_1) := 1-\trn(T_1)$; $\trn(T_1\lor T_2)= \trn(T_1)\cd\trn(T_2)$ and finally $\trn(T_1\land T_2) = 1-(1-\trn(T_1))\cd(1-\trn(T_2))$. \end{definition}
For a non-commutative \emph{formula} $f$ denote by $\pol f$ the \emph{polynomial} computed by $f$. Thus, $T$ is a propositional tautology (i.e., a Boolean formula that is satisfied by every assignment) iff $\pol{
\trn(T)}=0$ for every 0-1 assignment to the underlying variables of the non-commutative polynomial.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:intro:ncIPS_sim_Frege}
Let \F\ be either $\mathbb{Q}$ or $\mathbb{Z}_q$, for a prime $q$. The non-commutative IPS refutation system, when refutations are written as non-commutative formulas over \F, polynomially simulates the Frege system. More precisely, for
every propositional tautology T, if T has a polynomial-size Frege proof then there is a non-commutative
IPS certificate (over \F) of $\hbox{\rm \trn}(\neg T)$ that has a polynomial non-commutative formula size.
\end{theorem}
\newcommand{\FPC}{\ensuremath{\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}}}
The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:intro:ncIPS_sim_Frege} proceeds as follows. To simulate Frege proofs we use an intermediate proof system $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ formulated by Grigoriev and Hirsch \cite{GH03}. The $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ system (Definition \ref{def:F-PC}) is akin to the polynomial calculus refutation system \cite{CEI96}, except that we operate in $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ with \textit{arithmetic formulas} treated as syntactic terms, instead of writing polynomials throughout the proof as sum of monomials. We have the two rules of polynomial calculus: from a pair of previously derived polynomials $f, g$ we can derive $af+bg$ for $a,b\in\F$, and from $f$ we can derive $x_i\cd f$, for any variable $x_i$. We also have local rewriting rules, that can operate on any \textit{sub-}formula of an arithmetic formula appearing in the proof. These rewriting rules express simple operations on polynomials like commutativity of addition and product, associativity, distributivity, etc.
Grigoriev and Hirsch \cite{GH03} showed that \FPC\ polynomials simulates Frege proofs, and that for tree-like Frege proofs the polynomial simulation yields tree-like \FPC\ proofs. Since tree-like Frege is polynomial equivalent to Frege (because Frege proofs can always be balanced to depth which is logarithmic in their size; cf.~\cite{Kra95} for a proof), we have that tree-like \FPC\ polynomially simulates (dag-like) Frege proofs.
To conclude Theorem \ref{thm:intro:ncIPS_sim_Frege} it therefore remains to prove that non-commutative IPS polynomially simulates tree-like \FPC\ proofs. This can be proved by induction on the number of lines in the \FPC\ proofs. The interesting case in the induction is the simulation of the commutativity rewrite-rule for products by the non-commutative IPS system, which is done using the commutator axioms.
\smallskip
Now, since we write refutations as non-commutative formulas we can use the polynomial-time deterministic Polynomial Identity Testing algorithm for non-commutative formulas, devised by Raz and Shpilka \cite{RS04}, to check in \textit{deterministic} polynomial-time the correctness of non-commutative IPS refutations. Therefore, we obtain:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:intro:Cook-Reckhow}
The non-commutative IPS is a sound and complete Cook-Reckhow refutation system. That is, it is a sound and complete refutation system for unsatisfiable propositional formulas in which refutations can be checked for correctness in deterministic polynomial-time.
\end{corollary}
This should be contrasted with the original (commutative) IPS of \cite{GP14}, for which verification of refutations is done in \textit{probabilistic }polynomial time (using the standard Schwartz-Zippel \cite{Sch80,Zip79} PIT algorithm).
The major consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:intro:ncIPS_sim_Frege} is that to prove a super-polynomial Frege lower bound it is now sufficient to prove a super-polynomial lower bound on non-commutative formulas computing certain polynomials. Specifically, it is enough to prove that any non-commutative IPS certificate $\frak F(\overline x,\overline y)$ (which is simply a non-commutative polynomial) has a super-polynomial non-commutative formula size (and in yet another words, it suffices to show that any such $\frak F$ must have a super-polynomial total rank according to the associated partial-derivatives matrices discussed before). \bigskip\
We now consider the \textit{other direction}, namely, whether Frege can simulate the non-commutative IPS. We show that it does for CNFs (this is the case considered in \cite{GP14}), over $GF(2),$ and with only a quasi-polynomial increase in size. For convenience, we use a slightly different translation of clauses to non-commutative formulas than Definition
\ref{def:trn_1}:
\begin{definition}\label{def:trn_2}
Given a Boolean formula $f$ we define the non-commutative formula
translation $\trn'(f)$ as follows. Let $\trn'(x):= 1-x $ ~and~ $\trn(\neg x):= x$, for $x$ a variable.
And let $\trn'(f_1\lor\ldots \lor f_r):=\trn'(f_1)\cdots \trn'(f_r)$
(where the sequence of products stands for a tree of product gates
with $\trn'(f_i)$ as leaves).
Further, for a clause $k_i$ in a CNF $\phi=k_1\wedge k_2 \ldots \wedge k_m$, denote by $Q_i^{\phi}$ the non-commutative formula translation $\trn'(k_i)$ of $k_i$,
where $i=1,2\. m$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:intro:Frege_sim_ncIPS}
For a CNF $\phi=k_1\wedge \ldots \wedge k_m$ where $Q_1^{\phi},\ldots, Q_m^{\phi}$ are the corresponding non-commutative formulas for the clauses, if there is a \NCFIPS\ refutation of size $s$ of $Q_1^{\phi},\ldots, Q_m^{\phi}$ over $GF(2)$, then there is a Frege proof of size $s^{O(\log s)}$ of $\neg\phi$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:intro:Frege_sim_ncIPS} consists of several
separate steps of independent interest. Essentially, the argument is a short Frege proof for a \textit{reflection principle} for the non-commutative IPS system (a reflection principle for a given proof system $P$ is a statement that says that if a formula is provable in $P$ than the formula is also true). The argument
becomes rather complicated because we need to prove properties of the \textit{evaluation
procedure} of non-commutative formulas, within the restricted framework
of propositional Frege proofs.
The \textit{quasi-polynomial blowup }in Theorem \ref{thm:intro:Frege_sim_ncIPS} depends \textit{\uline{solely}} on the fact that the reflection principle for non-commutative IPS is efficiently provable (apparently) only when the non-commutative IPS certificate is written as a sum of \textit{homogenous }non-commutative formulas, as we now explain. Note that it is not known whether any arithmetic formula can be turned into a (sum of) homogenous formulas with only a polynomial increase in size (in contrast to the standard efficient homogenization of arithmetic \emph{circuits}). Recently Raz \cite{Raz13-tensor} showed how to transform an arithmetic formula into (a sum of) homogenous formulas with only a quasi-polynomial increase in size. In Lemma \ref{homogenous-proof} we show that:\vspace{-6pt}
\begin{itemize}
\item the same construction in \cite{Raz13-tensor} holds also for \textit{non-commutative} formulas; and that \vspace{-8pt}
\item this construction for non-commutative formulas can be carried out efficiently inside Frege.
\end{itemize}
Before we homogenize the non-commutative formulas (according to Raz'
construction \cite{Raz13-tensor}) we need to \emph{balance} them, so that their depth is logarithmic in their size. We inspect that the recent construction of Hrube\v s and Wigderson \cite{HW14}, for balancing non-commutative formulas with division gates (incurring at most a polynomial increase in size) results in a \textit{division-free} formula, when the \textit{initial }non-commutative formula is division-free itself. Therefore, we can assume that the non-commutative IPS certificate is already balanced.
\smallskip
To prove Theorem \ref{thm:intro:Frege_sim_ncIPS} we thus start with a non-commutative IPS certificate $\pi$ over $GF(2)$ of the polynomial translation of the CNF $\phi$, written as a \textit{balanced} non-commutative formula (over $GF(2)$). We then consider this non-commutative polynomial identity \emph{over $GF(2)$ as a Boolean tautology} by replacing plus gates with XOR and product gates with AND. We convert this Boolean tautology to a homogenous representation (as described above, using a simulation of \cite{Raz13-tensor}). Now, we have a Boolean tautology which we denote by $\pi$.
We wish to prove $\neg \phi$ in Frege, using the fact that $\pi$ is a (massaged version of a) non-commutative IPS certificate. To this end we essentially construct an efficient Frege proof of the correctness of the Raz and Shpilka non-commutative formulas PIT algorithm \cite{RS04}. The PIT algorithm in \cite{RS04} uses some basic linear algebraic concepts that might complicate the proof in Frege. However, since we only need to show the \textit{existence} of short Frege proofs for the PIT algorithm's correctness, we can supply \emph{witnesses} to witness the desired linear algebraic objects needed in the proof (these witnesses will be a sequence of linear transformations).
Furthermore, to reason inside Frege directly about the algorithm of \cite{RS04} is apparently impossible, since this algorithm first converts a non-commutative formula into an \textit{algebraic branching program }(ABP); but apparently the evaluation of ABPs cannot be done with Boolean formulas (and accordingly Frege possibly cannot reason about the evaluation of ABPs). The reason for this apparent inability of Frege to reason about ABP's evaluation is that an ABP is a ``sequential" object (an evaluation of an ABP seems to follow from the source to sink, level by level), while Frege operates with formulas, which are ``parallel'' objects (evaluation of [balanced] formulas can be done in logarithmic time, in case we have enough [separate] processors to perform parallel sub-evaluations of the formula). To overcome this obstacle we show how to perform Raz and Shpilka's PIT algorithm \emph{directly on non-commutative formulas}, without converting the formulas first into ABPs. This technical contribution takes a large part of the argument (Sec.~\ref{sec:splitting}). We are thus able to prove the following statement, which might be interesting by itself:
\begin{lemma}\label{homo-formula}
If a non-commutative \emph{homogeneous} formula $F(\overline x)$ over $GF(2)$ of size $s$ is identically zero, then the corresponding \boolean\ formula $\neg\Fb(\overline x)$ (where $\Fb$ results by replacing $+$ with XOR and $\cd$ with AND in $F(\overline x)$) can be proved with a Frege proof of size at most $s^{O(1)}$.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Significance}
The characterization of Frege proofs as non-commutative formulas obtained in this work contributes to our understanding of one of the most well-known but poorly understood propositional proof systems. It also gives hope for progress on the fundamental lower bounds problems in proof complexity: We have reduced the problem of proving lower bounds on Frege proofs to the problem of establishing rank lower bounds on matrices associated with non-commutative polynomials, where the non-commutative polynomials are given ``semi-explicitly'' (that is, they are given in terms of the properties of the non-commutative IPS (Definition \ref{def:intro:non-commutative-IPS})). We already know that rank lower bounds yielding strong lower bounds on non-commutative formulas are fairly simple (cf.~\cite{Nis91}). We thus get a quite compelling evidence that Frege lower bounds, although mostly considered out of reach of current techniques, might not be very far away.
The results also improve and simplify greatly the lower bound approach laid out in \cite{GP14}: the suggested lower bound approach in \cite{GP14} proposed to deal with (commutative) arithmetic circuits, for which there are no explicit lower bounds known. While for non-commutative formulas we have exponential lower bounds as well as a PIT algorithm, meaning this circuit class is well understood.
The characterization of Frege proofs sheds light on the correspondence between circuits and proofs in proof complexity: in the framework of the ideal proof system, a Frege proof can be seen from
the computational perspective as a non-commutative formula.
\smallskip
We also tighten the results of \cite{GP14} in the sense described before. Namely, by showing that already the non-commutative version of the IPS is sufficient to simulate Frege. As well as by showing \textit{unconditional }efficient simulation of the non-commutative IPS by Frege.
While proving that Frege quasi-polynomially simulates the non-commutative IPS, we demonstrate new simulations of algebraic complexity constructions within proof complexity; these include the homogenization for formulas of Raz \cite{Raz13-tensor} and the PIT algorithm for non-commutative formulas by Raz and Shpilka \cite{RS04}. These proof complexity simulations adds to the known previous such simulations shown in Hrube\v s and Tzameret \cite{HT12} and might be interesting by themselves.
Lastly, this work emphasizes the importance and usefulness of non-commutative models of computation in proof complexity (see \cite{Hru11,LT13} for more on this).
\subsection{Comparison with previous work}\label{sec:comparison}
As discussed before, our main characterization of Frege system is based on a non-commutative version of the IPS system from Grochow and Pitassi \cite{GP14}. As described above, the non-commutative IPS gives a tighter characterization than the (commutative) IPS in \cite{GP14}. Thus, our proof system is seemingly weaker than the original (formula version of) IPS, and hence apparently \emph{closer to capture the Frege system}.
Proofs in the original (formula version of the) IPS are arithmetic formulas, and thus any super-polynomial lower bound on IPS refutations implies $\sf VNP\neq \sf VP_e$, or in other words, that the permanent does not have polynomial-size arithmetic formulas (Joshua Grochow [personal communication]). This gives a justification of the considerable hardness of proving IPS lower bounds. On the other hand, an exponential-size lower bound on our non-commutative IPS gives only a corresponding lower bound on non-commutative formulas, for which exponential-size lower bounds are
already known \cite{Nis91}. Since Frege is quasi-polynomially equivalent to the non-commutative IPS, this means that exponential-size lower bounds on Frege implies merely---at least in the context of the Ideal Proof System---corresponding lower bounds on non-commutative formulas, a result which is however already known. This implies again that there is no strong concrete justification to believe that Frege lower bounds are
beyond current techniques.
\smallskip
The work in \cite{Tza11-I&C} dealt with propositional proof systems over non-commutative formulas. The difference with the current work is that \cite{Tza11-I&C} formulated all proof systems as variants of the polynomial calculus and hence the characterization of a proof system in terms of a \emph{single} non-commutative polynomial is lacking from that work (as well as the consequences we obtained in the current work).
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{Frege proof systems}
\begin{definition}[Boolean formula]
Given a set of input variables $\nx{x}$, a \emph{Boolean formula} on the inputs is a rooted tree of fan-in at most two, with edges directed from leaves to the root. Internal nodes are labeled with the Boolean gates $\lor,\land, \neg$, and the fan-in of $\lor,\land$ is two and the fan-in of $\neg$ is one. The leaves are labeled either with input variables or with $0,1$ (identified with the truth values \textsf{false} and \textsf{true}, resp.).
The entire formula computes the function computed by the gate at the root. Given a formula $F$, the
\textbf{size} of the formula is the number of Boolean gates in F.
\end{definition}
Informally, a Frege proof system is just a standard propositional proof system for proving propositional tautologies (one learns in a basic logic course), having axioms and deduction rules, where proof-lines are written as Boolean\ formulas. The \emph{size} of a Frege proof is the number of symbols it takes to write down the proof.
The problem of demonstrating super-polynomial size lower bounds on propositional proofs (called also Frege proofs) asks whether there is a family $(F_n)_{n=1}^\infty$ of propositional tautological formulas for which there is no polynomial $p$ such that the minimal Frege proof size of $F_n$ is at most $p(|F_n|)$, for all $n\in \mathbb{Z}^+$ (where $|F_n|$ denotes the size of the formula $F_n$).
\begin{definition} [Frege rule] A \emph{Frege rule} is a sequence of propositional formulas $A_0(\overline x),\ldots,A_k(\overline x)$, for $k \le 0$, written as $\frac{A_1(\overline x), \ldots,A_k(\overline x)}{A_0(\overline x)}$. In case $k=0$, the Frege rule is called an \emph{axiom scheme}. A formula $F_0$ is said to be \emph{derived by the rule} from $F_1,\ldots,F_k$ if $F_0,\ldots,F_k$ are all substitution instances of $A_1,\ldots,A_k$, for some assignment to the $\overline x$ variables (that is, there are formulas $B_1,\ldots,B_n$ such that $F_i = A_i(B_1/x_1,\ldots,B_n/x_n)$, for all $i=0,\ldots,k$). The Frege rule is said to be \emph{sound} if whenever an assignment satisfies the formulas in the upper side $A_1,\ldots,A_k$, then it also satisfies the formula in the lower side $A_0$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition} [Frege proof] Given a set of Frege rules, a \emph{Frege proof} is a sequence of Boolean formulas such that every proof-line is either an axiom or was derived by one of the given Frege rules from previous proof-lines. If the sequence terminates with the Boolean formula $A$, then the proof is said to be a \emph{proof} of $A$. The \textbf{size} of a Frege proof is the the total sizes of all the Boolean formulas in the proof.
\end{definition}
A proof system is said to be \emph{implicationally complete} if for all set of formulas $T$, if $T$ semantically implies $F$, then there is a proof of $F$ using (possibly) axioms from $T$. A proof system is said to be sound if it admits proofs of only tautologies (when not using auxiliary axioms, like in the $T$ above).
\begin{definition} [Frege proof system]\label{def:Frege_system} Given a propositional language and a set $P$ of sound Frege rules, we say that $P$ is a \emph{Frege proof system} if $P$ is implicationally complete.
\end{definition}
Note that a Frege proof is always sound since the Frege rules are assumed to be sound. We do not need to work with a specific Frege proof system, since a basic result in proof complexity states that every two Frege proof systems, even over different languages, are polynomially equivalent \cite{Rec76:PhD}.
\subsection{Algebraic proof systems}
In this section, we give the definitions the algebraic proof systems
Polynomial Calculus over Formulas ($\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$) defined by Grigoriev and Hirsch \cite{GH03}.
We start with the definition of a non-commutative formula:
\begin{definition}[Non-commutative formula]\label{def:nonc_formula}
Let $ \F $ be a field and $ x_1,x_2,\ldots $ be variables. A \emph{noncommutative arithmetic formula} (or \emph{noncommutative formula} for short) is a labeled tree, with edges directed from the leaves to the root, and with fan-in at most two, such that there is an order on the edges coming into a node (the first edge is called the \emph{left} edge and the second one the \emph{right} edge). Every leaf of the tree (namely, a node of fan-in zero) is labeled either with an input variable $ x_i $ or a field $ \F $ element. Every other node of the tree is labeled either with $ +$ or $\times $ (in the first case the node is a plus gate and in the second case a product gate). We assume that there is only one node of out-degree zero, called \emph{the root}. A noncommutative formula \emph{computes} a noncommutative polynomial in $ \F\langle x_1,\ldots,x_n\rangle $ in the following way. A leaf computes the input variable or field element that labels it. A plus gate computes the sum of polynomials computed by its incoming nodes. A product gate computes the \emph{noncommutative} product of the polynomials computed by its incoming nodes according to the order of the edges. (Subtraction is obtained using the constant $ -1$.) The output of the formula is the polynomial computed by the root. The \emph{depth} of a formula is the maximal length of a path from the root to the leaf. The \textbf{size} of a noncommutative formula $ f $ is the total number of nodes in its underlying tree, and is denoted $|f|$.
\end{definition}
The definition of (a commutative) arithmetic formula is almost identical:
\begin{definition}[Arithmetic formula]
An \emph{arithmetic formula} is defined in a similar way to a noncommutative formula, except that we ignore the order of multiplication (that is, a product node does not have order on its children and there is no order on multiplication when defining the polynomial computed by a formula).
\end{definition}
Given a pair of non-commutative formulas $ F $ and $ G $ and a variable $ x_i $, we denote by $ F[G/x_i] $ the formula $ F $ in which every occurrence of $ x_i $ is substituted by the formula $ G $.
\QuadSpace
Note that an arithmetic formula is a syntactic object. For example, $x_1+x_2$ and $x_2+x_1$ are different formulas because commutativity might not hold (even if commutativity holds, we will regard them as different formulas. And in the proof system \FPC\ they can be \emph{derived} from each other via the ``commutativity of addition'').
\subsubsection{$\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$}
The $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ proof system defined by Grigoriev and Hirsch \cite{GH03} operates with arithmetic formulas (as purely syntactic terms).
\begin{definition}[$ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ \cite{GH03}]\label{def:F-PC}
Fix a field $ \F $. Let $ F:=\set{f_1,\ldots,f_m} $ be a collection of \emph{formulas}\footnote{Note here that we are talking about formulas (treated as syntactic terms), and \emph{not} polynomials. Also notice that all formulas in $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ are (commutative) formulas computing (commutative) polynomials.}
computing polynomials from $ \F[x_1,\ldots,x_n] $.
Let the set of axioms be the following formulas:
\begin{description}
\item[\quad Boolean axioms]\qquad
$ x_i\cdot(1-x_i)\,, \qquad \mbox{ for all $\,1\le i\le n\,$.}$
\end{description}
A sequence $\pi =(\Phi_1,\ldots,\Phi_\ell)$ of formulas computing polynomials from
$\F[x_1,\ldots, x_n]$\, is said to be \emph{an $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ proof of $ \Phi_\ell $ from $F$},
if for every $i\in[\ell]$ we have one of the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\Phi_i = f_j\,$, for some $j\in[m]$;
\item $\Phi_i$ is a Boolean axiom;
\item $\Phi_i$ was deduced by one of the following inference rules from previous proof-lines
$\Phi_j, \Phi_k\,$, for $j,k<i$:
\begin{description}
\item[\quad Product]
\[
\frac{\Phi}{x_r\cd \Phi}\ , \qquad \qquad \mbox{for $ r\in[n]$}\,.
\]
\item[\quad Addition]
\[
\frac{{\Phi\quad \quad \Theta}}{{a\cd \Phi + b\cd \Theta}}\ ,\qquad
\,{\mbox{for}}\ a,b \in \F\,.
\]
\end{description}
(Where $\Phi, x_r\cd\Phi, \Theta, a\cd\Phi, b\cd\Theta $ are \emph{formulas}
constructed as displayed; e.g.,
$ x_r\cd\Phi $ is the formula with product gate at the root having the
formulas $ x_r $ and $ \Phi $
as children.)\footnote{In \cite{GH03} the product rule of $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ is
defined so that one can derive $ \Theta\cd\Phi $ from $ \Phi $,
where $ \Theta $ is any formula, and not just a variable. However, the definition
of $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ in \cite{GH03} and our Definition \ref{def:F-PC}
polynomially-simulate each other.}
\item $\Phi_i $ was deduced from previous proof-line $\Phi_j $, for $ j<i $, by one of the following \emph{rewriting rules}
expressing the polynomial-ring axioms (where $f,g,h$ range over all arithmetic formulas computing polynomials in $\F[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$):
\begin{description}
\item[Zero rule]
$ 0\cd f \leftrightarrow 0 $
\item[Unit rule]
$ 1\cd f \leftrightarrow f$
\item[Scalar rule]
$ t \leftrightarrow \alpha $, where $t $ is
a formula containing no variables (only field $ \F $ elements) that computes the constant $ \alpha\in\F $.
\item[Commutativity rules]
$ f + g \leftrightarrow g + f \,$, \qquad $ f\cd g \leftrightarrow g\cd f$
\item[Associativity rule]
$ f + (g+h) \leftrightarrow (f+g)+h \,$, \qquad $ f\cd(g\cd h) \leftrightarrow (f\cd g)\cd h $
\item[Distributivity rule]
$ f \cd(g+h) \leftrightarrow (f\cd g)+(f\cd h) $
\end{description}
\end{enumerate}
(The semantics of an $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ proof-line $ p_i$ is the polynomial equation $p_i=0$.)
An \emph{$ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ refutation of} $F$ is a proof of the formula $\;1$ from $F$.
The \textbf{size} of an $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ proof $\pi$ is defined as the total size of all
formulas in $\pi$ and is denoted by $|\pi|$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[Tree-like $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $]
A system $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ is a \emph{tree-like} $ \mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC} $ if
every derived arithmetic formula in the proof system is used only once (and if it is needed again, it must be derived once more).
\end{definition}
\para{Translation of Boolean formulas into polynomial equations.} The proof system $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ can be considered as a propositional proof system for Boolean tautologies (namely, Boolean formulas that are true under any assignment). Given a Boolean formula $T$ in the propositional variables $x_1,\ldots,x_n $ we can transform $T$ into a set of polynomial equations by encoding it into a set of arithmetic formulas where each clause in the CNF corresponds to an arithmetic formula by replacing $\wedge$ with $\times$, $\vee$ with $+$ and $\neg x$ with $1-x$; and for each variable $x_i$, add $x_i^2-x_i$ (called the \textit{Boolean axioms}) to guarantee that every satisfying assignment to the variables is a 0-1 assignment. Then the given CNF is a tautology if and only if the set of arithmetic formulas have no common root.
\begin{definition}[Polynomially Simulation]
Let $\mathcal P_1, \mathcal P_2$ be
two proof systems for the same language $ L$ (in case the proof systems are for two different languages we fix a translation from one language to the other, as described above).
We say that $\mathcal P_2$ \emph{polynomially simulates} $\mathcal P_1$
if given a $\mathcal P_1$ proof (or refutation) $\pi$ of a $ F$,
then there exists a proof (respectively, refutation) of $F$ in $\mathcal P_2$ of size polynomial
in the size of $\pi$.
In case $\mathcal P_2$ polynomially simulates $\mathcal P_1$ while $\mathcal P_1$
does not polynomially simulates $\mathcal P_2$ we say that $\mathcal P_2$
is \emph{strictly stronger} than $\mathcal P_1$.
\end{definition}
In \cite{GH03}, it was shown that $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ as well as tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ can polynomially simulate Frege:
\begin{theorem}\label{tree-like_F-PC=Frege}
Tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ polynomially simulates Frege.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The following was shown in \cite{GH03}:
\vspace{-20pt}
\begin{quote}
\begin{theorem*}[Theorem 3, \cite{GH03}]\label{tree-like-F-PC=tree-like-Frege}
The system $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ polynomially simulates the
Frege system.
\end{theorem*}
\end{quote}
Moreover, inspecting the proof of the above theorem, we can observe
that tree-like Frege proofs are simulated by tree-like \FPC\ proofs:
\begin{lemma}
Tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ polynomially simulates tree-like Frege systems.
\end{lemma}
But \Krajicek \ showed that tree-like Frege and Frege are polynomially
equivalent:
\vspace{-20pt}
\begin{quote}\begin{theorem*}[\cite{Kra95}]
Tree-like Frege proofs polynomially simulate Frege proofs.
\end{theorem*}\end{quote}
Thus, by this theorem and by Lemma \ref{tree-like-F-PC=tree-like-Frege}, tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ polynomially simulates the Frege system.
\end{proof}
\section{The non-commutative ideal proof system}
The non-commutative ideal proof system (non-commutative IPS for short) is an algebraic refutation system in which a refutation is a single non-commutative polynomial.
In the next section we show that when the non-commutative IPS refutations are written as \textit{non-commutative formulas} then the non-commutative IPS polynomially simulates tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$, and hence polynomially simulates the Frege proof system (by \cite{GH03}).
\begin{definition}[Non-commutative IPS]\label{def:non-commutative-IPS}
Let $\F$ be a field. Assume that $F_1(\overline x) = F_2(\overline x) = \cdots = F_m(\overline x) = 0$ is a system of non-commutative polynomial equations from $\F\langle x_1,\ldots,x_n\rangle$, and suppose that the following set of equations (axioms) are included in the $F_i(\overline x)$'s:
\begin{description}
\item[\quad Boolean axiom:]
\ $ x_i\cd (1-x_i)\,, $ \, \, for all $\,1\le i\le n\,$;\vspace{-8pt}
\item[\quad Commutator axiom:] \ $x_i\cd x_j -x_j\cd x_i$\,, \,\, for all $\,1\le i< j\le n\,.$
\end{description}
Suppose that the $F_i(\overline x)$'s have no common $0$-$1$ solutions.\footnote{One can check that the $F_i(\overline x)$'s have no common $0$-$1$ solutions in \F\ iff they do not have a common 0-1 solution in every \F-algebra.} A \emph{non-commutative IPS refutation} (or \emph{certificate}) that the system of $F_i(\overline x)$'s is unsatisfiable is a \textbf{non-commutative polynomial} $\mathfrak{F}(\overline x, \overline y)$ in the variables
$\nx{x}$ and $y_1,\ldots, y_m$ (i.e. $\mathfrak{F}\in\F\langle \overline x, \overline y\rangle)$, such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{it:1 in ncIPS def}
$\mathfrak{F}(\nx{x},\overline 0) = 0$; and \vspace{-8pt}
\item $\mathfrak{F}(\nx{x}, F_1(\overline x),\ldots, F_m(\overline x)) = 1.$ \label{it:2 in ncIPS def}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
In this paper we assume that the non-commutative IPS refutation is written as a \textit{non-commutative formula}. Hence the \emph{\textbf{size}} of a non-commutative IPS refutation is the minimal size of a non-commutative formula computing the non-commutative IPS refutation.
\begin{comment}
\begin{enumerate}
\item The identities in items 1 and 2 in Definition \ref{def:non-commutative-IPS} are \emph{formal} identities of polynomials (i.e., in \ref{it:1 in ncIPS def} the polynomial in the left hand side has a zero coefficient for every monomial, and in \ref{it:2 in ncIPS def} the only nonzero monomial is the monomial 1).
\item In order to prove that a system of \emph{commutative} polynomial equations $\{P_i=0\}$ (where each $P_i$ is expressed as an arithmetic formula) has no common roots in non-commutative IPS, we write each $P_i$ \emph{as a non-commutative formula} (in some way; note that there is no unique way to do this).
\item When we write $P\cdot Q-Q\cdot P$ where $P,Q$ are formulas (e.g., $x_i$ and $x_j$, resp.), we mean $((P\cdot Q)+(-1\cdot(Q\cdot P)))$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{comment}
\section{Non-commutative ideal proof system polynomially simulates Frege}
Here we show that the non-commutative IPS polynomially simulates
Frege. \begin{theorem}[restatement of Theorem \ref{thm:intro:ncIPS_sim_Frege}]
\label{thm:ncIPS_sim_Frege}
The non-commutative IPS refutation system, when refutations are written as non-commutative formulas, polynomially simulates Frege systems. More precisely, for every propositional tautology $T$, if $T$ has a polynomial-size Frege proof then there is a non-commutative IPS certificate (with integer coefficients) of polynomial non-commutative formula size.
\end{theorem}
Recall that Raz and Shpilka \cite{RS04} gave a deterministic polynomial-time
PIT algorithm for non-commutative formulas (over any field):
\begin{theorem}[PIT for non-commutative formulas \cite{RS04}]\label{thm:RS04-PIT}
There is a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm that decides whether a given noncommutative formula over a field $ \F $ computes the zero polynomial $ 0 $.\footnote{We assume here that the field $ \F $ can be efficiently represented (e.g., the field of rationals).}
\end{theorem}
Now, since we write refutations as non-commutative formulas we can use the theorem above to check in \textit{deterministic} polynomial-time the correctness of non-commutative IPS refutations, obtaining:
\begin{corollary}[restatement of Corollary \ref{cor:intro:Cook-Reckhow}]
The non-commutative IPS is a sound and complete Cook-Reckhow refutation system. That is, it is a sound and complete refutation system for unsatisfiable propositional formulas in which refutations can be checked for correctness in deterministic polynomial-time.
\end{corollary}
To prove Theorem \ref{thm:ncIPS_sim_Frege}, we will show in Section \ref{sec:ncIPS_sim_tree_FPC} that the
non-commutative IPS polynomially-simulates tree-like \FPC\ (Definition
\ref{def:F-PC}), which sufficed to complete the proof due to Theorem
\ref{tree-like_F-PC=Frege}.
\subsection{Non-commutative IPS polynomially simulates tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$}\label{sec:ncIPS_sim_tree_FPC}
For convenience, let $C_{i,j}$ denote the commutator axiom $x_i\cdot x_j-x_j\cdot x_i$, for $i,j\in [n], i\ne j$.
\begin{theorem}\label{ncIPS2Frege}
Non-commutative IPS polynomially simulates Tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ (Definition \ref{def:F-PC}).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $F_1, \ldots, F_m$ be arithmetic formulas over the variables $x_1,\ldots, x_n$. Note that an arithmetic formula is a syntactic term in which the children of gates are ordered. We thus can treat a (commutative) arithmetic formula as a \emph{non-commutative} arithmetic formula by taking the \textit{order }on the children of products gates to be the order of non-commutative multiplication.
Suppose $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$ has a $\poly(n)$-size tree-like refutation $\pi:=(L_1, \ldots, L_k)$ of the $F_i$'s (i.e., a proof of the polynomial $1$ from $F_1,\ldots, F_m$), where each $L_j$ is an arithmetic formula. We construct a corresponding non-commutative IPS refutation of the $F_i$'s from this \FPC\ tree-like refutation. Denote by $|\pi|$ the size of $\pi$. We have the following:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-IPSproperty}
For each $i\in[k]$, there exists a non-commutative formula $\phi_i$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\phi_i(\overline x, \overline 0)=0$;
\item $\phi_i(\overline x, F_t,C_{j,j'})=L_i$, where $t\in[m],~j,j'\in [n],\, j< j'$;\footnote{This is an abuse of notation meaning
$\phi_i(\overline x, F_1,\ldots,F_m,C_{1,2}, C_{1,3}\ldots,C_{n-1,n}).$ We use a similar abuse of notation in the sequel.}
\item $|\phi_i|\leq \proofbound{A_i}$, where $A_i\subset [k]$ refers to the indices of the \FPC\ proof-lines involved in deriving $L_i$.\footnote{ For example, if $L_i$ is derived by $L_\a$ and $L_\a$ is derived by $L_\b$ for some $\b<\a<i\in[k]$, then we say that $\a,\b$ are both involved for deriving $L_i$.}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
Note that if the lemma holds, then $\phi_k$ will be a non-commutative IPS proof because it has the property that $\phi_k(\overline x, \overline 0)=0$ and $\phi_k(\overline x, F_t,C_{j,j'})=L_k=1$, where $t\in[m], j,j'\in [n], j\ne j'$. And its size is bounded by $\proofbound{A_k}\leq \proofbound{[k]}\leq O(|\pi|^4).$ Thus, non-commutative IPS polynomially simulates tree-like $\mathcal{F\mbox{\rm-}PC}$.
\medskip
\proof
We construct $\phi_i$ by induction on the length $k$ of the refutation $\pi$. That is, for $i$ from $1$ to $k$, we construct the non-commutative formula $\phi_i(\overline x, \overline y)$ according to $L_i$, as follows:
\para{Case 1:} The $L_i$ is the input axiom $F_j$ for some $j\in[m]$.
Let $\phi_i:=y_j$. Obviously, $\phi_i(\overline x,0)=0, \phi_i(\overline x,F_t,C_{\a, \b})=F_j=L_i$ and $|\phi_i|=1 \leq \ |L_i|^4$.
\para{Case 2:} The $L_i$ is derived from an inference rule from previous proof-lines $L_j,L_{j'}$, for $j,j'< i$.
Then we divide this case into two parts.
\bigskip
\ind Part (1): The $L_i$ is derived from the addition rule $L_i=aL_j+bL_{j'}$. Put $\phi_i:=a\phi_j+b\phi_{j'}$ where $a,b\in \F$. Thus, $\phi_i(\overline x,0)=a\phi_j(\overline x,0)+b\phi_{j'}(\overline x,0) = 0,\,\phi_i(\overline x,F_t,C_{\a, \b})=aL_{j}+bL_{j'}=L_i$ and $|\phi_{i}|=|\phi_j|+|\phi_{j'}|+3\leq \proofbound{A_j}+\proofbound{A_{j'}}+3\leq \proofbound{A_i}$ (where the right most inequality holds since $\pi$ is a \textit{tree-like} refutation and hence $A_j \cap A_{j'}=\emptyset$).
\bigskip
\ind Part (2): The $L_i$ is derived from the product rule $L_i=x_r\cdot L_{j'}$ for $r\in[n]$. Put $\phi_i:=(x_r\cdot \phi_j)$. Then $\phi_i(\overline x,0)=x_r\cd\phi_j(\overline x,0) = 0, \phi_i(\overline x,F_t,C_{\a, \b})=x_r\cd L_j=L_i$ and $|\phi_{i}|=|\phi_j|+2\leq \proofbound{A_j}+2\leq \proofbound{A_i}$.
\para{Case 3:} The $L_i$ is derived from $L_j$ by a rewriting rule excluding the commutative rule of multiplication. Let $\phi_i:=\phi_j$. The non-commutative $\phi_i$ satisfies the properties claimed trivially since all the rewriting rules (excluding the commutative rule of multiplication) express the non-commutative polynomial-ring axioms, and thus cannot change the polynomial computed by a non-commutative formula. And $|\phi_i|=|\phi_j|\leq \proofbound{A_i}$.
\para{Case 4:} The $L_i$ is derived from $L_j$ by a single application of the commutative rule of multiplication. Then by Lemma \ref{LemmaLiLj} below, we can construct a non-commutative formula $\commF$ such that $\phi_i:=(\phi_j+\commF)$ satisfies the desired properties (stated in Lemma~\ref{lem-IPSproperty}).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LemmaLiLj}
Let $L_i, L_j$ be non-commutative formulas such that $L_i$ can be derived from $L_j$ via the commutative rule of multiplication. Then there is a non-commutative formula $\commF(\overline x, \overline y)$ in variables $\{x_\ell, y_{\a,\b},\; \ell\in[n], \a<\b \in [n] \},$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\commF(\overline x, \overline 0)=0$;
\item $\commF(\overline x,C_{\a,\b})=L_i-L_j$;
\item $\left|\commF\right|\leq \left|L_i\right|^2\left|L_j\right|^2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We define the non-commutative formula $\commF$ inductively as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $L_i=(P\cdot Q)$, and $L_j=(Q\cdot P)$, then $\commF$ is defined to be the formula constructed in Lemma~\ref{LemmaPQQP} below.
\item If $L_i=(P\cdot Q)$, $L_j=(P'\cdot Q')$.
Case 1. If $P=P'$, then let $\commF:=(P\cdot \phi_{Q,Q'})$.
Case 2. If $Q=Q'$, then let $\commF:=(\phi_{P,P'}\cdot Q)$.
\item If $L_i=(P+ Q)$, $L_j=(P'+ Q')$.
Case 1. If $P=P'$, then let $\commF= \phi_{Q,Q'}$.
Case 2. If $Q=Q'$, then let $\commF=\phi_{P,P'}$.
\end{itemize}
By induction, one could check the construction satisfies the desired properties.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LemmaPQQP}
For any pair $P, Q$ of two non-commutative formulas there exists a non-commutative formula $F$ in variables $\{x_\ell, y_{i,j}, \; \ell\in[n], i<j\in [n]\}$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $F(\overline x, \overline 0)=0$;
\item $F(\overline x,C_{i,j})=P\cdot Q-Q\cdot P$;
\item $\left|F\right|=\left|P\right|^2\left|Q\right|^2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $s(P,Q)$ denote the smallest size of $F$ satisfying the above properties. We will show that $s(P,Q)\le \left|P\right|^2\cdot \left|Q\right|^2$ by induction on $\max(\left|P\right|,\left|Q\right|)$.
\Base $\left|P\right|=\left|Q\right|=1$.
In this case both $P$ and $Q$ are constants or variables, thus $s(P,Q)=1\le \left|P\right|^2\left|Q\right|^2$.
\medskip
In the following induction step, we consider the case that $\left|P\right| \ge \left|Q\right|$ (which is symmetric for the case $\left|P\right| < \left|Q\right|$).
\Induction Assume that $\left|P\right| \ge \left|Q\right|$ (the case $\left|P\right| < \left|Q\right|$ is similar).
\item Induction step case 1, the root of P is addition.
\case 1 The root of $P $ is addition.
Let $P=(P_1+P_2)$. We have (after rearranging):
$$
P\cdot Q-Q\cdot P=((P_1\cdot Q-Q\cdot P_1)+(P_2\cdot Q-Q\cdot P_2))
$$
By induction hypothesis, we have $s(P,Q)\le s(P_1,Q)+1+s(P_2,Q)\le \left|P_1\right|^2\left|Q\right|^2+1+ \left|P_2\right|^2\left|Q\right|^2
\le (\left|P_1\right|+\left|P_2\right|+1)^2\left|Q\right|^2
= \left|P\right|^2\cdot \left|Q\right|^2$.
\case 2 The root of $P$ is a product gate.
Let $P=(P_1\cdot P_2)$. By rearranging:
$$
P\cdot Q-Q\cdot P=((P_1\cdot( P_2\cdot Q-Q\cdot P_2))+((P_1\cdot Q-Q\cdot P_1)\cdot P_2))
$$
By induction hypothesis, we have $s(P,Q)=\left|P_1\right|+1+s(P_2,Q)+1+s(P_1,Q)+1+\left|P_2\right|
\le \left|P_1\right|+1+\left|P_2\right|^2\left|Q\right|^2+1+\left|P_1\right|^2\left|Q\right|^2+1+\left|P_2\right|
\le (\left|P_1\right|+\left|P_2\right|+1)^2\left|Q\right|^2
= \left|P\right|^2\cdot \left|Q\right|^2$.
\end{proof}
\section{Frege quasi-polynomially simulates non-commutative IPS}
\newcommand{\fmlProof}{F}
\newcommand{\validProof}{Proof([F],[\phi])}
\newcommand{\truthTable}{\textsf{Truth}([\phi],\overline{p})}
\newcommand{\quasiOrPoly}{polynomial}
\newcommand{\bl}[1]{\neg~ #1}
\newcommand{\eval}[1]{\textsf{Eval}\left[\underline{#1}, \overline p \right]}
In this section we prove that the Frege system quasi-polynomially simulates the non-commutative IPS (over $GF(2)$). Together with Theorem \ref{ncIPS2Frege} this concludes Theorem \DIFdelbegin \DIFdel{ }\DIFdelend \ref{thm:Frege_sim_ncIPS} and gives a new characterization (up to a quasi-polynomial increase in size) of propositional Frege proofs as non-commutative arithmetic formulas.
We use the notation in Section \ref{sec:intro:ncIPS}: for a clause $k_i$ in a CNF $\phi=k_1\wedge \ldots \wedge k_m$, we denote by $Q_i^{\phi}$ the non-commutative formula translation
$\trn'(k_i)$ of the clause $k_i$ (Definition \ref{def:trn_2}). Thus,
$\neg x$ is translated to $x$, $x$ is translated to $1-x $ and $f_1\cdots
f_r$ is translated to $\prod_i \trn'(f_i)$ (considered as a tree
of product gates with $\trn'(f_i)$ as leaves), and where the formulas are over $GF(2)$ (meaning
that $1-x$ is in fact $1+x$).
\begin{theorem}[Main quasi-polynomial simulation]\DIFdelbegin
\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \label{thm:Frege_sim_ncIPS}
\DIFaddend For a 3CNF $\phi=k_1\wedge \ldots \wedge k_m$ where $Q_1^{\phi},\ldots, Q_m^{\phi}$ are the corresponding polynomial equations for the clauses, if there is a \NCFIPS\ refutation of size $s$ of $Q_1^{\phi},\ldots, Q_m^{\phi}$ over $GF(2)$, then there is a Frege proof of size $s^{O(\log s)}$ of $\neg\phi$.
\end{theorem}
The rest of the paper is dedicated to proving Theorem \ref{thm:Frege_sim_ncIPS}.
\subsection{Balancing non-commutative formulas}
We show that a non-commutative formula of size $s$ can be balanced to an equivalent formula of depth $O(\log s)$. Both the statement and its proof are similar to Proposition 4.1 in Hrube\v s and Wigderson \cite{HW14} (which in turn is similar to the proof
for the commutative formula with division gates case in Brent \cite{Bre74}) . Note that a formula of a logarithmic depth must have a polynomial-size. (Thus, in the sequel, without loss of generality we will assume the $F$ is given already in a balanced form, namely has depth $O(\log s)$ and polynomial-size which for simplicity we denoted simply as $s$.)
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:balance-non-commutative-formula}
Assume that a non-commutative polynomial $p$ can be
computed by a formula of size $s$. Then $p$ can be computed by a formula of depth
$O(\log s)$ (and hence of polynomial-size).
\end{lemma}
\newcommand{\bln}[1]{\ensuremath{{\widehat{#1}}}}
\newcommand{\Fh}{\ensuremath{\bln F}}
\newcommand{\tobe}{\leftarrow}
\begin{proof}
The proof is almost identical to the proof of Proposition 4.1 in \cite{HW14}, which deals with rational functions and allows formulae with division gates.
Thus, we only outline the argument in \cite{HW14} and argue that if the given formula does not have division gates, then the new formula obtained by the balancing construction will not contain any division gate either.
\medskip
\renewcommand{\g}{g}
\newcommand{\Fv}{F_\g}
\newcommand{\Fvout}{F[z/\g]}
\newcommand{\FvBack}{F[z\tobe G]}
\newcommand{\Fhv}{\Fh_\g}
\newcommand{\Fhvout}{\bln(F[z/\g])}
We need the following notations:
\begin{notation*}
Let $F$ be a non-commutative formula and let $\g$ be a gate in $F$. We denote by $F_{\g}$ the subformula of $F$ with the root being $\g$ and by $\Fvout$ the formula obtained by replacing $F_\g$ in $F$ by the variable $z$. We denote by $\widehat F, \widehat F_g$
the non-commutative \emph{polynomials} in $\F\langle \overline X\rangle$
computed by $F$ and $F_g$, respectively.
\end{notation*}
We simultaneously prove the following two statements by induction on $s$, concluding the lemma:
\DIFaddbegin
\DIFaddend \smallskip
\ind\textbf{Inductive statement}:
\textit
{Let $F$ be a non-commutative formula of size $s$ then for sufficiently large $s$ and suitable constants $c_1,c_2>0$, the following hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $\widehat F$ has a non-commutative formula of depth at most $c_1 \log s+1$\,;
\item[(ii)] if $z$ is a variable occurring at most once in $F$, then:
$$\widehat F = A\cd z \cd B+ C,$$
where $A, B,C$ are non-commutative polynomials that do not
contain $z$, and each can be computed by a non-commutative formula
of depth at most
$ c_2 \log s$.
\end{itemize}
}
\Base $s=1$. In this case there is one gate $\g$ connecting two variables or constants. (i) can be obtained immediately as it is already computed by a formula of depth $1=\log s + 1$. As for (ii), note that in the base case, $F$ is a formula with only one gate $\g$. Assuming that $z$ is a variable occurring only once in $F$, it is trivial to construct non-commutative formulas $A,B,C$ so that $\widehat F =A\cd z \cd B+ C$ for which the conditions in (ii) hold:
\smallskip
\case 1 if $\g$ is a plus gate connecting the variable $z$ and a variable or constant $x\neq z$, then $\widehat F:=1\cd z\cd 1+x$.
\case 2 if $\g$ is a product gate connecting $z,x$ (for $z\neq x$) sequentially, then $\Fv=1\cd z\cd x+0$.
\case 3 if $\g$ is a product gate connecting $x,z$ (for $z\neq x$) sequentially, namely in the reverse order, then $\Fv=x\cd z\cd 1 +0$.
\induction
(i) is obtained roughly as follows. Find a gate $\g$
in $F$ such that both $\Fv$ and $\Fvout$ are small (of size at most $2s/3$, and where $z$ is a new variable that does not occur in $F$). Then, by applying induction hypothesis on $\Fvout$, there exist formulas $A,B,C$ of small depth such that $\widehat {F[z/g]}=A\cd z \cd B + C$. Thus, $\widehat F:= A\cd \widehat {F_g} \cd B + C.$
\DIFaddend
To prove (ii), find an appropriate gate $\g$ on the path between $z$ and the output of
$F$ (an \textit{appropriate} $\g$ is a gate $g$ such that $F[z_1/\g]$
and $\Fv$
are both small (of size at most $2s/3$), where $z_1$ is a new variable introduced for substitution). Use the inductive assumptions to write:
$$
\widehat F[z_1/\g] = A_1\cd z_1\cd B_1 + C_1
\hbox{~~and~~} \widehat F_g = A_2\cd z \cd B_2 + C_2
$$
and compose these expressions to get the following :
$$\Fh =A_1\cd (A_2\cd z \cd B_2+C_2) \cd B_1+C_1=A'\cd z \cd B'+ C',$$
where $A'=A_1 \cd A_2$, $B'=B_2\cd B_1,C'=A_1\cd C_2 \cd B_1+C_1$.
It is obvious that the depths of $A', B',C'$ are at most $c_2\log (2s/3)+2\le c_2\log s $ when $s$ is sufficiently large.
To finish the proof of (ii), all that we need to show is that $A',B',C'$ do not contain the variable $z$. It is enough to prove that $A_1,B_1,C_1, A_2,B_2,C_2$ do not contain $z$. Notice that $\Fv$ contains $z$ and $z$ is a variable occurring at most once in $F$. Therefore $\widehat {F[z_1/\g]}$ does not contain the variable $z$, which means that
both $A_1,B_1,C_1$ do not contain $z$. Moreover, by induction hypothesis, we know that $A_2,B_2,C_2$ do not contain $z$. Therefore, we conclude that $A',B',C'$ do not contain $z$ and thereby the whole proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The reflection principle}\label{sec:refl_prncple}
Here we show that the existence of a \NCFIPS\ refutation of size $s$ and depth $O(\log s)$, implies the existence of a Frege proof with size $s^{O(\log s)}$ of $\neg\phi$.
This is done by proving a \textit{reflection principle} for the non-commutative IPS system in Frege. As mentioned in the introduction, informally, a reflection principle for a given proof system $P$ is a statement that says that if a formula is provable in $P$ then the formula is also \textit{true}. Thus, suppose we have a short Frege-proof of the reflection principle for $P$, having the form:
\begin{center}
``($[\pi]$ is a $P$-proof of
$[T])\,\longrightarrow\,T$'',
\end{center}
where $[T]$ and $[\pi]$ are some reasonable encodings of the tautology
$T$ and its $P$-proof $\pi$, respectively. Then, we can easily obtain a Frege proof of $T$ assuming we have a $P$-proof of $T$.
\medskip
First, note that $F$ is a \NCFIPS\ proof of $\phi$ only if it has the
following two properties:
\begin{equation}\label{properties}
\DIFaddbegin \\ \DIFaddend F\left(\xZero\right)=0,~~~~~~~~~~ F\left(\xQx\right)=1,
\end{equation}
showing the unsatisfiability of $\overline{Q}^\phi(\overline{x})=0$, and hence showing $\neg \phi$ is a tautology.
Since $F(\overline x)$ is a formula over $GF(2)$, we can turn it into a Boolean formula $\Fb (\overline p)$ by turning every plus gate and multiplication gate to $\oplus$ (i.e., XOR) and $\land$ gates, respectively, and turning the input variables $\overline x$ into propositional variables $\overline p$. We sometimes write $F$ and $\Fb$ without explicitly mentioning the $\overline x$ and $\overline p$ variables. Note that for any 0-1 assignment, $F$ and $\Fb$ have the same value. Thus, by the properties in \ref{properties}, we know:
\begin{equation}\label{toProve}
\Fz ,~~~~~~~~~~\Fq
\end{equation}
are both tautologies.
\textcolor{blue}{}
We proceed to prove $\neg\phi$ based on \ref{toProve} first, before we show there exists an $s^{O(\log s)}$ proof of $\ref{toProve}$.
\DIFdelbegin
\DIFdelend
\begin{lemma}\label{soundness}
$\left(\left(\Fz\right)\land \Fq \right)\rightarrow \neg\phi$ \ \ can be proved with a polynomial-size Frege proof.
\end{lemma}
\DIFaddbegin
\DIFaddend \begin{proof}
We will prove by way of a contradiction that:
\begin{equation}\label{contradiction_for_phi}
\phi,~~~~~~ \Fz,~~~~~\Fq
\end{equation}
cannot be simultaneously satisfied. Assume otherwise and let the \boolean\ formula $\truthTable$ express the statement that the assignment $\overline{p}$ satisfies the formula $\phi$, as defined below. In the following we always denote by $\overline p$ \textit{actual} propositional variables occurring in a propositional formula (and not an encoding of an assignment).
\begin{definition}[Section 4.3 in \cite{GP14}]
$$\truthTable:=\bigwedge_{i\in[m]}\truthTableki.$$
For a single $3$-literal clause $k_i$, define $\truthTablek$ as follows. For an integer $i$, let $[i]$ denote the standard binary encoding of $i$. And $[k]=\overline q_1 s_1 \overline q_2 s_2 \overline q_3 s_3 $ where each $s_i$ is the sign bit and each $\overline q_i$ is a length-$[\log_2 n+1]$ string of variables corresponding to the encoding of the index of a variable.
$$\truthTablek:=\bigvee_{j\in[3]}\bigvee_{i\in [n]} \left( \bl{\overline q_j=i}\wedge (p_i\lequal s_j)\right).$$
\end{definition}
\DIFaddbegin
\DIFaddend As $\truthTablek$ is syntactically identical to $k(\overline p)$, it can be easily proved as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{phi2truth}
\phi(\overline p)\rightarrow \truthTable,
\end{equation}
We proceed to prove the following formulae:
\newcommand{\Qi}{Q_{i_{\\ \bool}}^{\phi}(\overline{p})}
\newcommand{\Qbar}{Q_{\bool}^{\phi}}
\begin{itemize}
\item
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stam}
\truthTableki \rightarrow \neg \Qi, \ \forall i\in [m].
\end{equation}
Note that $\neg \Qi$ and $\truthTableki$ are of constant size. So (by completeness) all the formulae in \eqref{eq:stam} above can be proved with a Frege proof of constant-size.
\item Using the fact that $\truthTable=\bigwedge_{i\in[m]}\truthTableki$ we can easily prove in Frege with a polynomial-size proof that for each $i\in[m]$,
\begin{equation}\label{truth2Q}
\truthTable \rightarrow \neg \Qi.
\end{equation}
\item By assumption $ \phi$ together with modus pones using \ref{phi2truth}
and \ref{truth2Q}, we have:
\begin{equation}\label{Qip}
\bigwedge_{i\in[m]} \neg \Qi.
\end{equation}
\DIFaddbegin
\DIFaddend \item We show below how to prove the following by a way of contradiction:
\begin{equation}\label{soundness-step-two}
\Fz\land \bigwedge_{i\in[m]} \neg \Qi \rightarrow \neg \Fq.
\end{equation}
If there is an assignment $\overline a$ that makes $\FqA$ false, while $\FzA,\, \bigwedge_{i\in[m]} \neg \QiA$ are still true, then the assignment must make $\QA\neq \overline 0$, which is a contradiction with the fact that $\bigwedge_{i\in[m]} \neg \QiA$ is still true. Therefore, there is no such assignment $\overline a$. That is, \ref{soundness-step-two} holds.
\item Using the assumptions that $\Fz$ and \ref{Qip} together with
modus pones on \eqref{soundness-step-two}, we get:
$$\neg \Fq,$$
which is a contradiction to $\Fq$. Therefore, we finish our proof.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\bigskip
It remains to show a quasi-polynomial-size proof of \DIFdelbegin
\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{\ref{toProve}}\DIFaddend .
\newcommand{\Qbar}{Q_{\bool}^{\phi}}
We denote $\Fz$ and $\neg\left(1\oplus\Fq\right)$ by
\begin{equation}\label{finalStatement}
\Fb'(\overline p),~~\Fb''(\overline p)\hbox{,~~ respectively}.
\end{equation}
Note that the substitutions of the constants $0$ or the constant depth formulae $\Qbar$ in $F$ \textcolor{blue}{} can not increase the depth of $F$ too much (i.e., can add at most a constant to the size of $F$). In other words, the depths of the formulae in \DIFdelbegin
\DIFdelend \DIFaddbegin \DIFadd{$\ref{finalStatement}$ }\DIFaddend are still $O(\log s)$.
\DIFaddbegin \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:Frege_sim_ncIPS} (Main quasi-polynomial simulation)]
\DIFaddend Using Lemma \ref{main-proof} that we shall prove below, we get that \DIFdelbegin
\DIFdelend \ref{finalStatement} can be proved in quasi-polynomial-size.
And together with Lemma \ref{soundness} above, this shows that $\neg \phi$ can be proved in quasi-polynomial-size, concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
\newcommand{\vin}{\ensuremath{v_{0}}}
\newcommand{\vout}{\ensuremath{v_{l+1}}}
\newcommand{\vi}{v_i}
\newcommand{\synEqual}{=^{syn}}
\newcommand{\homojBool}{F_{bool}(\overline p)}
\newcommand{\zeroMatrix}{\Lambda_i}
\newcommand{\zeroMatrixFormer}{\Lambda_{i-1}}
\newcommand{\zeroMatrixFinal}{\Lambda_{d}}
\newcommand{\zeroMatrixABPFinal}{\Lambda_{l}}
\renewcommand{\homoj}{F^{(j)}}
\newcommand{\homoji}{\overline F_{i}}
\newcommand{\homojiFinal}{\overline F_{d}}
\newcommand{\homojiFormer}{\overline F_{i-1}}
\newcommand{\homojiBool}{\overline \homojBool_i}
\newcommand{\homojiBoolt}{\overline \homojBool_{i,t}}
\newcommand{\homojiBooltFinal}{\overline \homojBool_{d,t}}
\newcommand{\homojiBoolFormert}{\overline \homojBool_{i-1,t}}
\newcommand{\transforMatrix}{\mathbf{T}_{i-1}}
\newcommand{\transforMatrixFinal}{\mathbf{T}_{l}}
\newcommand{\nodeF}{F^{\bullet}}
\subsection{Non-commutative formula identities have quasi-polynomial-size proofs }
Recall that a (commutative or non-commutative) multivariate polynomial \(f\) is \emph{homogeneous} if every monomial in $f$ has the same total degree. For each $0\le j\le d$, denote by $f^{(j)}$ the homogenous part of degree $j$ of $f$, that is, the sum of all monomials (together with their coefficient from the field) in $f$ of total degree $j$. We say that a formula is \emph{homogeneous} if each of its gates computes a \emph{homogeneous} polynomial (see Definition \ref{def:nonc_formula}
for the definition of a polynomial computed by a gate or a formula).
To complete the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:Frege_sim_ncIPS} it
remains to prove the following:
\begin{lemma}\label{main-proof}\label{lem:Fbool-in-quasipolynomial-Frege}
If a non-commutative formula $F(\overline x)$ with 0-1 coefficients of size $s$ and depth $O(\log s)$ is identically zero, then the corresponding \boolean\ formula $\neg\Fb(\overline p)$ admits a Frege proof of size $s^{O(\log s)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\newcommand{\x}{D}
\newcommand{\Gd}{N_r}
\newcommand{\pv}{p_v}
\newcommand{\pw}{p_w}
\newcommand{\h}[1]{^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\hd}[1]{^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\hFv}[1]{{F}_v^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\hFw}[1]{{F}_w^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\hF}[1]{{F}^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\hFbool}[1]{{F}_{bool}^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\hFvbool}[1]{{F}_{v\;bool}^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\hFwbool}[1]{{F}_{w\;bool}^{(#1)}}
\newcommand{\Fvbool}{F_{v\;bool}}
\newcommand{\Fwbool}{F_{w\;bool}}
The formula $F$ is of size $s$ which means that the maximum degree of a polynomial computed by $F$ is at most $s+1$. Following Raz' work in $\cite{Raz13-tensor}$, we can split $F$ into homogenous formulae $\hF{i},\;i=0\.s+1$. In Lemma \ref{homogenous-proof}, proved in the sequel, we show that Raz' homogenization construction can already be proved efficiently in Frege. In other words, we show that there exists an $s^{O(\log s)}$-size Frege proof of:
\begin{equation}\label{homogenous-equality}
\bigoplus_{i=0}^{s+1}\hF{i}\leftrightarrow \Fb.
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{homo-formula} proved in the sequel, for any \emph{homogenous} formula $H$, $\neg H_{bool}$ admits a polynomial-size in the size
of $H$ Frege proof (recall that $\neg H_{\bool}$ is a tautology whenever $H$ is a non-commutative formula computing the zero polynomial over $GF(2)$). Thus, by Lemma \ref{homo-formula}, for every $\hF{i}$, $i=0,\ldots,s+1$, there exists an $s^{O(\log s)}$-size Frege proof of $\neg\hFbool{i}$. That is, there exists an $s^{O(\log s)}$-size Frege proof of $\neg \left(\bigoplus_{i=0}^{s+1}\hFbool{i}\right)$. (Note that Lemma \ref{homo-formula} gives proofs which have size
polynomial in the size of $\neg\hFbool{i}$, and this latter size is $s^{O(\log s)}$).
Together with tautology \eqref{homogenous-equality}, we can derive
$\neg\Fb$ in Frege.
\end{proof}
\newcommand{\hF}{{F}}
\newcommand{\h}[1]{^{\left(#1\right)}}
\newcommand{\hFbool}{\hF_{bool}}
\newcommand{\x}{D^u}
\newcommand{\D}[2]{\mathcal{D}_{#1}^{#2}}
\newcommand{\Du}[1]{\D{#1}{u}}
\newcommand{\Dv}[1]{\D{#1}{v}}
\newcommand{\Dw}[1]{\D{#1}{w}}
\newcommand{\pd}[1]{#1_{pd}}
\newcommand{\pdu}{\pd{u}}
\newcommand{\pdv}{\pd{u}}
\newcommand{\Gd}{N_{\pdu}}
\subsection{Homogenization of non-commutative formulas has short
Frege proofs}
To complete the proof of Theorem \ref{lem:Fbool-in-quasipolynomial-Frege}
it remains to prove Lemmas \ref{homogenous-proof} and \ref{homo-formula}.
Here we prove the former, namely that Raz' construction from \cite{Raz13-tensor} (see below) is efficiently provable in Frege:
\begin{lemma}\label{homogenous-proof}
If $F$ is a non-commutative formula of size $s$ and depth $O(\log s)$ and $\hF\h{0}\.\hF\h{s}$ are the homogenous formulae computing $F$'s homogenous parts of degree from $0$ to $s$, respectively,
constructed according to \cite{Raz13-tensor}, then there exists an $s^{O(\log s)}$-size Frege proof of:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:main-homogenous-equ}
\bigoplus_{i=0}^{s+1}\hF\h{i}\leftrightarrow \Fb.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first recall Raz' (commutative) formula homogenization construction from \cite{Raz13-tensor}.
\para{Raz' formula homogenization construction.} Given a (commutative)
arithmetic formula $F$ we wish to construct $s$ (commutative)
formulas computing the homogenous parts ${F}\h{i},\; i=0\.s$.
Define the \emph{product-depth} of a gate $u$, denoted $\pdu$, as the maximal number of product gates along a directed path from $u$ to the output gate. Since the formula $F$ is balanced, the depth is at most $O(\log s)$, namely the largest value of $\pdu$ for any node $u$ in $F$ is $O(\log s)$.
Furthermore, for every integer $r$, denote by $N_r$ the family of monotone non-increasing functions $\x$ from $\set{0,1 ,\ldots, r}$ to $\set{0,1 ,\ldots, s}$. Thus, the size of $N_r$ is ${r+
s+1 \choose r+1} = {r+s+1 \choose s}$ (the number of combinations with repetitions of
$r+1$ elements from $s+1$ elements, which determine functions in
$N_r$). Thus, for every node $u$ of $F$, the size of the set $\Gd$ is at most ${s+O(\log s)+1 \choose s}= s^{O(\log s)}$.
\newcommand{\bF}{F^\star}
We will construct the desired homogenous formulae $\hF\h{0},\hF\h{1}\.\hF\h{s+1}$ by constructing a big formula $\bF$ according to $F$ first. Split every gate $u$ in $F$ into $|\Gd|$ gates in $\bF$, labeled $(u,\x)$, for every $\x \in \Gd$ and add edges connecting nodes in the same way as \cite{Raz13-tensor}.
Denote by $\bF_{u,\x}$ the sub-formula rooted at $(u,\x)$ in $\bF$ (there may be some isolated nodes $(u,\x)$, namely nodes that no edge connects with them, and we consider the sub-formulae on these nodes as $0$). Similarly, denote by $F_u$ the sub-formula rooted at $
u$ in $F$.
In \cite{Raz13-tensor}, it was proved that for every node $(u,\x)$ in $\bF$, $\bF_{u,\x}$ is a homogenous formula computing the homogenous part of degree $\x(\pdu)$ of $F_u$.
More precisely, for every node $u$ in $F$, denote by $s_u$ the size of the formula $F_u$. The maximum degree of the polynomial computed by $F_u$ is $s_u+1$. Furthermore, for $i=0,1\. s_u+1$, let $\Du{i}$ denote the set of functions $\x$ in $N_{\pdu}$ such that $\x(\pdu)=i$. The formulae $\bF_{u,\x}$, for $\x\in\Du{i}$, are the formulae computing the homogenous parts of degree $i$ of $F_u$. For simplicity, let $\bF_{u,\Du{i}}$ denote such a formula.
\newcommand{\su}{{s_u}}
Next, we use a similar induction argument as in \cite{Raz13-tensor}, from leaves to the top gate of $F$, showing the existence of the $s^{O(\log s)}$-size proof, proving for every gate $u$ in $F$,
$$\bigoplus_{i=0}^{s_u+1}\bF_{u,\Du{i}\; bool}\leftrightarrow F_{ u\; bool}.$$
Observe that the formulae $\bF_{r,\D{0}{r}}\.\bF_{r,\D{s+1}{r}}$, computing the homogenous parts of all degree of the sub formula rooted on the root of $F$, are just those desired formulae $\hF\h{0},\hF\h{1}\.\hF\h{s+1}$.
Thus, eventually, when we prove the above statement for the root node $r$, we prove the existence of an $s^{O(\log s)}$-size Frege proof of the Boolean formulae in \ref{equ:main-homogenous-equ}.
\renewcommand{\v}{D^v}
\newcommand{\w}{D^w}
\begin{itemize}
\item If $u$ is a leaf, by the construction, for each $\x\in N_{\pdu}$, the node $(u,\x)$ is the leaf of $\bF$. Furthermore, if
$u$ is labeled by a field element, $(u,\x)$ is labeled by the same field element if $\x(\pdu) = 0$ and by $0$ if $\x(\pdu)\neq 0$. If $u$ is labeled by an input variable, $(u,\x)$ is labeled by the same
input variable if $\x(\pdu) = 1$ and by $0$ if $\x(\pdu) \neq 1$.
Thus, we know for each $\x\in N_{\pdu}$, $\bF_{(u,\x)}$ either computes $F_u\h{\x(\pdu)}$ or $0$. Namely, we can easily prove the induction base:
$$\bigoplus_{i=0}^{\su+1}\bF_{bool\;u,\Du{i}}\leftrightarrow F_{bool\; u}.$$
\item If $u$ is a sum gate with children $v,w$, by construction,
for every
$\x\in \Gd$, denote by $\v\in N_{\pd{v}}$ the function that agrees with $\x$ on $\set{0,1\.\pdu}$ and satisfies $\v(\pd{v}) = \x(\pdu)$, and in the same way, denote by $\w\in N_{\pd{w}}$ the function that agrees with $\x$ on $\set{0,1\.\pdu}$ and satisfies $\w(\pd{w}) = \x(\pdu)$. The node $(u,\x)$ computes:
$$\bF_{u,\x}: = \bF_{v,\v}+\bF_{w,\w}.$$
Assume $\x(\pdu)=j$. Then it means $$\hat{F}_{u,\Du{j}}: = \hat{F}_{v,\Dv{j}}+\hat{F}_{w,\Dw{j}}.$$
Therefore, the corresponding boolean formula of $\hat{F}_{u,\Du{j}}$ should have the following property:
$$\bF_{ u,\Du{j}\;bool}\leftrightarrow\bF_{v,\Dv{j}\;bool}\oplus\bF_{w,\Dw{j}\;bool}\,,~~~j=0,1\.s.$$
\renewcommand{\su}{{s_u+1}}
Together with the induction hypothesis on nodes $v,w$:
$$F_{bool\; v}\leftrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=0}^{s_v+1}\bF_{v,\Dv{i} \;bool}, ~~F_{bool\; w}\leftrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=0}^{s_w+1}\bF_{w,\Dw{i}\;bool},$$
we can show
$$\bigoplus_{i=0}^\su\left( \bF_{v,\Dv{i}\;bool}\oplus \bF_{w,\Dw{i}\;bool}\right) \leftrightarrow F_{ v\;bool}\oplus F_{w\;bool}.$$
Namely: $$\bigoplus_{i=0}^\su\bF_{u,\Du{i}\;bool}\leftrightarrow F_{u\;bool}\,,$$
as we have assumed that $u$ is a sum gate.
\item If $u$ is a product gate with children $v,w$, using the same notation as above, for $j=0,1\.s_u+1$, we define $\bF_{u,\Du{j}}:=\sum_{i=0}^j \bF_{v,\Dv{i}}\cdot \bF_{w,\Dw{j-i}}.$ If $j>u_s$, let $\bF_{u,\Du{j}}:=0$.
Similarly, using induction hypothesis on nodes $v,w$ and observing the fact that in the formula $s_u=s_v+s_w+1$, we can prove:
$$F_{u\;bool}\lequal \bigoplus_{i=0}^\su\bF_{u,\Du{i}\; bool}$$ as follows:
\begin{align*}
&F_{u\;bool}\\
\lequal& F_{v\;bool}\land F_{w\;bool}\\
\lequal&\left(\bigoplus_{j=0}^{s_v+1}\bF_{v,\Dv{j}\;bool}\right)\land\left(\bigoplus_{i=0}^{s_w+1} \bF_{w,\Dw{i}\;bool}\right)\\
\lequal& \bigoplus_{j=0}^{s_v+s_w+2}\bigoplus_{i=0}^{j}\left(\bF_{v,\Dv{i}\;bool}\land\bF_{w,\Dw{j-i}\;bool}\right)\\
\lequal&\bigoplus_{j=0}^\su\left(\bigoplus_{i=0}^{j}\left(\bF_{v,\Dv{i}\;bool}\land\bF_{w,\Dw{j-i}\;bool}\right)\right)\\
\lequal &\bigoplus_{i=0}^\su\bF_{u,\Du{i}\; bool}.\\
\end{align*}
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Homogenous non-commutative formula identities have polynomial-size
Frege proofs}
\begin{lemma}[Main technical lemma]\label{homo-formula}
There exists a constant $c$ such that if a non-commutative \emph{homogeneous} formula $F(\overline x)$ with 0-1 coefficients of size $s$ is identically zero, then the corresponding \boolean\ formula $\neg\Fb(\overline p)$ can be proved with a Frege proof of size at most $s^{c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we recall the work of Raz and Shpilka \cite{RS04} showing a deterministic polynomial-time PIT algorithm for non-commutative arithmetic formulas. Like \cite{RS04} did, we introduce the following definition
\begin{definition}[ABP]\label{def:ABP}
An algebraic branching program (ABP) is a directed acyclic
graph with one source and one sink. The vertices of the graph are partitioned into
levels numbered from $0$ to $d$ (the degree of the ABP), and edges may go only from
level $i$ to level $i + 1$. The source is the only vertex at level $0$, and the sink is the
only vertex at level $d$. Each edge is labeled with a homogeneous linear polynomial in
indeterminates $x_i$ (i.e., a function of the form
$\sum_{i}c_ix_i$, with coefficients $c_i\in\F$). The
size of an ABP is the number of vertices.
\end{definition}
By transforming the formula to ABP and using the following fact which had been proved by \cite{RS04}, we can obtain a deterministic
polynomial-time algorithm for the polynomial identity testing of
non-commutative formulas.
\begin{theorem}[Theorem 4, \cite{RS04}]
Let $A$ be a (non-commutative) ABP of size $s$ with $d + 1$ levels then we can verify whether A is a zero polynomial in time
$O(s^5 + s\cdot n^4)$.
\end{theorem}
Notice that it is unclear how to (usefully) represent an ABP $A$ directly in Frege system, because apparently ABP is a stronger model than formulas (and Frege operates with formulas). Thus, we cannot directly use the same formulation as \cite{RS04}.
To overcome this obstacle of working with ABPs inside a Frege proof
operating with formulas, we first observe
that what Raz and Shpilka \cite{RS04} proof uses is only those ABPs $A(v,\vout)$, in which $v$ is an arbitrary node in $A$ and $\vout$ is the sink; and then we introduce the following definitions:
\begin{definition}[Induced part of a formula]\label{def:part-of-formula}
Let $F'$ be a sub-formula of F and $g_1,...,g_k$ be gates in $F'$ and $c_1,...,c_k$ be constants in $\F$. Then $F'[c_1/g_1,...,c_k/g_k]$ is called \emph{an induced part of $F$}.
\end{definition}
We sometimes call an induced part of a formula simply a \emph{part of a formula}.
\begin{definition}[$v$-part of formula $F$]
Let $F$ be an homogenous formula and $A$ be an ABP transformed from $F$ according to the methods stated in \cite{RS04} in which the source is $\vin$ and the sink is $\vout$. For every node $v$ in $A$, if there exists a part of the formula $F$ computing the same polynomial as $A(v,\vout)$, then we call this part a \emph{$v$-part of the formula $F$}, denoted $\nodeF_v$ (the v-part is not necessarily unique).
\end{definition}
Let $F$ be a non-commutative homogenous formula and let $A$ be the corresponding ABP of $F$. By Lemma \ref{existence-v-part} (proved in the sequel) we construct \textit{\textbf{an injective }}(i.e., 1 to 1) \textit{\textbf{map }}between the nodes $v$ in $A$ to induced parts in $F$, denoted $\nodeF_v$, namely the $v$-parts in $F$, such that $\nodeF_v$ computes the non-commutative homogenous polynomial computed by $A(v,\vout)$.
Thus, we can refer to every ABP $A(v,\vout)$ implicitly by an explicit induced part of $F$, that is the $v$-part of $F$ denoted $\nodeF_{v}$, and for every $v$-part $\nodeF_{v}$, we know that there exists an order of summation (written as a fan-in two formula of plus gates) and also a linear sum (also written as a formula of plus gates) making the following \textit{syntactical} equality true:
$$\nodeF_{v}\synEqual \sum_{u: \text{ $u$ has incoming edge from $v$}}A(v,u)\times\nodeF_{u},$$
where we denote by $F\synEqual G$ the fact that $F$ is syntactically identical to $G$.
For two \textit{vectors }of formulae $\overline F,\overline G$, we denote by $\overline F\synEqual \overline G$ the fact that the $i$th formula in $\overline F$ is syntactically equal the $i$th formula in $\overline G$.
\bigskip
From now on we assume that we have \textbf{\textit{fixed }}the injective map from nodes $v$ in $A$ to their induced parts $\nodeF_v$.
Define the \emph{syntactic degree} of $F$, $deg (F)$ as follows:
(i) If $F$ is a field element or a variable, then $deg (F)$ = $0$ and $deg (F) = 1$, respectively;
(ii) $deg(F\oplus G) = max(deg (F), deg (G))$, and $deg(F\otimes G) = deg (F) + deg (G)$, where $\oplus,\otimes$ denote plus gates, product gates respectively.
Let $\homoji$ denote the vector of all those formulae which are $v$-parts of $F$, for some $v$ in $A$, computing a (homogenous) polynomial of degree exactly $i$. Denote the length of vectors $\homoji, i =0,1\.d$ by $m_i$,
where we assume that $d$ is the syntactic-degree of the given $F$. Note that $d$ is at most $s+1$.
Next, by Theorem \ref{existLambda}, we introduce some \textit{witnesses} by a similar idea to \cite{RS04}:
\begin{itemize}
\item $d+1$ many 0-1 matrices $\zeroMatrix$ of the following dimensions:
for $i=0\. d-1$, $\zeroMatrix$ is of dimension $m_i\times m_i$;
for $i=d$, $\zeroMatrixFinal$ is of dimension $1\times m_d$, where $m_d=1$ (so $\zeroMatrixFinal=1$).
\item $d$ many matrices $\transforMatrix$;
For each matrix $\transforMatrix,i=1 ,\ldots, d$, its $m_i\times m_{i-1}$ entries are homogenous linear forms in the $\overline x$ variables with 0-1 coefficients,
\end{itemize}
where these witnesses make the following equalities true:
\begin{equation}\label{intermidate1}
\zeroMatrix \cdot \homoji =\overline 0,~~i=0,1\. d,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{conclusion-Finalproof}
F\synEqual\zeroMatrixFinal\homojiFinal \hbox{ (meaning that $F\synEqual\homojiFinal$) }
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{intermidate2}
\zeroMatrix\homoji \synEqual\transforMatrix \zeroMatrixFormer \homojiFormer~~~~~~i=1\. d.
\end{equation}
Next we give a proof of $\neg \Fb$ based on the tautological Boolean formulas obtained from Equations \ref{intermidate1}, \ref{conclusion-Finalproof}, \ref{intermidate2}.
For simplicity of transforming \ref{intermidate1}, \ref{conclusion-Finalproof}, \ref{intermidate2} to Boolean formulas, denote $\homojiBool$ as the vector of all corresponding Boolean formulas of the formulas in $\homoji$, and $\homojiBoolt$ as its $t^{th}$ coordinates.
Based on Equation \ref{intermidate1} above, we have the following Boolean formulae:
\begin{equation} \label{Raz-trick}
\bigwedge_{w\in [m_i]}\left(\bigoplus_{t: \zeroMatrix(w,t)=1} \neg\left(\homojiBoolt\right)\right),~~~~i=0,1\. d.
\end{equation}
And based on Equation \ref{intermidate2}, for $i=1\. d$, and each index $u\in[m_i]$ of vector $\zeroMatrix\homoji$, we have the following logical equivalence between two Boolean formulae:
\begin{equation}\label{equivalence}
\left(\bigoplus_{t: \zeroMatrix(u,t)=1} \neg \homojiBoolt\right) \equiv
\bigoplus_{w\in [m_i]}\left(\transforMatrix (u,w)_{bool}(\overline p)\land \left(\bigoplus_{t: \zeroMatrixFormer(w,t)=1} \neg \homojiBoolFormert\right)\right),
\end{equation}
which states the equivalence between \textit{two consecutive }Boolean formulae in \ref{Raz-trick}. Note that $\transforMatrix (u,w)$ is a linear combination $\sum_{i=1}^n c_ix_i$ where $c_i\in GF(2), \forall i\in[n]$. Thus $$\transforMatrix (u,w)_{bool}(\overline p)=\bigoplus_{i:c_i=1} p_i.$$
Now we give a Frege proof of the Boolean formulae \ref{Raz-trick}, \ref{equivalence}.
First, \ref{equivalence} can be immediately proved in Frege since the left part is syntactically equal to the right part (by the syntactic equalities in \ref{intermidate2}).
Moreover, when $i=0$, $\overline F_0$ is just a 0-1 constant vector. Thus, the following Boolean formula is a tautology without variables and hence can be proved in Frege in polynomial-size:
\begin{equation}\label{basement-finalProof}
\bigwedge_{w\in [m_0]}\left(\bigoplus_{t: \zeroMatrix(w,t)=1} \neg \homojiBoolt\right).
\end{equation}
Therefore, applying modus ponens inductively on \ref{basement-finalProof} and \ref{equivalence} we can prove each tautology in \ref{Raz-trick}. Hence, when $i=d$, we have proved: $$\bigwedge_{w\in [m_{d}]}\left(\bigoplus_{t: \zeroMatrixFinal(w,t)=1} \neg \homojiBooltFinal\right),$$
which is just $\neg \Fb(\overline p)$ by \ref{conclusion-Finalproof}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Identity witnessing theorem}\label{sec:splitting}
\newcommand{\q}{q}
\newcommand{\vlevel}{v_{i,1} ,\ldots, v_{i,m_i}}
\newcommand{\vtwoi}{v_{\q,t}}
\newcommand{\vthreei}{v_{\q+1,j}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPzero}{\overline {A_{0 }} }
\newcommand{\vectorABP}{\overline {A_{\q }}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPtwo}{\overline {A_{\q }}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPthree}{\overline {A_{\q+1 }}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPl}{\overline {A_{l }}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPlminus}{\overline {A_{l-1 }}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPLayer}{\overline {A_{i }}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPLayerFormer}{\overline {A_{i-1}}}
\newcommand{\vectorABPLayerFinal}{\overline {A_{l }}}
\newcommand{\basisLayeri}{\overline \lambda_{i,1} \. \overline\lambda_{i,r_i}}
\newcommand{\basistwo}{\overline \lambda_{\q,1} \. \overline\lambda_{\q,r_\q}}
\newcommand{\basistwot}{\overline \lambda_{\q,t}}
\newcommand{\basistwoti}{\lambda_{\q,t,i}}
\newcommand{\basisthree}{\overline \lambda_{\q+1,1} \. \overline\lambda_{\q+1,r_{\q+1}}}
\newcommand{\basisthreet}{\overline \lambda_{\q+1,t}}
\newcommand{\basislt}{\overline \lambda_{l,t}}
\newcommand{\basisltminus}{\overline \lambda_{l-1,t}}
\begin{theorem}[Identity witnessing theorem]\label{existLambda}
Let $F(\overline x)$ be a non-commutative homogenous formula of syntactic degree $d$ with 0-1 coefficients, and let
$\homoji$ be the vector of all $v$-parts of $F$ that compute a (homogenous) polynomial of degree $i,$ and assume that $m_i$ is the number of elements in $\homoji$, for every $i=0\.d$.
If $F(\overline x)$ is identically zero, then there exist:
(i) $d+1$ 0-1 matrices $\zeroMatrix$ of dimension $m_i\times m_i, i=0\. d-1$ and $\zeroMatrixFinal$ of dimension $1\times m_{d}$, such that:
\begin{equation*}
\zeroMatrix \homoji =\overline 0,~~i=0,1\. d,~~~~ F\synEqual\zeroMatrixFinal\cd\homojiFinal.
\end{equation*}
and
(ii) $d$ matrices $\transforMatrix$ whose $m_i\times m_{i-1}$ entries are homogenous linear forms in the $\overline x$ variables with 0-1 coefficients, such that:
\begin{equation*}
\zeroMatrix\homoji \synEqual\transforMatrix \zeroMatrixFormer \homojiFormer,~~~~~i=1\.d.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\bigskip
In what follows we will prove the theorem by the following two lemmata.
Denote by $A$ the ABP obtained from $F$. For two vertices $v',v''$ in the ABP $A$, we denote by $A(v',v'')$ the polynomial computed by the ABP with the source $v'$ and the sink $v''$ and all paths leading from $v'$ to $v''$.
\newcommand{\allNodesOnLayer}{A(v_{l+1-i,1},\vout),\ldots, A(v_{l+1-i,m_{l-i}},\vout)}
Let $l$ be the number of levels of the ABP where the source node is on the $0^{th}$ level and the sink node is on $(l+1)^{th}$ layer.
Denote the nodes on $i^{th}$ level by $\vlevel$ (where $m_i$ is the number of nodes on the $i^{th}$ level). Thus the ABPs starting from each node on the $i^{th}$ layer to the sink $\vout$ compute the $i$-degree polynomials:
$\allNodesOnLayer$.
Furthermore, for $i=0,1,2 ,\ldots, l+1$, denote by: $$\vectorABPLayer:=\left(\allNodesOnLayer\right)$$ the vector of these polynomials.
With the above notation, we are now able to apply a similar idea to that in Raz and Shpilka's PIT algorithm for non-commutative formulas \cite{RS04}:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:Raz-ABP}
If $A(\vin,\vout)$ is identically zero then:
(i) there exist $l+1$ 0-1 matrices $\zeroMatrix$ with dimension $m_i\times m_i$
such that
$$\zeroMatrix \cdot \vectorABPLayer = \overline 0,~~i=0\. l,$$
(where the equality here is semantic).
(ii) there exist $l$ matrices $\transforMatrix$ whose $m_i\times m_{i-1}$ entries are homogenous linear forms in the $\overline x$ variables with 0-1 coefficients, such that
$$\zeroMatrix \cdot \vectorABPLayer \synEqual \transforMatrix \zeroMatrixFormer \vectorABPLayerFormer,~~~i=1\.l-1$$
$$A(\vin,\vout)\synEqual\overline{ A_{l+1}}\synEqual \transforMatrixFinal \zeroMatrixABPFinal \vectorABPLayerFinal,$$
where the syntactic equality means that the ABPs are all identical (when we construct the ABPs in the right hand sides of the two equalities above in the obvious manner).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Lambda_{l+1}:=1$. Then we know: $$\Lambda_{l+1}\overline{ A_{l+1}}=\transforMatrixFinal \zeroMatrixABPFinal \vectorABPLayerFinal.$$
We will start from $\Lambda_{l+1}$ and compute $\Lambda_{i}$ inductively for $i=l\. 0$.
Let $M_{i,i-1}$ be the adjacency matrix of dimension $m_i\times m_{i-1}$ of the two consecutive layers $l-i,l-i+1$ in $A,$ where for each entry: \begin{align*}
&M_{i,i-1}(p,q)=A(v_{l-i,p},v_{l+1-i,q})=\sum_{k=1}^n c_kx_k,\\ &\hbox{where }c_k\in\set{0,1},k\in[n],p\in[m_i],q\in[m_{i+1}].
\end{align*}
That is, $M_{i,i-1}$ can be written as $\sum_{k=1}^n x_k M_{i,i-1}^{(k)} $ (the superscript $(k)$ is used here as an index only, not as a homogenous component of a polynomial).
Therefore, by the definition of an ABP we have:
\begin{align*}
\vectorABPLayer&=M_{i,i-1}\vectorABPLayerFormer\\
&=\sum_{k=1}^n x_i M_{i,i-1}^{(k)}\vectorABPLayerFormer.
\end{align*}
Moreover, if $\zeroMatrix \vectorABPLayer=\overline 0 $, then
$$\zeroMatrix\sum_{k=1}^n x_i M_{i,i-1}^{(k)}\vectorABPLayerFormer=0.$$
Therefore, by the non-commutativity of product we have:
$$\zeroMatrix M_{i,i-1}^{(k)}\vectorABPLayerFormer=0, ~k=1,2\. n.$$
Hence, to prove the existence of $\zeroMatrixFormer$ for which the statement of the lemma holds, it suffices to find a $\zeroMatrixFormer$ that satisfies the following property:
$$\zeroMatrixFormer\vectorABPLayerFormer=0 ~~~\Longleftrightarrow~~~\zeroMatrix M_{i,i-1}^{(k)}\vectorABPLayerFormer=0, ~k=1,2\. n.$$
This can be done by finding the basis of the span of all row vectors in $\zeroMatrix M_{i,i-1}^{(k)},~~k=1,2\. n$.
Moreover, to prove the existence of $\transforMatrix^{(k)}$ we note that, by properties of a basis of a linear space, there must be a matrix $\transforMatrix^{(k)}$ such that:
$$\zeroMatrix M_{i,i-1}^{(k)}=\transforMatrix^{(k)}\zeroMatrixFormer,~k=1,2\. n $$
Then, let $\transforMatrix = \sum_{k=1}^n \transforMatrix^{(k)}x_k$.
Thus
$$\zeroMatrix \cdot \vectorABPLayer= \transforMatrix \zeroMatrixFormer \vectorABPLayerFormer.$$
\end{proof}
\newcommand{\nonHomoABP}{\ensuremath{\mathfrak{A}}}
\newcommand{\gl}{\g_{left}}
\newcommand{\gr}{\g_{right}}
\newcommand{\vg}{{\g_v}}
The injective mapping between nodes $v$ in $A$ and $v$-parts in $F$ is constructed inductively in the following proof.
\begin{lemma}\label{existence-v-part}
For a non-commutative homogenous formula $F$ with 0-1 coefficients, let $A$ be the ABP transformed from $F$ by the methods in \cite{RS04} in which the source is $\vin$ and the sink is $\vout$. For each node $v$ in $A$ the polynomial computed by $A(v,\vout)$ can be computed by some formula $\nodeF_v$ which is a v-part of $F$. Furthermore, for every node $v$ in the ABP, there exits a specific order of summation (written as a fan-in two tree of plus gates) and specific formulas computing homogenous linear forms $A(v,u),$ such that:
$$
\nodeF_{v}\synEqual \sum_{u: \text{ $u$ is in-neighbor of $v$}}A(v,u)\times \nodeF_{u}\,.
$$
\end{lemma}
\newcommand{\nodeFi}{F^{\bullet\;(i)}}
\begin{proof}
Let us recall the definition of a \emph{part of a formula} $F$: let $F'$ be a sub-formula of F and $g_1,...,g_k$ are gates in $F'$ and $c_1,...,c_k$ are constants in $\set{0,1}$. Then $F'[c_1/g_1,...,c_k/g_k]$ is called \emph{an induced part of $F$}.
First, we construct a non-homogeneous ABP \nonHomoABP, assigning each node $v$ of \nonHomoABP\ to a part $\nodeF_v$ of $F$.
According to \cite{RS04}, construct by recursion a non-homogeneous ABP for the right son of the root of the
formula and a non-homogeneous ABP for the left son of the root of the formula, where in
a non-homogeneous ABP we mean that the ABP is not necessarily leveled, that edges may
be labeled with constants $1$, and that it may output a non-homogeneous polynomial.
We denote with $\vin$ and $\vout$ the source and the sink, respectively, of the resulting ABP.
We will assign the corresponding $\nodeF_v$ to $v$ once we add the node $v$ in $\nonHomoABP$.
Consider the process of construction, each time we have two nodes $v_1,v_2$ which had been added and we proceed to construct, by recursion, $\nonHomoABP(v_1,v_2)$ for the formula $F'$. In other words, we add nodes between $v_1,v_2$ according to the arithmetic operation in the root gate $\g$, continuing the construction on the son gates of $\g$.
We now give the details of how to add nodes according to the arithmetic operation in $\g$ as well as how to assign specific parts of $F$ to these new nodes.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\g$ is a plus
gate, add nodes $v',v''$ and wire the ABPs in parallel with nodes $v',v''$. Then connect these nodes $v_1,v_2$ with the node $v_1$ with edges labeled by $1$. Furthermore, we continue the construction of $ \nonHomoABP(v',v_2), \nonHomoABP(v'',v_2)$ for $F'_{\gl},F'_{\gr}$ respectively.
Then, the corresponding $v$-parts $\nodeF_{v'},\nodeF_{v''}$ of $F$ for $v',v''$ should compute the same polynomials computed by $\nonHomoABP(v',\vout),\nonHomoABP(v'',\vout)$.
Consider the gate $\g$ in the original $F$, $F_{v_1}= F_{\gl}+F_{\gr}$. Furthermore, consider $\g$ in $F'$, $F' =F'_{\gl}+F'_{\gr} $.
\begin{align*}
\nonHomoABP(v',\vout)&= \nonHomoABP(v',v_2)\cdot \nonHomoABP(v_2,\vout) \\
&= F'_{\gl}\cdot \nodeF_{v_2}\\
&=(F'-F'_{\gr})\cdot \nodeF_{v_2}\\
&=F'[0/\gl]\cdot \nodeF_{v_2}\\
&=\left(F'\cdot \nodeF_{v_2}\right)[0/\gl]\\
&=\nodeF_{v_1}[0/\gl].\\
\end{align*}
Note that $\nodeF_{v_1}[0/\gl]$ is also a part of $F$ and we assign it to $v'$ as the corresponding $v$-part $\nodeF{v'}$. Similarly, for node $v''$, the part $\nodeF_{v_1}[0/\gr]$ is assigned as the $v$-part.
\item If $\g$ is a product
gate, add the node $v$ and wire \nonHomoABP\ sequentially with node $v_1,v,v_2$ such that $\nonHomoABP(v_1,v)=F_{\gl},\nonHomoABP(v,v_2)=F_{\gr}$.
Then the corresponding $v$-part of $F$ for the new node $v$ should satisfy the following:
$$\nodeF_{v}= F'_{\gr}\cdot \nodeF_{v_2}=F'[1/\gl]\cdot \nodeF_{v_2}=\nodeF_{v_1}[1/\gl]. $$
Thus we can assign $\nodeF_{v_1}[1/\gl]$ to $v$ as the corresponding $v$-part of $F$.
\end{itemize}
That is, each node $v$ of \nonHomoABP\ can corresponds to a unique part $\nodeF_v$ of $F$ computing $\nonHomoABP(v,\vout)$.
Observe that every edge in the non-homogenous ABP \nonHomoABP\ is labeled by only one constant or only one variables. Using the above notation, we have the following syntactical equality:
When $v',v''$ are introduced by a plus gate $v_1$,
$$\nodeF_{v_1}\synEqual\nodeF_{v_1}[0/g_{right}]+\nodeF_{v_1}[0/g_{left}]\synEqual\nodeF_{v'}+\nodeF_{v''}.$$
When $v$ is introduced by a product gate $v_1$ and $v$ and both $v_1$ are directly connected by a edge labeled with $x$,
$$\nodeF_{v_1}\synEqual \nonHomoABP(v_1,v) \nodeF_{v_1}[1/v]\synEqual x\cdot \nodeF_{v}.$$
Furthermore, notice that such parts $\nodeF_{v}$, where $v$ is a node of $\nonHomoABP$, is also an homogenous formula as we only substitute the son gates of plus gates or product gates by $0$, or $1$, respectively, maintaining these plus and product gates still computing the homogenous formula.
\newcommand{\homoSubF}{F_\vg^{(i)}}
Like \cite{RS04}, to turn the non-homogeneous ABP to a standard ABP, first replace each vertex $v$ (except the source) of the non-homogeneous ABP with $s + 1$
new vertices, $(v, 0),(v, 1)\.(v, s+1)$, such that vertex $(v, i)$ computes the homogeneous part
of degree $i$ of $v$, namely $\nodeFi_v$. However,
by the property of a homogenous formula, we know there is only one node $(v,i)$ in the $s+1$ copies computing the exact $\nodeF_v$ but $0$. Therefore, we only need to focus on the unique copy computing the non-zero polynomial among these ABPs and such copy, denoted by $A'$, is the same as $\nonHomoABP$ exactly except the original names $v$ of each node in $\nonHomoABP$ becomes $(v,i_v)$ where $i_v$ is the degree of the homogenous polynomial computed by $\nodeF_v$.
Then all that we need to do for letting $A'$ be a standard ABP is to get rid of edges labeled with constants.
Note that the following operations, for getting rid of edges labeled with constants, can only reduce the number of nodes in ABP but does not change any correspondence between the nodes in ABP and the sub-formulae of $F$. Therefore, we have already gotten the main conclusion that:
for each node $v$ in $A$, the formula computed by $A(v,\vout)$ can be computed by the formula $\nodeF_v$ which is part of $F$.
Additionally, the following operations do not change the syntactically equability between each nodes on different levels but may make several equalities into one with some specific order. For simplicity, we denote it as $$
\nodeF_{v}\synEqual \sum_{u: \text{$u$ is in-neighbor of $v$}}A(v,u)\nodeF_{u}.
$$
We now get rid of edges that are labeled with constants.
Since the coefficient is either $0$ or $1$ and the edge with $0$ can be erased directly as it has no influence on the result, all edges that we proceed to get ride of is those with constant $1$
Let $e$ be a such edge labeled with
a constant $1$.
For every edge $e$ going from $(v, i_v)$ to $(u, i_u)$ for some nodes $u,v$ of $F$: we erase the edge $e$, and instead
we connect every (directed) in-neighbor of $(v, i_v)$, $(w, i_w)$ if $i_w=i_v-1$, to $(u, i_u)$ in the following
manner: If the edge from $(w, i_w)$ to $(v, i_v)$ is labeled with some function g, then we put
a directed edge between $(w, i_w)$ and $(u, i_u)$ and label it with $g$. If there is already
an edge between $(w, i_w)$ and $(u, i_u)$, labeled with some function $g_0$, then we replace it
with an edge labeled with $g_0 +g$.
To conclude, we finish the transformation from a homogenous formula $F$ to an ABP $A$, where for each node $v$ in $A$, we have a $v$-part of $F$, denoted $\nodeF_v$, that computes the polynomial computed by $A(v,\vout)$; and further there exits a specific order of summation (written as a fan-in two tree of sum gates) and specific formulas computing homogenous linear forms $A(v,u),$ such that:
$$
\nodeF_{v}\synEqual \sum_{u: \ \text{$u$ is in-neighbor of $v$}}A(v,u)\times \nodeF_{u}\,.
$$
\end{proof}
Now we conclude the proof the main Theorem \ref{existLambda}, as follows:
\begin{proof}
For the non-commutative homogenous formula $F(\overline x)$ with 0-1 coefficients computing a zero polynomial, let $A(\vin,\vout)$ be its corresponding ABP, which means $A(\vin,\vout)$ is identically zero.
Then by Lemma \ref{lem:Raz-ABP}, we know:
(i) there exists $l+1$ 0-1 matrices $\zeroMatrix$ with dimension $m_i\times m_i$
such that
$$\zeroMatrix \cdot \vectorABPLayer = \overline 0,~~i=0\. l,$$
(ii) there exists $l$ matrices $\transforMatrix$ whose $m_i\times m_{i-1}$ entries are homogenous linear forms in the $\overline x$ variables with 0-1 coefficients, such that
$$\zeroMatrix \cdot \vectorABPLayer= \transforMatrix \zeroMatrixFormer \vectorABPLayerFormer, i=1\.l-1,$$
$$A(\vin,\vout)=\overline{ A_{l+1}}=\transforMatrixFinal \zeroMatrixABPFinal \vectorABPLayerFinal.$$
Using the correspondence given in the Lemma \ref{existence-v-part},
we can replace each ABP $A(v,\vout)$ in $\vectorABPLayer$ by a corresponding $v$-part $\nodeF_v$.
That is, denote with $\homoji$ the vector of all $v$-parts of $F$ that compute a (homogenous) polynomial of degree $i$, we can replace $\vectorABPLayer$ in the above equalities to obtain new equalities about parts of formula $F$ rather than APBs. Note that there may be some redundant $v$-parts of $F$ in $\homoji$ which do not correspond to any node in ABP, we can just add mores line with all zero in $\zeroMatrix$ to get rid of them. For simplicity, in what follows,
we still use $\zeroMatrix$ to denote such matrices with additional zero lines.
Now, we have:
(i) $d+1$ 0-1 matrices $\zeroMatrix$ of dimension $m_i\times m_i, i=0\. d-1$ and $\zeroMatrixFinal$ of dimension $1\times m_d$, such that
\begin{equation*}
\zeroMatrix \homoji =\overline 0,~~i=0,1\. d,~~~~
\end{equation*}
and
(ii) $d$ matrices $\transforMatrix$ whose $m_i\times m_{i-1}$ entries are homogenous linear forms in the $\overline x$ variables with 0-1 coefficients, such that
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:change-equal-synequal1}
\zeroMatrix\homoji =\transforMatrix \zeroMatrixFormer \homojiFormer,~~~~~i=1\. d.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:change-equal-synequal2}
F=\zeroMatrixFinal\cd\homojiFinal.
\end{equation*}
Using the syntactic equality in Lemma \ref{existence-v-part}, we know there exits a specific order of summation and specific formulas computing homogenous linear forms making equalities in \ref{equ:change-equal-synequal1}, \ref{equ:change-equal-synequal2} be syntactic equalities:
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:change-equal-synequal1}
\zeroMatrix\homoji \synEqual\transforMatrix \zeroMatrixFormer \homojiFormer,~~~~~i=1\. d.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:change-equal-synequal2}
F\synEqual\zeroMatrixFinal\cd\homojiFinal.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We wish to thank Joshua Grochow for useful correspondence.
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
\indent The rite of gratuitous hospitality provided by local residents to strangers is common among almost all known human cultures, especially traditional ones. We can cite melmastia of Pashtun \cite[p. 14]{melmastia}, terranga of Wolof \cite[p. 17]{teranga} and hospitality of Eskimo \cite{eskimo} as examples of traditional hospitality. A stranger hereby receives shelter, food, protection and other help. In return, the guest is expected to contribute at least symbolically to his hosts well-being.\\
\indent In the modern world the share of tourists among the strangers grew. Further, we will term adventurous budget tourists as travelers and concentrate on them, since they are the only ones seeking for gratuitous hospitality. Because travelers can turn into local residents and vice versa, the idea of hospitality exchange abbreviated as \textit{hospex} became relevant. Hospex participants host and can have hosts. They are organized in a community, where gratuitous hospitality is not responded directly but by hospitality of another participant or rather member. Further, we will term everybody as member, who had a real-life interaction with another member.\\
\indent The first hospex service was initiated by Servas International starting in 1949 \cite{servas}. A hospex service basically administrates so-called profiles -- participant description, contact and location. It is disputed, whether different organizations create different communities or are just different services for one single international hospex community, since some people use more than one hospex service \cite{hcsite}. We don't discuss this topic.\\
\indent A hospex service is easier to maintain, once a central online database of profiles is set up. In addition to profiles, recording accommodation reports aka references or comments became popular for on-line hospex services. Such a database is accessible over a web- and/or app-based front-end. At first, such service called 'Hospex' was created in 1992 \cite{hospex}. The installations of other services followed. Hospitality Club abbreviated as HC became the biggest of them with over 100k profiles in 2006 \cite{hcpaper}. Later, HC got outdistanced by Couchsurfing abbreviated as CS. CS has now the biggest number of profiles -- over 3M \cite{cssite}. We have to underline here the difference between the terms \textit{user}, which is basically a profile owner, and \textit{member} -- not every website user had a real-life interaction with other members in order to be called a member. Members are a subset of users.\\
\indent Hospex services always started as non-profit, donation and volunteer-driven organizations, since making profit on gratuitous hospitality is considered unethical in modern culture. Nevertheless, business on gratuitous hospitality is common at least in mediation of au-pairs to host families \cite[eg.]{aupair}.\\
\indent Unfortunately, we can not access the data from CS -- the biggest hospex service. CS became a for-profit corporation in 2011 and shut down the access of public science to its data. Scientists possessing pre-incorporation CS data are prohibited to share it with third parties. HC never allowed access of public science to its data. Therefore, we can only rely on the data kindly mirrored for us by BW on 04.03.2014, the public Google search data and the mirrored statistics from the CS website in 2011. The original statistics of CS website are no longer available. For what it's worth, subsequent versions of the official CS statistics page presented figures heavily reduced and are clearly different from their statistics published in 2011.\\
\section{Terminology}
\begin{description}
\item[\textbf{Traveler}]\hfill Adventurous budget tourist.\\
\item[\textbf{Hospex}]\hfill Indirect exchange of gratuitous hospitality.\\
\item[\textbf{Community}] \hfill People interconnected by fulfilled hospex.\\
\item[\textbf{Member}] \hfill A person, who had real-life interaction with another member concerning the hospex community.\\
\item[\textbf{Profile}] \hfill Description, contact and location of a person agreed to hospex.\\
\item[\textbf{Service}] \hfill A communication hub, which facilitates hospex arrangements.\\
\item[\textbf{User}]\hfill A person, who created a profile using a hospex service by signing up.\\
\end{description}
\section{Related Work}
\indent We can identify three categories of existing scientific publications claiming hospex as their subject matter -- non-data scientific articles, analysis of survey data, and analysis of CS data. Survey data gives insights into mindsets, but not into real behavior processes on hospex. Currently we know about 4 research teams, who used pre-incorporation CS data \cite{victor,danderkar,overgoor,lauterbach}. All papers written by these research teams solely concentrate on the aspect of trust among the CS users. Particularly, they don't provide general insights as aimed in this paper. Further, the correctness of their work can not be double-checked, because they are not allowed to share the data anymore.\\
\section{General development of hospex services}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{csgoogle.eps}
\caption{High linear correlation of .971 between Google search volume for \glqq Couchsurfing\grqq and CS monthly signup in the years 2005--2011 allows linear prediction for the subsequent development.}
\label{secondf}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{cskillhc.eps}
\caption{Google search volume for HC, CS and HC+CS. Pie chart of growth adjusted mean distribution of Google search for HC+CS over months.}
\label{cskillhc}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{cspredition.eps}
\caption{Power function fits for CS total signup in Jan 2004 - Aug 2011 and in Aug 2009 - Aug 2011. Monthly CS signup deviation from its seasonalized power function fit as gray curve.}
\label{hccsmigration}
\end{figure}
\indent Progressional Google search volume for the name of a hospex service and the rate of people signing up there are significantly correlated. The correlations coefficients are $.971$ for CS in the years 2005--2011 and $.913$ for BW in the years 2011--2013. Google search volume of BW is about 1-2\% of that of CS. Since we have only two years of Google data for BW and no signup data for HC, we concentrate on CS. Fig.\ref{secondf} shows scaled graphs of monthly Google search and signup for CS. P-value for their linear correlation is below ${10}^{-15}$. First, it allows to make a linear prediction/approximation of now hidden CS signup data based on available Google data. Summing up the approximated monthly signup, we can say with a $99$\% confidence that CS total number of signups was between 6.6M and 6.9M in Dezember 2013, if the linear relationship did not change over the years. Second, we can estimate the HC signup data relying its Google search data or even using Google search data as an equivalent for signup data.\\
\indent Fig.\ref{cskillhc} shows the Google search volume for HC, CS and HC+CS. As you can see, the interest in hospex services is seasonal and growing. Using Box-Cox transformation \cite{boxcox}, we can fit a power function to HC+CS. Averaging the deviations between HC+CS and the fitting power function gives us a growth adjusted average distribution of interest in hospex services over months. August has the highest share with $11.3$\% and December the lowest with $7.1$\%. The five months Jun--Oct have almost the same share as Nov--May. Therefore we use August to mark the time axis on all plots. This seasonality in Google search volume is common for all travel services like Airbnb or Booking.com.\\
\indent You see on fig.\ref{cskillhc} that the interest in CS overtook HC in 2007, whereby the interest in HC started to decrease. Both curves show seasonal variations with peaks in August. The seasonal variations for HC distinctly and visibly flattened from August 2009 on. The growth of the monthly signup for CS decreased from August 2009 on as well. The gray curve on fig.\ref{hccsmigration} shows the deviation between the CS monthly signup and its seasonalized power function fit. On this curve, you see the chasm of the CS database crash in summer 2006 and the clear slowdown after August 2009. This slowdown caused the change in the slope of the total signup curve for CS as depicted on fig.\ref{hccsmigration}. The two power function fits, meaning for Jan 2004 - Aug 2011 and for Aug 2009 - Aug 2011, shape different predictions. The growth of CS users dropped to almost quadratic from being over cubic before August 2009. By the way, the power function fit after August 2009 gives a prediction of 6.9M users for Dezember 2013. Since CS and HC are equivalent services, we assume a user migration period in the years 2006-2009, which powered the faster growth of CS and the decline of HC.\\
\indent The self-proclaimed purpose of the first hospex service Servas is ``world peace, goodwill and understanding by providing opportunities for personal contacts among people of different cultures, backgrounds and nationalities'' \cite{servas}. CS adapted it as ``a better world -- one couch at time'' \cite{cssite}. Combining World Bank and CS data reveals that $75\%$ of the world population, which lives in poor countries with a per capita GDP under \$$10,000$, represented only $10$\% of CS users in 2011. Well, at least for CS the admission to the 'better world' seems to be tightly restricted by income level.\\
\section{Insights for BW}
\indent The growth of interest in BW does not display seasonal variation as it is obvious on Fig.\ref{nologin}, but rather is driven by protest of CS users. There is a major peak in BW signups and the google search volume in September 2011 -- CS has been secretly privatized for the personal enrichment of a few a month before \cite{cspriv}. The three peaks between August 2012 and August 2013 are also consequences of changes in CS, which have been considered to be unethical by CS community. The first of these peaks is caused by the update in CS ToU, according to which the CS data can be sold to third parties.\\
\indent A data set of $68320$ profile entries has been received from BW on 04.03.2014. $68030$ of those entries possess e-mail domain names -- local parts have been removed before data transaction concerning privacy. The remaining $290$ entries are either invalid or officially deleted. Fig.\ref{bwemail} shows the domain name categorization and the corresponding histogram. E-mail services administrated by Google, Microsoft and Yahoo make $75.4$\% of all signups. Domain names of educational organizations like universities and schools from all around the world make $1.2$\%. We have introduced the category of alternative providers, which emphasize privacy and/or certain political goals. These are riseup.[org$|$net], no-log.org, lavabit.com, biomail.de, spamfreemail.de, openmailbox.org, jpberlin.de, mailoo.org, safe-mail.net, immerda.[ch$|$de] and posteo.*. This category makes only $.5$\% of all signups. Although signing up at BW is driven by incorporation of CS and its consequences, majorities choice in email providers is not be explained as ethically dictated.\\
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{emails.eps}
\caption{Domain name categorization and corresponding histogram in absolute numbers.}
\label{bwemail}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{nologin.eps}
\caption{BW growth and 'no login' rate.}
\label{nologin}
\end{figure}
\indent Not every signup at BW leads to subsequent real life interaction. $4921$ out of $68030$ profiles never logged in after signing up. Fig.\ref{nologin} makes a picture of this fact. The rate of users, who did never log in, grew with those signing up after September 2011 and stays at around $10$\%. The incentives for logging in on a hospex website are searching a stay, replying a request and general communication. We consider posting, inviting and contacting members for organization of activities and other minor reasons as examples for general communication. A user interested only in hosting, would not have any incentive to log in until an appropriate hospitality request is forwarded to his e-mail postbox. If communication obviously stimulates login frequency, one is interested in what is stimulating communication.\\
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{receiving.eps}
\caption{Average number of messages received, if neither sent nor posted.}
\label{receiving}
\end{figure}
\indent Under the application of decision tree based feature selection \cite{Weka}, we could determine two factors, which have most impact on number of received messages, in case neither messages have been sent nor posts have been published. These factors are the indicated gender and the hosting status. Fig.\ref{receiving} shows the average number of messages received depending on these two factors. The profile text was not under investigated features, because it has been replaced by its length to beware users' privacy. For your information, $41.7$\% of BW users indicated to be female and $56.7$\% to be male.\\
\indent Users, who set their hosting status on ``No, sorry'' are considered to be mostly travelers. The reason that they received messages without own initiation are the so-called ``Welcome messages'' sent by BW volunteers. ``Maybe'' is the default case. ``Yes, Welcome'' does not mean that every hospitality request will be accepted -- it only shifts a profile on the top of search results for an entered location.\\
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{prsrates.eps}
\caption{Communication rates among BW users.}
\label{comrate}
\end{figure}
\indent Since the text of private messages and public posts has been removed in order to protect users privacy, we can not apply text mining to categorize messages and to determine relationships between them. The correlation between the sum of sent messages and published posts with number of received messages is $.81$ among members. It is higher than the correlation between sent and received messages, which is only $.72$. Therefore, we conclude that publishing posts triggers private messages to some extent. As you can see in fig.\ref{comrate}, the rate of users, which did not receive any message yet, is nearly over $40$\%. This indicates a low share of travelers on BW and/or unequal distribution of existing hospitality requests. The share of users, who use public forums for communication is marginal as you can see in fig.\ref{comrate} -- $98$\% of posts are created by $5$\% of users.\\
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Distribution of participation in communication.}
\label{distpart}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c}
\hline
& neither sent nor posted yet & sent or posted & sum\\
\hline
not yet received & $43.3$\% & $2.7$\% & $46$\%\\
\hline
received & $26.2$\% & $27.8$\% & $54$\%\\
\hline
sum & $69.5$\% & $30.5$\% & $100$\%$\equiv68028$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\indent Tab.\ref{distpart} shows that the chance to fall into the category of BW users, who sent messages and/or posted, but did not yet receive any private message is low. A calculation on the BW data set of $227695$ messages involving $38425$ users shows that the median of time delay between the first sent/published message/post and first received message is $35$ hours and the average is $68$ days. New users send more than one message, before they received any. This is legitimate, since $68.2$\% of all initiated message exchanges aka conversations are not continued. $36408$ successful conversations between two users at a time resulted a median time delay of $16$ hours and an average of $10$ days. $60$\% of replies arrive in $24$ hours and $86.8$\% of replies arrive in a week. Therefore a time limit of a day means an estimated reply probability of $19.1$\% and of a week $27.6$\%. That means that $10$ private messages to new conversation partners give an estimated probability of $96$\% for receiving at least one reply
within a week. Archiving the same estimated probability within $24$ hours needs $15$ messages.\\
\indent BW as hospex service does not only facilitate on-line communication, it also creates a hospex community of members interconnected by real life interactions. The only way to estimate the size of this community is to investigate the accommodation reports called comments on BW. The number of real-life interactions is at least as big as the number of comments. A comment can be left by a user for a user and if it has not been disputed, we can assume a real life interaction between those members, even if it is not reciprocated yet. Under this assumption, the size of the BW community was at least $11115$ members by 04.03.2014. Fig.\ref{bwcom} shows the development of the BW community. Monthly growth of the number of users correlates only at $.44$ with the monthly growth of the number of members. The average number of connections per BW member drops after August 2011 and indicates joining of new members into the community.\\
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{bwcommune.eps}
\caption{Development of BW community.}
\label{bwcom}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\indent The interest in hospex services is as seasonal as the interest in other accommodation services. Market leadership of a hospex service according to the user number is superable, but takes a relatively long period of time to overcome. The migration period from HC to CS took $4$ years -- from 2006 to 2009. The interest in BW is not seasonal, but correlates with major changes of CS, which are considered to be unethical by the CS community. Most BW users' concerns about ethic of hospex communication facilitating utilities do not apply on choice of e-mail providers. BW lacks at traveler. To archive $96$\% reply probability within a week for an average hospitality request before 04.03.2014, $10$ messages were needed, and $15$ for the same probability within $24$ hours. The average number for real life interactions in BW community variates between $3$ and $5$.\\
\section*{About and Acknowledgment}
\indent This work was partially published on Bewelcome.org under a Creative Commons License \cite{bwdr}. I want to express my gratitude to the co-members of Bevolunteer for their help. We also thank the people, who provided the Weka library \cite{Weka}.\\
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec1}
\vspace{-5mm}
\IEEEPARstart{F}{ull} duplex (FD) operation in a single RF channel can potentially double the spectral efficiency of a wireless network. Approaching this level of improvement poses a number of theoretical and practical challenges but is motivated by the rapid growth in wireless data traffic along with concerns about a spectrum shortage. Regulatory bodies and companies have highlighted these trends with various projections and proposed ways forward~\cite{FCC,Cisco,Ericsson,difazio2011bandwidth,Horizon}. There have even been goals set to improve capacity by as much as 1000x~\cite{EB, Qualcomm}. Recent advances in FD technology~\cite{Khandani10, Katti10, Knox12, Katti13, Duarte13} provide a step towards meeting the projected need without requiring new spectrum.
The large differential between transmitted (Tx) and received (Rx) powers at a wireless terminal, together with typical Tx/Rx isolation, has driven the vast majority of systems to use either frequency division duplexing (FDD) or time division duplexing (TDD). FDD separates the Tx and Rx signals with filters and TDD with Tx/Rx switching. Recent developments in transceiver design has challenged this limitation, and established the feasibility of FD operation on a common carrier, also known as simultaneous transmit and receive (STR). A combination of antenna, analog and digital cancellation can remove most of the Tx self-interference from the Rx path to allow demodulation of the received signal. This was demonstrated using multiple antennas positioned for optimum cancellation~\cite{Khandani10,Katti10} and later as single antenna systems~\cite{Knox12,Katti13}, where as much as 110 dB cancellation is reported over an 80 MHz bandwidth. Multiple antennas were also used in~\cite{Duarte13}, where the cancellation ranged from 70 to 100 dB with a median of 85 dB. An antenna feed network, for which a prototype provided 40 to 45 dB Tx/Rx isolation before analog and digital cancellation, was described in~\cite{Knox12}.
Although extensive advances have been made in designing and implementing wireless transceivers with FD capability, and there are some MAC designs for FD IEEE 802.11 systems, to the best of our knowledge, little has been done to understand the impact of such terminals on a cellular network in terms of system capacity and energy efficiency. In~\cite{Duarte13, Sahai11, SanjayAsilomar13, Singh11}, an 802.11 system, with the CSMA/CA MAC slightly modified for FD operation, is presented where software simulations show throughput gains from 1.2x to 2.0x assuming 85 dB cancellation.
In this paper, we focus on a multi-cellular system, in which only the base stations (BSs) are assumed to be capable of FD operation, where the additional cost and power is most likely to be acceptable, while the user equipment (UE) is limited to half duplex (HD) operation. In such a system, FD operation provides simultaneous uplink and downlink transmission on the same frequency for a pair of UEs. However, while FD operation may increase the capacity by two times, it also generates new intra-cell and inter-cell interference and this is the main challenge we address in this paper.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-15mm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 3.3in,trim= 0.99in 3.99in 1.58in 4.11in, clip] {fig1}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{Half duplex and full duplex single cell scenarios.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\vspace{-5mm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 3.3in,trim= 0.48in 3in 1.50in 2.73in, clip] {fig2}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{Half duplex and full duplex multi-cell scenarios.}
\label{fig:fig2}
\vspace{-10 mm}
\end{figure}
The impact of FD operation in a single independent cell and in a multi-cell environment is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:fig1} and Figure~\ref{fig:fig2}, respectively. In a single cell, the HD scenario is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig1}(a) where UE1 is a downlink UE and UE2 is an uplink UE. The orthogonal channel access in time prevents interference between UEs, but each UE accesses the channel only half the time. Figure~\ref{fig:fig1}(b) shows the FD scenario in a single cell where both UEs are scheduled in the same timeslot, potentially doubling the total cell throughput. Unfortunately, several types of interference which do not exist in the HD scenario need to be considered here: (1) the Tx-to-Rx self-interference at the base station which impacts the ability of the BS to demodulate the uplink signal, and (2) the interference from UE2's uplink signal which impacts the ability of UE1 to demodulate its downlink signal. In a multi-cell scenario, the impact from additional interference during FD operation becomes even more severe because of the inter-cell interference. Consider the two-cell network in Figure~\ref{fig:fig2}, in which UE1 and UE3 are downlink UEs in cell 1 and cell 2, respectively, and UE2 and UE4 are uplink UEs in cell 1 and cell 2, respectively. We assume synchronized cells, which means that in a given time interval all cells schedule transmissions in the same direction. From Figure~\ref{fig:fig2}(a) one can see that in HD operation, UE1 gets interference ($I_1$) from BS2 which is transmitting to UE3 at the same time. Similarly, BS1 gets interference ($I_2$) from the uplink signal of UE4. During FD operation, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig2}(b), the downlink UE, UE1, not only gets interference ($I_1$) from the BS2, but also gets interference ($I_3$ and $I_4$) from the uplink signals of UE2 and UE4. Similarly, the uplink from UE2 to the BS1 not only gets interference ($I_2$) from UE4, but also gets interference ($I_6$) from the downlink signal of BS2 as well as Tx-to-Rx self-interference ($I_5$). The existence of additional interference sources raises the question of actual gain from FD operation.
Recently, there has been some research, which considered the above system. In~\cite{Barghi12}, a single cell capacity comparison between using multiple-antennas as HD MIMO with that of utilizing them to build an FD radio is done. Information theoretic techniques, that is, successive interference cancellation for uplink and dirty paper coding in downlink to calculate the UE capacity are used. It is shown that under certain conditions, using additional antennas for building an FD radio can provide a performance boost compared to utilizing the antennas to form a high capacity MIMO link. In~\cite{XShen13}, a suboptimal scheduling algorithm to select the transmission direction of each UE in a multi-cell scenario, assuming fixed transmission powers for each direction, is given. They simulated an FD scenario, in which downlink transmission occurs from the center BS in a cell, but uplink reception is performed at uniformly distributed Rx antennas in the cell. In their system, they ignore the inter-BS interference and interference from the UEs of neighboring cells, similar to the assumption made in~\cite{Simeone2014full}, where an analytical expression for the achievable rates assuming Cloud Radio Access Network (C-RAN) operation for both HD and FD are derived. In~\cite{ChoiSTR12}, a method to mitigate the inter-BS interference using null forming in elevation angle at BS antennas is given. With this design, they further analyze the performance of the multi-cell system with FD BSs with a simple UE selection procedure by assuming fixed powers in both directions.
In one of our previous papers~\cite{SanjayCISS13}, we considered a multi macro cellular network with FD BSs (with complete self-interference cancellation), where an analytical model based on stochastic geometry shows a throughput gain of 11$\%$ and 91$\%$ in the uplink and downlink, respectively. This stochastic geometry based analysis does not consider the multi-UE diversity gain, which comes through the scheduling of the appropriate UEs with power adjustments to mitigate the interference. This is especially crucial in FD systems, where as we have just noted the interference scenario is worse than the traditional HD systems. In~\cite{SanjayCISS13}, an OFDMA system with a heuristic greedy scheduling algorithm for the UE selection procedure in both FD and HD systems was also simulated, where it shows throughput gains of 57$\%$ and 99$\%$ in uplink and downlink, respectively. The design considered the fixed power allocation in both directions and did not consider the effect of residual self-interference at BSs, which is also the case in~\cite{Barghi12, XShen13, Simeone2014full, ChoiSTR12}. Residual self-interference, in general, lowers the uplink coverage and limits the advantage of FD technology in a large cell. For example, consider a cell with a 1 kilometer radius, where the path loss at the cell edge is around 130 dB~\cite{3GPP:1}. Assuming equal per channel transmission power in the uplink and downlink directions, the signal arriving at the BS is 130 dB lower than the signal transmitted. With the best self-interference cancellation circuit known to date, which is capable of suppressing crosstalk by 110 dB~\cite{Katti13}, the received signal to interference ratio (SIR) is at most -20 dB. At such an SIR, the spectrum efficiency would be very low. This motivates us to consider a low-power small-cell system to be a more suitable candidate to deploy an FD BS.
Due to the additional interference sources, the actual gain from FD operation will strongly depend on link geometries, the density of UEs, and propagation effects in mobile channels. Most previous work~\cite{XShen13, Simeone2014full, ChoiSTR12} either ignored or assumed cancellation of strong interference during FD operation. If we do not assume perfect cancellation of strong interference in an FD system, a robust scheduling algorithm is required to intelligently select the UEs with appropriate power levels in all the cells, so that the maximum FD gain can be extracted.
In prior work~\cite{SanjayICC14}, we set the framework for the single small-cell scenario, where we evaluate link conditions under which FD operation can be supported, and presented a hybrid scheduler that can exploit the FD capability at the BS whenever it is favorable, and otherwise defaults to HD operation. We compared the performance of our hybrid FD scheduler with a HD TDD baseline scheduler by assuming a fixed power allocation per transmission in both the uplink and downlink directions. It was shown by simulation that we can achieve as much as an 81$\%$ increase in capacity (with 85 dB of self-interference cancellation), close to the doubling promised by FD, and we discussed limitations from intra-cell interference effects specific to FD operation.
In this paper, we examine FD common carrier operation applied to a resource managed TDMA-type multi small-cell system for which the TDD variant of LTE is a current example~\cite{DahlmanLTE, 3GPP:2}. In a multi-cell scenario where the interference situation is worse, extracting the throughput gain due to FD operation compared to HD operation is not simple and depends on several factors. It requires an intelligent scheduler which appropriately selects the UEs and their powers during FD operation. We propose a proportional fairness based joint UE selection and power allocation for such a system, to simultaneously select the UEs and transmit power levels to maximize the system gain. This joint UE selection and power allocation is a non-convex, nonlinear, and mixed discrete optimization problem. There exists no method to find a globally optimum solution for such a problem, even for the traditional HD system scenario. We provide a sub-optimal method by separating the UE selection and power allocation procedures, using a heuristic greedy method for UE selection, and using geometric programming for power allocation. For the FD system, the UE selection procedure is a hybrid process, in which FD operation is enabled for a cell where it is advantageous to select two UEs (based on the interference scenario); otherwise it operates in the HD mode. Furthermore, the power allocation procedure adjusts the power of each terminal to an appropriate level so that maximum system gain can be achieved while not violating the maximum power constraint. We compare the performance of FD and HD systems in terms of throughput and energy efficiency in both indoor and outdoor environments by using parameters and simulation assumptions from ongoing activities in the cellular community, for example, 3GPP~\cite{3GPP:1, 3GPP:3}.
Section~\ref{sec2} presents the FD and HD communication system scenarios in terms of frame structure. Joint UE selection and power allocation algorithms for HD and FD operation are provided in Section~\ref{sec3}. Section~\ref{sec4} contains simulation results for throughput and energy efficiency. Conclusions are discussed in Section~\ref{sec5}.
\section{Full Duplex Frame Structure in a Cellular Environment}\label{sec2}
We consider a multi-cell deployment scenario in which each cell consists of multiple legacy HD UEs and a BS that can operate in FD or HD mode. Figure~\ref{fig:fig3}(a) shows the frame structure of the HD TDD baseline. It consists of a set of timeslots, all operating on the same frequency channel, that alternate between uplink (U) and downlink (D) operation providing a continuous stream of data in one direction or the other. This is a simplified structure in that a deployed system, TDD LTE for example~\cite{DahlmanLTE, 3GPP:2}, would typically have special timeslots (or subframes) as guard periods for Tx/Rx switching and other overhead functions and may group U and D slots together to minimize switching, which we do not consider in our current analysis. FD timeslots (F) are introduced in Figure~\ref{fig:fig3}(b). It would be desirable to configure every timeslot as FD with the aim of achieving a doubling of capacity, but we anticipate the need to operate some as either solely uplink or solely downlink due to the interference environment explained below. It is the responsibility of a packet scheduler to determine whether a timeslot will be an uplink, downlink, or FD timeslot, and which UE will be given service.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 4.5in,trim= 1.20in 5in 1.30in 4.7in, clip] {fig3}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{TDD half duplex baseline and full duplex operation.}
\label{fig:fig3}
\vspace{-10mm}
\end{figure}
As was shown in~\cite{SanjayICC14}, the use of FD operation may or may not lead to higher throughput compared to HD operation. The performance of the system depends on multiple factors, such as the relative locations among UEs and BSs, the propagation channels, the self-interference cancellation capability at the BSs, the required SNR at each receiver, and the Tx power limitations. Doubling of capacity is only an upper bound, and the actual FD gain needs to be evaluated, which is the subject of the remainder of this paper
\section{UE Selection and Power Allocation}\label{sec3}
As discussed in the previous section that FD throughput gain is available only under certain propagation conditions, distances among nodes in the network, and power levels. This suggests that FD operation should be used opportunistically, that is, with an intelligent scheduler that selects UEs to achieve FD gain when appropriate, and otherwise defaults to HD operation. With this capability, our design of the scheduler attempts to meet the typical criteria of most schedulers: maximize the system throughput while maintaining a level of fairness.
In a multi-cell scenario where each cell consists of multiple UEs, the objective of the scheduler in timeslot $t$ is to maximize the logarithmic sum of the average rates of all the UEs~\cite{Stoylar05}. In this paper, for all systems (HD and FD), we assume that each UE has infinite backlogged data in each direction. In the FD system the scheduler needs to maximize the throughput simultaneously in both uplink and downlink directions. The objective of the scheduler is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{1}
\begin{split}
& Maximize \sum_{b=1}^B \sum_{k=1}^{N^b} \left[ log(\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t)) + log(\overline{R^u_{b,k}}(t))\right] \\[-10pt]
&\mbox{subject to:} \\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le P^d_{b,k}(t) \le P^{d,max},\\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le P^u_{b,k}(t) \le P^{u,max},\\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ R^d_{b,k}(t) . R^u_{b,k}(t) = 0, \ 1 \le k \le N^b, b = \{1,2,...,B\},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $B$ is the number of cells and $N^b$ is the number of UEs in cell $b$; $\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t)$, $\overline{R^u_{b,k}}(t)$ are the average achieved downlink and uplink rates of the UE $k$ in cell $b$, denoted as $UE_{b,k}$, until timeslot $t$, respectively. The first two constraints in (\ref{1}) are for the transmit powers of the UEs and BSs in each cell, in which $P^d_{b,k}(t)$ and $P^u_{b,k}(t)$ are the downlink and uplink transmission powers used in timeslot $t$, corresponding to $UE_{b,k}$, respectively; $P^{d,max}$ and $P^{u,max}$ are the maximum powers that can be used in a downlink and uplink transmission direction, respectively. The third constraint in (\ref{1}) captures the HD nature of the UEs, where $R^d_{b,k}(t) $ and $R^u_{b,k}(t)$ denote the instantaneous rates of $UE_{b,k}$, that can be achieved in timeslot $t$, in the downlink and uplink, respectively. These instantaneous rates are defined later in this section. The average achieved data rate, for example, for downlink, $\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t)$ is updated iteratively based on the scheduling decision in timeslot $t$, that is,
\begin{equation}\label{2}
\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t) = \left\{ \,
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[] [c] {l?s}
\IEEEstrut
\beta\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t-1) + (1-\beta)R^d_{b,k}(t), & if $UE_{b,k}$ is scheduled at timeslot $t$, \\
\beta\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t-1), & otherwise.
\IEEEstrut
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\right.
\end{equation}
where $0<\beta<1$ is a constant weighting factor, which is used to calculate the length of the sliding time window, $1/(1-\beta)$, over which the average rate is computed for each frame, and its value is generally chosen close to one, e.g. 0.99~\cite{Stoylar05, jalali2000data, girici2010proportional}. The average achieved uplink rate of $UE_{b,k}$, $\overline{R^u_{b,k}}(t)$ can be similarly defined.
The goal of the scheduler is to select UEs in each cell with appropriate power levels, so that the overall utility defined in (\ref{1}) can be maximized. Assume that $\boldsymbol{\Psi}(t)$ denotes the set of chosen UEs in both downlink and uplink directions in timeslot $t$ as $\boldsymbol{\Psi}(t) = \{\{\psi_1^d(t),\psi_1^u(t)\}, \{\psi_2^d(t),\psi_2^u(t)\},\cdots,\allowbreak \{\psi_B^d(t),\psi_B^u(t)\} \}$. In the $i_{th}$ UE index pair $\{\psi_i^d(t),\psi_i^u(t)\} (\psi_i^d(t) \neq \psi_i^u(t))$, $\psi_i^d(t)$ is an index of the chosen downlink UE and $\psi_i^u(t)$ is an index of the chosen uplink UE in the $i_{th}$ cell. $\psi_i^d(t) = 0$ ($\psi_i^u(t) = 0$) indicates no UE for the downlink (uplink) in cell $i$. This could be the result of no downlink (uplink) demand in cell $i$, in the current time slot $t$; or, as discussed in the next section, it could also because scheduling any downlink (uplink) transmission in cell $i$, in timeslot $t$ will generate strong interference to the other UEs, and the total network utility will become lower. So, in each timeslot, each cell will select at most one UE in the downlink and at most one UE in the uplink direction. In other words $\psi_i^d(t),\psi_i^d(t) \in \{1,2,\cdots,N^i\}\cup\{0\},\ i = \{1,2,,\cdots,B\}$.
Assume that $\boldsymbol{P}(t) = \left\{ \{p_1^d(t),p_1^u(t)\},\{p_1^d(t),p_1^u(t)\},\cdots,\{p_B^d(t),p_B^u(t)\} \right\}$ contains the power levels for the selected UE combination, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}(t)$, in timeslot $t$, where $p_i^d(t)$ is the power level of the downlink direction and $p_i^u(t)$ is the power level for the uplink direction in the $i_{th}$ cell. Using (\ref{2}), the objective function in (\ref{1}) can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{3}
\begin{split}
& \textstyle \sum_{b=1}^B \sum_{k=1}^{N^b} [ log(\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t)) + log(\overline{R^u_{b,k}}(t)) ] = \sum_{b=1}^B [ \{ log(\beta\overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}(t-1) + (1-\beta)R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t)) - \\
& \textstyle log(\beta\overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}(t-1)) \} + \{ log(\beta\overline{R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}}(t-1) + (1-\beta)R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t)) - log(\beta\overline{R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}}(t-1)) \} ] + A,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $A$ is independent from the decision made at timeslot $t$, and is given by
\begin{equation}\label{4}
A = \sum_{b=1}^B \sum_{k=1}^{N^b} \left[ log(\beta\overline{R^d_{b,k}}(t-1)) + log(\beta\overline{R^u_{b,k}}(t-1))\right].
\end{equation}
In equation (\ref{3}), let us denote the first term in the summation as $\chi^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t)$,
\begin{equation}\label{5}
\chi^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) = log(\beta\overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}(t-1) + (1-\beta)R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t)) - log(\beta\overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}(t-1)).
\end{equation}
and the second term as $\chi^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t)$,
\begin{equation}\label{6}
\chi^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t) = log(\beta\overline{R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}}(t-1) + (1-\beta)R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t)) - log(\beta\overline{R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}}(t-1)).
\end{equation}
In the above equations, note that, if $\psi_b^d(t) = 0 \ (\psi_b^u(t) = 0)$, then $\chi^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) = 0 \ (\chi^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t) = 0)$. In the above equations, the instantaneous rates are given by,
\begin{equation}\label{7}
\textstyle R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) = W_c \ log_2(1+{SINR}_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}) = W_c \ log_2 \left(1 + \frac{p^d_b(t) G_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}{N_{\psi_b^d(t)} + \sum_{i=1,i \neq b}^B p_i^d G_{i,\psi_b^d(t)} + \sum_{i=1}^B p_i^u G_{\psi_i^u(t),\psi_b^d(t)}}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{8}
\textstyle R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t) = W_c \ log_2(1+{SINR}_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}) = W_c \ log_2 \left(1 + \frac{p^u_b(t) G_{\psi_b^u(t),b}}{N_{b} + p_b^d \gamma+\sum_{i=1, i \neq b}^B p_i^d G_{i,b} + \sum_{i=1, i \neq b}^B p_i^u G_{\psi_i^u(t),b}}\right).
\end{equation}
In the above equations, $W_c$ is the bandwidth of the channel and G is used to denote the channel gains between different nodes. For example, $G_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}$ denotes the channel gain between BS $b$ and the selected UE $\psi_b^u(t)$; $N_{\psi_b^d(t)}$ and $N_b$ are the noise power at the selected downlink UE and the BS in cell $b$. In (\ref{7}), in denominator of the last term, the second term counts the inter-cell interference from all the other BSs and the third term counts the interference from the uplink UEs of all cells. In (\ref{8}), in denominator of the last term, the second term counts the self-interference at its own BS, where $\gamma$ is used to denote the self interference cancellation level at the BS; the third term counts the inter-cell interference from the BSs of other cells; and the fourth term includes the inter-cell interference from uplink UEs of other cells.
The overall utility of a cell (e.g. cell $b$) is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{9}
\Phi_{b,(\psi_b^d(t),\psi_b^u(t))}(t) = \chi^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) + \chi^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t);
\end{equation}
Then, the optimization problem in (\ref{1}) can be equivalently expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{10}
\begin{split}
& \argmax_{(\boldsymbol{\Psi}(t), \boldsymbol{P}(t))} \sum_{b=1}^B \Phi_{b,(\psi_b^d(t),\psi_b^u(t))}(t)\\
&\mbox{subject to:} \\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^d_{b}(t) \le P^{d,max},\\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^u_{b}(t) \le P^{u,max},\\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) . R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t) = 0, \ b = \{1,2,...,B\},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The above problem is a nonlinear nonconvex combinatorial optimization and computing its globally optimal solution may not be feasible in practice. Although the problem can be optimally solved via exhaustive search, the complexity of this method increases exponentially as the number of cells increase. Moreover, the above problem is a mixed discrete (UE selection) and continuous (power allocation) optimization. In this paper, a joint UE selection and power allocation is proposed, which achieves near-optimal solution through iterative algorithms.
We solve the joint UE selection and power allocation problem (\ref{10}) in each timeslot in two steps, (1) $\textit {UE Selection}$: for a given feasible power allocation, this step finds the UE combination with maximum overall utility, and (2) $\textit {Power Allocation}$: for the given UE combination, this step derives the powers to be allocated to the selected UEs such that overall utility can be maximized. In the next two subsections, we discuss both steps in detail.
\subsection{UE Selection }\label{sec3a}
In this step, for each timeslot $t$, for the given power allocation ($\boldsymbol {P}_{initial}(t)$ ), the objective of the centralized scheduler is to find the UEs in each cell to transmit, which is given as
\begin{equation}\label{11}
\begin{split}
& \boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t) =\argmax_{\boldsymbol{\Psi}(t)} \sum_{b=1}^B \Phi_{b,(\psi_b^d(t),\psi_b^u(t))}(t)\\
&\mbox{subject to:} \\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \psi^d_{b}(t) \neq \psi^u_{b}(t), \ b = \{1,2,...,B\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In the above problem, the constraint captures the HD nature of the UEs, which is similar to the third constraint in the problem formulation (\ref{1}).
In the traditional HD systems, finding the optimal set of UEs is very different in the downlink and uplink direction. In the literature, the problem above is solved optimally in the downlink direction~\cite{venturino2009coordinated, yu2010joint, kiani2007maximizing}, where the interferers are the fixed BSs (assuming a synchronized HD multi-cell system) in the neighboring cells. It is easy to estimate the channel gains for each UE with the neighboring BSs. Thus, interference from the neighboring cells can be calculated without knowing the actual scheduling decision (UE selection) of the neighboring cells. In this situation, a centralized scheduler can calculate the instantaneous rate and the utility of the each UE in the each cell, and make the UE selection decision for each cell optimally. In the uplink scheduling, for the given power allocation, interference from the neighboring cell cannot be calculated until the actual scheduling decision of the neighboring cell is known, because in this case, a UE in the neighboring cell generates the interference. This is also applied to the FD system, where interference from the neighboring cell could be from a UE or the BS or both.
To solve this problem, we use a heuristic method similar to~\cite{SanjayCISS13,koutsopoulos2006cross}. We provide a centralized greedy algorithm to achieve a sub-optimal solution. The algorithm runs at the start of each timeslot, which we call Algorithm 1.
\vspace{-4mm}
\begin{algorithm}
\small {
$\mathbf{Q}_B$ = 0; $\mathbf{R}_{B}$ = 0\;\vspace{-2mm}
$\Theta$ = A random order of the sequence of all the BSs\;\vspace{-2mm}
\For{c = $\Theta$(1) to $\Theta$(B)} {\vspace{-2mm}
$\alpha_c^d = \{1,2,\cdots,N^c\}$, $\alpha_c^u = \{1,2,\cdots,N^c\}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$\left\{\psi_c^d(t), \Delta U_c^d(t) \right\} =\left\{ \argmax_{d \in \alpha_c^d} \{Get\_Utility(c,d,0)\}, Get\_Utility(c,\psi_c^d(t),0)\right\}$\;
$\left\{\psi_c^u(t), \Delta U_c^u(t) \right\} =\left\{ \argmax_{u \in \alpha_c^u} \{Get\_Utility(c,0,u)\}, Get\_Utility(c,0,\psi_c^u(t))\right\}$\;
\If{$\Delta U_c^d(t) > \Delta U_c^u(t)$ and $\Delta U_c^d(t) > 0$} {\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{R} \leftarrow$ set $R(c) = \psi_c^d(t)$ in $\mathbf{R}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
}
\ElseIf{$\Delta U_c^u(t) > \Delta U_c^d(t)$ and $\Delta U_c^u(t) > 0$} {\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{Q} \leftarrow$ set $Q(c) = \psi_c^u(t)$ in $\mathbf{Q}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
}
}\vspace{-2mm}
\For{c = $\Theta$(1) to $\Theta$(B)} {\vspace{-2mm}
\If{$R(c) \neq 0$}{\vspace{-2mm}
$\left\{\psi_c^u(t), \Delta U_c^u(t) \right\} =\left\{ \argmax_{u \in \alpha_c^u\backslash R(c)} \{Get\_Utility(c,R(c),u)\}, Get\_Utility(c,R(c),\psi_c^u(t))\right\}$\;
\If {$\Delta U_c^u(t) > 0$} {\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{Q} \leftarrow$ set $Q(c) = \psi_c^u(t)$ in $\mathbf{Q}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
}
}\vspace{-2mm}
\ElseIf {$Q(c) \neq 0$} {
$\left\{\psi_c^d(t), \Delta U_c^d(t) \right\} =\left\{ \argmax_{d \in \alpha_c^d\backslash Q(c)} \{Get\_Utility(c,d,Q(c))\}, Get\_Utility(c,\psi_c^d(t),Q(c))\right\}$\;
\If {$\Delta U_c^d(t) > 0$} {\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{R} \leftarrow$ set $R(c) = \psi_c^d(t)$ in $\mathbf{R}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
}}}}
\label{alg1}
\caption{UE Selection ($\boldsymbol{P}_{initial}(t)$)}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-5mm}
In each timeslot, the algorithm first initializes the vectors that contain the allocation results. Vectors $\mathbf{Q}$ and $\mathbf{R}$ contain the information of scheduled uplink UEs and downlink UEs, respectively, which are iteratively updated as the scheduling decision is taken for a cell. The entry $Q(i)$ in $\mathbf{Q}$ contains the index of scheduled uplink UE of BS $i$, if any, otherwise it will be zero. Similarly, entry $R(i)$of matrix $\mathbf{R}$ contains the index of the scheduled dowlink UE in cell $i$, if any, otherwsie zero. Note that in any timeslot, $Q(i) \neq R(j)$, if $i = j$ and $Q(i) \neq 0, R(j) \neq 0$ to ensure the HD constraint for UEs. In each timeslot $t$, the centalized scheduler generates a random order of the BSs (Line 2). Following that given order of the BSs, in each cell, the algorithm first finds the UE with the maximum positive utility gain, which can be either in the uplink direction (i.e., $\psi_c^u(t)$ for cell $c$ ) or in the downlink direction (i.e., $\psi_c^d(t)$ for cell $c$ ) (Line 4 - Line 10). To calculate the utility gain in each case, it uses a function $Get\_Utility(.)$ given in Algorithm 2, which is discussed later. It also updates the vector $\mathbf{Q}$ or $\mathbf{R}$ based on the decision made (Line 7 - Line 10). Now, to use the FD capability of the BS, the algorithm again runs for the same order of the BSs (Line 11 - Line 19). For each BS, it finds the UE with the maximum positive utility gain in the opposite direction of what has been selected in the previous loop (if any). Finally, based on the decision, it also updates the vector $\mathbf{Q}$ or $\mathbf{R}$.
\begin{algorithm}
\small{
\If{$Q(c) = 0$ and $u \neq 0$}{\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{Q^{'}} \leftarrow$ set $Q(c) = u$ in $\mathbf{Q}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{R^{'}} \leftarrow$ $\mathbf{R}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$U_{gain} \leftarrow U(u,c,\mathbf{Q^{'}},\mathbf{R^{'}})$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$U_{loss\_uplink} \leftarrow \sum_{i=Q(k):i\neq0, \forall k \in \Theta \backslash c} \left\{ U(i,k,\mathbf{Q^{'}},\mathbf{R^{'}}) - U(i,k,\mathbf{Q},\mathbf{R}) \right\}$\;
$U_{loss\_downlink} \leftarrow \sum_{i=R(k):i\neq0, \forall k \in \Theta} \left\{ U(i,k,\mathbf{Q^{'}},\mathbf{R^{'}}) - U(i,k,\mathbf{Q},\mathbf{R}) \right\}$\;
}
\ElseIf{$R(c) = 0$ and $d \neq 0$}{\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{R^{'}} \leftarrow$ set $R(c) = d$ in $\mathbf{R}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$\mathbf{Q^{'}} \leftarrow$ $\mathbf{Q}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$U_{gain} \leftarrow U(d,c,\mathbf{Q^{'}},\mathbf{R^{'}})$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$U_{loss\_uplink} \leftarrow \sum_{i=Q(k):i\neq0, \forall k \in \Theta} \left\{ U(i,k,\mathbf{Q^{'}},\mathbf{R^{'}}) - U(i,k,\mathbf{Q},\mathbf{R}) \right\}$\;
$U_{loss\_downlink} \leftarrow \sum_{i=R(k):i\neq0, \forall k \in \Theta \backslash c} \left\{ U(i,k,\mathbf{Q^{'}},\mathbf{R^{'}}) - U(i,k,\mathbf{Q},\mathbf{R}) \right\}$\;
}
$\Delta U = U_{gain} - |U_{loss\_uplink}| - |U_{loss\_downlink}|$\;\vspace{-2mm}
return $\Delta U$;
}
\label{alg2}
\caption{$Get\_Utility(c,d,u)$}
\end{algorithm}
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{0pt
Next, we describe how the function $Get\_Utility(.)$ works. As shown in Algorithm 2, it calculates the utility gain $\Delta U$ for the given cell and the UE based on the transmission direction, i.e., either in the uplink (Line 1- Line 6) or in the downlink (Line 7- Line 12). The utility gain $\Delta U$ is the difference between the gain in the marginal utility of the chosen UE ($U_{gain}$) and loss in the marginal utility of other uplink and downlink UEs ( $|U_{loss\_uplink}|$ and $|U_{loss\_downlink}|$) due to new interference generated from the chosen UE. Since, in this algorithm, the channel is allocated sequentially cell by cell, thus, $U_{gain}$ is the gain in utility due to scheduling of UE $i$ (say for BS $c$ and slot $t$), which is given by $U(i,c,\mathbf{Q^'},\mathbf{R^'})$, and it is calculated using (\ref{5}) for downlink or (\ref{6}) for uplink, by considering the channel allocation according to $\mathbf{Q^'}$ and $\mathbf{R^'}$. It means that during the calculation of the instantaneous rates in (\ref{5}) or (\ref{6}), it only considers the interference from the cells in which channel has been already assigned, which is given in $\mathbf{Q^'}$ and $\mathbf{R^'}$. Similarly, the utility loss for UEs, to which channel has been already assigned, is calculated as the difference in utility with the new interference occurring due to scheduling of new UEs and without this interference. Equations (\ref{5}) and (\ref{6}) are used to calculate both marginal utility terms, i.e., with and without new interference for $U_{loss\_uplink}$ and $U_{loss\_downlink}$, respectively.
Algorithm 1 gives the UE combination $\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)$, as $\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t) = \{\{R(1),Q(1)\}, \{R(2),Q(2)\},\cdots,\allowbreak \{R(B),Q(B)\} \}$. It consists of a downlink UE, or an uplink UE, or both, or no UE from each cell. It is a hybrid FD scheduling algorithm, where, in each timeslot, a cell can be in FD operation, or in HD operation, or no operation at all. An example is given in Figure~\ref{fig:fig4} for two cells, where cell 1 is in FD operation and cell 2 is in HD operation. To evaluate the performance of the FD system, we use an HD system as the benchmark, in which we assume that the transmission direction (uplink or downlink) of all cells are synchronized and follows the frame structure shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig3}(a). For the HD system, we also use the same procedure for UE selection. In each timeslot, for example, for uplink, we apply the same algorithm as discussed above and find the UE combinations consisting of an uplink UE or no UE from each cell. In the next subsection, we discuss the power allocation procedure for the selected UEs.
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 2.5in,trim= 2.02in 4.49in 2.14in 4.24in, clip] {fig4}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{An example of partial full duplex operation, where cell 2 is in half duplex mode and cell 1 is in full duplex mode.}
\label{fig:fig4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Power Allocation }\label{sec3b}
In this step, for the selected UE combination in the step 1, a power allocation process is applied to find the appropriate power levels for all UEs, so that the overall utility can be maximized, or for the given $\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)$ from the previous step (note that in this subsection, we use $\boldsymbol{\Psi}(t)$ to denote $\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)$, which is the UE selection found in the previous subsection),
\begin{equation}\label{12}
\begin{split}
& \boldsymbol{P}^*(t) = \argmax_{\boldsymbol{P}(t)} \sum_{b=1}^B \Phi_{b,(\psi_b^d(t),\psi_b^u(t))}(t)\\
&\mbox{subject to:} \\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^d_{b}(t) \le P^{d,max},\\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^u_{b}(t) \le P^{u,max}, \ b = \{1,2,...,B\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The above optimization is also a nonlinear nonconvex problem, which does not have any method for a low complexity solution. To get a near-optimal solution, we use geometric programming (GP)~\cite{boyd2007tutorial, chiang2007power}. GP cannot be applied directly to the objective function given in (\ref{12}) so we first convert our objective function into a weighted sum rate maximization using approximations as described below.
In (\ref{12}), the aggregate utility $\Phi_{b,(\psi_b^d(t),\psi_b^u(t))}(t)$ is the sum of the downlink and uplink UE's utility. Let us consider the downlink utility term to show the simplification procedure; the same procedure can be directly applied to the uplink utility term. For example, consider the downlink utility as given in (\ref{5}). It can also be written as,
\begin{equation}\label{13}
\chi^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) = log\left( 1+ \frac{(1-\beta)R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t)}{\beta\overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}(t-1)}\right).
\end{equation}
In the above equation, $\beta \in (0,1)$ with a value close to one (e.g. $\beta$ =0.999, or 0.99)~\cite{jalali2000data, girici2010proportional}. Moreover, if we assume that the value of the instantaneous rate, $R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}$, will be close to the average rate, $\overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}$, then the term $\frac{(1-\beta)R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t)}{\beta\overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}(t-1)}$ will be close to zero. So, by using $ln(1+x) \approx x$ for $x$ close to zero, (13) can be converted to,
\begin{equation}\label{14}
\chi^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) \simeq w_{b,\psi_b^d(t)} R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t),
\end{equation}
where, the weight of the UE $\psi_b^d(t)$ is given by,
\begin{equation}\label{15}
w_{b,\psi_b^d(t)} = \frac{(1-\beta)}{\beta \overline{R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}(t-1)}.\frac{1}{ln(10)}
\end{equation}
Thus, the problem (\ref{12}) can be converted to,
\begin{equation}\label{16}
\begin{split}
& \boldsymbol{P}^*(t) = \argmax_{\boldsymbol{P}(t)} \sum_{b=1}^B w_{b,\psi_b^d(t)} R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) + \sum_{b=1}^B w_{b,\psi_b^u(t)} R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t)\\
&\mbox{subject to:} \\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^d_{b}(t) \le P^{d,max},\\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^u_{b}(t) \le P^{u,max}, \ b = \{1,2,...,B\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which can be further written as,
\begin{equation}\label{17}
\begin{split}
& \argmax_{\boldsymbol{P}(t)} {\prod_{b=1}^B \left( \left( \frac{1}{1+{SINR}_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}\right)^{w_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}. \left( \frac{1}{1+{SINR}_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}}\right)^{w_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}} \right)}\\
&\mbox{subject to:} \\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le \frac{p^d_{b}(t)}{P^{d,max}} \le 1,\\[-3pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le \frac{p^u_{b}(t)}{P^{u,max}} \le 1, \ b = \{1,2,...,B\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In general, to apply GP, the optimization problem should be in GP standard form~\cite{boyd2007tutorial, chiang2007power}. In the GP standard form, the objective function is a minimization of a $\textit {posynomial}$\footnote{ A monomial is a function $f:\mathbf{R}_{++}^n \rightarrow \mathbf{R}: g(p) = d p_1^{a^{(1)}}p_2^{a^{(2)}}\cdots p_n^{a^{(n)}}$, where $d \geq 0$ and $a^{(k)} \in \mathbf{R}, k = 1,2,\cdots,n.$ A posynomial is a sum of monomials, $f(p) = \sum_{j=1}^J d_j p_1^{a_j^{(1)}} p_2^{a_j^{(2)}} \cdots p_n^{a_j^{(n)}}$. } function; the inequalities and equalities in the constraint set are a posynomial upper bound inequality and $\textit {monomial}$ equality, respectively.
In our case, in (\ref{17}), constraints are monomials (hence posynomials), but the objective function is a ratio of posynomials, as shown in (\ref{18}). Hence, (\ref{17}) is not a GP in standard form, because posynomials are closed under multiplication and addition, but not in division.
\begin{equation}\label{18}
\begin{split}
& \textstyle {\prod_{b=1}^B \left( \left( \frac{1}{1+{SINR}_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}\right)^{w_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}. \left( \frac{1}{1+{SINR}_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}}\right)^{w_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}} \right) =} \\
&\scriptstyle { \prod_{b=1}^B \left( \left( \frac{N_{\psi^d_b(t)} + \sum_{i=1, i \neq b}^B p_i^d G_{i,\psi^d_b(t)} + \sum_{i=1}^B p_i^u G_{\psi^u_i(t),\psi^d_b(t)}}{N_{\psi^d_b(t)} + \sum_{i=1}^B p_i^d G_{i,\psi^d_b(t)} + \sum_{i=1}^B p_i^u G_{\psi^u_i(t),\psi^d_b(t)}}\right)^{w_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}}. \left( \frac{N_b + p_b^d \gamma + \sum_{i=1, i \neq b}^B p_i^d G_{i,b} + \sum_{i=1, i \neq b}^B p_i^u G_{\psi^u_i(t),b}}{N_b + p_b^d \gamma + \sum_{i=1, i \neq b}^B p_i^d G_{i,b} + \sum_{i=1}^B p_i^u G_{\psi^u_i(t),b}}\right)^{w_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}} \right)}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
According to~\cite{chiang2007power}, (\ref{17}) is a signomial programming (SP) problem. In~\cite{chiang2007power}, an iterative procedure is given, in which (\ref{17}) is solved by constructing a series of GPs, each of which can easily be solved. In each iteration of the series, the GP is constructed by approximating the denominator posynomial (\ref{18}) by a monomial, then using the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality and the value of $\boldsymbol{P}$ from the previous iteration. The series is initialized by any feasible $\boldsymbol{P}$, and the iteration is terminated at the $s_{th}$ loop if $||\boldsymbol{P}_s - \boldsymbol{P}_{s-1}|| < \epsilon $, where $\epsilon$ is the error tolerance. This procedure is provably convergent, and empirically almost always computes the optimal power allocation~\cite{chiang2007power}.
In the overall joint UE selection and power allocation procedure as shown in the Algorithm~3, for each timeslot, we start with maximum capability of UEs (i.e., maximum powers) for each direction to perform the UE selection procedure as given in the last subsection, which provides the UE combination to be scheduled. Then, in second step, the power allocation process, as discussed above, is applied for this given UE combination to find the optimum powers for selected UEs. In the case, when no feasible power allocation for the selected UE combination is found from the power allocation process, a UE with the lowest utility gain is removed from the combination, followed by again applying the power allocation procedure. This process is continued until the feasibility issue is resolved.
\begin{algorithm}
\small{
$\boldsymbol{P}_{initial}(t) = \left\{ \{P^{d,max}, P^{u,max}\}, \{P^{d,max}, P^{u,max}\}, \cdots,\{P^{d,max}, P^{u,max}\} \right\}$\;\vspace{-2mm}
$\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)$ = UE Selection ($\boldsymbol{P}_{initial}(t)$)\;\vspace{-2mm}
loop: \\\vspace{-2mm}
\If {Solution(Geometric Programming($\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)$)) is feasible} {\vspace{-2mm}
$\boldsymbol{P}^*(t)$ = Geometric Programming($\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)$))\;\vspace{-2mm}
}\vspace{-2mm}
\Else{\vspace{-2mm}
$\theta(t)$ = UE with the lowest utility gain\;\vspace{-2mm}
$\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)$) = $\boldsymbol{\Psi}^*(t)) \backslash \theta(t)$\;\vspace{-2mm}
goto loop;\vspace{-2mm}
}
}\label{alg3}
\caption{Overall Joint Selection and Power Control}
\end{algorithm}
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{0pt
To generate the results for the HD base system, we use the same procedure in each timeslot in the corresponding direction. For example, in this case, (\ref{16}), (\ref{17}), and (\ref{18}) will just contain the single term for the corresponding direction in place of two terms.
\vspace{-3mm}
\section{Performance Evaluation}\label{sec4}
\vspace{-3mm}
In this section, we present a simulation analysis comparing the throughput and energy efficiency of the FD and the HD systems using the joint UE selection and power allocation algorithm described in Section~\ref{sec3}. Two deployment scenarios are studied: a dense indoor multi-cell system with nine indoor Remote Radio Head (RRH)/Hotzone cells, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig5}(a), and a sparse outdoor multi-cell system with twelve randomly dropped Pico cells, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig5}(b). As we described in Section~\ref{sec1}, since FD operation increases the interference in a network significantly, we select these two particular small cell scenarios to analyze the performance of FD operation because the penetration loss between cells in the indoor environment, and sparsity in the outdoor environment, provides some static relief in inter-cell interference. The channel bandwidth is 10 MHz for both the HD and the FD systems in both scenarios. In our simulations, since we use the Shannon equation to measure the data rate, we apply a minimum spectral efficiency of 0.26 bits/sec/Hz and a maximum spectral efficiency of 6 bits/sec/Hz to match practical systems. All other simulation parameters for each scenario are defined below in its corresponding sub-section.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 4in] {fig5}
\caption{(a) An indoor environment with nine RRH Cells, (b) An outdoor environment with twelve Pico cells.}
\label{fig:fig5}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Simulation results for dense indoor multi-cell environment}\label{sec4a}
\begin {table}
\caption {Simulation parameters for indoor multi-cell scenario} \label{tab1}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| p{2.7 in} | p{3.4 in} |}
\hline
\textbf {Parameter} & \textbf{Value} \\ \hline
Maximum BS Power & 24 dBm \\ \hline
Maximum UE Power & 23 dBm \\ \hline
Thermal Noise Density & -174 dBm/Hz \\ \hline
Noise Figure & BS: 8 dB, UE: 9 dB \\ \hline
Shadowing standard deviation (with no correlation) & LOS:~ $3~dB$ NLOS: $4~dB$ \\ \hline
Path Loss within a cell (dB) (R in kilometers)& LOS: $89.5 + 16.9~log_{10}(R)$,
NLOS: $147.4 + 43.3~log_{10}(R)$ \\ \hline
Path Loss between two cells (R in kilometers)& Max(($131.1 + 42.8~log_{10}(R)),(147.4 + 43.3~log_{10}(R)))$ \\ \hline
Penetration loss& Due to boundary wall of an RRH cell: 20 dB, Within a cell: 0 dB \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In this section we present the results for the dense indoor multi-cell environment as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig5}(a). The simulation parameters, based on 3GPP simulation recommendations for an RRH cell environment~\cite{3GPP:3}, are described in Table~\ref{tab1}. Path loss for both $LOS$ and $NLOS$ within a cell are given in Table~\ref{tab1}, where the probability of $LOS$ ($P_{LOS}$) is,
\begin{equation}\label{19}
\small{
P_{LOS} =
\left \{ \,
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[] [c] {l?s}
\IEEEstrut
1 & $R \leq 0.018$, \\[-10pt]
\exp{(-(R-0.018)/0.027)} & $ 0.018 < R < 0.037$, \\[-10pt]
0.5 & $R \geq 0.037$,
\IEEEstrut
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\right.
}
\end{equation}
In (\ref{19}), $R$ is the distance in kilometers. The channel model used between BSs and UEs is also used between mobile UEs and between BSs for the FD interference calculations with the justification that BSs do not have a significant height advantage in the small cell indoor scenarios considered, and that it is a conservative assumption for the UE-to-UE interference channel. Eight randomly distributed UEs are deployed in each cell. With these settings, we run our simulation for different UE drops in all cells, each with a thousand timeslots, with the standard wrap around topology and generate results for both the HD and FD systems.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 5in] {fig6}
\caption{Distribution of average data rates for the half-duplex system and full-duplex system with round-robin scheduler in indoor multi-cell scenario.}
\label{fig:fig6}
\end{figure}
We first generate the results for a round-robin scheduler with fixed transmission powers, that is, maximum allowed power in both directions. In the HD system, in each direction, each cell selects UEs in the round-robin manner. In the FD system, in each timeslot, each cell chooses the same UE as selected in the HD system with a randomly selected UE for the other direction to make an FD pair. Figures~\ref{fig:fig6}(a) and~\ref{fig:fig6}(b) show the distribution of average downlink and uplink throughputs, for the different BS self-interference cancellation capability. \emph{FD@x} means the FD system with self-interference cancellation of $x$ dB. \emph{FD@Inf} means that there is no self-interference. In the downlink direction, in most of the cases (~70$\%$), there is no FD gain, which is due to the lack of any intelligent selection procedure during FD operation. In the uplink, due to the cancellation of self-interference, the FD system has a gain compared to the HD system, which increases with the self-interference cancellation. From a complete system point of view, which includes both uplink and downlink, this round-robin scheduling does not provide FD capacity gain in most of the cases. This demonstrates the need for an intelligent scheduling algorithm to provide gain during FD operation, which can benefit both uplink and downlink.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 5in] {fig7}
\caption{Distribution of average data rates for the half-duplex system and full-duplex system with proposed joint UE selection and power allocation in indoor multi-cell scenario.}
\label{fig:fig7}
\end{figure}
\begin {table}
\caption {Average throughput gain of full duplex system over half duplex system in indoor multi-cell scenario.} \label{tab2}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
& \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf {Downlink} & 56$\%$ & 80$\%$ & 94$\%$ & 97$\%$ & 98$\%$ \\ \hline
\textbf {Uplink} & 63$\%$ & 83$\%$ & 93$\%$ & 96$\%$ & 97$\%$\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Next, we generate results with the proposed joint UE selection and power allocation procedure given in Section~\ref{sec3}. Figures~\ref{fig:fig7}(a) and ~\ref{fig:fig7}(b) show the distribution of average downlink and uplink throughputs. Table~\ref{tab2} shows the average throughput gain of the FD system compared to the HD system, and as one would expect, the gain increases as the self-interference cancellation improves. With the higher self-interference cancellation values, the FD system nearly doubles the capacity compared to the HD system. Further, Table~\ref{tab3} shows the average improvement in the 5$\%$ cell edge capacity, which also increases as the self-interference cancellation increases.
\begin {table}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption {Average improvement in the 5$\%$ cell edge capacity in indoor multi-cell scenario.} \label{tab3}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
& \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf {Downlink} & 49$\%$ & 74$\%$ & 84$\%$ & 86$\%$ & 87$\%$ \\ \hline
\textbf {Uplink} & 55$\%$ & 78$\%$ & 90$\%$ & 93$\%$ & 94$\%$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
From the simulation one can also observe the dependency between FD/HD operation selection in our scheduler and the self-interference cancellation capability, that is, the lower the self-interference cancellation, the fewer the number of cells in a timeslot that are scheduled in FD mode. This is verified by counting the average number of cells per timeslot which are in FD mode or HD mode or with no transmission as shown in Table~\ref{tab4}. With $75 dB$ self-interference cancellation, on average 84$\%$ of the cells operate in FD mode, while with 105 dB, 98$\%$ of the cells operate in FD mode. In the HD system, in each timeslot, all cells transmit in one direction (either uplink or downlink).
\begin{table}
\caption {Average number of cells per slot in different modes in indoor multi-cell scenario.} \label{tab4}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}\textbf{HD}\\ (\textbf{Downlink}, \textbf{Uplink})\end{tabular} & \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf{FD Mode} & - & 84\% & 93\% & 97\% & 98\% & 98\% \\ \hline
\textbf{HD Mode} & (100\%, 100\%) & 16\% & 7\% & 3\% & 2\% & 2\% \\ \hline
\textbf{No Transmission} & (0\%, 0\%) & 0\% & 0\% & 0\% & 0\% & 0\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
As energy efficiency becomes a more important performance indicator in future cellular system, we next examine how efficiently the energy is used in both HD and FD operation in terms of \emph{bits/joule}. To calculate this, we keep track of the total throughput and the total transmission power consumed for each UE. The results are shown in Table~\ref{tab5} where we see that there is a penalty in energy efficiency for FD operation that can be quite severe. As the self-interference cancellation improves, the number of UEs transmitting in FD mode increases, resulting in higher inter-node interference, while self-interference reduces. Given this trade-off, the relation between energy efficiency and self-interference cancellation is quite complex. In this scenario, we observe that while the energy efficiency of FD mode can be improved with higher self-interference cancellation, it is still much worse than that of the HD mode.
\begin {table}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption {Average energy efficiency in Tbits/joule in indoor multi-cell scenario.} \label{tab5}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
& \textbf{HD} & \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf {Downlink} & 3.74 & 0.045 & 0.097 & 0.227 & 0.326 & 0.434 \\ \hline
\textbf {Uplink} & 4.91 & 0.017 & 0.151 & 0.734 & 1.360 & 1.971 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Since the main reason for the lower energy efficiency of the FD system is the additional power to combat the extra interference, two kinds of solutions can be proposed to alleviate this issue. The first solution is to use techniques to cancel or mitigate the additional interference. The first solution is to cancel or mitigate the additional interference using techniques such as beamforming and sectorization. In this particular small cell indoor scenario, where most of the inter-cell interference is mitigated by penetration loss between the cells, intra-cell interference plays a dominant role during FD operation. Given that sufficient self-interference cancellation is available for the small cell scenario (e.g., 105 dB), allowing FD operation on the UEs (FD UEs) may remove UE to UE intra-cell interference. In this case, the BS and one UE in each cell will simultaneously transmit in both uplink and downlink directions. Thus, a downlink UE will not experience intra-cell interference from an uplink UE in the same cell. To investigate this observation, we ran our simulation with FD UEs and computed the throughput and energy efficiency. In this case, average throughput gains in the FD system are 44$\%$, 77$\%$, 90$\%$, 99$\%$, and 100$\%$ in the downlink and 43$\%$, 77$\%$, 90$\%$, 99$\%$, and 100$\%$ in the uplink for 75 dB, 85 dB, 95 dB, 105 dB, and perfect self-interference cancellation, respectively. The average energy efficiency of different systems are shown in Table~\ref{tab5EE1}. For the lower self-interference cancellation case of 75 dB, although the energy efficiency is higher as compared to the previous case of HD UEs, the throughput is lower. As cancellation improves, there is not much difference in the average throughput from the previous case, but energy efficiency improves significantly. In the downlink, 3.04 Tbits/joule is achieved as compared to the 0.326 Tbits/joule and in the uplink, 2.66 Tbits/joule is achieved as compared to the 1.36 Tbits/joule. These results show that in the higher self-interference cancellation scenario, it is beneficial to have FD UEs, especially in a small indoor environment. In this case, energy efficiency does not have monotonic behavior with the self-interference cancellation because of the trade-off mentioned earlier in this section.
\begin {table}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption {Average energy efficiency in Tbits/joule in indoor multi-cell scenario with FD UEs.} \label{tab5EE1}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
& \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf {Downlink} & 0.51 & 2.18 & 1.59 & 3.04 & 3.98 \\ \hline
\textbf {Uplink} & 0.31 & 1.60 & 0.86 & 2.66 & 4.08 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
A second solution to improve energy efficiency is to keep using HD UEs but implement a more intelligent scheduling algorithm in which, during the rate/power allocation step, a utility function incorporating the cost of using high power is considered. An example is given in (\ref{20}),
\begin{equation}\label{20}
\begin{split}
& \boldsymbol{P}^*(t) = \argmax_{\boldsymbol{P}(t)} \sum_{b=1}^B [w_{b,\psi_b^d(t)} R^d_{b,\psi_b^d(t)}(t) + w_{b,\psi_b^u(t)} R^u_{b,\psi_b^u(t)}(t)] - \sum_{b=1}^B [c_{b,\psi_b^d(t)} f(p^d_{b}(t)) + c_{b,\psi_b^u(t)} f(p^u_{b}(t))]\\
&\mbox{subject to:} \\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^d_{b}(t) \le P^{d,max},\\[-10pt]
& \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 \le p^u_{b}(t) \le P^{u,max}, \ b = \{1,2,...,B\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The first term is for the capacity maximization same as the given in Section~\ref{sec3b} for the selected UEs. The second term is to take into account power consumption, where $f(p^d_{i}(t))$, and $f(p^u_{i}(t))$ are the functions of power to be allocated to the selected UE in cell $i$ in the downlink and in the uplink direction, respectively. In this term, $c_{i,\psi_i^d(t)}$, and $c_{i,\psi_i^u(t)}$ are the weights to these power terms. In our simulation, $f(.)$ is a logarithmic function of the power. A key parameter in the above formulation is the value of $c_{(.)}$, which impacts the penalty when a UE uses high power. These costs vary for different UEs, for example, UEs further from the cell center should have a lower penalty for high power than UEs nearer to the center. We use a function of the distance of the UE from its BS, i.e., inversely proportional to the distance of the UE. With such an optimization, average throughput gains in the FD system are 44$\%$, 72$\%$, 91$\%$, 95$\%$, and 96$\%$ in the downlink and 50$\%$, 69$\%$, 85$\%$, 89$\%$, and 91$\%$ in the uplink for 75 dB, 85 dB, 95 dB, 105 dB, and perfect self-interference cancellation, respectively. In this case, we get less throughput gain as compared to the original case, where we did not consider power consumption during the power allocation, but gain a significant improvement in energy efficiency as shown in Table~\ref{tab5EE2}. For example, an energy efficiency of 2.02 Tbits/joule is achieved, compared to the 0.045 Tbits/joule in the downlink with 75 dB SIC. So the scheduler that penalizes high power in the optimization process provides a significant improvement in the energy efficiency for a modest cost in capacity.
\begin {table}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption {Average energy efficiency in Tbits/joule in indoor multi-cell scenario with power allocation method including penalty to higher power consumption.} \label{tab5EE2}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
& \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf {Downlink} & 2.02 & 1.01 & 0.80 & 0.75 & 0.73 \\ \hline
\textbf {Uplink} & 1.46 & 2.47 & 3.23 & 3.58 & 3.61 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Simulation results for sparse outdoor multi-cell environment}\label{sec4b}
The sparse outdoor multi-cell scenario with twelve Pico cells as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig5}(b) is investigated in this section. The simulation parameters are based on 3GPP simulation recommendations for outdoor Pico cells~\cite{3GPP:1}, and are described in Table~\ref{tab6}. The probability of LOS for BS-to-BS and BS-to-UE path loss is (R is in kilometers),
\begin{equation}\label{21}
P_{LOS} = 0.5 - min(0.5, 5exp(-0.156/R)) + min(0.5, 5exp(-R/0.03)).
\end{equation}
\begin {table}
\caption {Simulation parameters for outdoor multi-cell scenario} \label{tab6}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| p{2 in} | p{4 in} |}
\hline
\textbf {Parameter} & \textbf{Value} \\ \hline
Maximum BS Power & 24 dBm \\ \hline
Maximum UE Power & 23 dBm \\ \hline
Minimum distance between Pico BSs & 40 m \\ \hline
Radius of a Pico cell & 40 m \\ \hline
Thermal Noise Density & -174 dBm/Hz \\ \hline
Noise Figure & BS: 13 dB, UE: 9 dB \\ \hline
Shadowing standard deviation between BS and UE & LOS:~ $3~dB$ NLOS: $4~dB$ \\ \hline
Shadowing standard deviation between Pico cells & $6~dB$ \\ \hline
BS-to-BS pathloss (R in kilometers) & LOS: if $R < 2/3 km, PL(R) = 89.5 + 16.9~log_{10}(R)$, else $PL(R) = 101.9 + 40~log_{10}(R)$, NLOS: $PL(R) = 169.36 + 40 log_{10}(R)$. \\ \hline
BS-to-UE pathloss (R in kilometers) & LOS: $PL(R) = 103.8 + 20.9~log_{10}(R),$ NLOS: $PL(R) = 145.4 + 37.5~log_{10}(R)$. \\ \hline
UE-to-UE pathloss (R in kilometers) & If $R \leq 50 m, PL(R) = 98.45 + 20~log_{10}(R),$ else, $PL(R) = 175.78 + 40~log_{10}(R)$. \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Ten randomly distributed UEs are deployed in each cell. With these settings, we run our simulation for several random drops of twelve Pico cells in the given area of a hexagonal cell with height of 500 meters. We generate the results with the proposed joint UE selection and power allocation method given in Section~\ref{sec3}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 5in] {fig8}
\caption{Distribution of average data rates for the half-duplex system and full-duplex system with proposed joint UE selection and power allocation in outdoor multi-cell scenario.}
\label{fig:fig8}
\end{figure}
\begin {table}
\caption {Average throughput gain of full duplex system over half duplex system in outdoor multi-cell scenario.} \label{tab7}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
& \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf {Downlink} & 34$\%$ & 42$\%$ & 53$\%$ & 60$\%$ & 62$\%$ \\ \hline
\textbf {Uplink} & 47$\%$ & 54$\%$ & 60$\%$ & 63$\%$ & 64$\%$\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Figures~\ref{8}(a) and~\ref{8}(b) show the distribution of average downlink and uplink throughputs, and Table~\ref{tab7} shows the average throughput gain of the FD system compared to the HD system. Similar to the previous scenario, FD increases the capacity of the system significantly over the HD case, where the increase is proportional to the amount of self-interference cancellation. In this outdoor scenario, the average throughput of a UE is lower compared to the indoor case but it is distributed over a wider range. Moreover, the throughput increase due to FD operation is less than what it was in the indoor case. The reason behind this is that the inter-cell interference between a BS and UEs in neighboring cells is much stronger that in the indoor scenario.
Table~\ref{tab8} shows the average number of cells per slot which are in FD mode, HD mode or with no transmission. First of all, in the HD system, contrary to the indoor scenario, we can see that some cells are not transmitting. This is due to the higher inter-cell interference between the BS and UEs in neighboring cells; the system throughput is higher when certain cells are not scheduled for transmission, resulting in reduced inter-cell interference. Further, for the same reason, the average number of cells operating in FD mode is smaller than the indoor scenario. In this case, the number of cells in FD mode also increases with self-interference cancellation.
\begin{table}
\caption {Average number of cells per slot in different modes in outdoor multi-cell scenario.} \label{tab8}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}\textbf{HD}\\ (\textbf{Downlink}, \textbf{Uplink})\end{tabular} & \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf{FD Mode} & - & 36\% & 50\% & 56\% & 57\% & 57\% \\ \hline
\textbf{HD Mode} & (91\%, 98\%) & 62\% & 48\% & 42\% & 41\% & 41\% \\ \hline
\textbf{No Transmission} & (9\%, 2\%) & 2\% & 2\% & 2\% & 2\% & 2\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{tab9} shows the average energy efficiency results for both HD and FD operation in terms of bits/joule. Note that in this outdoor scenario, for most of the cases (except FD@75 downlink), energy efficiency is lower than the previous indoor case. This is again due to the high inter-cell interference between a BS and UEs in neighboring cells. For the FD@75 downlink case, energy efficiency is even higher than the HD case. This is because in an FD system, a downlink UE suffers interference from uplink UEs of neighboring cells and/or BSs of neighboring cells. It is observed in our simulations that in general, UE to UE interference is lower than the BS to UE interference. In case of FD@75, for most of the cells ($\sim$62$\%$) there is only one transmission, with 23$\%$ of cells in downlink and 39$\%$ in uplink. Thus, since UE to UE inter-cell interference is lower, we get higher energy efficiency in downlink of FD@75 compared to the downlink in HD where a downlink UE gets BS to UE interference from all of its active neighboring cells. Further, as the self-interference cancellation increases, energy efficiency is decreased due to a higher number of simultaneous transmissions. Also, as described in the Section IV.A, an increase in self-interference cancellation may not always guarantee a reduction in interference for a UE in the FD system. Due to this trade-off, uplink energy efficiency first decreases, then further increases with self-interference cancellation.
\begin {table}
\caption {Average energy efficiency in Tbits/joule in outdoor multi-cell scenario.} \label{tab9}
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | l | l | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
& \textbf{HD} & \textbf{FD@75} & \textbf{FD@85} & \textbf{FD@95} & \textbf{FD@105} & \textbf{FD@Inf} \\ \hline
\textbf {Downlink} & 0.07 & 0.15 & 0.046 & 0.026 & 0.023 & 0.023 \\ \hline
\textbf {Uplink} & 0.017 & 0.007 & 0.003 & 0.005 & 0.012 & 0.016 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec5}
We investigated the application of common carrier FD radios to resource managed small-cell systems in a multi-cell deployment. Assuming FD capable base stations with legacy user equipment, a joint scheduling and power allocation method was proposed, which can apply to both HD and FD systems. In the FD system, it operates in FD mode when conditions are favorable, and otherwise defaults to HD mode. We evaluate the performance of our scheduler in both indoor and outdoor multi-cell environments. Our simulation results show that an FD system using a practical design parameter of 95 dB self-interference cancellation at each base station can improve the capacity by 94$\%$ in the downlink and 93$\%$ in the uplink in an indoor multi-cell hot zone scenario and 53$\%$ in the downlink and 60$\%$ in the uplink in an outdoor multi Pico cell scenario. From these results we conclude that in both indoor small-cell and sparse outdoor environment, FD base stations with an intelligent scheduling algorithm are able to improve capacity significantly. We observed a penalty in energy efficiency during FD operation. Further, we discussed the ways to increase the energy efficiency of FD system by enabling FD UEs, specially in a small indoor environment, or using a modified scheduling algorithm that penalizes using high power during the FD operation. We continue to investigate FD resource management algorithms with manageable complexity and information exchange requirements, that incorporate energy efficiency as a performance metric, and that provide performance improvement consistent with the promising results achieved so far.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section*{Appendix: Algorithm for the Phase-Field Equation}
This Appendix provides a summary of the algorithm
we developed in \cite{DongS2012} for solving the phase field
equation \eqref{equ:CH}. We refer the reader to \cite{DongS2012}
for more detailed discussions.
The notation in this appendix follows that
of Section \ref{sec:method}.
Consider the system consisting of
the phase field equation \eqref{equ:CH},
the inflow boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:ibc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:ibc_phi_2},
the wall boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2},
and the outflow/open boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:obc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:obc_phi_2}.
Given $(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^n,\phi^n)$,
where $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^n$ is the approximation
velocity from the algorithm discussed
in Section \ref{sec:alg_momentum},
we discretize this system
as follows:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\gamma_0\phi^{n+1}-\hat{\phi}}{\Delta t}
+ \tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}\cdot\nabla\phi^{*,n+1}
=
-\lambda\gamma_1\nabla^2\left[
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}
- \frac{S}{\eta^2}(\phi^{n+1}-\phi^{*,n+1})
- h(\phi^{*,n+1})
\right]
+ g^{n+1}
\label{equ:phi_1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\phi^{n+1} = \phi_b^{n+1},
\qquad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i
\label{equ:phi_2}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1} - h(\phi^{n+1}) = g_b^{n+1},
\qquad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i
\label{equ:phi_3}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\left[
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}
- \frac{S}{\eta^2}(\phi^{n+1}-\phi^{*,n+1})-h(\phi^{*,n+1})
\right]
= g_{c1}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_w
\label{equ:phi_4}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\phi^{n+1}
=
\frac{3\sigma}{4\lambda}\cos\theta_s
\left[1-\left(\phi^{*,n+1}\right)^2\right]
+ g_{c2}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_w.
\label{equ:phi_5}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\left[
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}
- \frac{S}{\eta^2}(\phi^{n+1}-\phi^{*,n+1})-h(\phi^{*,n+1})
\right]
= g_{a1}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o
\label{equ:phi_6}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\phi^{n+1}
= -D_0 \left.\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} \right|^{*,n+1}
+ g_{a2}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o
\label{equ:phi_7}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\phi^{n+1}
= -D_0 \frac{\gamma_0\phi^{n+1}-\hat{\phi}}{\Delta t}
+ g_{a2}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o.
\label{equ:phi_8}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
In the above equations, $\hat{\phi}$
is defined in \eqref{equ:var_hat_def},
$\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}$ and $\phi^{*,n+1}$ are
defined in \eqref{equ:var_star_def},
and $S$ is a chosen constant that must satisfy
the condition
\begin{equation}
S \geqslant \eta^2\sqrt{\frac{4\gamma_0}{\lambda\gamma_1\Delta t}}.
\label{equ:S_condition}
\end{equation}
$\left.\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} \right|^{*,n+1}$
is an explicit approximation of
$\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t}$ at
time step $(n+1)$, given by
\begin{equation}
\left.\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} \right|^{*,n+1}
= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{\Delta t}(\phi^n - \phi^{n-1}), & \text{if} \ J=1 \\
\frac{1}{\Delta t}\left(
\frac{5}{2}\phi^n - 4\phi^{n-1} + \frac{3}{2}\phi^{n-2}
\right), & \text{if} \ J=2
\end{array}
\right.
\label{equ:phi_deriv_expr}
\end{equation}
where $J$ is the order of temporal accuracy
defined in Section \ref{sec:alg_momentum}.
Note that equations \eqref{equ:phi_7} and \eqref{equ:phi_8}
are two different discretizations of
the boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_phi_2},
and they will be used in different stages of
the implementation as discussed below.
Rewrite \eqref{equ:phi_1} into
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\left[
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1} - \frac{S}{\eta^2}\phi^{n+1}
\right]
+ \frac{\gamma_0}{\lambda\gamma_1\Delta t}\phi^{n+1}
= Q = Q_1 + \nabla^2 Q_2,
\label{equ:phi_1_trans_1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
Q_1 = \frac{1}{\lambda\gamma_1}\left[
g^{n+1} - \tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}\cdot\nabla\phi^{*,n+1}
+ \frac{\hat{\phi}}{\Delta t}
\right],
\quad
Q_2 = -\frac{S}{\eta^2}\phi^{*,n+1}
+ h(\phi^{*,n+1}).
\end{equation}
Equation \eqref{equ:phi_1_trans_1}
can be reformulated into an equivalent form
(see \cite{YueFLS2004,DongS2012})
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\psi^{n+1}
- \left(\alpha + \frac{S}{\eta^2} \right)\psi^{n+1} = Q,
\label{equ:CH_psi}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1} + \alpha\phi^{n+1} = \psi^{n+1},
\label{equ:CH_phi}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where $\psi^{n+1}$ is an auxiliary
phase field function, and the constant
$\alpha$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\alpha = -\frac{S}{2\eta^2}\left[
1 - \sqrt{1 - \frac{4\gamma_0}{\lambda\gamma_1\Delta t}\left(\frac{\eta^2}{S} \right)^2 }
\right].
\end{equation}
Note that $\alpha<0$
and $\alpha+\frac{S}{\eta^2}>0$
under the condition \eqref{equ:S_condition}
for the chosen constant $S$.
In light of equation \eqref{equ:CH_phi}, we can
transform \eqref{equ:phi_3} into
\begin{equation}
\psi^{n+1} = \alpha\phi_b^{n+1} + h(\phi_b^{n+1})
- g_b^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i,
\label{equ:ibc_phi_reform_1}
\end{equation}
where we have used \eqref{equ:phi_2}.
Similarly, equation \eqref{equ:phi_4} is transformed
into
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\psi^{n+1} = \mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla Q_2
+ \left(
\alpha + \frac{S}{\eta^2}
\right)\left\{
\frac{3\sigma}{4\lambda}\cos\theta_s
\left[1-\left(\phi^{*,n+1}\right)^2\right]
+ g_{c2}^{n+1}
\right\}
+ g_{c1}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_w,
\label{equ:wbc_phi_1_reform_1}
\end{equation}
where we have used equations \eqref{equ:phi_5}
and \eqref{equ:CH_phi}.
Equation \eqref{equ:phi_6} is transformed
into
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\psi^{n+1}
= \mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla Q_2
+ \left(\alpha + \frac{S}{\eta^2} \right)
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\phi^{n+1}
+ g_{a1}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o,
\label{equ:obc_phi_1_reform_1}
\end{equation}
where we have used \eqref{equ:CH_phi}.
We next derive the weak forms for
the equations \eqref{equ:CH_psi} and
\eqref{equ:CH_phi} in order
to facilitate the implementation
with $C^0$ spectral elements.
Let
\begin{equation}
H^1_{\phi 0}(\Omega) = \left\{ \
v\in H^1(\Omega) \ :\ v|_{\partial\Omega_i} = 0
\ \right\},
\end{equation}
and $\varpi\in H^1_{\phi 0}(\Omega)$
denote the test function.
Taking the $L^2$ inner product
between $\varpi$ and equation \eqref{equ:CH_psi}
and integrating by part,
we get the weak form about $\psi^{n+1}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{\Omega}\nabla\psi^{n+1}\cdot\nabla\varpi
&+ \left(\alpha + \frac{S}{\eta^2} \right)\int_{\Omega}\psi^{n+1}\varpi
=
-\int_{\Omega} Q_1\varpi
+ \int_{\Omega}\nabla Q_2\cdot\nabla\varpi \\
&
+ \left(
\alpha + \frac{S}{\eta^2}
\right)\int_{\partial\Omega_w}\left\{
\frac{3\sigma}{4\lambda}\cos\theta_s\left[
1-(\phi^{*,n+1})^2
\right] + g_{c2}^{n+1}
\right\} \varpi
+\int_{\partial\Omega_w} g_{c1}^{n+1}\varpi \\
&
+ \left(
\alpha + \frac{S}{\eta^2}
\right) \int_{\partial\Omega_o}\left(
-D_0\left.\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} \right|^{*,n+1}
+ g_{a2}^{n+1}
\right) \varpi
+ \int_{\partial\Omega_o} g_{a1}^{n+1}\varpi,
\quad \forall \varpi \in H^1_{\phi 0}(\Omega),
\end{split}
\label{equ:psi_weakform}
\end{equation}
where we have used \eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1_reform_1},
\eqref{equ:obc_phi_1_reform_1},
and \eqref{equ:phi_7}. Note that
$
\left.\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} \right|^{*,n+1}
$
is given by \eqref{equ:phi_deriv_expr}.
Again let $\varpi \in H_{\phi 0}^1(\Omega)$ denote
the test function.
Taking the $L^2$ inner product between $\varpi$
and equation \eqref{equ:CH_phi} and integrating
by part, we obtain the weak form about
$\phi^{n+1}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{\Omega} \nabla\phi^{n+1}\cdot\nabla\varpi
&
-\alpha \int_{\Omega}\phi^{n+1} \varpi
+ \frac{\gamma_0 D_0}{\Delta t} \int_{\partial\Omega_o}
\phi^{n+1}\varpi
= -\int_{\Omega} \psi^{n+1}\varpi
+ \int_{\partial\Omega_o}\left(
\frac{D_0}{\Delta t}\hat{\phi} + g_{a2}^{n+1}
\right) \varpi \\
&
+ \int_{\partial\Omega_w}\left\{
\frac{3\sigma}{4\lambda}\cos\theta_s\left[
1-(\phi^{*,n+1})^2
\right] + g_{c2}^{n+1}
\right\},
\quad \forall \varpi \in H^1_{\phi 0}(\Omega),
\end{split}
\label{equ:phi_weakform}
\end{equation}
where we have used \eqref{equ:phi_5}
and \eqref{equ:phi_8}.
Equations \eqref{equ:psi_weakform} and
\eqref{equ:phi_weakform} are in weak forms,
and all the terms involved therein can be
computed directly using $C^0$ elements.
These equations can be discretized in space
using $C^0$ spectral elements in the
standard fashion.
Note that these two equations are
de-coupled.
In summary, given $(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^n, \phi^{n})$,
our final algorithm for the phase field
equation consists of the following procedure.
We refer to this procedure as
{\bf AdvancePhase}. It produces
$(\psi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1},\nabla^2\phi^{n+1})$ in a
de-coupled fashion as follows \\
\noindent\underline{{\bf AdvancePhase} procedure:}
\begin{itemize}
\item
Solve equation \eqref{equ:psi_weakform},
together with the Dirichlet condition
\eqref{equ:ibc_phi_reform_1} on $\partial\Omega_i$,
for $\psi^{n+1}$;
\item
Solve equation \eqref{equ:phi_weakform},
together with the Dirichlet condition \eqref{equ:phi_2}
on $\partial\Omega_i$, for $\phi^{n+1}$;
\item
Compute $\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}$ according to equation
\eqref{equ:CH_phi} as follows:
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1} = \psi^{n+1} - \alpha\phi^{n+1}.
\label{equ:laplace_phi_expr}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The current work focuses on the motion of a mixture of
two immiscible incompressible fluids in a domain
that is open on part of its boundary.
The domain boundary is open in the sense that
the fluids can freely leave or even enter the domain
through such boundaries.
In particular, we assume that the interface formed
between the two fluids will pass through the
open portions of the domain boundary.
Therefore, the problem will involve
truly two-phase outflow or open boundaries.
Two-phase outflows are encountered in many situations:
oil plumes in the deep sea, wakes of surface ships,
and ocean waves generated by the wind shear are
some of the examples.
These problems usually involve physically unbounded
flow domains. Numerical simulation of such problems
will therefore need to truncate the domain to
a finite size, and some open/outflow boundary
condition (OBC) will be required on the artificial boundary.
The presence of fluid interfaces at
the open boundary calls for appropriate
two-phase open boundary conditions
in such problems.
Several challenges are associated with the design of
two-phase open boundary conditions.
Some of the challenges are common to those encountered
with single-phase outflows, for example,
the instability associated with
strong vortices or backflows at
the open boundary
(a.k.a. backflow instability) \cite{DongKC2014}.
Others are new and unique to
two-phase outflows.
For example, owing to the presence of fluid interfaces,
two-phase outflow problems
involve viscosity contrasts,
density contrasts, and surface tension
at the open boundaries.
Large viscosity ratios and large density ratios
at the open boundary can cause severe stability
difficulties \cite{Dong2014obc}.
While outflow/open boundary conditions for single-phase flows
have been under intensive investigations for decades,
very scarce work exists for two-phase outflows or open boundaries.
In \cite{LouGS2013} the zero-flux (Neumann),
convective, and extrapolation boundary conditions
originated from single-phase flows have been studied
for the two-phase lattice-Boltzmann equation.
The zero-flux condition is also employed for
the outflow boundary in \cite{AlbadawiDRMD2013}
within the context of a coupled level-set/volume-of-fluids
method, and in \cite{Son2001} in the context of
a level set method where the outflow boundary involves
only a single type of fluid.
The outflow condition for two immiscible fluids in
a porous medium is discussed in \cite{LenzingerS2010}.
The works of \cite{Munkejord2006,DesmaraisK2014}
have both considered the outflow condition
for two-phase compressible flows in one dimension.
In a recent work \cite{Dong2014obc} we have proposed a set of effective
two-phase outflow (and also inflow) boundary conditions
within the phase field framework.
A salient characteristic of
these boundary conditions is that
they ensure the energy stability of the two-phase system.
By looking into the two-phase energy balance relation,
we have shown, at the continuum level, that
with these boundary conditions the total
energy of the two-phase system will not increase
over time,
even in situations where there are strong vortices or backflows,
large viscosity contrast, and large density
contrast at the outflow/open boundaries.
In \cite{Dong2014obc}
we have further developed an algorithm for numerically treating
these open boundary conditions based on
a velocity-correction type splitting strategy.
Inspired by the two-phase energy balance relation from
\cite{Dong2014obc}, we propose in the current work
several new forms of outflow/open boundary conditions
for the two-phase momentum equations within
the phase field framework.
We also discuss a generalized form of the two-phase
open boundary conditions, which includes these new forms
and those forms proposed in \cite{Dong2014obc}
as particular cases.
In addition, we present an
algorithm for numerically treating
these new open boundary conditions.
Different than that of \cite{Dong2014obc},
the current algorithm
is based on a rotational pressure-correction
type strategy for solving the two-phase momentum
equations.
This algorithm shares one common property
with those of \cite{Dong2014obc,DongS2012},
namely, after discretization it gives rise to
linear algebraic systems for the pressure and
the velocity that involve
only {\em constant}
and {\em time-independent} coefficient matrices,
despite the variable density and variable
viscosity of the two-phase mixture.
Therefore, these coefficient matrices can be
pre-computed during pre-processing.
This makes the current algorithm computationally
very efficient and attractive.
It is commonly observed that,
with traditional splitting type schemes,
the variable density in
the Navier-Stokes equation has resulted in
a variable (time-dependent) coefficient
matrix for the pressure linear algebraic system
after discretization
\cite{BellM1992,PuckettABMR1997,GuermondQ2000,
DingSS2007,LiuW2007,PyoS2007,CalgaroCG2008,LiMGS2013}.
This creates a severe computational and performance issue,
due to the need for the frequent re-computation
of the coefficient matrix and
the challenge in efficiently solving the resultant linear
algebraic system at large density ratios.
Guermond \& Salgado \cite{GuermondS2009} have advocated a penalty point
of view toward the projection idea,
leading to a Poisson type equation for the pressure;
see also \cite{GuermondS2011,ShenY2010}.
Dong \& Shen \cite{DongS2012} have proposed a different
strategy for coping with the variable density.
By a reformulation of the pressure term in
the variable-density Navier-Stokes equation,
they have developed a
scheme which requires the solution of
a pressure Poisson equation with
constant (time-independent) coefficient matrix;
see also \cite{Dong2012,Dong2014nphase,Dong2014obc,DoddF2014,Dong2015}.
The novelties of this paper lie in two aspects:
(i) the several new forms of outflow/open
boundary conditions for the two-phase momentum equations,
and (ii) the pressure-correction based algorithm
for numerically treating these two-phase
open boundary conditions.
On the other hand,
we would like to point out that
the method for solving the phase field equation
employed in the current paper is not new.
It was originally developed in
\cite{DongS2012}.
The numerical algorithm presented herein has been implemented
using $C^0$ continuous high-order spectral elements
\cite{SherwinK1995,KarniadakisS2005,ZhengD2011} for
spatial discretizations
in the current paper.
It should however be noted that the algorithm is general and
can also be implemented with other spatial
discretization techniques.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
The support from NSF (DMS-1318820) and
ONR (N000141110028) is gratefully acknowledged.
\input Appendix
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\section{Pressure Correction Scheme for Two-Phase Outflows}
\label{sec:method}
In this section we present several
new open boundary conditions for the two-phase
momentum equations, together with an algorithm
for numerically treating these open boundary conditions based on a rotational
pressure correction-type strategy.
\subsection{Governing Equations and Open Boundary Conditions}
\label{sec:formulation}
Let $\Omega$ denote a flow domain in
two or three dimensions (2-D or 3-D), and
$\partial\Omega$ denote the boundary of $\Omega$.
Consider the mixture of two immiscible incompressible
fluids contained in $\Omega$.
We use $\rho_1$ and $\rho_2$ to denote
the constant densities of the two individual
fluids, and use $\mu_1$ and $\mu_2$
to denote their constant dynamic viscosities.
With the phase field approach,
the motion of this mixture can be
described by the following system of
equations \cite{LiuS2003,YueFLS2004,DongS2012},
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\rho\left(
\frac{\partial\mathbf{u}}{\partial t} + \mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\mathbf{u}
\right)
= -\nabla p + \nabla\cdot\left[\mu \mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u}) \right]
- \lambda\nabla\cdot(\nabla\phi\otimes\nabla\phi)
+ \mathbf{f}
\label{equ:nse}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla\cdot \mathbf{u} = 0
\label{equ:continuity}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} + \mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\phi
= -\lambda\gamma_1\nabla^2\left[
\nabla^2\phi - h(\phi)
\right] + g(\mathbf{x},t)
\label{equ:CH}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where $\mathbf{x}$ and $t$ are respectively the spatial
coordinates and time,
$\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{x},t)$ is the velocity,
$p(\mathbf{x},t)$ is pressure,
$\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u}) = \nabla\mathbf{u}+\nabla\mathbf{u}^T$
(the superscript $T$ denotes transpose),
$\mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x},t)$ denotes some
external body force, and
$\otimes$ represents the tensor product.
$\phi(\mathbf{x},t)$ is the phase field function,
$-1\leqslant \phi\leqslant 1$.
Regions with $\phi=1$ denote the first fluid,
and the regions with $\phi=-1$ denote the second fluid.
The function $h(\phi)$ is given by
$
h(\phi) = \frac{1}{\eta^2}\phi(\phi^2-1),
$
where $\eta$ is the characteristic scale of
the interfacial thickness.
$\lambda$ is referred to as the mixing energy
density coefficient, and is given by \cite{YueFLS2004}
\begin{equation}
\lambda = \frac{3}{2\sqrt{2}}\sigma\eta
\end{equation}
where $\sigma$ is the surface tension
and assumed to be constant in the current
paper.
The constant $\gamma_1>0$ is the mobility coefficient
associated with the interface.
$\rho(\phi)$ and $\mu(\phi)$ are respectively the
density and dynamic viscosity of the mixture, given by
\begin{equation}
\rho(\phi) = \frac{1}{2}(\rho_1+\rho_2)
+ \frac{1}{2}(\rho_1-\rho_2) \phi, \qquad
\mu(\phi) = \frac{1}{2}(\mu_1+\mu_2)
+ \frac{1}{2}(\mu_1-\mu_2) \phi.
\label{equ:rho_mu}
\end{equation}
The function $g(\mathbf{x},t)$ in \eqref{equ:CH}
is a prescribed source term for the purpose of
numerical testing only, and will be set to
$g(\mathbf{x},t)=0$ in actual simulations.
Equation \eqref{equ:CH} with $g=0$ is
the Cahn-Hilliard equation.
We assume that
the domain boundary consists of three types
which are non-overlapping with one another:
\begin{equation}
\partial\Omega = \partial\Omega_{i} \cup \partial\Omega_w
\cup \partial\Omega_o.
\end{equation}
We refer to $\partial\Omega_i$ as the inflow boundary,
$\partial\Omega_w$ as the wall boundary,
and $\partial\Omega_o$ as the outflow or
open boundary.
On the inflow and the wall boundaries,
the velocity $\mathbf{u}$ is assumed to be known.
In addition, the phase field function $\phi$
is also assumed to be known on the inflow boundary.
On the wall boundary we assume that
the wettability property (i.e. contact angle)
is known.
On the other hand,
at the outflow/open boundary $\partial\Omega_o$
none of the flow variables (velocity $\mathbf{u}$,
pressure $p$, phase field function $\phi$)
is known.
Inspired by the two-phase energy balance
discussed in \cite{Dong2014obc},
we propose in the following several new boundary conditions
for the open boundary $\partial\Omega_o$:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- \left[\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi + F(\phi) \right]\mathbf{n}
- \frac{1}{4}\rho\left[
|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n} + (\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}
\right]\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\ \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o;
\label{equ:obc_v_C}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- \left[\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi + F(\phi) \right]\mathbf{n}
- \frac{1}{2}\rho\left[
|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n} + (\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}
\right]\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\ \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o;
\label{equ:obc_v_D}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- \left[\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi + F(\phi) \right]\mathbf{n}
- \left[\rho
|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n} \right]
\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\ \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o;
\label{equ:obc_v_A}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- \left[\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi + F(\phi) \right]\mathbf{n}
- \left[\rho
(\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u} \right]
\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\ \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o.
\label{equ:obc_v_B}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
In the above equations \eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B},
$\mathbf{n}$ is the outward-pointing unit vector
normal to $\partial\Omega_o$,
$|\mathbf{u}|$ denotes the magnitude of $\mathbf{u}$,
$\mu$ and $\rho$ are respectively
the mixture dynamic viscosity and density given
by \eqref{equ:rho_mu}.
The function $F(\phi)$ is given by
$
F(\phi) = \frac{\lambda}{4\eta^2}(1-\phi^2)^2,
$
and note that
$
\left[
\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi + F(\phi)
\right]
$
is the free energy density of the
two-phase system \cite{LiuS2003,YueFLS2004}.
$\mathbf{f}_b$ is a prescribed function on $\partial\Omega_o$
for the purpose of numerical testing only,
and will be set to $\mathbf{f}_b=0$ in actual
simulations.
$\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})$ is a smoothed
step function whose form is given by \cite{DongKC2014,Dong2014obc}
\begin{equation}
\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u}) = \frac{1}{2}\left(
1 - \tanh \frac{\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u}}{U_0\delta}
\right),
\label{equ:theta0_expr}
\end{equation}
where $U_0$ is the characteristic velocity scale,
and $\delta >0$ is a constant that is sufficiently small.
$\delta$ controls the sharpness of the smoothed
step function, and
$\Theta_0$ approaches the step function as $\delta \rightarrow 0$.
When $\delta$ is sufficiently small,
$\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})$ essentially
assumes the unit value where $\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u}<0$
and vanishes otherwise.
The boundary conditions \eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B}
belong to the following family of
boundary conditions for $\partial\Omega_o$,
\begin{multline}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- \left[\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi
+ F(\phi) \right]\mathbf{n} \\
- \left[ \left(1-\theta+\beta_1\right) \frac{1}{2}\rho
(\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}
+ \left(\theta + \beta_2 \right) \frac{1}{2}\rho
|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n}
\right]\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\ \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o,
\label{equ:obc_v_gobc}
\end{multline}
where $0\leqslant \theta \leqslant 1$,
$\beta_1\geqslant 0$ and $\beta_2\geqslant 0$
are constant parameters. One can verify that
the general form of open boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_gobc},
as $\delta \rightarrow 0$ and assuming $\mathbf{f}_b=0$,
is conducive to the stability of the two-phase
energy balance equation
given in \cite{Dong2014obc}.
The boundary conditions \eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B}
are particular cases of \eqref{equ:obc_v_gobc}.
For example, \eqref{equ:obc_v_C} corresponds to
$(\theta,\beta_1,\beta_2)=(1/2,0,0)$ and
\eqref{equ:obc_v_B} corresponds to
$(\theta,\beta_1,\beta_2)=(0,1,0)$ in \eqref{equ:obc_v_gobc}.
This general form also contains the following
two open boundary conditions as particular
cases, which are
proposed in \cite{Dong2014obc} and can be obtained by
respectively setting
$(\theta,\beta_1,\beta_2)=(1,0,0)$ and
$(\theta,\beta_1,\beta_2)=(0,0,0)$ in \eqref{equ:obc_v_gobc},
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- \left[\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi + F(\phi) \right]\mathbf{n}
- \left[ \frac{1}{2}\rho
|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n}
\right]\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\ \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o;
\label{equ:obc_v_E}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- \left[\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi + F(\phi) \right]\mathbf{n}
- \left[\frac{1}{2}\rho
(\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}
\right]\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\ \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o.
\label{equ:obc_v_F}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
The above boundary conditions on $\partial\Omega_o$ are for
the momentum equations \eqref{equ:nse}--\eqref{equ:continuity}.
In addition to them,
one also needs to supply appropriate boundary
conditions on $\partial\Omega_o$
for the phase field equation \eqref{equ:CH}.
Note that two independent conditions will be
needed on each boundary, due to the fourth spatial
order of equation \eqref{equ:CH}.
For the phase field function $\phi$, on
the outflow boundary $\partial\Omega_o$
we will employ the boundary conditions
developed in \cite{Dong2014obc}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\left[
\nabla^2\phi - h(\phi)
\right] = g_{a1}(\mathbf{x},t),
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o
\label{equ:obc_phi_1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\phi = -D_0\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t}
+ g_{a2}(\mathbf{x},t),
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o,
\label{equ:obc_phi_2}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where $g_{a1}$ and $g_{a2}$ are prescribed source terms
on $\partial\Omega_o$ for the purpose of numerical testing
only, and will be set to $g_{a1}=0$ and $g_{a2}=0$
in actual simulations.
The constant $D_0\geqslant 0$ is
a chosen non-negative constant, and $\frac{1}{D_0}$
plays the role of a convection velocity
at the outflow boundary $\partial\Omega_o$.
The boundary conditions for the other types of boundaries
(wall and inflow)
will be set in accordance with previous works \cite{Dong2012,Dong2014obc}.
We impose a Dirichlet condition for the velocity
on the inflow and wall boundaries,
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{u} = \mathbf{w}(\mathbf{x},t),
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i \cup \partial\Omega_w,
\label{equ:dbc_v}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{w}$ is the boundary velocity.
For the phase field function, we
impose the following condition from \cite{Dong2014obc}
on the inflow boundary,
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\phi = \phi_b(\mathbf{x},t), \quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i,
\label{equ:ibc_phi_1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\phi - h(\phi) = g_b(\mathbf{x},t),
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i,
\label{equ:ibc_phi_2}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where $\phi_b$ denotes the distribution of the
phase field function on the inflow boundary,
and $g_b$ is a prescribed source term for
numerical testing only and will be
set to $g_b=0$ in actual simulations.
On the wall boundary we employ
the contact-angle condition of
\cite{Dong2012}, considering only
the effect of the static contact angle,
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\left[
\nabla^2\phi - h(\phi)
\right] = g_{c1}(\mathbf{x},t),
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_w,
\label{equ:wbc_phi_1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\phi = \frac{3\sigma}{4\lambda}\cos\theta_s
(1-\phi^2)
+ g_{c2}(\mathbf{x},t),
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_w,
\label{equ:wbc_phi_2}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where $\theta_s$ is the static (equilibrium) contact
angle formed between the fluid interface and
the wall measured on the side of the first fluid,
$g_{c1}$ and $g_{c2}$ are two prescribed
source terms for the purpose of the numerical testing only
and will be set to $g_{c1}=0$ and $g_{c2}=0$
in actual simulations.
Finally, we assume that the following initial conditions for the
velocity and the phase field function are known
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{x},0) = \mathbf{u}_{in}(\mathbf{x}), \quad
\phi(\mathbf{x},0) = \phi_{in}(\mathbf{x}),
\label{equ:ic}
\end{equation}
where the initial velocity $\mathbf{u}_{in}$ and
the initial phase field function $\phi_{in}$
should be compatible with the above boundary conditions
and the governing equations.
\subsection{Two-Phase Momentum Equations: Algorithm and Implementation}
\label{sec:alg_momentum}
The system of equations \eqref{equ:nse}--\eqref{equ:CH},
the boundary conditions \eqref{equ:obc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2},
and one of the conditions among \eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B},
together with the initial conditions \eqref{equ:ic} for
the velocity and the phase field function,
constitute the overall system that need to be
solved in numerical simulations.
We next consider the numerical
solution of this system.
Because the phase field equation \eqref{equ:CH}
is coupled to the momentum equations
\eqref{equ:nse}--\eqref{equ:continuity} only
through the convection term, it is possible
and convenient to treat the momentum equations
and the phase field equation individually.
Indeed, by treating
the convection term in \eqref{equ:CH} explicitly,
one can de-couple the computation for
the phase field function from those for
the momentum equations.
On can first solve \eqref{equ:CH}
for the phase field function, and then solve
the momentum equations for the pressure and the velocity.
In the following
we will first concentrate
on the momentum equations \eqref{equ:nse}--\eqref{equ:continuity},
together with the associated boundary
conditions \eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B} for $\partial\Omega_o$
and \eqref{equ:dbc_v} for $\partial\Omega_i$ and $\partial\Omega_w$.
We defer the discussion of the solution
to the phase field equation to an Appendix
(see the subsequent Section \ref{sec:overall_method} for detail).
In subsequent discussions of this section
we assume that
the variables $\phi$ and $\nabla^2\phi$ have been
computed in appropriate ways and are
already available.
To facilitate the following discussions we introduce an
auxiliary pressure
\begin{equation}
P = p + \frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi
\end{equation}
which will also be loosely called pressure where
no confusion arises.
Then equation \eqref{equ:nse} can be transformed into
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial\mathbf{u}}{\partial t}
+ \mathbf{u}\cdot\nabla\mathbf{u} =
-\frac{1}{\rho}\nabla P
+ \frac{1}{\rho}\nabla\mu\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
+ \frac{\mu}{\rho}\nabla^2\mathbf{u}
-\frac{\lambda}{\rho}\nabla^2\phi\nabla\phi
+ \frac{1}{\rho}\mathbf{f}.
\label{equ:nse_trans_1}
\end{equation}
We further re-write the open boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B} or
\eqref{equ:obc_v_E}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_F}
into
a unified compact form
\begin{equation}
-P\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
- F(\phi)\mathbf{n} - \mathbf{E}(\rho,\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})
= \mathbf{f}_b,
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o,
\label{equ:obc_v_trans}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{E}(\rho,\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u}) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{4}\rho [
|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n} + (\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}
] \Theta_0(\mathbf{n},u), &
\text{for boundary condition} \ \eqref{equ:obc_v_C}; \\
\frac{1}{2}\rho[
|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n} + (\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}
] \Theta_0(\mathbf{n},u), &
\text{for boundary condition} \ \eqref{equ:obc_v_D}; \\
\rho|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n}\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},u), &
\text{for boundary condition} \ \eqref{equ:obc_v_A}; \\
\rho(\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},u), &
\text{for boundary condition} \ \eqref{equ:obc_v_B}; \\
\frac{1}{2}\rho|\mathbf{u}|^2\mathbf{n}\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},u), &
\text{for boundary condition} \ \eqref{equ:obc_v_E}; \\
\frac{1}{2}\rho(\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u})\mathbf{u}\Theta_0(\mathbf{n},u), &
\text{for boundary condition} \ \eqref{equ:obc_v_F}. \\
\end{array}
\right.
\label{equ:obc_v_E_expr}
\end{equation}
The following algorithm is for
the equations \eqref{equ:nse_trans_1} and \eqref{equ:continuity},
together with the boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:dbc_v} on $\partial\Omega_i\cup \partial\Omega_w$
and \eqref{equ:obc_v_trans} on $\partial\Omega_o$.
Note that the variables
$\phi$ and $\nabla^2\phi$ are assumed to be known
here, as discussed before.
Let $n$ denote the time step index,
and $(\cdot)^n$ denote the variable $(\cdot)$
at time step $n$.
We use $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^n$ and $\mathbf{u}^n$
to denote two slightly different approximations of
the velocity at time step $n$.
Define
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^0 = \mathbf{u}_{in}, \quad
\mathbf{u}^0 = \mathbf{u}_{in}, \quad
\phi^0 = \phi_{in}.
\end{equation}
By enforcing equation \eqref{equ:nse_trans_1}
at time step zero, one can compute
the initial pressure $P^0$ as follows.
Let
\begin{equation}
H_{p0}^1(\Omega) = \{ \
v \in H^1(\Omega) \ : \ v|_{\partial\Omega_o}=0
\ \},
\label{equ:H1_p0}
\end{equation}
and $q\in H^1_{p0}(\Omega)$ denote the test function.
By taking the inner product between $\nabla q$ and
equation \eqref{equ:nse_trans_1} and integrating by part,
one obtains the weak form about $P^0$,
\begin{multline}
\int_{\Omega} \frac{1}{\rho^0}\nabla P^0\cdot\nabla q
= \int_{\Omega}\left[
\frac{1}{\rho^0}\mathbf{f}^0
- \tilde{\mathbf{u}}^0\cdot\nabla\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^0
+ \frac{1}{\rho^0}\nabla\mu^0\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^0)
- \frac{\lambda}{\rho^0}\Psi\nabla\phi^0
+ \nabla\left(\frac{\mu^0}{\rho^0} \right) \times \tilde{\bm{\omega}}^0
\right] \cdot \nabla q \\
- \int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w\cup\partial\Omega_o}
\frac{\mu^0}{\rho^0}\mathbf{n}\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^0\cdot\nabla q
- \int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\left.\frac{\partial\mathbf{w}}{\partial t}\right|^0 q,
\quad \forall q\in H_{p0}^1(\Omega),
\label{equ:init_p}
\end{multline}
where
\begin{equation}
\rho^0 = \rho(\phi^0), \quad
\mu^0 = \mu(\phi^0), \quad
\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^0 = \nabla\times\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^0.
\label{equ:rho_mu_step_0}
\end{equation}
$\left.\frac{\partial\mathbf{w}}{\partial t}\right|^0$
is the time derivative at time step zero, which can be
numerically computed based on the
second-order backward differential
formula (BDF2) because the boundary
velocity $\mathbf{w}(\mathbf{x},t)$ is
known on $\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w$.
$\Psi$ represents the projection of
$\nabla^2\phi^0$ into the $H^1(\Omega)$ space, and is given
by the following weak form ($\varphi$ denoting the test function),
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega} \Psi\varphi
= -\int_{\Omega} \nabla\phi^0\cdot\nabla\varphi
+ \int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w\cup\partial\Omega_o}
(\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\phi^0)\varphi,
\quad \forall \varphi \in H^1(\Omega).
\label{equ:laplace_phi}
\end{equation}
The weak forms \eqref{equ:init_p}
and \eqref{equ:laplace_phi} can be discretized in space
using $C^0$
spectral elements (or finite elements).
We solve equation \eqref{equ:init_p},
together with the Dirichlet condition
\begin{equation}
P^0 = \mu^0\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^0)\cdot\mathbf{n}
- F(\phi^0)
- \mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{E}(\rho^0, \mathbf{n}, \tilde{\mathbf{u}}^0)
- \mathbf{f}_b^0\cdot\mathbf{n},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o,
\end{equation}
to obtain the initial pressure $P^0$,
where $\Psi$ is obtained by
solving equation \eqref{equ:laplace_phi}.
Given $(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^n,\mathbf{u}^n,P^n,
\phi^{n+1},\nabla^2\phi^{n+1})$,
where $\phi^{n+1}$ and $\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}$
are assumed known and result from the algorithm for
the phase field equation to be discussed later,
we compute $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}$, $\mathbf{u}^{n+1}$ and $P^{n+1}$,
together with an auxiliary field variable $\xi^{n+1}$,
successively in a de-coupled fashion
as follows: \\[0.1in]
\underline{For $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}$:}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{\gamma_0\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}-\hat{\mathbf{u}}}{\Delta t}
& + \tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}\cdot\nabla\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}
+ \frac{1}{\rho_m}\nabla P^n
- \nu_m\nabla^2\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
=
\left( \frac{1}{\rho_m} - \frac{1}{\rho^{n+1}} \right) \nabla P^{*,n+1} \\
&
+ \frac{1}{\rho^{n+1}}\nabla\mu^{n+1}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1})
- \left( \frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}}-\nu_m \right)
\nabla\times\nabla\times \tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1} \\
&
- \frac{\lambda}{\rho^{n+1}}\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}\nabla\phi^{n+1}
+ \frac{1}{\rho^{n+1}}\mathbf{f}^{n+1}
\end{split}
\label{equ:velocity_1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1} = \mathbf{w}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w
\label{equ:velocity_2}
\end{equation}
\begin{multline}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1})
=
\left(1 - \frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\mu_0} \right)
\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}) \\
+ \frac{1}{\mu_0}\left[
P^{*,n+1}\mathbf{n} + F(\phi^{n+1})\mathbf{n}
+ \mathbf{E}(\rho^{n+1},\mathbf{n},\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1})
+ \mathbf{f}_b^{n+1}
\right],
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o
\label{equ:velocity_3}
\end{multline}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
= \mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1})
- \mathbf{n}\cdot(\nabla\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1})^T,
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o.
\label{equ:velocity_4}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
\underline{For $\xi^{n+1}$:}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\gamma_0}{\Delta t}\xi^{n+1} - \nu_m\nabla^2\xi^{n+1}
=
\nabla\cdot \mathbf{G}^{n+1}
+ \nabla\left(\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} \right)
\cdot\nabla\times\nabla\times\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
\label{equ:xi_1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\xi^{n+1}
=
\frac{1}{\nu_m}\mathbf{n}\cdot
\frac{\gamma_0\mathbf{w}^{n+1}-\hat{\mathbf{w}}}{\Delta t}
- \frac{1}{\nu_m}\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{G}^{n+1}
+ \frac{1}{\nu_m}\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\times\nabla\times\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w
\label{equ:xi_2}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\xi^{n+1} = \nabla\cdot\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o.
\label{equ:xi_3}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
\underline{For $P^{n+1}$:}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\gamma_0\mathbf{u}^{n+1}-\gamma_0\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}}{\Delta t}
+ \frac{1}{\rho_m} \nabla(P^{n+1} - P^n + \rho_m\nu_m\xi^{n+1}) = 0
\label{equ:pressure_1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla\cdot\mathbf{u}^{n+1} = 0
\label{equ:pressure_2}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{u}^{n+1} = \mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{w}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w
\label{equ:pressure_3}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
P^{n+1} = \mu^{n+1}\mathbf{n}\cdot
\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1})\cdot\mathbf{n}
- F(\phi^{n+1})
- \mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{E}(\rho^{n+1},\mathbf{n},\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1})
- \mu_{\min}\nabla\cdot\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1},
\quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o.
\label{equ:pressure_4}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
The notation employed
in the equations \eqref{equ:velocity_1}--\eqref{equ:pressure_4}
is as follows.
Let $J$ ($J=1$ or $2$) denote the temporal order
of the scheme, and $\chi$ denote a generic
variable.
Then in the above equations,
$\chi^{*,n+1}$ is a $J$-th order explicit
approximation of $\chi^{n+1}$, given by
\begin{equation}
\chi^{*,n+1} = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\chi^n, & J=1 \\
2\chi^n - \chi^{n-1}, & J=2.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{equ:var_star_def}
\end{equation}
The expression
$
\frac{1}{\Delta t}(\gamma_0\chi^{n+1}-\hat{\chi})
$
denotes an approximation of
$
\left.\frac{\partial\chi}{\partial t} \right|^{n+1}
$
by the $J$-th order backward differentiation formula,
where $\Delta t$ is the time step size and
\begin{equation}
\hat{\chi} = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\chi^n, & J=1 \\
2\chi^n - \frac{1}{2}\chi^{n-1}, & J=2,
\end{array}
\right.
\qquad
\gamma_0 = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1, & J=1 \\
\frac{3}{2}, & J=2.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{equ:var_hat_def}
\end{equation}
In equations \eqref{equ:xi_1} and \eqref{equ:xi_2}
$\mathbf{G}^{n+1}$ is given by
\begin{multline}
\mathbf{G}^{n+1} =
\frac{1}{\rho^{n+1}}\mathbf{f}^{n+1}
-\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}\cdot\nabla\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1}
-\frac{1}{\rho_m}\nabla P^n
+\left(\frac{1}{\rho_m} - \frac{1}{\rho^{n+1}} \right)\nabla P^{*,n+1} \\
+\frac{1}{\rho^{n+1}}\nabla\mu^{n+1}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1})
-\frac{\lambda}{\rho^{n+1}}\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}\nabla\phi^{n+1}.
\label{equ:G_expr}
\end{multline}
The function $\mathbf{E}(\rho,\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})$ is defined
by equation \eqref{equ:obc_v_E_expr}.
$\rho^{n+1}$ and $\mu^{n+1}$ are given by
equation \eqref{equ:rho_mu} and by using $\phi^{n+1}$.
In equation \eqref{equ:pressure_4} $\mu_{\min} = \min(\mu_1,\mu_2)$.
In the above equations, $\rho_m$ is a chosen
constant that must satisfy the condition
\begin{equation}
0 < \rho_m \leqslant \min(\rho_1,\rho_2).
\label{equ:rho_m_condition}
\end{equation}
This condition is critical to the stability of the scheme.
The scheme is observed to be unstable if this condition is
violated.
We will employ $\rho_m=\min(\rho_1,\rho_2)$ for
the numerical simulations in Section \ref{sec:tests}.
$\nu_m$ is a chosen constant that is sufficiently large,
and a reasonable condition is
\begin{equation}
\nu_m \geqslant \frac{1}{2}\left(
\frac{\mu_1}{\rho_1} + \frac{\mu_2}{\rho_2}
\right).
\end{equation}
$\mu_0$ in equation \eqref{equ:velocity_3}
is a chosen constant that is sufficiently large.
In the presence of open boundaries
and when $\mu_1 \neq\mu_2$,
the scheme is
observed to be unstable if
$\mu_0 \leqslant \min(\mu_1,\mu_2)$.
We will use $\mu_0\geqslant \max(\mu_1,\mu_2)$
in the numerical simulations in Section \ref{sec:tests}.
It is observed that
increasing $\nu_m$
tends to improve the stability.
Increasing $\mu_0$ also tends to improve
the stability in the presence of open boundaries.
Note that
the constant $\mu_0$ here should not be confused
with the field variable $\mu^{0}=\mu(\phi^0)$
in equation \eqref{equ:rho_mu_step_0},
which represents the distribution of
the dynamic viscosity at time step zero.
We would like to make several comments on the above
scheme:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The computations for the pressure $P^{n+1}$
and the velocity $\tilde{u}^{n+1}$ are de-coupled in
this algorithm, and
the velocity $\mathbf{u}^{n+1}$ can be
evaluated based on equation \eqref{equ:pressure_1}
once $P^{n+1}$ is computed.
One can recognize that the overall construction of the scheme
resembles
a rotational pressure-correction type
strategy \cite{GuermondMS2006}.
However, the formulation here contains features
that distinguish it
from the usual pressure-correction formulations.
Most notably, the current scheme
involves a discrete equation and associated boundary
conditions, \eqref{equ:xi_1}--\eqref{equ:xi_3},
about an auxiliary variable $\xi^{n+1}$.
In addition, the pressure $P^{n+1}$ from the current
scheme resides in the $H^1(\Omega)$ space.
In contrast, the pressure from
the usual pressure-correction formulations
resides in the $L^2(\Omega)$ space (see \cite{GuermondMS2006}).
\item
The variable $\xi^{n+1}$ is an approximation of
the quantity $\nabla\cdot\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}$.
The equation \eqref{equ:xi_1} about
$\xi^{n+1}$ exists only in the discrete
sense. It is different than the dynamic
equation about $\nabla\cdot\mathbf{u}$
at the continuum level.
\item
The scheme leads to linear algebraic systems involving only
{\em constant} and
{\em time-independent} coefficient matrices
for the pressure, velocity, and
the variable $\xi^{n+1}$ after discretization.
This is due to the reformulations
of the pressure term and the viscous term, and
the introduction of
the constants $\rho_m$
and $\nu_m$ in the scheme.
The reformulation of the pressure term
for coping with the variable density
is proposed by \cite{DongS2012}.
The idea for the treatment of the viscous term
for dealing with the variable viscosity
can be traced to the early works in the 1970s
(e.g. \cite{GottliebO1977});
see also later works
in e.g. \cite{BadalassiCB2003,DongS2012}.
Because only constant and time-independent
coefficient matrices are involved, which
can be pre-computed during pre-processing,
the current scheme is computationally
very attractive and efficient.
\item
In the velocity substep we impose a velocity
Neumann-type condition,
\eqref{equ:velocity_3}--\eqref{equ:velocity_4},
on the open boundary $\partial\Omega_o$.
The discrete condition \eqref{equ:velocity_3}
originates from the open boundary
condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_trans}.
But it contains constructions
involving the constant $\mu_0$, which are
critical to the stability if open boundaries are present.
In the absence of the $\mu_0$ constructions,
the computation is unstable when
the viscosity ratio of the two fluids becomes
large and when the fluid interface passes through
the open boundaries.
The idea of the $\mu_0$ construction for treating
the variable viscosity at the open boundary
is first proposed by \cite{Dong2014obc}.
However, there exists a crucial difference
in terms of stability between the
current scheme and that of \cite{Dong2014obc}.
The algorithm of \cite{Dong2014obc}
is based on a velocity-correction type
strategy, and it is observed that a
smaller $\mu_0$ constant
tends to improve the stability of that scheme
in the presence of open boundaries \cite{Dong2014obc}.
In contrast, the current scheme is
based on a pressure-correction type strategy,
and we observe that a larger $\mu_0$
constant tends to improve the stability of
the scheme when open boundaries are present.
\item
In the pressure substep we impose
a pressure Dirichlet condition,
\eqref{equ:pressure_4},
on the open boundary $\partial\Omega_o$.
This discrete condition results
essentially from taking the inner product
between $\mathbf{n}$ and
the open boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_trans}.
However, note that it contains an
extra term $\mu_{\min}\nabla\cdot\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}$
in the construction.
\end{itemize}
We employ $C^0$ continuous spectral
elements \cite{SherwinK1995,KarniadakisS2005,ZhengD2011}
for spatial discretizations in the current paper.
Let us next consider how to implement
the algorithm, represented
by \eqref{equ:velocity_1}--\eqref{equ:pressure_4},
using $C^0$ spectral elements.
The formulations presented below
with no change also applies to
$C^0$ finite elements.
The main issue with regard to the
implementation arises from
the terms such as
$
\nabla\times\nabla\times\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1},
$
$
\nabla\times\nabla\times\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1},
$
and
$
\nabla\cdot\mathbf{G}^{n+1}
$
involved in the algorithm.
These terms cannot be directly computed
in the discrete space of $C^0$ elements.
Note that the term
$\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}$ itself may
also cause difficulty to $C^0$ elements.
However, this term
will be computed in a proper fashion using
$C^0$ elements later when discussing how to solve
the phase field equation.
So here we assume that
$\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}$ is already available
in a suitable form.
We will derive weak forms of the algorithm
for different flow variables.
In the process the terms causing difficulty to
$C^0$ elements will be treated
in an appropriate way.
Let $\tilde{\bm{\omega}}=\nabla\times\tilde{\mathbf{u}}$
denote the vorticity.
Equation \eqref{equ:velocity_1} can be
re-written as
\begin{equation}
\frac{\gamma_0}{\nu_m\Delta t}\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
- \nabla^2\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
= \frac{1}{\nu_m}\left[
\mathbf{G}^{n+1} + \frac{\hat{\mathbf{u}}}{\Delta t}
\right]
-\frac{1}{\nu_m}\left(
\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} - \nu_m
\right)
\nabla \times \tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{*,n+1},
\label{equ:velocity_1_reform_1}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{G}^{n+1}$ is given
by \eqref{equ:G_expr}.
Let
\begin{equation}
H_{u0}(\Omega) = \{\
v\in H^1(\Omega) \ : \
v|_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w} = 0
\ \},
\end{equation}
and $\varphi\in H_{u0}^1(\Omega)$
denote the test function.
Taking the $L^2$ inner product
between $\varphi$ and equation
\eqref{equ:velocity_1_reform_1},
and integrating by part,
we get the weak form about $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{\gamma_0}{\nu_m\Delta t}
\int_{\Omega} \varphi\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
&+ \int_{\Omega}\nabla\varphi\cdot\nabla\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
=
\frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\Omega}\left[
\mathbf{G}^{n+1} + \frac{\hat{\mathbf{u}}}{\Delta t}
+ \nabla\left(\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} \right)
\times \tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{*,n+1}
\right]\varphi \\
&
- \frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\Omega}\left(
\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} - \nu_m
\right)
\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{*,n+1}\times\nabla\varphi
- \frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\partial\Omega_o}\left(
\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} - \nu_m
\right)
\mathbf{n}\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{*,n+1}\varphi \\
&
+ \int_{\partial\Omega_o}\left\{
\frac{1}{\mu_0}\left[
P^{*,n+1}\mathbf{n}+ F(\phi^{n+1})\mathbf{n}
+ \mathbf{E}(\rho^{n+1},\mathbf{n},\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1})
+ \mathbf{f}_b^{n+1}
\right]
\right. \\
& \qquad\qquad
\left.
+\left(1-\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\mu_0} \right)
\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1})
- \mathbf{n}\cdot(\nabla\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{*,n+1})^T
\right\} \varphi,
\quad \forall \varphi\in H^1_{u0}(\Omega).
\end{split}
\label{equ:vel_weakform}
\end{equation}
When deriving the above weak form we have
used the equations \eqref{equ:velocity_3} and
\eqref{equ:velocity_4}, and the following identity
($K$ denoting a scalar field function)
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega}K(\nabla\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}})\varphi
= \int_{\partial\Omega}K (\mathbf{n}\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}})\varphi
- \int_{\Omega}(\nabla K\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}})\varphi
+ \int_{\Omega}K(\tilde{\bm{\omega}}\times\nabla\varphi).
\end{equation}
Let $\vartheta\in H^1_{p0}(\Omega)$ denote the
test function, where
$H_{p0}^1(\Omega)$ is defined in \eqref{equ:H1_p0}.
Taking the $L^2$ inner product between
$\vartheta$ and equation \eqref{equ:xi_1},
and integrating by part, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{\gamma_0}{\nu_m\Delta t}
\int_{\Omega}\xi^{n+1}\vartheta
& + \int_{\Omega}\nabla\xi^{n+1}\cdot\nabla\vartheta
=
-\frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\Omega}\left[
\mathbf{G}^{n+1}
+ \nabla\left(\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} \right)\times
\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{n+1}
\right] \cdot \nabla\vartheta \\
&
+ \frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\frac{\gamma_0\mathbf{w}^{n+1}-\hat{\mathbf{w}}}{\Delta t}\vartheta
+ \frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w}
\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}}\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\times
\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{n+1} \vartheta \\
&
- \frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\partial\Omega}
\nabla\left(\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} \right)\cdot
\mathbf{n}\times \tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{n+1} \vartheta,
\quad \forall \vartheta\in H_{p0}^1(\Omega),
\end{split}
\label{equ:xi_1_reform_1}
\end{equation}
where we have used the fact that $\vartheta\in H_{p0}^1(\Omega)$,
equation \eqref{equ:xi_2}, the divergence
theorem, and the following identity
($K$ denoting a scalar field function)
\begin{equation}
\nabla K \cdot \nabla\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}}\vartheta
= \nabla\cdot(\tilde{\bm{\omega}}\times\nabla K \vartheta)
+ \nabla K\cdot(\tilde{\bm{\omega}}\times\nabla\vartheta).
\end{equation}
We note the identity
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w}\frac{\mu}{\rho}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}}\vartheta
&= \int_{\partial\Omega}\frac{\mu}{\rho}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\nabla\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}}\vartheta \\
&
= \int_{\partial\Omega}
\nabla\left(\frac{\mu}{\rho} \right)\cdot
\mathbf{n}\times\tilde{\bm{\omega}}\vartheta
+ \int_{\partial\Omega}\frac{\mu}{\rho}
\mathbf{n}\cdot \tilde{\bm{\omega}}\times\nabla\vartheta,
\quad \forall \vartheta\in H^1_{p0}(\Omega),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have used the fact $\vartheta\in H^1_{p0}(\Omega)$,
and have repeatedly used the divergence theorem.
Then, equation \eqref{equ:xi_1_reform_1}
can be transformed into the final weak form about $\xi^{n+1}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{\gamma_0}{\nu_m\Delta t}
\int_{\Omega}\xi^{n+1}\vartheta
& + \int_{\Omega}\nabla\xi^{n+1}\cdot\nabla\vartheta
=
-\frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\Omega}\left[
\mathbf{G}^{n+1}
+ \nabla\left(\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}} \right)\times
\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{n+1}
\right] \cdot \nabla\vartheta \\
&
+ \frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w}
\mathbf{n}\cdot\frac{\gamma_0\mathbf{w}^{n+1}-\hat{\mathbf{w}}}{\Delta t}\vartheta
+ \frac{1}{\nu_m}\int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w\cup\partial\Omega_o}
\frac{\mu^{n+1}}{\rho^{n+1}}\mathbf{n}\times
\tilde{\bm{\omega}}^{n+1}\cdot\nabla \vartheta, \\
&
\ \forall \vartheta\in H_{p0}^1(\Omega).
\end{split}
\label{equ:xi_weakform}
\end{equation}
Let $q \in H^1_{p0}(\Omega)$ denote the test function.
Taking the $L^2$ inner product between
$\nabla q$ and equation \eqref{equ:pressure_1}
and integrating by part, we obtain
the weak form about $P^{n+1}$,
\begin{multline}
\int_{\Omega}\nabla P^{n+1}\cdot\nabla q
=
\int_{\Omega} \left[
\frac{\gamma_0\rho_m}{\Delta t}\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
+ \nabla\left(P^n - \rho_m\nu_m\xi^{n+1} \right)
\right] \cdot \nabla q \\
- \frac{\gamma_0\rho_m}{\Delta t}
\int_{\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w}
\mathbf{n}\cdot \mathbf{w}^{n+1} q,
\quad \forall q\in H^1_{p0}(\Omega),
\label{equ:p_weakform}
\end{multline}
where we have used the divergence theorem, and the
equations \eqref{equ:pressure_2} and \eqref{equ:pressure_3}.
One can observe that
the weak forms \eqref{equ:vel_weakform},
\eqref{equ:xi_weakform} and \eqref{equ:p_weakform}
involve no derivatives of order two or higher,
and all the terms can be computed directly
with $C^0$ elements.
These weak forms can be discretized in space
using $C^0$ spectral elements in
the standard way \cite{KarniadakisS2005}.
Given $(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^n, \mathbf{u}^n,P^n,\phi^{n+1},
\nabla^2\phi^{n+1})$,
our final algorithm for solving
the momentum equations therefore
consists of the following procedure. We refer to
this procedure as {\bf AdvanceMomentum} hereafter.
It produces
$(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1},\mathbf{u}^{n+1},P^{n+1})$
as follows: \\
\underline{{\bf AdvanceMomentum} procedure:}
\begin{itemize}
\item
Solve equation \eqref{equ:vel_weakform},
together with the velocity Dirichlet condition
\eqref{equ:velocity_2} on $\partial\Omega_i\cup\partial\Omega_w$,
for $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}$;
\item
Solve equation \eqref{equ:xi_weakform},
together with the Dirichlet condition \eqref{equ:xi_3}
on $\partial\Omega_o$, for $\xi^{n+1}$;
\item
Solve equation \eqref{equ:p_weakform},
together with the pressure Dirichlet condition
\eqref{equ:pressure_4} on $\partial\Omega_o$, for $P^{n+1}$;
\item
Evaluate $\mathbf{u}^{n+1}$ based on equation
\eqref{equ:pressure_1} in the following form:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{u}^{n+1} = \tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}
- \frac{\Delta t}{\gamma_0\rho_m}\nabla\left(
P^{n+1} - P^n + \rho_m\nu_m \xi^{n+1}
\right).
\label{equ:u_expr_eval}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
In the above algorithm,
when imposing the Dirichlet condition \eqref{equ:xi_3}
about $\xi^{n+1}$ on $\partial\Omega_o$ and
when imposing the pressure Dirichlet condition
\eqref{equ:pressure_4} on $\partial\Omega_o$,
it should be noted that with $C^0$ elements
one needs to first project
the Dirichlet data computed from these equations
into the $H^1(\partial\Omega_o)$,
and then impose the projected data as the
Dirichlet condition.
This is because the expressions for
the boundary conditions of \eqref{equ:xi_3}
and \eqref{equ:pressure_4} involve derivatives,
which may not be continuous across element boundaries
on $\partial\Omega_o$ for $C^0$ elements.
One can observe that the
{\bf AdvanceMomentum} algorithm has the following
characteristics: (i) The computations
for the velocity, the pressure, and
the field variable $\xi^{n+1}$ are all
de-coupled;
(ii) The computations for
the different components of
the velocity $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1}$
are de-coupled in \eqref{equ:vel_weakform};
(iii) All resultant linear algebraic
systems from the algorithm involve only
constant and time-independent coefficient
matrices, which can be pre-computed.
As discussed in \cite{DongS2012},
the density $\rho^{n+1}$ and the dynamic
viscosity $\mu^{n+1}$
computed according to equation \eqref{equ:rho_mu}
based on $\phi^{n+1}$ may
encounter numerical difficulties
when the density ratio between the two
fluids becomes very large or conversely
very small.
This is because the numerically-computed
$\phi$ may not exactly lie within
the range $[-1,1]$ and
may be slightly out of bound at certain
spatial points in the domain,
because of the interaction between mass
conservation and the minimization of
the free energy inherent in the Cahn-Hilliard
dynamics \cite{DongS2012}.
At large density ratios,
the slightly out-of-range values of $\phi$
may cause the density or
the dynamic viscosity computed
from \eqref{equ:rho_mu} to become negative
at certain points, thus causing numerical
difficulties.
Following \cite{DongS2012},
when the density ratio becomes large or conversely
small (typically beyond $10^2$ or below $10^{-2}$),
we will use the following modified function
for computing the mixture density and dynamic
viscosity,
\begin{equation}
\hat{\phi} = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\phi, & \text{if} \ |\phi|\leqslant 1, \\
\text{sign}(\phi), & \text{if} \ |\phi|>1;
\end{array}
\right.
\ \
\rho = \frac{1}{2}\left(\rho_1+\rho_2 \right)
+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\rho_1-\rho_2 \right)\hat{\phi};
\ \
\mu = \frac{1}{2}\left(\mu_1+\mu_2 \right)
+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\mu_1-\mu_2 \right)\hat{\phi}.
\label{equ:rho_mu_modified}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Overall Method for Two-Phase Flow Simulations}
\label{sec:overall_method}
Let us now consider the numerical solution of the phase field
equation \eqref{equ:CH}, together with
the boundary conditions \eqref{equ:ibc_phi_1}
and \eqref{equ:ibc_phi_2} for $\partial\Omega_i$,
\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1} and \eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2}
for $\partial\Omega_w$, and
\eqref{equ:obc_phi_1} and \eqref{equ:obc_phi_2}
for $\partial\Omega_o$.
In a previous work \cite{DongS2012}, we have
developed an algorithm for the phase field equation
\eqref{equ:CH}.
This algorithm
computes the phase field function $\phi^{n+1}$
and $\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}$ (both in $H^1(\Omega)$ space) by solving
two Helmholtz type equations in a successive but
un-coupled fashion.
We will employ this algorithm for the
phase field equation in the current work.
For the sake of completeness, we provide a summary
of this algorithm for solving the phase field equation
together with the boundary conditions
in the Appendix of this paper,
and it is referred to as the {\bf AdvancePhase}
procedure (see the Appendix).
Our overall method for simulating incompressible
two-phase flows is a combination of
the algorithm presented in
Section \ref{sec:alg_momentum} for the
momentum equations and the algorithm
in the Appendix for the phase field equation.
Specifically,
given $(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^n,\mathbf{u}^n,P^n,\phi^n)$,
the overall discrete formulation of the method consists of
equations \eqref{equ:phi_1}--\eqref{equ:phi_8} (in the Appendix),
\eqref{equ:velocity_1}--\eqref{equ:velocity_4},
\eqref{equ:xi_1}--\eqref{equ:xi_3},
and \eqref{equ:pressure_1}--\eqref{equ:pressure_4}.
With $C^0$ spectral-element spatial discretizations,
we go through the developments discussed in
Section \ref{sec:alg_momentum} and in the Appendix
to obtain the weak forms for the field variables.
The final solution procedure
is composed of
the following steps:
\begin{itemize}
\item
Compute $\phi^{n+1}$ and $\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}$
based on the {\bf AdvancePhase} procedure discussed in the Appendix.
\item
Compute $\rho^{n+1}$ and $\mu^{n+1}$ according to
equation \eqref{equ:rho_mu} by using $\phi^{n+1}$
computed above.
When the density ratio becomes large or conversely small
(typically above $10^2$ or below $10^{-2}$), use
equation \eqref{equ:rho_mu_modified} instead.
\item
Compute $(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}^{n+1},\mathbf{u}^{n+1},P^{n+1})$
based on the {\bf AdvanceMomentum} procedure
discussed in Section \ref{sec:alg_momentum},
using $\phi^{n+1}$, $\nabla^2\phi^{n+1}$,
$\rho^{n+1}$, and $\mu^{n+1}$ computed
above.
\end{itemize}
It can be observed that this method
has the following characteristics:
(1) The computations for all the flow
variables and auxiliary variables are
completely de-coupled;
(2) All the resultant linear algebraic systems
after discretization involve only {\em constant}
and {\em time-independent} coefficient matrices,
which can be pre-computed;
(3) Within each time step, the method
involves only the solution of
individual Helmholtz-type (including Poisson)
equations;
(4) The method is suitable for large density
ratios and large viscosity ratios,
which will be demonstrated using numerical
simulations in Section \ref{sec:tests}.
\section{Concluding Remarks}
\label{sec:summary}
We have presented
several new open boundary conditions
for two-phase outflows, and a
rotational pressure-correction based
algorithm for solving the two-phase momentum equations
in conjunction with the proposed
open boundary conditions.
These techniques are then combined with a solver
for the phase-field equation
to form an efficient and effective method
for simulating incompressible two-phase flows
involving open/outflow boundaries.
The two-phase open boundary conditions
presented here are inspired by the
two-phase energy balance
discussed in the previous work \cite{Dong2014obc}.
The current work has provided a generalization
and several new forms for
the open boundary condition
beyond those developed in \cite{Dong2014obc}
for the momentum equations.
The algorithm presented herein
for the two-phase momentum equations
is based on a rotational
pressure correction-type strategy
for de-coupling the velocity/pressure
computations.
More importantly, the current algorithm
results in velocity and the pressure linear
algebraic systems with {\em constant} and
{\em time-independent} coefficient matrices
after discretization, despite the
variable nature of the mixture density and
mixture viscosity.
Therefore, these coefficient matrices can be
pre-computed during pre-processing.
In a previous work \cite{DongS2012} we have developed
a {\em velocity correction-based} algorithm
for the variable-density Navier-Stokes equations
that possesses similar properties (leading to
constant coefficient matrices for pressure/velocity
linear systems); see also subsequent applications and
further developments
based on that algorithm in \cite{Dong2012,Dong2014obc,Dong2014nphase}.
The algorithm developed herein
in a sense can be considered as the {\em pressure-correction
counterpart} to the scheme of \cite{DongS2012}.
The implementation of the algorithm
presented herein is suitable for $C^0$
spectral elements, and with no change it
also applies to conventional finite elements.
It should be noted that the rotational
pressure correction
formulation embodied in the current algorithm
has a difference to the usual pressure correction
formulations (see e.g. \cite{GuermondMS2006}),
in that apart from the velocity/pressure
we have introduced a discrete equation
and the corresponding boundary conditions
for another field variable $\xi^{n+1}$
in the algorithmic formulation.
The numerical treatments for the
open boundary conditions proposed
herein involve imposing a discrete Neumann type
condition on the outflow boundary at
the velocity substep, and two discrete Dirichlet type
conditions on the outflow boundary
at the substeps for $\xi^{n+1}$ and pressure
respectively.
The discrete velocity-Neumann and
the pressure-Dirichlet conditions on
the outflow boundary
stem largely from the
continuous open boundary condition.
But they contain modifications and additional terms
that are essential to
the stability of the algorithm.
To demonstrate the physical accuracy of
the method developed herein, we have considered
the capillary wave problem and compared quantitatively
the numerical solution
with the two-phase exact physical solution
by \cite{Prosperetti1981} for
a range of density ratios (up to $1000$).
The comparisons show that our method has produced
physically accurate results.
We have also considered the bounce of
a water droplet on a superhydrophobic
surface, and compared the restitution coefficients
from the simulations and
the experimental measurement
of \cite{RichardQ2000}.
The simulation results are in good agreement with
the experimental data.
We have further simulated the air jet in water problem
to test the effectiveness of the open boundary
conditions and the numerical algorithm
for two-phase problems
involving outflow or open boundaries.
This problem involves large density ratio, large
viscosity ratio, and backflows or vortices
at the two-phase open boundary.
The results demonstrate the long-time stability
of the method presented herein.
It is also shown that
our boundary conditions allow
the fluid interface to pass through
the open domain boundary in a smooth
and seamless fashion.
\section{Representative Numerical Tests}
\label{sec:tests}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}
l c | l c}
\hline
variables/parameters & normalization constants &
variables/parameters & normalization constants \\
$\mathbf{x}$, $\eta$ & $L$ & $\sigma$ & $\rho_1U_0^2L$ \\
$\mathbf{u}$, $\mathbf{u}_{in}$, $\mathbf{w}$ & $U_0$ & $D_0$ & $1/U_0$ \\
$t$, $\Delta t$ & $L/U_0$ & $\gamma_1$ & $L/(\rho_1U_0)$ \\
$\mathbf{g}_r$ (gravity) & $U_0^2/L$ & $\lambda$ & $\rho_1U_0^2 L^2$ \\
$p$, $P$, $\mathbf{f}_b$ & $\rho_1U_0^2$ & $\nu_m$ & $U_0L$ \\
$\phi$, $\hat{\phi}$, $\phi_b$, $\phi_{in}$, $\theta_s$ & $1$ & $\mathbf{f}$ & $\rho_1U_0^2/L$ \\
$\rho$, $\rho_1$, $\rho_2$, $\rho_m$ & $\rho_1$ & $\xi^n$, $g$ & $U_0/L$ \\
$\mu$, $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$, $\mu_0$ & $\rho_1U_0L$ & $g_{a1}$ & $1/L^4$ \\
$g_{a2}$, $g_{c2}$ & $1/L$ & $g_b$ & $1/L^2$ \\
$g_{c1}$ & $1/L^3$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{center}
\caption{Normalization constants for the flow variables and parameters.}
\label{tab:normalization}
\end{table}
In this section
we demonstrate the accuracy of
the method presented in Section \ref{sec:method}
and its capability
for coping with two-phase outflows and open boundaries
using several two-phase flow
problems.
These test problems are in two dimensions.
They involve two-phase
open boundaries,
and large contrasts in densities
and dynamic viscosities of the two fluids.
Simulation results will be compared
with the experimental data and with the
exact physical solutions from theory
to demonstrate that
the method developed herein produces physically
accurate results.
We first briefly mention
the normalization of the governing equations and physical
parameters, which
has been discussed at length in previous
works \cite{Dong2012,Dong2014obc}.
Let $L$ denote the characteristic length scale
and $U_0$ denote the characteristic velocity scale.
In Table \ref{tab:normalization} we have listed
the normalization constants for different
physical variables and parameters. For instance,
the non-dimensional mixing energy density coefficient
is given by
$
\frac{\lambda}{\rho_1 U_0^2L^2}
$
based on this table.
When the flow variables and parameters
are normalized as given by the table,
the forms of the governing equations and the boundary
conditions
will remain unchanged
upon normalization.
In the following discussions all the flow variables
and physical parameters are given in non-dimensional
forms unless otherwise noted, with the understanding
that they have all been properly normalized.
\subsection{Convergence Rates}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=2.3in]{Figures/Convergence/mesh_anal.eps}(a)
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=3in]{Figures/Convergence/conv_spatial_anal_obc_1_1_0.eps}(b)
\includegraphics[height=3in]{Figures/Convergence/conv_temporal_anal_obc_1_1_0.eps}(c)
}
\caption{
Spatial/temporal convergence rates:
(a) Mesh and boundary conditions;
(b) Numerical errors versus element order
showing spatial exponential convergence
(with fixed $\Delta t=0.001$);
(c) Numerical errors versus $\Delta t$ showing
temporal second-order convergence rate
(element order fixed at $18$).
On the face $\overline{CD}$ the open boundary
condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D} is used.
}
\label{fig:conv}
\end{figure}
The goal of this section is to study the convergence
behavior of the method from Section \ref{sec:method},
and to demonstrate its spatial and temporal convergence
rates using a contrived analytic solution to
the two-phase governing equations.
The setup of the problem is as follows.
Figure \ref{fig:conv}(a) shows the rectangular domain
$\overline{ABCD}$ for this problem,
$0\leqslant x\leqslant 2$ and $-1\leqslant y\leqslant 1$.
We consider the following analytic expressions for
the flow variables
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{split}
&
u = A\cos \pi y \sin ax \sin Wt \\
&
v = -\frac{Aa}{\pi}\sin \pi y \cos ax \sin Wt \\
&
P = A \sin \pi y \sin ax \cos Wt \\
&
\phi = B \cos a_1 x \cos b_1 y \sin W_1 t
\end{split}
\right.
\label{equ:anal_soln}
\end{equation}
where $(u,v)$ are the $x$ and $y$ velocity components,
and $A$, $B$, $a$, $W$, $a_1$, $b_1$ and $W_1$ are
prescribed constants to be specified below.
It is evident that the $u$ and $v$ expressions
satisfy the equation \eqref{equ:continuity}.
The external force $\mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x},t)$ in
\eqref{equ:nse_trans_1} and the source term $g(\mathbf{x},t)$
in \eqref{equ:CH} are chosen such that
the analytic expressions in \eqref{equ:anal_soln}
satisfy the equations
\eqref{equ:nse_trans_1} and \eqref{equ:CH}.
For the boundary conditions,
on the sides $\overline{AD}$, $\overline{AB}$
and $\overline{BC}$ we impose the Dirichlet
condition \eqref{equ:dbc_v} for the
velocity
with the boundary velocity $\mathbf{w}$
chosen according to the analytic expressions
of \eqref{equ:anal_soln},
and we impose the contact-angle
conditions \eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2}
for the phase field function,
in which $\theta_s=90^0$ and
$g_{c1}$ and $g_{c2}$ are chosen such that
the $\phi$ expression in \eqref{equ:anal_soln}
satisfies the equations \eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1} and
\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2}.
On the side $\overline{CD}$ we impose
the open boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_trans},
in which $\mathbf{f}_b$ is chosen such that
the analytic expressions in \eqref{equ:anal_soln}
satisfy \eqref{equ:obc_v_trans},
and we impose the conditions
\eqref{equ:obc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:obc_phi_2}
for the phase field function,
in which $D_0=0$ and $g_{a1}$ and $g_{a2}$
are chosen such that the $\phi$
expression in \eqref{equ:anal_soln}
satisfies the equations \eqref{equ:obc_phi_1}
and \eqref{equ:obc_phi_2}.
For the initial conditions \eqref{equ:ic}
we choose $\mathbf{u}_{in}$ and
$\phi_{in}$ according to
the analytic expressions in \eqref{equ:anal_soln}
by setting $t=0$.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} l c | l c}
\hline
parameters & values & parameters & values \\
$A$ & $2.0$ & $\rho_m$ & $\min(\rho_1,\rho_2)$ \\
$B$ & $1.0$ & $\nu_m$ & $\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\mu_1}{\rho_1}+\frac{\mu_2}{\rho_2} \right)$ \\
$a$, $a_1$, $b_1$ & $\pi$ & $\mu_0$ & $\max(\mu_1,\mu_2)$ \\
$W$, $W_1$ & $1.0$ & $\delta$ & $\frac{1}{20}$ \\
$\rho_1$ & $1.0$ & $\eta$ & $0.1$ \\
$\rho_2$ & $3.0$ & $\theta_s$ & $90^0$ \\
$\mu_1$ & $0.01$ & $D_0$ & $0.0$ \\
$\mu_2$ & $0.05$ & $J$ (integration order) & $2$ \\
$\sigma$ & $9.428\times 10^{-2}$ \\
$\gamma_1$ & $0.01$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{center}
\caption{Parameter values for convergence tests.}
\label{tab:conv_param}
\end{table}
We partition the domain along the $x$ direction using two
quadrilateral spectral elements of the same size as
shown in Figure \ref{fig:conv}(a).
The system of governing equations \eqref{equ:nse_trans_1},
\eqref{equ:continuity} and \eqref{equ:CH}
is integrated over time with the algorithm
presented in Section \ref{sec:method}
from $t=0$ to $t=t_f$ ($t_f$ to be specified below).
Then we compute and monitor the errors of the simulation results
at $t=t_f$ against the analytic solution
given in \eqref{equ:anal_soln}.
The parameters for this problem are listed in
Table \ref{tab:conv_param}.
In the first group of tests we fix the final integration
time at $t_f=0.1$ and the time step size at
$\Delta t=0.001$ ($100$ time steps).
Then we vary the element order systematically
between $2$ and $20$.
Figure \ref{fig:conv}(b) shows the $L^2$ errors of
the velocity, pressure and the phase field
function at $t=t_f$ as a function of
the element order.
The results correspond to the open boundary
condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D} on the side of
the domain $\overline{CD}$.
It can be observed that the numerical errors
decrease exponentially as the
element order increases (when below order $10$).
As the element order increases beyond $12$,
the error curves level off due to the saturation
by the temporal truncation error.
In the second group of tests
we fix the final integration time at $t_f=0.1$
and the element order at a large value $18$,
and then vary the time step size systematically
between $\Delta t=1.953125\times 10^{-5}$
and $\Delta t=0.01$.
In Figure \ref{fig:conv}(c) we plot the
$L^2$ errors of the flow variables as
a function of $\Delta t$ in logarithmic
scales. A slope of $2$ has been observed in
the error curves when the time step size
becomes small.
The results of these tests demonstrate that
the method developed in Section \ref{sec:method}
has a spatial exponential convergence rate
and a temporal second-order convergence rate.
\subsection{Capillary Wave}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=3in]{Figures/Capillary_Wave/capillary_wave_config.eps}
}
\caption{
Configuration for the capillary wave problem.
}
\label{fig:cwave}
\end{figure}
The goal of this section is to demonstrate the physical
accuracy of our method
using a two-phase capillary wave problem, whose exact physical
solution is known from the literature \cite{Prosperetti1981}.
The problem involves two fluid phases, density contrast,
viscosity contrast, gravity and the surface
tension effects. We have considered this problem
in a previous work \cite{DongS2012}. It should be noted that
the algorithm tested here is different from that
of \cite{DongS2012}.
Here is the setting of the problem.
We consider two immiscible incompressible fluids in
an infinite domain. The lighter fluid occupies
the top half of the domain, and the heavier fluid occupies
the bottom half. The gravity is in the vertical direction
and points downward. Without loss of generality
we assume that the first fluid is lighter than
the second one ($\rho_1\leqslant \rho_2$).
At $t=0$, the interface formed between
the two fluids is perturbed by a small-amplitude
sinusoidal wave from its equilibrium horizontal
position, and starts to oscillate.
The goal of this problem is to study the behavior
of the interface over time.
Prosperetti \cite{Prosperetti1981} reported an
exact standing-wave (but time-dependent)
solution to this problem under the following condition:
The two fluids may have different densities and
dynamic viscosities, but their kinematic viscosities
must match. The relation of the capillary-wave
amplitude over time has been provided.
We will simulate this problem under the same
condition, and compare with the exact physical solution
from \cite{Prosperetti1981}.
Specifically, we consider a computational
domain as depicted in Figure \ref{fig:cwave} (non-dimensionalized),
$0\leqslant x\leqslant 1$ and $-1\leqslant y\leqslant 1$.
The un-perturbed equilibrium position of the fluid interface coincides
with the $x$-axis. We assume that
the initial perturbation profile of the interface
is given by
\begin{equation}
y = H_0 \cos k x,
\quad k = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda_w} = 2\pi,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_w=1$ is the wave length
of the perturbation profile,
and $H_0=0.01$ is the initial amplitude of the capillary
wave. Note that the capillary wave-length $\lambda_w$
is chosen to be the same as the domain dimension
in the $x$ direction, and that the initial capillary amplitude
$H_0$ is small compared to the domain dimension in
the $y$ direction.
We employ the algorithm developed in Section \ref{sec:method}
to solve the governing equations \eqref{equ:nse_trans_1}
and \eqref{equ:continuity}--\eqref{equ:CH},
where the external body force in \eqref{equ:nse_trans_1}
is set to $\mathbf{f}=\rho \mathbf{g}_r$ and
$\mathbf{g}_r$ is the gravitational acceleration.
For the boundary conditions, in the
horizontal direction we assume that it is
periodic at $x=0$ and $x=1$.
At the bottom of the domain ($y=-1$), we
assume a solid wall in the simulations,
and impose the Dirichlet condition \eqref{equ:dbc_v}
with $\mathbf{w}=0$ for the
velocity, and impose the boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2}
with $g_{c1}=g_{c2}=0$ and $\theta_s=90^0$.
On the top side ($y=1$) we assume that
the domain is open, and impose the open
boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_trans}
with $\mathbf{f}_b=0$
for the momentum equation,
and impose the open boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:obc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:obc_phi_2}
with $g_{a1}=g_{a2}=0$ and $D_0=0$ for
the phase field function.
We employ the following initial velocity and
phase field function in the simulations
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{u}_{in}(\mathbf{x}) = 0, \quad
\phi_{in}(\mathbf{x}) = \tanh\left(\frac{y-H_0\cos kx}{\sqrt{2}\eta}\right).
\end{equation}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} l c | l c}
\hline
parameters & values & parameters & values \\
$|\mathbf{g}_r|$ & $1.0$ & $\rho_m$ & $\min(\rho_1,\rho_2)$ \\
$\sigma$ & $1.0$ & $\nu_m$
& $\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\mu_1}{\rho_1}+\frac{\mu_2}{\rho_2} \right)$ \\
$H_0$ & $0.01$ & $\mu_0$ & $\mu_1$ \\
$\lambda_w$ & $1.0$ & $\delta$ & $1/100$ \\
$\rho_1$ & $1.0$ & $D_0$ & $0.0$ \\
$\mu_1$ & $0.01$ & $\theta_s$ & $90^0$ \\
$\frac{\mu_2}{\rho_2}$ & $\frac{\mu_1}{\rho_1}$
& $J$ (integration order) & $2$ \\
$\rho_2$, $\mu_2$ & (varied) & $\Delta t$ & $2.5\times 10^{-5}$ \\
$\eta$ & $0.002$ & $\lambda$ & $\frac{3}{2\sqrt{2}}\sigma\eta$ \\
$\gamma_1$ & $2.5\eta^2$ & Element order & $14$ \\
Number of elements in mesh & $240$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{center}
\caption{Parameter values for the capillary wave problem.}
\label{tab:capillary_param}
\end{table}
We discretize the domain using $240$ quadrilateral elements,
with $10$ elements in the $x$ direction and $24$ elements
in the $y$ direction.
The elements are uniform along the $x$ direction, and are
non-uniform along the $y$ direction, clustering around
the region $-0.012\leqslant y\leqslant 0.012$.
We have used an element order $14$ for all the elements.
The non-dimensional time step size is
fixed at $\Delta t=2.5\times 10^{-5}$
in the simulations.
We choose the physical parameters for this problem
in accordance with those in \cite{DongS2012}.
A summary of the values for the physical and numerical
parameters in this problem is provided in Table
\ref{tab:capillary_param}.
Note that while $\rho_2$ and $\mu_2$ are varied
in different cases in the simulations,
the relation $\frac{\mu_2}{\rho_2}=\frac{\mu_1}{\rho_1}$
is maintained according to the condition of
the exact physical solution by \cite{Prosperetti1981}.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=3in]{Figures/Capillary_Wave/capillary_wave_disp_hist_DR2.eps}(a)
\includegraphics[width=3in]{Figures/Capillary_Wave/capillary_wave_disp_hist_DR50_01.eps}(b)
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=3in]{Figures/Capillary_Wave/capillary_wave_disp_hist_DR200_01.eps}(c)
\includegraphics[width=3in]{Figures/Capillary_Wave/capillary_wave_disp_hist_DR1000.eps}(d)
}
\caption{
Comparison of time histories of the capillary-wave amplitudes
between current simulation and the exact solution
by Prosperetti \cite{Prosperetti1981} for
density ratios
(a) $\frac{\rho_2}{\rho_1}=2$,
(b) $\frac{\rho_2}{\rho_1}=50$,
(c) $\frac{\rho_2}{\rho_1}=200$, and
(d) $\frac{\rho_2}{\rho_1}=1000$.
}
\label{fig:capillary_compare}
\end{figure}
Let us compare the simulation results
with the exact physical solution given by
\cite{Prosperetti1981}.
Figure \ref{fig:capillary_compare}
shows the time histories of the capillary
amplitude $H(t)$ from the simulation
and from the exact solution \cite{Prosperetti1981}
at several density ratios.
Figures \ref{fig:capillary_compare}(a)--(d)
respectively correspond to
the density ratios
$\frac{\rho_2}{\rho_1}=2$,
$50$, $200$, and $1000$.
These results are obtained using the open
boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D} at
the upper domain boundary.
It can be observed that
the fluid interface fluctuates about
its equilibrium position with
the amplitude attenuated over time.
The oscillation frequency decreases
with increasing density ratios between
the two fluids.
One can further observe that
the time-history curves from the simulations
almost exactly overlap with those
from the physical solution
given by \cite{Prosperetti1981}
for all density ratios.
The insets of Figure \ref{fig:capillary_compare}(b)
and Figure \ref{fig:capillary_compare}(c) are
the blow-up views of the curves,
which show that the difference between
the simulation and the exact physical solution
is small.
These results indicate that
our method presented in Section
\ref{sec:method} has produced physically
accurate results for the capillary
wave problem.
\subsection{Bouncing Water Drop on Superhydrophobic Surface}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_0.eps}(a)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_4.eps}(b)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_7.eps}(c)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_10.eps}(d)
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_13.eps}(e)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_16.eps}(f)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_19.eps}(g)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/bouncing_drop_phase_snap_22.eps}(h)
}
\caption{
Bouncing water drop (initial height $H_0=3.2$mm):
temporal sequence of snapshots of the air-water
interface at time instants:
(a) $t=0.05$,
(b) $t=0.25$,
(c) $t=0.4$,
(d) $t=0.55$,
(e) $t=0.7$,
(f) $t=0.85$,
(g) $t=1.0$,
(h) $t=1.15$.
}
\label{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}
\end{figure}
The goal of this section is to further
evaluate and demonstrate the
accuracy of the method developed here
by comparing simulation
results with the experimental measurement.
The test problem considered in this section
involves large density ratio, large viscosity
ratio, and
superhydrophobic walls
(i.e. contact angle $\geqslant 150^0$).
A similar problem but under a different
condition has been considered in a previous
work \cite{Dong2012}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular*}{0.8\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} l l l}
\hline
Density $[kg/m^3]$ & air: $1.2041$ & water: $998.207$ \\
Dynamic viscosity $[kg/(m\cdot s)]$ & air: $1.78 \times 10^{-5}$
& water: $1.002\times 10^{-3}$ \\
Surface tension $[kg/s^2]$ & air-water: $7.28 \times 10^{-2}$ \\
Gravity $[m/s^2]$ & $9.8$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{center}
\caption{Physical properties of air and water.}
\label{tab:air_water_param}
\end{table}
We consider a rectangular domain
(see Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}(a)),
$-\frac{L}{2} \leqslant x \leqslant \frac{L}{2}$
and $0\leqslant y\leqslant \frac{3L}{2}$,
where $L=4$mm.
The domain is periodic in the horizontal direction
at $x=\pm \frac{L}{2}$.
The top and bottom of the domain are two superhydrophobic
solid walls.
If the air-water interface
intersects the walls, the contact angle
is assumed to be $170^0$.
The domain is initially filled with air.
A water drop, initially circular with
a radius $R_0=\frac{L}{4}$, is suspended in
the air. The center of the water
drop is initially located at a height $H_0$ above
the bottom wall, that is,
$(x_0,y_0)=(0,H_0)$,
where $(x_0,y_0)$ is the coordinate of
the center of mass of the water drop.
The gravity is assumed to be in the $-y$ direction.
At $t=0$, the water drop is released,
and falls through the air, impacting
and bouncing off the bottom wall.
The objective of this problem is to simulate and study
the behavior of the water drop.
The physical properties of
the air, water and the air-water interface
employed in this problem
are listed in Table \ref{tab:air_water_param}.
The air and the water are respectively assigned
as the first and the second fluids in
the simulations.
We use $L$ as the characteristic length scale,
and choose the characteristic velocity scale
$U_0 = \sqrt{g_{r0}L}$, where $g_{r0}=1m/s^2$.
The problem is then non-dimensionalized
according to Table \ref{tab:normalization}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} l l | ll}
\hline
parameters & values & parameters & values \\
$\rho_2/\rho_1$ & $829.01$ & $\rho_m$ & $\min(\rho_1,\rho_2)$ \\
$\mu_1/(\rho_1 U_0 L)$ & $5.843\times 10^{-2}$ & $\nu_m$
& $\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\mu_1}{\rho_1}+\frac{\mu_2}{\rho_2} \right)$ \\
$\mu_2/\mu_1$ & $56.29$ & $\Delta t U_0/L$ & $2.5\times 10^{-5}$ \\
$\eta/L$ & $0.01$ & $\theta_s$ & $10^0$ \\
$\sigma/(\rho_1 U_0^2 L)$ & $3778.76$
& $(\gamma_1\rho_1 U_0)/L$ & $\left(\frac{\eta}{L}\right)^3\frac{1}{\lambda/(\rho_1U_0^2L^2)}$ \\
$\lambda/(\rho_1U_0^2L^2)$ & $\frac{3}{2\sqrt{2}}\frac{\sigma}{\rho_1U_0^2L}\frac{\eta}{L}$ & $g_rL/U_0^2$ (gravity) & $9.8$ \\
Number of elements in mesh & $150$ & Element order & $14$ \\
$H_0$ (water drop initial height) & (varied) &
$J$ (integration order) & $2$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{center}
\caption{Physical and numerical parameter values for the
bouncing water drop problem.}
\label{tab:bouncing_param}
\end{table}
To simulate the problem we discretize the domain
using $150$ equal-sized quadrilateral elements,
with $10$ and $15$ elements in the $x$ and $y$
directions respectively.
We use an element order $14$ for all elements
in the simulations.
The algorithm presented in Section \ref{sec:method}
is employed for marching in time,
with a non-dimensional time
step size $\Delta t=2.5\times 10^{-5}$.
In the horizontal direction we employ
periodic boundary conditions for all flow variables.
At the top and the bottom walls,
we impose the Dirichlet condition
\eqref{equ:dbc_v} with $\mathbf{w}=0$
for the velocity, and impose
the contact-angle boundary
conditions \eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2}
with $g_{c1}=g_{c2}=0$ and $\theta_s=10^0$
for the phase field function.
Note that $\theta_s$ in \eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2}
is the angle measured on the side of
the first fluid, that is, the air for
the current configuration.
We employ the following initial velocity and
phase field function distributions
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{u}_{in} = 0, \quad
\phi_{in} = \tanh\frac{\left\|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{X}_0 \right\|-R_0}{\sqrt{2}\eta},
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{X}_0=(x_0,y_0)$ is the initial
coordinate of the center of mass of
the water drop.
The values for the physical and numerical parameters
of this problem are summarized in
Table \ref{tab:bouncing_param}.
Let us first look into the dynamics of
this air-water two-phase system.
Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}
shows a temporal sequence of snapshots of
the air-water interface.
The initial height of the water drop
is $H_0=3.2$mm above the bottom wall.
The interface is visualized by the contour levels
$\phi = 0$ at different time instants.
Upon release, the water drop falls
through the air
(Figures \ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}(a)--(b)),
and impacts the bottom wall (Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}(c)).
One can observe a notable deformation of
the water drop upon impact of the wall.
Subsequently, the water drop
bounces off the bottom wall (Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}(d))
and rises through the air, reaching
a maximum height (Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}(e)).
Then the drop falls through the air again
and impacts the bottom wall a second
time (Figures \ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}(f)--(h)).
This process repeats several times,
and the water drop eventually settles down
on the bottom wall.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=3in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/CofM_y_hist.eps}
}
\caption{
Time histories of the water-drop center of mass (y coordinate)
corresponding to several different initial drop heights.
}
\label{fig:bouncing_cofm}
\end{figure}
We have
monitored the motion of the center of mass of the water drop
for different values of the initial drop height,
ranging from $H_0=1.6$mm to $4$mm.
The drop center of mass is defined by
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{X}_w = (x_w, y_w) =
\frac{
\int_{\Omega_w} \mathbf{x} d\mathbf{x}
}{
\int_{\Omega_w} d\mathbf{x}
}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_w(t)$ is the domain occupied by
the water drop at time $t$ and demarcated by
the contour level $\phi=0$.
In Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_cofm}
we show the time histories of the $y$ component (normalized)
of the drop center of mass
for several values of the initial drop height $H_0$.
It can be discerned that the water drop bounces off the
bottom wall a number of times in all these cases.
One can also discern the oscillation in the drop shape
in later time, before it completely settles down
on the wall.
For larger values of the initial drop height,
we notice that
occasionally the water drop can reach a maximum height after
a bounce that
is quite close to that before the bounce; see
for instance the second and third peaks in
the curve for $H_0=3.2$mm of Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_cofm}.
This is likely due to the fact that
a larger initial drop height tends to cause
a more pronounced deformation of the water drop
upon impact and a more
pronounced oscillation in the drop shape
after the bounce-off into the air (see Figures
\ref{fig:bouncing_phase_snap}(c)--(g)).
The elastic energy associated with the drop deformation
can be converted to the kinetic energy
associated with the motion of the drop
center of mass in subsequent impact and lift-off,
thus resulting in a maximum height close to
that before the bounce.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=3in]{Figures/Bouncing_WaterDrop/Restitution.eps}
}
\caption{
Comparison of restitution coefficient as a function
of impact velocity between current simulations
and the experiment \cite{RichardQ2000}.
$H_0$ is the initial height of the water drop.
}
\label{fig:bouncing_rest_coeff}
\end{figure}
We have computed the restitution coefficient
based on the time histories of the center of mass
of the water drop. We follow \cite{RichardQ2000}
and define the restitution coefficient $C_{res}$ by
\begin{equation}
C_{res} = \sqrt{\frac{H^{\prime}}{H}}
\end{equation}
where $H$ and $H^{\prime}$
respectively denote
the maximum heights of the water drop
above the bottom wall
before and after the bounce.
We also follow \cite{RichardQ2000} and
estimate the impact velocity of the water
drop $V_{imp}$ by
\begin{equation}
V_{imp} = \sqrt{2g_r H}
\end{equation}
where $g_r$ is the gravitational acceleration.
In Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_rest_coeff}
we plot the restitution coefficient $C_{res}$ as a function
of the impact velocity $V_{imp}$
from the current simulations.
For comparison, we have also shown
the restitution coefficient data from the
experiment of \cite{RichardQ2000}.
The restitution coefficients
corresponding to different initial drop heights $H_0$
from the simulations
have been included in this figure.
The drop size in the simulations is a little
larger than that in the experiment of \cite{RichardQ2000}.
The bulk of the restitution coefficients from
current simulations agree well with the experimentally
determined values.
On the other hand, some differences can be observed,
especially for the data points corresponding
to the first few bounces with larger initial
drop-height values.
We observe that for such cases
the restitution coefficients from the simulation
tend to be a little smaller than the bulk of
the experimental data.
This is likely due to the larger drop deformation upon impact and
stronger drop-shape oscillation after the bounce-off,
associated with a larger initial drop height and a larger
impact velocity.
The elastic energy associated with
the drop deformation may reduce the maximum height
the drop can reach after the bounce, and thus
results in a smaller restitution coefficient.
The outlying data point,
with a large restitution coefficient,
from the simulation case with an
initial drop height $H_0=3.2$mm
corresponds to the second and the third
peaks in the time-history curve in
Figure \ref{fig:bouncing_cofm},
which has been discussed in a previous paragraph.
The above comparison indicates that
the simulation results obtained using our
method overall are in good agreement with
the experimental measurement.
\subsection{Air Jet in Water with Two-Phase Open Boundaries}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=3in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_config.eps}
}
\caption{
Configuration of the air jet in water problem.
}
\label{fig:airjet_config}
\end{figure}
The goal of this section is to demonstrate the effectiveness
of the open boundary conditions and
the numerical algorithm from
Section \ref{sec:method} for two-phase
outflow problems.
The test problem considered in this section
involves open boundaries where the two fluids
may leave or enter
the domain, large density contrast,
and large viscosity contrast.
The fluid interface passes through
the open domain boundary in this problem.
We consider the long-time behavior of an air-water
two-phase flow,
in which a train of air bubbles continually
forms at a wall inside the water
and then moves out of the domain
due to buoyancy.
This flow problem has been considered
in a previous work \cite{Dong2014obc}. It should be noted that
the open boundary conditions and the numerical
algorithm being tested here are different.
Specifically, we consider the flow
domain shown in Figure \ref{fig:airjet_config},
$-\frac{L}{2}\leqslant x\leqslant \frac{L}{2}$
and $0\leqslant y\leqslant \frac{3L}{2}$,
where $L=3$cm.
The bottom of the domain is a solid wall,
while the other three sides (top, left and right)
are all open, where the fluid can freely leave or
enter the domain.
The domain is initially filled with water,
and the gravity is along the vertical direction
pointing downward.
The bottom wall has an orifice in its center,
with a diameter $d=6$mm.
A stream of air is continuously injected
into the domain through the orifice.
The air velocity has a parabolic profile at
the orifice, with a centerline value
$U_0=17.3cm/s$.
The bottom wall has a neutral wettability,
that is,
if the air-water interface intersects the wall
the contact angle would be $90^0$.
Our objective is to simulate and study
the long-time behavior of this system.
The two-phase open boundaries coupled with
the large density ratio between air and water
make this problem very challenging to
simulate.
The physical parameters concerning the air, water
and the air-water interface have been provided in
Table \ref{tab:air_water_param}.
We treat the air and the water
as the first and the second fluids,
respectively.
$L$ and $U_0$ are employed respectively as the characteristic
length and velocity scales.
Normalization of the problem then proceeds according
to Table \ref{tab:normalization}.
The flow domain is discretized using
$600$ quadrilateral spectral elements,
with $20$ and $30$ elements in
the $x$ and $y$ directions respectively.
An element order $12$ has been used for
all elements in the simulations.
At the bottom wall, we impose
the velocity Dirichlet condition \eqref{equ:dbc_v}
with $\mathbf{w}=0$
and the boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:wbc_phi_2}
with $g_{c1}=g_{c2}=0$ and $\theta_s=90^0$.
At the air inlet we impose
the velocity Dirichlet condition \eqref{equ:dbc_v},
in which $\mathbf{w}$ has zero horizontal component and its
vertical component takes
a parabolic profile with a centerline
value $U_0$;
for the phase field function, we impose the
boundary conditions \eqref{equ:ibc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:ibc_phi_2},
in which $g_b=0$ and
\begin{equation}
\phi_b(\mathbf{x},t) =
-\tanh \frac{x-R}{\sqrt{2}\eta} \left[
H(x,0) - H(x,R)
\right]
+ \tanh \frac{x+R}{\sqrt{2}\eta} \left[
H(x,-R) - H(x,0)
\right]
\end{equation}
where $R=\frac{d}{2}=3mm$ is the radius of
the orifice,
and $H(x,a)$ is the heaviside step function taking
unit value if $x\geqslant a$ and vanishing otherwise.
On the top, left and right sides of the domain,
we impose the open boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_trans}
with $\mathbf{f}_b=0$
for the momentum equation;
for the phase field function we impose
the boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:obc_phi_1}--\eqref{equ:obc_phi_2}
with $g_{a1}=g_{a2}=0$.
For the initial conditions, we have used an instantaneous
snapshot of the velocity field and the phase field function
from the simulation of \cite{Dong2014obc}.
Because long-time simulations have been performed,
the initial velocity and phase field distributions
have no effect on the long-time behavior
of the system.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} l l | ll}
\hline
parameters & values & parameters & values \\
$\rho_2/\rho_1$ & $829.01$ & $\rho_m$ & $\min(\rho_1,\rho_2)$ \\
$\mu_1/(\rho_1 U_0 L)$ & $2.845\times 10^{-2}$ & $\nu_m$
& $50\max\left(\frac{\mu_1}{\rho_1},\frac{\mu_2}{\rho_2} \right)$ \\
$\mu_2/\mu_1$ & $56.29$ & $\Delta t U_0/L$ & $1.5\times 10^{-6}$ \\
$\eta/L$ & $0.01$ & $\theta_s$ & $90^0$ \\
$\sigma/(\rho_1 U_0^2 L)$ & $67.178$
& $(\gamma_1\rho_1 U_0)/L$ & $0.1\left(\frac{\eta}{L}\right)^3\frac{1}{\lambda/(\rho_1U_0^2L^2)}$ \\
$\lambda/(\rho_1U_0^2L^2)$ & $\frac{3}{2\sqrt{2}}\frac{\sigma}{\rho_1U_0^2L}\frac{\eta}{L}$ & $g_rL/U_0^2$ (gravity) & $9.8$ \\
$D_0 U_0$ & $0.4$ & $\mu_0$ & $20\max (\mu_1, \mu_2)$ \\
Number of elements in mesh & $600$ & Element order & $12$ \\
$-\Delta P/L$ (external pressure gradient) & $\rho_w g_r$
& $J$ (integration order) & $2$ \\
$\delta$ & $0.01$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{center}
\caption{Physical and numerical parameter values for the
air jet in water problem.}
\label{tab:airjet_param}
\end{table}
We apply an external pressure gradient
in the $y$ direction ($-\frac{\Delta P}{L}$) to balance
the weight of water in the simulations, i.e.
\begin{equation}
-\frac{\Delta P}{L} = \rho_w g_r,
\end{equation}
where $\rho_w$ is the water density and
$g_r$ is the magnitude of the gravitational acceleration.
Table \ref{tab:airjet_param} summarizes
the physical and numerical parameter values
in the simulations for this problem.
The $D_0$ in the open
boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_phi_2}
for the phase field function
is determined based on a preliminary
simulation with $D_0=0$.
Preliminary simulations indicate that
the air bubbles have a
non-dimensional convection velocity
about $2.0 \sim 3.0$
at the upper domain
boundary. Because $\frac{1}{D_0}$ plays
the role of a convection velocity,
we therefore use
an outflow dynamic mobility
$\frac{1}{D_0 U_0} \approx 2.5$ in
the simulations.
A non-dimensional time step size
$1.5 \times 10^{-6}$
has been employed for the current
problem.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/y_avg_vel_hist_obc_0.5_0_0.eps}(a)
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/y_avg_vel_hist_obc_1_1_0.eps}(b)
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/y_avg_vel_hist_obc_1_0_1.eps}(c)
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/y_avg_vel_hist_obc_0_1_0.eps}(d)
\caption{
Time histories of average vertical-velocity magnitude
obtained using different open boundary conditions:
(a) OBC \eqref{equ:obc_v_C},
(b) OBC \eqref{equ:obc_v_D},
(c) OBC \eqref{equ:obc_v_A},
(d) OBC \eqref{equ:obc_v_B},
}
\label{fig:airjet_vel_hist}
\end{figure}
Let us first demonstrate the long-term stability of the
computation.
We have performed long-time simulations of
this problem using different open boundary conditions.
Figure \ref{fig:airjet_vel_hist}
shows a window of the time histories of
the average vertical velocity magnitudes $V_{\text{avg}}(t)$,
\begin{equation}
V_{\text{avg}}(t) = \left(
\frac{1}{V_{\Omega}}\int_{\Omega} |v|^2 d\Omega
\right)^{\frac{1}{2}},
\end{equation}
where $v$ is the $y$ velocity component and
$V_{\Omega}=\int_{\Omega}d\Omega$ is
the volume of the domain.
Results in Figures \ref{fig:airjet_vel_hist}(a)--(d)
are obtained using the open boundary conditions
\eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B},
respectively.
One can make two observations.
First, the average velocity magnitude $V_{\text{avg}}$
fluctuates over time about some constant mean
level and its time history signal exhibits
a quasi-periodic nature.
This indicates that the flow is at a statistically
stationary state, and that
the computations using our algorithm and the several outflow
boundary conditions are stable over a long time.
Second, the time-history curves
obtained with different open boundary
conditions \eqref{equ:obc_v_C}--\eqref{equ:obc_v_B}
are qualitatively similar,
indicating that these two-phase boundary conditions
lead to similar results about the flow.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_0.eps}(a)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_5.eps}(b)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_11.eps}(c)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_15.eps}(d)
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_20.eps}(e)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_25.eps}(f)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_30.eps}(g)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_snap_35.eps}(h)
}
\caption{
Air jet in water: temporal sequence of snapshots of
the air-water interface at time instants
(a) $t=16.9397$,
(b) $t=16.9772$,
(c) $t=17.0222$,
(d) $t=17.0522$,
(e) $t=17.0897$,
(f) $t=17.1272$,
(g) $t=17.1647$,
(h) $t=17.2022$.
Results are obtained using the boundary
condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D} on the open
boundaries.
}
\label{fig:airjet_dynamics_1}
\end{figure}
The dynamics of this air-water flow is
illustrated by Figure \ref{fig:airjet_dynamics_1},
in which we show a temporal sequence of
snapshots of the air-water interface
in a time-window between
$t=16.9397$ and $t=17.2022$.
The fluid interface is visualized using
the contour level $\phi(\mathbf{x},t)=0$
in the plots.
These results are obtained with
the open boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D},
corresponding to the time history in
Figure \ref{fig:airjet_vel_hist}(b).
These plots demonstrate the process of
free air bubbles generated at the wall rising
through water and crossing
the upper domain boundary to migrate out of
the domain.
Figures \ref{fig:airjet_dynamics_1}(a)--(e)
show the leading air bubble passing
through the upper open boundary
of the domain.
They demonstrate that the boundary
condition and the numerical algorithm we
developed in Section \ref{sec:method}
can effectively
allow the fluid interface to pass through
the open/outflow boundary in
a smooth fashion.
Simultaneously, one can observe that
the trailing free bubble rises through
the water, and that a new air bubble is forming
at the bottom wall
(Figures \ref{fig:airjet_dynamics_1}(b)--(h)).
Subsequently, the air bubble at the wall breaks
free, and the above process will repeat itself.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_0.eps}(a)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_5.eps}(b)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_11.eps}(c)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_15.eps}(d)
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_20.eps}(e)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_25.eps}(f)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_30.eps}(g)
\includegraphics[width=1.4in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_vel_alg110_snap_35.eps}(h)
}
\caption{
Air jet in water: temporal sequence of snapshots of
the velocity field at time instants
(a) $t=16.9397$,
(b) $t=16.9772$,
(c) $t=17.0222$,
(d) $t=17.0522$,
(e) $t=17.0897$,
(f) $t=17.1272$,
(g) $t=17.1647$,
(h) $t=17.2022$.
Velocity vectors are plotted on every ninth quadrature
points in each direction within each element.
Results are obtained using the boundary
condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D} on the open
boundaries.
}
\label{fig:airjet_vel_1}
\end{figure}
We further illustrate
the flow dynamics using
instantaneous velocity distributions.
Figure \ref{fig:airjet_vel_1} is a temporal
sequence of snapshots of the velocity fields
at identical time instants as those
of the interfacial plots of Figure \ref{fig:airjet_dynamics_1}.
One can observe that a significant flow field
is induced in the regions occupied by
the air bubbles, and that a particularly
strong velocity field exists
inside the free air bubble as it initially breaks free
from the wall; see the region of
the trailing free bubble in Figures \ref{fig:airjet_vel_1}(a)--(b).
On the other hand, the velocity field
in the water region is in general quite weak.
As the air bubble rises through the water,
a pair of vortices forms in the water
region trailing the air bubble;
see the region behind the second air bubble
in Figures \ref{fig:airjet_vel_1}(e)--(h).
These vortices can induce a backflow
on portions of the outflow/open boundary after the air bubble
passes through (Figure \ref{fig:airjet_vel_1}(h)).
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=4.5in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/y_avg_vel_hist_obc_1_1_0_laterStage.eps}
}
\caption{
Another window of time history of the average vertical-velocity
magnitude, suggesting a somewhat different flow state.
Result is obtained using the
open boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D}.
}
\label{fig:airjet_vel_hist_2}
\end{figure}
The above results illustrate one state of the flow.
We observe that this air-water flow can exhibit
another state, in which the flow
characteristics are somewhat different than those seen above.
In Figure \ref{fig:airjet_vel_hist_2}
we show another window in the time history
of the average magnitude of the vertical
velocity, obtained also with the open
boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D}.
The flow evidently is at a statistically
stationary state.
Contrasting this figure with
Figure \ref{fig:airjet_vel_hist}(b), which
is computed using the same boundary conditions,
we can observe that
the velocity-history curves have qualitatively
different characteristics in these figures.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_0.eps}(a)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_5.eps}(b)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_10.eps}(c)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_15.eps}(d)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_20.eps}(e)
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_25.eps}(f)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_30.eps}(g)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_snap_35.eps}(h)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_r2_snap_3.eps}(i)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_r2_snap_7.eps}(j)
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_r2_snap_11.eps}(k)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_r2_snap_15.eps}(l)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_r2_snap_20.eps}(m)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_r2_snap_25.eps}(n)
\includegraphics[width=1.2in]{Figures/AirJet_Water/airjet_water_phase_alg110_later_r2_snap_33.eps}(o)
}
\caption{
Air jet in water: Temporal sequence of snapshots
of the air-water interface at time instants:
(a) $t=22.9997$,
(b) $t=23.0372$,
(c) $t=23.0747$,
(d) $t=23.1122$,
(e) $t=23.1497$,
(f) $t=23.1872$,
(g) $t=23.2247$,
(h) $t=23.2622$,
(i) $t=23,2922$,
(j) $t=23.3222$,
(k) $t=23.3522$,
(l) $t=23.3822$,
(m) $t=23.4197$,
(n) $t=23.4572$,
(o) $t=23.5172$.
Results are obtained using the boundary condition
\eqref{equ:obc_v_D} on the open boundaries.
}
\label{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}
\end{figure}
This different flow state is further illustrated by
the temporal sequence of snapshots of
the air-water interface shown in
Figure \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2},
which covers a time window
between $t\approx 23$ and $t\approx 23.5$
in the history plot of Figure \ref{fig:airjet_vel_hist_2}.
These results correspond to the
open boundary condition \eqref{equ:obc_v_D}.
The plots clearly show the breakaway
the air bubble from the wall
(Figures \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(a)--(c))
and the bubble motion across the domain
and the upper open boundary
(Figures \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(d)--(k)).
The crucial difference, when compared
with Figure \ref{fig:airjet_dynamics_1},
lies in the following.
When multiple free bubbles are present in
the domain, the interaction between
the leading-bubble wake and the trailing
bubble appears to have caused the trailing bubble
to accelerate and nearly catch up with
the leading one; see
Figures \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(e)--(j).
This has also induced significant deformations
in the trailing bubble (Figures \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(j)--(l)),
and caused it to subsequently break up
(Figures \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(m)--(o)).
As the free bubbles (and their daughter bubbles)
quickly move out of the domain,
one can observe that
another bubble is forming, but
still attached to the wall (Figure \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(o)).
Consequently, the flow domain will
be depleted of free bubbles for
a period of time
beyond the time instant
corresponding to Figure \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(o),
until the air bubble attached to the wall breaks free.
This scenario is more similar to
the one discussed in \cite{Dong2014obc},
but is quite different from that shown by
Figure \ref{fig:airjet_dynamics_1}.
From Figures \ref{fig:airjet_phase_snap_2}(i)--(k)
we can again observe that our method allows the
air bubble and the air-water interface
to cross the open domain
boundary in a smooth fashion.
The air jet in water problem is a stringent
test to the open boundary conditions.
The presence of two-phase open boundary,
combined with the large density ratio
between air and water, makes this problem
extremely challenging to simulate.
The results of this section show
that the two-phase open boundary conditions
and the numerical algorithm developed
in the current work are effective
for two-phase outflows with
large density and viscosity contrasts
at the outflow boundaries.
The $\mathbf{E}(\rho,\mathbf{n},\mathbf{u})$
term in the open boundary condition
\eqref{equ:obc_v_trans} is critical
to the stability for this problem.
We observe that the computation
using an open boundary condition
without this term is unstable
for this problem, that is,
\begin{equation}
-p\mathbf{n} + \mu\mathbf{n}\cdot\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{u})
-\left[
\frac{\lambda}{2}\nabla\phi\cdot\nabla\phi
+ F(\phi)
\right]\mathbf{n}
= 0, \quad \text{on} \ \partial\Omega_o,
\end{equation}
due to
the backflows induced by the
vortices at the outflow
boundary.
It is observed that increasing
$\nu_m$ in the algorithm tends to improve
the stability, and that a
larger $\mu_0$ in \eqref{equ:velocity_3}
for the numerical treatment of
the open boundary condition
also improves the stability
for the current pressure-correction based
scheme.
This observation concerning $\mu_0$
seems different from the trend
observed in \cite{Dong2014obc},
which is for a velocity-correction based
algorithm.
|
\section{Introduction}
Amorphous solids with free surfaces share a number of intriguing features. Nanometrically thin films of polymers and small-molecule glasses have glass-transition temperatures that are substantially lower than in bulk materials; nanoparticles display an excess of low-frequency modes in their vibrational densities of states compared to their bulk counterparts \cite{Sopu2011}; and free surfaces in nanopillars mediate the allowed failure modes that lead to shear banding \cite{Shavit2014, Greer2013}. These findings are all correlated with the observation that relaxation dynamics are more rapid near a free surface than in the bulk~\cite{Ediger2014}. The enhanced dynamics extend some distance into the bulk, but fail to correlate with measures of static structure that have been explored~\cite{Ediger2014}. An outstanding challenge is to find a structural feature that decays slowly enough from the surface that may be used to explain the increase in dynamics. More generally, the characteristic length scale over which a disordered solid is influenced by a free surface is unknown.
It is well-established in supercooled liquids that regions with large root-mean-squared short-time particle fluctuations are also regions that on longer time scales are more likely to exhibit particle rearrangements \cite{Harrowell2006}. Furthermore, these short-time fluctuations are themselves correlated with low-frequency, quasi-localized modes (which have low energy barriers to rearrangements \cite{Xu2010}) in both supercooled fluids \cite{Reichman2008,Royall2014} and jammed systems \cite{Manning2011}. The successful use of low-frequency modes to identify a structural population of potential flow defects in bulk systems \cite{Manning2011, Schoenholz2014} leads us to investigate the vibrational modes at the surface of model disordered systems. Specifically, we study disordered spring networks in dimensions $d=2$ and $d=3$. The networks are derived from jammed packings of soft spheres described in more detail below. In the bulk, these networks are characterized by the average coordination of each particle, $\langle Z \rangle$, where the jamming transition occurs at the isostatic point where $\langle Z \rangle=Z_c=2d$ \cite{Ohern2003}.
In bulk jammed systems a population of disordered low-frequency ``anomalous'' modes \cite{Wyart2005} swamp out the plane waves predicted by continuum elasticity. These additional modes can be understood as a consequence of a diverging length scale: as the jamming transition is approached from high density there is a diverging length scale $l^*\sim \Delta Z^{-1}$ where $\Delta Z \equiv (\langle Z \rangle-Z_c)$ \cite{Silbert2005,Wyart2005} that controls the effect of free surfaces on the stability of the system \cite{Wyart2005, Goodrich2013}. The low-frequency sound modes are connected to the zero-energy modes associated with uniform translations of the system, and similarly the anomalous modes are connected to zero-energy deformation modes that exist at the jamming transition in a system with free boundaries, according to a variational argument \cite{Wyart2005}.
Just as for systems with periodic boundary conditions, in disordered systems with a free surface the diverging length scales of jamming herald a new class of modes, and we find a robust population of disordered low-frequency vibrational modes localized near the surface. While there are zero-energy modes localized at the surface on the scale of a particle diameter \cite{Goodrich2013}, we find that the nonzero-frequency vibrations have an intricate spatial structure that extends into the bulk with length scales set by the proximity to the jamming transition. In addition to $l^*$ there is a second diverging length that controls system stability with respect to finite-wavevector boundary deformations~\cite{Silbert2005, Schoenholz2013}, the transverse length scale $l_T \sim \Delta Z^{-1/2}$. We find that this length is also relevant to disordered surface modes. These lengths, and other diverging lengths with the same scalings \cite{Ellenbroek2006, Lerner2014}, have been argued to characterize the length below which continuum elasticity fails \cite{Ohern2003} and the detailed disordered structure must be considered to understand the response of the amorphous material to point forces.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. We begin in Sec. \ref{sec:prep} by describing the numerical preparation protocol for our systems. Section \ref{sec:harmresults} presents our numerical results on disordered spring networks, beginning in Sec. \ref{sec:dos} with data on the vibrational density of states and continuing in Sec. \ref{sec:struct} in which we investigate the spatial structure of the surface vibrational modes. We close with a discussion of these results in the context of the broader class of amorphous solids in Sec. \ref{sec:bridge}.
\section{System preparation \label{sec:prep}}
We begin by numerically generating jammed packings of $N$ bidisperse spheres in two and three dimensions. We use two distributions (i) 50-50 mixture of spheres with diameter ratio 1:1.4 and (ii) a polydisperse mixture using a flat distribution of particle sizes between $\sigma$ and $1.4\sigma$, where $\sigma$ represents the smallest particle diameter. The interaction between particles $i$ and $j$ is the harmonic soft repulsive potential,
\begin{equation}
V(r_{ij})=\left\{ \begin{array}{cr} \frac{\epsilon}{2}\left( 1-r_{ij}/\sigma_{ij} \right)^2\quad & r_{ij}<\sigma_{ij} \\ 0 & r_{ij}\geq\sigma_{ij} \end{array} \right. ,
\end{equation}
where $r_{ij}$ is the distance between particle centers, $\sigma_{ij}$ is the sum of their radii, and $\epsilon$ sets the energy scale. We will take all particles to have equal mass $m$, measure energies in units of $\epsilon$, distances in units of the average particle diameter, and frequencies in units of $\sqrt{\epsilon/m \sigma^2}$. To obtain a jammed configuration at a target pressure, $p$, particles were initially placed at random in the simulation box with periodic boundary conditions (i.e. in an infinite temperature configuration). The system was then quenched to zero temperature by combining linesearch methods, Newton's method, and the FIRE algorithm \cite{quench}. The system was then incrementally expanded or compressed uniformly and then re-quenched to zero temperature until the target pressure was obtained to within $1\%$. For each configuration specified by a total number of particles of $256 \leq N \leq 10000$ and a pressure of $10^{-8}\leq p \leq 10^{-1},$ approximately 1000 states were prepared for analysis.
When using a purely repulsive potential there is a challenge in dealing with free surfaces; most notably, if one removes particles to create a surface in a finite-pressure jammed configuration, force balance would no longer be satisfied and the system would expand. We circumvent this problem by studying the corresponding ``unstressed'' network \cite{Alexander1998, Silbert2005pre}. We replace each pairwise interaction with a harmonic unstretched spring between nodes at the particle centers. This gives us a system with the same geometry and connectivity as the original sphere packing. These unstressed networks are the cleanest way to understand the bulk density of states of the jammed particle packings, and can be used to understand, e.g., heat transport properties of the original system \cite{Vitelli2010}. They are also useful for systems with attractive interactions, such as Lennard-Jones systems \cite{Xu2007}.
We thus replace the jammed packing with the unstressed network. Formally, one constructs the $dN\times dN$ dynamical matrix $\mathcal{M}_{ij}$ by taking the second derivative of the energy: $\mathcal{M}_{ij} \equiv \frac{\partial^2 U}{\partial \vec{r}_i \partial \vec{r}_j}$, where
\begin{equation}
U = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{\langle i,j \rangle} k_{ij} \left( (\vec{r}_i-\vec{r}_j) \cdot \hat{r}_{ij}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
Here $i$ and $j$ refer to particle indices, the sum is over neighboring particles, and $k_{ij} = \frac{\partial^2 V(r_{ij})}{\partial^2 r_{ij}}$ is the stiffness of the bond. Crucially, this expression for the dynamical matrix neglects terms proportional to stress that are present in the sphere packing. The pressure at which the sphere packing was prepared sets the average contact number for the unstressed system, and we thus use initial packing pressure as a proxy for the spring network connectivity. For the positive pressures and harmonic interactions considered in this work, the average excess contact number is $\langle Z \rangle-2d\sim p^{1/2}$ \cite{Ohern2003}. The dynamical matrix can be diagonalized to obtain the density of states, $D(\omega)$, of the unstressed spring network. In periodic jammed configurations the anomalous modes lead to a plateau in the a density of states that extends down to a characteristic frequency $\omega^*\sim \Delta Z$ \cite{Silbert2005}. Below this frequency, the density of anomalous modes drops to zero. In the following, we will report measurements with respect to an estimate of $\omega^* \approx 2 \sqrt{p}$, which is approximately the frequency at which the density of states for bulk systems drops below 1.
With the unstressed spring network in hand, we create a free surface by removing any bond that crosses a boundary of interest. In this work we focus on systems in a thin film or slab geometry, and so remove the periodic boundary conditions in the $x$-direction. This is equivalent to cutting any bond that crosses $x=0$ or $x=L$ where $L$ is the linear system size. Our system is thus a strip of width $L$ in the $x$-direction, with periodic boundary conditions in the remaining directions.
\section{Numerical results \label{sec:harmresults}}
\subsection{Density of States \label{sec:dos}}
We begin by characterizing the density of vibrational modes in these free-surface systems. Figure \ref{fig:dos} shows representative examples of the density of states that we obtain by cutting free surfaces at $x=0$ and $x=L$ in both 2 and 3 dimensions. The different curves correspond to different pressures at which the harmonic disk packings were originally prepared. As noted above, before cutting the free surface the pressure sets the characteristic length scale $l^*\sim\Delta Z^{-1}$, and by varying the initial pressure of the packings we are able to study the density of states as a function of the ratio $l^*/L$. Although it may be more intuitive to study this ratio by varying the system size, in practice it is much easier to prepare systems at a fixed size and minimize them to different targeted pressures. We note in passing that at all values of $l^*/L$ that we study our disordered packings have of order $L^{d-1}$ surface zero-frequency modes~\cite{Thorpe1995}: for modestly over-constrained systems there is a $\Delta Z$-dependent, non-zero probability per unit surface area of creating a localized zero-frequency mode, and the resulting modes are localized to the surface on the scale of the particle size \cite{Goodrich2013}. In addition to these zero frequency modes, however, there is also a nontrivial population of finite-frequency modes associated with the free surface.
When the strip thickness is $L=l^*$, the system as a whole is brought very close to the isostatic threshold and, by analogy with bulk systems \cite{Silbert2005}, one expects a plateau in the density of states extending to arbitrarily low frequencies. When the strip thickness is $L<l^*$, the system is brought below isostaticity by the introduction of free surfaces and is no longer rigid. For finite-sized systems the lowest-frequency plane wave has a frequency proportional to $1/L$, and there are no disordered modes in the frequency range $0 < \omega \lesssim \omega^*$ \cite{Wyart2013}. This leads to an effective gap in the density of vibrational modes, as seen in Fig. \ref{fig:dos}a. The figure shows a larger gap at lower initial packing pressures, corresponding to a larger ratio of $l^*/L$. Not shown is the delta-function spike of additional \emph{extended} zero-frequency modes that grows as the system is taken farther and farther below the isostatic point by increasing $l^*/L$.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{dos2.pdf}}
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{dos1.pdf}}
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{dos3d.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig:dos}
(a) and (b) Density of vibrational modes averaged over 2500 networks derived from jammed packings of $N=500$ particles in two dimensions. (a) From right to left the pressures of the initial packings are $p=4.0\times 10^{-6},\ 6.3\times 10^{-6},\ 1.0\times 10^{-5},\ 1.6\times 10^{-5},\ 2.5\times 10^{-5},$ and $4.0\times 10^{-5}$, for which $L \lesssim l^*$. (b) From top to bottom the pressures of the initial packings are $p=1.0\times 10^{-4},\ 2.5\times 10^{-4},\ 6.3\times 10^{-4},\ 1.6\times 10^{-3},\ 4.0\times 10^{-3},$ and $1.0\times 10^{-2}$, for which $L \gtrsim l^*$. (c) Low-frequency part of the density of vibrational modes for systems of $N=1000$ particles in 3D. From top to bottom the pressures of the initial packings are $p=6.3\times 10^{-4},\ 1.6\times 10^{-3},\ 4.0\times 10^{-3}, \ 1.0\times 10^{-2},$ and $2.53\times 10^{-2}$, for which $L \gtrsim l^*$.}
\end{figure}
Our primary focus is on systems with $l^*/L < 1$. These systems have free surfaces but remain rigid because the system retains enough contacts to be globally stable. Just as in the periodic case, there is a plateau that extends down to a frequency $\omega^*_s$. We find that for strips this frequency is a factor of two smaller than the lower frequency edge of the plateau in identical systems with full periodic boundary conditions, $\omega^*_s \approx \omega^*/2$. This result is consistent with a cutting argument, as we will show in the Discussion. The most noticeable feature of Fig.~\ref{fig:dos}b, however, is a secondary population of modes below $\omega^*_s$ that is absent in the periodic system. This feature persists for three-dimensional systems with cut surfaces, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dos}c. The additional modes appear to extend all the way down to zero frequency; the curves end at low frequencies where we no longer have sufficient statistics. Note that for each $l^*/L< 1$ there is an upturn at very low frequencies. This upturn is particularly striking at $l^*/L \sim 1$. An extremely minor upturn has been observed for periodic jammed systems with $\Delta Z < 3\times 10^{-2}$ \cite{Silbert2005pre}, but here we see an apparent power-law increase in the density of states that scales as $\omega^{-1/2}$ at low frequencies. This feature has not been understood in the context of the counting/variational argument \cite{Wyart2005}, and is currently unexplained.
The number of modes in this secondary, low-frequency portion of the density of states strongly suggests that this contribution to the density of states arises from the existence of free surfaces. To ensure that we do not include modes that are present in the bulk, we count only the number of modes below $\omega^*_s/2$. For different system sizes the average number of modes per system in the frequency range $0<\omega <\omega^*_s/2$ scales with the free surface area, $L^{d-1}$, as expected. Additionally, at fixed system size but with varying initial packing pressure we find that the number of modes in this frequency range per system scales as $1/\sqrt{p}\sim (l^*)$. These two features are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:doscollapse}, which plots the number of low-frequency modes versus $L^{d-1} p^{-1/2} $ for a variety of pressures and system sizes in both two and three dimensions. This scaling suggests that the volume of particles that participate in surface modes with $0 < \omega < \omega^*_s/2$ scales as $L^{d-1} l^*$; assuming that surface modes are localized to the surface leads to the conclusion that particles within $l^*$ of the free surface participate in these modes.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{doscollapse2.pdf} }
\caption{\label{fig:doscollapse}
Log-log plot of the number of modes below $\omega^*_s/2$ versus $L^{d-1}p^{-1/2}$. Points are drawn from two-dimensional packings with $N=250,\ 500,\ 2048$ and three-dimensional packings with $N=1000,\ 10000$. The straight line is a guide to the eye with unit slope.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Surface mode structure \label{sec:struct}}
We can now look at the spatial structure of the modes that lie in the new band between $\omega=0$ and $\omega=\omega^*_s$ . Figure \ref{fig:mode} shows two typical examples of these modes in a two-dimensional system. The black lines show the magnitude and orientation of the polarization vector of the given mode on each particle. The modes are clearly localized to the free surface. As seen in the left figure, we occasionally find modes that tunnel through the sample and have localized vibrations at both free surfaces. Additionally, we typically find that the extent of localization is weakly frequency-dependent, with a localization length that grows with frequency. A quantification of this dependence is difficult, though, as individual modes typically have non-trivial structure, including plane-wave contributions.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{mode1}}
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{mode2} }
\caption{\label{fig:mode}
Typical low-frequency modes for two-dimensional systems with periodic boundary conditions along the top and bottom edges of the cell and free boundaries along the vertical edges. Circles represent particle centers and black lines represent the orientation and magnitude of particle motion, $\delta\vec{R}_{i}$, in that mode. The frequencies correspond to $\omega/\omega^*_s=0.24$ (top) and $\omega/\omega^*_s=0.62$ (bottom).}
\end{figure}
In order to quantify the decay of the vibrational amplitude from the surface into the bulk, we average the vibrational amplitude over all modes in the frequency band $0 < \omega \leq \omega^*_s$. Specifically, we look at the average polarization magnitude and average squared polarization magnitude of particles between $x$ and $dx$ as a function of distance, $x$, from the free surface (similar to the overlap function defined by Wyart \cite{Wyart2005annrev}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:overlap}
\langle | \vec{e}|^\tau \rangle dx = \sum_{\mu} \sum_{x_i\in [x,x+dx]} \left| \delta\vec{R}_{i,\mu} \right|^\tau.
\end{equation}
Here $\mu$ indexes any of the modes whose frequency is in the surface plateau region, $\delta\vec{R}_{i,\mu}$ refers to the vector displacement of particle $i$ in vibrational mode $\mu$, and $\tau=1$ or $\tau=2$. We have checked that our subsequent results are insensitive to the choice of upper frequency cut-off in the set of modes we study, as long as that cut-off is less than $\omega^*_s$. A representative plot of this surface-mode profile is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:overlap}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{overlap.pdf}}
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{rootoverlap.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig:overlap}
(top) Log-log plot of the overlap function for two-dimensional packings with $N=10000$ and $p=1.0\times 10^{-3}$, vertically shifted (normalized by $\langle |e|^2 \rangle$ of the leftmost data point) for clarity. The solid blue line is an exponential fit over the first region from the surface to the blue dashed line, while the solid black line is a straight line fit on the log-log plot that characterizes the third region (from the black dashed line to the center of the sample). The vertical dashed lines show where the data deviate by a fixed percentage from the solid fitting lines, with the black vertical dashed line marking a knee separating the second from the third regimes. (bottom) Log-log plot of the polarization magnitude between $x$ and $dx$ for $N=10000$ and pressures of (bottom to top $p=4.0\times10^{-3},\ 6.3\times 10^{-3}, 1.0\times 10^{-2},\ 1.6\times 10^{-2}$. The dashed line is a guide to the eye with slope $-1/4$. The curves have been shifted vertically for clarity.}
\end{figure}
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:overlap}(a), the average mode profile decreases away from the surface. The blue curve, an exponential decay, is a good fit to the region closest to the surface. The profile begins to deviate from the initial exponential decay at a distance that we mark in Fig.~\ref{fig:overlap}(a) with a vertical blue dashed line. We have studied mode profiles as a function of initial pressure, and for sufficiently low pressures we consistently see that close to the surface the profile has a clear exponential decay, and that the distance over which this exponential decay persists decreases with increasing pressure. At the highest pressures studied, when an extrapolation would suggest that the exponential decay length is less than the $\approx 2\sigma$ length scale over which the jammed packings have a non-trivial local structure, it is harder to observe this exponential decay. We have also confirmed that the same length scale can be obtained by fitting an exponential decay on a mode-by-mode basis, although this leads to a much noisier signal. In Fig.~\ref{fig:pdepth} we plot (blue solid circles) the distance at which the average mode profile deviates from an exponential decay, corresponding to the blue dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:overlap}, as a function of pressure. We find that this distance scales as the transverse length scale, $l_T\sim p^{-1/4}$, which diverges at the jamming transition~\cite{Silbert2005,Schoenholz2013,Lerner2014}. By varying the precise region over which we fit and the tolerance at which we declare the profile to have deviated from the fit we obtain the error bars in Fig. \ref{fig:pdepth}.
That the modes decay on the scale of the transverse length is surprising in light of our analysis of the density of states, where we found of order $\sim L^{d-1}l^*$ modes below $\omega^*_s/2$. Since $l^* > l_T$, this suggests that even though the dominant decay length is on the scale of $l_T$, there must be contributions from particles farther away from the surface, i.e. on the scale of $l^*$. In fact there are indications of this length scale in the surface mode profile. Although the average mode structure beyond $l_T$ is complicated by the finite number of plane waves that may lie in the frequency band $0<\omega<\omega^*$, we find that the initial exponential decay is consistently followed by a crossover regime which ends with a knee. At larger $x$ the decay is again faster, indicating a new regime. The onset of this new regime is marked by a vertical black dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:overlap}(a). Although we have a very limited range in this third regime, the decay in this regime has the same slope on a log-log plot across the range of pressures for which the third regime is observable in our $N=10000$ two-dimensional systems. This is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:overlap}(b), where we plot the mode profiles on a log-log plot for several pressures, with vertical shifts, to show that they have the same slope in this third regime.
We plot the distance corresponding to the onset of the third regime as a function of pressure in Fig.~\ref{fig:pdepth} (black open circles). We find that the onset of the third regime of decay scales as $l^*\sim p^{-1/2}$, which diverges at the jamming transition~\cite{Silbert2005,Wyart2005,Goodrich2013,Ellenbroek2006}. This is consistent with our expectation that, based on the scaling of the surface density of states, these surface modes should extend into the system on the length scale $l^*$.
In summary, the surface modes appear to have a signature of both of the two diverging length scales associated with jamming~\cite{Silbert2005, Wyart2005, Goodrich2013, Schoenholz2013, Ellenbroek2006, Lerner2014}. The 10000-particle systems studied have a box size of roughly $100\sigma \times 100\sigma$, which accounts for our inability to observe $l^*$ at very low pressures: when the second regime of the mode profile extends past $\sim 50\sigma$ it cannot be reliably detected as the second free surface starts influencing the decay of the overlap function. Thus, studying the transition between the secondary and tertiary decay regimes for lower pressures would require much larger systems. Additionally, as noted above there is local structure on a scale of $\sim 2\sigma$, and so when $l_T$ is comparable to this distance (at very high pressures) it, too, cannot be reliably observed.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{pdepth.pdf} }
\caption{\label{fig:pdepth}
Length scales marking the end of the exponential decay regime at small $x$ corresponding to the blue dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:overlap} (blue solid circles) and the crossover between the second and third regimes corresponding to the black dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:overlap} (black open circles), as a function of pressure for $N=10000$ particle systems in 2D. Straight lines are guides to the eye with slopes $-0.25$ and $-0.50$, respectively; these pressure-dependancies correspond to the scalings of $l_T$ and $l^*$. The error bars around each point correspond to the range of values obtained by varying the parameters of the fitting procedure described in the main text.}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion\label{sec:bridge}}
The most striking feature of the density of states for strips of finite width is the presence of a new population of disordered surface modes with frequencies below $\omega^*_s$. We identify these as surface modes because their number scales as $L^{d-1}$. Above $\omega^*_s$, there is a plateau in the density of states that scales with the volume of the strip, $L^d$. The frequency $\omega^*_s$ is half that of the frequency $\omega^*$, which marks the lower frequency edge of the plateau in the bulk density of states. This factor of two may be understood in the context of a simple counting estimate for $l^*$ and $\omega^*$ \cite{Wyart2005, Goodrich2013}. In bulk systems a counting estimate of $l^*$ comes from thinking about cutting a boundary completely around the system on a size scale $L$. The number of bonds cut by this procedure is $N_c^{cut}=\gamma \langle Z \rangle L^{d-1}$, and the number of excess bonds (above isostaticity) the system had before the cut is $N_c^{extra} = \nu \Delta Z L^d$, where $\gamma$ and $\nu$ are prefactors that depend on the geometry of the cut. Estimating $l^*$ as the length at which $N_c^{cut}=N_c^{extra}$ yields $l^*\sim \gamma \langle Z \rangle/(\nu \Delta Z)$. However, in a system that already has free surfaces in one of the dimensions there is a reduction in $N_c^{extra}$ by a surface term: $N_c^{extra} = \nu \Delta Z L^d - \gamma \langle Z \rangle L^{d-1}$. Equating $N_c^{extra}$ and $N_c^{cut}$ for these free-surface systems thus increases the counting estimate of $l^*$ by a factor of two, and hence $\omega^*\sim1/l^*$ is reduced by a factor of two.
A more pressing question to address is why the surface modes fill in the gap $0 < \omega \leq \omega^*_s$, with a number of modes in this regime that scales as $l^* L^{d-1}$. The fact that the surface modes can have arbitrarily low frequencies is a consequence of the arguments of Goodrich et al. \cite{Goodrich2014pre}, where it was noted that, depending on the degree of localization of a given mode, breaking a contact can lower that individual mode's frequency by an arbitrary amount. Thus, if we assume that modes are quasi-localized to the surface, cutting $L^{d-1}$ bonds could generically create a population proportional to $\sim L^{d-1}$ of very-low energy modes (since this is related to the probability of cutting a bond important to one of those quasi-localized modes). The scaling of the size of this population of sub-$\omega^*_s$ modes is independent of the geometry of the cutting, but the actual number of such modes and their distribution in frequency could depend on the spatial distribution of cut bonds. In the case of a surface, then, why does the surface density of states scale as $l^*$?
A justification comes from recalling that if the system has $L < l^*$ then it loses its rigidity~\cite{Wyart2005, Goodrich2013}. One reasonable assumption is that this rigidity loss occurs because very soft surface modes that decay from each cut surface to a distance $l^*$ can communicate with each other through the system once $L\sim l^* $. We observe that there are two decay lengths governing the decay of the surface mode profile, $l_T$ and $l^*>l_T$. If surface vibrations are localized on a scale of $l^*$, one expects, from a straightforward generalization of the variational argument of Wyart et al. \cite{Wyart2005}, that some population of them (of order $L^{d-1}$) would have an energy cost bounded by $\delta E_{loc} \lesssim (l^*)^{-2}$ and thus have a frequency $\omega \lesssim \omega^*$. (This does not preclude the possibility of ``surface'' modes additionally appearing at higher frequencies.) Thus, the assumption that modes are localized to be within $l^*$ of the surface -- which is verified by the appearance of $l^*$ as a decay length in the surface mode profile -- immediately suggests a population of $l^*L^{d-1}$ modes at frequencies below $\omega^*_s$, consistent with our observation.
We note that our observation of two decay lengths in the profile, $l_T$ and $l^*$, is consistent with ideas of Lerner et al. \cite{Lerner2014}, which suggests that $l_T$ is the length scale below which disordered response, beyond that predicted by continuum elasticity, can be observed as long as the system is at least $l^*$ in size.
It is natural to ask what we might expect for surface modes in disordered systems with longer-range interactions. We speculate that our findings may have implications for the existence of a free-surface length scale in Lennard-Jones thin films. Although these systems do not properly have a jamming transition (it lies inside the liquid-vapor spinodal \cite{Berthier2009}), and the surface modes share the same frequency range as bulk vibrational modes \cite{Jain2004}, there may still be a remnant of the two surface length scales seen in our present studies. One can define longitudinal and transverse length scales by comparing the speeds of sound with the boson peak frequency. For instance, $l_T\sim c_T/\omega^*$, where the transverse speed of sound is $c_T=\sqrt{G/\rho}$, with $G$ the shear modulus and $\rho$ the mass density. In jammed systems this definition recovers the expected scalings of $l_T\sim p^{-1/4}$ and $l^*\sim p^{-1/2}$~\cite{Silbert2005}. We can estimate these length scales by estimating the boson peak and moduli of a zero-temperature Lennard-Jones glass whose density corresponds to a zero-pressure state. Doing so, we find that $l_T\sim2.5\sigma$ and $l^*\sim 6.0\sigma$. While modest, the estimated $l^*$ is longer than static length scales typically observed near free surfaces, and is roughly consistent with the characteristic size of the mobile layer of Lennard-Jones polymer glasses below their glass transition. It is therefore possible that the length scales we observe for jammed systems may survive in the surface properties of real glassy thin films.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank Samuel S. Schoenholz and Randall D. Kamien for useful discussions. This research was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Division of Materials Sciences and Engineering under award DE-FG02-05ER46199 (DMS, CPG, and AJL) and DE-FG02-03ER46088 (DMS and SRN), the UPENN MRSEC under award NSF-DMR-1120901 (DMS and AJL), and the Advanced Materials Fellowship of the American Philosophical Society (DMS).
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The quantum nature of microscopic systems may, under some special
circumstances, manifest itself in the form of interesting macroscopic
effects. On the other hand, one of the most distinctive features of
quantum phenomena are the vacuum fluctuations, among which one of the most
celebrated examples are the zero-point electromagnetic field
fluctuations. These, however, do not produce any observable effect in free
space. This may change drastically when non-trivial boundary conditions are
imposed on the electromagnetic field: in the Casimir effect (and related phenomena), a
force appears even between two {\em neutral\/} macroscopic bodies. Indeed, this
effect can be understood as due to the fact that vacuum fluctuations induce
(vacuum) currents in each object, the interaction between which results in
a macroscopic force~\cite{libros}.
The very same quantum fluctuations may also produce qualitatively different
observable effects in different set-ups. One that has received much
attention is the existence of a frictional force when plane mirrors {\em
which are not in contact\/} undergo constant-speed relative parallel
motion. The phenomenon manifests itself, for instance, when the mirrors'
media are lossy, since a frictional force is then generated by the phase
lag between the fluctuation-induced currents, and that phase lag is not
present for perfect mirrors~\cite{Pendry97}. A different situation, which
also leads to friction, is due to the quantum Cerenkov effect between
non-dispersive media~\cite{Maghrebi:2013jpa} at a relative speed which
surpasses a threshold determined by the speed of light in the media. In
any case, the effect can be understood in terms of an exchange of virtual
photons between two bodies, which in turn excite their internal degrees of
freedom. This effect has been analyzed~\cite{Pendry97} (and
debated~\cite{debate}) at length, mainly for the case of media which fill
half-spaces, shifting with constant velocity. Quantum friction has been computed using different
theoretical approaches \cite{others}. Ref.\cite{vp2007} contains a detailed account of the works
on the subject, pointing out
some contradictory results in earlier literature.
Note that quantum
dissipative effects on moving bodies may also be due to the excitation of
{\em real\/} photons out of the quantum vacuum, an effect known as
dynamical Casimir effect (see, for instance,
Ref.~\cite{dce}). The latter, however, unlike
the quantum friction phenomenon, requires the existence on non-vanishing
accelerations.
In this paper, we present a detailed study of quantum friction between two
mirrors which undergo constant parallel speed relative motion, using functional
methods. We follow
two complementary approaches that, we believe, shed new light on this
interesting effect from the perspective of quantum field theory. We present our study for a specific simple model, consisting of a vacuum
scalar field linearly coupled to a set of uncoupled quantum harmonic
oscillators which are the microscopic `matter' degrees of freedom on the mirrors.
Our first approach here is analogous to the one presented in a previous
paper by some of us~\cite{Fosco2011}, where dissipative effects (for either
normal or parallel motions) have been analysed using an Euclidean
functional integral formalism for the calculation of the effective action,
the result of which is rotated back to real time. Mirrors have been
represented by nonlocal coupling terms in the vacuum field action, which
proceed from the integration of the microscopic degrees of freedom. It has
been shown there that, indeed, an imaginary part for the in-out effective
action emerged as a consequence of non-contact friction. We extend here that
study in more than one direction: we present a more detailed
description of the model for the microscopic degrees of freedom (namely,
before integrating them out) and we analyze in detail the relation
between the analytic structure of the nonlocal coupling terms in Fourier
space and the presence of frictional forces, performing all the calculations in
real time, and discussing the subtleties of Wick rotation. The second approach
consists in the explicit computation of the frictional force from the vacuum expectation value of the energy momentum tensor.
We will see that, although the problem is stationary, as the {\it in} and {\it out} vacuum states
of the system do not coincide, it is necessary to use the {in-in} or Closed Time Path (CTP) formalism.
Both the { in-out} and {in-in} functional approaches have been previously applied
to the case of accelerated mirrors in Ref.\cite{Fosco:2007nz}.
Regarding the mirrors, we consider two different geometries: two infinitesimally
thin mirrors (that is, two-dimensional mirrors of zero width) separated by
a distance $a$, and two half-spaces separated by a distance $a$.
The structure of this paper is as follows: in Section~\ref{sec:system} we
define the class of system that we consider in this paper and establish
some of the approximations to be used. We also present a microscopic model which provides concrete
realizations of the system defined above. Then, in
Section~\ref{sec:effective}, we calculate the in-out effective action,
studying the relation between its analytic structure and the existence of
friction. In Section~\ref{sec:force} we calculate the frictional force, by
means of the in-in vacuum expectation value of the stress tensor, using the CTP formalism.
Section~\ref{sec:concl} contains our conclusions.
\section{The system}\label{sec:system}
Let us begin by defining the (real-time) action ${\mathcal S}$ for the
system; it depends on the vacuum field $\phi$ and on the matter
fields, denoted collectively by $\psi$, confined to the mirrors.
Hence, the action naturally decomposes into three terms, as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defs}
{\mathcal S}[\phi, \psi] \;=\; {\mathcal S}^{(0)}_{\rm v}[\phi]
\,+\, {\mathcal S}^{(0)}_{\rm m}[\psi] \,+\, {\mathcal S}^{({\rm int})}_{\rm v m}[\phi,\psi] ,
\end{equation}
where ${\mathcal S}^{(0)}_{\rm v}$ is the free (i.e., no mirrors) action for the vacuum
field:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defs0}
{\mathcal S}^{(0)}_{\rm v}[\phi]\;=\; \frac{1}{2} \int d^4x \,\big[ \partial^\mu
\phi\partial_\mu \phi \,-\, (m^2-i \epsilon) \phi^2 \big] \;,
\end{equation}
whilst ${\mathcal S}^{(0)}_{\rm m}$ and ${\mathcal S}_{\rm v m}^{({\rm int})}$ denote the actions for the free
matter field and for the $\phi -\psi$ interaction, respectively.
Assuming locality of the microscopic vacuum-field/matter interaction,
${\mathcal S}_{\rm v m}^{({\rm int})}$ will only depend on the vacuum field at spatial points
on the regions occupied by the two mirrors, which we will denote by $L$ and
$R$ (each letters will be used to denote both a mirror and the spatial
region it occupies). Each mirror is assumed to have homogeneous and
isotropic properties on each $x^3 = {\rm constant}$ plane, whenever $x^3$
is inside the mirror width. Besides, those properties are independent of
$x^3$ inside each mirror. We adopt the convention $\hbar=c=1$.
The in-out effective action $\Gamma$ for the full system described by
${\mathcal S}$ may therefore be written in terms of the vacuum persistence
amplitude, ${\mathcal Z}$, which in turn can be represented as a functional
integral:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:funcgenphipsi}
e^{ i \Gamma} \;=\; \mathcal{Z}=\;\langle0_{\rm out}\vert 0_{\rm in}\rangle\;=\int \mathcal{D}\phi \mathcal{D}\psi \;
e^{i {\mathcal S}[\phi,\psi]}\;.
\end{equation}
Rather than performing the functional integrals over matter and vacuum
fields simultaneously, it is convenient to introduce the partial result of
integrating out just the matter degrees of freedom at the plates:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equrep1}
\mathcal{Z} \;=\;\int \mathcal{D}\phi \; e^{i {\mathcal S}_{\rm v}^{({\rm eff})}[\phi]}\;,
\end{equation}
with ${\mathcal S}_{\rm v}^{({\rm eff})}[\phi] \equiv {\mathcal S}^{(0)}_{\rm v}[\phi]
+ {\mathcal
S}^{({\rm int})}_{\rm v} [\phi]$, where the second term incorporates the effect of the
matter degrees of freedom, and is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defSvm}
e^{i {\mathcal S}^{({\rm int})}_{\rm v}[\phi]}\;=\; \int \mathcal{D}\psi \;
e^{i \big( {\mathcal S}^{(0)}_{\rm m}[\psi] + {\mathcal S}_{\rm v m}^{({\rm
int})}[\phi,\psi]\big)}\;.
\end{equation}
Regardless of the model used for the mirrors, based on the assumptions
about the system, the general form of ${\mathcal S}^{({\rm int})}_{\rm v}[\phi]$
will be:
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal S}^{({\rm int})}_{\rm v}[\phi]\;=\; {\mathcal S}^{(L)}_{\rm v}[\phi] +
{\mathcal S}^{(R)}_{\rm v}[\phi]\;,
\end{equation}
where ${\mathcal S}^{(R)}_{\rm v}[\phi]$ and ${\mathcal S}^{(L)}_{\rm v}[\phi]$ are,
in general, nonlocal and non-quadratic functionals of
$\phi(x_\parallel,x^3)$, where $x_\parallel \equiv (x^0,x^1,x^2)$. Because
of the assumed locality of the microscopic interaction, we also know that
${\mathcal S}^{(L,R)}_{\rm v}$ will depend on $\phi(x_\parallel,x^3)$ only for $x^3$
inside the region defining the respective mirror.
It is convenient to introduce, in this respect, two functions $\chi_L(x^3)$ and
$\chi_R(x^3)$, respectively, which determine the regions occupied by them.
For finite or infinite width mirrors: $\chi_{L,R}(x^3) = 1$ if $x_3$ belongs to
$L,R$, and $\chi_{L,R}(x^3) = 0$ otherwise. For zero-width ones, they are
just $\delta$ functions of the corresponding value of $x^3$.
Thus, under the assumption that, either exactly (as in the model we shall
consider) or approximately, ${\mathcal S}^{({L,R})}_{\rm v}$ is quadratic in its
respective argument, we
have:
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal S}^{({\rm int})}_{\rm v}[\phi] \;=\; - \frac{1}{2}
\int_{x,y} \phi(x) V(x,y) \phi(y)
\end{equation}
(where we introduced a shorthand notation for the two spacetime integrals) with:
\begin{equation}
V(x,y) \;=\; V_L(x,y) \,+\, V_R(x,y) \;.
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
V_{L,R}(x,y) \;=\; \chi_{L,R}(x^3) \, \delta(x^3-y^3) \, \lambda_{L,
R}(x_\parallel-y_\parallel) \;.
\end{equation}
The `potentials' $V_{L,R}$ can be determined by using a concrete model,
or even introduced by hand, under some specific assumptions.
Nevertheless, regardless of the origin of those potentials, the $\phi$
integral becomes a Gaussian,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:phigaussian}
{\mathcal Z}\;=\;\int \mathcal{D}\phi \, e^{-\frac{1}{2} \int_{x,y}\,
\phi(x) A(x,y) \phi(y) } \;,
\end{equation}
where we introduced $A(x,y)$, which may be regarded as the kernel of an
(integral) operator $A$. In a Dirac bracket-like notation: \mbox{$A(x,y) =
\langle x|A|y\rangle$}, with:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defA}
A(x,y)\;=\; \big[ i (\Box_x + m^2 ) + \epsilon \big] \delta(x-y) + i V(x,y) \;.
\end{equation}
Thus, the formal result of the integral over $\phi$ yields for $\Gamma$:
\begin{equation}
\label{accionefectiva}
\Gamma\;=\;\frac{i}{2} \, {\rm Tr}\log A \,.
\end{equation}
An expansion of $\Gamma$ in powers of the potentials can be performed by
noting that $A = A_0 + A_1$, where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defA0}
A_0(x,y)\;=\; \big[ i (\Box_x + m^2 ) + \epsilon \big] \delta(x-y) \;,
\end{equation}
is the inverse of the free Feynman propagator
$G_F(x-y)=-i$\mbox{$\langle 0|T[\phi(x)\phi(y)|0\rangle$}, and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defA1}
A_1(x,y)\;=\; i V(x,y) \;.
\end{equation}
The first contribution in this expansion which already encodes a nontrivial
interaction between the two mirrors is of the second order, and has the form:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gammaI}
\Gamma_I^{(2)} \;=\; -\frac{i}{2} {\rm Tr} \big(G_F V_L G_F V_R\big) \;.
\end{equation}
The trace may be evaluated in momentum space, so that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:effam}
\Gamma_I^{(2)} \;=\;- \frac{i}{2} \int \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}
\frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \tilde{G}_F(p) \tilde{G}_F (q) \tilde{V}_L(p,q)
\tilde{V}_R(q,p) \;,
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{G}(p) \equiv \frac{i}{p^2 - m^2 + i \epsilon}$, while the two momentum space kernels $\tilde V_{R,L}$ are determined by the geometry and composition of the mirrors, as well as by the relative motion between them. The advantage of using a microscopic model is that the analytic properties of the kernels will be completely determined after the integration of the matter degrees of freedom.
Let us consider now, in the next subsection, how the effect of the relative
motion is reflected in the potentials.
\subsection{Potentials}\label{sec:pots}
Since only the relative motion of the mirrors may affect the physical
results, we shall use as the reference system a laboratory frame ($L$), where $L$
is at rest, while $R$ moves rigidly with a constant speed $u$ along any direction
parallel to its homogeneity and isotropy planes, $x^1$ say.
Using $x'^\mu$, $\mu = 0,1,2,3$ for coordinates fixed to the moving mirror,
and assuming $|u| << 1$, we have the Galilean transformations:
$x^0 = x'^0$, $x'^0 = x^0$, $x'^1 = x^1 - u x^0$, $x'^2 = x^2$ and $x'^3 =
x^3$.
For the $L$ mirror, under the assumptions we presented above, the potential
necessarily has the form:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vllab}
V_L(x,y)\;=\; \chi_L(x^3) \,\lambda_L(x_\parallel-y_\parallel) \,
\delta(x^3-y^3) \;,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_L$ may be conveniently determined by its Fourier space
transformed $\tilde\lambda_L(k^0,k^1,k^2)$.
Regarding the $R$ mirror, we note that, in a comoving reference system,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vrcm}
V'_R(x',y')\;=\; \chi_R(x'^3) \,\lambda_R(x'_\parallel-y'_\parallel) \,
\delta(x'^3-y'^3) \;,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_R$ is determined by the microscopic model at rest, since it
is a comoving system object. It may be
written in terms of its Fourier transform, as follows:
\begin{equation}
\lambda_R(x'_\parallel-y'_\parallel)\;=\; \int
\frac{d^3k_\parallel}{(2\pi)^3} \, e^{i k_\parallel \cdot
(x'_\parallel - y'_\parallel)}
\tilde\lambda_R(k_\parallel)
\end{equation}
(no need to introduce primed variables for the momenta, since they are
integrated, dummy variables). Note that, if the two media were identical,
$\tilde\lambda_R$ above would be identical to
$\tilde\lambda_L$.
The interaction between the mirrors and the vacuum field will be:
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal S}_{\rm v}^{\rm (int)} \;=\; - \frac{1}{2} \int_{x, y} \, \phi(x)
\, V_L(x,y) \phi(y) \,
- \, \frac{1}{2} \int_{x',y'}\, \phi'(x') \, V'_R(x',y') \phi'(y') \;.
\end{equation}
We have to put both potentials in the same reference system. The scalar
field satisfies $\phi'(x') = \phi(x)$, and $\chi_R$ is invariant. On the
other hand:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda_R(x'_\parallel-y'_\parallel) &=& \int
\frac{d^3k_\parallel}{(2\pi)^3} \, e^{i [k^0 (x'^0 - y'^0) -
k^1 (x'^1 - y'^1) - k^2 (x'^2 - y'^2)}
\tilde\lambda_R(k^0,k^1,k^2) \nonumber\\
&=& \int \frac{d^3k_\parallel}{(2\pi)^3} \, e^{i [k^0 (x^0 - y^0) -
k^1 (x^1 - y^1 - u (x^0 - y^0)) - k^2 (x^2 - y^2)]}
\tilde\lambda_R(k^0,k^1,k^2) \nonumber\\
&=& \int \frac{d^3k_\parallel}{(2\pi)^3} \, e^{i [k^0 (x^0 - y^0) -
k^1 (x^1 - y^1) - k^2 (x^2 - y^2)]}
\tilde\lambda_R(k^0- u k^1,k^1,k^2) \;,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the Galilean transformation and a shift of integration
variables. The last line in the equation above tells us that, in the $L$
system, the $R$ mirror is described by the shifted $\tilde\lambda_R$
function:
\begin{equation}
\tilde\lambda_R(k^0,k^1,k^2) \;\to\;
\tilde\lambda_R(k^0- u k^1,k^1,k^2)\;.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Microscopic model for the media}\label{ssec:micro}
We introduce here a simple microscopic model, a concrete
realization of the interaction between vacuum and matter fields, which
provides a physically acceptable function $\tilde{\lambda}$.
Microscopic matter degrees of freedom on the media behave as
one-dimensional harmonic oscillators, one at each point of the mirror.
They have generalized coordinates $Q(x^0,x^1,x^2) = Q(x_\parallel)$, taking
values in an internal space.
No coupling between the oscillators is included, and there is a linear
coupling between each oscillator and the vacuum field. The interaction
only occurs locally, at the spatial positions occupied by the media.
To find ${\mathcal S}_{\rm v}^{(L)}$, we consider the terms in the action
depending on $Q_L$ (for $R$ an analogous argument will apply):
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal S}_{\rm m}^{(0)} \;=\; \frac{1}{2}\int d^4x \chi_L(x^3)\,
\big[\dot{Q}_L^2(x_\parallel)-(\Omega_L^2-i \epsilon)
Q_L^2(x_\parallel)\big]
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal S}^{\rm (int)}_{\rm v m} \;=\; g_L \int d^4x \, \chi_L(x^3) \,
Q_L(x_\parallel) \phi(x) \;.
\end{equation}
The integral to find ${\mathcal S}_{\rm v}^{(L)}$ is a Gaussian, and it results
in the potential:
\begin{equation}
V_L(x,y) \;=\;\chi_L(x^3) \delta(x^3-y^3)\,\lambda_L(x_\parallel-y_\parallel)
\end{equation}
with the Fourier transform of $\lambda_L$ given by:
\begin{equation}
\tilde\lambda_L(k_\parallel) \;=\;
{\tilde\lambda}_L(k^0) \;,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lambda}
{\tilde\lambda}_L(k^0) \; = \,
\frac{g_L^2}{(k^0)^2-\Omega_L^2+i\epsilon}\;.
\end{equation}
Note that, even for this simple model, $\tilde{\lambda}_L$ is
not analytic, since it has two poles, located at $k^0_L=\pm\sqrt{\Omega_L^2-i\epsilon}\approx
\pm \Omega_L \mp \frac{i\epsilon}{2\Omega_L}$.
An important remark is in order: the mass dimensions of the coupling constant
$g_L$ and of $Q$ are different when $\chi_L$ is a $\delta$ function rather
than a step-like function. Indeed, in the former, $[Q] = 1/2$ and
$[g_L]=-3/2$, while in the latter $[Q] = 1$ and
$[g_L]=-2$.
For a moving $R$ mirror, on the other hand, we shall have
\begin{equation}
{\tilde\lambda}_R(k^0,k^1) \; = \, \frac{g_R^2}{(k^0 - u
k^1)^2-\Omega_R^2+i\epsilon} \;.
\end{equation}
\section{In-out effective action}\label{sec:effective}
Let us now compute the effective action as a function
of the $\tilde{\lambda}$ functions which characterize the material:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_I^{(2)}\;=\; \frac{-iT \Sigma}{2(2\pi)^2} \int
d^3p_\parallel \; \tilde\lambda_L(p^0)
\tilde\lambda_R(p^0-u p^1) \;
\int dx^3 dy^3 \; \chi_L(x^3) \,
\big[G(p_\parallel,x^3-y^3)\big]^2 \, \chi_R(y^3) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $T$ is the total time, $\Sigma$ the total surface of the
plates, and:
\begin{equation}
G(p_\parallel,x^3) \;=\; i \, \int dp^3 \, \frac{e^{i p^3
x^3}}{(p_\parallel)^2 - (p^3)^2 + i \epsilon} \;.
\end{equation}
For two zero-width mirrors, at a distance $a$, we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:accionef}
\Gamma_I^{(2)}\;=\; \frac{i T \Sigma}{4} \int d^3 p_\parallel \,
\frac{e^{2ia\sqrt{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}}}{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}
\;\tilde\lambda_L(p^0) \, \tilde\lambda_R(p^0-u p^1)\;.
\end{equation}
Here, each $\tilde{\lambda}(\omega)$ appears evaluated at a frequency
measured at the rest frame of each plate.
On the other hand, for infinite media filling half-spaces, namely,
$\chi_L(x^3) = \theta(-x^3)$ and $\chi_R(x^3) = \theta(x^3-a)$, we see that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:accionefectivasemiespacios}
\Gamma_I^{(2)}\;=\; \frac{i T \Sigma}{4} \int d^3 p_\parallel \,
\frac{\tilde\lambda_L(p^0) \; \tilde\lambda_R(p^0- u
p^1)}{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon} \int dx_3 dx'_3 \theta(-x_3)
\theta(x_3'-a) e^{2i(x_3'-x_3)\sqrt{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}} \;.
\end{equation}
We note that the result corresponding to the two half-spaces may also be
obtained from the one corresponding to thin mirrors, by performing
integrations over two auxiliary variables. Indeed, using the relations:
\begin{equation}
\theta(-x^3) \;=\; \int_{-\infty}^0 ds_L \,\delta(x^3 - s_L)
\;,\;\;
\theta(x^3 -a) \;=\; \int_a^\infty ds_R \,\delta(x^3 - s_R) \;,
\end{equation}
and that $\Gamma$, for thin mirrors, is only a function of the distance
between the mirrors, we obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hat-trick}
\Gamma_I^{(2)}\;=\; \frac{i T \Sigma}{4} \int_{-\infty}^0 ds_L
\int_{a-s_L}^\infty ds_R
\int d^3 p_\parallel \,
\frac{e^{2i s_R\sqrt{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}}}{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}
\;\tilde\lambda_L(p^0) \, \tilde\lambda_R(p^0-u p^1)\;,
\end{equation}
or
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:hat-trick2}
\Gamma_I^{(2)} &=& \frac{i T \Sigma}{4} \int_a^\infty ds_R
\int_{a-S_R}^0 ds_L \int d^3 p_\parallel \,
\frac{e^{2i s_R\sqrt{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}}}{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}
\;\tilde\lambda_L(p^0) \, \tilde\lambda_R(p^0-u p^1) \nonumber\\
&=& \frac{i T \Sigma}{4} \int_a^\infty ds_R (s_R -a) \int d^3 p_\parallel \,
\frac{e^{2i s_R\sqrt{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}}}{(p_\parallel)^2+i\epsilon}
\;\tilde\lambda_L(p^0) \, \tilde\lambda_R(p^0-u p^1) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Since the auxiliary variable is real, one can also extract the imaginary
part of $\Gamma$ for the half-spaces from the result corresponding to thin
mirrors. Therefore, in what follows we will describe in detail the calculations for the case of thin mirrors,
and eventually quote only the final results for half-spaces. To simplify the notation, we will also omit
the superscript in the second order approximation to the effective action, that will be denoted by
$\Gamma_I$.
\subsection{Imaginary part of the in-out effective action}
Since the in-out effective action is related to the vacuum persistence amplitude
(Eq.~\eqref{eq:funcgenphipsi}), the presence of an imaginary part signals,
for the systems considered in this paper, the excitation of internal
degrees of freedom on the mirrors. Since this is due to the
constant-velocity motion of one of the mirrors, it reflects the existence
of non-contact friction.
In this section we will obtain explicit expressions
for this imaginary part, for the microscopic model described above, in the case of zero-width mirrors. The case of media filling
half-spaces will be considered at the end, taking advantage of the result for thin mirrors.
In what follows, we consider the case of identical mirrors, so we shall
drop the $L$ and $R$ subscripts from the microscopic model parameters.
If we use the notation $\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}=(p^1,p^2)$, the integrand for the effective action of Eq.\eqref{eq:accionef}, considered as a function of
$p^0$, has singularities in $\pm \sqrt{\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}^2-i\epsilon} \approx
\pm (\vert\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}\vert - i \epsilon / 2 \vert\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}\vert)$. It also has two branch
cuts: the first one could be taken as starting
on the first singularity, to $+\infty$, parallel to the $x$ axis, (that is, with
$\text{Im}(p^0)=-\epsilon/2 \vert\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}\vert$ and $\text{Re}(p^0) >
\vert\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}\vert$, under the approximation of small $\epsilon$). The other
branch cut extends parallel to the real axis, from the second singularity to
$-\infty$.
In Eq.(\ref{eq:accionef}), we can write the integral in the variable $p^0$ in the positive axis
\begin{equation}
\label{primercuad}
\Gamma_I=\frac{iT\Sigma}{4}\int d^2\mathbf{p_{\parallel}} \int_{0}^{\infty}dp^0(f(p^0)+f(-p^0))\, ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
f(p^0)=\frac{e^{2ia\sqrt{(p^0)^2-\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}^2+i\epsilon}}}{(p^0)^2-\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}^2+i\epsilon}\tilde{\lambda}(p^0)\tilde{\lambda}(p^0-u
p^1) .
\end{equation}
This allows us to compute the $p^0$-integral in the complex plane by considering
a closed contour formed by the positive real and imaginary axes and a quarter of a
circle with very large radius. As the integral over the quarter of circle vanishes when the radius of the
circle tends to infinity, the integral in Eq.(\ref{primercuad}) is given by its Wick rotated
expression $p^0\to i p^0$ plus the contribution coming from the poles of $f(p^0)$ in the first
quadrant.
As a first example, one may consider the case of constant
$\tilde{\lambda}(p^0)$. Denoting this constant by $\omega_{\rm p}^2$,
it can be shown that this corresponds to the
dielectric permittivity given by the plasma model
$\epsilon(p^0)=1-\omega_{\rm p}^2/(p^0)^2$. In this case, as $\tilde\lambda$ has no poles,
and $f(i p^0)$ is a real function, there is no imaginary part in the effective action
and therefore no quantum friction.
Let us now consider the case of the microscopic model with uncoupled harmonic oscillators. The function $f(p^0)$ reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:accionefosc1}
f(p^0)=g^4 \frac{1}{(p^0)^2-\Omega^2+i\epsilon} \times
\frac{1}{(p^0-u p^1)^2-\Omega^2+i\epsilon}
\times
\frac{e^{2ia\sqrt{(p^0)^2-\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}^2+i\epsilon}}}{(p^0)^2-\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}^2+i\epsilon} \, ,
\end{equation}
and it has, in addition to the already mentioned singularities, four simple poles, located at:
\begin{align*}
p^0 &= \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon} \approx \Omega - \frac{i\epsilon}{2\Omega}\\
p^0 &= - \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon} \approx - \Omega + \frac{i\epsilon}{2\Omega}\\
p^0 &= u p^1 + \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon} \approx u p^1 + \Omega - \frac{i\epsilon}{2\Omega}\\
p^0 &= u p^1 - \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon} \approx u p^1 -\Omega + \frac{i\epsilon}{2\Omega} \, .
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{polos.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:polos} (Color online). Singularities of $f(p^0)$ (Eq.(38)) in the complex $p^0$ plane. Simple poles are depicted as filled dots, while the branch cuts are represented by dashed lines. We have introduced the notation: $u^\pm = u p^1 \pm \Omega$.}
\end{figure}
The singularities of $f(p_0)$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:polos} (the
ones for $f(-p^0)$ can be found by $p^0 \rightarrow -p^0$). Note that,
for each term of the integrand ($f(p^0)$ and $f(-p^0)$), there is only one
pole that may appear in the first quadrant, as long as the parameters fulfill
certain conditions. For the first term, this happens if $u p^1 - \Omega >
0$ while for the second term when $-u p^1 - \Omega > 0$.
Then, using Cauchy's theorem we find
\begin{align}
\label{eq:accionefectivaenfunciondep1}
\Gamma_I &= \frac{i T \Sigma}{4} \int d^2\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}\int_{0}^{+\infty} dp^0 (f(p^0)+f(-p^0))= \frac{- T \Sigma}{4} \int d^2 \textbf{p}_\parallel \left\lbrace \int_{0}^{+\infty} dp^0 (f(ip^0)+f(-ip^0)) + \right. \nonumber \\
&\left. + \Theta(u p^1 - \Omega) 2 \pi \text{Res}\left[f(p^0), u p^1 - \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon}\right] + \Theta(-u p^1 - \Omega) 2 \pi \text{Res}\left[f(-p^0), -u p^1 - \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon}\right] \right\rbrace.
\end{align}
Noting that $f(ip^0)+f(-ip^0)$ is real, the imaginary part of the effective
action becomes:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:imaccionef}
{\rm Im}\, \Gamma_I &= \frac{- T \Sigma \pi}{2} \Im \int d^2 \mathbf{p_{\parallel}} \left\lbrace
\Theta(u p^1 - \Omega) \text{Res}\left[f(p^0), u p^1 - \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon}\right] + \Theta(-u p^1 - \Omega) \text{Res}\left[f(-p^0), -u p^1 - \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon} \right] \right\rbrace \, .
\end{align}
In order to obtain a functional form from the expression above, we
evaluate the two residues involved:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:resi}
\text{Res}\left[(\pm p^0), \pm u p^1 - \sqrt{\Omega^2-i\epsilon}\right]=g^4\frac{e^{2ia \sqrt{u^2p_1^2+\Omega^2-\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}^2-2 u p^1 \sqrt{\Omega^2-i \epsilon} }}}{u^2p_1^2+\Omega^2-\mathbf{p_{\parallel}}^2\mp 2 u p^1 \sqrt{\Omega^2-i \epsilon}} \left( \frac{1}{u^2p_1^2\mp 2 u p^1 \sqrt{\Omega^2-i \epsilon}}\right) \left( \frac{1}{-2 \sqrt{\Omega^2-i \epsilon}}\right) .
\end{align}
From Eq.~\eqref{eq:imaccionef}, we see that the only modes of the vacuum
field that contribute to friction are those with
$\vert p_1\vert >\Omega/u$. Inserting Eq.(\ref{eq:resi}) into Eq.(\ref
{eq:imaccionef}), and performing the change of variables $u p^1
\rightarrow \omega$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:funciondeomega}
{\rm Im}\, \Gamma_I =\pi T \Sigma \frac{g^4}{2\Omega} {\rm Im} \left\lbrace \int_{-\infty}^\infty dp_2 d\omega \Theta(\omega - \Omega)u \frac{\exp\left[2i\frac{a}{u} \sqrt{((v^2-1)\omega^2+\Omega^2u^2-p_2^2u^2-2 \omega \Omega u^2 + i \omega \epsilon u^2/ \Omega}\right]}{(u^2-1)\omega^2+\Omega^2u^2-p_2^2u^2-2 \omega \Omega u^2 + i \omega \epsilon u^2/ \Omega)\omega(\omega-2 \Omega + i \epsilon / \Omega)}\right\rbrace \, .
\end{equation}
To perform the integration over $\omega$, we use that
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\omega-2\Omega+i \epsilon / \Omega}= ´{\rm p.v.} \left(\frac{1}{\omega-2\Omega}\right)-i\pi \delta(\omega-2\Omega)\, ,
\end{equation*}
and note that $\epsilon$ can be set to zero in the rest of the integrand.
Performing another change of variables, $u p_2 a \rightarrow x$, the final expression for the effective action reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:analiticak}
{\rm Im}\, \Gamma_I =\frac{\pi^2}{4} \frac{T \Sigma}{a^3} \frac{g^4 }{\Omega^6}(\Omega a)^4 \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx \frac{e^{-\frac{2}{u}\sqrt{(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x^2}}}{(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x^2}
\simeq \frac{\pi^2}{4} \frac{T \Sigma}{a^3} \frac{g^4 }{\Omega^6}(\Omega a)^4 \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx \frac{e^{-\frac{2}{u}\sqrt{4(\Omega a)^2+x^2}}}{4(\Omega a)^2+x^2}\, .
\end{equation}
This is the main result of this section, written as a product of dimensionless factors. The integral over $x$ on the Eq.\eqref{eq:analiticak} may be performed numerically. In Fig. \ref{fig:numerico3+1} we show the result for the imaginary part of the effective action as a function of $u$, for $\Omega a=0.01$. As expected, the dissipative effects are strongly suppressed as $u\rightarrow 0$. Indeed, the integral in Eq.(\ref{eq:analiticak}) vanishes as $\exp(-4 \Omega a /u)$ for $u\ll \Omega a$, and grows linearly in $u$
in the opposite limit.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[scale=2]{effact_thin_plates.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:numerico3+1} (Color online). Imaginary part of the effective action for thin mirrors, as a function of $u$, with $\Omega a=0.01$. $A$ is the global factor
$A=\frac{g^4 T\Sigma (\Omega a)^3 \pi^2}{4 a^3 \Omega ^6}$. The imaginary part of the effective action, and hence the dissipative effects, are strongly suppressed for small values of the velocity between the plates.}
\end{figure}
The imaginary part of the effective action for half-spaces can be obtained by integrating the thin
mirrors case, as explained above (see Eq.(\ref{eq:hat-trick2})). The result is
\begin{align}
\label{eq:accionefectivasemiespk}
{\rm Im}\, \Gamma_I &=\frac{\pi^ 2}{16}\frac{T \Sigma}{a^3} \frac{g^4}{\Omega^8} (\Omega a)^6 u^2 \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx \frac{e^{-\frac{2}{u}\sqrt{(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x ^2}}}{\left[(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x^2\right]^2}\, .
\end{align}
As already mentioned, the coupling constants $g$ for half-spaces and thin mirrors have different dimensions. We show the numerical results for this integration in Fig. \ref{fig:numerico3+1semiesp}, as a function of $u$, with $\Omega a=0.01$. As in the previous case,
there is a strong suppression for low velocities.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[scale=2]{effact_half_spaces.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:numerico3+1semiesp} (Color online). Imaginary part of the effective action for half-spaces, as a function of $u$, with $\Omega a=0.01$. $A$ is the global factor $A=\frac{g^4 T\Sigma (\Omega a)^5 \pi ^2}{16 a^3 \Omega ^8}$. The imaginary part of the effective action, and hence the dissipative effects, are strongly suppressed for small values of the velocity between the plates.}
\end{figure}
\section{Frictional Force}\label{sec:force}
Since ${\rm Im}\, \Gamma_I >0$ when the mirrors are in relative motion,
there is an energy transfer to the system. Indeed, starting in the {\it
in} vacuum $\vert 0_{in}\rangle$, the system ends up being in an excited state, as can
be seen from the vacuum persistence probability
\begin{equation}
\vert \langle 0_{\rm out}\vert 0_{\rm in} \rangle \vert^2 = e^{-2{\rm Im} \Gamma_I }\, .
\end{equation}
Therefore, energy conservation implies that there should be force
performing mechanical work when moving the mirror. Moreover, since this
motion has a constant speed, the force has to be dissipative in nature.
In spite of the fact that the effective action allows one to understand, in
an indirect way, the existence of a frictional force, it is not the
appropriate tool to find that force explicitly.
On the other hand, we believe that it is important, as a consistency check,
to have an explicit, independent evaluation of that frictional force.
To find that expression, we compute the mean value of the energy-momentum
tensor $t_{\mu\nu}$ in the in-vacuum, in the steady regime:
\begin{equation}
\langle t_{\mu\nu} \rangle \equiv \langle 0_{\rm in}\vert t_{\mu\nu}\vert 0_{\rm in}\rangle \, .
\end{equation}
The force per unit area, $\sigma$ can be obtained by means of the
point-splitting technique:
\begin{equation}
\sigma = \lim_{x\to a^+}\langle t_{13}(x) \rangle -\lim_{x\to a^-}\langle t_{13}(x) \rangle \, ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\langle t_{13}(x)\rangle =\lim_{x'\rightarrow x} \langle \partial_1 \phi(x) \partial_3^\prime \phi(x')\rangle = \frac{1}{2} \lim_{x'\rightarrow x} \int \frac{dp^0}{2\pi} \frac{d^2 p_\parallel}{(2\pi)^2} (i p_1) \partial _3^\prime G_1(p^0,p_\parallel,x_3,x_3') \, .
\end{equation}
Here, $G_1$ denotes Hadamard's two-point function, that is defined by:
\begin{equation}
G_1(x,x')= \langle 0_{\rm in} \vert \lbrace \phi(x), \phi(x') \rbrace \vert 0_{\rm in} \rangle \, .
\end{equation}
Note that the very fact that there is a non-vanishing imaginary part in
$\Gamma$ implies that the in-vacuum is different from the out-vacuum; thus, in
order to compute the mean value of the energy momentum tensor one cannot
use the in-out formalism. It is well-known, however, that one can use the
the Schwinger-Keldysh, CTP, or
{in-in} approach \cite{CTP}. We note that this point becomes irrelevant when
computing the static Casimir force, since when $u=0$ the two vacua are
equivalent.
In the usual {in-out} formalism, the Feynman propagator in the presence of
the mirrors can be computed perturbatively, assuming that the potentials
$V_R$ and $V_L$ are small perturbations to the free problem. We have,
schematically,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:diagramasinout}
G_F=G^{(0)}_F + G^{(0)}_{F} V_{L} G^{(0)}_{F} V_{R} G^{(0)}_{F} + L \leftrightarrow R \, ,
\end{equation}
where we only included terms with mixed contributions from the L and R mirrors. We also omitted the
integrations in the contraction of the propagators.
In the CTP formalism, the
free propagator is a $2\times 2$ matrix with elements $G^{(0)}_{\alpha \beta}$, where $\alpha, \beta = +, -$: \cite{CTP}
\begin{equation}
G^{(0)}_{\alpha\beta}(p)\equiv
\left(
\begin{array}{c c}
{1}/({p^2+i\epsilon}) & 2\pi \delta(p^2) \theta(-p^0) \\
2\pi \delta(p^2) \theta(p^0) & {1}/({p^2-i\epsilon})
\end{array}
\right) \, .
\end{equation}
It is worth noting that $G^{(0)}_{++}$ is defined by:
\begin{equation}
G_{++}(x,x')= \langle 0_{\rm in} \vert T \phi(x) \phi(x') \vert 0_{\rm in} \rangle \, ,
\end{equation}
and it is related to the Hadamard's function by $G_1(x,x')=-2 {\rm Im}(G_{++}(x,x'))$.
The CTP version of the perturbative evaluation of the propagator is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:diagramas}
G_{++}=G^{(0)}_{++}+ G^{(0)}_{+ \alpha} V_{L,\alpha \beta} G^{(0)}_{\beta \gamma} V_{R,\gamma,\delta} G^{(0)}_{\delta, +} + L \leftrightarrow R \, ,
\end{equation}
where the potentials $V_{L,R}$ are again $2\times 2$ matrices
\begin{equation}
\lambda(p^0)=
\left(
\begin{array}{c c}
{1}/({(p^0)^2-\Omega^2+i\epsilon}) & -\frac{\pi}{\Omega} \delta(p^0+\Omega) \\
-\frac{\pi}{\Omega} \delta(p^0-\Omega) & {1}/({(p^0)^2-\Omega^2-i\epsilon})
\end{array}
\right) \, .
\end{equation}
Computing explicitly every contraction in Eq.\eqref{eq:diagramas}, the desired component of the energy-momentum tensor may be written as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:tmunupos}
\langle t_{13}(x) \rangle= - \, {\rm Im} \left\lbrace \lim_{x \rightarrow x'} \left[\partial_1 \partial_3^\prime G^{(0)}_{++} (x,x') + \int du dv dy dz \partial_1 G^{(0)}_{+ \alpha} (x,u) V_{L,\alpha \beta} (u,v) G^{(0)}_{\beta \gamma} V_{R, \gamma \delta}(y,z) \partial_3^\prime G^{(0)}_{\delta +} (z, x') \right] \right\rbrace \, ,
\end{equation}
where we have written explicitly the spatial integrations.
The dissipative force is given by the discontinuity of the previous magnitude at $x=a$. The first term in Eq.\eqref{eq:tmunupos}, the contribution of the free vacuum field propagator, is continuous at $x=a$ and will not contribute to the force. Writing the free propagators in momentum space, the derivatives can easily be calculated, and it can be shown that the only non-vanishing contribution to the force comes from the term with $\delta=+$, for the $\delta=-$ is continuous at $x=a$. The force is then given by:
\begin{equation}
\sigma = {\rm Im} \int \frac{dp^0}{2\pi} \frac{d^2 p_\parallel}{(2\pi)^2} i p_1 G^{(0)}_{+ \alpha}(p^0,p_\parallel,a) V_{L,\alpha \beta}(p) G^{(0)}_{\beta \gamma}(p^0,p_\parallel,a) V_{R,\gamma +}(p) + L \leftrightarrow R \, .
\end{equation}
The integrand consists of eight different terms, but only one of them turns out to be non-vanishing: the one with $\alpha=+, \beta = \gamma = -$. The other seven terms vanish either due to parity considerations, or as a result of the Heaviside and Dirac delta functions appearing on the propagators and potentials. The remaining term can easily be calculated since the integration over $p^0$ and $p_1$ is trivial thanks to the Dirac and Heaviside functions. The final result is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fuerza}
\sigma = -\frac{1}{4\pi a^4} \frac{g^4}{\Omega^6}(\Omega a)^6\frac{1}{u} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx \frac{e^{-\frac{2}{u}\sqrt{(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x^2}}}{(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x^2}
\end{equation}
This is the main result of this section (we have written the result as a factor $1/a^4$, which gives the units of $\sigma$, times dimensionless factors).
Note that we are left with the exact same integral that we found while calculating the effective action, which is not surprising, since both quantities account for the dissipative effects present on the system. This expression can be numerically integrated, and the result is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:fuerza3mas1} .
The behaviour of the force as a function of the relative velocity of the plates shows that, as expected, quantum friction is practically
negligible for very small velocities $u\ll \Omega a$.
It is worth to remark that, had we naively used the in-out or Euclidean formalisms, we would have obtained a vanishing value for the frictional force.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[scale=2]{force_thin_plates.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:fuerza3mas1} (Color online). Modulus of the dissipative force, as a function of the relative velocity of the plates, for $\Omega a = 0.01$. The global factor is $A=\frac{g^4 (\Omega a)^5}{4 \Omega ^6 \pi a^4}$. The frictional force is practically negligible for small values of the velocity between the plates.}
\end{figure}
It is now a matter of performing an integration to find the force
corresponding to half-spaces, since the same argument used for the
effective action applies here. Thus, for two half-spaces, we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:fuerza2}
\sigma &=& - \frac{g^4}{4 \pi \Omega u} \int_a^\infty ds
(s-a) \,\int dk
\frac{\exp[-\frac{2s}{u}\sqrt{\Omega^2(4-u^2)+k^2}]}{\Omega^2(4-u^2)+k^2}\nonumber\\
&=& - \frac{1}{16\pi a^4}\frac{g^4}{\Omega^8}(\Omega a)^7 u \int dx
\frac{\exp[-\frac{2}{u}\sqrt{(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x^2}]}{[(\Omega a)^2(4-u^2)+x^2]^2}\; ,
\end{eqnarray}
a result which is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fuerzasemi}. We recall that the mass dimensions of $g$ and $\Omega$ are different when the mirrors have a non-zero width, as explained in \ref{ssec:micro}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[scale=2]{force_half_spaces.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:fuerzasemi} (Color online). Modulus of the dissipative force for half-spaces, as a function of the relative velocity of the plates, for $\Omega a = 0.01$. The global factor is $A=\frac{g^4 (\Omega a)^5}{16 \Omega ^8 \pi a^4}$. The frictional force is practically negligible for small values of the velocity between the plates.}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:concl}
In this paper we have used a functional approach to study quantum
friction effects on imperfect moving mirrors, within a model where a
scalar vacuum field is coupled to microscopic degrees of freedom confined
to two mirrors, moving with a constant relative speed. This coupling induces,
after integrating out the microscopic degrees of freedom, a nonlocal interaction
term in the action for the vacuum field, having an structure which depends on
the relative velocity between the mirrors. The nonlocal action for the vacuum
field has been used to approach the problem from two complementary viewpoints.
In the first part of the paper, we computed the imaginary part of the {in-out} effective action.
Being related to the vacuum persistence amplitude, the presence of an imaginary part is a signal
for dissipative effects. In order to clarify the relation
between dissipation and the analytic properties
of the nonlocal interaction (i.e. of the analogue of the dielectric permittivity),
we performed a detailed analysis in real time.
The integration of the microscopic degrees of
freedom and of the vacuum field in the {in-out} functional integral
involve the $-i\epsilon$ prescription and therefore the presence of
the Feynman propagator, whose analytic structure determines
both the analytic structure of the dielectric permittivity and of
the full effective action,
implying the existence
of quantum friction effects. The analysis of the present paper
complements the Euclidean approach of Ref.\cite{Fosco2011} and
clarifies the issue of the validity of the Wick rotation of the Euclidean results.
In the second part of the paper, we computed the frictional force between mirrors. In order to do this,
we used the CTP formalism, which is crucial to obtain the correct result
for $\langle 0_{\rm in}\vert t_{\mu\nu}\vert 0_{\rm in}\rangle$.
The crucial point here is that, due to dissipation, the {in} and
{out} vacuum states are different. This is the reason why the CTP formalism is not required to compute
static Casimir forces, while its use is unavoidable to compute the force on moving mirrors \cite{Fosco:2007nz}.
The approach described here can be generalized to the more realistic case
of the electromagnetic field at non vanishing temperature. The nonlocal
interaction should be generalized accordingly, and will involve the
derivatives of the potential vector $A_\mu$ on the position of the mirrors.
Work in this direction is in progress.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported by ANPCyT, CONICET, UBA and UNCuyo.
|
\section{Introduction}
An encryption scheme is \emph{homomorphic} over some set of circuits $\classS$ if any circuit in $\classS$ can be evaluated on an encrypted input. That is, given an encryption of the message~$m$, it is possible to produce a ciphertext that decrypts to the output of the circuit $\sf C$ on input $m$, for any ${\sf C}\in\classS$. In \emph{fully homomorphic encryption (FHE)}, $\classS$ is the set of all classical circuits. FHE was introduced in 1978 by Rivest, Adleman and
Dertouzos~\cite{RAD78}, but the existence of such a scheme was an open problem for over~30 years.
Some early public-key encryption schemes were homomorphic over the set of circuits consisting of only additions~\cite{GM84, Paillier99} or over the set of circuits consisting of only multiplications~\cite{ElGamal85}.
Several steps were made towards FHE,
with schemes that were homomorphic over increasingly large circuit classes, such as circuits containing additions and a single multiplication~\cite{BGN05}, or of logarithmic depth~\cite{SYY99},
until finally in 2009, Gentry established a breakthrough result by giving the first fully homomorphic encryption scheme~\cite{Gen09}. Follow-up work showed that FHE could be simplified~\cite{MGHV10}, and based
on standard assumptions, such as \emph{learning with errors}~\cite{BV11}.
The advent of FHE has unleashed a series of far-reaching consequences, such as delegating computations in a cloud architecture, and functional encryption~\cite{Goldwasser:2013:RGC:2488608.2488678}.
For a survey on fully homomorphic encryption, see~\cite{Vaikuntanathan:2011}.
Quantum cryptography is the study of cryptography in light of quantum information. One branch of quantum cryptography revisits \emph{classical} primitives in the light of quantum information, establishing either no-go results (\emph{e.g.}~\cite{Lo-Chau, Mayers}), or qualitative improvements achieved with quantum information (\emph{e.g.}~\cite{BB84}). Another branch of quantum cryptography seeks to establish \emph{quantum} cryptographic functionality, for instance in multiparty quantum computation~\cite{QMPC} or quantum message authentication~\cite{BCGST02}.
The study of quantum cryptography is notorious for its subtleties and challenges, ranging from dealing with ``purification attacks''~\cite{Lo-Chau, Mayers} to dealing with situations that are unique to the quantum world (such as ``quantum rewinding''~\cite{W06, U12}).
A number of works have studied the cryptographic implications of the delegation of quantum computations, including:
Childs~\cite{Chi05}; Broadbent, Fitzsimons and Kashefi~\cite{BFK09}; Aharonov, Ben-Or and Eban~\cite{ABE10}; Vedran, Fitzsimons, Portmann and Renner~\cite{DFPR13}; Broadbent, Gutoski and Stebila~\cite{BGS12};
and Fisher~\emph{et al.}~\cite{QCED}.
None of these works, however directly address the question of quantum homomorphic encryption, since they are interactive schemes, and the work of the client is proportional to the size of the circuit being evaluated (and thus, they do not satisfy the \emph{compactness} requirement of fully homomorphic encryption, even if we allow for interaction).
Non-interactive approaches are given by Arrighi and Salvail~\cite{AS06}, Rohde, Fitzsimons and Gilchrist~\cite{RFJG12} and Tan, Kettlewell, Ouyang, Chen and Fitzsimons~\cite{TKOCF14}. However, \cite{AS06} and~\cite{RFJG12} are applicable to very restricted function families. Furthermore, in the case of~\cite{AS06}, security is given only in terms of cheat sensitivity, while both~\cite{RFJG12} and~\cite{TKOCF14} only bound the leakage of their encoding schemes and thus do not provide security according to standard cryptographic definitions.
Recent work by Yu, P\'erez-Delgado and Fitzsimons~\cite{YPF14} examine the question of perfect security and correctness for quantum homomorphic encryption, concluding that the trivial scheme is optimal in this context. In light of this result, it is therefore natural to consider computational assumptions in achieving QFHE. Indeed, the question of computationally secure QFHE remains an open problem; our contribution makes progress in this direction by presenting the first quantum schemes that are homomorphic for a large class of quantum circuits.
\subsection{Summary of Contributions and Techniques}
\label{sec:intro-summary}
We introduce schemes for \emph{quantum homomorphic encryption (QHE)}, the quantum version of classical homomorphic encryption; we are thus interested in establishing functionality for the evaluation of \emph{quantum} circuits on encrypted \emph{quantum} data.
In terms of definitions, we contribute by giving the first definition of quantum homomorphic encryption (QHE) in the computational setting, in the case of both public-key and symmetric-key cryptosystems. As a consequence, we give the first formal definition (and scheme) for the public-key encryption of quantum information, where security is given in terms of \emph{quantum indistinguishability under chosen plaintext attacks}---for which we show the equivalence of a number of definitions, including security for multiple messages.
In terms of QHE schemes, we start by using straightforward techniques to construct a scheme that is homomorphic for Clifford circuits (or, more generally, stabilizer circuits).
This can be seen as an analogue to a classical scheme that is homomorphic for linear circuits (circuits performing only additions). While stabilizer circuits are not universal for quantum computation, this already yields a range of applications for quantum information processing, including encoding and decoding into stabilizer codes. More specifically, our quantum public-key encryption scheme is a hybrid of a classical public-key fully homomorphic encryption scheme and the quantum one-time pad~\cite{AMTW00}. Intuitively, the scheme works by encrypting the quantum register with a quantum one-time pad, and then encrypting the one-time pad encryption keys with a classical public-key FHE scheme. Since Clifford circuits conjugate Pauli operators to Pauli operators, any Clifford circuit can be directly applied to the encrypted quantum register; the homomorphic property of the classical encryption scheme is used to update the encryption key.
Of course, we specify that the classical FHE scheme should be secure against quantum adversaries. By using, \emph{e.g.},~the scheme from~\cite{BV11}, we get security based on the \emph{learning with errors} (LWE) assumption \cite{Regev2005, Regev2009}; this has been equated with worst-case hardness of ``short vector problems" on arbitrary lattices \cite{MG09}, which is widely believed to be a quantum-safe (or ``post-quantum'') assumption.
For universal quantum computations, we must evaluate a non-Clifford group gate, for which we choose the ``$\rgate$'' gate (also known as ``$\mathsf{R}$'' or ``$\pi/8$'') gate. Applying the above principle we run into trouble, since $\tgate \xgate^a \zgate^b = \xgate^a \zgate^{a \oplus b} \pgate^a \tgate$. That is, conditioned on the quantum one-time pad encryption key $a, b \in \{0,1\}$, the output picks up an undesirable non-Pauli error.
Our main contribution is to present two schemes, $\EPR$~and~$\AUX$, that deal with this situation in two different ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The main idea of $\EPR$ (named after the famous Einstein-Podolski-Rosen trio~\cite{EPR35}) is to use
entangled quantum registers
to enable corrections \emph{within the circuit} at the time of decryption.
This scheme is efficient for any quantum circuit, however, it fails to meet a requirement for fully homomorphic encryption called \emph{compactness}, which requires that the complexity of the decryption procedure be independent of the evaluated circuit.
More specifically, the complexity of the decryption procedure for $\EPR$ scales with the square of the number of $\tgate$-gates. This gives an advantage over the trivial scheme whenever the number of $\tgate$-gates in the evaluated circuit is less than the squareroot of the number of gates. (The \emph{trivial} scheme consists of
appending to the ciphertext a description of the circuit to be evaluated, and specifying that it should be applied as part of the decryption procedure.)
\vspace{.15cm}
\item
Compared to $\EPR$, the scheme $\AUX$ takes a more pro-active approach to performing the correction required for a $\tgate$-gate: to do this, it uses a number of auxiliary qubits that are given as part of the evaluation key. Intuitively, these auxiliary qubits encode the required corrections. In order to ensure universality, a large number of possible corrections must be available --- the length of the evaluation key is thus given by a polynomial of degree exponential in the circuit's $\tgate$-gate \emph{depth}, yielding a homomorphic scheme that is efficient for quantum circuits with constant $\tgate$-depth.
\end{enumerate}
\newpage
Note that the two main schemes $\EPR$ and $\AUX$ are incomparable; for some circuits, $\EPR$ is more desirable, while for others, it is preferable to use $\AUX$. The scheme $\EPR$ becomes less \emph{compact} (and therefore less interesting, since it approaches the trivial scheme), as the \emph{number} of $\tgate$-gates increases, while the scheme~$\AUX$ becomes inefficient (\emph{extremely} rapidly) as the \emph{depth} of $\tgate$-gates increases.
Our results can be viewed as a quantum analogue of precursory results to classical fully homomorphic encryption, which established the homomorphic property of encryption schemes that tolerate a limited amount of operations.
One difference is that, while these schemes started with the \emph{very} modest goal of just a \emph{single} multiplication (the addition operation being ``easy''), we have already allowed for at the very least a \emph{constant} number, and, depending on the circuit, up to a polynomial number of ``hard'' operations, namely of $\tgate$-gates.
Our schemes use the existence of classical FHE, although at the expense of a slightly more complicated exposition, a classical scheme that is homomorphic only for linear circuits would actually suffice. We see the relationship between our schemes and classical FHE as a strength of our result, via the following interpretation: classical FHE is sufficient to enable QHE for a large family of circuits, and perhaps by taking greater advantage of the \emph{fully} homomorphic property of the classical scheme in some as yet unknown way, our ideas might be extended to larger classes of quantum circuits. With this in mind, and for ease of exposition, we use a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme for all of our quantum homomorphic encryption schemes.
An additional contribution of ours is conceptual: in the context of quantum circuits, it had been known for some time now that the non-Clifford part of a quantum computation is the ``difficult'' one (this phenomena appears, \emph{e.g.}~in the context of quantum simulations~\cite{Got98}, fault-tolerant quantum computation~\cite{BK05} and quantum secure function evaluation~\cite{DNS10, DNS12, QMPC}).
This has motivated a series of theoretical work seeking to optimize quantum circuits in terms of their $\tgate$-gate complexity~\cite{Sel13, KMM13}. In particular, Amy, Maslov, Mosca, and Roetteler~\cite{AMMR13} recently proposed $\tgate$-depth as a cost function, the idea being to count the number of $\tgate$-layers in a quantum circuit and optimize over this parameter. Our contribution adds to this understanding, showing that, in the context of quantum homomorphic encryption, the main challenge is to evaluate non-Clifford gates, the bottleneck being, more precisely, the \emph{depth} of the $\tgate$-gate part of the circuit.
\paragraph{Organization}
Some preliminaries and notation are given in Section~\ref{sec:Prelim}. We give formal definitions of quantum homomorphic encryption and related concepts, including security definitions, in Section~\ref{sec:QFHE-Defs}; this allows us to formally state our results in Section~\ref{sec:main-contributions}. Section~\ref{sec:scheme-Clifford} contains a basic quantum homomorphic encryption scheme,~$\CL$, for Clifford circuits that is used as a basis for $\EPR$, the entanglement-based quantum homomorphic encryption scheme (Section~\ref{sec:scheme-EPR}), and for $\AUX$, the auxiliary-qubit based quantum homomorphic encryption scheme (Section~\ref{sec:scheme-AUX}).
\section{Preliminaries and Notation}
\label{sec:Prelim}
\subsection{Notation}
A negligible function, denoted~$negl(\cdot)$, is a function such that for every polynomial $p(\cdot)$, there exists an~$N$ such that for all integers $n > N$ it holds that $negl(n) < \frac{1}{p(n)}$.
As a convention, if $a$ is a classical plaintext, we denote its encryption by $\tilde{a}$. Throughout this work we use $\kappa$ to indicate the security parameter.
For a detailed and rigorous introduction to quantum information theory, we refer the reader to \cite{WatrousNotes}. In the remainder of this section, we give a brief overview of some of the necessary concepts, as well as our specific notation.
A \emph{quantum register} is a quantum system, which we view as a physical object that stores quantum information. Focusing on the case of qubits with classical states labelled $\{0,1\}$, we note that the contents of a quantum register are mathematically, modelled as the set of trace-1, positive semidefinite operators, called \emph{density operators}, on~$\mathcal{X}$, where $\mathcal{X}$
is a complex Euclidean space. We denote the set of density operators on any space $\mathcal{X}$ by $D(\mathcal{X})$.
Quantum registers are typically denoted with calligraphic typeset, such as $\regA$, $\regB$.
Two (or more) quantum systems, $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$, form a composite system by the tensor product of the subsystems, $\mathcal{X}\otimes \mathcal{Y}$. If $\rho\in D(\mathcal{X}\otimes \mathcal{Y})$ is a state on the joint system, we write $\rho^{\mathcal{X}}$ to denote $\Tr_{\mathcal{Y}}(\rho)$.
If $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$ have the same dimension, we denote this by $\mathcal{X} \equiv \mathcal{Y}$.
A density matrix that is diagonal in the computational basis corresponds to a classical random variable. For a random variable $X$ on some set $\Sigma_X$, we define $\rho(X):=\sum_{x\in\Sigma_X}\Pr[X=x]\ket{x}\bra{x}$, the density matrix corresponding to $X$.
A \emph{classical-quantum} state is a state of the form $\rho^{\mathcal{M}\mathcal{A}} = \sum_x \Pr[X=x]\egoketbra{x}^\mathcal{M} \otimes \rho_x^\mathcal{A}$.
One special quantum state on any system $\cal X$ is the \emph{completely mixed state}, $\frac{1}{\dim \cal X}\mathbb{I}_{\cal X}$, which we will sometimes denote by $\maxmix$ (where $\cal X$ should be implicit from the context). When $\cal X$ is interpreted as $\mathbb{C}^S$ for some finite set $S$, then $\maxmix$ corresponds to the uniform distribution on $S$.
The \emph{trace distance} between two states, $\rho$ and $\sigma$, is defined $\Delta(\rho, \sigma):=\Tr\(\sqrt{(\rho-\sigma)^\dagger(\rho-\sigma)}\)$.
A \emph{quantum channel} $\Phi:D(\regA)\to D(\regB)$ refers to any physically-realizable mapping on quantum registers.
The identity channel on register~$\regR$ is denoted~$\mathbb{I}_\regR$.
Let $\Phi$ be a quantum channel acting on register $\regA$, and $\rho^{\regA\regE}$ a quantum system held in the joint registers $\regA \otimes \regE$. Then to simplify notation, when it is clear from the context, we write $\Phi(\rho^{\regA\regE})$ to mean $(\Phi \otimes \id)(\rho^{\regA\regE})$.
We mention a special type of channel, a \emph{conditional quantum channel}, which, on input the classical-quantum state $\sum_x \Pr[x]\egoketbra{x}^\mathcal{M} \otimes \rho_x^\mathcal{A}$, outputs the quantum state:
\begin{equation*}
\Tr_M \left(\sum_x \Pr[x]\egoketbra{x}^\mathcal{M} \otimes \Phi_x (\rho_x^\mathcal{A})\right)
\end{equation*}
for quantum channels $\Phi_x: D(\regA)\to D(\regB)$.
Unless otherwise specified, a quantum \emph{measurement} refers to a measurement in the computational basis.
A quantum \emph{algorithm} is a polynomial-time uniform family of quantum circuits, implementing a family of quantum channels.
\subsection{Quantum Circuits}
\label{sec:prelim-circuits}
We work with the universal set of quantum gates consisting of single-qubit preparation in the~$\ket{0}$ state, single-qubit measurements, as well as the following unitary gates:
$$\xgate = \left[\begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1\\ 1 & 0\end{array}\right],
\quad\zgate = \left[\begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0\\ 0 & -1\end{array}\right],
\quad\pgate = \left[\begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0\\ 0 & i\end{array}\right],
\quad\rgate = \left[\begin{array}{cc} 1 & 0\\ 0 & e^{i\pi/4}\end{array}\right],$$
$$\hgate = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\begin{array}{cc}1 & 1\\1 & -1\end{array}\right],\quad\mbox{and}
\quad\cnot = \left[\begin{array}{cccc} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 0\end{array}\right].$$
The set $\{\xgate,\zgate,\pgate,\cnot,\hgate\}$ applied to arbitrary wires (redundantly) generates the Clifford group, and adding any non-Clifford gate, such as $\rgate$, is known to give a generating set for all quantum circuits.
We note the following relations between these gates:
$$\xgate\zgate = - \zgate\xgate,\quad \rgate^2=\pgate,\quad\pgate^2=\zgate,\quad\hgate\xgate\hgate=\zgate,\quad \rgate\pgate=\pgate\rgate,\quad\pgate\zgate=\zgate\pgate.$$
A classical circuit is \emph{layered} if it consists of alternating layers of either all `$+$' gates or all `$\times$' gates. The \emph{multiplicative depth} of a layered circuit is the number of `$\times$' layers. As we see in this work, a natural quantum analogue of `$+$' gates are Clifford group gates, while the analogue of the~`$\times$' gate is the~$\tgate$ gate.\footnote{The analogy is due to the ``easiness'' of performing Clifford group computations on encrypted data, versus the ``hardness'' of performing non-Clifford group computations. Another way of seeing this is that the (reversible) quantum analogue of multiplication is the Toffoli gate: $\ket{x,y,z} \mapsto \ket{x,y,x\cdot y \oplus z}$. The Toffoli is a non-Clifford group gate that can be expressed in terms of $\rgate$-gates~\cite{Sel13}.} Thus, a \emph{layered quantum circuit} consists of alternating layers of either all Clifford group gates, or $\tgate$ gates. Then the $\tgate$-depth of a layered quantum circuit is the number of such $\tgate$ layers~\cite{AMMR13}.
\subsection{Quantum One-time Pad}
\label{sec:prelim-QOTP}
For a single-qubit system $\rho$ in register $\regR$, and $a,b \in \{0,1\}$, we denote by $\QEnc_{a,b}: \regR \rightarrow \regR $ the quantum one-time pad encryption and by $\QDec_{a,b}: \regR \rightarrow \regR$ the quantum one-time pad decryption~\cite{AMTW00}, namely:
\begin{equation}
\mathsf{QEnc}_{a,b} : \rho \mapsto \xgate^a \zgate^b \rho \zgate^b \xgate^a\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
\mathsf{QDec}_{a,b} : \rho \mapsto \xgate^a \zgate^b \rho \zgate^b \xgate^a.
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that $\QDec_{a,b} \circ \QEnc_{a,b} = \id_{\regR}$. Furthermore, by specifying that~$(a,b)$ be chosen uniformly at random, we get that the encryption maps any input to the completely mixed state, since for all~$\rho$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{4}\sum_{a,b} \xgate^a \zgate^b \rho \zgate^b \xgate^a = \frac{\id_2}{2}\,.
\end{equation}
\section{Definitions}
\label{sec:QFHE-Defs}
In this section, we formally define QHE schemes, including correctness and security. More precisely, in Section~\ref{sec:QFHE}, we first review classical FHE, and then define~QHE in the public-key setting. Section~\ref{sec:security-QHE} carefully defines the security of QHE, by considering several definitions for security under chosen plaintext attacks, and showing that they are equivalent. Section \ref{sec:QHE-correctness} defines the correctness and compactness of QHE, culminating in a complete definition of quantum fully homomorphic encryption (QFHE, Definition~\ref{defn:QFHE}). Section~\ref{sec:indivisible} deals with an important subtlety that arises in the quantum case: due to the no-cloning theorem, when a large system is encrypted with some auxiliary quantum information needed for decryption, that auxiliary information cannot be copied and given to every subsystem, but rather, the system must now be decrypted as a whole, rather than subsystem-by-subsystem. We also define a notion of compactness and quasi-compactness in this context. Finally, for technical reasons, one of our schemes ($\AUX$) must be used in the symmetric-key setting, which we define in Section~\ref{sec:symmetric-key}.
\subsection{Classical and Quantum Homomorphic Encryption}
\label{sec:QFHE}
Our schemes rely on a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme; for completeness, we include a definition in Appendix~\ref{appendix:Classical-FHE}.
Since our adversaries are modelled as being \emph{quantum} polynomial-time, we need a further security guarantee on the classical scheme, namely that it is secure against \emph{quantum} adversaries (see Definition~\ref{defn:classical-cipher-q-IND-CPA}). Fortunately, much of classical fully homomorphic encryption uses lattice-based cryptography, which exploits one of the few conjectured ``quantum-safe'' assumptions~\cite{MG09}. Among all known solutions, the scheme of~\cite{BV11} appears to be the best for our purposes, as it bases its security on the \emph{learning with errors} (LWE) assumption \cite{Regev2005, Regev2009}, which has been equated with worst-case hardness of ``short vector problems" on arbitrary lattices.
\begin{definition} [q-IND-CPA]
\label{defn:classical-cipher-q-IND-CPA}
A classical homomorphic encryption scheme $\mathsf{HE}$ is q-IND-CPA secure if for any \emph{quantum} polynomial-time adversary $\advA$, there exists a negligible function $negl$ such that
\begin{equation}
\left|\mathrm{Pr}[\advA(pk, evk, \mathsf{HE.Enc}_{pk}(0)) = 1] - \mathrm{Pr}[\advA(pk, evk, \mathsf{HE.Enc}_{pk}(1)) = 1] \right|\leq negl(\kappa)\,, \end{equation}
where $(pk, evk, sk) \leftarrow \mathsf{HE.Keygen(1^\kappa)}$.
\end{definition}
\noindent We note that a number of recent works examine the security of classical schemes against quantum superposition attacks~\cite{Zandry12, BDFS11, BZ13b}. In this context, our definition of q-IND-CPA above models security for classical plaintexts only (with an arbitrary learning phase, since the public key is given). Furthermore, we note that a classical homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA, is also IND-CPA. The converse, however, may not be true (in particular, if the IND-CPA property depends on a computational assumption that is broken by quantum computers). Note, however, that any proof that a scheme is IND-CPA can be potentially turned into a proof for q-IND-CPA if all statements still hold when ``PPT'' is replaced by a ``QPT'' (see~\cite{Song14}).
We now give our new definitions for quantum homomorphic encryption. Note that in the quantum case, there are some choices to be made in this definition. In particular, in our definitions, both $pk$, the public encryption key, and $sk$, the secret decryption key, are classical, whereas the evaluation key is allowed to be a quantum state.
\begin{definition}[QHE]A quantum homomorphic encryption scheme is a $4$-tuple of quantum algorithms $(\sf{QHE.KeyGen},\sf{QHE.Enc},\sf{QHE.Eval},\sf{QHE.Dec})$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Key Generation.}
$\QHE.\KeyGen: 1^\kappa \rightarrow (pk, sk, \rho_{evk})$.
This algorithm takes a unary representation of the security parameter as input and outputs a classical public encryption key~$\pk$, a classical secret decryption key~$\sk$ and a quantum evaluation key $\rho_{evk}\in D(\regR_{evk})$.
\item \textbf{Encryption.}
$\QHE.\Enc_{pk}: D(\mathcal{M}) \rightarrow D(\regC)$. For every possible value of $pk$, the quantum channel $\mathsf{Enc}_{pk}$ maps a state in the message space $\cal M$ to a state (the \emph{cipherstate}) in the cipherspace ${\cal C}$.
\item \textbf{Homomorphic Evaluation.} $\QHE.\Eval^{\mathsf{C}}: D(\regR_{evk}\otimes \mathcal{C}^{\otimes n}) \rightarrow D(\mathcal{C'}^{\otimes m})$.
For every quantum circuit $\mathsf{C}$, with induced channel $\Phi_{\mathsf{C}}:D(\mathcal{M}^{\otimes n})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{M}^{\otimes m})$, we define a channel $\mathsf{Eval}^{\mathsf{C}}$ that maps an $n$-fold cipherstate to an $m$-fold cipherstate, consuming the evaluation key in the process.\footnote{Since we have not specified any requirement on the behaviour of this channel, we can define $\mathsf{Eval}^{\mathsf{C}}$ to have some trivial behaviour on some, or even all quantum circuits $\mathsf{C}$. However, for the scheme to have the $\mathscr{C}$-homomorphic property (Definition \ref{defn:C-homomorphism}), this cannot be the case for any circuit in $\mathscr{C}$.}
\item \textbf{Decryption.} $\mathsf{QHE.Dec}_{sk} : D(\regC') \rightarrow D(\mathcal{M})$. For every possible value of $sk$, $\mathsf{Dec}_{sk}$ is a quantum channel that maps the state in $D(\regC')$ to a quantum state in $D(\mathcal{M})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\subsection{Security of Quantum Homomorphic Encryption}
\label{sec:security-QHE}
We now define a notion of security for QHE analogous to the classical notion of indistinguishability under chosen plaintext attacks. As in the classical case, there are several possible definitions, ranging from a relatively simple experiment (Definition~\ref{def:q-IND-CPA1}) to the situation of multiple messages (Definition~\ref{def:q-IND-CPA-mult}). As evidence of the robustness of these definitions, we show that they are equivalent; this strengthens our results since security in the most general case follows from security for the simplest definition.
The proofs of equivalency are similar to the classical case (see, \emph{e.g.}~\cite{KL08}), and are included in Appendix~\ref{sec:appendix-equivalent-q-IND-CPA} for completeness. Finally, we note that, by taking the evaluation key, $\rho_{evk}$ to be empty, our definitions and theorems are trivially applicable to the scenario of quantum public-key encryption (\emph{i.e.}~without a homomorphic property).
\paragraph{CPA security} The CPA indistinguishability experiment is given below and illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:q-IND-CPA1}. The experiment interacts with an adversary $\advA$, which is a pair of polynomial-time quantum algorithms $(\advA_1,\advA_2)$ (which we also refer to as adversaries). The first algorithm $\advA_1$ implements a quantum channel $D(\regR_{evk})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{M}\otimes\mathcal{E})$ conditioned on $pk$, where $\mathcal{E}$ is an arbitrary environment. The second algorithm $\advA_2$ maps $D(\mathcal{C}\otimes\mathcal{E})$ to a bit.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-.25,1.54) -- (2,1.54);
\draw (-.25,1.46) -- (2,1.46);
\draw (.5,0)--(3.5,0);
\draw (.5,1)--(3.5,1);
\draw (-.25,0.04)--(.5,0.04);
\draw (-.25,-.04)--(.5,-.04);
\draw (-.25,1) -- (.5,1);
\draw (3.9,.46)--(4.4,.46);
\draw (3.9,.54)--(4.4,.54);
\filldraw[fill=white] (-.75,-.25) rectangle (-.25,1.75);
\node[rotate=90] at (-.5,.75) {\small$\KeyGen(1^\kappa)$};
\node at (0,1.7) {$pk$};
\node at (.1,1.2) {\small $\mathcal{R}_{evk}$};
\node at (0,.2) {$pk$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.5,1.25) rectangle (1,-.25);
\node at (.75,.5) {$\advA_1$};
\node at (1.25,1.2) {${\small\cal M}$};
\node at (1.25,.2) {${\small\cal E}$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (1.7,1.75) rectangle (2.7,.75);
\node at (2.2,1.25) {$\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},r}$};
\node at (2.95,1.2) {$\small\cal C$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (3.4,1.25) rectangle (3.9,-.25);
\node at (3.65,.5) {$\advA_2$};
\node at (4.65,.5) {$r'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at (7,0) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (-.5,1) {$\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},0}$:};
\draw (.5,1)--(1.5,1);
\node at (1.5,1) {\meas};
\node at (2.5,1) {$\ket{\mathbf{0}}$};
\draw (2.75,1)--(5.25,1);
\node at (3,1.2) {\small $\cal M$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (3.5,1.25) rectangle (4.5,.75);
\node at (4,1) {$\mathsf{Enc}_{pk}$};
\node at (4.75,1.2) {\small $\cal C$};
\node at (.75,1.2) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (-.5,0) {$\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},1}$:};
\draw (.5,0)--(5.25,0);
\filldraw[fill=white] (2.125,.25) rectangle (3.125,-.25);
\node at (2.625,0) {$\mathsf{Enc}_{pk}$};
\node at (.75,.2) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (3.375,.2) {\small $\cal C$};
\draw[dashed] (-1.25,1.5) rectangle (5.5,.5);
\draw[dashed] (-1.25,-.5) rectangle (5.5,.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The quantum CPA indistinguishability experiment.}\label{fig:q-IND-CPA1}
\end{figure}
\textbf{The quantum CPA indistinguishability experiment $\mathsf{PubK^{cpa}_{\advA, QHE}} (\kappa)$}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathsf{KeyGen}(1^\kappa)$ is run to obtain keys $(pk,sk,\rho_{evk})$.
\item Adversary $\advA_1$ is given $(pk,\rho_{evk})$ and outputs a quantum state in message space $\mathcal{M}$, together with a state in an environment register $\cal E$.
\item For $r\in \{0,1\}$, let $\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},r}: D(\mathcal{M}) \rightarrow D(\mathcal{C})$ be given by
$\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},0}(\rho)= {\sf QHE.Enc}_{pk}(\egoketbra{\textbf{0}})$ and $\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},1}(\rho)= {\sf QHE.Enc}_{pk}(\rho)$.
A random bit $r \in \{0,1\}$ is chosen and $\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},r}$ is applied to the state in $\mathcal{M}$ (the output being a state in $\mathcal{C}$).
\item Adversary $\advA_2$ obtains the system in $\mathcal{C} \otimes \mathcal{E}$ and outputs a bit $r'$.
\item The output of the experiment is defined to be~1 if~$r'=r$ and~$0$~otherwise. In case $r=r'$, we say that $\advA$ \emph{wins} the experiment.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{definition}[Quantum Indistinguishability under Chosen Plaintext Attack (q-IND-CPA)] \label{def:q-IND-CPA1}
A quantum homomorphic scheme $\sf{QHE}$ is \emph{q-IND-CPA} secure if for all quantum polynomial-time adversaries $\advA = (\advA_1, \advA_2)$ there exists a negligible function $negl$ such that:
\begin{equation}
\Pr[\mathsf{PubK^{cpa}_{\advA, QHE}} (\kappa) =1] \leq \frac{1}{2} + negl(\kappa)\,.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\paragraph{CPA-mult security} The CPA-mult indistinguishability experiment is similar to the CPA scenario above, but in this case the adversary chooses two $t$-tuples of messages, for any $t\geq 1$, and the challenger returns encryptions corresponding to one of the $t$-tuples. The adversary's task is then to guess which of the two $t$-tuples of messages has been encrypted. The experiment is given below; the illustration follows closely the one in Figure~\ref{fig:q-IND-CPA-2} of Appendix \ref{sec:appendix-equivalent-q-IND-CPA} (but with single messages replaced by $t$-fold messages).
\textbf{The quantum CPA-mult indistinguishability experiment $\mathsf{PubK^{cpa\text{-}mult}_{\advA, QHE}} (\kappa)$}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathsf{KeyGen}(1^\kappa)$ is run to obtain keys $(pk,sk,\rho_{evk})$.
\item For $r \in \{0,1\}$, and $t\in O(\mathrm{poly}(\kappa))$, let $\mathcal{M}_r =\mathcal{M}_r^1\otimes \cdots \otimes \mathcal{M}_r^t$, where $\mathcal{M}_0^i \equiv\mathcal{M}_1^i\equiv\mathcal{M}$ (for all~$i$).
Adversary $\advA_1$ is given $(pk,\rho_{evk})$ and outputs a quantum state $\rho$ in $\mathcal{M}_0 \otimes \mathcal{M}_1 \otimes \mathcal{E}$.
\item For $r\in \{0,1\}$, let $\Xi^{{\sf cpa\text{-}mult},r}_{\QHE}: D(\mathcal{M}_0 \otimes \mathcal{M}_1) \rightarrow D(\mathcal{C}^1 \otimes \cdots \otimes \mathcal{C}^t)$ be given by
$\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa\text{-}mult},0}(\rho)= \Tr_{\mathcal{M}_1}({\sf Enc}_{pk}^{\otimes t} \otimes \id_{\mathcal{M}_1})(\rho)$ and $\Xi_{\QHE}^{\textsf{cpa-mult},1}(\rho)= \Tr_{\mathcal{M}_0}(\id_{\mathcal{M}_0} \otimes {\sf Enc}_{pk}^{\otimes t})(\rho)$.
A random bit $r \in \{0,1\}$ is chosen and $(\Xi_{\QHE}^{\textsf{cpa-mult},r} \otimes \id_{\cal E})$ is applied to $\rho$ (the output being a state in $\mathcal{C}^{\otimes t} \otimes \mathcal{E}$).
\item Adversary $\advA_2$ obtains the system in $\mathcal{C}^{\otimes t} \otimes \mathcal{E}$ and outputs a bit $r'$.
\item The output of the experiment is defined to be~1 if~$r'=r$ and~$0$~otherwise. In case $r=r'$, we say that $\advA$ \emph{wins} the experiment.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{definition}[Quantum Indistinguishability under Multiple Chosen Plaintext Attack \mbox{(q-IND-CPA-mult)}]\label{def:q-IND-CPA-mult}
A quantum homomorphic scheme $\sf{QHE}$ is \emph{q-IND-CPA-mult} secure if for all quantum polynomial-time adversaries $\advA = (\advA_1, \advA_2)$ there exists a negligible function $negl$ such that:
\begin{equation}
\Pr[\mathsf{PubK^{{cpa\text{-}mult}}_{\advA, QHE}} (\kappa) =1] \leq \frac{1}{2} + negl(\kappa)\,.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}[Equivalence of q-IND-CPA and q-IND-CPA-mult] \label{thm:equiv-IND-CPA}
Let $\QHE$ be a quantum homomorphic encryption scheme. Then $\QHE$ is q-IND-CPA if and only if $\QHE$ is q-IND-CPA-mult.
\end{theorem}
\noindent The proof of the above theorem is given in Appendix~\ref{sec:appendix-equivalent-q-IND-CPA}.
\subsection{Correctness and Compactness of Quantum Homomorphic Encryption}
\label{sec:QHE-correctness}
Next, we give, in Definition~\ref{defn:C-homomorphism}, a notion that encapsulates ``correctness'' of both the encryption and evaluation operations, with respect to a specified class
$\mathscr{C}$ of quantum circuits (when $\mathscr{C}$ is a strict subset of all computations, the literature sometimes refers to this as a ``somewhat homomorphic'' scheme). Note that in the classical context, it is common to restrict attention to circuits that output a single bit, since any deterministic string can be computed bit-by-bit. We cannot do this quantumly, as a quantum state cannot be described (or generated) one qubit at a time. We therefore consider correctness
as a global property of the output.
Furthermore, as quantum data can be entangled, we require that a ``correct'' scheme preserve this entanglement and thus explicitly include an auxiliary space in the definition below.
\begin{definition}($\mathscr{C}$-homomorphic).
\label{defn:C-homomorphism}
Let $\mathscr{C} = \{\classC_\kappa\}_{\kappa \in \mathbb{N}}$ be a class of quantum circuits.
A quantum encryption scheme \textsf{QHE} is $\mathscr{C}$-homomorphic (or, homomorphic for the class $\mathscr{C}$) if
for any sequence of circuits $\{\mathsf{C}_\kappa \in \mathscr{C}_\kappa\}_{\kappa}$ and input $\rho\in D({\mathcal{M}^{\otimes n}\otimes \regE})$, with $n = n(\kappa)$, there exists a negligible function $negl$ such that:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:C-homomorphism}
\Delta\left( \mathsf{QHE.Dec}^{\otimes m}_{sk} \(\mathsf{QHE.Eval}^{\mathsf{C}_\kappa} \(\rho_{evk}, \mathsf{QHE.Enc}^{\otimes n}_{pk} (\rho)\)\) , \Phi_{\mathsf{C}_\kappa} (\rho)\right) = negl(\kappa)\,,
\end{equation}
where $(pk, sk, \rho_\evk) \leftarrow \mathsf{QHE.Keygen(1^\kappa)}$ and $\Phi_{\mathsf{C}_\kappa}$ is the channel induced by $\mathsf{C}_\kappa$.
\end{definition}
We point out two properties of the above definition. First of
all, we do not require that the ciphertexts be decryptable themselves, only that they become
decryptable after homomorphic evaluation --- however as long as $\QHE$ is homomorphic for the class of identity circuits, we can effectively decrypt a ciphertext by first homomorphically evaluating the identity circuit. Secondly, we do not require that the output of $\QHE.\Eval$
be able to undergo additional homomorphic evaluations; indeed, in the case that the evaluation key $\rho_{evk}$ is quantum, it will in general be ``consumed'' by the $\QHE.\Eval$ process, rendering any future applications of $\QHE.\Eval$ impossible.
Analogously to the classical case, we define compactness (which we also parametrize by a class of circuits~$\mathscr{C}$), which, intuitively, requires that the output of $\QHE.\Eval$ be short --- thus ruling out trivial quantum fully homomorphic encryption schemes where all the work of applying the circuit is delayed to the $\QHE.\Dec$ stage (see the text following Definition~\ref{defn:compact-indivisible} for an informal description of the trivial scheme, $\TRIV.\HE$).
\begin{definition}($\mathscr{C}$-compactness).
Let $\mathscr{C}=\{\mathscr{C}_{\kappa}\}_{\kappa\in\mathbb{N}}$ be a class of quantum circuits. A quantum encryption scheme $\sf{QHE}$ is $\mathscr{C}$-\emph{compact} if there exists a polynomial $p$ such that for any sequence of circuits $\{\mathsf{C}_\kappa \in \mathscr{C}_\kappa\}_\kappa$,
the circuit complexity of applying $\QHE.\Dec$ to an output system $\mathcal{C}'$ of $\QHE.\Eval^{\mathsf{C}_{\kappa}}$ is at most $p(\kappa)$.
(That is, the circuit complexity of decryption does not depend on the circuit complexity of $\mathsf{C}_{\kappa}$).
If a quantum scheme $\QHE$ is $\mathscr{C}$-compact for $\mathscr{C}$ the class of all quantum circuits, then we simply say that $\QHE$ is \emph{compact}.
\end{definition}
Although this work leaves open the central problem of quantum fully homomorphic encryption, we have established all the machinery relevant for a formal definition, which we include below.
\begin{definition}[Quantum Fully Homomorphic Encryption] \label{defn:QFHE}
A scheme $\sf{QHE}$ is \emph{a quantum fully homomorphic encryption scheme} if it is both compact and homomorphic for the class of all quantum circuits.
\end{definition}
\subsection{Indivisible Schemes}
\label{sec:indivisible}
In general, a quantum system is not equal to the sum of its parts. Because of this, for one of our schemes (as given in Section~\ref{sec:scheme-EPR}), it is convenient (if not necessary, by the no-cloning theorem~\cite{WZ82}) to define the output of $\QHE.\Eval$ as containing, in addition to a series of cipherstates corresponding to each qubit, some auxiliary quantum register, entangled with each cipherstate. Then the decryption operation, $\QHE.\Dec$ must operate on the entire quantum system, rather than qubit-by-qubit. This is in contrast to a classical scheme, in which we could make a copy of the auxiliary register for each encrypted bit, enabling the decryption of individual bits, without decrypting the entire system.
\begin{definition}An \emph{indivisible} quantum homomorphic encryption scheme is a quantum homomorphic encryption scheme with $\QHE.\Eval$ and $\QHE.\Dec$ re-defined as:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Homomorphic Evaluation.} $\QHE.\Eval^{\mathsf{C}}: D(\regR_{evk}\otimes \mathcal{C}^{\otimes n}) \rightarrow D(\regR_{aux} \otimes \mathcal{C'}^{\otimes m})$
Compared to $\QHE.\Eval$ in a standard QHE, this algorithm outputs an additional auxiliary quantum register $\regR_{aux}$. This extra information is used in the decryption phase. Since the state of $\mathcal{R}_{aux}$ may be entangled with the state of each $\cal C'$, the system in $\mathcal{R}_{aux}\otimes {\cal C'}^{\otimes m}$ can no longer be considered subsystem-by-subsystem.
\item \textbf{Decryption.} $\mathsf{QHE.Dec}_{sk} : D(\regR_{aux} \otimes \mathcal{C'}^{\otimes m}) \rightarrow D(\mathcal{M}^{\otimes m})$.
For every possible value of $sk$, $\mathsf{Dec}_{sk}$ is a quantum channel that maps an auxiliary register, together with an $m$-fold cipherstate, to an $m$-fold message in $D(\mathcal{M}^{\otimes m})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We need to define compactness for an indivisible scheme (recall that here, there is no notion of separating the individual output systems).
\begin{definition}($\mathscr{C}$-compactness for an indivisible scheme).
\label{defn:compact-indivisible}
Let $\mathscr{C}=\{\mathscr{C}_{\kappa}\}_{\kappa\in\mathbb{N}}$ be a class of quantum circuits. An indivisible quantum encryption scheme $\sf{QHE}$ is $\mathscr{C}$-\emph{compact} if there exists a polynomial $p$ such that for any sequence of circuits $\{\mathsf{C}_{\kappa} \in \mathscr{C}_{\kappa}\}_{\kappa}$
with induced channels $\Phi_{\mathsf{C}_\kappa}:\mathcal{M}^{\otimes n(\kappa)}\rightarrow \mathcal{M}^{\otimes m(\kappa)}$,
the circuit complexity of applying $\QHE.\Dec^{\otimes m(\kappa)}$ to the output of $\QHE.\Eval^{\mathsf{C}_\kappa}$ is at most $p(\kappa,m(\kappa))$. (That is, the circuit complexity of decryption does not depend on the circuit complexity of $\mathsf{C}_{\kappa}$).
\end{definition}
Note that the trivial quantum fully homomorphic encryption scheme, $\TRIV.\HE$ is easily phrased in terms of an indivisible scheme. Informally, $\TRIV.\HE$ is the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The algorithms $\TRIV.\KeyGen$ and $\TRIV.\Enc$ are taken from any quantum public-key encryption scheme.
\item The algorithm $\TRIV.\Eval$ simply sets $\regR_{aux}$ to be the target circuit, $\mathsf{C}$, and otherwise outputs the cipherstates corresponding to the encrypted inputs.
\item The algorithm $\TRIV.\Dec$ first decrypts the cipherstates, then applies $\mathsf{C}$ and outputs the result.
\end{enumerate}
Clearly, $\TRIV$ is homomorphic, but it is not compact for all circuits, since the decryption procedure must evaluate the quantum circuit $\mathsf{C}$, and so its complexity scales with $G(\mathsf{C})$, the number of gates in $\mathsf{C}$.
Although a decryption procedure with any dependence on $G$, or any other property of $\mathsf{C}$, is not compact, it is still interesting to consider schemes whose decryption procedure has complexity that scales sublinearly in $G$ (such schemes are called \emph{quasi-compact} schemes~\cite{GentryThesis}). We give a formal definition that quantifies this notion for indivisible quantum homomorphic encryption schemes.
\begin{definition}[quasi-compactness]
Let $\classS=\{\classS_{\kappa}\}_{\kappa}$ be the set of all quantum circuits over some fixed universal gate set. Let $f:\classS\rightarrow \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$ be some function on the circuits in $\classS$. An indivisible quantum homomorphic encryption scheme $\QHE$ is \emph{$f$-quasi-compact} if there exists a polynomial $p$ such that for any sequence of circuits $\{\mathsf{C}_{\kappa}\in\classS_{\kappa}\}_{\kappa}$ with induced channels
$\Phi_{\mathsf{C}_{\kappa}}:\mathcal{M}^{\otimes n(\kappa)}\rightarrow \mathcal{M}^{\otimes m(\kappa)}$, the circuit complexity of decrypting the output of $\QHE.\Eval^{\mathsf{C}_{\kappa}}$ is at most $f(\mathsf{C}_{\kappa})p(\kappa,m(\kappa))$.
\end{definition}
This definition allows us to consider schemes whose decryption complexity scales with some property of the evaluated circuit. We consider such a scaling non-trivial when it is smaller than~$G(\mathsf{C})$, the number of gates in $\mathsf{C}$.
\subsection{Quantum Homomorphic Encryption in the Symmetric-Key Setting}
\label{sec:symmetric-key}
We have defined quantum homomorphic encryption as a \emph{public-key} encryption scheme. For technical reasons, our final scheme, $\AUX$ is given in the symmetric-key setting, so in this section we define functionality and security for symmetric-key quantum homomorphic encryption. In the case of classical homomorphic encryption, symmetric-key encryption is known to be \emph{equivalent} to public-key encryption~\cite{R11}. In the quantum case, this is not known.
This section also contains the definition of a \emph{bounded} fully homomorphic scheme, which we again require for technical reasons in our symmetric key scheme, $\AUX$.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{symmetric-key} quantum homomorphic encryption scheme is a quantum homomorphic encryption scheme with $\QHE.\KeyGen$ and $\QHE.\Enc$ re-defined as:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Key Generation.}
$\QHE.\KeyGen: 1^\kappa \rightarrow (sk, \rho_{evk})$.
This algorithm takes a unary representation of the security parameter as input and outputs a secret encryption/decryption key~$\sk$ and a quantum evaluation key $\rho_{evk}\in D(\regR_{evk})$.
\item \textbf{Encryption.}
$\QHE.\Enc_{sk}: D(\mathcal{M}) \rightarrow D(\mathcal{C})$. For every possible value of $sk$, the quantum channel $\mathsf{Dec}_{sk}$ maps a state in the message space $\cal M$ to a state (the \emph{cipherstate}) in the cipherspace ${\cal C}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Next, we define a quantum homomorphic encryption scheme that
is \emph{bounded} by $n$, which forces the number of ciphertexts encrypted by $sk$ to be at most $n$. Furthermore, the scheme maintains a counter, $d$, of the number of previous encryptions, which can be thought of as allowing the scheme to avoid key reuse.
\begin{definition}A \emph{bounded} symmetric-key quantum homomorphic encryption scheme is a symmetric-key quantum homomorphic encryption scheme with $\QHE.\KeyGen$, $\QHE.\Enc$, and $\QHE.\Dec$ re-defined as:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Key Generation.}
$\QHE.\KeyGen: (1^\kappa, 1^n) \rightarrow (sk, \rho_{evk})$.
\item \textbf{Encryption.}
$\QHE.\Enc_{sk,d}: D(\mathcal{M}) \rightarrow D(\regC )$. Every time $\QHE.\Enc_{sk,d}$ is called, the register containing $d$ is incremented: $d\leftarrow d+1$. If $d>n$, $\QHE.\Enc_{sk,d}$ outputs $\bot$, indicating an error.
\item \textbf{Decryption.}
$\QHE.\Dec_{sk,d}:D(\mathcal{C}')\rightarrow D(\mathcal{M})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\paragraph{Security of Symmetric Key Schemes}
In order to define \emph{indistinguishability under chosen plaintext attacks} in the symmetric key setting, we must equip the adversary with an encryption oracle $\Enc_{sk}(\cdot)$.
An \emph{adversary with access to an encryption oracle}, $\advA$ is a tuple of quantum channels $(\advA^{(1)}, \dots, \advA^{(q+1)})$, such that $\advA^{(1)}:D({\cal X})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{M}\otimes\mathcal{E})$ for some space $\cal X$, for $i=2,\dots,q$, $\advA^{(i)}:D(\mathcal{C}\otimes\mathcal{E})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{M}\otimes\mathcal{E})$, and $\advA^{(q+1)}:D(\mathcal{C}\otimes\mathcal{E})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{Y})$ for some space $\mathcal{Y}$. The interaction of the adversary and the encryption oracle is shown in Figure \ref{fig:adv-with-oracle}, and for the case of a bounded encryption scheme, in which the oracle also updates a counter, in Figure \ref{fig:adv-with-oracle-bounded}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\input{fig-adv-with-oracle.tex}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\input{fig-adv-with-oracle-bounded.tex}
\end{figure}
Just as in the public key setting, we can define a quantum CPA indistinguishability experiment for the symmetric key setting, $\mathsf{SymK}_{\advA,\QHE}^{\sf cpa}(\kappa)$. An adversary for $\mathsf{SymK}_{\advA,\QHE}^{\sf cpa}(\kappa)$ is a pair of adversaries with access to an encryption oracle $\advA=(\advA_1,\advA_2)=(\advA_1^{(1)},\dots,\advA_1^{(q+1)},\advA_2^{(1)},\dots,\advA_2^{(q'+1)})$ ($q$~is the number of oracle calls before the challenger is called, and $q'$ is the number of oracle calls after the challenger is called). The experiment $\mathsf{SymK}_{\advA,\QHE}^{\sf cpa}(\kappa)$ is defined below, and shown in Figure~\ref{fig:symmetric-cpa}.\looseness=-1
\noindent\textbf{The quantum symmetric key CPA indistinguishability experiment} $\mathsf{SymK^{cpa}_{\advA,\QHE}}(\kappa)$
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\KeyGen(1^\kappa)$ is run to obtain keys $(sk,\rho_{evk})$.
\item $\advA_1$ is given $\rho_{evk}$, and may make a polynomial number of calls to an encryption oracle $\QHE.\Enc_{sk}$ before outputting a quantum state in message space $\cal M$ and environment register $\cal E$.
\item A random bit $r\in\{0,1\}$ is chosen and $\Xi_{\QHE}^{{\sf cpa},r}$ is applied to the state in $\cal M$ (the output being a state in $\cal C$).
\item Adversary $\advA_2$ obtains the system $\mathcal{C}\otimes \mathcal{E}$ and may make a polynomial number of calls to an encryption oracle $\QHE.\Enc_{sk}$ before outputting a bit $r'$.
\item The output of the experiment is defined to be 1 if $r=r'$ and 0 otherwise. In case $r=r'$, we say that $\advA$ \emph{wins} the experiment.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0){
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,2.54)--(5.5,2.54);
\draw (0,2.46)--(5.5,2.46);
\draw (0,.75)--(5,.75);
\draw (5,.415)--(5.5,.415);
\draw (5,.335)--(5.5,.335);
\draw (1,0)--(5,0);
\filldraw[fill=white] (-.5,.5) rectangle (0,2.75);
\node[rotate=90,align=center] at (-.25,1.625) {\small ${\sf QHE.KeyGen}$};
\node at (.25,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (.4,.95) {\small $\mathcal{R}_{evk}$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (1,1.25) rectangle (1.5,2.75);
\node[rotate=90] at (1.25,2) {\small $\QHE.\Enc$};
\draw[->] (1.1,1)--(1.1,1.25);
\draw[->] (1.4,1.25)--(1.4,1);
\filldraw[fill=white] (1,-.25) rectangle (1.5,1);
\node at (1.25,.375) {$\advA_1$};
\node at (1.75,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (1.75,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (1.75,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (2.5,.5) rectangle (3.5,2.75);
\node at (3,1.625) {$\Xi_{\QHE}^{\textsf{cpa},r}$};
\node at (3.75,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (3.75,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (4.5,1.25) rectangle (5,2.75);
\node[rotate=90] at (4.75,2) {\small $\QHE.\Enc$};
\draw[->] (4.6,1)--(4.6,1.25);
\draw[->] (4.9,1.25)--(4.9,1);
\filldraw[fill=white] (4.5,-.25) rectangle (5,1);
\node at (4.75,.375) {$\advA_2$};
\node at (5.25,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (5.75,.375) {$r'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at (8,0){
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,2.54)--(5.5,2.54);
\draw (0,2.46)--(5.5,2.46);
\draw (.6,1.54)--(5.5,1.54);
\draw (.6,1.46)--(5.5,1.46);
\draw (0,.75)--(5,.75);
\draw (5,.415)--(5.5,.415);
\draw (5,.335)--(5.5,.335);
\draw (1,0)--(5,0);
\filldraw[fill=white] (-.5,.5) rectangle (0,2.75);
\node[rotate=90,align=center] at (-.25,1.625) {\small ${\sf QHE.KeyGen}$};
\node at (.25,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (.5,1.5) {$1$};
\node at (.4,.95) {\small $\mathcal{R}_{evk}$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (1,1.25) rectangle (1.5,2.75);
\node[rotate=90] at (1.25,2) {\small $\QHE.\Enc$};
\draw[->] (1.1,1)--(1.1,1.25);
\draw[->] (1.4,1.25)--(1.4,1);
\filldraw[fill=white] (1,-.25) rectangle (1.5,1);
\node at (1.25,.375) {$\advA_1$};
\node at (1.75,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (2,1.7) {\small$q+1$};
\node at (1.75,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (1.75,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (2.5,.5) rectangle (3.5,2.75);
\node at (3,1.625) {$\Xi_{\QHE}^{\textsf{cpa},r}$};
\node at (3.75,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (4,1.7) {\small$q+2$};
\node at (3.75,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (4.5,1.25) rectangle (5,2.75);
\node[rotate=90] at (4.75,2) {\small $\QHE.\Enc$};
\draw[->] (4.6,1)--(4.6,1.25);
\draw[->] (4.9,1.25)--(4.9,1);
\filldraw[fill=white] (4.5,-.25) rectangle (5,1);
\node at (4.75,.375) {$\advA_2$};
\node at (5.25,2.7) {$sk$};
\node at (5.85,1.7) {\small$q'+q+2$};
\node at (5.75,.375) {$r'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The quantum CPA experiment for symmetric key systems (left) and bounded symmetric key systems (right).
}\label{fig:symmetric-cpa}
\end{figure}
\begin{definition}[Quantum Indistinguishability under Chosen Plaintext Attack (q-IND-CPA) for Symmetric Key Schemes]
\label{def:q-ind-cpa-Symmetric}
A symmetric key quantum homomorphic encryption scheme $\QHE$ is q-IND-CPA secure if for all quantum polynomial-time adversaries with oracle access, $\advA=(\advA_1^{(1)},\dots,\advA_1^{(q+1)},\advA_2^{(1)},\dots,\advA_2^{(q'+1)})$, there exists a negligible function $negl$ such that:
$$\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\QHE}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]\leq \frac{1}{2}+negl(\kappa).$$
\end{definition}
Similar to the case of public-key encryption (Section~\ref{sec:security-QHE}), it is straightforward to give the seemingly stronger variant of q-IND-CPA, \emph{q-IND-CPA-mult}, which is defined identically to the public key case (Definition \ref{def:q-IND-CPA-mult}) but with an adversary having access to an encryption oracle. However, just as in the public key case, it turns out that these definitions are equivalent.
\begin{theorem}[Equivalence of q-IND-CPA and q-IND-CPA-mult in symmetric key schemes] \label{thm:equiv-IND-CPA-sym}
Let $\QHE$ be a symmetric key quantum homomorphic scheme. Then $\QHE$ is q-IND-CPA if and only if $\QHE$ is q-IND-CPA-mult.
\end{theorem}
\noindent The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:equiv-IND-CPA-sym} is virtually identical to that of Theorem \ref{thm:equiv-IND-CPA}, given in Appendix \ref{sec:appendix-equivalent-q-IND-CPA}.
\section{Main Contributions}
\label{sec:main-contributions}
We now formally state our main results (formal schemes and proofs are given in Sections~\ref{sec:scheme-Clifford}--\ref{sec:scheme-AUX}).
Our first theorem, Theorem~\ref{thm:main-Clifford}, establishes quantum homomorphic encryption for Clifford circuits.
\begin{theorem}(Clifford scheme, $\CL$)
\label{thm:main-Clifford}
Let $\classC$ be the class of Clifford circuits. Then assuming the existence of a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA secure, there exists a quantum homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA, compact and $\mathscr{C}$-homomorphic.
\end{theorem}
Next, we consider two variants of the scheme given by Theorem~\ref{thm:main-Clifford}. Each variant deals with non-Clifford group gates --- in our case $\tgate$-gates --- in a different way. The first scheme, described in Theorem \ref{thm:main-EPR} and formally defined in Section \ref{sec:scheme-EPR}, uses entanglement to implement $\tgate$-gates, resulting in a quantum homomorphic encryption scheme in which the complexity of decryption scales with the number of $\tgate$-gates in the homomorphically evaluated circuit.
\begin{theorem}(entanglement-based scheme, $\EPR$) \label{thm:main-EPR}
Let $\classS$ be the set of all quantum circuits over the universal gate set $\{\xgate,\zgate,\pgate,\hgate,\cnot,\tgate\}$ (as well as single-qubit preparation and measurement). Then assuming the existence of a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA secure, there exists an indivisible quantum homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA, $\classS$-homomorphic and $R^2$-quasi-compact, where $R(\mathsf{C})$ is the number of $\tgate$-gates in a circuit~$\mathsf{C}$.
\end{theorem}
The compactness of the scheme $\EPR$ is nontrival for all circuits in which $R^2\ll G$, where $G$ is the number of gates.
Our second scheme, formally defined in Section \ref{sec:scheme-AUX}, is based on the use of auxiliary qubits to implement $\tgate$-gates, resulting in a quantum homomorphic encryption scheme that is homomorphic for circuits with constant $\tgate$-depth, as described in the following theorem:
\begin{theorem}(auxiliary-qubit scheme, $\AUX$) \label{thm:main-AUX}
Fix a constant $L$. Let $\classS$ be the set of layered quantum circuits over the universal gate set $\{\xgate,\zgate,\pgate,\hgate,\cnot,\tgate\}$ (as well as single-qubit preparation and measurement) with \mbox{$\tgate$-depth} at most~$L$. Then assuming the existence of a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA secure, there exists a bounded symmetric-key quantum homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA, $\classS$-homomorphic and compact.
\end{theorem}
The QHE scheme in Theorem \ref{thm:main-AUX} can be seen as somewhat analogous to an important building block in classical fully homomorphic encryption: a \emph{levelled} fully homomorphic scheme, which is a scheme that takes a parameter $L$, which is an a-priori bound on the \emph{depth} of the circuit that can be evaluated. However, we note that in contrast to a levelled fully homomorphic scheme, in which operations are polynomial in $L$, the complexity of our scheme is a polynomial of degree exponential in $L$, so we really require $L$ to be constant.
As previously noted, Theorems~\ref{thm:main-EPR} and~\ref{thm:main-AUX} are complimentary: the scheme $\EPR$ becomes less compact as the \emph{number} of $\tgate$-gates increases, while the scheme~$\AUX$ becomes inefficient as the \emph{depth} of $\tgate$-gates increases.
\section{Scheme $\CL$: Homomorphic Encryption for Clifford Circuits}
\label{sec:scheme-Clifford}
In this section, we present $\CL$, a compact quantum homomorphic encryption scheme for stabilizer qubit circuits, which consist of qubit Clifford circuits combined with measurements and single-qubit preparation. This is a building block for the schemes that follow in Sections~\ref{sec:scheme-EPR} and~\ref{sec:scheme-AUX}. The main theorem we prove is Theorem~\ref{thm:main-Clifford}, which follows directly from Theorems \ref{thm:correctness:Clifford},~\ref{thm:compactness:Clifford} and~\ref{thm:security:Clifford}.
By definition, Clifford circuits conjugate Pauli operators to Pauli operators~\cite{Got98}. In other words, for any Clifford $\mathsf{C}$, and any Pauli, $\mathsf{Q}$, there exists a Pauli $\mathsf{Q}'$ such that $\mathsf{C}\mathsf{Q}=\mathsf{Q}'\mathsf{C}$.
Furthermore, applying a random Pauli operator is a perfectly secure symmetric-key quantum encryption scheme: the quantum one-time pad (see Section~\ref{sec:prelim-QOTP}). Combining these observations, we see that it is possible to perform any Clifford circuit on quantum data that is encrypted using the quantum one-time pad. We can apply the desired Clifford, $\mathsf{C}$, to the encrypted state $\mathsf{Q}\ket{\psi}$ to get $\mathsf{Q}'(\mathsf{C}\ket{\psi})$. Now decrypting the state requires applying the Pauli $\mathsf{Q}'$. If $\mathsf{P}$ can be described by the encryption key $(a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n)$ --- that is, $\mathsf{Q}=\xgate^{a_1}\zgate^{b_1}\otimes \dots\otimes \xgate^{a_n}\zgate^{b_n}$ --- then $\mathsf{Q}'$ can be described by some key $(a_1',\dots,a_n',b_1',\dots,b_n')$ depending on $\mathsf{C}$ and $(a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n)$. We describe this dependence by a function $f^{\mathsf{C}}:\mathbb{F}_2^{2n}\rightarrow \mathbb{F}_2^{2n}$, which we call a \emph{key update rule}. We need only consider key update rules for each gate in our gate set, which consists of single-qubit measurement, single-qubit preparation, and the one- and two-qubit gates in $\{\xgate,\zgate,\pgate,\cnot,\hgate\}$. For a single-qubit gate $\mathsf{C}$, since the only keys that are affected are those corresponding to the wire to which $\mathsf{C}$ is applied, an update rule can be more succinctly described by a pair of functions $f_a^{\mathsf{C}},f_b^{\mathsf{C}}:\mathbb{F}_2^2\rightarrow \mathbb{F}_2$ such that when $\mathsf{C}$ is applied to the \th{i} wire, $a_i'=f_a^{\mathsf{C}}(a_i,b_i)$ and $b_i'=f_b^\mathsf{C}(a_i,b_i)$:
\vskip10pt
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (-2.1,0) {$\xgate^{a_i}\zgate^{b_i}\ket{\psi}$};
\draw (-1,0)--(1,0);
\filldraw[fill = white] (-.25,.25) rectangle (.25,-.25);
\node at (0,0) {$\mathsf{C}$};
\node at (2.25,0) {$\xgate^{a_i'}\zgate^{b_i'}\mathsf{C}\ket{\psi}$};
\node at (8,0) {$a_i\leftarrow a_i'=f_{a}^{\mathsf{C}}(a_i,b_i),\;\; b_i\leftarrow b_i'=f_{b}^{\mathsf{C}}(a_i,b_i)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\vskip10pt
For the two-qubit $\cnot$-gate, the update rule is described by a 4-tuple of functions, since $\cnot$ acts on two wires. We give the key update rules for all gates in Appendix~\ref{appendix:Key-update-rules-stabilizer}.
By applying these update rules after each gate, we can update the key so that the output is correctly decrypted. (Such a technique was already used, \emph{e.g.} in~\cite{Chi05,QCED}.)
This solution, however, requires that the key updates be executed by the party holding the encryption keys: an ``easy'' classical computation, but nevertheless a computation that is polynomial in the \emph{size} of the circuit. In the context of quantum homomorphic encryption, the challenge is therefore to allow the execution of \emph{arbitrary} Clifford circuits, while maintaining the compactness condition. Here, we present a quantum public-key encryption scheme which is a hybrid of the quantum one-time pad and of a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme. This encryption scheme is used to perform key updates on encrypted quantum one-time pad keys, enabling the computation of arbitrary Clifford group circuit on the encrypted quantum states, while maintaining the compactness condition. More precisely, to homomorphically evaluate a Clifford circuit consisting of a sequence of gates $\mathsf{c}_1,\dots,\mathsf{c}_G$, we apply the gates to the quantum one-time pad encrypted message, and homomorphically evaluate the function $f^{{\sf c}_1}\circ\dots\circ f^{{\sf c}_G}$ on the encrypted one-time pad keys $a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n$, where $\circ$ denotes function composition. To accomplish this, we will keep track of functions for each bit of the quantum one-time pad encryption key, $\{f_{a,i},f_{b,i}\}_{i=1}^n$. Since each of the key update rules presented in Appendix \ref{appendix:Key-update-rules-stabilizer} is linear, each $f_{a,i}$ and $f_{b,i}$ is a linear polynomial in $\mathbb{F}_2[a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n]$ (from the perspective of the evaluation procedure, $a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n$ are unknowns), so we refer to them as \emph{key-polynomials}. Before we begin to evaluate the circuit, the key polynomials are the monomials $f_{a,i}=a_i$ and $f_{b,i}=b_i$.
As we evaluate each gate $\mathsf{c}_j$, we can update the {key-polynomials} corresponding to the affected wires by composing them with the key update rules. To compute the new encrypted one-time pad keys once the circuit is complete, we homomorphically evaluate each key-polynomial on the old encrypted one-time pad keys.
It is interesting to note that since the key update rules (Appendix~\ref{appendix:Key-update-rules-stabilizer}) for stabilizer circuit elements are all linear, for the scheme~$\CL$, the underlying classical fully homomorphic scheme would only need to be additively homomorphic.
We define our scheme $\CL$ as a QHE scheme. Here and throughout, we assume $\mathsf{HE}$ to be a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme that is q-IND-CPA secure (see Definition~\ref{defn:classical-cipher-q-IND-CPA} and Appendix~\ref{appendix:Classical-FHE}). As noted, such a scheme (based on the LWE assumption) could be derived from~\cite{BV11}. All of our schemes operate on qubit circuits, and encrypt qubit-by-qubit. Thus we fix $\mathcal{M}=\mathbb{C}^{2}$. Ciphertexts will consist of quantum states in $\mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$, combined with classical strings. Specifically, if $C$ is the output space of $\HE.\Enc$, and $C'$ is the output space of $\HE.\Eval$, then we define $\mathcal{C}= \mathbb{C}^{C\times C}\otimes {\cal X}$, where ${\cal X}\equiv\mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$, and $\mathcal{C}'=\mathbb{C}^{C'\times C'}\otimes \cal X$.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Key generation} $\CL.\KeyGen(1^\kappa)$. For key generation, execute $(\pk, \sk, \evk) \leftarrow \mathsf{HE.Keygen(1^\kappa)}$. Output the obtained secret key, $\sk$, and public key, $\pk$. The evaluation key $\rho_\evk$ takes the value of the classical state $\rho({\evk})$.
\item \textbf{Encryption} $\mathsf{CL.Enc}_{pk}: D(\mathcal{M})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{C})$.
Encryption is defined as the quantum channel that outputs the classical-quantum state:
\begin{equation}
\mathsf{CL.Enc}_{pk}(\rho^\mathcal{M})=\sum_{a,b\in\{0,1\}}\frac{1}{4}\rho(\mathsf{HE.Enc}_{pk}(a),\mathsf{HE.Enc}_{pk}(b))\otimes
\QEnc_{a,b}(\rho^{\cal M}).
\end{equation}
\item \textbf{Homomorphic evaluation}
$\mathsf{CL.Eval}^{\mathsf{C}}:D(\mathcal{R}_{evk}\otimes \mathcal{C}^{\otimes n})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{C'}^{\otimes m})$.
Suppose $\mathsf{C}=\mathsf{c}_1,\dots,\mathsf{c}_G$ is a Clifford circuit. For every $j=1,\dots, {G}$ such that $\mathsf{c}_j$ initializes a fresh qubit, we initialize a new qubit $\CL.\Enc_{pk}(\ket{0}\bra{0})$ and append it to the system. Let $\rho \in D(\mathcal{X}_1\otimes\dots\otimes\mathcal{X}_{m})$, be the composite system consisting of the input quantum system and the initialized qubits.
\\
Initialize polynomials $f_{a,1},\dots,f_{a,n},f_{b,1},\dots,f_{b,n}\in \mathbb{F}_2[a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n]$ by $f_{a,i}\leftarrow a_i$ and $f_{b,i}\leftarrow b_i$ for all $i=1,\dots,n$.\\
For $j=1,\dots,G$ such that $\mathsf{c}_j$ is a gate or a measurement:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Apply the gate $\mathsf{c}_j$ to the state: $\rho\leftarrow \mathsf{c}_j\rho\mathsf{c}_j^{-1}$.
\item Compose the key update rules with the key-polynomials of the affected wires:
if $\mathsf{c}_j$ is a single qubit gate or measurement acting on the \th{i} wire, update as $(f_{a,i},f_{b,i})\leftarrow ( f_{a,i}\circ f_a^{\mathsf{c}_j}, f_{b,i}\circ f_b^{\mathsf{c}_j})$. If $\mathsf{c}_j$ is a $\cnot$-gate acting on wires $i$ and $i'$, update $(f_{a,i},f_{a,i'},f_{b,i},f_{b,i'})$ analogously.
\end{enumerate}
Finally, update the classical encryptions by computing $c_i = (\HE.\Eval_{evk}^{f_{a,i}}(\tilde{a}_i), \HE.\Eval_{evk}^{f_{b,i}}(\tilde{b}_i))$.
Output $(c_1,\dots,c_m,\rho)$ (with registers permuted to fit the prescribed form).
\item \textbf{Decryption $\mathsf{CL.Dec}_{sk}: D (\mathcal{C'})\rightarrow D(\mathcal{M})$.}
For $\tilde{a},\tilde{b} \in C'$, the output space of $\HE.\Eval$, decryption is given by the conditional quantum channel:
\begin{equation*}
\CL.\Dec_{sk}:\ket{\tilde{a}}\bra{\tilde{a}}\otimes \ket{\tilde{b}}\bra{\tilde{b}}\otimes \rho^{\cal X}\mapsto \QDec_{\HE.\Dec_{sk}(\tilde{a}),\HE.\Dec_{sk}(\tilde{b})}(\rho^{\cal X}),
\end{equation*}
which can be implemented by first decoding the classical registers to obtain $a=\HE.\Enc_{sk}(\tilde{a})$ and $b=\HE.\Enc_{sk}(\tilde{b})$, applying $\QDec_{a,b}$, and then tracing out $\mathbb{C}^{C'\times C'}$.
\end{itemize}
We have chosen to present $\mathsf{CL.Enc}_{pk}$ and $\mathsf{CL.Dec}_{sk}$ as quantum channels, since they are easily seen to be polynomial-time implementable. Note, however, that for more complicated quantum channels such as $\CL.\Eval$ we will generally prefer their description in terms of a high-level algorithmic description.
\subsection{Analysis}
\label{sec:analysis-CL}
We now analyse the various properties of $\CL$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:correctness:Clifford}
Let $\mathscr{C}$ be the class of stabilizer circuits. Then $\CL$ is $\mathscr{C}$-homomorphic.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
This follows from the circuits in Appendix~\ref{appendix:Key-update-rules-stabilizer}, as well as the homomorphic property of $\mathsf{HE}$. In particular, since the decrypted values of the ciphertexts are correct (except with exponentially small probability), then Equation~\eqref{eqn:C-homomorphism} is satisfied.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:compactness:Clifford}
$\CL$ is compact.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $p$ be a polynomial such that the complexity of applying $\HE.\Dec$ to the output of $\HE.\Eval$ is at most $p(\kappa)$ --- such a polynomial exists by the compactness of $\HE$. Then decrypting a single qubit of the output of $\CL.\Eval$ has complexity at most $2p(\kappa)+2$, since we must decrypt two keys $a$ and $b$ and then apply $\xgate^a$ and $\zgate^b$, so $\CL$ is also compact.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:security:Clifford}
Assuming a classical fully homomorphic encryption scheme $\HE$ that is q-IND-CPA secure, the quantum homomorphic scheme $\CL$ is q-IND-CPA secure.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The main part of this proof will be to show that the classical ciphertexts $\HE.\Enc_{pk}(a)$ and $\HE.\Enc_{pk}(b)$ give at most a negligible advantage. We will then see that without these classical ciphertexts, the quantum CPA Indistinguishability experiment is independent of $r$ from the perspective of the adversary.
Let $\CL'$ be the quantum homomorphic encryption scheme with $\CL'.\KeyGen=\CL.\KeyGen$, $\CL'.\Eval=\CL.\Eval$, $\CL'.\Dec=\CL.\Dec$, and
\begin{align*}
\CL'.\Enc_{pk}(\rho) &=\sum_{a,b\in\{0,1\}}\frac{1}{4}\rho(\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0),\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0))\otimes (\xgate^a\zgate^b\rho\zgate^b\xgate^a)\\
&=\rho(\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0),\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0))\otimes \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{I}_2.
\end{align*}
Let $\advA=(\advA_1,\advA_2)$ be an adversary for $\mathsf{PubK}_{\advA,\CL}^{\textsf{cpa}}(\kappa)$.
We will define an adversary $\advA'=(\advA_1',\advA_2')$ for $\mathsf{PubK_{\advA',\HE}^{cpa\text{-}mult}}(\kappa)$. Essentially, $\advA'$ will simulate $\mathsf{PubK}_{\advA,\CL}^{\textsf{cpa-mult}}(\kappa)$, except that when it simulates $\Xi_{\CL}^{{\sf cpa},r}$, it will use $\Xi_{\HE}^{\textsf{cpa-mult},s}$ in place of $\HE.\Enc$, so that it will actually be running either $\Xi_{\CL}^{{\sf cpa},r}$ (if $s=1$) or $\Xi_{\CL'}^{{\sf cpa},r}$ (if $s=0$) (see Figure~\ref{fig:cl-security}).
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\input{fig-cl-security.tex}
\end{figure}
\begin{description}
\item[$\advA_1'(pk,evk)$:] Run $\advA_1(pk,evk)$ to get a state $\rho^{\cal ME}$. Choose a uniform random bit $r$. If $r=0$, discard the $\mathcal{M}$ subsystem and replace it with the state $\ket{0}\bra{0}$. Choose uniform random bits $a$ and $b$, and apply $\QEnc_{a,b}$, the quantum one-time pad, to $\mathcal{M}$, relabelling the resulting system by $\cal X$. Input $(a,b)$ and $(0,0)$ to $\Xi_{\HE}^{\textsf{cpa-mult},s}$.
\item[$\advA_2'$:] Run $\advA_2$ to get a bit $r'$. Output $1$ if $r=r'$ and $0$ otherwise.
\end{description}
We now compute the probability that $\advA'$ correctly guesses $s$, which we know must be at most $\frac{1}{2}+negl(\kappa)$ for some negligible function, since $\HE$ is q-IND-CPA. If $s=1$, then $\advA'$ is simulating $\mathsf{PubK}_{\advA,\CL}^{\mathsf{cpa}}$, so the probability that $r'=r$ (and thus that $s'=1=s$) is $\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]$.
On the other hand, if $s=0$, then $\advA_2$ gets encryptions of $0$ rather than $\HE.\Enc(a),\HE.\Enc(b)$,~so $\advA'$ is simulating $\mathsf{PubK}_{\advA,\CL'}^{\mathsf{cpa}}$, so the probability that $r\neq r'$, and thus $s'=0=s$ is \mbox{$\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=0]$}.\looseness = -1
Then since the total probability that $s=s'$ is at most $\frac{1}{2}+negl(\kappa)$, we have:
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{2}\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]+\frac{1}{2}\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=0] &\leq \frac{1}{2}+negl(\kappa)\nonumber\\
\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]+1-\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1] &\leq 1+2negl(\kappa)\nonumber\\
\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]-\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1] &\leq 2negl(\kappa).\label{eq:negl}
\end{align}
We complete the proof by noting that when $s=0$, since $c=(\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0),\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0))$, it is independent of $a,b$ (see
Figure~\ref{fig:cl-security-s0}).
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\input{fig-cl-security-s0.tex}
\end{figure}
\noindent Then from the perspective of $\advA_2$, since $a,b$ is uniform random, the system $\cal X$ just contains the completely mixed state $\maxmix$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:cl-security-last}).
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\input{fig-cl-security-last.tex}
\end{figure}
\noindent Since the experiment $\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL'}^{cpa}}$ is independent of $r$ from the perspective of $\advA$, $\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{advA,\CL'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]=\frac{1}{2}$. Combining this with Equation \eqref{eq:negl}, we get
\begin{equation*}
\Pr[\mathsf{PubK_{\advA,\CL}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]\leq \frac{1}{2}+2negl(\kappa),
\end{equation*}
which completes the proof, since $2negl$ is still a negligible function.
\end{proof}
\section{Scheme $\EPR$: $\tgate$-gate Computation Using Entanglement}
\label{sec:scheme-EPR}
In order to achieve universality for quantum circuits, we need to add a non-Clifford group gate, such as the $\tgate$-gate. As noted in Section~\ref{sec:intro-summary}, if we apply the same technique as in Section~\ref{sec:scheme-Clifford} (\emph{i.e.} to apply the $\tgate$-gate on the encrypted quantum data) we run into a problem, since:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:T-gate-P-error}
\tgate \xgate^a \zgate^b = \xgate^a \zgate^{a \oplus b} \pgate^a \tgate.
\end{equation}
That is, conditioned on $a$, the output picks up an undesirable
$\pgate$ error, which cannot be corrected by applying Pauli
corrections. In~\cite{Chi05}, Childs arrives at this same conclusion,
and then makes the observation that, in the case where $a=1$,
the evaluation algorithm could be made to \emph{correct} this erroneous
$\pgate$-gate by executing a correction (which consists of
$\zgate\pgate$). As long as the evaluation algorithm does not find out if this
correction is being executed or not, security holds. The solution in~\cite{Chi05} involves quantum interaction; this was recently improved to a single auxiliary qubit, coupled with classical interaction~\cite{QCED}. In this section, we base the evaluation of the $\tgate$-gate on a modification of this technique, as presented in Figure~\ref{fig:T-gate-EPR}. The modification is that we allow the auxiliary qubit to be prepared in a state dependent on the $\xgate$-encryption key, whereas~\cite{QCED} explicitly avoids this since it requires the auxiliary qubits to be prepared independently of the computation. Correctness of Figure~\ref{fig:T-gate-EPR} is proven in Appendix~\ref{appendix:Correctness-T-gate}.
As a proof technique (for establishing security), \cite{QCED} considers an equivalent, entanglement-based protocol. Here, we use the idea of exploiting entanglement in order to \emph{delay} the correction required for the evaluation of the $\tgate$-gate on encrypted data.
The protocol is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:T-gadget-EPR}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[dashed] (0,0)--(8,0);
\draw (2.5,1.5)--(7,1.5);
\draw (5,.5)--(8,.5);
\draw (5,.5)--(5,-1);
\draw (2.5,-1)--(5,-1);
\draw (7,1.54)--(7.5,1.54);
\draw (7,1.46)--(7.5,1.46);
\draw (7.54,1.5)--(7.54,-.5);
\draw (7.46,1.5)--(7.46,-.5);
\draw (7.5,-.46)--(8,-.46);
\draw (7.5,-.54)--(8,-.54);
\filldraw[fill=white] (4,1.25) rectangle (4.5,1.75);
\node at (4.25,1.5) {$\tgate$};
\node at (1.6,1.5) {$\xgate^a\zgate^b\ket{\psi}$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (3,-1.25) rectangle (3.5,-.75);
\node at (3.25,-1) {$\pgate^a$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (4,-1.25) rectangle (4.5,-.75);
\node at (4.25,-1) {$\zgate^k$};
\node at (2,-1) {$\ket{+}$};
\node at (6.75,1.5) {\meas};
\node at (7.5,1.5) {\cntrl};
\node at (7.5,-.5) {\cntrl};
\node at (5.5,.5) {\cntrl};
\node at (5.5,1.5) {\target};
\draw (5.5,.5)--(5.5,1.5);
\node at (6.5,-1) {$(k\in_R\{0,1\})$};
\node at (8.4,-.5) {$c$};
\node at (10,.5) {$\xgate^{a\oplus c}\zgate^{a\oplus b\oplus k\oplus a\cdot c}\tgate\ket{\psi}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{\label{fig:T-gate-EPR}Functionality of the $\tgate$-gate gadget.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,5)--(3,5);
\draw (3,5.04)--(4,5.04);
\draw (3,4.96)--(4,4.96);
\node at (-1,5) {$\xgate^{f_{a,i}}\zgate^{f_{b,i}}\ket{\psi}$};
\node at (.25,4.75) {\small $\mathcal{X}_i$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.75,5.25) rectangle (1.25,4.75);
\node at (1,5) {$\rgate$};
\node at (2,5) {\target};
\node at (2,4) {\cntrl};
\draw (2,5)--(2,4);
\node at (3,5) {\meas};
\node at (4.2,5) {$c$};
\draw (.5,4)--(4,4);
\node at (6.5,4) {$\xgate^{f_{a,i}\oplus c}\zgate^{f_{a,i}\oplus f_{b,i}\oplus k_t\oplus cf_{a,i}}\rgate\ket{\psi}$};
\node at (3.75,3.75) {\small $\mathcal{X}_i$};
\node at (-.5,3.5) {$\ket{\Phi^+}$};
\draw (0,3.5)--(.5,4);
\draw (0,3.5)--(.5,3);
\draw (.5,3)--(4.5,3);
\node at (3.75,2.75) {{\small $\mathcal{R}_t$}};
\node at (11.5,5) {$f_t\leftarrow f_{a,i}$};
\node at (11.5,4) {$V\leftarrow V\cup\{k_t\}$};
\node at (11.5,3) {$f_{a,i}\leftarrow f_{a,i}\oplus c$};
\node at (11.5,2) {$f_{b,i}\leftarrow (1\oplus c)f_{a,i}\oplus f_{b,i} \oplus k_t$};
\draw (4.5,3)--(4.5,2)--(7,2);
\filldraw[fill=white] (4.9,2.25) rectangle (5.6,1.75);
\node at (5.25,2) {$\pgate^{f_t}$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (6,2.25) rectangle (6.5,1.75);
\node at (6.25,2) {$\hgate$};
\node at (7.25,2) {\meas};
\draw (7.6,2.04)-- (8.25,2.04);
\draw (7.6,1.96)-- (8.25,1.96);
\node at (8.5,2) {$k_t$};
\draw[dashed] (4.25,2.5) rectangle (8.9,1);
\node at (6.4,1.25) {\small (Part of decryption)};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{\label{fig:T-gadget-EPR}Evaluation protocol for the \th{t} $\rgate$-gate, applied to the \th{i} wire. The key-polynomials $f_{a,i}$ and $f_{b,i}$ are in $\mathbb{F}_2[V]$. After the protocol, $V$ gains a new variable corresponding to the unknown measurement result $k_t$. The dashed box shows part of the decryption procedure, which happens at some point in the future, after the complete evaluation is finished.}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:T-gadget-EPR} shows that, via the use of the entangled state~$\ket{\Phi^+} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\ket{00} + \ket{11})$, the conditional~$\pgate$ correction can be delayed. The cost of this, however is that the value of the measurement result,~$k_t$ on auxiliary register $\regR_t$ remains undetermined until a later point, when it is measured as part of the decryption algorithm. Thus we view the key update rules as a symbolic computation: each time a $\tgate$-gate is applied, an extra variable, $k_t$, is introduced.
For the first $\tgate$-gate evaluation ($t=1$), the evaluation procedure does not have the knowledge to evaluate $f_1=f_{a,i}$, where $i$ is the wire upon which the gate is performed, in order to perform the correction. It is possible (using the classical scheme $\HE$), to compute a classical ciphertext $\widetilde{f_1}$ that decrypts to $f_1(a_1,b_1,\dots,a_n,b_n)$. Thus, for this $\tgate$-gate, the output part of the auxiliary system contains both $\widetilde{f_1}$ and the register~$\regR_1$. As part of the decryption operation, compute $f_1 \leftarrow \HE.\Dec(\widetilde{f_1})$, and apply $\pgate^{f_1}$ on $\regR_1$ before measuring in the Hadamard basis and obtaining~$k_1$. From the point of view of the evaluation procedure,~$k_1$ is unknown and so it becomes an \emph{unknown} part of the encryption key (in contrast with the previous keys, which are also ``unknown'', but to a lesser degree, since we have access to the classical encrypted values of these keys). The algorithm $\Eval$ continues in this fashion for values of $t$ up to~$R$; each time, the set of unknown variables increasing by~one.
Note that, according to Figure~\ref{fig:T-gadget-EPR}, as well as the key updates rules (Appendix~\ref{appendix:Key-update-rules-stabilizer}), for all $t$, $f_t\in \mathbb{F}_2[a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n,k_1,\dots,k_{t-1}]$ is linear (since $c$ is a known constant), so we can write $f_t=f_t^k+f_t^{ab}$ for $f_t^k\in \mathbb{F}_2[k_1,\dots,k_{t-1}]$ and $f_t^{ab}\in \mathbb{F}_2[a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n]$.
The cost of this construction is that each $\tgate$-gate adds to the complexity of the decryption procedure, since, in particular, for each $\rgate$-gate, we must perform a possible $\pgate$-correction and a measurement on an auxiliary qubit. In addition, we cannot evaluate the key-polynomials, nor the $f_t$, until the variables $k_t$ have been measured, so this evaluation must take place in the decryption phase, increasing the dependence on $R$, the number of $\tgate$-gates. We make this dependence precise in Theorem~\ref{cor:EPR-dec-complexity}.\looseness=-1
We now formally define the indivisible quantum homomorphic scheme,~$\EPR$. As in $\CL$, we have message space ${\cal M}=\mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$ and cipherspace ${\cal C}=\mathbb{C}^{C\times C}\otimes\cal X$, where $C$ is the output space of $\HE.\Enc$ and ${\cal X}\equiv \mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$. However, since $\EPR$ is indivisible, the output space of $\EPR.\Eval^{\mathsf{C}}$ has the form $\mathcal{R}_{aux}\otimes {\cal C'}^{\otimes m}$. We require an indivisible scheme, because decryption of any one of the output qubits requires access to the auxiliary system. In our case, we have $\mathcal{R}_{aux}=\mathcal{R}_1\otimes\dots\otimes \mathcal{R}_R\otimes\(\mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}^{R+1}}\)^{\otimes R}\otimes \(\mathbb{C}^{C'}\)^{\otimes R}$, where $R$ is the number of $\tgate$-gates in $\mathsf{C}$, $C'$ is the output space of $\HE.\Eval$, and $\mathcal{R}_t\equiv \mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$ for each $t$. The classical parts of the auxiliary space allow us to output $R$ linear polynomials in $\mathbb{F}_2[k_1,\dots, k_R]$ corresponding to $\{f_t^k\}_{t=1}^R$, each of which can be represented with $R+1$ bits; as well as $R$ $\HE.\Eval$ outputs, corresponding to encryptions of $\{f_t^{ab}(a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n)\}_{t=1}^R$.
Similarly, we have $\mathcal{C}'=\(\mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}^{R+1}}\)^{\otimes 2}\otimes\mathbb{C}^{C'\times C'} \otimes\cal X$.
\paragraph{Key Generation: $\EPR.\KeyGen(1^\kappa)$} The key generation procedure is the same as $\mathsf{CL.KeyGen}(1^\kappa)$.
\paragraph{Encryption: $\EPR.\Enc_{pk}:D({\mathcal{M}})\rightarrow D({\cal C})$} The encryption procedure is the same as $\mathsf{CL.Enc}_{pk}$.
\paragraph{Evaluation: $\EPR.\Eval_{evk}$} As in $\mathsf{CL}$, apply gates in $\{\xgate, \zgate, \pgate, \hgate, \cnot\}$ directly on the encrypted quantum registers.
For the $\tgate$-gate, use the gadget defined in Figure \ref{fig:T-gadget-EPR}. This gadget differs from previous gadgets in that it creates an auxiliary entangled state,~$\ket{\Phi^+}$. After the system of the \th{i} wire, $\mathcal{X}_i$, is measured, relabel half of the Bell state as $\mathcal{X}_i$, and the other half as~$\regR_t$, which is returned as part of~$\mathcal{R}_{aux}$.
The full evaluation procedure is as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Set $V\leftarrow \{a_i,b_i\}_{i\in [n]}$, and for all $i\in \{1,\dots,n\}$, initialize $f_{a,i},f_{b,i}\in \mathbb{F}_2[V]$ as $f_{a,i}\leftarrow a_i$, $f_{b,i}\leftarrow b_i$.
\item Let $\mathsf{g}_1,\dots,\mathsf{g}_G$ be a topological ordering of the gates in~$\mathsf{C}$. For $j=1,\dots,G$, evaluate $\mathsf{g}_j$ using the appropriate gadget.
\item Let $S$ be the set of output wires.
Let $\mathcal{L}$ be the set of labels $\mathcal{L}=\{(a,i),(b,i):i\in S\}\cup\{1,\dots, R\}$. For each $\alpha\in \mathcal{L}$, we want to homomorphically evaluate $f_\alpha$ to obtain the actual (encrypted) key, but we can only actually evaluate the part of $f_\alpha$ that is in the variables $\{a_i,b_i\}_i$ --- the $\{k_t\}_t$ are still unknown. Recall that we can write $f_\alpha=f_\alpha^k+f_\alpha^{ab}$ for $f_\alpha^k\in \mathbb{F}[k_1,\dots,k_R]$ and $f_\alpha^{ab}\in \mathbb{F}_2[a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n]$.
Compute
$\widetilde{f_\alpha^{ab}}\leftarrow\mathsf{HE.Eval}_{evk}^{f_\alpha^{ab}}(\tilde{a}_1,\dots,\tilde{a}_n,\tilde{b}_1,\dots,\tilde{b}_n)$.
\item Output: \begin{itemize}
\item The $m=|S|$ qubit registers $\{\mathcal{X}_i:i\in S\}$ corresponding to the encrypted output of the circuit;
\item The $R$ qubit registers $\mathcal{R}_1,\dots,\mathcal{R}_R$ corresponding to auxiliary states created by $\rgate$-gadgets;
\item The polynomials $\{f_\alpha^k\}_{\alpha\in \mathcal{L}}\subset\mathbb{F}_2[k_1,\dots,k_R]$ and the homomorphically evaluated polynomials $\{\widetilde{f_\alpha^{ab}}\}_{\alpha\in \mathcal{L}}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{Decryption: $\EPR.\Dec_{sk}$} In order to decrypt,
measure the $\mathcal{R}_t$ in order from 1 to~$R$, computing $f_t(k_1,\dots,k_{t-1})$ as required.
Formally:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $t=1,\dots, R$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Decrypt $f^{ab}_t \leftarrow \mathsf{HE.Dec}_{sk}(\widetilde{f^{ab}_t})$.
\item Compute $a \leftarrow f_t^k(k_1,\dots,k_{t-1})\oplus f^{ab}_t$ and apply $\hgate\pgate^a$ to $\mathcal{R}_t$.
\item Measure $\mathcal{R}_t$ to get $k_t$.
\end{enumerate}
\item Let $S$ be the set of indices of the output qubit registers. For $i\in S$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Decrypt $f^{ab}_{a,i} \leftarrow \mathsf{HE.Dec}_{sk}(\widetilde{f^{ab}_{a,i}})$ and $f^{ab}_{b,i} \leftarrow \mathsf{HE.Dec}_{sk}(\widetilde{f^{ab}_{b,i}})$.
\item Compute $a_i \leftarrow f^k_{a,i}(k_1,\dots,k_t)\oplus f^{ab}_{a,i}$ and $b_i \leftarrow f^k_{b,i}(k_1,\dots,k_t)\oplus f^{ab}_{b,i}$.
\end{enumerate}
\item To each register $\mathcal{X}_i$, apply the map $\QDec_{a_i, b_i}$.
Output registers $\mathcal{X}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{X}_{m}$.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Analysis}
We now analyse the various properties of $\EPR$.
Since the scheme $\EPR$ uses the same $\KeyGen$ and $\Enc$ procedures as~$\CL$, the following theorem follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:security:Clifford}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:security:QHE}
If $\HE$ is q-IND-CPA secure, then $\EPR$ is q-IND-CPA secure.
\end{theorem}
The next theorem shows the homomorphic property for all circuits (recall that this property is independent of compactness).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:correctness:QHE}
Let $\classS$ be the class of all quantum circuits. Then $\EPR$ is $\classS$-homomorphic.
\end{theorem}
The proof follows from the circuits in Appendix~\ref{appendix:Key-update-rules-stabilizer}, Figure~\ref{fig:T-gadget-EPR}, as well as the homomorphic property of~$\mathsf{HE}$.
Since the complexity of the decryption procedure depends on $R$, the number of $\tgate$-gates in the circuit, it is clear that the scheme $\EPR$ is not compact. However, by analysing the circuit's dependence on $R$, we can see that for a very large class of quantum circuits, $\EPR$ is non-trivially quasi-compact. The following theorem is immediate from the decryption procedure.
\begin{theorem}\label{cor:EPR-dec-complexity}
Let $p$ be a polynomial such that $\HE.\Dec$ has complexity $O(p(\kappa))$. Then the decryption procedure $\EPR.\Dec$ has complexity $O(R^2+Rp(\kappa)+mp(\kappa)+mR)$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent Thus, the dependence of the complexity of $\EPR.\Dec$ on the evaluated circuit $\mathsf{C}$ is $R^2$:
\begin{corollary}
Let $R(\mathsf{C})$ denote the number of $\tgate$-gates in a circuit $\mathsf{C}$. Then $\EPR$ is $R^2$-quasi-compact.
\end{corollary}
This beats the compactness of the trivial scheme for all circuits $\mathsf{C}$ such that the number of $\tgate$-gates is less than the squareroot of the number of gates; that is $R\ll \sqrt{G}$.
\section{Scheme $\AUX$: $\tgate$-gate Computation Using Auxiliary States}
\label{sec:scheme-AUX}
In the previous scheme for quantum homomorphic encryption, we solved the problem of performing the $\pgate$ correction (Equation~\ref{eqn:T-gate-P-error}) by \emph{delaying} the correction via entanglement.
In this section, we present a homomorphic encryption scheme, $\AUX$, that takes a more pro-active approach to dealing with the $\pgate$ correction. At a high level, $\AUX$ can be understood as the following: as part of the evaluation key, $\textsf{AUX.Keygen}$ outputs a number of auxiliary states. These states ``encode'' parts of the original encryption key, and are used to correct for the errors induced by the straightforward application of the $\tgate$-gate on the cipherstates. In more details, the auxiliary states encode hidden versions of $\pgate$ corrections, such as $\ket{+_{a,k}}:=\zgate^{k}\pgate^{a} \ket{+}$ (where $k$ is a random bit and~$a$ is an encryption key) that are useful for the evaluation of the $\tgate$-gate (see Figure~\ref{fig:T-gate-AUX}). In general (after having applied prior gates), the exact auxiliary state will not be available; instead, the $\Eval$ procedure combines a number of auxiliary states in order to create a single copy of a state that is useful for performing the correction. This combination operation, however, is expensive as it introduces new unknowns (in terms of new variables as well as ``cross-terms''), that need to be corrected in any future gate application. Thus the size of the evaluation key grows rapidly. Since the rate is a polynomial whose degree is exponential in the $\tgate$-depth, we can tolerate only a \emph{constant} $\tgate$-gate depth for this scheme to be efficient.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,1)--(3,1);
\node at (.25,.75) {\small $\mathcal{X}_i$};
\draw (3,1.04) -- (4.25,1.04);
\draw (3,.96) -- (4.25,.96);
\node at (-.8,1) {$\xgate^{f_{a,i}}\zgate^{f_{b,i}}$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (1,1.25) rectangle (1.5,.75);
\node at (1.25,1) {$\rgate$};
\node at (2.25,1) {\target};
\draw (2.25,1) -- (2.25,0);
\node at (2.25,0) {\cntrl};
\node at (3.25,1) {\meas};
\node at (4.5,1) {$c$};
\draw (0,0)--(4.25,0);
\node at (-.7,0) {$\ket{+_{f_{a,i},k}}$};
\node at (4,-.25) {\small $\mathcal{X}_i$};
\node at (6.4,0) {$\xgate^{f_{a,i}\oplus c}\zgate^{f_{a,i}\oplus f_{b,i}\oplus k\oplus cf_{a,i}}\rgate$};
\node at (11,1) {$f_{a,i}\leftarrow f_{a,i}\oplus c$};
\node at (11,0) {$f_{b,i}\leftarrow f_{a,i}\oplus f_{b,i}\oplus k\oplus cf_{a,i}$};
\node at (11,-1) {$V\leftarrow V\cup \mathrm{var}(k)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A $\rgate$-gadget for the scheme $\AUX$ consists of the above circuit and key-update rules. We use $\mathrm{var}(k)$ to denote the set of variables in the polynomial $k$, which depends on the construction of the auxiliary state $\ket{+_{f_{a,i},k}}$, described below.}\label{fig:T-gate-AUX}
\end{figure}
We further specify that $\AUX$ is a symmetric-key encryption scheme. This is because $\AUX.\KeyGen$ generates auxiliary qubits that depend on the quantum one-time pad encryption keys. Also, $\textsf{KeyGen}$ takes an extra parameter $1^n$, where $n$ is an upper bound on the total number of qubits that can be encrypted ($\AUX$ acts much like a classical one-time pad scheme that picks a fixed-length encryption key ahead of time). After this bound on the number of encryptions has been attained, no further qubits can be encrypted. We will suppose without loss of generality that a circuit being homomorphically evaluated is on $n$ wires.
Furthermore, the number and type of auxiliary qubits will depend on the $\tgate$-depth of the circuit to be evaluated, $L$. The scheme will not be able to homomorphically evaluate circuits with $\tgate$-depth greater than $L$. We will see that the number of required auxiliary states grows super-exponentially in $L$, so we will require that $L$ be a constant. Fix a constant $L$. We will now define a scheme $\AUX=\AUX_L$ that is homomorphic for all circuits with $\tgate$-depth at most $L$.
\paragraph{Auxiliary Qubit Construction} In general, providing the necessary auxiliary qubits for each $\tgate$-gate would require advance knowledge of the key $f_{a,i}$ at the time a $\tgate$-gate is applied to the \th{i} wire. Since this depends on both the circuit being applied and on the prior measurement results, we appear to be at an impasse. The key observation that allows us to continue with this approach is that, given two auxiliary qubits $\ket{+_{f_1,k_1}}$ and $\ket{+_{f_2,k_2}}$, we can combine them to get $\ket{+_{f_1\oplus f_2,k}}$, for some $k$, using the following circuit:
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (-.25,1) {$\ket{+_{f_1,k_1}}$};
\node at (-.25,0) {$\ket{+_{f_2,k_2}}$};
\draw (.5,1)--(2.75,1);
\draw (.5,0)--(2,0);
\draw (2,0.04)--(2.75,0.04);
\draw (2,-0.04)--(2.75,-0.04);
\node at (4.75,1) {$\ket{+_{f_1\oplus f_2,k_1\oplus k_2\oplus (f_1\oplus c)f_2}}$};
\node at (1,1) {\cntrl};
\node at (1,0) {\target};
\draw (1,1)--(1,0);
\node at (2,0) {\meas};
\node at (3,0) {$c$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{figure}
In general, by iterating this procedure, given auxiliary states $\ket{+_{f_1,k_1}},\dots,\ket{+_{f_r,k_r}}$, we can construct the auxiliary state $\ket{+_{f_1\oplus\dots\oplus f_r,k}}$, where $k=\bigoplus_{i=1}^m k_i\oplus \bigoplus_{i=2}^r c_if_i\oplus \bigoplus_{i=1}^r\bigoplus_{j=1}^{i-1}f_if_j$ for known values $c_i$. Thus, if we give many initial auxiliary states of the form $\{\ket{+_{a_i,k_{a,i}}},\ket{+_{b_i,k_{b,i}}}\}_i$ (with different keys for different copies), we can construct $\ket{+_{f,k}}$ for $f$ a linear function of $\{a_i,b_i\}_{i\in [n]}$. However, using an auxiliary state $\ket{+_{f_{a,i},k}}$ to facilitate a $\tgate$-gate on the \th{i} wire introduces the unknown $k$ into $f_{b,i}$. In particular, suppose $f_{a,i}=\bigoplus_{j=1}^r t_j$ for some monomial terms $t_j\in\mathbb{F}_2[V]$. Then we will need to construct it from auxiliary states $\ket{+_{t_1,k_1}},\dots,\ket{+_{t_r,k_r}}$, to get $\ket{+_{f_{a,i},k}}$ for $k=\bigoplus_{i=1}^m k_i\oplus \bigoplus_{i=2}^r c_it_i\oplus \bigoplus_{i=1}^r\bigoplus_{j=1}^{i-1}t_it_j$. Thus, after the $\tgate$-gadget, the new keys $f_{a,i}',f_{b,i}'$ will be in unknowns $V\cup\{k_1,\dots,k_r\}$. Furthermore, because of the cross terms $t_it_j$, the degree of the key-polynomials increases, so we can no longer assume they are linear. Since we can't produce $\ket{+_{f_1f_2,k}}$ from $\ket{+_{f_1,k_1}}$ and $\ket{+_{f_2,k_2}}$, we will need to provide additional auxiliary states for every possible term. We discuss this more formally below and in Section \ref{sec:aux-analysis}.
\paragraph{Spaces} As in $\CL$ and $\EPR$, we will work with qubits: $\mathcal{M}\equiv \mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$. In contrast to our previous schemes, the classical encryptions of quantum one-time pad keys will be part of the evaluation key (for convenience only), so we will have $\mathcal{C}\equiv \mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$. However, after evaluation, the classical encryption of the new one-time pad keys will be needed for decryption, so as in $\CL$, we will have $\mathcal{C}'\equiv \mathbb{C}^{C'\times C'}\otimes\mathcal{X}$, where $C'$ is the output space of $\HE.\Eval$, and $\mathcal{X}\equiv\mathbb{C}^{\{0,1\}}$.
\paragraph{Key Generation: $\mathsf{\AUX.Keygen}(1^\kappa, 1^n)$}
The evaluation key contains auxiliary states that allow each of $L$ layers of $\tgate$-gates to be implemented. Thus, for each layer, since every wire must have the possibility to implement a $\tgate$-gate, for each wire, we will need to be able to construct an auxiliary state $\ket{+_{f_{a,i},k}}$ for some $k$. Since we can add auxiliary states, we can construct this auxiliary state if we have an auxiliary state for each term in $f_{a,i}$. Since $f_{a,i}$ depends on the circuit, which we do not know in advance, we need to provide an auxiliary state for every term that could possibly be in $f_{a,i}$ at the \th{\ell} layer of $\tgate$-gates, for $\ell=1,\dots,L$.
We will now define sets of monomials $T_1,\dots,T_L$ such that the keys in the \th{\ell} layer will consist of sums of terms from $T_\ell$ (as proven in Lemma \ref{lem:terms}). Let $V_1:=\{a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n\}$, and define $T_1\subset \mathbb{F}_2[V_1]$ by
$$T_1:=\{a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n\}.$$
The monomials in $T_1$ represent the possible terms in the key-polynomials before the first layer of $\tgate$-gates. Each of the up to $n$ $\tgate$-gates in the first layer will require a copy of each of $\{\ket{+_{t,k^{(1)}_t}}\}_{t\in T_1}$, with independent random keys for each, for a total of $n|T_1|$ auxiliary states with independent keys. More generally, for the \th{\ell} layer of $\tgate$-gates, we will let $T_{\ell}$ be the set of possible terms in the key-polynomials before applying the \th{\ell} layer of $\tgate$-gates. We can see from the $\tgate$-gadget, as well as the construction for adding auxiliary states that the keys from the previous layer's auxiliary states, $\left\{k^{(\ell-1)}_{1,i},\dots,k^{(\ell-1)}_{|T_{\ell-1}|,i}\right\}_{i=1}^n$, may now be variables in the key-polynomials, and that products of terms from the previous layer may now be terms in the key-polynomials of the current layer. (This is caused by auxiliary state addition. See Lemma \ref{lem:terms} for more details). Thus,
for $\ell> 1$, we can define $T_{\ell}\subset \mathbb{F}_2[V_{\ell}]$, where
$$V_{\ell}:=V_{\ell-1}\cup \left\{k^{(\ell-1)}_{1,i},\dots,k^{(\ell-1)}_{|T_{\ell-1}|,i}\right\}_{i=1}^n,$$
by
$$T_{\ell}:=T_{\ell-1}\cup \{tt': t,t'\in T_{\ell-1}, t\neq t'\}\cup \left\{k^{(\ell-1)}_{1,i},\dots,k^{(\ell-1)}_{|T_{\ell-1}|,i}\right\}_{i=1}^n.$$
We will then provide each of the $n$ wires with an auxiliary state for each term in $T_{\ell}$, for $\ell=1,\dots,L$. We now make this more precise.
To each $T_\ell$, we will associate a family of strings $\{s^{(\ell)}(x)\}_{x\in\{0,1\}^{V_\ell}}$ in $\{0,1\}^{T_{\ell}}$, defined so that for every $f\in T_{\ell}$, the $f$-entry of $s^{(\ell)}(x)$ is $s^{(\ell)}_f(x)=f(x).$ That is, $s^{(\ell)}(x)$ represents evaluating every monomial in $T_{\ell}$ at $x$. For instance, we have, for any strings $a,b\in \{0,1\}^n$, $s^{(1)}(a,b)=(a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n)$.
For any strings $s,k\in \{0,1\}^n$, define
$$\sigma(s,k):=\bigotimes_{i=1}^n\ket{+_{s_i,k_i}}\bra{+_{s_i,k_i}}.$$
For any string $s$, let $s^{*n}$ denote the concatenation of $n$ copies of $s$. For any $a,b\in\{0,1\}^n$ and $k=(k^{(1)},\dots,k^{(L)})\in \{0,1\}^{n|T_1|}\times\dots\times\{0,1\}^{n|T_L|}$, define
$$\sigma_{aux}^{a,b,k}:=\sigma(s^{(1)}(a,b)^{*n},k^{(1)})\otimes \dots \otimes \sigma(s^{(L)}(a,b,k^{(1)},\dots,k^{(L-1)})^{*n},k^{(L)}).$$
We can now define the procedure $\AUX.\KeyGen(1^\kappa,1^n)$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Execute $(pk,sk,evk)\leftarrow \HE.\KeyGen(1^{\kappa+n})$.
\item Choose uniform random strings $a,b\in\{0,1\}^n$ and $k=(k^{(1)},\dots,k^{(L)})\in \{0,1\}^{n|T_1|}\times\dots\times\{0,1\}^{n|T_L|}$.
\item Output secret key $(sk,a,b,k)$.
\item Output evaluation key: $pk$, $evk$, $\tilde{a}_1=\HE.\Enc_{pk}(a_1),\dots,\tilde{a}_n=\HE.\Enc_{pk}(a_n)$,\\ $\tilde{b}_1=\HE.\Enc_{pk}(b_1),\dots,\tilde{b}_n\HE,\Enc_{pk}(b_n)$, $\(\tilde{k}^{(\ell)}_i=\HE.\Enc_{pk}\(k^{(\ell)}_{j,i}\)\)_{\substack{\ell=1,\dots,L\\ i=1,\dots,n \\ j=1,\dots,|T_\ell|}}$, and $\sigma_{aux}^{a,b,k}$.
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{Encryption: $\AUX.\Enc_{(sk,a,b,k),d}: D(\mathcal{M}) \rightarrow D(\mathcal{C})$} The encryption procedure takes an extra parameter~$d$ that keeps track of the number of qubits already encrypted (we assume that $d$ is initially~$1$ and not modified outside of $\AUX.\Enc$). If $d \leq n $, for a single-qubit register $\mathcal{M}$, it applies the quantum one-time pad channel $\QEnc_{a_d, b_d}: D(\mathcal{M}) \rightarrow D(\mathcal{C})$.
The output is the cipherstate in register $\mathcal{C}$; the parameter $d$ is updated as $d \leftarrow d+1$.
If $d >n $, then output $\bot$ to indicate an error.
\paragraph{Decryption: $\AUX.\Dec_{(sk,a,b,k),d}: D(\regC') \rightarrow D(\mathcal{M})$} Here, $\regC'$ and $\mathcal{M}$ are single-qubit registers and the decryption operation applies $\QDec_{a_d,b_d}$.
\paragraph{Evaluation: $\AUX.\Eval^{\mathsf{C}}: D(\regR_{evk} \otimes \regC^{\otimes n}) \rightarrow D(\regC'^{\otimes m})$}
For Clifford group gates, we apply the gadgets as in $\CL.\Eval$. For $\tgate$-gates, we apply the gadget in Figure \ref{fig:T-gate-AUX}. The full evaluation procedure is as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Set $V\leftarrow \{a_i,b_i\}_{i\in [n]}$, and
for all $i\in [n]$, set $f_{a,i},f_{b,i}\in\mathbb{F}_2[V]$ as $f_{a,i}\leftarrow a_i$, $f_{b,i}\leftarrow b_i$.
\item Let $\mathsf{g}_1,\dots,\mathsf{g}_G$ be a topological ordering of the gates in $\mathsf{C}$. For $i=1,\dots,G$, evaluate $\mathsf{g}_i$ using the appropriate gadget.
\item Let $S$ be the set of output wire labels. For each $i\in S$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Homomorphically evaluate $f_{a,i}$ and $f_{b,i}$ to obtain the updated (encrypted) keys: $\tilde{a}_i\leftarrow \HE.\Eval_{evk}^{f_{a,i}}(\tilde{v}:v\in V)$ and $\tilde{b}_i\leftarrow \HE.\Eval_{evk}^{f_{b,i}}(\tilde{v}:v\in V)$.
\end{enumerate}
\item Output in ${\cal C'}_i$ the classical-quantum system given by:
\begin{itemize}
\item The encrypted keys $\{\tilde{a}_i,\tilde{b}_i\}_{i\in S}$.
\item The output register
corresponding to the encrypted output qubit $i$ of the circuit.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
The correctness of this scheme depends on two facts, which we prove in Section~\ref{sec:aux-analysis}. The first is that for every unknown $v\in V$, we have an encrypted copy of $\tilde{v}$, encrypted using $\HE.\Enc$. We need these to compute the final keys $\{\tilde{a}_i,\tilde{b}_i\}$ using $f_{a,i},f_{b,i}\in\mathbb{F}_2[V]$. Finally, for each level $\ell$, for each wire label $i$, we need an auxiliary state $\ket{+_{t,k}}$ for every term that may appear in the key $f_{a,i}$ going into the \th{\ell} level. This allows us to construct the auxiliary qubit required to execute each $\rgate$-gadget.
\vskip10pt
We remark that if we only had a classical encryption scheme that was homomorphic over linear circuits, and not fully homomorphic, then we could get the same functionality from a slightly modified version of this scheme, in which we include with every auxiliary qubit $\ket{+_{s,k}}\bra{+_{s,k}}$, $\HE.\Enc_{pk}(s)$ --- at the moment we only include some of these, but not those auxiliary states arising from \emph{products} of terms, since we can compute products homomorphically. Since we have classical fully homomorphic encryption, we use this to slightly simplify the scheme, however the observation that the fully homomorphic property is not fully taken advantage of strengthens the idea that Clifford circuits are analogous to classical linear circuits in the context of QHE.
\subsection{Analysis}\label{sec:aux-analysis}
We now analyse the various properties of $\AUX$. Consider a layered quantum circuit $\mathsf{C}$ with $L$ layers of $\tgate$-gates.
To simplify the analysis, we assume that the ordering of gates $\mathsf{g}_1,\dots,\mathsf{g}_G$ has the property that if $\mathsf{g}_i$ is a $\tgate$-gate in level $\ell$, and $\mathsf{g}_j$ is a $\tgate$-gate in level $\ell+1$, then $i<j$; that is, we completely evaluate level $\ell$ before we begin to evaluate level $\ell+1$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:terms}
Let $f_{a,i}$ be a key-polynomial going into the \th{\ell} layer of $\rgate$-gates. Then $f_{a,i}$ is a sum of terms in $T_\ell$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove this statement by induction on $\ell$. Before any gates have been applied, the key-polynomial are $f_{a,i}=a_i$ and $f_{b,i}=b_i$ for $i=1,\dots,n$. We can easily see from the update rules that applying Clifford gates results in keys of the form $f$ or $f+f'$, where $f$ and $f'$ were previous keys. Thus, after a Clifford circuit has been applied, all key-polynomial are sums of terms from $\{a_1,\dots,a_n,b_1,\dots,b_n\}=T_1$.
Let $f_{a,1},\dots,f_{a,n},f_{b,1},\dots,f_{b,n}$ be the key-polynomials going into the \th{\ell} layer, and suppose they are sums of terms in $T_{\ell}$. Let $f'_{a,1},\dots,f'_{a,n},f'_{b,1},\dots,f'_{b,n}$ be the key-polynomials right after the \th{\ell} layer of $\tgate$-gates has been applied. If no $\tgate$ is applied on the \th{i} wire, then $f_{a,i}'=f_{a,i}$ and $f_{b,i}'=f_{b,i}$, so $f_{a,i}',f_{b,i}'$ are both sums of terms in $T_{\ell}\subset T_{\ell+1}$. Suppose on the other hand that we apply a $\tgate$-gate to the \th{i} wire at level $\ell$.
From the $\tgate$-gadget (Figure \ref{fig:T-gate-AUX}), we see that after applying a $\tgate$ to the \th{i} wire, we have new keys $f_{a,i}'=f_{a,i}\oplus c$ for a known constant $c$, so $f_{a,i}'$ is a sum of terms in $T_\ell\subset T_{\ell+1}$; and $f_{b,i}'=(1\oplus c)f_{a,i}\oplus f_{b,i}\oplus k$, where $k$ is the auxiliary state key of the auxiliary state used to implement the gadget. If $f_{a,i}=t_1\oplus \dots\oplus t_r$, for $t_1,\dots,t_r\in T_\ell$, then we construct $\ket{+_{f_{a,i},k}}$ from auxiliary states $\ket{+_{t_1,k_1}},\dots,\ket{+_{t_r,k_r}}$ for some $k_1,\dots,k_r\in\{k^{(\ell)}_{q,i}\}_{q=1}^{|T_{\ell}|}\subset T_{\ell+1}$, so we have
$k=\bigoplus_{j=1}^rk_j\oplus \bigoplus_{j=2}^rc_jt_j\oplus \bigoplus_{j=1}^r\bigoplus_{j'=1}^{j-1}t_jt_{j'}$ for known $c_2,\dots,c_r$, which is the sum of terms in $T_{\ell+1}$, since $t_1,\dots,t_r\in T_{\ell}$. Thus, $f_{b,i}'$ is the sum of terms in $T_{\ell+1}$.
Thus, after applying the \th{\ell} layer of $\tgate$-gates, all key-polynomials are sums of terms from $T_{\ell+1}$. To complete the proof, we simply observe again that Clifford circuits act additively on the keys, and so do not introduce new terms, so just before the \th{(\ell+1)} layer of $\tgate$-gates, the key-polynomials are still sums of terms in $T_{\ell+1}$.
\end{proof}
\noindent The bottleneck in this scheme is the number of auxiliary states required:
\begin{lemma}
The number of auxiliary states output by $\AUX.\KeyGen(1^\kappa,1^n)$ grows in $n$ as $O(n^{2^{L-1}+1})$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The number of qubits encoded in $\sigma_{aux}^{a,b,k}$ is
$$|k^{(1)}|+|k^{(2)}|+\dots+|k^{(L)}|=n|T_1|+n|T_2|+\dots+n|T_L|=n\sum_{\ell=1}^{L}|T_\ell|.$$
From the definition of $T_{\ell}$, we see that:
$$|T_1|=2n,\quad\mbox{and for $\ell>1$,}\quad |T_\ell|=|T_{\ell-1}|+\binom{|T_{\ell-1}|}{2}+n|T_{\ell-1}|.$$
So certainly for all $\ell>1$, $|T_{\ell}|\leq c|T_{\ell-1}|^2$ for some constant $c$, and thus $|T_{\ell}|\leq c^{\ell-1}(2n)^{2^{\ell-1}}\in O(n^{2^{\ell-1}})$. Thus $n\sum_{\ell=1}^L|T_{\ell}|\in O(n^{2^{L-1}+1})$.
\end{proof}
\noindent We thus have the following theorem:
\begin{theorem}
Let $\classS_n$ be the class of all quantum circuits on $n$ wires with $\rgate$-depth at most~$L$, and let $\classS=\{\classS_n\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$. Then $\AUX$ is $\classS$-homomorphic and compact.
\end{theorem}
We now consider the security of the scheme.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:security:AUX}
If $\HE$ is q-IND-CPA secure, then $\AUX$ is q-IND-CPA secure.
\end{theorem}
We will prove Theorem \ref{thm:security:AUX} in several parts. To begin, we will show that an adversary that interacts with $\AUX.\KeyGen$ can't do much better than an adversary that interacts instead with an altered version of $\AUX.\KeyGen$, $\KeyGen'$, in which every classical encryption has been replaced with $\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0)$ (Lemma \ref{lem:aux-security-1}). Then we will be able to complete the proof by showing that an adversary interacting with $\KeyGen'$ instead of $\AUX.\KeyGen$ can't win the q-IND-CPA experiment for $\AUX$ with probability better than $\frac{1}{2}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:aux-security-1}
Define a QHE scheme $\AUX'$ such that $\AUX'.\KeyGen(1^{\kappa},1^n)=\KeyGen'(1^\kappa,1^n)$, where $\KeyGen'$ behaves identically to $\AUX.\KeyGen$, except it replaces every classical encryption $\HE.\Enc_{pk}(x)$ with $\HE.\Enc_{pk}(0)$. Let $\AUX'.\Enc=\AUX.\Enc$, $\AUX'.\Dec=\AUX.\Dec$ and $\AUX'.\Eval=\AUX.\Eval$. Then for any quantum polynomial-time adversary $\advA=(\advA_1,\advA_2)$ with encryption oracle access, there exists a negligible function $negl$ such that:
$$\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]-\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]\leq negl(\kappa).$$
Thus, we can restrict our attention to adversaries that make no use of the classical encryptions, since they add at most a negligible advantage.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will define an adversary $\advA'=(\advA_1',\advA_2')$ for the quantum CPA-mult indistinguishability experiment for $\HE$, $\mathsf{PubK_{\advA',\HE}^{cpa\text{-}mult}}(\kappa)$.
Essentially, $\advA'$ will run $\AUX.\KeyGen$, except it will use the challenger $\Xi_{\HE}^{\textsf{cpa-mult}}$ in place of $\HE.\Enc_{pk}$, so that it is either running $\AUX.\KeyGen$ or $\KeyGen'$. It will then simulate the $\sf SymK$ experiment, and if $\advA$ wins, it will guess that it ran the original version of $\AUX.\KeyGen$, and otherwise it will guess that it ran $\KeyGen'$.
\begin{description}
\item[$\advA_1'(pk,evk)$:] $\advA_1'$ chooses uniform random bit strings $a,b\in\{0,1\}^n$ and $k\in\{0,1\}^N$, where $N=n|T_1|+\dots+n|T_L|$, and gives $m_0=\mathbf{0}=0^{2n+N}$ and $m_1=(a,b,k)$ to the challenger $\Xi_{\HE}^{\textsf{cpa-mult}}$, which outputs either $c_1=\HE.\Enc_{pk}(a,b,k)$, or $c_0=\HE.\Enc_{pk}(\mathbf{0})$.
\item[$\advA_2'(c)$:] $\advA_2'$ computes $\sigma_{aux}^{a,b,k}$ and gives $\sigma_{aux}^{a,b,k},pk,evk,c$ to $\advA_1$. $\advA_1$ may make several oracle calls, which $\advA_2'$ can simulate, because it has $a,b$ and so can run $\AUX.\Enc$. When $\advA_1$ outputs a message to the challenger, $\advA_2'$ samples a random bit $r$, and runs $\Xi_{\AUX}^{\mathsf{cpa},r}$, which it can simulate, since it has $a,b$, and so can run $\AUX.\Enc$. $\advA_2'$ then gives the challenge to $\advA_2$, and if $\advA_2$ outputs $r$, $\advA_2'$ outputs $1$, and otherwise, $\advA_2'$ outputs $0$.
\end{description}
We now calculate the probability that $\advA'$ correctly guesses which of $c_0$ and $c_1$ it received from the challenger, which we know must be less than $\frac{1}{2}+negl(\kappa+n)$ for some negligible function, since $\HE$ is q-IND-CPA, $\kappa+n$ is the security parameter given to $\HE.\KeyGen$, and $|m_0|=|m_1|=2n+N = O(\mathrm{poly}(n))=O(\mathrm{poly}(n+\kappa))$. If $\advA'$ received $c_0$, then it acted as $\KeyGen'$, whereas if it received $c_1$, it acted as $\AUX.\KeyGen$. In the former case, the probability that $\advA'$ correctly guesses 0 is the probability that $\advA$ loses the $\sf SymK$ experiment when it interacts with $\AUX'$, $\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=0]$. In the latter case, the probability that $\advA'$ correctly guesses 1 is the probability that $\advA$ wins the $\sf SymK$ experiment when it interacts with $\AUX$, $\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]$. Thus, since $\HE$ is q-IND-CPA, there exists a negligible function $negl'$ such that
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{2}\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=0]+\frac{1}{2}\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1] & \leq \frac{1}{2}+negl'(\kappa)\\
1-\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]+\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1] &\leq 1+2negl'(\kappa)\\
\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]-\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1] &\leq 2negl'(\kappa).
\end{align*}
Setting $negl=2negl'$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
The next lemma shows that the output of $\KeyGen'$ is actually $(pk,evk,\maxmix)$, which is independent of $a,b,k$. The proof of Lemma \ref{lem:aux-security-2} is mainly computational, and provides little insight, so we relegate it to Appendix \ref{app:misc}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:aux-security-2}
Let $N=n|T_1|+\dots+n|T_L|$. For any $a,b\in\{0,1\}^{n}$,
$$\sum_{k\in\{0,1\}^{N}}\sigma_{aux}^{a,b,k}=\frac{1}{2^{N}}\mathbb{I}_{2^{N}}.$$
\end{lemma}
To complete the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:security:AUX}, we simply show that no adversary interacting with $\AUX.\KeyGen'$ can win the experiment $\sf SymK^{cpa}$ with probability better than $\frac{1}{2}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:aux-security-3}
For any adversary $\advA=(\advA_1,\advA_2)$ with access to an encryption oracle,
$$\Pr[\mathsf{SymK_{\advA,\AUX'}^{cpa}}(\kappa)=1]= \frac{1}{2}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $q$ be the number of oracle calls made by $\advA_1$, and write $\advA_1=(\advA_1^{(1)},\dots,\advA_1^{(q+1)})$. Let $q'$ be the number of oracle calls made by $\advA_2$, and write $\advA_2=(\advA_2^{(1)},\dots,\advA_2^{(q'+1)})$. If $q\geq n$, then the challenger just outputs $\bot$, independent of $r$, so certainly in that case $\advA$ cannot win with probability more than $\frac{1}{2}$, so suppose $q<n$. If $q+q'+1>n$, then the last $q+q'+1-n$ oracle calls made by $\advA_2$ simply return $\bot$, which $\advA$ could simulate without actually making these oracle calls, so suppose without loss of generality that $q+q'+1\leq n$.
The output of $\AUX'.\KeyGen=\KeyGen'$ to $\advA_1^{(1)}$ is $(pk,evk,\sigma_{aux}^{a,b,k})$, and
by Lemma \ref{lem:aux-security-2}, for any $a,b$, this is equal to $(pk,evk,\frac{1}{2^{N}}\mathbb{I}_{2^{N}})$. Thus, the interaction of $\KeyGen'$ with the experiment is shown in part (a) of Figure \ref{fig:aux-security}. $\KeyGen'$ chooses random bits $a_1,b_1,\dots,a_{q+q'+1},b_{q+q'+1}$, for use in oracle calls and the challenge itself, but these are independent of the information given to $\advA$ by $\KeyGen'$. (The other random bits selected by $\KeyGen'$, $a_{q+q'+2},b_{q+q'+2},\dots,a_n,b_n$ and the string $k$, are independent of the interaction with the adversary, so we ignore them.)
It is then easy to see from Figure \ref{fig:aux-security} that every call to the encryption oracle can be replaced by a channel that discards the input and returns a completely mixed state, since for any input $\rho^{\mathcal{M}}$, the encryption oracle returns
$$\Tr_1\(\frac{1}{4}\sum_{a,b\in\{0,1\}}\ket{a,b}\bra{a,b}_1\otimes\xgate^{a}\zgate^{b}\rho^{\cal M}\zgate^{b}\xgate^{a}\)=\frac{1}{4}\sum_{a,b\in\{0,1\}}\xgate^{a}\zgate^{b}\rho^{\cal M}\zgate^{b}\xgate^{a}=\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{I}_{2}.$$
\newpage
In other words, we have:
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0){
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,.79)--(.75,.79);
\draw (0,.71)--(.75,.71);
\draw (0,0)--(2.75,0);
\filldraw[fill=white] (-.5,.5) rectangle (0,1);
\node at (-.25,.75) {$\maxmix$};
\node at (.4,.95) {$a,b$};
\node at (.5,.2) {\small $\cal M$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.75,-.25) rectangle (2,1);
\node at (1.375,0) {\small $\QEnc_{a,b}$};
\node at (2.25,.2) {\small $\cal C$};
\end{tikzpicture}};
\node at (2.5,0) {$\equiv$};
\node at (5,0) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,0) -- (1,0); \draw (2,0) -- (2.75,0);
\node at (.4,.2) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (1,0) {\meas};
\filldraw[fill=white] (1.7,-.25) rectangle (2.2,.25);
\node at (1.95,0) {$\maxmix$};
\node at (2.45,.2) {\small $\cal C$};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{figure}
\noindent Here $\maxmix$ denotes the channel that outputs a completely mixed state, or equivalently, a uniform random variable.
For the same reason, the call to the challenger $\Xi_{\AUX}^{{\sf cpa},r}$ can also be replaced with the channel that discards the input and returns $\maxmix$, since $\Xi_{\AUX}^{{\sf cpa},r}$ applies a quantum one-time pad using random keys $a_{q+1},b_{q+1}$ to the input or to $\ket{0}\bra{0}$, and in either case, the resulting state is the completely mixed state. Thus, from the perspective of $\advA$, the experiment is independent of $r$, as shown in part (b) of Figure \ref{fig:aux-security}. Thus, an adversary can not win with probability better than $\frac{1}{2}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (1,4.25)--(13,4.25);
\draw (1,3.25)--(13,3.25);
\draw (1,2.5)--(10.5,2.5);
\draw (1,1.5)--(3.5,1.5);
\draw (0,.75)--(13,.75);
\draw (1,0) -- (13,0);
\filldraw[fill=white] (-.5,-.25) rectangle (0,2.75);
\node[rotate=90] at (-.25,1.25) {$\HE.\KeyGen(1^{\kappa+n})$};
\node at (.75,.95) {$pk,evk$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.8,4) rectangle (1.3,4.5);
\node at (1.05,4.25) {$\maxmix$};
\node at (1.05,3.85) {$\vdots$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.8,3) rectangle (1.3,3.5);
\node at (1.05,3.25) {$\maxmix$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.8,2.25) rectangle (1.3,2.75);
\node at (1.05,2.5) {$\maxmix$};
\node at (1.05,2.1) {$\vdots$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.8,1.25) rectangle (1.3,1.75);
\node at (1.05,1.5) {$\maxmix$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.8,-.25) rectangle (1.3,.25);
\node at (1.05,0) {$\maxmix$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (1.8,-.25) rectangle (2.7,1);
\node at (2.25,.375) {$\advA_1^{(1)}$};
\node at (2.8,4.45) {\small $a_{q+q'+1},b_{q+q'+1}$};
\node at (2.35,3.45) {\small $a_{q+2},b_{q+2}$};
\node at (2.35,2.7) {\small $a_{q+1},b_{q+1}$};
\node at (2,1.7) {\small $a_1,b_1$};
\node at (2.95,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (2.95,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (3.25,.5) rectangle (4.75,1.75);
\node at (4,.75) {\small$\QEnc_{a_1,b_1}$};
\node at (6,2) {\small (encryption oracle)};
\draw[dashed,->] (6,1.8) -- (4.75,1.25);
\node at (4.95,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (5.3,-.25) rectangle (6.2,1);
\node at (5.75,.375) {$\advA_1^{(2)}$};
\node at (6.45,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (6.45,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\fill[fill=white] (6.9,-.25) rectangle (7.85,1.75);
\node at (7.375,.75) {$\dots$};
\node at (8.325,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\node at (8.325,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (8.55,-.25) rectangle (9.7,1);
\node at (9.125,.375) {$\advA_1^{(q+1)}$};
\node at (9.95,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (9.95,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (10.4,.5) rectangle (11.6,2.75);
\node at (11,1.625) {$\Xi_{\AUX}^{{\sf cpa},r}$};
\node at (11.85,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (12.3,1.25) rectangle (13.2,4.5);
\node[rotate=90] at (12.75,2.875) {$\AUX.\Enc$};
\draw[->] (12.4,1) -- (12.4,1.25);
\draw[->] (13.1,1.25) -- (13.1,1);
\filldraw[fill=white] (12.3,-.25) rectangle (13.2,1);
\node at (12.75,.375) {$\advA_2$};
\draw (13.2,.415)--(13.7,.415);
\draw (13.2,.335)--(13.7,.335);
\node at (13.95,.375) {$r'$};
\draw[dashed] (-.75, -.5) rectangle (1.5,5.25);
\node at (.375,5) {$\KeyGen'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at (0,-3.25) {(a)};
\node at (0,-5){
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,.75)--(13,.75);
\draw (1,0) -- (13,0);
\filldraw[fill=white] (-.5,-.25) rectangle (0,2.5);
\node[rotate=90] at (-.25,1.125) {\small$\HE.\KeyGen(1^{\kappa+n})$};
\node at (.75,.95) {$pk,evk$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (.8,-.25) rectangle (1.3,.25);
\node at (1.05,0) {$\maxmix$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (1.8,-.25) rectangle (2.7,1);
\node at (2.25,.375) {$\advA_1^{(1)}$};
\node at (2.95,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (2.95,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\fill[fill=white] (3.4,.5) rectangle (4.6,1.75);
\node at (3.6,.75) {\meas};
\filldraw[fill=white] (4.25,.5) rectangle (4.75,1);
\node at (4.5,.75) {$\maxmix$};
\node at (5,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (5.3,-.25) rectangle (6.2,1);
\node at (5.75,.375) {$\advA_1^{(2)}$};
\node at (6.45,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (6.45,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\fill[fill=white] (6.9,-.25) rectangle (7.85,1.75);
\node at (7.375,.75) {$\dots$};
\node at (8.325,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\node at (8.325,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\filldraw[fill=white] (8.55,-.25) rectangle (9.7,1);
\node at (9.125,.375) {$\advA_1^{(q+1)}$};
\node at (9.95,.95) {\small $\cal M$};
\node at (9.95,.2) {\small $\cal E$};
\fill[fill=white] (10.4,.5) rectangle (11.6,1.75);
\node at (10.6,.75) {\meas};
\filldraw[fill=white] (11.25,.5) rectangle (11.75,1);
\node at (11.5,.75) {$\maxmix$};
\node at (12,.95) {\small $\cal C$};
\node at (12.3,1.5) {\meas};
\filldraw[fill=white] (12.85,1.25)rectangle(13.35,1.75);
\node at (13.1,1.5) {$\maxmix$};
\draw[->] (12.4,1)--(12.4,1.25);
\draw[->] (13.1,1.25)--(13.1,1);
\filldraw[fill=white] (12.3,-.25) rectangle (13.2,1);
\node at (12.75,.375) {$\advA_2$};
\draw (13.2,.415)--(13.7,.415);
\draw (13.2,.335)--(13.7,.335);
\node at (13.95,.375) {$r'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at (0,-6.75) {(b)};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:aux-security-3}. Part (a) shows how $\KeyGen'$ interacts with the experiment. The channel $\maxmix$ outputs a completely mixed state, or equivalently, a uniform random variable. Since the random bits $a_i,b_i$ are independent of the other outputs of $\KeyGen'$, for each $i$, we can replace each of the oracle calls as well as the challenger with a channel that discards the input and returns a completely mixed state, as shown in part (b). Thus, the experiment is independent of $r$ from the perspective of $\advA$, and so $\advA$ can do no better than guessing $r$. }\label{fig:aux-security}
\end{figure}
Combining Lemma \ref{lem:aux-security-1} and Lemma \ref{lem:aux-security-3} proves Theorem \ref{thm:security:AUX} immediately.
\section{Conclusions and Open Problems}
In this work, we have presented three quantum homomorphic encryption schemes. The first, $\CL$, is a stepping stone to the other two, and is homomorphic and compact for the class of stabilizer circuits. The second, $\EPR$, is homomorphic for all quantum circuits, but the compactness property degrades with the number of $\tgate$-gates. In the third scheme, $\AUX$, the complexity of the evaluation key and the evaluation procedure scale doubly exponentially with the $\tgate$-depth, so that it is only homomorphic for circuits with constant $\tgate$-depth, but it is also compact.
The clear central open problem in this work is to come up with a quantum fully homomorphic encryption scheme satisfying Definition \ref{defn:QFHE}, which must be homomorphic for all quantum circuits and compact. Our schemes $\EPR$ and $\AUX$ make progress towards this goal from two directions, but still leave open a full solution to this problem.
Our work can be seen as analogous to a number of classical results leading up to fully homomorphic encryption, including classical encryption schemes that were homomorphic for some limited classes of circuits, including limits in the multiplicative depth, as well as quasi-compact homomorphic schemes. In addition, we have attempted, in our security definitions and the theorems in Appendix \ref{sec:appendix-equivalent-q-IND-CPA}, to set the groundwork for a rigorous treatment of quantum homomorphic encryption, hopefully leading, eventually to quantum fully homomorphic encryption.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank Fang Song for helpful discussions about this paper, in particular regarding security definitions.
A.\,B.\ acknowledges support from the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (\textsc{Cifar}); A.\,B.\ and S.\,J.\ acknowledge support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (\textsc{Nserc}).
Part of this work was done while the authors were visitors at the Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing.
|
\section{Introduction}
State-space models, also known as hidden Markov models, are a very
popular class of time series models that have found numerous of applications
in fields as diverse as statistics, ecology, econometrics, engineering
and environmental sciences; see \cite{cappe2005}, \cite{Douc01},
\cite{Elliott1996}, \cite{west97}. Formally a state-space model
is defined by two stochastic processes $\{X_{n}\}_{n\geq0}$ and $\{Y_{n}\}_{n\geq0}$.
The process $\{X_{n}\}_{n\geq0}$ is a $\mathcal{X}$-valued latent
Markov process of initial density $\mu_{\theta}\left(x\right)$ and
Markov transition density $f_{\theta}(x^{\prime}|x)$, that is
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{X_{0}\sim\mu_{\theta}\left(x_{0}\right),\ }\ensuremath{X_{n}|\left(X_{0:n-1}=x_{0:n-1}\right)\sim f_{\theta}(x_{n}|x_{n-1}),}\label{Equ: stateSpaceSystemLitRev1}
\end{equation}
whereas the $\mathcal{Y}$-valued observations $\{Y_{n}\}_{n\geq0}$
satisfy
\begin{equation}
Y_{n}|\left(X_{0:n}=x_{0:n},\ Y_{0:n-1}=y_{0:n-1}\right)\sim g_{\theta}(y_{n}|x_{n}),\label{Equ: stateSpaceSystemLitRev-2}
\end{equation}
where $g_{\theta}(y|x)$ denotes the conditional marginal density,
$\theta\in\Theta$ the parameter of the model and $z_{i:j}$ denotes
components $\left(z_{i},z_{i+1},...,z_{j}\right)$ of a sequence $\left\{ z_{n}\right\} $.
The spaces $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$ can be Euclidean but
what follows applies to more general state spaces as well.
The popularity of state-space models stems from the fact that they
are flexible and easily interpretable. Applications of state-space
models include stochastic volatility models where $X_{n}$ is the
volatility of an asset and $Y_{n}$ its observed log-return \cite{KimShephardChib},
biochemical network models where $X_{n}$ corresponds to the population
of various biochemical species and $Y_{n}$ are imprecise measurements
of the size of a subset of these species \cite{wilkinson2012}, neuroscience
models where $X_{n}$ is a state vector determining the neuron's stimulus-response
function and $Y_{n}$ some spike train data \cite{paninski2010}.
However, nonlinear non-Gaussian state-space models are also notoriously
difficult to fit to data and it is only recently, thanks to the advent
of powerful simulation techniques, that it has been possible to fully
realize their potential.
To illustrate the complexity of inference in state-space models, consider
first the scenario where the parameter $\theta$ is \emph{known}.
On-line and off-line inference about the state process $\{X_{n}\}$
given the observations $\{Y_{n}\}$ is only feasible analytically
for simple models such as the linear Gaussian state-space model. In
nonlinear non-Gaussian scenarios, numerous approximation schemes such
as the Extended Kalman filter or the Gaussian sum filter \cite{gaussian_sum}
have been proposed over the past fifty years to solve these so-called
optimal filtering and smoothing problems, but these methods lack rigor
and can be unreliable in practice in terms of accuracy, while deterministic
integration methods are difficult to implement. Markov chain Monte
Carlo (MCMC) methods can obviously be used but they are impractical
for on-line inference; and even for off-line inference it can be difficult
to build efficient high-dimensional proposal distributions for such
algorithms. For nonlinear non-Gaussian state space models \emph{particle
algorithms} have emerged as the most successful. Their widespread
popularity is due to the fact that they are easy to implement, suitable
for parallel implementation \cite{LeeWhiteley2014forest} and, more
importantly, have been demonstrated in numerous settings to yield
more accurate estimates than the standard alternatives; e.g. see \cite{cappe2005},
\cite{delmoral2004}, \cite{Douc01}, \cite{Liu01}.
In most practical situations, the model (\ref{Equ: stateSpaceSystemLitRev1})-(\ref{Equ: stateSpaceSystemLitRev-2})
depends on an\emph{\ unknown} parameter vector $\theta$ that needs
to be inferred from the data either in an on-line or off-line manner.
In fact inferring the parameter $\theta$ is often the primary problem
of interest; e.g. for biochemical networks, we are not interested
in the population of the species per se, but we want to infer some
chemical rate constants, which are parameters of the transition prior
$f_{\theta}(x^{\prime}|x)$. Although it is possible to define an
extended state that includes the original state $X_{n}$ and the parameter
$\theta$ and then apply standard particle methods to perform parameter
inference, it was recognized very early on that this naive approach
is problematic \cite{Kita98} due to the parameter space not being
explored adequately. This has motivated over the past fifteen years
the development of many particle methods for the parameter estimation
problem, but numerically robust methods have only been proposed recently.
The main objective of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview
of this literature. This paper thus differs from recent survey papers
on particle methods which all primarily focus on estimating the state
sequence $X_{0:n}$ or discuss a much wider range of topics, e.g.
\cite{doucet2011}, \cite{kitagawa2014}, \cite{kunsch2013}, \cite{LinLiuChen2012}.
We will present the main features of each method and comment on their
pros and cons. No attempt however is made to discuss the intricacies
of the specific implementations. For this we refer the reader to the
original references.
We have chosen to broadly classify the methods as follows: Bayesian
or Maximum Likelihood (ML) and whether they are implemented off-line
or on-line. In the Bayesian approach, the unknown parameter is assigned
a prior distribution and the posterior density of this parameter given
the observations is to be characterized. In the ML\ approach, the
parameter estimate is the maximizing argument of the likelihood of
$\theta$ given the data. Both these inference procedures can be carried
out off-line or on-line. Specifically, in an off-line framework we
infer $\theta$ using a fixed observation record $y_{0:T}$. In contrast,
on-line methods update the parameter estimate sequentially as observations
$\left\{ y_{n}\right\} _{n\geq0}$ become available.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:computationalissues},
we present the main computational challenges associated to parameter
inference in state-space models. In Section~\ref{sec:filteringandparticle},
we review particle\ methods for filtering when the model does not
include any unknown parameters whereas Section \ref{sec:smoothingandparticle}
is dedicated to smoothing. These filtering and smoothing techniques
are at the core of the off-line and on-line ML parameter procedures
described in Section \ref{sec:MLestimation}. In Section \ref{sec:Bayesianestimation},
we discuss particle methods for off-line and on-line Bayesian parameter
inference. The performance of some of these algorithms are illustrated
on simple examples in Section \ref{sec:experimentalresults}. Finally,
we summarize the main advantages and drawbacks of the methods presented
and discuss some open problems in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Computational challenges associated to parameter inference} \label{sec:computationalissues}
A key ingredient of ML and Bayesian parameter inference is the likelihood
function $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$ of $\theta$ which satisfies
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)=\int p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n},y_{0:n}\right)dx_{0:n},\label{eq:decompositionjointdistribution}
\end{equation}
where $p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n},y_{0:n}\right)$ denotes the joint
density of $\left(X_{0:n},Y_{0:n}\right)$ which is given from equations
(\ref{Equ: stateSpaceSystemLitRev1})-(\ref{Equ: stateSpaceSystemLitRev-2})
by
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n},y_{0:n}\right)=\mu_{\theta}\left(x_{0}\right)\prod\limits _{k=1}^{n}f_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{k}\right\vert x_{k-1}\right)\prod\limits _{k=0}^{n}g_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{k}\right\vert x_{k}\right).\label{eq:jointpdfxy}
\end{equation}
The likelihood function is also the normalizing constant of the posterior
density $p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n}\right)$ of the latent states
$X_{0:n}$ given data $y_{0:n}$
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n}\right)=\frac{p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n},y_{0:n}\right)}{p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)}.\label{eq:filteringdensityjoint}
\end{equation}
This posterior density is itself useful for computing the score vector
$\nabla_{\theta}\ell_{n}\left(\theta\right)$ associated to the log-likelihood
$\ell_{n}(\theta)=\mathrm{log}\thinspace p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$,
as Fisher's identity yields
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\theta}\ell_{n}\left(\theta\right)=\int\nabla_{\theta}\log p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n},y_{0:n}\right)\text{ }p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n}\right)dx_{0:n}.\label{eq:fisheridentityloglike}
\end{equation}
The main practical issue associated to parameter inference in nonlinear
non-Gaussian state-space models is that the likelihood function is
intractable. As performing ML parameter inference requires maximizing
this intractable function, it means practically that it is necessary
to obtain reasonably low variance Monte Carlo estimates of it, or
of the associated score vector if this maximisation is carried out
using gradient-based methods. Both tasks involve approximating high
dimensional integrals, \eqref{eq:decompositionjointdistribution}
and \eqref{eq:fisheridentityloglike}, whenever $n$ is large. On-line
inference requires additionally these integrals to be approximated
on the fly, ruling out the applications of standard computational
tools such as MCMC.
Bayesian parameter inference is even more challenging, as it requires
approximating the posterior density
\begin{eqnarray}
p(\theta|y_{0:n}) & = & \frac{p_{\theta}(y_{0:n})p(\theta)}{\int p_{\theta}(y_{0:n})p(\theta)d\theta},\label{eq:ParameterPosterior}
\end{eqnarray}
where $p(\theta)$ is the prior density. Here not only $p_{\theta}(y_{0:n})$
but also $p\left(y_{0:n}\right)=\int p_{\theta}(y_{0:n})p(\theta)d\theta$
are intractable and, once more, these integrals must be approximated
on-line if one wants to update the posterior density sequentially.
We will show in this review that particle methods are particularly
well-suited to these integration tasks.
\section{Filtering and particle approximations}\label{sec:filteringandparticle}
In this section, the parameter $\theta$ is assumed known and we focus
on the problem of estimating the latent process $\{X_{n}\}_{n\geq0}$
sequentially given the observations. An important byproduct of this
so-called filtering task from a parameter estimation viewpoint is
that it provides us with an on-line scheme to compute $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$.
As outlined in Section \ref{sec:computationalissues}, the particle
approximation of these likelihood terms is a key ingredient of numerous
particle-based parameter inference techniques discussed further on.
\subsection{Filtering\label{sec:filtering}}
Filtering denotes usually the task of estimating recursively in time
the sequence of marginal posteriors $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$,
known as the filtering densities. However we will adopt here a more
general definition and will refer to filtering as the task of estimating
the sequence of joint posteriors $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$
recursively in time but we will still refer to the marginals $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$
as the filtering densities.
It is easy to verify from \eqref{eq:decompositionjointdistribution}
and \eqref{eq:filteringdensityjoint} that the posterior $p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n}\right)$
and the likelihood $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$ satisfy the following
fundamental recursions: for $n\geq1$,
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n-1}\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)\frac{f_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert x_{n-1}\right)g_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{n}\right\vert x_{n}\right)}{p_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)}\label{eq:jointupdate}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n-1}\right)p_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)\label{eq:likelihoodDecomp}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)=\int g_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{n}\right\vert x_{n}\right)f_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert x_{n-1}\right)p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n-1}\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)dx_{n-1:n}.\label{eq:recursivelikeliDecomp}
\end{equation}
There are essentially two classes of models for which $p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n}\right)$
and $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$ can be computed exactly: the
class of linear Gaussian models, for which the above recursions may
be implemented using Kalman techniques, and when $\mathcal{X}$ is
a finite state-space; see for example \cite{cappe2005}. For other
models these quantities are typically intractable, i.e. the densities
in \eqref{eq:jointupdate}-\eqref{eq:recursivelikeliDecomp} cannot
be computed exactly.
\subsection{Particle filtering\label{sec:smc-filtering}}
\subsubsection{Algorithm}
Particle filtering methods are a set of simulation-based techniques
which approximate numerically the recursions \eqref{eq:jointupdate}
to \eqref{eq:recursivelikeliDecomp}. We focus here on the APF (auxiliary
particle filter \cite{Pitt99}) for two reasons: first, this is a
popular approach, in particular in the context of parameter estimation
(see e.g. Section \ref{sub:Using-MCMCsteps-within-SMC}); second,
the APF covers as special cases a large class of particle algorithms,
such as the bootstrap filter \cite{It_all_started_with} and SISR
(Sequential Importance Sampling Resampling \cite{Douc00}, \cite{Liu98}).
Let
\begin{equation}
q_{\theta}\left(x_{n},y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)=q_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)q_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)\label{eq:APFproposal}
\end{equation}
where $q_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)$ is a probability
density function which is easy to sample from, and $q_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)$
is not necessarily required to be a probability density function but
just an non-negative function of $\left(x_{n-1},y_{n}\right)\in\mathcal{X}\times\mathcal{Y}$
one can evaluate. (For $n=0$, remove the dependency on $x_{n-1}$,
i.e. $q_{\theta}(x_{0},y_{0})=q_{\theta}(x_{0}|y_{0})q_{\theta}(y_{0})$.)
The algorithm relies on the following importance weights
\begin{align}
w_{0}\left(x_{0}\right) & =\frac{g_{\theta}\left(y_{0}|x_{0}\right)\mu_{\theta}\left(x_{0}\right)}{q_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0}\right\vert y_{0}\right)},\label{eq:importanceweightinit}\\
w_{n}\left(x_{n-1:n}\right) & =\frac{g_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n}\right)f_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)}{q_{\theta}\left(x_{n},y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)}\text{ for }n\geq1.\label{eq:importanceweights}
\end{align}
In order to alleviate the notational burden we omit the dependence
of the importance weights on $\theta$; we will do so in the remainder
of the paper when no confusion is possible. The auxiliary particle
filter can be summarized as follows.
\noindent
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{At time} $n=0$ , for all $i\in\left\{ 1,...,N\right\} $:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample }$X_{0}^{i}\sim q_{\theta}(\left.x_{0}\right\vert y_{0}).$
\item \textsf{Compute }$\overline{W}_{1}^{i}\propto w_{0}\left(X_{0}^{i}\right)q_{\theta}\left(y_{1}|X_{0}^{i}\right),$
$\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{1}^{i}=1.$
\item \textsf{Resample }$\overline{X}_{0}^{i}\sim\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{1}^{i}\delta_{X_{0}^{i}}\left(dx_{0}\right)$.
\end{enumerate}
\item \emph{At time} $n\geq1$ , for all $i\in\left\{ 1,...,N\right\} $:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample }$X_{n}^{i}\sim q_{\theta}(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{n},\overline{X}_{n-1}^{i})$
\textsf{and set} $X_{0:n}^{i}\leftarrow\left(\overline{X}_{0:n-1}^{i},X_{n}^{i}\right).$
\item \textsf{Compute }$\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}\propto w_{n}\left(X_{n-1:n}^{i}\right)q_{\theta}\left(y_{n+1}|X_{n}^{i}\right),$
$\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}=1.$
\item \textsf{Resample }$\overline{X}_{0:n}^{i}\sim\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}\delta_{X_{0:n}^{i}}\left(dx_{0:n}\right)$\textsf{.}
\end{enumerate}
\end{itemize}
\protect\caption{\label{alg:APF}\textbf{Auxiliary Particle Filtering} }
\end{algorithm}
\noindent %
\begin{comment}
\noindent \hrulefill
\begin{center}
\textbf{Auxiliary Particle Filtering}
\par\end{center}
\emph{At time} $n=0$
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample }$X_{0}^{i}\sim q_{\theta}(\left.x_{0}\right\vert y_{0}).$
\item \textsf{Compute }$\overline{W}_{1}^{i}\propto w_{0}\left(X_{0}^{i}\right)q_{\theta}\left(y_{1}|X_{0}^{i}\right)$,
$\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{1}^{i}=1.$
\item \textsf{Resample }$\overline{X}_{0}^{i}\sim\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{1}^{i}\delta_{X_{0}^{i}}\left(dx_{0}\right)$.
\end{enumerate}
\emph{At time} $n\geq1$
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample }$X_{n}^{i}\sim q_{\theta}(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{n},\overline{X}_{n-1}^{i})$
\textsf{and set} $X_{0:n}^{i}\leftarrow\left(\overline{X}_{0:n-1}^{i},X_{n}^{i}\right).$
\item \textsf{Compute }$\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}\propto w_{n}\left(X_{n-1:n}^{i}\right)q_{\theta}\left(y_{n+1}|X_{n}^{i}\right),$
$\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}=1.$
\item \textsf{Resample }$\overline{X}_{0:n}^{i}\sim\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}\delta_{X_{0:n}^{i}}\left(dx_{0:n}\right)$\textsf{.}
\end{enumerate}
\noindent \hrulefill
\end{comment}
One recovers the SISR algorithm as a special case of Algorithm \ref{alg:APF}
by taking $q_{\theta}(y_{n}|x_{n-1})=1$ (or more generally, by taking
$q_{\theta}(y_{n}|x_{n-1})=h_{\theta}(y_{n})$, some arbitrary positive
function). Further, one recovers the bootstrap filter by taking $q_{\theta}(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1})=f_{\theta}(x_{n}|x_{n-1})$.
This is an important special case, as some complex models are such
that one may sample from $f_{\theta}(x_{n}|x_{n-1})$, but not compute
the corresponding density; in such a case the bootstrap filter is
the only implementable algorithm. For models such that the density
$f_{\theta}(x_{n}|x_{n-1})$ is tractable, \cite{Pitt99} recommend
selecting $q_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)$
and $q_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)$
when these quantities are tractable, and using approximations of these
quantities in scenarios when they are not. The intuition for these
recommendations is that this should make the weight function \eqref{eq:importanceweights}
nearly constant.
The computational complexity of Algorithm \ref{alg:APF} is ${\normalcolor \mathcal{O}}\left(N\right)$
per time step; in particular see e.g. \cite[p. 201]{Douc00} for a
${\normalcolor \mathcal{O}}\left(N\right)$ implementation of the
resampling step. At time $n$, the approximations of $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
and $p_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)$ presented
earlier in \eqref{eq:filteringdensityjoint} and \eqref{eq:recursivelikeliDecomp}
respectively are given by
\begin{align}
\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right) & =\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n}^{i}\delta_{X_{0:n}^{i}}\left(dx_{0:n}\right),\label{eq:SMCfullPosterior}\\
\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right) & =\left(\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}w_{n}\left(X_{n-1:n}^{i}\right)\right)\left(\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n-1}^{i}q_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|X_{n-1}^{i}\right)\right),
\end{align}
where $W_{n}^{i}\propto w_{n}\left(X_{n-1:n}^{i}\right),\:\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n}^{i}=1$
and $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0}\right)=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}w_{0}\left(X_{0}^{i}\right).$
In practice, one uses \eqref{eq:SMCfullPosterior} mostly to obtain
approximations of posterior moments
\[
\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n}^{i}\varphi(X_{0:n}^{i})\approx\mathbb{E}\left[\varphi(X_{0:n})|y_{0:n}\right]
\]
but expressing particle filtering as a method for approximating distributions
(rather than moments) turns out to be a more convenient formalization.
The likelihood \eqref{eq:likelihoodDecomp} is then estimated through
\begin{equation}
\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)=\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0}\right)\prod\limits _{k=1}^{n}\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{k}\right\vert y_{0:k-1}\right).\label{eq:SMClikelihood}
\end{equation}
The resampling procedure is introduced to replicate particles with
high weights and discard particles with low weights. It serves to
focus the computational efforts on the ``promising\textquotedblright \ regions
of the state-space. We have presented above the simplest resampling
scheme. Lower variance resampling schemes have been proposed in \cite{Kita96a},
\cite{Liu98}, as well as more advanced particle algorithms with better
overall performance, e.g. the Resample-Move algorithm \cite{Gilks01}.
For the sake of simplicity, we have also presented a version of the
algorithm that operates resampling at every iteration $n$. It may
be more efficient to trigger resampling only when a certain criterion
regarding the degeneracy of the weights is met; see \cite{Douc00},
\cite[pages 35 and 74]{LiuBook}.
\subsubsection{Convergence results\label{sec:convergenceparticle}}
Many sharp convergence results are available for particle methods
\cite{delmoral2004}. A selection of these results that gives useful
insights on the difficulties of estimating static parameters with
particle methods is presented below.
Under minor regularity assumptions, one can show that for any $n\geq0$,
$N>1$ and any bounded test function $\varphi_{n}:\mathcal{X}^{n+1}\rightarrow\lbrack-1,1]$,
there exist constants $A_{\theta,n,p}<\infty$ such that for any $p\geq1$
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}\left[\left\vert \int\varphi_{n}(x_{0:n})\left\{ \widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)-p_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} \right\vert ^{p}\right]\leq\frac{A_{\theta,n,p}}{N^{p/2}}\label{eq:weakresult1}
\end{equation}
where the expectation is with respect to the law of the particle filter.
In addition, for more general classes of functions, we can obtain
for any fixed $n$ a Central Limit Theorem (CLT) as $N\rightarrow+\infty$
\cite{chopin2004}, \cite[Proposition 9.4.2]{delmoral2004}. Such
results are reassuring but weak as they reveal nothing regarding long
time behavior. For instance, without further restrictions on the class
of functions $\varphi_{n}$ and the state-space model, $A_{\theta,n,p}$
typically grows exponentially with $n$. This is intuitively not surprising
as the dimension of the target density $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
is increasing with $n$. Moreover the successive resampling steps
lead to a depletion of the particle population; $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:m}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
will eventually be approximated by a single unique particle as $n-m$
increases. This is referred to as the \emph{degeneracy} problem in
the literature \cite[Figure 8.4, p. 282]{cappe2005}. This is a fundamental
weakness of particle methods: given a fixed number of particles $N$,
it is impossible to approximate $p_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n}\right)$
accurately when $n$ is large enough.
Fortunately, it is also possible to establish much more positive results.
Many state-space models possess the so-called \emph{exponential forgetting}
property \cite[Chapter 4]{delmoral2004}. This property states that
for any $x_{0},x_{0}^{\prime}\in\mathcal{X}$ and data $y_{0:n}$,
there exist constants $B_{\theta}<\text{\ensuremath{\infty}}$ and
$\lambda\in\lbrack0,1)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\left\Vert p_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{1:n},x_{0}\right)-p_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{1:n},x_{0}^{\prime}\right)\right\Vert _{\text{TV}}\leq B_{\theta}\lambda^{n},\label{eq:ergod}
\end{equation}
where $\left\Vert \cdot\right\Vert _{\text{TV}}$ is the total variation
distance; that is the optimal filter forgets exponentially fast its
initial condition. This property is typically satisfied when the signal
process $\left\{ X_{n}\right\} _{n\geq0}$ is a uniformly ergodic
Markov chain and the observations $\left\{ Y_{n}\right\} _{n\geq0}$
are not too informative \cite[Chapter 4]{delmoral2004} or when $\left\{ Y_{n}\right\} _{n\geq0}$
are informative enough that it effectively restricts the hidden state
to a bounded region around it \cite{outjane_rubenthal}. Weaker conditions
can be found in \cite{douc_moulin_ritov,whiteley2011}. When exponential
forgetting holds, it is possible to establish much stronger uniform-in-time
convergence results \emph{for functions $\varphi_{n}$ that depend
only on recent states}. Specifically, for an integer $L>0$ and any
bounded test function $\Psi_{L}:\mathcal{X}^{L}\rightarrow\lbrack-1,1]$,
there exist constants $C_{\theta,L,p}<\infty$ such that for any $p\geq1$,
$n\geq L-1$,
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}\left[\left\vert \int_{\mathcal{X}^{L}}\Psi(x_{n-L+1:n})\Delta_{\theta,n}\left(dx_{n-L+1:n}\right)\right\vert ^{p}\right]\leq\frac{C_{\theta,L,p}}{N^{p/2}},\label{eq:Lp}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{\theta,n}\left(dx_{n-L+1:n}\right)=\int_{x_{0:n-L}\in\mathcal{X}^{n-L+1}}\left\{ \widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)-p_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} .\label{eq:3}
\end{equation}
This result explains why particle filtering is an effective computational
tool in many applications such as tracking, where one is only interested
in $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n-L+1:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$,
as the approximation error is uniformly bounded over time.
Similar positive results holds for $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$.
This estimate is unbiased for any $N\geq1$ \cite[Theorem 7.4.2, page 239]{delmoral2004}
and, under assumption \eqref{eq:ergod}, the \emph{relative} variance
of the likelihood estimate $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$,
that is the variance of the ratio $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)/p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$,
is bounded above by $D_{\theta}n/N$ \cite{cerou2010}, \cite{whiteley2011}.
This is a great improvement over the exponential increase with $n$
that holds for standard importance sampling techniques, see for instance
\cite{doucet2011}. However, the constants $C_{\theta,L,p}$ and $D_{\theta}$
are typically exponential in $n_{x}$, the dimension of the state
vector $X_{n}$. We note that non-standard particle methods designed
to minimize the variance of the estimate of $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$
have recently been proposed \cite{whiteley2014}.
Finally we recall the theoretical properties of particles estimates
of the following so-called smoothed additive functional \cite[Section 8.3]{cappe2005},
\cite{olsson2008}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}=\int_{\mathcal{X}^{n+1}}\left\{ \sum_{k=1}^{n}s_{k}\left(x_{k-1:k}\right)\right\} p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)dx_{0:n}.\label{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals}
\end{equation}
Such quantities are critical when implementing ML\ parameter estimation
procedures; see Section \ref{sec:MLestimation}. If we substitute
$\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
to $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)dx_{0:n}$
to approximate $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$, then we obtain an estimate
$\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}$ which can be computed recursively
in time, see e.g. \cite[Section 8.3]{cappe2005}. For the remainder
of this paper we will refer to this approximation as the \emph{path
space} approximation. Even when \eqref{eq:ergod} holds, there exists
$0<F_{\theta},G_{\theta}<\infty$ such that the asymptotic bias \cite{delmoral2004}
and variance \cite{poyadjis2009} satisfy
\begin{equation}
\left|\mathbb{E}\left(\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}\right)-\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}\right|\leq F_{\theta}\frac{n}{N},\;\mathbb{\; V}\left(\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}\right)\geq G_{\theta}\frac{n^{2}}{N}\label{eq:sufficientstatsdegrade}
\end{equation}
for $s_{p}:\mathcal{X}^{2}\rightarrow\lbrack-1,1]$ where the variance
is w.r.t the law of the particle filter. The fact that the variance
grows at least quadratically in time follows from the degeneracy problem
and makes $\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}$ unsuitable for some
on-line likelihood based parameter estimation schemes discussed in
Section \ref{sec:MLestimation}.
\section{Smoothing}\label{sec:smoothingandparticle}
In this section, the parameter $\theta$ is still assumed known and
we focus on smoothing, that is the problem of estimating the latent
variables $X_{0:T}$ given a fixed batch of observations $y_{0:T}$.
Smoothing for a fixed parameter $\theta$ is at the core of the two
main particle ML parameter inference techniques described in Section
\ref{sec:MLestimation} as these procedures require computing smoothed
additive functionals of the form \eqref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals}.
Clearly one could unfold the recursion (\ref{eq:jointupdate}) from
$n=0$ to $n=T$ to obtain $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$.
However, as pointed out in the previous section, the path space approximation
(\ref{eq:SMCfullPosterior}) suffers from the degeneracy problem and
yields potentially high variance estimates of (\ref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals})
as (\ref{eq:sufficientstatsdegrade}) holds. This has motivated the
development of alternative particle approaches to approximate $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
and its marginals.
\subsection{Fixed-lag approximation\label{sub:FixedLagapproxparticle}}
For state-space models with ``good\textquotedblright{} forgetting
properties (e.g. (\ref{eq:ergod})), we have
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)\approx p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:\left(n+L\right)\wedge T}\right)\label{eq:forgetting}
\end{equation}
for $L$ large enough; that is observations collected at times $k>n+L$
do not bring any significant additional information about $X_{0:n}$.
In particular, when having to evaluate $\mathcal{S}_{T}^{\theta}$
of the form \eqref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals} we can approximate
the expectation of $s_{n}\left(x_{n-1:n}\right)$ w.r.t $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n-1:n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
by its expectation w.r.t $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n-1:n}\right\vert y_{0:\left(n+L\right)\wedge T}\right)$.
Algorithmically, a particle implementation of \eqref{eq:forgetting}
means not resampling the components $X_{0:n}^{i}$ of the particles
$X_{0:k}^{i}$ obtained by particle filtering at times $k>n+L$. This
was first suggested in \cite{kitagawa2001} and used in \cite[section 8.3]{cappe2005},
\cite{olsson2008}. This algorithm is simple to implement but the
main practical problem is the choice of $L$. If taken too small,
then $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:\left(n+L\right)\wedge T)}\right)$
is a poor approximation of $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$.
If taken too large, the degeneracy remains substantial. Moreover,
even as $N\rightarrow\infty$, this particle\ approximation will
have a non-vanishing bias since $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)\neq p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:\left(n+L\right)\wedge T)}\right)$.
\subsection{Forward-backward smoothing\label{sub:Forward-backwardsmoothing}}
\subsubsection{Principle}
The joint smoothing density
$p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$ can be
expressed as a function of the filtering densities $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T}$ using the following key decomposition
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right){\displaystyle \prod\limits _{n=0}^{T-1}}p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},x_{n+1}\right)\label{eq:jointdecomposition}
\end{equation}
where $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},x_{n+1}\right)$
is a backward (in time) Markov transition density given by
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},x_{n+1}\right)=\frac{f_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n+1}\right\vert x_{n}\right)p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)}{p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n+1}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)}.\label{eq:backwardkernel}
\end{equation}
A backward in time recursion for $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T}$
follows by integrating out $x_{0:n-1}$ and $x_{n+1:T}$ in \eqref{eq:jointdecomposition}
while applying \eqref{eq:backwardkernel}
\begin{equation}
p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\int\frac{f_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n+1}\right\vert x_{n}\right)p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n+1}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)}{p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n+1}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)}dx_{n+1}.\label{eq:marginalforwardbackward}
\end{equation}
This is referred to as forward-backward smoothing as a forward pass
yields $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T}$
which can be used in a backward pass to obtain $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T}$.
Combined to $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},x_{n+1}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T-1}$,
this allows us to obtain $\mathcal{S}_{T}^{\theta}$. An alternative
to these forward-backward procedures is the generalized two-filter
formula \cite{Briers09}.
\subsubsection{Particle implementation}
The decomposition \eqref{eq:jointdecomposition} suggests that it
is possible to sample approximately from $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
by running a particle filter from time $n=0$ to $T,$ storing the
approximate filtering distributions $\left\{ \widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T}$,
i.e. the marginals of \eqref{eq:filteringdensityjoint}, then sampling
$X_{T}\sim\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
and for $n=T-1,T-2,...,0$ sampling $X_{n}\sim\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},X_{n+1}\right)$
where this distribution is obtained by substituting $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
for $p_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$ in \eqref{eq:backwardkernel}:
\begin{equation}
\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},X_{n+1}\right)=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n}^{i}f_{\theta}(X_{n+1}|X_{n}^{i})\delta_{X_{n}^{i}}\left(dx_{n}\right)}{\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n}^{i}f_{\theta}(X_{n+1}|X_{n}^{i})}.\label{eq:backwardparticle-new}
\end{equation}
This Forward Filtering Backward Sampling (FFBSa) procedure was proposed
in \cite{godsill}. It requires $\mathcal{O}\left(N\left(T+1\right)\right)$
operations to generate a single path $X_{0:T}$ as sampling from \eqref{eq:backwardparticle-new}
costs $\mathcal{O}\left(N\right)$ operations. However, as noted in
\cite{douc09}, it is possible to sample using rejection from an alternative
approximation of $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},X_{n+1}\right)$
in $\mathcal{O}\left(1\right)$ operations if we use an
unweighted particle approximation of $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
in \eqref{eq:backwardkernel} and if the transition prior satisfies
$f_{\theta}(x^{\prime}|x)\leq C<\infty$. Hence, with this approach,
sampling a path $X_{0:T}$ costs only on average $\mathcal{O}\left(T+1\right)$
operations. A related rejection technique was proposed in \cite{hurzeler1998}.
In practice, one may generate $N$ such trajectories to compute Monte
Carlo averages that approximates smoothing expectations $\mathbb{E}\left[\varphi\left(X_{0:T}\right)|y_{0:T}\right]$.
In that scenario, the first approach costs $\mathcal{O}\left(N^{2}\left(T+1\right)\right)$,
while the second approach costs $\mathcal{O}\left(N\left(T+1\right)\right)$ on average. In some applications, the
rejection sampling procedure can be computationally costly as the acceptance probability can be very small for some particles; see
for example Section 4.3 in \cite{olsson2014} for empirical results. This has
motivated the development of hybrid procedures combining FFBSa and rejection sampling \cite{taghavi2013}.
We can also directly approximate the marginals $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T}$.
Assuming we have an approximation $\overline{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n+1}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)=\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{\left.n+1\right\vert T}^{i}\delta_{X_{n+1}^{i}}(dx_{n+1})$
where $W_{\left.T\right\vert T}^{i}=W_{T}^{i}$ then by using \eqref{eq:marginalforwardbackward}
and \eqref{eq:backwardparticle-new}, we obtain the approximation
$\overline{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)=\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{\left.n\right\vert T}^{i}\delta_{X_{n}^{i}}(dx_{n})$
with
\begin{equation}
W_{n|T}^{i}=W_{n}^{i}\times\sum_{j=1}^{N}\frac{W_{n+1|T}^{j}f_{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{j}|X_{n}^{i}\right)}{\sum_{l=1}^{N}W_{n}^{l}f_{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{j}|X_{n}^{l}\right)}.\label{eq:backwardweights-new}
\end{equation}
This Forward Filtering Backward Smoothing (FFBSm, where `m' stands
for `marginal') procedure requires $\mathcal{O}\left(N^{2}\left(T+1\right)\right)$
operations to approximate $\left\{ p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)\right\} _{n=0}^{T}$
instead of $\mathcal{O}\left(N\left(T+1\right)\right)$ for the path
space and fixed-lag methods. However this high computational complexity
of forward-backward estimates can be reduced using fast computational
methods \cite{Klass2005}. Particle approximations of generalized
two-filter smoothing procedures have also been proposed in \cite{Briers09},
\cite{fearnhead2008}.
\subsection{Forward smoothing\label{sub:Forward-only-smoothing}}
\subsubsection{Principle}
Whenever we are interested in computing the sequence
$\left\{ \mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}\right\} _{n\geq0}$ recursively in time, the forward-backward
procedure described above is cumbersome as it requires performing
a new backward pass with $n+1$ steps at time $n.$ An important but
not well-known result is that it is possible to implement exactly
the forward-backward procedure using only a forward procedure. This
result is at the core of \cite{Elliott1996} but its exposition relies
on tools which are non-standard for statisticians. We follow here
the simpler derivation proposed in \cite{delmoral2009} which simply
consists of rewriting \eqref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals} as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}=\int V_{n}^{\theta}\left(x_{n}\right)p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)dx_{n}\label{eq:additivesmoothfunctionalsasfunctionofT}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
V_{n}^{\theta}\left(x_{n}\right):=\int\left\{ \sum_{k=1}^{n}s_{k}\left(x_{k-1:k}\right)\right\} \text{ }p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:n-1}\right\vert y_{0:n-1},x_{n}\right)dx_{0:n-1}.\label{eq:definitionVn}
\end{equation}
It can be easily checked using \eqref{eq:jointdecomposition} that
$V_{n}^{\theta}\left(x_{n}\right)$ satisfies the following forward
recursion for $n\geq0$
\begin{equation}
V_{n+1}^{\theta}\left(x_{n+1}\right)=\int\left\{ V_{n}^{\theta}\left(x_{n}\right)+s_{n+1}\left(x_{n:n+1}\right)\right\} p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},x_{n+1}\right)dx_{n}\label{eq:recursionadditivefunctionalVn}
\end{equation}
with $V_{0}^{\theta}\left(x_{0}\right)=0$ and where $p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},x_{n+1}\right)$
is given by \eqref{eq:backwardkernel}. In practice, we shall approximate
the function $V_{n}^{\theta}$ on a certain grid of values $x_{n}$,
as explained in the next section.
\subsubsection{Particle implementation}
We can easily provide a particle approximation of the forward smoothing
recursion. Assume you have access to approximations $\left\{ \widehat{V}_{n}^{\theta}\left(X_{n}^{i}\right)\right\} $
of $\left\{ V_{n}^{\theta}\left(X_{n}^{i}\right)\right\} $ at time
$n$, where $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)=\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n}^{i}\delta_{X_{n}^{i}}\left(dx_{n}\right).$
Then when updating our particle filter to obtain $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n+1}\right\vert y_{0:n+1}\right)=\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n+1}^{i}\delta_{X_{n+1}^{i}}\left(dx_{n+1}\right),$
we can directly compute the particle approximations $\left\{ \widehat{V}_{n+1}^{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{i}\right)\right\} $
by plugging \eqref{eq:backwardparticle-new} and $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
in (\ref{eq:additivesmoothfunctionalsasfunctionofT})-(\ref{eq:recursionadditivefunctionalVn})
to obtain
\begin{align}
\widehat{V}_{n+1}^{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{i}\right) & =\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{N}W_{n}^{j}f_{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{i}|X_{n}^{j}\right)\left\{ \widehat{V}_{n}^{\theta}\left(X_{n}^{j}\right)+s_{n+1}\left(X_{n}^{j},X_{n+1}^{i}\right)\right\} }{\sum_{j=1}^{N}W_{n}^{j}f_{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{i}|X_{n}^{j}\right)},\label{eq:Tapproximation-new}\\
\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta} & =\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{n}^{i}\text{ }\widehat{V}_{n}^{\theta}\left(X_{n}^{i}\right).\label{eq:SMCapproxadditivefunctionals-1}
\end{align}
This approach requires $\mathcal{O}\left(N^{2}\left(n+1\right)\right)$
operations to compute $\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}$ at iteration
$n$. A variation over this idea recently proposed in \cite{olsson2014} and \cite{westerbornOlsson2014}
consists of approximating $V_{n+1}^{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{i}\right)$
by sampling $X_{n}^{i,j}\sim\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},X_{n+1}^{i}\right)$
for $j=1,...,K$ to obtain
\begin{equation}
\widehat{V}_{n+1}^{\theta}\left(X_{n+1}^{i}\right)=\frac{1}{K}\sum_{j=1}^{K}\left\{ \widehat{V}_{n}^{\theta}\left(X_{n}^{i,j}\right)+s_{n+1}\left(X_{n}^{i,j},X_{n+1}^{i}\right)\right\} .\label{eq:OlssonMCapproximation}
\end{equation}
When it is possible to sample from $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{n}\right\vert y_{0:n},X_{n+1}^{i}\right)$
in $\mathcal{O}\left(1\right)$ operations using rejection sampling, \eqref{eq:OlssonMCapproximation}
provides a Monte Carlo approximation to \eqref{eq:Tapproximation-new}
of overall complexity $\mathcal{O}\left(NK\right)$.
\subsection{Convergence results for particle smoothing}
Empirically, for a fixed number of particles, these smoothing procedures
perform significantly much better than the naive path space approach
to smoothing (that is, simply propagating forward the complete state
trajectory within a particle filtering algorithm). Many theoretical
results validating these empirical findings have been established
under assumption (\ref{eq:ergod}) and additional regularity assumptions. The particle\ estimate
of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$ based on the fixed-lag approximation
(\ref{eq:forgetting}) has an asymptotic variance in $n/N$ with a
non-vanishing (as $N\rightarrow\infty$) bias proportional to $n$
and a constant decreasing exponentially fast with $L$ \cite{olsson2008}.
In \cite{delmoral2009}, \cite{delmoralforward}, \cite{douc09},
it is shown that when \eqref{eq:ergod} holds, there exists $0<F_{\theta},H_{\theta}<\infty$
such that the asymptotic bias and variance of the particle\ estimate
of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$ computed using the forward-backward
procedures satisfy
\begin{equation}
\left|\mathbb{E}\left(\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}\right)-\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}\right|\leq F_{\theta}\frac{n}{N},\;\mathbb{\; V}\left(\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}\right)\leq H_{\theta}\frac{n}{N}.\label{eq:sufficientstatsFB}
\end{equation}
The bias for the path space and forward-backward estimators of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$
are actually equal \cite{delmoralforward}. Recently, it has also been established in \cite{olsson2014} that, under similar regularity assumptions, the
estimate \eqref{eq:OlssonMCapproximation} also admits an asymptotic variance in $n/N$ whenever $K\geq2$.
\section{Maximum likelihood parameter estimation}\label{sec:MLestimation}
We describe in this Section how the particle filtering and smoothing
techniques introduced in Sections \ref{sec:filteringandparticle}
and \ref{sec:smoothingandparticle} can be used to implement maximum
likelihood parameter estimation techniques.
\subsection{Off-line methods}
\label{sec:offlineML} We recall that $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)$
denote the log-likelihood function associated to data $y_{0:T}$ introduced
in Section \ref{sec:computationalissues}. So as to maximize $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right),$
one can rely on standard nonlinear optimization methods, e.g. using
quasi-Newton or gradient-ascent techniques. We will limit ourselves
to these approaches even if they are sensitive to initialization and
might get trapped in a local maximum.
\subsubsection{Likelihood function evaluation}
We have seen in Section \ref{sec:filteringandparticle} that $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)$
can be approximated using particle methods, for any fixed $\theta\in\Theta$.
One may wish then to treat ML estimation as an optimization problem
using Monte Carlo evaluations of $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)$. When
optimizing a function calculated with a Monte Carlo error, a popular
strategy is to make the evaluated function continuous by using common
random numbers over different evaluations to ease the optimization.
Unfortunately, this strategy is not helpful in the particle context.
Indeed, in the resampling stage, particles $\{\overline{X}_{n}^{i}\}_{i=1}^{N}$
are resampled according to the distribution $\sum_{i=1}^{N}\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}\delta_{X_{n}^{i}}\left(dx_{n}\right)$
which admits a piecewise constant and hence discontinuous cumulative
distribution function (cdf). A small change in $\theta$ will cause
a small change in the importance weights $\{\overline{W}_{n+1}^{i}\}_{i=1}^{N}$
and this will potentially generate a different set of resampled particles.
As a result, the log-likelihood function estimate will not be continuous
in $\theta$ even if $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)$ is continuous.
To bypass this problem, an importance sampling method was introduced
in \cite{Hurzeler2001} but it has computational complexity $\mathcal{O}\left(N^{2}\left(T+1\right)\right)$
and only provides low variance estimates in the neighborhood of a
suitably preselected parameter value. In the restricted scenario where
$\mathcal{X}\subseteq\mathbb{R}$, an elegant solution to the discontinuity
problem was proposed in \cite{Pitt02}. The method uses common random
numbers and introduces a ``continuous\textquotedblright{} version
of the resampling step by finding a permutation $\sigma$ such that
$X_{n}^{\sigma\left(1\right)}\leq X_{n}^{\sigma\left(2\right)}\leq\cdots\leq X_{n}^{\sigma\left(N\right)}$
and defining a piecewise linear approximation of the resulting cdf
from which particles are resampled, i.e.
\[
F_{n}\left(x\right)=\left(\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}\overline{W}_{n+1}^{\sigma\left(i\right)}\right)+\overline{W}_{n+1}^{\sigma\left(k\right)}\frac{x-X_{n}^{\sigma\left(k-1\right)}}{X_{n}^{\sigma\left(k\right)}-X_{n}^{\sigma\left(k-1\right)}},\quad X_{n}^{\sigma\left(k-1\right)}\leq x\leq X_{n}^{\sigma\left(k\right)}.
\]
This method requires $\mathcal{O}\left(N\left(T+1\right)\log N\right)$
operations due to the sorting of the particles but the resulting continuous
estimate of $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)$ can be maximized using
standard optimization techniques. Extensions to the multivariate case
where $\mathcal{X}\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{n_{x}}$ (with $n_{x}>1$)
have been proposed in \cite{Lee08} and \cite{DeJong2013}. However,
the scheme \cite{Lee08} does not guarantee continuity of the likelihood
function estimate and only provides log-likelihood estimates which
are positively correlated for neighboring values in the parameter
space whereas the scheme in \cite{DeJong2013} has $\mathcal{O}\left(N^{2}\right)$
computational complexity and relies on a non-standard particle filtering
scheme.
When $\theta$ is high-dimensional, the optimization over the parameter
space may be made more efficient if provided with estimates of the
gradient. This is exploited by the algorithms described in the forthcoming
sections.
\subsubsection{Gradient ascent}
The log-likelihood $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)$ may be maximized
with the following steepest ascent algorithm: at iteration $k+1$
\begin{equation}
\theta_{k+1}=\theta_{k}+\gamma_{k+1}\left.\nabla_{\theta}\ell_{T}(\theta)\right\vert _{\theta=\theta_{k}},\label{eq:batchgradient}
\end{equation}
where $\left.\nabla_{\theta}\ell_{T}(\theta)\right\vert _{\theta=\theta_{k}}$
is the gradient of $\ell_{T}(\theta)$ w.r.t $\theta$ evaluated at
$\theta=\theta_{k}$ and $\{\gamma_{k}\}$ is a sequence of positive
real numbers, called the step-size sequence. Typically, $\gamma_{k}$
is determined adaptively at iteration $k$ using a line search or
the popular Barzilai-Borwein alternative. Both schemes guarantee convergence
to a local maximum under weak regularity assumptions; see \cite{yuan2008}
for a survey.
The \emph{score} vector $\nabla_{\theta}\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)$
can be computed by using Fisher's identity given in \eqref{eq:fisheridentityloglike}.
Given \eqref{eq:jointpdfxy}, it is easy to check that the score is
of the form \eqref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals}. An alternative
to Fisher's identity to compute the score is presented in \cite{coquelin2008}
but this also requires computing an expectation of the form \eqref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals}.
These score estimation methods are not applicable in complex scenarios
where it is possible to sample from $f_{\theta}(x^{\prime}|x)$ but
the analytical expression of this transition kernel is unavailable
\cite{ionides:breto:king:2006}. For those models, a naive approach
is to use a finite difference estimate of the gradient; however this
might generate too high a variance estimate. An interesting alternative
presented in \cite{Ionides09}, under the name of iterated filtering,
consists of deriving an approximation of $\left.\nabla_{\theta}\ell_{T}(\theta)\right\vert _{\theta=\theta_{k}}$
based on the posterior moments $\{\mathbb{E}(\vartheta_{n}|y_{0:n}),\mathbb{V}(\vartheta_{n}|y_{0:n})\}_{n=0}^{T}$
of an artificial state-space model with latent Markov process $\{Z_{n}=(X_{n},\vartheta_{n})\}_{n=0}^{T}$,
\begin{equation}
\vartheta_{n+1}=\vartheta_{n}+\varepsilon_{n+1},\quad X_{n+1}\sim f_{\vartheta_{n+1}}(\cdot|x_{n}),\quad
\end{equation}
and observed process $Y_{n+1}\sim g_{\vartheta_{n+1}}(\cdot|x_{n+1})$.
Here $\left\{ \varepsilon_{n}\right\} _{n\geq1}$ is a zero-mean white
noise sequence with variance $\sigma^{2}\Sigma$, $\mathbb{E}(\vartheta_{n+1}|\vartheta_{n})=\vartheta_{n}$,
$\mathbb{E}(\vartheta_{0})=\theta_{k},$ $\mathbb{V}(\vartheta_{0})=\tau^{2}\Sigma$.
It is shown in \cite{Ionides09} that this approximation improves
as $\sigma^{2},\tau^{2}\rightarrow0$ and $\sigma^{2}/\tau^{2}\rightarrow0$.
Clearly as the variance $\sigma^{2}$ of the artificial dynamic noise
$\left\{ \varepsilon_{n}\right\} $ on the $\theta-$component decreases,
it will be necessary to use more particles to approximate $\left.\nabla_{\theta}l_{T}(\theta)\right\vert _{\theta=\theta_{k}}$
as the mixing properties of the artificial dynamic model deteriorates.
\subsubsection{Expectation-Maximization}
Gradient ascent algorithms can be numerically unstable as they require
to scale carefully the components of the score vector. The Expectation
Maximization (EM) algorithm is a very popular alternative procedure
for maximizing $\ell_{T}(\theta)$\ \cite{Demster77}. At iteration
$k+1$, we set
\begin{equation}
\theta_{k+1}=\arg\underset{\theta}{\max}\text{ \ }Q(\theta_{k},\theta)\label{eq:maximizationEM}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
Q(\theta_{k},\theta)=\int\log p_{\theta}(x_{0:T},y_{0:T})\text{ }p_{\theta_{k}}(x_{0:T}|y_{0:T})dx_{0:T}.\label{eq:Qfunction}
\end{equation}
The sequence $\{\ell_{T}(\theta_{k})\}_{k\geq0}$ generated by this
algorithm is non-decreasing. The EM is usually favored by practitioners
whenever it is applicable as it is numerically more stable than gradient
techniques.
In terms of implementation,\ the EM consists of computing a $n_{s}$-dimensional
summary statistic of the form (\ref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals})
when $p_{\theta}(x_{0:T},y_{0:T})$ belongs to the exponential family,
and the maximizing argument of $Q(\theta_{k},\theta)$\ can be characterized
explicitly through a suitable function $\Lambda:\mathbb{R}^{n_{s}}\rightarrow\Theta$,
i.e.
\begin{equation}
\theta_{k+1}=\Lambda\left(T^{-1}\mathcal{S}_{T}^{\theta_{k}}\right).\label{eq:maximiEM}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Discussion of particle implementations}\label{sub:Discussion-of-particle-batch}
The path space approximation (\ref{eq:SMCfullPosterior}) can be used
to approximate the score \eqref{eq:fisheridentityloglike} and the
summary statistics of the EM algorithm at the computational cost of
$\mathcal{O}(N\left(T+1\right))$; see \cite[section 8.3]{cappe2005},
\cite{olsson2008}, \cite{poyadjis2009}. Experimentally the variance
of the associated estimates increases typically quadratically with
$T$ \cite{poyadjis2009}. To obtain estimates whose variance increases
only typically linearly with $T$ with similar computational cost,
one can use the fixed-lag approximation presented in Section \ref{sub:FixedLagapproxparticle}
or a more recent alternative where the path space method is used but
the additive functional of interest, which is a sum of terms over
$n=0,\ldots,T$, is approximated by a sum of similar terms which are
now exponentially weighted w.r.t $n$ \cite{nemeth2013}. These methods
introduce a non-vanishing asymptotic bias difficult to quantify but
appear to perform well in practice.
To improve over the path space method without introducing any such
asymptotic bias, the FFBSm and forward smoothing discussed in Sections
\ref{sub:Forward-backwardsmoothing} and \ref{sub:Forward-only-smoothing}
as well as the generalized two-filter smoother have been used \cite{schon2010},
\cite{delmoral2009}, \cite{delmoralforward}, \cite{poyadjis2009},
\cite{Briers09}. Experimentally the variance of the associated estimates
increases typically linearly with $T$ \cite{poyadjis2009} in agreement
with the theoretical results in \cite{delmoral2009}, \cite{delmoralforward},
\cite{douc09}. However the computational complexity of these techniques
is $\mathcal{O}(N^{2}\left(T+1\right))$. For a fixed computational
complexity of order $\mathcal{O}\left(N^{2}(T+1)\right)$, an informal
comparison of the performance of the path space estimate using $N^{2}$
particles and the forward-backward estimate using $N$ particles suggest
that both estimates admit a Mean Square Error (MSE) of order $\mathcal{O}(N^{-2}\left(T+1\right))$,
but the MSE of the path space estimate is variance dominated whereas
the forward-backward estimates are bias dominated. This can be understood
by decomposing the MSE as the sum of the squared bias and the variance
and then substituting appropriately for $N^{2}$ particles in \eqref{eq:sufficientstatsdegrade}
for the path space method and for $N$ particles in \eqref{eq:sufficientstatsFB}
for the forward-backward estimates. We confirm experimentally this
fact in Section \ref{sub:Maximum-likelihood-methods}.
These experimental results suggest that these particle smoothing estimates
might thus of limited interest compared to the path based estimates
for ML parameter inference when accounting for computational complexity.
However, this comparison ignores that the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ computational
complexity of these particle smoothing estimates can be reduced to
$\mathcal{O}\left(N\right)$ by sampling approximately from $p_{\theta}(x_{0:T}|y_{0:T})$
with the FFBSa procedure in Section \ref{sub:Forward-backwardsmoothing}
or by using fast computational methods \cite{Klass2005}. Related
$\mathcal{O}\left(N\right)$ approaches have been developed for generalized
two-filter smoothing \cite{briers2005}, \cite{fearnhead2008}. When
applicable, these fast computational methods should be favored.
\subsection{On-line methods}
For a long observation sequence the computation of the gradient of
$\ell_{T}(\theta)$ can be prohibitive, moreover we might have real-time
constraints. An alternative would be a recursive procedure in which
the data is run through once sequentially. If $\theta_{n}$ is the
estimate of the model parameter after the first $n$ observations,
a recursive method would update the estimate to $\theta_{n+1}$\ after
receiving the new data $y_{n}$. Several on-line variants of the ML
procedures described earlier are now presented. For these methods
to be justified, it is crucial for the observation process to be ergodic
for the limiting averaged likelihood function $\ell_{T}\left(\theta\right)/T$
to have a well-defined limit $\ell\left(\theta\right)$ as $T\rightarrow+\infty.$
\subsubsection{On-line gradient ascent}
An alternative to gradient ascent is the following parameter update
scheme at time $n\geq0$
\begin{equation}
\theta_{n+1}=\theta_{n}+\gamma_{n+1}\left.\nabla\log p_{\theta}(y_{n}|y_{0:n-1})\right\vert _{\theta=\theta_{n}},\label{eq:update_theta_partial_gradient}
\end{equation}
where the positive non-increasing step-size sequence $\left\{ \gamma_{n}\right\} _{n\geq1}$
satisfies $\sum_{n}\gamma_{n}=\infty$ and $\sum_{n}\gamma_{n}^{2}<\infty$
\cite{BMP90}, \cite{legland1997}; e.g. $\gamma_{n}=n^{-\alpha}$
for $0.5<\alpha\leq1$. Upon receiving $y_{n}$, the parameter estimate
is updated in the direction of ascent of the conditional density of
this new observation. In other words, one recognizes in \eqref{eq:update_theta_partial_gradient}
the update of the gradient ascent algorithm \eqref{eq:batchgradient},
except that the partial (up to time $n$) likelihood is used. The
algorithm in the present form is however not suitable for on-line
implementation, because evaluating the gradient of $\log p_{\theta}(y_{n}|y_{0:n-1})$
at the current parameter estimate requires computing the filter from
time $0$ to time $n$ using the current parameter value $\theta_{n}$.
An algorithm bypassing this problem has been proposed in the literature
for a finite state-space latent process in \cite{legland1997}. It
relies on the following update scheme
\begin{equation}
\theta_{n+1}=\theta_{n}+\gamma_{n+1}\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n}}(y_{n}|y_{0:n-1})\label{eq:RML}
\end{equation}
where $\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n}}(y_{n}|y_{0:n-1})$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n}}(y_{n}|y_{0:n-1})=\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n}}(y_{0:n})-\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n-1}}(y_{0:n-1}),\label{eq:timevaryingscore}
\end{equation}
with the notation $\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n}}(y_{0:n})$ corresponding
to a `time-varying' score which is computed with a filter using the
parameter $\theta_{p}$ at time $p$. The update rule (\ref{eq:RML})
can be thought of as an approximation to the update rule (\ref{eq:update_theta_partial_gradient}).
If we use Fisher's identity to compute this `time-varying' score,
then we have for $1\leq p\leq n$
\begin{equation}
s_{p}(x_{p-1:p})=\left.\nabla\log f_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{p}\right\vert x_{p-1}\right)\right\vert _{\theta=\theta_{p}}+\left.\nabla\log g_{\theta}\left(\left.y_{p}\right\vert x_{p}\right)\right\vert _{\theta=\theta_{p}}.\label{eq:additivetimevaryingscore}
\end{equation}
The asymptotic properties of the recursion (\ref{eq:RML}) (i.e. the
behavior of $\theta_{n}$\ in the limit as $n$\ goes to infinity)
has been studied in \cite{legland1997} for a finite state-space HMM.
It is shown that under regularity conditions this algorithm converges
towards a local maximum of the average log-likelihood $\ell\left(\theta\right)$,
$\ell\left(\theta\right)$ being maximized at the `true' parameter
value under identifiability assumptions. Similar results hold for
the recursion (\ref{eq:update_theta_partial_gradient}).
\subsubsection{On-line Expectation-Maximization}
It is also possible to propose an on-line version of the EM algorithm.
This was originally proposed for finite state-space and linear Gaussian
models in \cite{elliott2000}, \cite{ford1998}; see \cite{cappe11jcgs}
for a detailed presentation in the finite state-space case. Assume
that $p_{\theta}(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})$ is in the exponential family.
In the on-line implementation of EM, running averages of the sufficient
statistics $n^{-1}\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$ are computed \cite{Cap09},
\cite{elliott2000}. Let $\{\theta_{p}\}_{0\leq p\leq n}$ be the
sequence of parameter estimates of the on-line EM\ algorithm computed
sequentially based on $y_{0:n-1}$. When $y_{n}$ is received, we
compute
\begin{equation}
\begin{tabular}{l}
\ensuremath{\mathcal{S}_{\theta_{0:n}}=\gamma_{n+1}\text{ }\int s_{n}\left(x_{n-1:n}\right)p_{\theta_{0:n}}(x_{n-1},x_{n}|y_{0:n})dx_{n-1:n}}\\
\ensuremath{+\left(1-\gamma_{n+1}\right)\sum_{k=0}^{n}\left(\prod\limits _{i=k+2}^{n}\left(1-\gamma_{i}\right)\right)\gamma_{k+1}\int}\ensuremath{s_{k}\left(x_{k-1:k}\right)p_{\theta_{0:k}}(x_{k-1:k}|y_{0:k})dx_{k-1:k},}
\end{tabular}\label{eq:suffStatOnline}
\end{equation}
where $\left\{ \gamma_{n}\right\} _{n\geq1}$ needs to satisfy $\sum_{n}\gamma_{n}=\infty$
and $\sum_{n}\gamma_{n}^{2}<\infty$. Then the standard maximization
step (\ref{eq:maximiEM}) is used as in the batch version
\begin{equation}
\theta_{n+1}=\Lambda\left(\mathcal{S}_{\theta_{0:n}}\right).
\end{equation}
The recursive calculation of $\mathcal{S}_{\theta_{0:n}}$ is achieved
by setting $V_{\theta_{0}}=0$, then computing
\begin{equation}
V_{\theta_{0:n}}\left(x_{n}\right)=\int\left\{ \gamma_{n+1}\text{ }s_{n}\left(x_{n-1},x_{n}\right)+\left(1-\gamma_{n+1}\right)\text{ }V_{\theta_{0:n-1}}\left(x_{n-1}\right)\right\} p_{\theta_{0:n}}\left(\left.x_{n-1}\right\vert y_{0:n-1},x_{n}\right)dx_{n-1},\label{eq:updateStatonline}
\end{equation}
and finally
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}_{\theta_{0:n}}=\int V_{\theta_{0:n}}\left(x_{n}\right)p_{\theta_{0:n}}(x_{n}|y_{0:n})dx_{n}.\label{eq:updateStatonline2}
\end{equation}
Again, the subscript $\theta_{0:n}$ on $p_{\theta_{0:n}}(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n})$
indicates that the posterior density is being computed sequentially
using the parameter $\theta_{p}$ at time $p\leq n$. The filtering
density then is advanced from time $n-1$ to time $n$ by using $f_{\theta_{n}}(x_{n}|x_{n-1})$,
$g_{\theta_{n}}(y_{n}|x_{n})$ and $p_{\theta_{n}}(y_{n}|y_{0:n})$
in the fraction of the rhs of \eqref{eq:jointupdate}. Whereas the
convergence of the EM algorithm towards a local maximum of the average
log-likelihood $\ell\left(\theta\right)$ has been established for
i.i.d. data \cite{cappe2009JRSSB}, its convergence for state-space
models remains an open problem despites empirical evidence it does
\cite{Cap09}, \cite{cappe11jcgs}, \cite{delmoralforward}. This
has motivated the development of modified versions of the on-line
EM algorithm for which convergence results are easier to establish
\cite{ADT05}, \cite{lecorfffort2013}. However, the on-line EM presented
here performs empirically usually better \cite{lecorfffort2013-2}.
\subsubsection{Discussion of particle implementations}\label{sub:Discussion-of-particle-online}
Both the on-line gradient and EM procedures require approximating
terms (\ref{eq:timevaryingscore}) and (\ref{eq:suffStatOnline})
of the form (\ref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals}), except that
the expectation is now w.r.t the posterior density $p_{\theta_{0:n}}(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n})$
which is updated using the parameter $\theta_{p}$ at time $p\leq n$.
In this on-line framework, only the path space, fixed lag smoothing
and forward smoothing estimates are applicable, the fixed lag approximation
is also applicable but introduces a non-vanishing bias. For the on-line
EM algorithm, similarly to the batch case discussed in Section \ref{sub:Discussion-of-particle-batch},
the benefits of using the forward smoothing estimate \cite{delmoralforward}
compared to the path space estimate \cite{Cap09} with $N^{2}$ particles
are rather limited, as experimentally demonstrated in Section \ref{sub:Maximum-likelihood-methods}.
However for the on-line gradient ascent algorithm, the gradient term
$\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n}}(y_{n}|y_{0:n-1})$ in (\ref{eq:RML})
is a difference between two score-like vectors (\ref{eq:timevaryingscore})
and the behavior of its particle estimates differs significantly from
its EM counterpart. Indeed the variance of the particle path estimate
of $\nabla\log p_{\theta_{0:n}}(y_{n}|y_{0:n-1})$ increases linearly
with $n$, yielding an unreliable gradient ascent procedure, whereas
the particle forward smoothing estimate has a variance uniformly bounded
in time under appropriate regularity assumptions and yields a stable
gradient ascent procedure \cite{pdm_ad_sss_filter_derivative}. Hence
the use of a procedure of computational complexity $\mathcal{O}\left(N^{2}\right)$
is clearly justified in this context. The very recent paper \cite{westerbornOlsson2014}
reports that the computationally cheaper estimate (\ref{eq:OlssonMCapproximation})
appears to exhibit similar properties whenever $K\geq2$ and might
prove an attractive alternative.
\section{Bayesian parameter estimation}
\label{sec:Bayesianestimation}
In the Bayesian setting, we assign a suitable prior density $p\left(\theta\right)$
for $\theta$ and inference is based on the joint posterior density
$p\left(\left.x_{0:T},\theta\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$ in the off-line
case, or the sequence of posterior densities $\left\{ p\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$
in the on-line case.
\subsection{Off-line methods}
\subsubsection{Particle Markov chain Monte Carlo methods}\label{sub:PMCMC}
Using MCMC is a standard approach to approximate $p\left(\left.x_{0:T},\theta\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$. Unfortunately designing efficient MCMC\ sampling
algorithms for non-linear non-Gaussian state-space models is a difficult
task: one-variable-at-a-time Gibbs sampling typically mixes very poorly
for such models, whereas blocking strategies that have been proposed
in the literature are typically very model-dependent; see for instance
\cite{KimShephardChib}.
Particle MCMC are a class of MCMC\ techniques which rely on particle\ methods
to build efficient high dimensional proposal distributions in a generic
manner \cite{andrieu2010}. We limit ourselves here to the presentation
of the Particle Marginal Metropolis--Hastings (PMMH)\ sampler, which
is an approximation of an ideal MMH\ sampler for sampling from $p\left(\left.x_{0:T},\theta\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
which would utilize the following proposal density
\begin{equation}
q\left(\left.\left(x_{0:T}^{\prime},\theta^{\prime}\right)\right\vert \left(x_{0:T},\theta\right)\right)=q\left(\left.\theta^{\prime}\right\vert \theta\right)p_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(\left.x_{0:T}^{\prime}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right),\label{eq:proposalMMH}
\end{equation}
where $q\left(\left.\theta^{\prime}\right\vert \theta\right)$ is
a proposal density to obtain a candidate $\theta^{\prime}$ when we
are at location $\theta$. The acceptance probability of this sampler
is
\begin{equation}
1\wedge\frac{p_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(y_{0:T}\right)p(\theta^{\prime})q(\theta|\theta^{\prime})}{p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:T}\right)p(\theta)q(\theta^{\prime}|\theta)}.\label{eq:acceptprobaMH}
\end{equation}
Unfortunately this ideal algorithm cannot be implemented as we cannot
sample exactly from $p_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(\left.x_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
and we cannot compute the likelihood terms $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$
and $p_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$ appearing in the acceptance
probability.
The PMMH\ sampler is an approximation of this ideal MMH\ sampler
which relies on the particle approximations of these unknown terms.
Given $\theta$ and a particle approximation $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$
of $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$, we sample $\theta^{\prime}\sim q\left(\left.\theta^{\prime}\right\vert \theta\right)$
then run a particle filter to obtain approximations $\widehat{p}_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(\left.dx_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
and $\widehat{p}_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$ of $p_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(\left.dx_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
and $p_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$. We then sample $X_{0:T}^{\prime}\sim\widehat{p}_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(\left.dx_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$,
that is we choose randomly one of $N$ particles generated by the
particle filter, with probability $W_{T}^{i}$ for particle $i$,
and accept $\left(\theta^{\prime},X_{0:T}^{\prime}\right)$ (and $\widehat{p}_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$)
with probability
\begin{equation}
1\wedge\frac{\widehat{p}_{\theta^{\prime}}\left(y_{0:T}\right)p(\theta^{\prime})q(\theta|\theta^{\prime})}{\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0:T}\right)p(\theta)q(\theta^{\prime}|\theta)}.\label{eq:acceptprobaPMMH}
\end{equation}
The acceptance probability (\ref{eq:acceptprobaPMMH}) is a simple
approximation of the ``ideal\textquotedblright \ acceptance probability
(\ref{eq:acceptprobaMH}).
This algorithm was first proposed as an heuristic to sample from $p\left(\left.\theta\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
in \cite{fernandez2007}. Its remarkable feature established in \cite{andrieu2010}
is that it does admit $p\left(\left.x_{0:T},\theta\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$
as invariant distribution whatever being the number of particles $N$
used in the particle\ approximation \cite{andrieu2010}. However
the choice of $N$ has an impact on the performance of the algorithm.
Using large values of $N$ usually results in PMMH averages with variances
lower than the corresponding averages using fewer samples but the
computational cost of constructing $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(y_{0:T}\right)$
increases with $N$. A simplified analysis of this algorithm suggests
that $N$ should be selected such that the standard deviation of the
logarithm of the particle likelihood estimate should be around $0.9$
if the ideal MMH sampler was using the perfect proposal $q(\theta^{\prime}|\theta)=p\left(\theta^{\prime}|y_{0:n}\right)$
\cite{pitt2011} and around $1.8$ if one uses an isotropic normal
random walk proposal, the target is a product of $d$ i.i.d. components
and $d\rightarrow\text{\ensuremath{\infty}}$ \cite{sherlock2013}.
For general proposal and target densities, a recent theoretical analysis
and empirical results suggest that this standard deviation should
be selected around $1.2-1.3$ \cite{doucet2012}. As the variance
of this estimate typically increases linearly with $T$, this means
that the computational complexity is of order $\mathcal{O}(T^{2})$
by iteration.
A particle version of the Gibbs sampler is also available \cite{andrieu2010}
which mimicks the two-component Gibbs sampler sampling iteratively
from $p\left(\left.\theta\right\vert x_{0:T},y_{0:T}\right)$ and
$p_{\theta}\left(\left.x_{0:T}\right\vert y_{0:T}\right)$. These
algorithms rely on a non-standard version of the particle filter where
$N-1$ particles are generated conditional upon a ``fixed'' particle.
Recent improvements over this particle Gibbs sampler introduce mechanisms
to rejuvenate the fixed particle, using forward or backward sampling
procedures \cite{whiteley2010backwarddiscussion}, \cite{Lindsten2014},
\cite{whiteley2010backward}. These methods perform empirically extremely
well but, contrary to the PMMH, it is still unclear how one should
scale $N$ with $T$.
\subsection{On-line Methods\label{sub:BayesianOn-line-Methods}}
In this context, we are interested in approximating on-line the sequence
of posterior densities $\left\{ p\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$.
We emphasize that, contrary to the on-line ML\ parameter estimation
procedures, none of the methods presented in this section bypass the
particle degeneracy problem. This should come as no surprise. As discussed
in Section \ref{sec:convergenceparticle}, even for a \textit{fixed}
$\theta$, the particle estimate of $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$
has a relative variance that increases linearly with $n$ under favorable
mixing assumptions. The methods in this section attempt to approximate
$p\left(\theta|y_{0:n}\right)\propto p_{\theta}(y_{0:n})p(\theta)$.
This is a harder problem as it implicitly requires having to approximate
$p_{\theta^{i}}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$ for all the particles $\left\{ \theta^{i}\right\} $
approximating $p\left(\theta|y_{0:n}\right)$.
\subsubsection{Augmenting the state with the parameter}
At first sight, it seems that estimating the sequence of posterior
densities $\left\{ p\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$
can be easily achieved using standard particle methods, by merely
introducing the extended state $Z_{n}=\left(X_{n},\theta_{n}\right)$,
with initial density $p\left(\theta_{0}\right)\mu_{\theta_{0}}\left(x_{0}\right)$
and transition density $f_{\theta_{n}}\left(\left.x_{n}\right\vert x_{n-1}\right)\delta_{\theta_{n-1}}\left(\theta_{n}\right);$
i.e. $\theta_{n}=\theta_{n-1}$. However, this extended process $Z_{n}$
clearly does not possess any \emph{forgetting} property (as discussed
in Section \ref{sec:filteringandparticle}), so the algorithm is bound
to degenerate. Specifically, the parameter space is explored only
in the initial step of the algorithm. Then, each successive resampling
step reduces the diversity of the sample of $\theta$ values; after
a certain time $n$, the approximation $\widehat{p}\left(\left.d\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
contains a single unique value for $\theta$. This is clearly a poor
approach. Even in the\ much simpler case when there is no latent
variable $X_{0:n}$, it is shown in \cite[Theorem 4]{chopin2004}
that the asymptotic variance of the corresponding particle estimates
diverges at least at a polynomial rate, which grows with the dimension
of $\theta$.
A pragmatic approach that has proven useful in some applications is
to introduce artificial dynamics for the parameter $\theta$ \cite{Kita98}
\begin{equation}
\theta_{n+1}=\theta_{n}+\varepsilon_{n+1}
\end{equation}
where $\left\{ \varepsilon_{n}\right\} _{n\geq0}$ is an artificial
dynamic noise with decreasing variance. Standard particle methods
can now be applied to approximate $\left\{ p\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$.
A related kernel density estimation method also appeared in \cite{Liu01},
which proposes to use a kernel density estimate $p\left(\theta|y_{0:n}\right)$
from which one samples from. As before the static parameter is transformed
to a slowly time-varying one, whose dynamics is related to the kernel
bandwidth. To mitigate the artificial variance inflation, a shrinkage
correction is introduced. An improved version of this method has been
recently proposed in \cite{flury2010}.
It is difficult to quantify how much bias is introduced in the resulting
estimates by the introduction of this artificial dynamics. Additionally,
these methods require a significant amount of tuning, e.g. choosing
the variance of the artificial dynamic noise or the kernel width.
However they can perform satisfactorily in practice \cite{flury2010},
\cite{Liu01}.
\subsubsection{Practical filtering}
The practical filtering approach proposed in \cite{Polson2002} relies
on the following fixed-lag approximation
\begin{equation}
p\left(\left.x_{0:n-L},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)\approx p\left(\left.x_{0:n-L},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)
\end{equation}
for $L$ large enough; that is observations coming after $n-1$ presumably
brings little information on $x_{0:n-L}$. To sample\ approximately
from $p\left(\left.\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$, one uses the
following iterative process: at time $n$, several MCMC\ chains are
run in parallel to sample from
\[
p\left(\left.x_{n-L+1:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n},X_{0:n-L}^{i}\right)=p\left(\left.x_{n-L+1:n},\theta\right\vert y_{n-L+1:n},X_{n-L}^{i}\right)
\]
where the $X_{n-L}^{i}$ have been obtained at the previous iteration,
and are such that (approximately) $X_{n-L}^{i}\sim p(x_{n-L}|y_{0:n-1})\approx p(x_{n-L}|y_{0:n})$.
Then one collects the first component $X_{n-L+1}^{i}$ of the simulated
sample $X_{n-L+1:n}^{i}$, increments the time index and runs several
new MCMC\ chains in parallel to sample from $p\left(\left.x_{n-L+2:n+1},\theta\right\vert y_{n-L+2:n+1},X_{n-L+1}^{i}\right)$
and so on. The algorithm is started at time $L-1$, with MCMC chains
that target $p(x_{0:L-1}|y_{0:L-1})$. Like all methods based on fixed-lag
approximation, the choice of the lag $L$ is difficult and this introduces
a non-vanishing bias which is difficult to quantify. However, the
method performs well on the examples presented in \cite{Polson2002}.
\subsubsection{Using MCMC\ steps within particle\ methods}\label{sub:Using-MCMCsteps-within-SMC}
To avoid the introduction of an artificial dynamic model or of a fixed-lag
approximation, an approach originally proposed independently in \cite{Fea02}
and \cite{Gilks01} consists of adding MCMC steps to re-introduce
``diversity\textquotedblright \ among the particles. Assume we use
an auxiliary particle filter to approximate $\left\{ p\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$
then the particles $\left\{ X_{0:n}^{i},\theta_{n}^{i}\right\} $
obtained after the sampling step at time $n$ are approximately distributed
according to
\[
\widetilde{p}\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\propto p\left(\left.x_{0:n-1},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n-1}\right)q_{\theta}\left(x_{n},y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right).
\]
We have $\widetilde{p}\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)=p\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
if $q_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)$
and $q_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)$.
To add diversity in this population of particles, we introduce an
MCMC\ kernel $K_{n}\left(d\left(x_{0:n}^{\prime},\theta^{\prime}\right)|\left(x_{0:n},\theta\right)\right)$
with invariant density $\widetilde{p}\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$,
and replace, at the end of each iteration, the set of resampled particles,
$(\bar{X}_{0:n}^{i},\bar{\theta}_{n}^{i})$ with $N$ ``mutated''
particles $\left(\widetilde{X}_{0:n}^{i},\tilde{\theta}_{n}^{i}\right)$
simulated from, for $i=1,\ldots,N$
\[
\left(\widetilde{X}_{0:n}^{i},\tilde{\theta}_{n}^{i}\right)\sim K_{n}\left(d(x_{0:n},\theta)|\left(\bar{X}_{0:n}^{i},\bar{\theta}_{n}^{i}\right)\right).
\]
If we use the SISR algorithm, then we can alternatively use an MCMC
step of invariant density $p\left(\left.x_{0:n},\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
after the resampling step at time $n$.
Contrary to standard applications of MCMC, the kernel does not have
to be ergodic. Ensuring ergodicity would indeed require one to sample
an increasing number of variables as $n$ increases -- this algorithm
would have an increasing cost per iteration, which would prevents
its use in on-line scenarios but it can be an interesting alternative
to standard MCMC and was suggested in\ \cite{leedominic2002}. In
practice one therefore sets $\widetilde{X}_{0:n-L}^{i}=X_{0:n-L}^{i}$
and only sample $\theta^{i}$ and $\widetilde{X}_{n-L+1:n}^{i}$,
where $L$ is a small integer; often $L=0$ (only $\theta$ is updated).
Note that the memory requirements for this method do not increase
over time if $\widetilde{p}_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n},y_{0:n}\right)$
is in the exponential family and thus can be summarized by a set of
fixed dimensional sufficient statistics $s^{n}(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})$.
This type of methods was first used in to perform on-line Bayesian
parameter estimation in a context where $\widetilde{p}_{\theta}\left(x_{0:n},y_{0:n}\right)$
is in the exponential family \cite{Gilks01}, \cite{Fea02}. Similar
strategies were adopted in \cite{Andrieu99} and \cite{Sto02}. In
the particular scenario where $q_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(x_{n}|y_{n},x_{n-1}\right)$
and $q_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)=p_{\theta}\left(y_{n}|x_{n-1}\right)$,
this method was mentioned in \cite{Andrieu99}, \cite{vercauteren2005}
and is discussed at length in \cite{Lopes2010} who named it particle
learning. Extensions of this strategy to parameter estimation in conditionally
linear Gaussian models, where a part of the state is integrated out
using Kalman techniques \cite{Chen00}, \cite{Douc00}, is proposed
in \cite{Car10}.
As opposed to the methods relying on kernel or artificial dynamics,
these MCMC-based approaches have the advantage of adding diversity
to the particles approximating $p\left(\theta|y_{0:n}\right)$ without
perturbing the target distribution. Unfortunately, these algorithms
rely implicitly on the particle approximation of the density $p\left(x_{0:n}|y_{0:n}\right)$
even if algorithmically it is only necessary to store some fixed-dimensional
sufficient statistics $\left\{ s^{n}(X_{0:n}^{i},y_{0:n})\right\} $.
Hence in this respect they suffer from the degeneracy problem. This
was noticed as early as in \cite{Andrieu99}; see also the word of
caution in the conclusion of \cite{Fea02}, \cite{ADT05} and \cite{PLValenciaDiscussion}.
The practical implications are that one observes empirically that
the resulting Monte Carlo estimates can display quite a lot of variability
over multiple runs as demonstrated in Section \ref{sub:bayesianmethodsexperiments}.
This should not come as a surprise as the sequence of posterior distributions
does not have exponential forgetting properties, hence there is an
accumulation of Monte Carlo errors over time.
\subsubsection{The SMC$^{2}$ algorithm}
The SMC$^{2}$ algorithm introduced simultaneously in \cite{smc2}
and \cite{fulop2013} may be considered as the particle equivalent
of Particle MCMC. It mimics an ``ideal'' particle algorithm proposed
in \cite{chopin2002} approximating sequentially $\left\{ p\left(\left.\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$
where $N_{\theta}$ particles (in the $\theta$-space) are used to
explore these distributions. The $N_{\theta}$ particles at time $n$
are reweighted according to $p_{\theta}(y_{0:n+1})/p_{\theta}(y_{0:n})$
at time $n+1$. As these likelihood terms are unknown, we substitute
to them $\hat{p}_{\theta}(y_{0:n+1})/\hat{p}_{\theta}(y_{0:n})$ where
$\hat{p}_{\theta}(y_{0:n})$ is a particle approximation of the partial
likelihood $p_{\theta}(y_{0:n})$, obtained by a running a particle
filter of $N_{x}$ particles in the $x-$dimension, up to time $n$,
for each of the $N_{\theta}$ $\theta-$particles. When particle degeneracy
(in the $\theta-$dimension) reaches a certain threshold, $\theta-$particles
are refreshed through the succession of a resampling step, and an
MCMC step, which in these particular settings takes the form of a
PMCMC update. The cost per iteration of this algorithm is not constant
and, additionally, it is advised to increase $N_{x}$ with $n$ for
the relative variance of $\hat{p}_{\theta}(y_{0:n})$ not to increase,
therefore it cannot be used in truly on-line scenarios. Yet there
are practical situations where it may be useful to approximate jointly
all the posteriors $p(\theta|y_{1:n})$, for $1\leq n\leq T$, for
instance to assess the predictive power of the model.
\section{Experimental results}\label{sec:experimentalresults}
We focus on illustrating numerically a few algorithms and the impact
of the degeneracy problem on parameter inference. This last point
is motivated by the fact that particle degeneracy seems to have been
overlooked by many practitioners. In this way numerical results may
provide valuable insights.
We will consider the following simple scalar linear Gaussian state
space model:
\begin{equation}
X_{n}=\rho X_{n-1}+\tau W_{n},\quad Y_{n}=X_{n}+\sigma V_{n}\label{eq:dlm1}
\end{equation}
where $V_{n},\: W_{n}$ are independent zero-mean and unit-variance
Gaussians and $\rho\in[-1,1]$. The main reason for choosing this
model is that Kalman filter recursions can be implemented to provide
the exact values of the summary statistics $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$
used for ML estimation through the EM algorithm, and to compute the
exact likelihood $p_{\theta}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$. Hence, using a
fine discretization of the low-dimensional parameter space, we can
compute a very good approximation of the true posterior density $p\left(\left.\theta\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$.
In this model it is straightforward to present numerical evidence
of some effects of degeneracy for parameter estimation and show how
it can be overcome by choosing an appropriate particle method.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth,height=0.8\textheight]{sufstat_bias_var_mse_3.eps}
\protect\caption{Estimating smoothed additive functionals: Empirical bias of the estimate
of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$ (top panel), empirical variance (middle
panel) and MSE (bottom panel) for the estimate of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}/\sqrt{n}$.
Left column: $\mathcal{O}(N)$ method using $N^{2}=2500,10000,40000$
particles. Right column: $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ method using $N=50,100,200$
particles. In every subplot, the top line corresponds to using $N=50,$
the middle for $N=100$ and the lower for $N=200.$}
\label{fig:smoothing}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Maximum likelihood methods}\label{sub:Maximum-likelihood-methods}
As ML methods require approximating smoothed additive functionals
$\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$ of the form (\ref{eq:expectationadditivefunctionals}),
we begin by investigating the empirical bias, variance and MSE of
two standard particle estimates of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$, where
we set $s_{k}(x_{k-1},x_{k})=x_{k-1}x_{k}$ for the model described
in \eqref{eq:dlm1}. The first estimate relies on the path space method
with computational cost $\mathcal{O}(N)$ per time, which uses $\widehat{p}_{\theta}\left(\left.dx_{0:n}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
in (\ref{eq:SMCfullPosterior}) to approximate $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$
as $\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}$; see \cite[Section 8.3]{cappe2005}
for more details. The second estimate relies on the forward implementation
of FFBSm presented in Section \ref{sub:Forward-only-smoothing} using
(\ref{eq:additivesmoothfunctionalsasfunctionofT})-(\ref{eq:SMCapproxadditivefunctionals-1});
see \cite{delmoralforward}. Recall that this procedure has a computational
cost that is $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ per time for $N$ particles and
provides the same estimates as the standard forward-backward implementation
of FFBSm. For the sake of brevity we will not consider the remaining
smoothing methods of Section \ref{sec:smoothingandparticle}; for
the fixed-lag and the exponentially weighted approximations we refer
the reader to \cite{olsson2008} respectively \cite{nemeth2013} for
numerical experiments.
We use a simulated dataset of size $6\times10^{4}$ obtained using
$\theta^{\ast}=(\rho^{\ast},\tau^{2^{*}},\sigma^{2^{*}})=(0.8,0.1,1)$
and then generate 300 independent replications of each method in order
to compute the empirical bias and variance of $\mathcal{\hat{S}}_{n}^{\theta^{*}}$
when $\theta$ is fixed to $\theta^{\ast}$. In order to make a comparison
that takes into account the computational cost, we use $N^{2}$ particles
for the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ method and $N$ for the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$
one. We look separately at the behavior of the bias of $\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}$
and the variance and MSE of the rescaled estimates $\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}/\sqrt{n}$.
The results are presented in Figure \ref{fig:smoothing} for $N=50,100,200$.
For both methods the bias grows linearly with time, this growth being
higher for the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ method. For the variance of $\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}/\sqrt{n}$,
we observe a linear growth with time for the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ method
with $N^{2}$ particles whereas this variance appears roughly constant
for the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ method. Finally, the MSE of $\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}/\sqrt{n}$
grows for both methods linearly as expected. In this particular scenario,
the constants of proportionality are such that the MSE is lower for
the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ method than for the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ method.
In general, we can expect that the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ method be superior
in terms of the bias and the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ method superior
in terms of the variance. These results are in agreement with the
theoretical results in the literature \cite{delmoral2009}, \cite{delmoralforward},
\cite{douc09} but additionally show that the lower bound on the variance
growth of $\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{n}^{\theta}$ for the $\mathcal{O}(N)$
method of \cite{poyadjis2009} appears sharp.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=1.05\textwidth,height=0.59\linewidth]{offline_em3.eps}
\protect\caption{Off-line EM: Boxplots of $\hat{\theta}_{n}$ for various $T$ using
25 iterations of off-line EM and 150 realizations of the algorithms.
Top panels: $\mathcal{O}(N)$ method using $N=150^{2}$ particles.
Bottom panels: $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ with $N=150$. The dotted horizontal
lines are the ML estimate for each time $T$ obtained using Kalman
filtering on a grid.}
\label{fig:offlineEM}
\end{figure}
We proceed to see how the bias and variance of the estimates of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$
affect the ML estimates, when the former are used within both an off-line
and an on-line EM algorithm; see Figures \ref{fig:offlineEM} and
\ref{fig:onlineEM} respectively. For the model in (\ref{eq:dlm1})
the E-step corresponds to computing $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$ where
$s_{k}(x_{k-1},x_{k})=\left((y_{k}-x_{k})^{2},x_{k-1}^{2},x_{k-1}x_{k},x_{k}^{2}\right)$
and the M-step update function is given by \[\Lambda(z_{1},z_{2},z_{3},z_{4})=\left(\frac{z_{3}}{z_{4}},z_{4}-\frac{z_{3}^{2}}{z_{2}},z_{1}\right).\]
We compare the estimates of $\theta^{\ast}$ when the E-step is computed
using the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ and the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ methods
described in the previous section with $150^{2}$ and $150$ particles
respectively. A simulated dataset for $\theta^{\ast}=(\rho^{\ast},\tau^{*},\sigma^{*})=(0.8,1,.2)$
will be used. In every case we will initialize the algorithm using
$\theta_{0}=(0.1,0.1,0.2)$ and assume $\sigma^{*}$ is known. In
Figures \ref{fig:offlineEM} and \ref{fig:onlineEM} we present the
results obtained using 150 independent replications of the algorithm.
For the off-line EM, we use $25$ iterations for $T=100,1000,2500,5000,10000$.
For the on-line EM, we use $T=10^{5}$ with the step size set as $\gamma_{n}=n{}^{-0.8}$
and for the first $50$ iterations no M-step update is performed.
This ``freezing'' phase is required to allow for a reasonable estimation
of the summary statistic; see \cite{Cap09}, \cite{cappe11jcgs} for
more details. Note that in Figure \ref{fig:onlineEM} we plot only
the results after the algorithm has converged, i.e. for $n\geq5\text{\ensuremath{\times}10}^{4}$.
In each case, both the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ and the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$
methods yield fairly accurate results given the low number of particles
used. However we note, as observed previously in the literature, that
the on-line EM as well as the on-line gradient ascent method requires
a substantial number of observations, i.e. over 10000, before achieving
convergence \cite{Cap09}, \cite{cappe11jcgs}, \cite{delmoralforward},
\cite{poyadjis2009}. For smaller datasets, these algorithms can also
be used by going through the data say $K$ times. Typically this method
is cheaper than iterating (\ref{eq:batchgradient}) or (\ref{eq:Qfunction})-(\ref{eq:maximiEM})
$K$ times the off-line algorithms and can yield comparable parameter
estimates \cite{yildirim2013}. Experimentally, the properties of
the estimates of $\mathcal{S}_{n}^{\theta}$ discussed earlier appear
to translate into properties of the resulting parameter estimates:
the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ method provides estimates with less bias but
more variance than the $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ method.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1.05\textwidth,height=0.59\linewidth]{mle_plot_revision.eps}
\protect\caption{On-line EM: Boxplots of $\hat{\theta}_{n}$ for $n\geq5\times10^{4}$
using 150 realizations of the algorithms. We also plot the ML estimate
at time $n$ obtained using Kalman filtering on a grid (black).}
\label{fig:onlineEM}
\end{figure}
For more numerical examples regarding the remaining methods discussed
in Section \ref{sec:MLestimation}, we refer the reader to \cite{ionides:breto:king:2006},
\cite{Ionides09} for iterated filtering, to \cite{delmoral2009},
\cite{delmoralforward}, \cite{poyadjis2009} for comparisons of the
$\mathcal{O}(N)$ and $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ methods for EM and gradient
ascent, to \cite{Cap09} for the $\mathcal{O}(N)$ on-line EM, to
\cite{Pitt02} and \cite[Chap. 10]{Lee08} for smooth likelihood function
methods and to \cite[Ch. 10-11]{cappe2005} for a detailed exposition
of off-line EM methods.
\subsection{Bayesian methods}\label{sub:bayesianmethodsexperiments}
We still consider the model in (\ref{eq:dlm1}) but simplify it further
by fixing either $\rho$ or $\tau$. This is done in order to keep
the computations of the benchmarks that use Kalman computations on
a grid relatively inexpensive. For those parameters that are not fixed,
we shall use the following independent priors: a uniform on $[-1,1]$
for $\rho$, and inverse gamma for $\tau^{2},\sigma^{2}$ with the
shape and scale parameter pair being $(a,b)$ and $(c,d)$ respectively
with $a=b=c=d=1$. In all the subsequent examples, we will initialize
the algorithms by sampling $\theta$ from the prior.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{BoxPlotsTau_new2.eps}\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{relativeVarTau_new.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ScaledVarTau_new.eps}\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{pl_var_nc2.eps}\protect\caption{Top left: box plots for estimates of posterior mean of $\tau^{2}$
at $n=1000,2000,\ldots50000$. Top right: relative variance, i.e.
empirical variance (over independent runs) for the estimator of the
mean of $p(\tau^{2}|y_{0:n})$ using particle method with MCMC normalized
with the true posterior variance computed using Kalman filtering on
a grid. Bottom left: average (over independent runs) of the estimated
variance of $p(\tau^{2}|y_{0:n})$ using particle method with MCMC
normalized with the true posterior variance. Bottom right: variance
of the $\left\{ \hat{p}\left(y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$; All
plots are computed using $N=5000$ and over 100 different independent
runs.}
\label{Flo:relVar}
\end{figure}
We proceed to examine the combination of particle method with MCMC
methods described in Section \ref{sub:Using-MCMCsteps-within-SMC}.
We focus on an efficient implementation of this idea discussed in
\cite{Lopes2010} which can be put in practice for the simple model
under consideration. We investigate the effect of the degeneracy problem
in this context. The numerical results obtained in this section have
been produced in Matlab (code available from the first author), and
double-checked using the R program available on the personal web page
of the first author of \cite{Lopes2010}.
We first focus of the estimate of the posterior of $\theta=(\tau^{2},\sigma^{2})$
given a long sequence of simulated observations with $\tau=\sigma=1$.
In this scenario, $p_{\theta}(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})$ admits the following
two-dimensional sufficient statistics, $s^{n}(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})=\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n}\left(x_{k}-x_{k-1}\right)^{2},\sum_{k=0}^{n}\left(y_{k}-x_{k}\right)^{2}\right)$,
and $\theta$ can be updated using Gibbs steps. We use $T=5\times10^{4}$
and $N=5000$. We ran the algorithm over 100 independent runs over
the same dataset. We present the results only for $\tau^{2}$ and
omit the ones for $\sigma^{2}$ as these were very similar. The top
left panel of Figure \ref{Flo:relVar} shows the box plots for the
estimates of the posterior mean, and the top right panel shows how
the corresponding relative variance of the estimator for the posterior
mean evolves with time. Here the relative variance is defined as the
ratio of the empirical variance (over different independent runs)
of the posterior mean estimates at time $n$ over the true posterior
variance at time $n$, which in this case is approximated using a
Kalman filter on a fine grid. This quantity exhibits a steep increasing
trend when $n\geq15000$ and confirms the aforementioned variability
of the estimates of the posterior mean. In the bottom left panel of
Figure \ref{Flo:relVar} we plot the average (over different runs)
of the estimators of the variance of $p(\theta|y_{0:n})$. This average
variance is also scaled/normalized by the actual posterior variance.
The latter is again computed using Kalman filtering on a grid. This
ratio between the average estimated variance of the posterior over
the true one decreases with time $n$ and it shows that the supports
of the approximate posterior densities provided by this method cover
on average only a small portion of the support of the true posterior.
These experiments confirm that in this example the particle method
with MCMC steps fails to adequately explore the space of $\theta$.
Although the box plots provide some false sense of security, the relative
and scaled average variance clearly indicate that any posterior estimates
obtained from a single run of particle method with MCMC steps should
be used with caution. Furthermore, in the the bottom right panel of
Figure \ref{Flo:relVar} we also investigate experimentally the empirical
variance of the marginal likelihood estimates $\left\{ \hat{p}\left(y_{0:n}\right)\right\} _{n\geq0}$.
This variance appears to increase quadratically with $n$ for the
particle method with MCMC moves instead of linearly as it does for
state-space models with good mixing properties. This suggests that
to one should increase the number of particles quadratically with
the time index to obtain an estimate of the marginal likelihood whose
relative variance remains uniformly bounded with respect to the time
index. Although we attribute this quadratic variance growth to the
degeneracy problem, the estimate $\hat{p}\left(y_{0:n}\right)$ is
not the particle approximation of a smoothed additive functional,
thus there is not yet any theoretical convergence result explaining
rigorously this phenomenon.
\begin{figure}[h]
{\footnotesize{}\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth,height=0.8\textheight]{plot_sigma_rho2.eps}}\protect\caption{Particle method with MCMC steps, $\theta=(\rho,\sigma^{2})$; estimated
marginal posterior densities for $n=10^{3},2\times10^{3},\dots,5\times10^{3}$
over 50 runs (red) versus ground truth (blue). }
\label{Flo:dlm_drift_snapshot}
\end{figure}
One might argue that these particle methods with MCMC moves are meant
to be used with larger $N$ and/or shorter data sets $T$. We shall
consider this time a slightly different example where $\tau=0.1$
is known and we are interested in estimating the posterior of $\theta=(\rho,\sigma^{2})$
given a sequence of observations obtained using $\rho=0.5$ and $\sigma=1$.
In that case, the sufficient statistics are $s^{n}(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})=\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n}x_{k-1}x_{k},\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}x_{k-1}^{2},\sum_{k=0}^{n}\left(y_{k}-x_{k}\right)^{2}\right)$,
and the parameters can be rejuvenated through a single Gibbs update.
In addition, we let $T=5000$ and use $N=10^{4}$ particles. In Figures
\ref{Flo:dlm_drift_snapshot} we display the estimated marginal posteriors
$p\left(\left.\rho\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$ and $p\left(\left.\sigma^{2}\right\vert y_{0:n}\right)$
obtained from $50$ independent replications of the particle method.
On this simple problem, the estimated posteriors seem consistently
rather inaccurate for $\rho$, whereas they perform better for $\sigma^{2}$
but with some non-negligible variability over runs which increases
as $T$ increases. Similar observations have been reported in \cite{PLValenciaDiscussion}
and remain unexplained: for some parameters this methodology appears
to provide reasonable results despite the degeneracy problem and for
others it provides very unreliable results.
We investigate further the performance of this method in this simple
example by considering the same example for $T=1000$ but now consider
two larger numbers of particles, $N=7.5\times10^{4}$ and $N=6\times10^{5}$,
over 50 different runs. Additionally we compare the resulting estimates
with estimates provided by the particle Gibbs sampler of \cite{Lindsten2014}
using the same computational cost, that is $N=50$ particles with
$3000$ and $24000$ iterations respectively. The results are displayed
in Figure \ref{Flo:compare_low} and \ref{Flo:compare_high}. As expected,
we improve the performance of the particle with MCMC moves when $N$
increases for a fixed time horizon $T$. For a fixed computational
complexity, the particle Gibbs sampler estimates appear to display
less variability. For a higher dimensional parameter $\theta$ and/or
very vague priors, this comparison would be more favorable to the
particle Gibbs sampler as illustrated in \cite[pp. 336-338]{andrieu2010}.
\begin{figure}[h]
{\footnotesize{}\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth,height=0.4\textheight]{comparison_low.eps}}\protect\caption{Estimated marginal posterior densities for $\theta=(\rho,\sigma^{2})$
with $T=10^{3}$ over 50 runs (black-dotted) versus ground truth (green).
Top: Particle method with MCMC, $N=7.5\times10^{4}$. Bottom: Particle
Gibbs with $3000$ iterations and $N=50$.}
\label{Flo:compare_low}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
{\footnotesize{}\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth,height=0.4\textheight]{comparison_high.eps}}\protect\caption{Estimated marginal posterior densities for $\theta=(\rho,\sigma^{2})$
with $T=10^{3}$ over 50 runs (black-dotted) versus ground truth (green).
Top: Particle method with MCMC, $N=6\times10^{5}$. Bottom: Particle
Gibbs with $24000$ iterations and $N=50$.}
\label{Flo:compare_high}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
Most particle methods proposed originally in the literature to perform
inference about static parameters in general state-space models were
computationally inefficient as they suffered from the degeneracy problem.
Several approaches have been proposed to deal with this problem by
either adding an artificial dynamic on the static parameter \cite{flury2009},
\cite{Kita98}, \cite{Liu01} or introducing a fixed-lag approximation
\cite{kitagawa2001}, \cite{olsson2008}, \cite{Polson2002}. These
methods can work very well in practice but it remains unfortunately
difficult/impossible to quantify the bias introduced in most realistic
applications. Various asymptotically bias-free methods with good statistical
properties and a reasonable computational cost have recently appeared
in the literature.
To perform batch ML estimation, the forward filter backward sampler/smoother
and generalized two filter procedures are recommended whenever the
$\mathcal{O}(N^{2}T)$ computational complexity per iteration of their
direct implementations can be lowered to $\mathcal{O}(NT)$ using,
for example, the methods described in \cite{briers2005}, \cite{douc09},
\cite{fearnhead2008}, \cite{Klass2005}. Otherwise, besides a lowering
of memory requirements, not much can be gained from these techniques
compared to simply using a standard particle filter with $N^{2}$
particles. In an on-line ML context, the situation is markedly different.
Whereas for the on-line EM algorithm, the forward smoothing approach
in \cite{poyadjis2009}, \cite{delmoralforward} of complexity $\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$
per time step will be similarly of limited interest compared to a
standard particle filter using $N^{2}$ particles, it is crucial to
use this approach when performing on-line gradient ascent as demonstrated
empirically and established theoretically in \cite{pdm_ad_sss_filter_derivative}.
In on-line scenarios where one can admit a random computational complexity
at each time step, the method presented in \cite{olsson2014} is an interesting alternative when it is applicable.
Empirically these on-line ML methods converge rather slowly and will
be primarily be useful for large datasets.
In a Bayesian framework, batch inference can be conducted using particle
MCMC methods \cite{andrieu2010}, \cite{Lindsten2014}. However these
methods are computationally expensive as, for example, an efficient
implementation of the PMMH has a computational complexity of order
$\mathcal{O}(T^{2})$ per iteration \cite{doucet2012}. On-line Bayesian
inference remains a challenging open problem as all methods currently
available, including particle methods with MCMC moves \cite{Fea02},
\cite{Sto02}, \cite{Car10} suffer from the degeneracy problem.
These methods should not be ruled out but should be used cautiously
as they can provide unreliable results even in simple scenarios as
demonstrated in our experiments.
Very recent papers in this dynamic research area have proposed to
combine individual parameter estimation techniques so as to design
more efficient inference algorithms. For example, \cite{Dahlin2014}
suggests to use the score estimation techniques developed for ML parameter
estimation to design better proposal distributions for the PMMH algorithm
whereas \cite{fearnhead2014} demonstrates that particle methods with
MCMC moves might be fruitfully used in batch scenarios when plugged
into a particle MCMC scheme.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
N. Kantas was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research
Council (EPSRC) under grant EP/J01365X/1 and programme grant on Control
For Energy and Sustainability (EP/G066477/1). S.S. Singh's research
is partly funded by EPSRC under the First Grant Scheme (EP/G037590/1).
A. Doucet's research is partly funded by EPSRC (EP/K000276/1 and EP/K009850/1).
N. Chopin's research is partly by the ANR as part of the \textquotedblleft Investissements
d\textquoteright Avenir\textquotedblright{} program (ANR-11-LABEX-0047).
|
\section{Monte Carlo -- an invaluable method}
One resorts to Monte Carlo algorithms when faster-converging numerical approaches are not applicable; such is usually the case in statistical physics and quantum field theory -- especially when estimating high-dimensional integrals with sums. A Riemann sum of $n-$terms evaluated, for example, by the Simpsons rule deviates from the exact value of the integral by an amount proportional to $n^{-4/d}$. In comparison to that, for most Monte Carlo methods, the error scales as $n^{-1/2}$ (square root of the computational budget) and is independent on the dimensionality of the integral. Thus, already for $d>8$ Monte Carlo outperforms the Simpsons rule. This point is stressed in Sokal's lecture notes \cite{96Sokal} and is accompanied by cautionary words: "Monte Carlo is an extremely bad method; it should be used only when all alternative methods are worse." Such is precisely the case in statistical physics, where Monte Carlo algorithms are often irreplaceable.
In a dynamical Monte Carlo method, one defines a stochastic process on the configuration space of the considered physical system, such that as time goes to infinity the system relaxes to its equilibrium. A typical stochastic process used is a Markov chain. In this review, we will focus on dynamical Monte Carlo methods utilizing Markov chains, the so-called Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods. At sufficiently large times, when the system is close enough to equilibrium -- the "numerical experiment" can begin. At that point we have means of generating samples from the equilibrium distribution, measuring observables, correlations between observables, estimating the partition function, etc. This stochastic time evolution is only an auxiliary fictitious dynamics, and a lot of work is being done in order to speed up its convergence \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible,2013SakaiHukushima,91Fill,Ferna2011,Diaconis:2000vi,CLP00,2014arXiv1401.8087B}. The focus of our article is to show how to modify the stochastic time evolution in order to accelerate the convergence to equilibrium. Our intuition stems from hydrodynamics and the mixing in non-equilibrium physics. Such analogies will be made below, when we introduce our nonreversible MCMC \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible}. In mathematics and computer science literature our kind of nonreversible Markov chains are called "lifted" Markov chains, and we will adopt this jargon as well \cite{CLP00,HS}.
In the next section we will introduce some mathematical definitions and notation. Afterward we will describe a very famous variant of the MCMC algorithm family -- the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm, followed by measures of relaxation to equilibrium. Finally we will introduce the lifted (nonreversible) MCMC, illustrate it on pertinent examples and conclude with a discussion.
\section{Mathematical prerequisits and notation}
Suppose we have a physical system that we initially prepared in a state $x$ from the finite set of possible configurations $\Omega$. A Markov chain is a sequence of states where the probability of the next state is determined by the previous state. It is specified by a transition matrix $P$ between the states of the physical system and the initial probability distribution over the states of the system $\rho(t=0)$. In a Markov chain the conditional probability of switching from state $x$ to state $y$ at the next time step, $P(x,y)={\rm Prob} [x \to y]$, is independent of the path that preceded to getting to state $x$. Precisely this "independence from the past" is the reason that $P$ a matrix of size $|\Omega|\times|\Omega|$ and a row-vector $\rho(t=0)$ of length $|\Omega|$ are sufficient to specify evolution of this realization.
The $x-$th row of the transition matrix $P$ is a distribution itself. As a corollary of the conservation of probability $P$ has non-negative elements and is stochastic, i.e.:
\bal
\label{eq:P_stochastic}
\sum_{y\in \Omega} P(x,y) = 1,
\eal
holds for all $x\in \Omega$. The probability distribution $\rho(t)$ evolves according to
\bal
\rho(t;\!x) \!=\!\! \sum _{y\in\Omega}\!\rho(t\!-\!1;\!y)P(y,\!x) \!=\! ... \!=\! \!\sum_{y\in\Omega}\!\rho(0;\!y)P^t(y,\!x),
\eal
or in vectorially
\bal
\rho(t) = \rho(t-1)P = ... =\rho (0)P^t,
\eal
where the time $t \geq 0$ is assumed to be discrete and $P^t$ is the matrix $P$ raised to the power $t$. Note that we are multiplying a matrix by a vector on the left. One can also define continuous time Markov chains, but this is beyond the scope of our review. A distribution is called stationary if it does not change with time, i.e.
\bal
\pi = \pi P.
\eal
A transition matrix $P$ is called irreducible if a path can be found between any two states on $\Omega$, that is for any two states $x,y$ in $\Omega$ there exists at integer $t$ such that $P^t(x,y)>0$. Irreducibility of $P$ means, that it is possible to get from any state to any other state using only transitions of positive probability; physicists usually call this property ergodicity. A Markov chain $(\rho(t=0),P)$ will converge to a stationary distribution $\pi$ if the Global Balance (GB) condition
\bal
\label{eq:GBC}
\sum _{y \in \Omega} \left[\pi(x) P(x,y) - \pi(y) P(y,x)\right]=0\,, \quad \forall x \in \Omega,
\eal
holds and $P$ is irreducible. Furthermore, one can show that the stationary distribution $\pi$ is unique. The book of Levin, Peres, and Wilmer \cite{2009Levinbook} provides a very comprehensible source of knowledge on Markov chains, stochastic processes, and mixing. We strongly recommend this book for the mathematically inclined novice.
The GB condition, \EQ{GBC}, signifies that the total influx to a state is equal to the total efflux from this state. To employ a hydrodynamics analogy -- GB amounts to the incompressibility of the phase space. A special case of \EQ{GBC} is the pairwise cancelation of the terms in the sum -- the so-called Detailed Balance (DB) condition:
\bal
\label{eq:DBC}
\pi(x) P(x,y) = \pi(y) P(y,x)\,, \quad \forall x,y\in\Omega.
\eal
Note that as opposed to GB, DB is a local, microscopic reversibility property. A hydrodynamic analogy would be that of an irrotational flow. DB is a special case of GB, likewise as all irrotational flows are incompressible. Markov chains obeying DB are called reversible Markov chains. Usually, it is much easier to implement and numerically enforce DB since it is a local condition. Below we will show several examples of MCMC with GB, which are faster than their conventional counterparts with DB. Prior to that, we will show how to implement MCMC with DB.
\section{Metropolis-Hastings (MH) algorithm}
One of the most famous MCMC algorithms is due to Metropolis et al.~\cite{MRRTT53}. It is called the Metropolis-Hastings (MH) algorithm, since it has been later generalized by Hastings~\cite{H70}. We will use the MH algorithm in all of our examples that follow, so let us first explain how it works. We start off with an arbitrary initial distribution $\rho(t=0)$ and a transition matrix $Q$. We want a Markov chain that will converge to a specified equilibrium distribution $\pi$. This can be achieved by introducing the "acceptance probabilities" $a(x,y)$ in such a way that the new transition matrix $P$, has off-diagonal elements ($x\neq y$)
\bal
P(x,y) = a(x,y)Q(x,y),
\eal
while the diagonal elements are set by conservation of total probability: $P(x,x) = 1 - \sum _{y\in \Omega \backslash x} P(x,y)$. As we have seen in the previous section, sufficient condition for an arbitrary initial distribution $\rho(t=0)$ to converge at large times to the equilibrium distribution $\pi$ is that $P$ obeys DB, \EQ{DBC}.
For this to be fulfilled, the acceptance probability should satisfy
\bal
\label{eq:acceptance_criterion}
\frac{a(x,y)}{a(y,x)} = \frac{\pi(y)Q(y,x)}{\pi(x)Q(x,y)}.
\eal
Solutions of \EQ{acceptance_criterion} are the heat bath acceptance probability
\bal
&a(x,y) = \frac{\pi(y)Q(y,x)}{\pi(y)Q(y,x)+\pi(x)Q(x,y)},
\eal
and the Metropolis-Hastings (MH) acceptance probability
\bal
&a(x,y) = {\rm min} \left[ 1, \frac{\pi(y)Q(y,x)}{\pi(x)Q(x,y)}\right].
\eal
Both solutions are widely used. In the following sections we will use the Metropolis-Hastings (MH) acceptance probability.
Now that we have defined a correct MCMC process, in that it converges to the target equilibrium distribution, we also need to know how fast it converges and this is the topic of the next section.
\section{Convergence measures}
Eventually once equilibrium is achieved we will be interested in the average values and correlations between observables. In this section we will describe various measure of convergence following the lecture notes of Sokal \cite{96Sokal}. Suppose $f$ is an observable, it is a function of the possible system states -- for example in a magnetic system, magnetization is a function of the spin configuration. We define a Markov process with a transition matrix $P$ and we start the system with the initial distribution $\rho(t=0)$. The mean $\mu_f(t)$ and variance $\sigma^2_f$ of the observable $f$ are time dependent and equal to
\bal
\mu_f(t) &\equiv \langle f(t)\rangle \equiv \sum_{x\in \Omega} \rho(t;x)f(x),
\\
\sigma^2 _f(t) &\!\equiv\! \langle f^2(t)\rangle - \langle f(t)\rangle^2\! = \!\sum _{x\in\Omega}\!\rho(t;x)[f(x) - \mu_f(t)]^2\!.\!\!\!\!
\eal
For the types of Markov processes that we consider here, as the time goes to infinity, the $\rho(t;x)$ converges to the equilibrium distribution $\pi$ and the average properties become stationary (time-independent)
\bal
\mu_{f,\pi} &\equiv\langle f\rangle_\pi \equiv \sum_{x\in\Omega}\pi(x)f(x),
\\
\sigma^2 _{f,\pi} &\equiv \langle f^2 \rangle _\pi - \langle f \rangle^2 _{\pi}\equiv \sum _{x\in\Omega}\pi(x)[f(x) - \mu_f]^2.
\eal
Above we omitted the dependence on time to stress that these averages are time-independent and added a subscript $\pi$ to also emphasize that these are equilibrium averages. A good measure of how close the system dynamics is to equilibrium is an autocorrelation function, that describes the correlations between the stochastic observable at different times. An autocorrelation function for the observable $f$, $R_{f\!f}(t_1, t_2)$, is defined as
\bal
R_{f\!f}(t_1,t_2) \equiv
\frac{\langle [f(t_1) - \mu_f(t_1)][f(t_2) - \mu_f(t_2)]\rangle}{\sigma_f(t_1)\sigma_f(t_2)}\,.
\eal
For a second-order stationary stochastic process (a process where the first and the second moment do not vary with respect to time) the autocorrelation function only depends on the time-lag between the observables $t = t_2-t_1$ but not on their position in time. In this case above formula simplifies to
\bal
\label{eq:autocorr_norm}
R_{f\!f}(t)\! =\!
\frac{\langle f(0)f(t)\rangle_{\pi}\! -\! \langle f(0)\rangle^2_\pi}{\langle f(0)^2\rangle_\pi\! -\!\langle f(0)\rangle ^2_\pi}\! =\!\frac{\langle f(0)f(t)\rangle_\pi \!-\! \mu^2_{f,\pi}}{\sigma_{f,\pi}^2},\!\!
\eal
where
$\langle f(0)f(t) \rangle _\pi = \sum_{x,y\in\Omega}f(x)\pi(x)P^t(x,y)f(y)$
As measures of convergence to equilibrium it is customary to define the exponential autocorrelation correlation time, the integrated autocorrelation time and the inverse spectral gap. The exponential autocorrelation time of the observable $f$, $\tau_{\exp,f}$, is
\bal
\tau_{\exp,f} = \limsup _{t \to \infty} \frac{t}{-\ln|R _{f\!f} (t)|},
\eal
that is the eventual least upper bound of $t/(-\ln|R_{f\!f}(t)|)$ as $t \to \infty$.
We define exponential autocorrelation time $\tau_{\exp}$ to be the relaxation of the slowest observable of the system
\bal
\tau_{\exp} = \sup _f \tau_{\exp,f}.
\eal
For infinite systems $\tau_{\exp}$ may be infinite. In a nutshell, $\tau_{\exp}$ places an upper bound on the number of iterations that should be discarded at a beginning of a run, before the system relaxed to the equilibrium for all practical purposes.
The inverse spectral gap is also a frequently used measure of convergence. The transition probability matrix has the following spectral properties. The eigenvalues of the matrix $P$ lie in a unit disk: $1=\lambda_1 \leq \lambda_2 \leq ... \leq -1$, where $\lambda _1 = 1$ is the largest eigenvalue and it is a simple eigenvalue (non-degenerate). The corresponding eigenvector $\varphi_1$ is a constant function with $\varphi_1(x) = 1$ for all $x\in\Omega$. This follows from stochasticity, \EQ{P_stochastic}. The spectral gap is defined as the difference between the two largest eigenvalues, here
\bal
\Delta \equiv \lambda_1-\lambda_2 = 1 - \lambda_2.
\eal
At a finite time $t$ we have
\bal
\frac{P^t(x,y)}{\pi(y)} = 1 + \varphi_2(x)\varphi_2(y)\lambda^t_2 +\mathcal{O}(\lambda^t_3),
\eal
where $\varphi_2$ is the eigenvector of the second largest eigenvalue. This expression can be written as
\bal
P^t(x,y) &\approx \pi(y)\left(1 + \varphi_2(x)\varphi_2(y)(1-\Delta)^t\right) \\
&\approx \pi(y)\left(1 + \varphi_2(x)\varphi_2(y)e^{-\Delta t}\right),
\eal
thus we see that $e^{-\Delta t}$ is a measure of how fast the Markov chain converges to $\pi$. Also if $P$ obeys DB, then one can show that it has real eigenvalues. To see that we define another matrix $A(x,y) = \pi(x)^{1/2}\pi(y)^{-1/2}P(x,y)$, which has the same eigenvalues as $P$, and observe that $A$ is symmetric and thus has real eigenvalues. On the other hand if $P$ obeys GB, the eigenvalues are in general complex and it makes more sense to use the "absolute spectral gap" $\Delta^* \equiv 1 - |\lambda_2|$ or the real part of the spectral gap ${\rm Re}(\Delta)$ as measures of convergence. In fact from the definition of $\tau_{\exp}$ it follows
\bal
\tau_{\exp} = \frac{1}{\Delta^*}.
\eal In this case a system relaxes to equilibrium with damped oscillations.
Another useful measure of convergence is the so-called integrated autocorrelation time $\tau_{\rm int}$ which is defined as
\bal
\label{eq:tau_int}
\tau_{\rm int} = \sup _{f} \tau_{{\rm int},f} = \sup_f \left( \frac{1}{2}+\sum^\infty _{t=1}R _{f\!f}(t)\right).
\eal
Note that if $R _{f\!f}(t) \sim e^{-t/\tau}$ and $\tau \gg 1$ we have
\bal
\tau_{{\rm int},f}\approx \tau_{{\rm \exp},f},
\eal
which one can check by direct substitution. The integrated autocorrelation time controls the statistical error in the Monte Carlo measurements of the equilibrium averages, such as $\mu_{f,\pi}$.
For further details on MCMC methods and convergence see the excellent lecture notes by Sokal \cite{96Sokal}. Also another fantastic source on Monte Carlo algorithms and their applications to statistical physics is the book of Krauth \cite{Kra06}.
\section{Lifting}
MCMC methods that obey detailed balance use equilibrium dynamics to sample a phase space. For example when visiting a lattice with uniform steady state distribution $\pi$, MH moves are unbiased hops to nearest neighbor lattice sites which occur with acceptance rate $1$ -- that is an ordinary random walk on a lattice. In this case the MH moves perform a diffusion like motion in the phase space. We use the term "diffusion" for a motion that requires $\propto N^2$ steps to travel distance $N$ from its point of origin. Now, what if this is too slow? One can imagine that sometimes it would be beneficial to have some "inertia" or "momentum", when performing auxiliary fictitious Markov chain hops in the phase space. Very much like using a spoon to stir a coffee helps to spread the sugar in the whole cup faster. Another example is odor from the dinner table -- if it were to diffuse it would reach us in a few hours instead of minutes. We can smell our dinner in a timely way thanks to air turbulence. Certain MCMC algorithms, like MH, are particularly slow close to phase transitions, where the dynamics suffers from critical slowing down due to large fluctuations of the observables. When sampling close to phase transitions, it would be beneficial to introduce some "inertia" and "bias".
"Lifting" is an idea that originated in computer science -- we increase the phase space in order to create more biases and explore the now enlarged phase space more efficiently than we would explore the original space \cite{CLP00, Diaconis:2000vi}. Here we show how to implement lifting for discrete Markov processes. Lifting will alter the convergence time. It is an open question whether and when it will make it faster. The method we will introduce is potentially good for overcoming entropic, but not high energetic barriers (see the discussion).
One can create a lifting in an uncontrolled way by adding many cycles, since cycles in phase space do not change the steady state, but the practical caveat is how many and what cycles to add to the already existing transitions. In \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible} we introduced a controlled way to create a nonreversible Markov Chain. Suppose that $\pi$ is a stationary distribution: $\pi = \pi P$, where $P$ is a stochastic matrix (\EQ{P_stochastic} holds). We define a larger space $\tilde\Omega = \Omega \times \{1,-1\}$ and denote a state in this space as $\{x_{\xi} \vert x\in \Omega, \xi \in\{1,-1\}\}$. Next we impose skew-detailed balance
\bal
\label{eq:SDB}
\tilde{\pi}(x_{\xi})\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},y_{\xi})=\tilde{\pi}(y_{-\xi})\tilde{P}(y_{-\xi},x_{-\xi})\,,
\eal
for
\bal
\label{eq:newstatdist}
\tilde{\pi} = \frac{1}{2}(\pi,\pi).
\eal
Recall that $\tilde{\pi}$ and $\pi$ are vectors. We enforce that the lifted transition matrix $\tilde{P}$ is stochastic
\bal
\label{eq:Ptilde_stochastic}
\sum_{y_{\eta}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},y_{\eta})=1,~\forall x_{\xi}\in\tilde{\Omega},
\eal
by adjusting the diagonal elements $\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},x_{\xi})=1 - \sum_{y_{\eta} \in \tilde \Omega:y_{\eta}\neq x_{\xi}}\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},y_{\eta})$.
The matrix $\tilde{P}$ has the following block structure: two diagonal blocks describe transitions inside $\Omega \times \{1\}$ and $\Omega \times \{-1\}$ spaces respectively, while the off-diagonal blocks are describe transitions between $x_\xi$ and $y_{-\xi}$ states. For simplicity, we assume that the off-diagonal blocks are diagonal matrices of the following form
\bal
\label{eq:OFFDIAG}
\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},y_{-\xi})=\delta_{xy}\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},y_{-\xi}).
\eal
A distribution $\tilde{\pi}$ satisfying the skew-detailed balance \EQ{SDB} is stationary with respect to $\tilde{P}$, i.e. $\tilde{\pi} = \tilde{\pi}\tilde{P}$. One can prove this as follows:
\bal
\nonumber
& \sum _{y_{\eta}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{\pi}(y_{\eta})\tilde{P}(y_{\eta},x_{\xi})
= \sum _{y_{\eta}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{\pi}(y_{\eta})\tilde{P}(y_{\eta},x_{\xi}) (\delta_{\xi\eta} + 1 - \delta_{\xi\eta})
\\
&=\sum _{y_{\xi}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\left(\tilde{\pi}(y_{\xi})\tilde{P}(y_{\xi},x_{\xi}) + \tilde{\pi}(y_{-\xi})\tilde{P}(y_{-\xi},x_{\xi}) \right)
\eal
Next using skew-detailed balance \EQ{SDB} and \EQ{OFFDIAG} we have
\bal
& \sum _{y_{\eta}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{\pi}(y_{\eta})\tilde{P}(y_{\eta},x_{\xi})=
\\
&
=\tilde{\pi}(x_{-\xi})\left(\sum _{y_{\xi}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},y_{-\xi}) + \tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},x_{\xi}) \right)
\\
&=\tilde{\pi}(x_{-\xi})\sum _{y_{\eta}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},y_{\eta}) = \tilde{\pi}(x_{-\xi}),
\eal
where the last equality follows from \EQ{Ptilde_stochastic}. Finally using \EQ{newstatdist} we get
\bal
& \sum _{y_{\eta}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{\pi}(y_{\eta})\tilde{P}(y_{\eta},x_{\xi}) = \tilde{\pi}(x_{\xi}),
\eal
which is the definition of stationarity and thus concludes our proof.
We should also determine the off-diagonal elements. From stochasticity and \EQ{OFFDIAG} we have
\bal
\tilde{P}(x_\xi,x_{-\xi}) &= 1- \sum_{y_{\xi}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},y_{\xi}),
\eal
or
\bal
\tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},x_{\xi})&=1- \sum_{y_{\xi}\in\tilde{\Omega}}\tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},y_{-\xi}).
\eal
Subtracting the two equations we get
\bal
\nonumber
&\tilde{P}(x_\xi,x_{-\xi})-\tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},x_\xi)
\\
\label{eq:inter_replica_transitions_diff}
&
=\sum_{y_\xi\in\tilde{\Omega}}\left(\tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},y_{-\xi})-\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},y_{\xi})\right).
\eal
From all possible solutions we want to choose the minimal rates, since the higher rates will impede the relaxation to equilibrium, by fostering too many transitions between the two copies of the same state ($x_\xi$ and $x_{-\xi}$). The rates are the smallest when one of the terms is $0$. This leads to
\bal
\label{eq:OFFDIAG_der}
&\tilde{P}(x_{\xi},x_{-\xi})\!=\!{\rm max}\!\!\left[\!0,\!\!\sum_{y_\xi \in\tilde{\Omega}}\!\!\!\left(\!\tilde{P}(x_{-\xi},y_{-\xi})-\tilde{P}(x_\xi,y_\xi)\!\right)\!\right]\!\!.\!\!
\eal
Note that there is still freedom in adjusting $\tilde{P}(x_\xi,y_\xi)$ transition rates, even when the skew-detailed balance \EQ{SDB} is imposed. The choice ultimately has to depend on the physics of the system and measures of how much DB is violated \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible,2013SakaiHukushima}.
\section{Appplications of Lifting}
\subsection{Ring with a uniform stationary distribution}
As a first example let us look at a Markov chain on a ring of $N$ states
converging to a uniform distribution $\pi(x) = N^{-1}$ for all $x \in \{1,...,N\}$. The idea is illustrated in \FIG{N_cycle_v02.pdf}. A random walker would cover every state along the ring in time that scales as diffusion timescale $t\propto N^2$ (see \FIG{N_cycle_v02.pdf}A). Lifting here can improve the convergence to the stationary distribution $\pi$. To apply liftng we create two rings of $N$ states: one on which the transitions are made only in the counter clockwise direction and the other where the transitions are made only in a clockwise direction. The bias is set by choosing $\varepsilon$: with probability $1-\varepsilon$ the walker continues to hop in the same direction, otherwise the walker jumps to the same state, but on the other replica of the system. This system converges to a steady state $\pi$ after $\propto \mathcal{O}(N)$ steps \cite{Diaconis:2000vi,CLP00}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.65\columnwidth]{N_cycle_v02.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:N_cycle_v02.pdf}$\bf A$ Random walk on a ring with $N$ sites. The time to visit all sites is set by the diffusion timescale $t \propto N^2$. $\bf B$ Lifted random walk on a ring with $N$ states. We introduce two rings of $N$ sites -- in the upper one the moves are with probability $1-\varepsilon$ counterclockwise and in the lower one the $1-\varepsilon$ clockwise, where $\varepsilon$ is small, e.g. $\varepsilon \propto \mathcal{O}(N^{-1})$ for $N\to\infty$. The same state $x$ exists on both cycles as $x_+$ and $x_{-}$. These two copies of the state $x$ are connected by auxiliary transitions specified in \EQ{OFFDIAG_der}, that ensure that GB is maintained.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Torus with uniform stationary distribution}
A reversible Markov chain on a torus of $N^2$ sites with a uniform stationary distribution $\pi(x) = N^{-2}$ (for all $x \in \{1,...,N^2\}$) performs a random walk, whose convergence toward $\pi$ scales as $t\propto\mathcal{O}(N^{2})$ (see e.g. \cite{CLP00} or the inset on \FIG{autocorrelationfunction_spectral_gap_torus_v06.pdf}). Now let us give the random walker some “inertia”. More exactly, we define a walk as follows: if we enter a node, we are most likely to exit over the opposite edge ($1-\varepsilon$), then we turn left or right with probability $\varepsilon/2$ and we never turn back. If we start the walk in a given direction, say towards north, we are likely to continue going north until we circle the torus about a $2 N /\varepsilon$ times. Afterward, we will likely turn; the node where we turn is essentially uniformly distributed over the cycle we started on. Now we circle the torus for another approximately $2 N /\varepsilon$ times, going either east or west. When we turn again, our east-west coordinate will also be essentially uniformly distributed. In other words, the second turning point will be essentially uniformly distributed over all nodes of our graph. To get to this second turning point, we only needed is $\mathcal{O}(N)$ steps. This idea described in the work \cite{CLP00} and we simulated it here (see \FIG{torus_pic_v01.pdf} and \FIG{autocorrelationfunction_spectral_gap_torus_v06.pdf}). The decay of the pair correlation function and the scaling of the real part of the inverse gap with the system size is presented on \FIG{autocorrelationfunction_spectral_gap_torus_v06.pdf}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{torus_pic_v01.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:torus_pic_v01.pdf}$\bf A$ (left) Random walk on a torus -- square lattice with periodic boundary conditions. (right) Density of visited sites by a random walker on a torus of 1024 sites, after 1024 steps. $\bf B$ (left) The torus is replaced with four torii with biased diffusion - the north, south, east and west tori. (right) Density of visited sites by a "lifted" random walker projected back on the original torus of 1024 sites, after 1024 steps. The bias was $\varepsilon = 0.1$. Notice long vertical and horizontal strides that the "lifted" random walker makes while exploring the torii.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{autocorrelationfunction_spectral_gap_torus_v06.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:autocorrelationfunction_spectral_gap_torus_v06.pdf}Decay of the position $r(t)$ autocorrelation function $R_{rr}(t)$ (see \EQ{autocorr_norm}), indicating the approach to steady state. (inset) Dependence of the real part of the inverse spectral gap on the lattice size $N$ for a torus with $N^2$ sites.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Ising Model on a complete graph}
Suppose we have $N$ Ising spins on a complete graph (every pair of distinct vertices is connected by a unique edge). This system exhibits a phase transition, symmetry breaking and emergence of spontaneous magnetization, at a finite positive temperature in the limit infinite number of spins $N\to \infty$. Let each vertex carry a spin $s_i \in\{1,-1\}$. The energy of a spin configuration $\mathcal{C} = \{s_1,...,s_N\}$ is
\bal
E(\mathcal{C}) = - \frac{J}{N}\sum_{i<j}s_is_j,
\eal
where the above sum runs over all pairs of spins. The ground state energy is $E_g = - \frac{J}{2}(N-1)$. This ground state is degenerate, it has entropy $S = \ln 2$ and it corresponds to all spins pointing up or all spins pointing down. Note that $E_g\propto \mathcal{O}(N)$, while $S\propto \mathcal{O}(1)$. At $T = \infty$ all states are equally probable giving rise to $\langle E \rangle = 0$ and $S =N \ln 2$, since the partition function (number of configurations) is $Z = 2^N$. Notice that at $T=\infty$ the entropy scales with the system size $S\propto \mathcal{O}(N)$. Thus at high temperatures the spins are disordered and the average magnetization is zero while at low temperature phase the energy effects will dominate and the spins will tend to align with magnetization $M = \sum _{i=1}^N s_i$ different from zero (though the average magnetization will still remain zero). As infinitesimal perturbation will determine which ground state is selected. This is an example of "symmetry breaking" in statistical mechanics. Somewhere at $T$ positive and non-zero there will be a phase transition, where the energy and entropy are of the same order of magnitude.
A key observation in this model is that the energy depends solely on the magnetization: $E =- \frac{J}{2N}(M^2-1)$. This means that instead of summing over configurations, the partition function can be written down with $N+1$ terms, since this is how many different values of magnetization are there. Each magnetization occurs with multiplicity $D(M) =\binom{N}{N_+}$, where $N_+ = (N+M)/2$ is the number of positive spins. Therefore the partition sum is
\bal
Z(T) = \sum _{\mathcal{C}}e^{-\beta E(\mathcal{C})} = \sum _{m=-1,...,1}D(m)e^{\beta E(m)},
\eal
where $m\equiv M/N$ is magnetization density. The entropy density $s\equiv S/M$ at fixed magnetization, in the limit of large $N$, is
\bal
s(m) = - \frac{1+m}{2}\ln\! \left(\frac{1+m}{2}\right)-\frac{1-m}{2}\ln
\!\left(\frac{1-m}{2}\right)\!\!.\!\!\!
\eal
Using $s(m) = N \ln D(m)$, in the limit of large $N$ we have
\bal
Z &= \sum _{m=-1,...,1}e^{-\beta N f(m)},
\\
\label{eq:free_energy_functional}
f(m) &= - \frac{J}{2}m^2 - Ts(m),
\eal
where $f(m)$ is the free energy functional. As we see on \FIG{free_energy_complete_graph_ising.pdf},
there is a critical temperature $T_c = J$, below which there are two free energy minima at $m\propto\mathcal{O}(1)$ and above which it is only one free energy minima at zero magnetization. The degeneracy between the two free energy functional minimums is lifted with a small perturbation (such as an external magnetic field) and remains lifted even after the perturbation has vanished. At $N\to\infty$ we have a phase transition, but at finite $N$ we have fluctuations of magnetization proportional to $\mathcal{O}(N^{\delta-1})$. Expanding the free energy functional \EQ{free_energy_functional} for $T$ close to $T_c$ we have
\bal
f(m) \approx \frac{\tau}{2}m^2 +\frac{m^4}{12} -T\ln 2 + \mathcal{O}(m^6,\tau m^4)
\eal
where $\tau = 1 - T/T_c$. For $\tau >0$ the fluctuations of $Nm$ are proportional to $N^{-1/2}$, which gives $\delta = 1/2$. At the critical temperature the quadratic term and the average magnetization vanish, but the fluctuations are of the order $N^{-1/4}$ and thus the magnetization $Nm$ has a distribution of width $N^{3/4}$. One can learn more about the Ising model on a complete graph from the lecture notes of Monasson \cite{2005Remi}, which we followed here to explain this phase transition. Also \cite{2010GouldTobochnik} gives an excellent introduction to magnetic spin system and their simulations.
The time it takes for a reversible MCMC algorithm to decorrelate $R _{mm}(t)$ is proportional to the variance of $m$, i.e. $\propto N^{3/2}$ close to the phase transition. On the other-hand, the proposed lifting algorithm converges as $N^{3/4}$. This we argued and confirmed numerically in \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible}, by measuring both the inverse spectral gap $\Delta^{-1}$ and the decay of the autocorrelation function of magnetization $R _{mm}(t)$. Here we reproduced these results on \FIG{mixingtime.pdf}.
We created two copies of the system, where in one copy we would be just increasing magnetization and in the other we would be just decreasing magnetization. This resulted in an effective magnetic field, which was dependent on the state of the system and allowed the system to linger longer at states of very low and very high magnetization \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible}. Similar observations were made for $1d$ Ising in \cite{2013SakaiHukushima}. Ultimately the lifted MCMC converged faster to the equilibrium \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible} and a pseudocode is given on \FIG{lifting}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=3.42in]{free_energy_complete_graph_ising.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:free_energy_complete_graph_ising.pdf} The free energy functional for $J = 1$ and three different temperatures. We notice that $T_c = J$ is the critical temperature -- above this temperature the probability distribution of magnetization is centered around 0, below there are two non-zero minimas. The degeneracy between the two is lifted with a small perturbation, such as an external magnetic field and remains lifted even after the perturbation has vanished. At $T_c = J$ we notice that the curvature of the saddle point $m =0$ vanishes, which signifies the second order phase tansition.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=3.42in]{mixingtime.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:mixingtime.pdf} This figure is reproduced from \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible} it represents the correlation time of the magnetization autocorrelation function in the Ising model on complete graph. The blue labels represent the reversible MH algorithm and the red labels are the nonreversible MH algorithm (color online). The dots represent $T = 1/({\rm Re}( \Delta))$, where $\Delta$ is the spectral gap, obtained by exact diagonalization of respective transition matrices. The crosses represent correlation times reconstructed by fitting the large time asymptotics with an exponential function, $\exp(-t /\tau_{\rm rev})$, and exponential-oscillatory function, $\exp(-t/\tau_{\rm nonrev})\cos(\omega t -\phi)$, in the reversible and nonreversible cases, respectively. Best slope fits are $\tau_{\rm rev}(N)\propto N^{1.43}$ and $\tau_{\rm nonrev}(N)\propto N^{0.85}$.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\noindent\makebox[\linewidth]{\rule{\columnwidth}{0.4pt}}
\begin{algorithmic}
\STATE\COMMENT {initially: system at state $x_+$}
\STATE $s_i\gets{\text{randomly selected} \uparrow \text{spin from } x_+}$
\STATE $a(x_+,y_+) = {\rm min}\left[1, \frac{\pi(y_+)}{\pi(x_+)}\right]$\COMMENT {MH proposal (flipping $s_i$ in $x_+$ gives $y_+$)}
\STATE $p \gets{\text{random number in }(0,1)}$
\IF {$p \leq a$}
\STATE spin is flipped and the new state is $y_+$ \COMMENT{MH move}
\ELSE \COMMENT{attempt to change from $x_+$ to $x_-$}
\STATE $q\gets{\text{random number in }(0,1)}$
\IF {$q \leq \frac{\tilde{P}(x_+,x_-)}{(1 - \sum_{z_+;z_+\neq x_+} \tilde{P}(x_+,z_+))}$}
\STATE the new state is $x_-$
\ENDIF
\ENDIF
\end{algorithmic}
\noindent\makebox[\linewidth]{\rule{\columnwidth}{0.4pt}}
\caption{Implementation of "lifting" with a MH MCMC algorithm.}
\label{fig:lifting}
\end{figure}
\subsection{$1d$ Ising Model}
Next example is a $1d$ Ising model of $N$ spins with periodic boundary conditions and energy
\bal
E(\mathcal{C}) = - J \sum^N _{i=1}s_is_{i+1}.
\eal
Sakai and Hukushima implemented in \cite{2013SakaiHukushima} three different nonreversible MCMC algorithms. All three cases fulfill \EQ{inter_replica_transitions_diff} and one of them was exactly \EQ{OFFDIAG_der}. In all three cases the nonreversible MCMC converged faster than the reversible MCMC. In the excellent and very intuitively written work the authors explain analytically why in some of the cases the MCMC convergence was faster. The lifted MCMC $1d$ Ising had Glauber-like transition rates as of a reversible MCMC algorithm for a $1d$ Ising in a magnetic field that depends on the state of the system \cite{2013SakaiHukushima}. The skew-detailed balance \EQ{SDB} condition insured that the nonreversible Markov Chain converges to the equilibrium distribution without the magnetic field \cite{2013SakaiHukushima}.
\subsection{$2d$ Ising model - caveats}
Applying lifting in the same way as in the previous two examples -- by controlling magnetization, did not yield a significant speed up on the $2d$ Ising model at the asymptotic critical point \cite{Ferna2011}. Also creating replicas where we allow only specific/biased energy changes, but obey global balance, did not lead to a significant speed up \cite{Ferna2011}. This speed up seemed to have only changed a prefactor at most, but not the scaling with the system size \cite{Ferna2011, 2013SakaiHukushima}. Further investigation is needed on how to make lifting adaptive to the obstacles of the configuration space.
Thus, although we have successfully created a correct algorithm, that obeys GB, and converges to the proper equilibrium distribution, in the case of $2d$ Ising we have not yet been able to find the lifting that leads to significantly faster convergence. The lifting that provides the fastest convergence has to utilize the physics of the system at hand. For example in the mean field Ising model -- the slowest observable to converge is magnetization and the equilibrium distribution can be written as a function magnetization only. Thus it was very much natural to choose a lifting that "tempers" the magnetization.
\section{Discussion and comparison to other methods}
Besides the above mentioned implementations of lifting \cite{Ferna2011, 2013SakaiHukushima}, there were several other similar ideas, such as e.g. \cite{2013Ichiki,PhysRevLett.105.120603,2009BKW,2012BK,2004Neal,Schram201588}. Suwa and Todo have proposed another MCMC method that violates DB and significantly reduces the convergence time of the Potts model, compared to the respective reversible MCMC method \cite{PhysRevLett.105.120603}. A new nonreversible algorithm was developed for hard-sphere systems \cite{2009BKW,2012BK}, with substantial acceleration compared to related variants obeying detailed balance. For a more detailed comparison of the proposed algorithms that violated DB we refer the reader to \cite{turitsyn2011irreversible}.
On the more rigorous side some of the results that were pertinent to our work can be found in these papers \cite{Diaconis:2000vi,CLP00,Hayes,2014arXiv1401.8087B,09GB,2013lelievre,2014arXiv1404.0105R}. Still much less is known about nonreversible Markov Chains, compared to vast knowledge on reversible Markov Chains (see e.g. \cite{2009Levinbook}). For example for the reversible Markov Chains, the Peskun theorem holds. It states that the asymptotic variance of any observable is reduced by increasing the acceptance probability of the Markov Chain ($a(x,y)$ in our notation for the MH Markov Chain). Chen, Lovasz and Pak show in \cite{CLP00} that lifting can at most introduce a square root improvement of the convergence time. Such an acceleration is still quite impressive for large convergence times.
\section{Conclusions}
We have reviewed several works that show how to controllably transform a reversible MCMC algorithm into a nonreversible MCMC algorithm. The main idea is to enlarge the phase space and by that "escape" entropic bottleneck and traps. This method was not designed to cover rugged energy landscapes, there the convergence time to equilibrium is determined by rare events of escaping deep energy wells. Lifting is potentially useful where we have "entropic barriers" -- such as a vast energetically almost flat configuration space or a maze with paths of low entropy. Lifting does not require any particular symmetry of the configuration space (for example it does not rely on the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry of the Ising model). The illustrated simple examples show that lifting can lead to a dramatic reduction of the convergence time. Methods using non-equilibrium mixing (methods that violated detailed balance) might prove useful in studies of phase transitions, soft matter dynamics, protein structures and granular media, etc. An interesting direction for future research is to explore if this additional nonreversibility can improve the convergence properties of well known reversible algorithms \cite{14VMachta}.
\begin{acknowledgments}
Part of this work was completed in Aspen Center for Physics. MV acknowledges the Aspen Center for Physics and NSF grant $\#1066293$ for support. MV thanks J.~Machta, K.~S.~Turitsyn, M.~Chertkov, C.~Moore, K.~Hukushima, W.~Krauth, C.~{Godr\' eche} and T.~Hayes for illuminating discussions.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
In this paper, we study the Hausdorff dimension of the level and collision sets of a certain class of strong Feller processes; concrete examples were constructed in \cite{KK13a} and \cite{KK13b} under rather general assumptions, see Assumption A below. This assumption guarantees, in particular, that the process is a strong Feller process admitting a transition probability density which enjoys upper and lower estimates of ``compound kernel'' type, see \eqref{set-e35} and \eqref{set-e36}.
Let us briefly describe the problems which are discussed in this paper. Let $X$ be a (strong) Feller process with values in $\rn$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{intro-e05}
\left\{s \,:\, X_s(\omega)\in D\right\}
\quad\text{for any Borel set $D\subset\rn$}
\end{equation}
denotes a level set of $X$, i.e.\ the (random) set of times when $X$ visits the set $D$.
We adapt the techniques from \cite{Ha74}, see also \cite{Ha70} and \cite{Ha71}, to obtain bounds on the Hausdorff dimension of such level sets. The idea used in \cite{Ha74} is based on the notion of subordination (in the sense of Bochner, i.e.\ a random time change by an independent increasing L\'evy process), and on knowledge of the Hausdorff dimension of the range of a $\gamma$-stable subordinator $T_t^{\gamma}$ (cf.\ Lemma~\ref{ha} below).
The proof presented in \cite{Ha74} heavily relies on the fact that $X$ is a L\'evy process; a key ingredient is a criterion for the polarity of points in terms of the characteristic exponent of the L\'evy process $X$. For general Markov processes such a result is not available, and so we need an essentially different approach.
The first problem which we encounter in the investigation of the level set \eqref{intro-e05}, is how to check that the process $X$ a.s.\ enters $D$; in other words: when is the starting point $x$ \emph{regular} for $D$. We can overcome this problem using some abstract potential theory and the Kato class; this requires, however, upper and lower estimates for the transition density $p_t(x,y)$ of $X$ which allows us to characterize the Kato class (with respect to $p_t(x,y)$; Definition~\ref{Kato}) and regular points for $D$. For $d$-sets this problem simplifies and, at least for certain values of $d$, any point in the topological boundary $\partial D$ is regular for $D$. Using the structure of the estimates for $p_t(x,y)$, we can establish similar assertions on the polarity of sets and regularity of points for the subordinate (i.e.\ time changed) process $X_{T_t^{\gamma}}$.
In Theorem~\ref{H-bounds} we use the indices $\gamma_{\inf}$ and $\gamma_{\sup}$---these characterize the set $D$ ``in the eyes'' of the time-changed process $X_{T_t^{\gamma}}$---to obtain uniform upper and lower bounds on the random set $\dim \{s\,:\, X_s(\omega)\in D\}$; here $D$ is a $d$-set and the process starts from a point $x$ which belongs to the topological closure $\overline{D}$ of $D$. In the one-dimensional case we obtain (Proposition~\ref{cor-H}) the exact value of the Hausdorff dimension of the zero-level set $\{s:\, X_s(\omega)=0\}$. This result can be pushed a bit further: in dimension one we show (Proposition~\ref{prop-H2}) that this value is also the Hausdorff dimension of the set of times, at which two independent copies of $X$ meet.
The second half of the paper is on collision sets. Motivated by our findings in Proposition~\ref{prop-H2} and the results from \cite{Ta66} and \cite{JP69}, we investigate the Hausdorff dimension of the collision set
\begin{equation*
A(\omega):=
\left\{x\in \real\,:\, \, X^1_t(\omega)=X_t^2(\omega)=x\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right\}
\end{equation*}
of two independent copies $X^1$ and $X^2$ of $X$; from now on we assume that $X$ is one-dimensional and recurrent. Since recurrence reflects the behaviour of the process as time tends to infinity, it cannot be deduced from Assumption A (which is essentially a condition on short times). Some examples of recurrent processes which fit our setting are given in Section~\ref{rec}. In order to get bounds on the Hausdorff dimension of $A(\omega)$, we compare the polar sets of the process $(X^1, X^2)$ with the polar sets of symmetric stable processes with parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$. The idea to use the range of a stable process as a ``gauge'' in order to express the Hausdorff dimension of a Borel set in $\rn$ is due to Taylor \cite{Ta66}; in its original version it heavily relies on the fact that the process $X$ is a L\'evy process. In the present paper, we use the symmetric stable (``gauge'') processes in a different way, especially when establishing the lower bound for the Hausdorff dimension.
Let us briefly mention some known results. We refer to \cite{Xi04} for an extensive survey on sample path properties of L\'evy processes, in particular, for various dimension results on level, intersection and image sets. Most results essentially depend on the independence and stationarity of increments of L\'evy processes, while for general Markov processes much less is known. For L\'evy-type processes the behaviour of the symbol of the corresponding generator allows us to get the results on the Hausdorff dimension of the image sets, see e.g.\ \cite{Sch98}, \cite{KSW14}, and the monograph \cite{BSW14}; in \cite{Sh95} conditions are given, such that Markov processes collide with positive probability, and \cite{SX10} studies the Hausdorff and packing dimensions of the image sets of self-similar processes.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{set} we explain the notation and state our main results. Section~\ref{pot} is devoted to some facts and auxiliary statements from probabilistic potential theory; these are interesting in their own right. The proofs of the main results are given in Sections~\ref{s4} and \ref{s5}. Examples of recurrent processes, which satisfy Assumption~A can be found in Section~\ref{rec}. Finally, the (rather technical) proofs of some auxiliary statements are given in the appendix.
\section{Setting and main results}\label{set}
We begin with the description of the class of stochastic processes which we are going to consider. Denote by $C_\infty^k(\rn)$ the space of $k$ times continuously differentiable functions which vanish, with all derivatives, at infinity. For $f\in C_\infty^2(\rn)$ we consider the following L\'evy-type operator
\begin{equation}\label{set-e05}
L(x,D)f(x)
:=a(x) \cdot \nabla f(x) + \int_\rno \big(f(x+h)-f(x)-h \cdot \nabla f(x) \I_{(0,1)}(|h|)\big)m(x,h)\,\mu(dh),
\end{equation}
where $a:\rn\to\rn$, $m:\rn\times\rn\to (0,\infty)$ are measurable functions and $\mu$ is a L\'evy measure, i.e.\ a measure on $\rno$ such that $\int_\rno \big(1\wedge |h|^2\big)\mu(dh)<\infty$.
Denote by $\hat f(x) := (2\pi)^{-n}\int_\rn f(x)e^{-ix\cdot\xi}\,dx$ the Fourier transform. It is not hard to see that we can rewrite $L(x,D)$ as a pseudo-differential operator
\begin{equation}\label{set-e10}
L(x,D)f(x)
= -q(x,D)f(x)
:= -\int_\rn q(x,\xi) \hat f(\xi)\,d\xi,
\qquad f\in C_c^\infty(\rn),
\end{equation}
with symbol $q:\rn\times\rn\to\comp$. The symbol is given by the L\'evy--Khintchine representation
\begin{equation}\label{set-e15}
q(x,\xi)
=
-ia(x)\cdot\xi + \int_\rno \big(1-e^{ih\cdot\xi}+ih\cdot\xi\I_{(0,1)}(|h|)\big) m(x,h)\,\mu(dh).
\end{equation}
We will frequently compare the variable-coefficient operator $-q(x,D) = L(x,D)$ with an operator $q(D)$ (with bounded coefficients), defined by
$$
-q(D) f(x)
= - \int_\rn e^{i x \cdot \xi} q(\xi) \hat f(\xi)\,d\xi,
$$
with the real-valued symbol
\begin{equation}\label{set-e20}
q(\xi) = \int_\rno \big(1-\cos (\xi \cdot h)\big)\, \mu(dh).
\end{equation}
The symbol $q(\xi)$ is the characteristic exponent of a symmetric L\'evy process $Z_t$ in $\rn$, i.e.\ $\Ee e^{i \xi\cdot Z_t} = e^{-tq(\xi)}$.
Define
\begin{equation*
q^U(\xi)
:= \int_\rno \big((\xi \cdot h)^2\wedge 1\big)\,\mu(dh)
\quad\text{and}\quad
q^L(\xi)
:= \int_{0<|\xi\cdot h|\leq 1} (\xi \cdot h)^2\,\mu(dh)
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*
q^*(r)
:= \sup_{\ell\in \mathds{S}^n} q^U( r\ell),
\end{equation*}
where $\mathds{S}^n$ is the unit sphere in $\rn$. The functions $q^U$ and $q^L$ are, up to multiplicative constants, upper and lower bounds for $q(\xi)$, cf.~\cite{KK12a,K13}. The key regularity assumption in \cite{KK13a,KK13b} is the following comparison result:
\begin{equation}\label{set-e30}
\exists \kappa \geq 1 \quad
\forall r\geq 1\::\:
q^*(r) \leq \kappa \inf_{\ell \in \mathds{S}^n} q^L( r \ell).
\end{equation}
This condition means that the function $q(\xi)$ does not oscillate ``too much''. For example, if $q(\xi)=|\xi|^\alpha$ one can check that \eqref{set-e30} holds true with $\kappa=2/\alpha$. Motivated by this example, we use the notation
\begin{equation}\label{set-e31}
\alpha:= 2/\kapp
\end{equation}
with $\kappa\geq 1$ from \eqref{set-e30}. Moreover, \eqref{set-e30} implies, see \cite{KK12a,K13}, that
\begin{equation}\label{set-e33}
q(\xi)\geq c |\xi|^\alpha, \quad |\xi|\geq 1.
\end{equation}
We refer to \cite{KK12a} for examples which illustrate this condition.
In \cite{KK13b} it was shown that, under the following assumptions
\begin{assumption-A}\mbox{}
\begin{itemize}
\item[\bfseries 1)]
The L\'evy measure $\mu$ is such that \eqref{set-e30} holds;
\item[\bfseries 2)]
There exist constants $c_1, c_2, c_3>0$, such that $|a(x)|\leq c_1$ and $c_2\leq m(x,u)\leq c_3$;
\item[\bfseries 3)]
The functions $a(x)$ and $ m(x,u)$ are locally H\"older continuous in $x$ with some index $\lambda\in (0,1]$;
\item[\bfseries 4)]
Either $\alpha>1$, with $\alpha$ as in \eqref{set-e30}, \eqref{set-e31}, or $a(x)\equiv 0$ and $m(x,h)=m(x,-h)$, $\mu(dh)=\mu(-dh)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{assumption-A}
\noindent
the operator $L(x,D)$ extends to the generator $(L, D(L))$ of a (strong) Feller process $X$, which has a transition probability density $p_t(x,y)$; this density is continuous for $(t,x,y)\in [t_0,\infty)\times \rn\times \rn$, $t_0>0$, and satisfies the following upper and lower bounds:
\begin{equation}\label{set-e35}
p_t(x,y) \geq c\rho_t^n f_{\textrm{low}}(x \rho_t),\quad t\in (0,1],\; x,y\in \rn,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{set-e36}
p_t(x,y)\leq C \rho_t^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_t \:\cdot) * Q_t\big)(y-x),\quad t\in (0,1],\; x,y\in \rn,
\end{equation}
where $(Q_t)_{t\geq 0}$ is a family of sub-probability measures,
\begin{gather*
\rho_t :=\inf\{ r>0: \,\, q^*(r)\geq 1/t\}, \\
f_{\textrm{low}}(z):= a_1 (1-a_2|z|)_+
\quad\text{and}\quad
f_{\textrm{up}}(z):=a_3 e^{-a_4 |z|},\quad z\in \real;
\end{gather*}
($a_i>0$, $i=1,\dots,4$, are constants and $x_+:= \max(x,0)$). The family of sub-probability measures $(Q_t)_{t\geq 0}$ is explicitly constructed in \cite{KK13b}; for our purposes the exact form of the $Q_t$ is not important.
\medskip\noindent
\boldmath
\textbf{Unless otherwise specified, $X=(X_t)_{t\geq 0}$ will always denote an $\rn$-valued Feller process as above, with law $\Pp^x(X_t\in dy) = p_t(x,y)\,dy$, $t>0$.}
\unboldmath
\medskip
In order to state our result on the bound for the Hausdorff dimension of level sets we need to define two auxiliary indices.
Denote by $\mathcal{M}_b^+(\overline{D})$ the family of all finite Borel measures with support in $\overline{D}\subset \rn$. Then
\begin{align}
\label{set-e40}
\gamma_{\inf}
&:= \inf\left\{\gamma\in [0,1]\,:\,\int_0^1 \frac{r^d}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/r)}\,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}} < \infty\right\},\\
\label{set-e42}
\gamma_{\sup}
&:= \sup\bigg\{\gamma \in [0,1]\,:\, \int_0^1 \frac{\varpi\big(B(x,r)\cap \overline{D}\big)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/r)}\,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}} \quad \text{is unbounded}\quad\forall \varpi\in \mathcal{M}_b^+(\overline{D})\bigg\}.
\end{align}
Let us give an intuitive explanation of the meaning of the indices $\gamma_{\inf}$ and $\gamma_{\sup}$.
Denote by $T^{\gamma} = (T_t^{\gamma})_{t\geq 0}$, $\gamma\in (0,1)$, a $\gamma$-stable subordinator, i.e.\ a real-valued L\'evy process with increasing sample paths such that $t^{-1/\gamma} T^{\gamma}_t=T^{\gamma}_1$ in distribution for all $t>0$. Assume that $T^{\gamma}$ is independent of $X$. Intuitively, $\gamma_{\inf}$ is the smallest $\gamma$ for which the time-changed process $X_{T^\gamma_t}$ still can see the set $\overline{D}$, and $\gamma_{\sup}$ is the largest $\gamma$, for which $\overline{D}$ is polar for $X_{T^\gamma_t}$.
Recall that a set $D$ is called a $d$-set, if there exists a measure $\varpi\in \mathcal{M}_b^+(\overline{D})$, $\supp\varpi = \overline{D}$, for which
\begin{equation}\label{set-e45}
c_1 r^d \leq \varpi\big(B(x,r)\cap \overline{D} \big) \leq c_2 r^d, \quad x\in \overline{D},\; r>0;
\end{equation}
the corresonding measure $\varpi$ is called a $d$-measure. We can now state our first main result.
\begin{theorem}\label{H-bounds}
Suppose that the Feller process $X$ with generator $L(x,D)$ satisfies Assumption A, and $D=\overline D\subset \rn$ is a closed $d$-set with $d>n-\alpha$. Then\footnote{Here, as well as in the rest of the paper, ``$\dim$'' stands for the Hausdorff dimension.}
\begin{equation}\label{set-e50}
1-\gamma_{\inf}
\leq \dim\{s\,:\, X_s^x \in D, \; x\in D\}
\leq 1-\gamma_{\sup}, \quad \Pp^x\text{-a.s.}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_{\inf}$ and $\gamma_{\sup}$ are given by \eqref{set-e40} and \eqref{set-e42}, respectively.
\end{theorem}
In the one-dimensional case we can get a result which closely resembles those in \cite{Ha74} for L\'evy processes. Denote by
$$
X^{-1}(\{0\},\omega):= \{ s>0\,:\, X_s(\omega)=0\}, \quad \text{where $X_0(\omega)=0$},
$$
the zero-level set of $X$ and set
\begin{equation*
\gamma^* := \inf\left\{ \gamma\in [0,1]\,:\,\int_0^1 \frac{1}{(q^*(1/s))^\gamma}\,\frac{ds}{s^2} <\infty \right\}.
\end{equation*}
The corollary below follows from Theorem~\ref{H-bounds} if we take $D=\{0\}$, $d=0$ and $\alpha>1$; in this case points are non-polar for $X$.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor-H}
Let $X$ be a Feller process with generator $L(x,D)$ and suppose that Assumption A is satisfied. Let $n=1$ and $\alpha>1$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\dim X^{-1}(\{0\},\omega) = 1-\gamma^* \quad \Pp^0\text{-a.s.}
\end{equation*}
In particular, if $q^*(\xi)\asymp |\xi|^\alpha$ ($|\xi|\geq 1$),\footnote{We write $f(t)\asymp g(t)$ or $f\asymp g$ if there is an absolute constant $0<c<\infty$ such that $c^{-1}f(t)\leq g(t)\leq cf(t)$ for all $t$ (in the specified domain)} then $\gamma^*= 1/\alpha$.
\end{corollary}
Corollary~\ref{cor-H} can also be used to calculate the Hausdorff dimension of the set of collision times of independent copies $X^1$, $X^2$ of $X$:
\begin{equation*
\Theta(\omega)
:= \left\{ t\geq 0\,:\, X^1_t =X^2_t=x\quad \text{for some $x\in \rn$}\right\}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop-H2}
Suppose that $X$ is a one-dimensional $(n=1)$ Feller process with generator $L(x,D)$ and that Assumption A is satisfied. Let $\alpha>1$, and denote by $X^{1}$ and $X^{2}$ two independent copies of $X$. Then
\begin{equation*
\dim\Theta(\omega)= 1-\gamma^* \quad \Pp\text{-a.s.}
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
Our second main result concerns the Hausdorff dimension of the collision set
\begin{align}\label{set-e65}
A(\omega)
&:= \left\{x\in \real\,:\, X^1_t(\omega) = X_t^2(\omega) = x \quad \text{for some $ t>0$}\right\}\\
\notag&\qquad (X^1, X^2\text{\ are two independent copies of $X$}).
\end{align}
\begin{theorem}\label{t-col}
Let $X$ be a one-dimensional $(n=1)$ Feller process with generator $L(x,D)$ and suppose that Assumption A is holds. If $X$ is recurrent and if the function $q(\xi)$ from \eqref{set-e20} satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{set-e70}
c_1|\xi|^\alpha \leq q(\xi)\leq c_2 |\xi|^\beta\quad \text{for all $|\xi|\geq 1$},
\end{equation}
for some constants $c_1,c_2>0$ and $1<\alpha\leq \beta<2$, then the Hausdorff dimension of the collision set $A(\omega)$ is estimated from above and below as
\begin{equation*
\alpha-1
\leq \dim A(\omega)
\leq \beta-1 \quad \Pp^x\text{-a.s.\ for all $x\in\real$.}
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\section{Some auxiliary results from potential theory}\label{pot}
A central problem is which points can be hit by the process $X$. For this we need a few tools from potential theory. The following definition is taken from \cite{KT07}.
\begin{definition}\label{Kato}
Let $(X_t)_{t\geq 0}$ be an $\rn$-valued Markov process admitting a transition density $p_t(x,y)$ and $\varpi$ a Borel measure on $\rn$. The measure $\varpi$ belongs to the \emph{Kato class} $\Kato$ with respect to $p_t(x,y)$, if
\begin{equation}\label{pot-e05}
\lim_{t\to 0} \sup_{x\in \rn} \int_0^t \int_\rn p_s(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,ds = 0.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Let $r_\lambda(x,y)$, $\lambda>0$, be the $\lambda$-potential density of $X$, i.e.
$$
r_\lambda(x,y) := \int_0^\infty e^{-\lambda s} p_s(x,y)\, ds.
$$
We can extend the resolvent operator from functions $f\in L_1(\rn)$ to (finite) measures: For $\lambda>0$ and any finite measure $\varpi$ we can define the operator
\begin{equation*}
R_\lambda \varpi(x)
:= \int_0^\infty \int_\rn e^{-\lambda s} p_s(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,ds
= \int_\rn r_\lambda(x,y)\,\varpi(dy).
\end{equation*}
A Borel set $D\subset\rn$ is \emph{polar} for $X=(X_t)_{t\geq 0}$, if $\Pp^x(\tau_D<\infty)=0$ for all $x\in \rn$, where
\begin{equation*
\tau_D := \inf\{t>0\,:\, X_t \in D\}
\end{equation*}
is the first hitting time of the set $D$.
\begin{remark}\label{equiv}
It is shown in \cite{KT06} that \eqref{pot-e05}
is equivalent to ``$\lim_{\lambda\to \infty} \sup_x R_\lambda \varpi(x)=0$''.
The set $D$ is polar if and only if $R_0\varpi(x)$ is unbounded for any
finite non-zero measure $\varpi$ with compact support contained in $\overline{D}$, see \cite[p.~285]{BG68}.
\end{remark}
In order to make sure that the process $X$ enters the set $D$, we need to take the starting point $x$ from the \emph{fine closure} (i.e.\ the closure in the fine topology) of $D$. Recall from \cite[p.~87, Exercise 4.9]{BG68} that the fine closure $\widetilde D$ of a set $D$ is $D\cup D^r$, where $D^r$ denotes the set of \emph{regular points} of $D$, i.e.
$$
D^r := \left\{x\in \rn\,:\,\Pp^x(\tau_D=0)=1\right\}.
$$
We need to characterize the regular points for $D$. The following elementary result \emph{should} be known, but we could not find a reference and so we include the short proof.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-reg}
Let $D\subset \rn$ and assume that there exists a finite measure $\varpi\in\Kato$ (w.r.t.\ $p_t(x,y)$) with $\supp\varpi=\overline{D}$. If a point $x\in\rn$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{pot-e15}
\liminf_{\lambda\to \infty} \frac{R_\lambda \varpi(x)}{\sup_{y\in \overline{D}} R_\lambda \varpi(y)}
= c(x) > 0,
\end{equation}
then $x$ is regular for $D$. In particular, if a point $x$ is not regular for $D$, then the constant $c(x)$ in \eqref{pot-e15} is necessarily equal to $0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varpi$ be a finite measure such that $\supp\varpi= \overline{D}$ and $\varpi\in \Kato$. By \cite[Vol.~1, p.~194, Theorem~6.6]{Dy65}, there exists a continuous additive functional\footnote{that is, $A_{t+s}=A_s + A_t\circ \theta_s$ for any $t,s>0$ where $\theta_s$ is the shift operator.} $A_t$ satisfying
$$
\Ee^x A_t = \int_0^t \int_\rn p_s(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,ds.
$$
Using standard arguments, we find for any $\lambda>0$ and $x\in \rn$
\begin{align}\label{pot-e20}
\Ee^x \int_0^m e^{-\lambda t}\, dA_t
= \int_0^m e^{-\lambda t}\, d\Ee^x A_
= \int_0^m e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt.
\end{align}
Passing to the limit as $m\to \infty$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{pot-e25}
\Ee^x \int_0^\infty e^{-\lambda t} \,dA_t
= R_\lambda \varpi(x).
\end{equation}
Let $\tau:=\tau_D$ be the hitting time of the set $D$. By construction, the additive functional $A_t$ satisfies $A_t=0$ for $t<\tau$. Thus,
\begin{align*
\lambda\Ee^x \int_0^m e^{-\lambda t} A_t \,dt
&= \lambda \underbrace{\Ee^x \int_0^{ m} e^{-\lambda t} A_t \I_{\{\tau > m\}}\,dt}_{=0}
+ \lambda \Ee^x \int_{\tau}^m e^{-\lambda t} A_t \I_{\{\tau\leq m\}}\,dt\\
&= \lambda \Ee^x \int_0^{m-\tau}e^{-\lambda (t+\tau)} A_{t+\tau} \I_{\{\tau\leq m\}} \,dt\\
&= \Ee^x \left[e^{-\lambda \tau} \I_{\{\tau\leq m\}} \Ee^{X_{\tau}} \left( \lambda \int_0^{m-\tau} e^{-\lambda t} A_t\,dt \right) \right]\\%+ \lambda \Ee^x e^{-\lambda \tau} A_{\tau}\\
&=\Ee^x\left[ e^{-\lambda \tau}\I_{\{\tau \leq m\}} \Ee^{X_{\tau}} \left(\int_0^{m-\tau} e^{-\lambda t} \,dA_t\right)\right] - e^{-\lambda m} \,\Ee^x \left[ \I_{\{\tau \leq m\}} \Ee^{X_{\tau}} A_{m-\tau}\right]\\
&= \Ee^x\left[ e^{-\lambda \tau}\I_{\{\tau \leq m\}} \Ee^{X_{\tau}} \left( \int_0^{m-\tau} e^{-\lambda t} \,dA_t\right)\right] - e^{-\lambda m} \Ee^x A_m.
\end{align*}
For the last step we used the continuity of $A_t$ to get $A_\tau =0$ and, by the additive property,
\begin{align*}
\Ee^x A_m
=\Ee^x A_{\tau} + \Ee^x \left[A_{m-\tau}\circ \theta_{\tau}\I_{\{\tau \leq m\}}\right]
&= \Ee^x \left[ \Ee^x \left( A_{m-\tau}\circ \theta_{\tau} \:\middle|\: \mathcal{F}_{\tau}\right) \right]\\
&= \Ee^x \left[\I_{\{\tau \leq m\}}\Ee^{X_{\tau}} A_{m-\tau}\right].
\end{align*}
These calculations, when combined with \eqref{pot-e20} and integration by parts, yield
\begin{equation*}
\Ee^x \int_0^m e^{-\lambda t}\,dA_t
= \Ee^x\left[ e^{-\lambda \tau}\I_{\{\tau \leq m\}} \Ee^{X_{\tau}} \left( \int_0^{m-\tau} e^{-\lambda t} \,dA_t\right)\right],
\end{equation*}
and passing to the limit as $m\to \infty$ we finally arrive at
\begin{equation*
R_\lambda \varpi(x) = \Ee^x \left[ e^{-\lambda \tau} R_\lambda \varpi(X_{\tau})\right].
\end{equation*}
Since $X_{\tau}\in \overline{D}$, the last equality implies
\begin{equation}\label{pot-e40}
\frac{R_\lambda \varpi(x)}{\sup_{y\in \overline{D}} R_\lambda\varpi(y)}\leq \Ee^x e^{-\lambda \tau}.
\end{equation}
Taking the lower limit $\liminf_{\lambda \to \infty}$ on both sides, we get a contradiction to \eqref{pot-e15}, unless $\tau\equiv 0$. Thus, $\Pp^x(\tau>0)=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
For a symmetric Markov process $X$, the relation \eqref{pot-e25} is known for all measures which have \emph{finite energy integrals}, see \cite[pp.~223--226, Theorem~5.1.1, Lemma~5.1.3]{FOT11}.
\end{remark}
It is possible to give a more explicit sufficient condition for a point $x$ to be regular for $D$; this requires further knowledge of the structure of $D$, for instance that $D$ is a $d$-set.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-dmeas}
Let $D\subset \rn$ be a $d$-set and assume that the corresponding $d$-measure $\varpi$ belongs to $\Kato$ w.r.t.\ $p_t(x,y)$. Then any point of $\overline{D}$ is regular for $D$, i.e.\ $\overline{D} = D \cup D^r = \widetilde D$.
\end{lemma}
In order to keep the presentation transparent, we defer the rather technical proof of this lemma to the appendix.
Here is a criterion for the non-polarity of a set $D$ based on the inequality \eqref{pot-e40}.
\begin{corollary}\label{poten}
Assume that there exists some $\varpi\in \Kato$ w.r.t.\ $p_t(x,y)$ such that $\supp\varpi= \overline{D}$. Then the set $D$ is non-polar for $X$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{pot-e50}
\Pp^x(\tau_D<\infty) > 0.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We know from \cite{KT06}, see also Remark~\ref{equiv}, that $\varpi\in \Kato$ satisfies $\sup_x R_\lambda \varpi(x)<\infty$ for some $\lambda>0$. From \eqref{pot-e40} we derive
\begin{equation}\label{low1}
\frac{R_\lambda \varpi(x)}{\sup_{y\in \overline{D}} R_\lambda\varpi(y)}\leq \Pp^x (\tau_D<\infty).
\end{equation}
Let us show that $R_{\lambda}\varpi(x)>0$. Pick $t_0\in (0,1)$, $y_0\in D$, and observe that for $z\in B(y_0,c/\rho_{t_0})$ we have because of \eqref{set-e35} the inequality $p_{t_0}(z,y_0)\geq c_1$. By the joint continuity of $ (x,y)\mapsto p_t(x,y)$, we have for all $ z,y \in B(y_0,c_2/\rho_{t_0})\cap \overline{D}$ the inequality $p_{t_0} (z,y) \geq c_3$. Then, by the Chapman--Kolmogorov equation and joint continuity of $p_t(x,y)$ we get for $t\geq t_0$
$$
p_t(x,y)\geq \int_{B(y_0,c/\rho_{t_0})} p_{t-t_0}(x,z) p_{t_0}(z,y) \,dz
\geq c_4(x,y_0,t_0).
$$
for all $y\in B(y_0,c_2/\rho_{t_0})\cap \overline{D}$, $t>t_0$. Thus,
$$
R_\lambda\varpi(x)
\geq e^{-\lambda}\int_0^1\int_D p_t(x,y) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt
\geq c_5(x,y_0,t_0)
> 0.
$$
Hence, we get \eqref{pot-e50}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{low-rem}
\textbf{a)}
Under the assumptions of Corollary~\ref{poten} one has $\Pp^x(\tau_D<\infty)> c_K$ uniformly for all $x\in K$ where $K\subset \rn$ is a compact set.
\medskip\textbf{b)}
If, in addition, the process $X$ is recurrent, then $\Pp^x(\tau_D<\infty)=1$, see \cite[p.~60]{Sh88}.
\medskip\textbf{c)}
Suppose that $X$ is one-dimensional ($n=1$) and $\int_1^\infty q^*(s)^{-1}\,ds<\infty$.
Then there exists a local time for any point $x\in \rn$, see \cite{KK13b}. Let $D=\{x\}$, where $x$ is the starting point of $X_t$. Then $R_\lambda\varpi(x) = \sup_{y\in \real} R_\lambda\varpi(y)$, i.e.\ the left-hand side of \eqref{pot-e15} is equal to $1$, implying that every point is regular for itself.
On the other hand, if $n\geq 2$, we always have $\int_{|\xi|\geq 1} q^*(\xi)^{-1}\,d\xi = \infty$, i.e.\ for $n\geq 2$ points are polar.
\end{remark}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{H-bounds} and Proposition \ref{prop-H2}}\label{s4}
Throughout this section $X=(X_t)_{t\geq 0}$ is a Feller process as in Section~\ref{set}. Let $(\Omega^*, \mathcal{F}^*,\Pp^*)$ be a further probability space and define on this space a $\gamma$-stable subordinator $T^{\gamma} = (T_t^{\gamma})_{t\geq 0}$, $\gamma\in (0,1)$. $T_t^{\gamma}$ has a transition probability density $\sigma_t^{(\gamma)}(s)$, and
\begin{equation*
\int_0^\infty e^{-\lambda s}\sigma_t^{(\gamma)}(s)\,ds
= e^{-t \lambda^\gamma}, \quad \lambda>0,\; t>0.
\end{equation*}
From this we immediately get the following scaling property
\begin{equation}\label{s4-e07}
\sigma_t^{(\gamma)} (s)
= t^{-1/\gamma} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(s t^{-1/\gamma}).
\end{equation}
Let $X^{\gamma}_t:= X_{T_t^{\gamma}}$ be the subordinate process. Its transition probability density $p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y)$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{s4-e10}
p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y)
= \int_0^\infty p_s(x,y) \sigma_t^{(\gamma)}(s)\,ds,
\end{equation}
see, for example, \cite[Theorem~4.3.1]{Ja01}.
The technical proof of the following lemma is deferred to the appendix. Recall that $\Kato$ denotes the Kato class of measures, cf.\ Definition~\ref{Kato}. If $\gamma=1$, $T_t^{(\gamma)}\equiv t$, and the `subordinate' kernel $p^{(1)}_t(x,y)$ is just $p_t(x,y)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-SK}
\textbf{\upshape a)}
Suppose that $\varpi$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{s4-e15}
\int_0^1 \sup_x \frac{\varpi(B(x,r))}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/r)}\,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}}
< \infty, \quad\text{for some}\quad \gamma\in (0,1].
\end{equation}
Then $\varpi\in\Kato$ with respect to $p^{(\gamma)}_t (x,y)$.
\medskip\textbf{\upshape b)}
Suppose that $\varpi\in\Kato$ with respect to $p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y)$, where $\gamma\in (0,1]$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{s4-e20}
\lim_{t\to 0} \sup_x \int_0^t \frac{\varpi(B(x,r))}{(q^*)^\gamma(1/r)}\,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}}
= 0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The next lemma is due to Hawkes \cite[Lemma~2.1]{Ha74}, cf.\ also \cite[Proof of Theorem 1]{Ha71}; it plays the key role in the proof of Theorem~\ref{H-bounds}.
\begin{lemma}\label{ha}
Let $T^{\gamma}$ be a stable subordinator of index $\gamma\in (0,1)$, and let $B\subset [0,\infty)$ be a Borel set. Then
\begin{align*}
\Pp\left(T_t^{\gamma}\in B\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right)
= 0 \quad &\text{implies} \quad \dim B \leq 1-\gamma,
\intertext{while}
\Pp\left(T_t^{\gamma}\in B\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right)
> 0 \quad &\text{implies}\quad \dim B \geq 1-\gamma.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\bigskip
We are now ready for the
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{H-bounds}]
By assumption, $D$ is a closed $d$-set; pick a corresponding $d$-measure $\varpi$ on $D$. For $d > n-\alpha$ we have
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^1 \sup_x \frac{\varpi(B(x,r))}{q^*(1/r)}\,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}}
\leq c_1\int_0^1 \frac{r^d}{q^*(1/r)}\,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}}
\leq c_2 \int_0^1 r^{d+\alpha-n-1}\,dr
< \infty,
\end{equation*}
where we used that $q^*(r)\geq c r^\alpha$, cf.\ \eqref{set-e33}. By Lemma~\ref{lem-SK} (used for $\gamma=1$) we have $\varpi\in\Kato$ w.r.t.\ $p_t(x,y)$, and by Lemma~\ref{lem-dmeas} all points of $D$ are regular for $D=\overline{D}$.
Throughout the remainder of the proof we assume that $X_0=x\in D$. Then the set $\{s\,:\, X_s(\omega)\in D\}$ is a.s.\ non-empty, and therefore the random set
\begin{equation}\label{s4-e30}
\begin{split}
W
:= &\left\{ (\omega,\omega^*)\,:\, X_{T^{\gamma}_t(\omega^*)}(\omega) \in D \quad\text{for some $t>0$}\right\}\\
= &\left\{ (\omega,\omega^*)\,:\, T_t^{\gamma}(\omega^*)\in \{s\,:\, X_s (\omega)\in D\}\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right\}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
is well-defined and non-void.
First we calculate the lower bound of the Hausdorff dimension of the random set $\{ s:\, X_s(\omega)\in D\}$. Assume that $\gamma\in (\gamma_{\inf},1)$. Recall that the transition probability density of the subordinate process $X_{T^{\gamma}_t(\omega^*)}(\omega)$
is given by \eqref{s4-e10}. By Lemma~\ref{lem-SK}, $\varpi\in \Kato$ with respect to $p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y)$ for any $\gamma\in (\gamma_{\inf},1) $. Using Lemma~\ref{lem-dmeas} we see that the points, which are regular for $D$ ``in the eyes'' of the original process $X$, are still regular for $D$ and the subordinate process $X_{T_t^{\gamma}}$---whenever $\gamma\in (\gamma_{\inf},1)$. This implies that the set $W$ has full $\Pp^x\otimes \Pp^*$-measure. Thus, \eqref{s4-e30} yields
$$
1
= (\Pp^x\otimes \Pp^*)(W)
= \int_\Omega \Pp^*\left(\omega^*\::\: T_t^{\gamma}(\omega^*)\in \{ s\,:\, X_s (\omega) \in D\}\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right) \Pp^x(d\omega),
$$
which in turn gives
$$
\Pp^x\left(\omega:\, \Pp^*\left[ \omega^*\::\: T_t^{\gamma}(\omega^*)\in \{ s\,:\, X_s(\omega) \in D\}\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right] > 0\right) = 1.
$$
Now Lemma~\ref{ha} shows $\dim \{s: \, X_s(\omega)\in D\}\geq 1-\gamma$ with $\Pp^x$-probability $1$; letting $\gamma\downarrow \gamma_{\inf}$ along a countable sequence we arrive at
\begin{equation*
\dim \{s: \, X_s(\omega)\in D\}
\geq 1-\gamma_{\inf}\qquad \Pp^x\text{-a.s.}
\end{equation*}
To show the upper bound in \eqref{set-e50}, we take $\gamma\in (0,\gamma_{\sup})$. By the definition of $\gamma_{\sup}$,
$$
x\mapsto \int_0^\delta \frac{\varpi(B(x,r))}{(q^*)^\gamma (1/r)}\,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}}
$$
is unbounded for any finite measure $\varpi$ supported in $D$. There exist, see \eqref{app-e60} below, constants $a,\, b, \delta(T)>0$ such that
$$
\int_0^T \int_D p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt
\geq a \int_0^{\delta(T)} \frac{\varpi(B(x,r))}{(q^*)^\gamma(1/r)} \,\frac{dr}{r^{n+1}}.
$$
Thus, $R_0 \varpi(x)$ is unbounded and, by Remark~\ref{equiv}, the set $D$ is polar for $X_t^{\gamma}$. Therefore, $(\Pp^x\otimes \Pp^*)(W)=0$ and, consequently,
$$
\Pp^x\left(\omega\,:\, \Pp^*\left[\omega^*\::\: T_t^{\gamma}(\omega^*)\in \{ s\,:\, X_s^x (\omega) \in D\}\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right] =0 \right) = 1.
$$
This means that $\{s\,:\, X_s^x (\omega) \in D\}$ is polar for $T_t^{\gamma}$ with $\Pp^x$-probability $1$. Applying Lemma~\ref{ha} we get
$\dim \{s: \, X_s^x(\omega)\in D\}\leq 1-\gamma$ with $\Pp^x$-probability $1$. Letting $\gamma \uparrow \gamma_{\sup}$ along a countable sequence, the upper bound in \eqref{set-e50} follows.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop-H2}]
Since the processes $X^1$ and $X^2$ are, up to different starting points, i.i.d.\ copies, the transition probability density of $\tilde{X}_t:= X^1_t-X_t^2$ is given by
$$
\tilde{p}_t(x,y)
= \int_\real p_t(x+x_0,z+y) p_t(x_0,z)\,dz;
$$
here $x_0\in \real$ is the starting point of $X_t^2$. Let us estimate $\tilde{p}_t(x,y)$ using the upper bounds \eqref{set-e36} for $p_t(x,y)$. By the triangle inequality we have for any $\epsilon>0$ and $w_1,w_2\in\real$
\begin{align*}
\int_\real \rho_t^2 &e^{-a_4\rho_t \,|z+y-x-x_0-w_1|} e^{-a_4\rho_t\,|x_0-z+w_2|} \,dz\\
&\leq \rho_t\, e^{-a_4\epsilon \rho_t \,|y-x-w_1+w_2|} \int_\real \rho_t \,e^{-a_4(1-\epsilon) \rho_t\cdot ( |z+y-x-x_0-w_1|+|x_0-z+w_2|)}\,dz \\
&\leq c \rho_t \,e^{-a_4\epsilon \rho_t\,|y-x-w_1+w_2|}.
\end{align*}
This yields the following upper bound for $\tilde{p}_t(x,y)$:
\begin{equation*
\begin{split}
\tilde{p}_t(x,y)
&\leq a_3^2 \iiint_{\real^3} \rho_t^2 e^{-a_4\rho_t \,|z-x-x_0-w_1|} e^{-a_4\rho_t\,|z-x_0-w_2|} \,dz \,Q_t(dw_1) \,Q_t(dw_2)\\
&\leq C \rho_t \left(f_{\textrm{up}}^{\epsilon} (\rho_t \cdot\, ) * \tilde{Q}_t\right)(y-x),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\tilde{Q}_t(dw):= \int_\real Q_t(dw+v)\,Q_t(dv)$ is again a sub-probability measure. In other words, the transition probability density of $\tilde{X}$ has an upper bound of the same form as $p_t(x,y)$.
To show the lower bound, take $x,y$ such that $\rho_t \,|y-x|\leq a_2^{-1}(1-a_2 \epsilon)$, where $\epsilon>0$ is small. Then
\begin{align*}
\tilde{p}_t(x,y)
&\geq a_1^2 \rho_t^2 \int_\real f_{\textrm{low}}((y+z-x-x_0)\rho_t)f_{\textrm{low}}((x_0-z)\rho_t)\,dz\\
&\geq a_1\rho_t \int_{|v|\leq \epsilon} f_{\textrm{low}} (\rho_t (y-x-v/\rho_t))f_{\textrm{low}}(v)\,dv.
\end{align*}
Since for $|v|\leq\epsilon$
$$
1-a_2 \rho_t \,|y-x-v/\rho_t|
\geq 1-a_2 \epsilon -a_2 \rho_t\, |y-x|
= (1-\epsilon a_2)\left( 1- \frac{a_2}{1-a_2\epsilon} \rho_t \,|y-x|\right),
$$
we get for all $x,y$ such that $\rho_t \,|y-x|\leq a_2^{-1}(1-a_2 \epsilon)$ the estimate
$$
\tilde{p}_t(x,y)
\geq c_1 \rho_t\left( 1- c_2 \rho_t\,|y-x|\right)
$$
with $c_1= a_1 (1-a_2\epsilon) \int_{|v|\leq\epsilon} f_{\textrm{low}}(v)\,dv$ and $c_2= a_2 (1-a_2\epsilon)^{-1}$. Thus, the lower bound for $\tilde{p}_t(x,y)$ is also of the same form as the one for $p_t(x,y)$.
We have shown that the symmetrized process $\tilde X$ satisfies the estimates \eqref{set-e35} and \eqref{set-e36}, and these estimates are the essential ingredient in the proof of Corollary~\ref{cor-H}.\footnote{Notice that Assumption A in Corollary~\ref{cor-H} is just used to ensure that we have \eqref{set-e35} and \eqref{set-e36}.}. Thus, we can apply Corollary~\ref{cor-H}, and the proof is finished.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{t-col}}\label{s5}
Throughout this section we work under the assumptions of Theorem~\ref{t-col}: Assumption A holds and $X$ is a recurrent one-dimensional strong Feller process with generator $L(x,D)$ given by \eqref{set-e05}; we denote the transition probability density by $p_t(x,y)$, $t>0$. Recall that the process $X$ is called
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1)] (\emph{neighbourhood}) \emph{recurrent} if
$$
\forall x\in \real\quad
\forall \text{open sets\ } G\subset\real
\::\: \Pp^x \left(X_t\in G\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right) = 1.
$$
\item[2)] \emph{point recurrent}, if
$$
\forall x,y\in\real\::\: \Pp^x\left(X_t=y\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right) = 1.
$$
\end{enumerate}
Using the arguments of \cite[Lemma~4.1]{JP69} we can show that, in the setting of Theorem~\ref{t-col}, the recurrence of $X$ already implies point recurrence.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-rec}
The process $X$ is point recurrent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Write $\tau_y:=\inf\{ t>0\,:\, X_t=y\}$ for the hitting time of $\{y\}$ and set
\begin{equation*
\Phi(x,y):= \Pp^x\left(X_t =y \quad\text{for some $t>0$}\right)
= \Ee^x \I_{\{\tau_y<\infty\}}.
\end{equation*}
Let us show that for $X$ any singleton $\{x\}$ is regular for itself. By \eqref{set-e36} and the inequality $\rho_t\leq c t^{-1/\alpha}$, $t\in (0,1]$---this follows from \eqref{set-e33}---we have for $\alpha>1$
\begin{align*}
\sup_{x,y\in \real}\int_0^t p_s(x,y)\,ds
\leq c_1 \int_0^t \rho_s \,ds
\leq c_2 \int_0^t s^{-1/\alpha}\,ds
\leq c_3 t^{1-1/\alpha}, t\in (0,1].
\end{align*}
Thus, any measure of the form $\varpi = c\delta_y$ for $c\geq 0$ and some $y$ belongs to the Kato class $\Kato$ w.r.t.\ $p_t(x,y)$. By Lemma~\ref{lem-dmeas}, any point $y\in \real$ is regular for itself for $X$. Then
\begin{equation*
\Phi(y,y)=1,
\end{equation*}
because $\{\tau_x=0\} = \bigcap_{\epsilon>0} \{X_t=x \text{\ \ for some\ \ } t\in (0,\epsilon)\}$, and by regularity $\Pp^x(\tau_x=0) =1$.
Let us show that the function $\Phi(\cdot,y)$ is excessive. Denote by $(P_t)_{t\geq 0}$ the semigroup given by the kernel $p_t(x,y)$. Since
\begin{align*}
\Phi(X_t(\omega),y)
&= \Pp^{X_t (\omega)}\left(X_s=y \quad\text{for some $s>0$}\right)\qquad \text{for $\Pp^x$-a.a.\ $\omega$}\\
&= \Pp^x\left(X_{t+s}=y \quad\text{for some $s>0$}\right),
\end{align*}
we have
$$
P_t\Phi(\cdot,y)(x)
= \Ee^x \Phi(X_t,y)
= \Pp^x\left(X_{t+s}=y \quad\text{for some $s>0$}\right)
\leq \Phi(x,y),
$$
and by the dominated convergence theorem $P_t \Phi(x,y) \uparrow \Phi(x,y)$ as $t\to 0$. Since $X$ is recurrent, all excessive functions are constant, see \cite[Exercise~10.39]{Sh88}; hence, we get $\Phi(x,y)\equiv 1$ for all $x,y\in \real$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{point-rec}
Let $X^1$ and $X^2$ be two independent copies of $X$. Then the symmetrized process $\tilde{X}= X^1 -X^2$ is point recurrent.
\end{remark}
Let $\beta$ be the exponent appearing in the upper bound in \eqref{set-e70}.
\begin{lemma}\label{t.3.1}
Let $X^1$ and $X^2$ be independent copies of $X$, and denote by $Z^\beta$ a symmetric $\beta$-stable L\'evy process in $\real^2$. Let $D$ be a subset of the diagonal in $\real^2$. If $D$ is polar for $Z^\beta$, then it is polar for $(X^1, X^2)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Denote by $\mathfrak{p}_t(x,y)$, $x=(x_1,x_2)$, $y=(y_1,y_2)$, the transition probability density of the bivariate process $(X^1, X^2)$. Suppose that $|x-y|\leq \epsilon$ for some sufficiently small $\epsilon>0$. Using the lower estimates \eqref{set-e35} for $p_t(x_i,y_i)$, $i=1,2$, we get
\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \mathfrak{p}_t(x,y)\,dt
&\geq a_1^2 \int_0^1 (1-a_2 \rho_t\,|x_1-y_1|)_+ (1-a_2 \rho_t\,|x_2-y_2|)_+ \rho_t^2 \,dt\\
&\geq a_1^2 (1-a_2)^2 \int_{\phi(|x-y|)}^1 \rho_t^2 \,dt,
\end{align*}
where $\phi(r):= 1/q^U(1/r)$; with this choice of $\phi(r)$ we have $\rho_t\,|x-y|<1$. Changing variables gives
\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \mathfrak{p}_t(x,y)\,dt
\geq c_1 \int_{|x-y|}^{1/\rho_1} \frac{1}{r^3 q^U(1/r)}\,dr
\geq c_2 |x-y|^{\beta-2},
\end{align*}
where we used the definition of $\rho_t$ as inverse of $q^*$ and \eqref{set-e30}, as well as $\big(q^U (r)\big)'= 2 q^L(r)/ r$ a.e.\ and \eqref{set-e70}. The expression in the last line is (up to a constant) the potential of the process $Z^\beta$. Thus, for $|x-y|<\epsilon$ the potential of $(X^1,X^2)$ is bounded from below by the potential $U(x):= |x|^{\beta-2}$ of $Z^\beta$. Now
\begin{equation}\label{s5-e18}
\int_{|x-y|>\epsilon} \frac{1}{|x-y|^{2-\beta}}\, \varpi(dy)
\leq \epsilon^{\beta-2}\varpi (D)
\quad\text{for all finite measures $\varpi$.}
\end{equation}
By Remark~\ref{equiv} the set $D$ is polar for $Z^\beta$ if and only if the potential of $Z^\beta$ is unbounded for any finite measure $\varpi\neq 0$ with $\supp\varpi\subset\overline{D}$, i.e.
\begin{equation*
\sup_x U\varpi(x)
= \sup_x \int \frac{1}{|x-y|^{2-\beta}}\,\varpi(dy)
=\infty.
\end{equation*}
Because of \eqref{s5-e18} this happens if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{s5-e07}
\sup_x \int_{|x-y|\leq \epsilon} \frac{1}{ |x-y|^{2-\beta}}\, \varpi(dy)=\infty
\end{equation}
Thus, if \eqref{s5-e07} holds true, then $\sup_x \mathfrak{R}_0 \varpi(x)=\infty$, where $\mathfrak{R}_0$ is the $0$-resolvent for $(X^1,X^2)$; by Remark~\ref{equiv} the set $D$ is polar for $(X^1,X^2)$.
\end{proof}
The next lemma is from \cite[Theorem~4]{Ta66}, see also \cite{JP69}, and it plays the key role in the proof of Theorem~\ref{t-col}.
\begin{lemma}\label{l.4.2}
Suppose that $A$ is an analytic subset of $\rn$, and $Z_t^{\zeta,n}$ is any symmetric $\zeta$-stable L\'evy process in $\rn$. Then
$$
\dim A
= n-\inf\left\{\zeta\,:\, \text{$A$ is non-polar for $Z^{\zeta,n}$}\right\}.
$$
\end{lemma}
\medskip
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{t-col}]
Let $A(\omega)$ be the collision set defined in \eqref{set-e65}. Since the one-dimensional process $X^1- X^2$ is point recurrent, cf.\ Remark~\ref{point-rec}, the set $A(\omega)$ is a.s.\ non-empty. Instead of $A(\omega)$ we consider the following set on the diagonal of $\real^2$:
\begin{align*}
\hat{A}(\omega)
:= &\left\{(x,x)\in\real^2\,:\,(X^1_t(\omega),X_t^2(\omega))=(x,x)\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right\}\\
\equiv &\left\{(x,x)\in\real^2\,:\, \tau^x(\omega)<\infty\right\},
\end{align*}
where $\tau^x:= \inf\{t>0\,:\,(X^1_t,X_t^2)=(x,x)\}$. There is a one-to-one correspondence between $\hat{A}(\omega)$ and $A(\omega)$, and their Hausdorff dimensions coincide. For our needs it is more convenient to work with the set $\hat{A}(\omega)$.
Define on a further probability space $(\Omega', \mathcal{F}', \Pp')$ a symmetric $\theta$-stable L\'evy process $Z^{\theta,1}_t (\omega')$, $t\geq 0$, taking values on the diagonal of $\real^2$ and with $\theta<2-\beta$. We are going to show that
\begin{equation}\label{s5-e30}
\Pp'\left(\omega'\,:\, Z^{\theta,1}_t(\omega')\in \hat{A}(\omega)\quad\text{for some $t>0$}\right) = 0
\end{equation}
for almost all $\omega$; this means that $\hat{A}(\omega)$ is a.s.\ polar for $Z^{\theta,1}(\omega')$.
Let
$$
\Gamma :=
\left\{(\omega,\omega')\,:\, Z_t^{\theta,1} (\omega') \in \hat{A}(\omega) \quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right\}.
$$
Then, by the definition of $\hat{A}(\omega)$,
$$
\Gamma =
\left\{(\omega,\omega') \,:\, (X_t^1(\omega),X_t^2(\omega))=(x,x)\in \hat{B}(\omega') \quad\text{for some $t>0$}\right\},
$$
where $\hat{B}(\omega'):= \textrm{Range}\,Z_t^{\theta,1}(\omega')$. In \cite{BG60} it is shown that $\dim \hat{B}(\omega')=\theta$; by Lemma~\ref{l.4.2} we get
$$
2 - \inf\left\{\zeta>0\,:\, \text{$\hat{B}(\omega')$ is non-polar for $Z^{\zeta,2}$}\right\}
= \dim \hat{B}(\omega')
= \theta < 2-\beta,
$$
and so
$$
\beta
< \inf\left\{\zeta>0 \,:\, \text{$\hat{B}(\omega')$ is non-polar for $Z^{\zeta,2}$}\right\}.
$$
Thus, the set $\hat{B}(\omega')$ is for almost all $\omega'$ polar for the process $Z_t^{\beta,2}$. By Lemma~\ref{t.3.1} the set $\hat{B}(\omega')$ is polar for $(X_t^1(\omega),X_t^2(\omega))$ for almost all $\omega'$. By Fubini's theorem we have $\Pp\otimes\Pp' (\Gamma)=0$; therefore, \eqref{s5-e30} holds true, showing that $\hat{A}(\omega)$ is polar for $Z^{\theta, 1}$ for all $\theta<2-\beta$. Thus, by Lemma~\ref{l.4.2}
$$
\dim \hat{A}(\omega)
= 1-\inf\left\{\theta>0\,:\, \text{$\hat{A}(\omega)$ is non-polar for $Z^{\theta, 1}$}\right\}
\leq 1- (2-\beta)
= \beta-1.
$$
Next, we are going to show that $\dim\hat{A}(\omega) \geq \alpha-1$. Choose $\theta\in (2-\alpha, 2)$, and let $Z^{\theta,1}$ be a symmetric $\theta$-stable L\'evy process on the diagonal in $\real^2$. Denote by $\hat{B}(\omega')$ its range; by \cite{BG60}, $\dim \hat{B}(\omega')=\theta$. By Frostman's lemma, cf.\ e.g.\ \cite[p.~387, Theorem A.44]{sch-bm}, there exists a measure $\varpi$ on $\hat{B}(\omega')\cap K$ ($K$ is a compact subset of the diagonal in $\real^2$) such that
\begin{equation}\label{s5-e35}
\varpi\big(B(z,r)\big)
\leq Cr^{\theta-\epsilon},
\quad z\in \hat{B}(\omega'), \; r>0.
\end{equation}
Denote by $\mathfrak{p}_t(x,y)$ the transition probability density of $(X^1_t,X^2_t)$. A direct calculation shows (cf.\ \eqref{app-e20} in the next section for details of the first estimate) that \eqref{s5-e35} implies
\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \int_{\hat{B}(\omega')\cap K} \mathfrak{p}_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt
&\leq c_1 \int_0^1 \int_0^\infty \rho_t^2 \sup_{x\in \real^2} \varpi\{y\,:\, |x-y|\leq c_2 r/\rho_t\}\, e^{-r}\,dr\,dt\\
&\leq c_3 \int_0^1 \rho_t^{2-\theta+\epsilon}\,dt\\
&\leq c_4 \int_0^1 t^{-(\theta-2+\epsilon)/\alpha}\,dt < \infty,
\end{align*}
which shows that $\varpi\in \Kato$ w.r.t.\ $\mathfrak{p}_t(x,y)$. Hence, by Corollary~\ref{poten} the set $\hat{B}(\omega')$ is non-polar for $(X^1,X^2)$.
By $\Pp^{(z,z)}$ we indicate that the starting point of the process $(X^1,X^2)$ is $(z,z)$. For all $(z,z)\in \real^2$
$$
\Pp^{(z,z)}\otimes \Pp'\left( (\omega,\omega') \,:\, (X_t^1(\omega),X_t^2(\omega))=(x,x)\in \hat{B}(\omega') \quad\text{for some $t>0$}\right) > 0.
$$
By Fubini's theorem, there is a set $F\in \mathcal{F}$ with $\Pp^{(z,z)}(F)>0$ such that
\begin{equation*
\forall\omega\in F\::\: \Pp'\left(\omega' \,:\, Z_t^{\theta,1}(\omega') \in \hat{A}(\omega)\quad \text{for some $t>0$}\right) > 0.
\end{equation*}
Let us show that there exists an open subset $\mathcal{O}$ of the diagonal in $\real^2$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{s5-e45}
\inf_{(z,z)\in \mathcal{O}} \Pp^{(z,z)}(F)
\geq \delta > 0.
\end{equation}
Indeed, for any $s>0$ we have
\begin{align*}
\Ee^{(z,z)} \Ee'\I_{\{\exists t>0\,:\, (X_t^1,X_t^2)\in \hat{B}(\omega')\}}
&\geq \Ee^{(z,z)} \Ee'\I_{\{\exists t>s\,:\, (X_t^1,X_t^2)\in \hat{B}(\omega')\}}\\
&= \Ee^{(z,z)} \left(\Ee^{(X_s^1,X_s^2)} \Ee'\I_{\{\exists t>s\,:\, (X_{t-s}^1,X_{t-s}^2)\in \hat{B}(\omega')\}}\right)\\
&= \Ee^{(z,z)} \left(\Ee^{(X_0^1,X_0^2)} \Ee'\I_{\{\exists t>0\,:\, (X_{t}^1\circ \theta_s,X_{t}^2\circ\theta_s)\in \hat{B}(\omega')\}}\right)\\
&= \Ee^{(z,z)} \left(\Ee'\I_{\{\exists t>0\,:\, (X_{t}^1\circ \theta_s,X_{t}^2\circ\theta_s)\in \hat{B}(\omega')\}}\right).
\end{align*}
Denote by $\theta_s F = \{\theta_s\omega\,:\, \omega\in F\}$ the shift of the set $F$. Then
$$
\Pp^{(z,z)}(F)\geq \Pp^{(z,z)}(\theta_s F).
$$
This inequality implies that $\Pp^{(z,z)}(F)$ is excessive:
\begin{align*}
P_t \Pp^{(z,z)}(F)
= \Ee^{(z,z)} \Pp^{(X_t,X_t)}(F)
&= \Ee^{(z,z)} \left( \Ee^{(z,z)} \left[\I_{\theta_t F} \:\middle|\:\mathcal{F}_t\right] \right)\\
&= \Ee^{(z,z)} \I_{\theta_t F}
= \Pp^{(z,z)}(\theta_t F)
\leq \Pp^{(z,z)}(F),
\end{align*}
and, by the dominated convergence theorem, $P_t \Pp^{(z,z)}(F) \uparrow \Pp^{(z,z)}(F)$ as $t\to 0$. Assumption A implies that the process $X$ is a strong Feller process, cf.\ Section~\ref{set}, which means that any excessive function is lower semicontinuous, see \cite[p.~77, Exercise~2.16]{BG68}. Since $z\mapsto \Pp^{(z,z)}(F)$ is lower semi-continuous we get \eqref{s5-e45}.
Fix $\epsilon>0$, and define
$$
\tau_1:= \inf\{ t>\epsilon\,:\,X^1_t=X_t^2 \}, \quad
\tau_1^x := \inf\{ t>\epsilon: \quad X^1_t=X^2_t=x\}, \quad x\in\real,
$$
and
$$
\hat{A}_1(\omega):= \left\{(x,x)\in\real^2\,:\,\tau_1^x(\omega) <\infty\right\}.
$$
We have
$$
\Pp'\left(\omega'\,:\, Z_t^{\theta,1} (\omega')\in \hat{A}_1(\omega)\quad\text{for some $t\in (0,\tau_1]$}\right)
> 0, \quad \forall\omega\in F.
$$
Thus,
$$
\inf\left\{\zeta\,:\, \hat{A}_1(\omega) \quad \text{is non-polar for $Z^{\zeta,1}$}\right\}
\leq 2-\alpha,
$$
which implies by Lemma~\ref{l.4.2} that
$$
\dim \hat{A}_1(\omega)
= 1 - \inf\left\{\zeta \,:\, \hat{A}_1(\omega) \quad\text{is non-polar for $Z^{\zeta,1}$}\right\}
\geq 1 - (2-\alpha)
= \alpha-1,\quad\forall\omega\in F.
$$
For $(z,z)\in \mathcal{O}$ we get
\begin{equation}\label{s5-e50}
\Pp^{(z,z)}\left(\dim\hat{A}_1(\cdot)\geq \alpha-1\right)
\geq \Pp^{(z,z)}(F)\geq \delta>0.
\end{equation}
Let us now show that
$$
\dim \hat{A}(\omega)
\geq \alpha-1\quad \Pp^{(z,z)}\text{-a.e.\ for all $z\in \real$}.
$$
Let $\tau_0(\omega)=0$ and define
$$
\tau_n(\omega)
:= \inf\left\{ t>\tau_{n-1}(\omega) + \epsilon \,:\, (X^1_t(\omega),X^2_t(\omega))=(x,x)\in K\right\},
$$
where $K$ is as above. Since the process $X^1-X^2$ is point recurrent, the stopping times $\tau_n$ are almost surely finite. Define $G_1(\omega):= \dim \hat{A}_1(\omega)$, and
$$
G_n(\omega):=
\dim\left\{(x,x)\in\real^2 \,:\, X^1_t = X^2_t = x\quad\text{for some $t\in (\tau_{n-1}(\omega), \tau_{n}(\omega)]$}\right\}, \quad n\geq 2.
$$
Note that $\dim \hat{A}(\omega)\geq \sup_n G_n(\omega)$. Using the Markov property and \eqref{s5-e50} we get
\begin{align*}
\Pp^{(z,z)}\left(\dim \hat{ A} <1-\theta\right)
&\leq \Pp^{(z,z)}\left(\sup_n G_n<1-\theta\right)\\
&\leq \Pp^{(z,z)}\left(\max_{i\leq n} G_i <1-\theta\right)\\
&= \Ee^{(z,z)}\left(\I_{\{ \max_{1\leq i\leq n-1} G_i<1-\theta\}} \vphantom{\Ee^{(X_{\tau_{n-1}}^1, X_{\tau_{n-1}}^2)}}\Ee^{(z,z)}\left[ \I_{\{ G_n<1-\theta\}} \:\middle|\: \mathcal{F}_{\tau_{n-1}} \right] \right)\\
&= \Ee^{(z,z)}\left(\I_{\{ \max_{1\leq i\leq n-1} G_i <1-\theta\}} \Ee^{(X_{\tau_{n-1}}^1, X_{\tau_{n-1}}^2)}\left[\I_{\{ G_1 <1-\theta\}}\right] \right)\\
&\leq (1-\delta) \Ee^{(z,z)}\left(\I_{\{ \max_{1\leq i\leq n-1} G_i <1-\theta\}} \right)\\
&\leq (1-\delta)^n
\end{align*}
for all $n\geq 1$. Therefore, $\dim A(\omega)\geq 1-\theta$ $\Pp$-a.s. Letting $\theta\downarrow 2-\alpha$ along a countable sequence, the claim follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Examples: Recurrent processes satisfying Assumption A}\label{rec}
In this section we give examples of processes $X$ which satisfy Assumption A and which are recurrent. For simplicity, we will assume that the space dimension $n=1$.
\begin{example}\label{exa1}
Let
\begin{equation*
j(x,u):= \big( n(x,u)+n(u,x) \big) \mathfrak{g}(x-u),
\end{equation*}
where the function $n(x,u)$ is strictly positive, uniformly bounded and H\"older continuous in both variables; $\mathfrak{g}$ satisfies the following assumptions
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
$\mathfrak{g}$ is even and $\mathfrak{g}(h)\leq C |h|^{-1-\eta}$ for some $\eta>1$ and all $|u|\geq 1$;
\item[ b)]
There exists some $\epsilon\in (0,1)$ such that $h^{2+\epsilon}\mathfrak{g}(h)$ is increasing on $(0,1]$;
\item[c)]
There exits some $\delta>1$ such that the function $h^\delta \mathfrak{g}(h) $ is decreasing on $(0,1]$.
\end{enumerate}
As in Section~\ref{set} we write
\begin{equation*
q(\xi)
= \int_{\real\setminus\{0\}} \big( 1- \cos(\xi h) \big) \mathfrak{g}(h)\,dh
\end{equation*}
and we define the corresponding upper and lower symbols $q^U(\xi)$ and $q^L(\xi)$. The conditions a) and b) imply \eqref{set-e30}. Indeed, by b) we have for $|\xi|\geq 1$
$$
q^L(\xi)
= \frac{2}{\xi} \int_0^{1} v^2 \mathfrak{g}\left(\tfrac v\xi\right)\,dv
= \frac{2}{\xi} \int_0^{1} v^{-\epsilon} v^{2+\epsilon} \mathfrak{g}\left(\tfrac v\xi\right)\,dv
\leq \frac{c_1}{\xi}\mathfrak{g}\left( \tfrac{1}{\xi}\right),
$$
and by c) we get
\begin{gather*}
q^{L}(\xi)
= \frac{2}{\xi} \int_0^{1} v^2 \mathfrak{g}\left(\tfrac v\xi\right)\,dv
\geq \frac{2}{\xi} \int_0^{1} v^{2-\delta} v^\delta \mathfrak{g}\left(\tfrac v\xi\right)\,dv
\geq \frac{c_2}{\xi}\mathfrak{g}\left( \tfrac{1}{\xi}\right),\\
\int_{1/\xi}^1 \mathfrak{g}(h)\,dh
= \int_{1/\xi}^1 h^{-\delta} h^{\delta} \mathfrak{g}(h)\,dh
\leq \frac{c_3}{\xi}\mathfrak{g}\left( \tfrac{1}{\xi}\right),
\end{gather*}
which implies \eqref{set-e30}. Since $(1-\cos 1) q^L(\xi) \leq q(\xi) \leq 2 q^U(\xi)$, we have $q(\xi)\asymp |\xi|^{-1}\mathfrak{g}\left(|\xi|^{-1}\right)$ for large $|\xi|$.
Note that the estimate a) gives
\begin{equation*
\begin{split}
q(\xi)
&= \int_{|h|\leq 1} (1-\cos \xi h)\,\mathfrak{g}(h)\,dh + \int_{|h|\geq 1} (1-\cos \xi h)\mathfrak{g}(h)\,dh\\
&\leq c_1\xi^2 + c_2 |\xi|^\eta \int_{\xi}^\infty (1-\cos v)\frac{dv}{v^{1+\eta}}\\
&\leq c_3 |\xi|^{2\wedge \eta}, \quad \quad |\xi|\leq 1.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Assume also that
\begin{equation*
\int_{|h|\leq 1} |h| \big| j(x,x+h)- j(x,x-h)\big| \,dh <\infty.
\end{equation*}
Then the function
\begin{equation*
k(x)
:= \frac{1}{2} \int_{|h|\leq 1} \big( j(x,x+h)- j(x,x-h)\big) h\, dh
\end{equation*}
is well-defined.
Consider the operator $L(x,D)$ defined by \eqref{set-e05} with $a(x)=k(x)$, and
\begin{equation*
m(x,h)\,\mu(dh)
= j(x,x+h)\, dh
= \big( n(x,x+h)+ n(x+h,x)\big) \mathfrak{g}(h)\,dh.
\end{equation*}
Then
\begin{equation*
L(x,D) f(x) = \int_{\real\setminus\{0\}} \big(f(x+h)-f(x)\big) j(x,x+h)\, dh,
\end{equation*}
which is a symmetric operator, and generates a (symmetric) Dirichlet form
$$
\mathcal{E}(\phi,\phi)
=\frac{1}{2} \int_{\real\setminus\{0\}} \int_\real (\phi(x+h)-\phi(x))^2\, j(x,x+h)\,dx\,dh.
$$
The form $\mathcal{E}(\cdot,\cdot)$ is comparable with the Dirichlet form $\mathcal E^q(\cdot,\cdot)$ corresponding to the L\'evy process $Z$ with characteristic exponent $q$:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}(\phi,\phi)
&\asymp \mathcal{E}^{q}(\phi,\phi)
:= \int_\real q(\xi) |\hat{\phi}(\xi)|^2d\xi
= \int_\real \int_{\real\setminus\{0\}} \big(\phi(x+h)-\phi(x)\big)^2 \mathfrak{g}(h)\,dh\, dx.
\end{align*}
The Dirichlet form $\mathcal{E}^{q}$ is recurrent, because the related L\'evy process $Z$ is recurrent by the Chung-Fuchs criterion, i.e.\ $\int_{|\xi|\leq 1} q(\xi)^{-1}\,d\xi =\infty$. By Oshima's criterion, cf.\ \cite{Osh92}, the form $\mathcal{E}$ is also recurrent implying the recurrence of the related process $X$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{exa2}
Let $L(x,D)$ be the generator defined by \eqref{set-e05}. In order to construct an example of a non-symmetric recurrent Markov process satisfying Assumption A, we use the approach from \cite{W08}. Note that our Assumption A implies the condition (H) needed in \cite{W08}. According to \cite[Theorem~1.4]{W08} the following condition is sufficient for the recurrence of the process $X$ generated by $L(x,D)$:
\begin{equation}\label{rec-e70}
B(x)x + D(x)|x|\leq C \quad \text{for sufficiently large $|x|$,}
\end{equation}
where $B(x):= b(x)+ \int_{1<|z|\leq |x|} z m(x,z)\,\mu(dz)$ and $D(x):= \int_{|z|\geq |x|} |z| m(x,z)\,\mu(dz)$, with $b(x)$ and $m(x,u)$ from the representation of $L(x,D)$ in \eqref{set-e05}. Thus, by \cite[Theorem~1.4]{W08}, the process $X$ which corresponds to \eqref{set-e05} is recurrent, if \eqref{rec-e70} holds true.
\end{example}
\section*{Appendix}\label{app}
\subsection*{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem-dmeas}}
Without loss of generality we may assume that $D$ is a closed set.
We begin with the upper bound for
$$
R_\lambda\varpi(x)
= \int_0^1 \int_{D} e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y) \,\varpi(dy)\,dt + \int_1^\infty \int_{D} e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt.
$$
The upper estimate for the second term can be proved in the same way as \cite[(3.3)]{KT06}: for any $x\in D$ and $\lambda>0$ one finds that
\begin{align*}
\int_1^\infty \int_D e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt
\leq \frac{e^{-\lambda }}{1-e^{-\lambda }} \sup_{x\in D} \int_0^1 \int_D p_s(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,ds,
\end{align*}
where we used in the last line that the integral on the right-hand side is finite since $\varpi\in\Kato$.
Therefore,
\begin{equation*
\int_0^1 \int_D e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt
\leq R_\lambda \varpi(x)
\leq \left( 1+ \frac{e^{-\lambda}}{1-e^{-\lambda}}\right)\sup_{x\in D} \int_0^1 \int_D e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y) \,\varpi(dy)\,dt.
\end{equation*}
Using the upper and lower bounds \eqref{set-e35}, \eqref{set-e36} for the heat kernel, we obtain by a change of variables
\begin{align*}
\int_0^1 \int_D &e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt \\
&\geq a_1 \int_0^1 \int_D e^{-\lambda t}\rho_t^n (1-a_2 |x-y|\rho_t)_+ \,\varpi(dy) \,dt\\
&= a_1 \int_0^1 \int_0^1 e^{-\lambda t} \rho_t^n \,\varpi\left\{y\in D\,:\, (1-a_2 |x-y|\rho_t)_+ \geq 1-r\right\} \,dr \,dt\\
&= a_1 \int_0^1 \int_0^1 e^{-\lambda t}\rho_t^n \,\varpi\left\{y\in D\,:\, a_2 |x-y|\rho_t\leq r\right\} \,dr \,dt.
\end{align*}
Using the lower bound in \eqref{set-e45} for the $d$-measure $\varpi$, we get for $x\in D$
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^1 \int_D e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dt
\geq c_1 a_2^{-d} \int_0^1 \int_0^1 \rho_t^{n-d} e^{-\lambda t} r^d\, dt\, dr
= c \lambda^{-1} \int_0^\lambda e^{-u} \rho_{u/\lambda}^{n-d}\,du.
\end{equation*}
Similarly, we have with the upper bound \eqref{set-e36},
\begin{equation}\label{app-e20}
\begin{split}
\int_0^1 \int_D &e^{-\lambda t} p_t(x,y) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt\\
&\leq a_3 \int_0^1 \int_\rn \int_D e^{-\lambda t}\rho_t^n e^{-a_4|x-y-z|\rho_t}\,\varpi(dy) \,Q_t(dz) \,dt\\
&\leq a_3 \int_0^1 \int_\rn \int_0^\infty e^{-\lambda t} \rho_t^n \,\varpi\left\{y\in D\,:\, a_4 |x-y-z|\rho_t\leq r\right\} e^{-r} \,dr \,Q_t(dz) \,dt\\
&\leq c_4 \int_0^1 \int_0^\infty e^{-t\lambda} \rho_t^n\, \sup_{w\in \rn} \varpi\left\{ y\in D\,:\, a_4|w-y|\rho_t \leq r\right\} e^{-r} \,dr\, dt\\
&\leq c_5 \int_0^1 e^{-t\lambda} \rho_t^{n-d} \,dt \cdot \int_0^\infty r^d e^{-r} \,dr\\
&= c_6 \lambda^{-1} \int_0^\lambda e^{-u} \rho_{u/\lambda}^{n-d}\,du.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here we used the upper bound \eqref{set-e45} for small $r$, and the fact that $\supp\varpi=D$, which implies $\sup_x \varpi(B(x,r))\leq C$ for large $r$. This proves that $\sup_y R_\lambda \varpi(y)<\infty$.
Therefore, we see
\begin{equation*
\liminf_{\lambda \to\infty} \frac{R_\lambda \varpi(x)}{\sup_{y\in D } R_\lambda \varpi(y)}
\geq \liminf_{\lambda \to\infty} \frac{R_\lambda \varpi(x)}{\sup_{y\in \rn} R_\lambda \varpi (y)}
\geq c>0,
\end{equation*}
and by Lemma~\ref{lem-reg} all points of $D$ are regular.
\qed
\subsection*{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem-SK}}
The case $\gamma=1$ is already contained in \cite{KK13b}. Therefore, we consider only $\gamma\in (0,1)$. Without loss of generality we may assume that $D$ is closed.
\medskip
\textbf{a)}
Under our assumptions the transition density $p_t(x,y)$ of the process $X$ satisfies \eqref{set-e35} and \eqref{set-e36} for $t\in (0,1]$. Using \eqref{set-e36} and the scaling property of the subordinator \eqref{s4-e07}, we get for any $T\in (0,1]$
\begin{align*}
\int_0^T \int_D &p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt\\
& \leq C \int_0^T \int_D \int_0^1 \rho_s^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_s \cdot) *Q_s \big)(x-y) t^{-1/\gamma} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(t^{-1/\gamma} s) \,ds \,\varpi(dy) \,dt\\
&\qquad\mbox{} + \int_0^T \int_D \int_1^\infty p_s(x,y) t^{-1/\gamma} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(t^{-1/\gamma} s) \,ds \,\varpi(dy) \,dt\\
&=: C I_1(x,T) + I_2(x,T).
\end{align*}
We estimate $I_1(x,T)$ and $I_2(x,T)$ separately. For $I_2(x,T)$ we have
\begin{align*}
I_2(x,T)
&= \int_0^T \int_{t^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \int_D p_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}(x,y) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,d\tau \,dt\\
&= \int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \int_{\tau^{-\gamma}}^T \int_D p_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}(x,y) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt \,d\tau\\
&= \int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \int_{1}^{\tau^\gamma T} \int_D p_{v^{1/\gamma}}(x,y) \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv \,d\tau.
\end{align*}
Note that $\sup_{x,y\in \rn} p_t(x,y)\leq c$ for all $t\geq 1$. Indeed, since for $0<\epsilon <1$ we have $p_\epsilon (x,y)\leq C_\epsilon$ for all $x,y\in \rn$, the Chapman--Kolmogorov relation implies
$$
p_t(x,y)=\int_\rn p_{t-\epsilon} (x,z) p_\epsilon(z,y) \,dz
\leq C_\epsilon.
$$
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
\sup_{x\in \rn} I_2(x,T)
&\leq c_1 \int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty (\tau^\gamma T-1) \varpi(D)\tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,d\tau\\
&\leq c_1 \varpi(D) T \int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,d\tau
\leq c_1 \varpi(D) T\xrightarrow[T\to 0]{} 0,
\end{align*}
where we used that $\int_0^\infty \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau)\,d\tau=1$.
For the first integral expression $I_1(x,T)$ we have
\begin{align*}
I_1(x,T)
&= \int_0^T \int_0^{t^{-1/\gamma}} \int_D \rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,d\tau \,dt\\
&= \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}}\int_0^T \int_D \rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y)\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt \,d\tau\\
&\qquad \mbox{}+ \int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \int_0^{\tau^{-\gamma}}\int_D \rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt \,d\tau\\
&= \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}}\int_0^{\tau^\gamma T} \int_D \rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{v^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{v^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y)\tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv \,d\tau \\
&\qquad \mbox{}+ \int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \int_0^{1}\int_D \rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{v^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{v^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y) \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv \,d\tau\\
&=: I_{11}(x,T)+ I_{12}(x,T).
\end{align*}
For $I_{12}(x,D)$ we have
$$
I_{12}(x,T)
=\left[\int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,d\tau \right]
\int_0^{1}\int_D \rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{v^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{v^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv.
$$
Since $\lim_{T\to 0}\int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,d\tau = 0$, we get $\lim_{T\to 0} I_{12}(x,T) = 0$, if we can show that
\begin{equation}\label{app-e40}
\sup_{x\in \rn} \int_0^{1}\int_D \rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{v^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{v^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv
< \infty
\quad\text{for some $\gamma\in (\gamma_{\inf},1)$.}
\end{equation}
Set $\ell := e_1 = (1,0,\dots 0)^\top$ and $\theta_t:= \inf\left\{ r\,:\, q^U(r\ell)\geq 1/t\right\}$. Because of \eqref{set-e30} we have $\theta_t\asymp \rho_t$ for all $t\in (0,1]$. Moreover, the mapping $r\mapsto q^U(r\ell)$ is absolutely continuous, and we have, cf.\ \cite{K13},
\begin{equation}\label{app-e45}
q^U(r_2 \ell) - q^U(r_1 \ell)
= 2\int_{r_1}^{r_2} \frac{q^L(v\ell)}{v}\,dv,
\qquad 0<r_1<r_2.
\end{equation}
Thus, the above calculations give
\begin{equation}\label{app-e50}
\begin{split}
&\sup_{x\in \rn} \int_0^1\int_D \rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \cdot \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (\rho_{v^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{v^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y)\,\varpi(dy)\,dv \\
&\leq c_1 \sup_{x\in \rn} \int_0^1 \int_D \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \cdot \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (c_2\theta_{v^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) * Q_{v^{1/\gamma}}\big)(x-y) \,\varpi(dy)\,dv\\
&= c_1 a_3 \sup_{x\in \rn} \int_0^1 \int_\rn \int_0^\infty \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \cdot \varpi \left\{ y\in D\,:\, e^{-c_2 a_4 |x-y-z| \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}} } \geq s\right\} \,ds\,Q_{v^{1/\gamma}}(dz)\,dv\\
&= c_1 c_2 a_3 a_4 \sup_{x\in \rn} \int_0^1 \int_\rn \int_0^\infty \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \cdot \varpi\left\{ y\in D \,:\, |x-y-z| \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}} \leq r\right\} e^{-c_2 a_4 r} \,dr\,Q_{v^{1/\gamma}}(dz)\,dv\\
&= C_1 \int_0^\infty \int_0^1 \int_\rn \sup_{x\in\rn} \frac{\varpi\left\{ y\in D \,:\, |x-y-z|\leq ur\right\}}{(q^U)^{\gamma}(\ell u^{-1})} e^{-C_2 r} \,\tilde{Q}_{u}(dz)\,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}} \,dr\\
&\leq \kappa C_1 \int_0^\infty \int_0^1 \sup_{\xi\in \rn} \frac{\varpi\left\{ y\in D\,:\, |\xi-y|\leq ur\right\}}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/u)} e^{-C_2 r} \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}}\,dr,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
$\tilde{Q}_u(dz)=Q_{v^{1/\gamma}}(dz)$ under the change of variables $v= (q^U)^{-\gamma}(\ell u^{-1})$, which was done in the second line from below. Note that $\frac{1}{t}= q^U (\theta_t \ell)$, and that by \eqref{app-e45} and $q^U\asymp q^L$, one has
$$
\frac{dv}{du}\asymp (q^U)^{-\gamma} (\ell u^{-1} ) u^{-1}.
$$
The constant $\kappa$ is from \eqref{set-e30}.
Let us estimate the integrals in the last line of \eqref{app-e50}. Without loss of generality we assume that $C_2=1$. Put
$h(r):= \sup_{\xi\in \rn} \varpi\left\{ y\in D \,:\, |\xi-y|\leq r\right\}$.
Split
\begin{align*}
J
:= \left[\int_0^1\int_0^1 + \int_1^\infty\int_0^1\right] \frac{h(ur)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/u)} \, \frac{du}{u^{n+1}} \, e^{-r}\,dr
=: J_1 + J_2.
\end{align*}
From the monotonicity of $h(r)$ and the assumption \eqref{s4-e15}
$$
J_1
\leq \int_0^1 \frac{h(u)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/u)} \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}}
\cdot \int_0^1 e^{-r}\,dr
<\infty.
$$
Using the monotonicity of $q^*$, we get
\begin{align*}
J_2
&\leq c_1\int_1^\infty \left[\int_0^{r} \frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)} \,\frac{dv}{v^{n+1}} \right] r^n e^{-r}\,dr\\
&= \left[ \int_1^\infty \int_0^1 + \int_1^\infty \int_1^r \right] \frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)} \,r^n e^{-r}\, \frac{dv}{v^{n+1}} \,dr
=: J_{21} + J_{22}.
\end{align*}
Clearly, $J_{21}<\infty$. For $J_{22}$ we have
\begin{align*}
J_{22}
&\leq \int_0^\infty \left[\int_{v}^\infty r^n e^{-r} \,dr\right] \frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)} \,\frac{dv}{v^{n+1}}\\
&\leq c_2\int_0^\infty e^{-\epsilon v} \left[\int_{v}^\infty r^n e^{-(1-\epsilon)r}\, dr \right] \frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)} \,\frac{dv}{v^{n+1}}\\
&\leq c_3 \int_0^\infty e^{-\epsilon v } \frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)} \,\frac{dv}{v^{n+1}}.
\end{align*}
By \eqref{s4-e15} and the fact that the integrand is bounded by $C e^{\epsilon v}$ for $v>1$ show that the integral in the last line is finite. Thus, \eqref{app-e40} holds true, implying that $\sup_{x\in \rn}I_{12}(x,T)\to 0$ as $T\to 0$.
Let us estimate $I_{11}(x,T)$. Define $\phi(u) := 1/\theta_u$,
$$
I(v,\tau,T) := \I_{ \{\tau \leq T^{-1/\gamma}\}} e^{-\epsilon v /(2 \phi( T^{1/\gamma} \tau))},
$$
and recall that
$h(r):= \sup_{\xi\in \rn} \varpi\left\{ y\in D \,:\, |\xi-y|\leq r\right\}$.
By the same arguments as those which we have used in \eqref{app-e50}, we derive
\begin{align*}
&\sup_{x\in \rn} I_{11}(x,T)\\
&\leq c_1 \sup_{x\in \rn}\int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^{T\tau^\gamma} \int_D \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \cdot \big(f_{\textrm{up}} (c_2\theta_{v^{1/\gamma}} \cdot) *Q_{v^{1/\gamma}} \big)(x-y) \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv \,d\tau\\
&\leq c_2 \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^\infty \int_0^{\phi(T^{1/\gamma}\tau)} \frac{h(ur)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/u)} \,e^{-c_3 r} \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}} \,dr \,d\tau\\
&\leq c_2 \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^1 \int_0^{\phi(T^{1/\gamma}\tau)} \frac{h(u)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/u)} \,e^{-c_3 r} \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}} \,dr \,d\tau\\
&\qquad\mbox{}+ c_2 \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_1^\infty \int_0^{\phi(T^{1/\gamma}\tau)} \frac{h(ur)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/u)} \,e^{-c_3 r} \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}} \,dr \,d\tau.
\end{align*}
The first term is estimated from above by
$$
\int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^{\phi(T^{1/\gamma}\tau)}
\frac{h(u)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/u)}\, \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}}\, d\tau,
$$
which tends to zero as $T\to 0$ by the dominated convergence theorem.
For the second term we have for some $\epsilon>0$
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} &\int_1^\infty \int_0^{r \phi(T^{1/\gamma}\tau)}
\frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)}\, r^n e^{-c_3 r} \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\frac{dv}{v^{n+1}}\,dr\,d\tau\\
&\leq \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^\infty \int_{v/\phi( T^{1/\gamma} \tau)}^\infty
\frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)} \,r^n e^{-c_3 r} \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) dr\, \frac{dv}{v^{n+1}} \,d\tau\\
&\leq c_4 \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^\infty e^{- \epsilon v/\phi( T^{1/\gamma} \tau)}
\frac{h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)} \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\frac{dv}{v^{n+1}} \,d\tau \\
&\leq c_4 \int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty
\frac{ e^{-\epsilon v/2\phi(1)}h(v)}{(q^*)^{\gamma}(1/v)}\, \tau^{-\gamma}\sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) I(v,\tau,T)\, \frac{dv}{v^{n+1}}\, d\tau.
\end{align*}
Note that $I(v,\tau, T)\leq 1$, and $\lim_{T\to 0}I(v,\tau,T)= 0$ a.e. From Euler's Gamma-integral
$s^{-a} = \Gamma(a)^{-1}\int_0^\infty e^{-s x}x^{a-1}\,dx$, $a>0$, we derive
\begin{align*}
\int_0^\infty s^{-a} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(s)\,ds
= \int_0^\infty\int_0^\infty\frac{e^{-s x}x^{a-1}}{\Gamma(a)}\, \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(s)\,ds\,dx
= \int_0^\infty \frac{e^{-x^\gamma} x^{a-1}}{\Gamma(a)}\,dx
=\frac{\Gamma(a/\gamma)}{\gamma\Gamma(a)}.
\end{align*}
By a dominated convergence argument, $\lim_{T\to 0}\sup_{x\in \rn} I_{11}(x,T)= 0$. This finishes the proof of a).
\bigskip
\textbf{b)} Without loss of generality we may assume that $T\in (0,1/2]$. Using \eqref{set-e35}, we have
\begin{align*}
\int_0^T \int_D &p^{(\gamma)}(t,x,y) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt\\
&\geq \int_0^T \int_D\int_0^\infty \rho_s^n f_{\textrm{low}}(\rho_s (x-y)) t^{-1/\gamma} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)} ( t^{-1/\gamma}s ) \,ds \,\varpi(dy) \,dt\\
&\geq \int_0^T \int_D\int_0^1 \rho_s^n f_{\textrm{low}}(\rho_s (x-y))t^{-1/\gamma} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)} ( t^{-1/\gamma}s ) \,ds \,\varpi(dy) \,dt \\
&= \int_0^T \int_0^{t^{-1/\gamma}} \int_D \rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}} (\rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}(x-y)) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)} (\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,d\tau \,dt\\
&= \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^T \int_D \rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}} (\rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}(x-y)) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)} (\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt \,d\tau\\
&\qquad\mbox{} + \int_{T^{-1/\gamma}}^\infty \int_0^{\tau^{-\gamma}} \int_D \rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}} (\rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}(x-y)) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt \,d\tau\\
&\geq \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^T \int_D \rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}} (\rho_{\tau t^{1/\gamma}}(x-y)) \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt \,d\tau\\
&= \int_0^{T^{-1/\gamma}} \int_0^{\tau^\gamma T} \int_D \rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}} (\rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}(x-y))\tau^{-\gamma} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv \,d\tau\\
&\geq \int_1^{2^{1/\gamma}} \tau^{-\gamma} \sigma_1^{(\gamma)}(\tau) \,d\tau
\int_0^T \int_D \rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}}(\rho_{v^{1/\gamma}}(x-y)) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv.
\end{align*}
Using the form of $f_{\textrm{low}}$ and the fact that $\rho_t \asymp \theta_t$, we see that the double integral is bounded from below by
$$
\int_0^T\int_D \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}} (c\theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}(x-y)) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv,
$$
where $c>0$ is some constant. Proceeding as in the estimate for $I_{11}(x,T)$, we get for this expression
\begin{align*}
\int_0^T\int_D &\theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n f_{\textrm{low}} (c_2\theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}(x-y)) \,\varpi(dy) \,dv\\
&= \int_0^T \int_0^1 \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}^n \varpi\left\{ y\in D\,:\, c_2 d_2 \theta_{v^{1/\gamma}}|x-y|\leq r\right\} \,dr \,dv\\
&\geq c_3 \int_0^{\phi(T^{1/\gamma})} \int_0^1 \frac{\varpi\left\{ y\in D\,:\, |x-y|\leq r u\right\}}{(q^*)^\gamma(1/u)}\,dr \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}}\\
&\geq \frac{c_3}2 \int_0^{\phi(T^{1/\gamma})} \frac{\varpi\left\{ y\in D \,:\, |x-y|\leq 2^{-1} u\right\}}{(q^*)^\gamma(1/u)}\, \frac{du}{u^{n+1}}.
\end{align*}
Combining everything, we have shown
\begin{equation}\label{app-e60}
\int_0^T \int_D p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y) \,\varpi(dy) \,dt
\geq \textrm{const.} \int_0^{\phi(T^{1/\gamma})} \frac{\varpi\left\{ y\in D \,:\, |x-y|\leq 2^{-1} u\right\}}{(q^*)^\gamma(1/u)} \,\frac{du}{u^{n+1}}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, whenever $\varpi\in \Kato$ with respect to $p^{(\gamma)}_t(x,y)$, then \eqref{s4-e20} holds true.
\qed
|
\part{Prologue}\label{part:intro}
\section{Introduction}\label{s:intro}
We are concerned in this paper with a generalisation of the affine adjunction of classical algebraic geometry to algebraic and categorical settings, and with the resulting relationship to the theory of dualities. We establish a general framework that encompasses several important categorical dualities in mathematics, as well as several attempts to unify them.
The paper thus spans a number of different topics, often at varying levels of generality. We offer an introduction that is perhaps longer than customary, in the hope of providing motivation and guidance for the interested reader.
\subsection{The classical affine adjunction} In classical affine algebraic geometry, one studies solutions to systems of polynomial equations with coefficients in an algebraically closed field $k$. For any subset $R$ of the polynomial ring over finitely many variables $k[X]:=k[X_{1},\ldots,X_{n}]$, there remains defined the (possibly infinite) system of equations:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sist}
p(X_1,\ldots, X_{n})=0, \ p \in R.
\end{equation}
Let us write $\VV{(R)}\subseteq k^{n}$ for the set of solutions of \eqref{eq:sist} over $k^{n}$, where $k^{n}$ is the affine $n$-space over $k$.
Then $\VV{(R)}$
is the \emph{affine set defined by $R$}. Since $k[X]$ is Noetherian by Hilbert's Basis Theorem, it is no loss of generality to assume that $R$ be finite.
Conversely, for any subset $S\subseteq k^{n}$ we can consider the set $\CC{(S)}\subseteq k[X]$ of polynomials that vanish over $S$, which is automatically an ideal. Then $\CC{(S)}$ is the \emph{ideal defined by $S$}. Again by Hilbert's Basis Theorem, the quotient $k$-algebra $k[X]/\CC(S)$ ---the \emph{co-ordinate ring} of the affine set $S$--- is \emph{finitely presentable}.
Writing $2^{E}$ for the power set of the set $E$, we obtain functions (implicitly indexed by $n$)
\begin{align}
\CC&\colon 2^{k^{n}}\longrightarrow 2^{k[X]},\label{intro:c}\\
\VV&\colon 2^{k[X]}\longrightarrow 2^{k^{n}}\label{intro:v}
\end{align}
that yield a (contravariant) Galois connection. The fixed points of the closure operator $\VV\circ\CC$ are then precisely the affine sets in $k^{n}$. Since $\VV\circ\CC$ is a \emph{topological} closure operator ---i.e.\ it commutes with finite unions--- affine algebraic sets are the closed sets of a topology on $k^{n}$, namely, the \emph{Zariski topology}. The fixed points of the dual closure operator $\CC\circ\VV$, on the other hand, may be identified thanks to Hilbert's {\it Nullstellensatz}: they are precisely the \emph{radical ideals} of $k[X]$, that is, those ideals that coincide with the intersection of all prime ideals containing them. The {\it Nullstellensatz} thus characterises co-ordinate rings, for $k[X]/I$ is one such if, and only if, $I$ is radical. Since radical ideals may in turn be elementarily characterised as those ideals $I$ such that $k[X]/I$ has no non-zero nilpotents, co-ordinate rings are precisely the finitely presented nilpotent-free (or \emph{reduced}) $k$-algebras.
The Galois connection given by the pair $(\CC,\VV)$ in (\ref{intro:c}--\ref{intro:v}) can be made functorial. On the algebraic side we consider the category of finitely presented $k$-algebras with their homomorphism. On the geometric side we take as objects subsets of $k^{n}$, for each finite $n$, by which we mean sets $S$ equipped with a specific embedding $S\hookrightarrow k^{n}$.
It is important not to blur the distinction between $S$ itself --- a mere set--- and $S\hookrightarrow k^{n}$ ---an object of our category. Indeed, arrows in the geometric category are to be defined affinely, i.e.\ by restriction from $k^{n}$. An arrow from $S\hookrightarrow k^{n}$ to $T\hookrightarrow k^{m}$ is a \emph{regular map} $S\to T$, that is, the equivalence class of a \emph{polynomial function} $f\colon k^{n}\to k^{m}$ such that $f$ throws $S$ onto $T$; two such functions are equivalent if, and only if, they agree on $S$. There is a functor that associates to each regular map $S\to T$ a contravariant homomorphism of the (automatically presented) co-ordinate rings of $\VV\circ\CC{(T)}$ and $\VV\circ\CC{(S)}$. And there is a companion functor that associates to each homomorphism of presented $k$-algebras $k[X]/I\to k[Y]/J$, with $Y=\{Y_1,\ldots,Y_{m}\}$ and $J$ an ideal of $k[Y]$, a contravariant regular map $\VV{(J)}\to\VV{(I)}$. The two functors yield a contravariant adjunction; upon restricting each functor to the fixed points in each domain, one obtains the classical duality (=contravariant equivalence) between affine algebraic varieties and their co-ordinate rings. Compare\footnote{Terminology: Hartshorne's corollary is stated for irreducible varieties, which he calls varieties {\it tout court}.} e.g.\ \cite[Corollary 3.8]{hartshorne1977algebraic}.
\subsection{The universal algebra framework}
A first aim of this paper is to generalise the classical affine adjunction above to any \emph{variety of algebras}, whether finitary to infinitary.
We assume some familiarity with Birkhoff's theory of general, or ``universal'', algebra; for background see e.g.\ \cite{birkhoff79, cohn81, jacobson80, Burris:81}. Henceforth, variety (of algebras) means ``possibly infinitary variety (of algebras)'' in the sense of S{\l}ominsky \cite{Slominsky:1959} and Linton \cite{Linton:1965} (after Lawvere \cite{lawverereprint}).
The main observation is that in any variety, the \emph{free algebras} play the same r\^{o}le as the ring of polynomials in the above correspondence. Ideals of the ring of polynomials become then, in full generality, congruences of some free algebra, while the ground field $k$ can be substituted for any algebra $A$ in the variety. We refer the reader to Table \ref{tab:transl} below, for a schematic translation of the main concepts in the adjunctions.
In Part \ref{part:alg} we show that the classical affine adjunction extends \textit{verbatim} to this general algebraic setting.
It is important to note that in the geometric adjunction, co-ordinate rings are \emph{presented}, that is, they are not merely isomorphic to a ring of the form $k[X]/I$: they come with a specific defining ideal $I$. By an easy general argument relying on the Axiom of Choice ---cf.\ Remark \ref{rem:Vpequiv} below--- the category of finitely presented $k$-algebras is equivalent to that of finitely presentable $k$-algebras (morphisms being the ring homomorphisms in each case), whether actually presented or not. Nonetheless, for our purposes here the presented and the \emph{presentable} objects are to be kept distinct. We shall indicate by $\Vap$ the category of presented algebras in the variety $\Va$.
\begin{table}[h!]
\adjustbox{max width=\columnwidth}{
\begin{tabular}{|p{4cm}|p{4cm}|p{4cm}|}
\hline
\textbf{Algebraic geometry} & \textbf{Universal algebra} & \textbf{Categories} \\ \hline
Ground field $k$ & Any algebra $A$ in $\Va$ & Functor $\mathscr{I}:\T \to \S $ \\ \hline
Class of $k$-algebras & Any variety $\Va$ & Category $\R$ \\ \hline
$k[X_{1}, \ldots, X_{n}]$ & Free algebras & Objects in $\T$ \\ \hline
Ideals & Congruences & Subsets of $\hom^{2}_{\T}(t,\a)$ with $t$ in $\T$ \\ \hline
Assignment $k[X_{1}, \ldots, X_{n}] \to k$ & Assignment $\mathcal{F}(\mu) \to A$ & Object $\a$ in $\T$ \\ \hline
Regular map & Definable map & Restriction of $\mathscr{I}(f)$ \\ \hline
Co-ordinate algebra of $S$ & Algebra presented by $\CC(S)$ & Pair $(t, \CC{(S)})$ in $\R$ \\ \hline
Affine variety & $\VV\circ\CC$-closed set & Pair $(t,\VV{(R)})$ in $\S$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{Corresponding concepts in the geometric, algebraic, and categorical setting.}\label{tab:transl}
\end{table}
In Corollary \ref{cor:algadj} we obtain the adjunction between $\Vap^{\rm op}$, the opposite of the category of presented $\Va$-algebras, and the category of subsets of (the underlying set of) $A^\mu$, as $\mu$ ranges over all cardinals, with definable maps as morphisms. The functors that implement the adjunction act on objects by taking a subset $R\subseteq \F{(\mu)}\times\F{(\mu)}$ ---that is, a ``system of equations in the language of $\Va$''--- to its solution set $\VV{(R)}\subseteq A^\mu$, where $\VV{(R)}$ is the set of elements of $A^\mu$ such that each pair of terms in $R$ evaluate identically over it; and a subset $S\hookrightarrow A^\mu$ to its ``co-ordinate $\Va$-algebra'', namely, $\F{(\mu)}/\CC{(S)}$, where $\CC{(S)}$ is the congruence on $\F{(\mu)}$ consisting of all pairs of terms that evaluate identically at each element of $S$. Please see section \ref{sec:algadj} for details.
To identify the fixed points of this general affine adjunction on the algebraic side, we prove an appropriate generalisation of the {\it Nullstellensatz}. The final result is stated as Theorem \ref{thm:algnull}. The identification of an appropriate notion of radical congruence (in part (ii) of the theorem) leads to a result formally analogous to the ring-theoretic {\it Nullstellensatz}. Additionally, the identification of an appropriate type of representation for those $\Va$-algebras that are fixed under the adjunction (in part (iii) of the theorem) leads to a result reminiscent of Birkhoff's Subdirect Representation Theorem. Failure of the latter for infinitary varieties is irrelevant for our purposes here. In fact, while our Theorem \ref{thm:algnull} may be be conceived of as a version of the Subdirect Representation theorem that is ``relative to the ground algebra $A$'', it is formally incomparable to Birkhoff's result: neither statement entails the other, in general. See section \ref{sec:algebraic} for details and further comments.
To characterise the fixed points on the \emph{affine} side, we use the fact that in several cases the composition $\VV\circ\CC$ gives a topological closure operator. The topology induced by $\VV\circ\CC$ is readily seen to be a generalisation of the Zariski topology (see e.g., \cite[Chapter 1]{hartshorne1977algebraic}). We therefore provide some sufficient condition to characterise the fixed points on this side as topological $A$-compact sets (\cite{weir1975hewitt}).
\subsection{The general affine adjunction} The general affine adjunction of Corollary \ref{cor:algadj} can be lifted from the algebraic setting to a more general categorical context. This we do in Part \ref{part:general} of the paper, thus achieving our second aim. Conceptually, the key ingredient in the algebraic construction sketched above is the functor $\I_{A}\colon \T \to \Set$. In the categorical abstraction, the basic {\it datum} is any functor $\I \colon \T \to \S$, which can be conceived as the \emph{interpretation} of the ``syntax'' $\T$ into the ``semantics'' $\S$, along with a distinguished object $\a$ of $\T$. (In the algebraic specialisation, $\a$ is $\F{(1)}$, the free singly generated $\Va$-algebra.) Here $\T$ and $\S$ are simply arbitrary (locally small\footnote{All categories in this paper are assumed to be locally small.}) categories. Out of these data, we construct two categories $\D$ and $\R$ of subobjects and relations, respectively.
The category $\D$ abstracts that of sets affinely embedded into $A^{\mu}$; here, sets are replaced by objects of $\S$, the powers $A^{\mu}$ are replaced by objects $\I(t)$ as $t$ ranges over objects of $\T$, and the morphisms of $\S$ that are ``definable'' are declared to be those in the range of $\I$. The category $\R$ abstracts the category of relations (not necessarily congruences) on the free $\Va$-algebras $\F{(\mu)}$; that is, its objects are relations on the hom-set $\hom_{\T}(t,\a)$, as $t$ ranges over objects of $\T$. Arrows are $\T$-arrows that preserve the given relations.
It is possible, in this setting, to define the operator $\CC$ in full generality. In order to define an appropriate abstraction of the operator $\VV$, we need to require that $\S$ has enough limits (Assumption \ref{ass:limits} below), because ``solutions'' to ``systems of equations'' are computed by intersecting solutions to ``single equations''. The pair $(\CC,\VV)$ yields a Galois connection (Lemma \ref{lem:galois}) that satisfies an appropriate abstraction of the {\it Nullstellensatz}, as we show in Theorem \ref{thm:null}. Moreover, the Galois connection functorially lifts to an adjunction between $\D$ and $\R$; see Theorem \ref{thm:weakadj}. This is to be considered a weak form of the algebraic adjunction, because in the algebraic setting one can additionally take quotients of the categories $\D$ and $\R$ that have semantic import.
One would like to identify pairs of definable morphisms in $\D$, if they agree on the given ``affine subobject''. Similarly, one would like to identify morphisms that agree on the same ``presented object'', in the appropriate abstract sense.
See section \ref{sec:weak} for details. This can be done via appropriate equivalence relations that lead us to quotient categories $\D^{q}$ and $\R^{q}$. However, in order for the adjunction between $\D$ and $\R$ to descend to the quotients, it is necessary to impose a condition on the object $\a$. More precisely, we find that it suffices to assume that $\a$ be an \emph{$\I$-coseparator}; please see Definition \ref{def:coseparator} and Lemma \ref{lem:cosep}. (In the algebraic specialisation, we prove that this assumption on $\a=\F{(1)}$ is automatically satisfied; see Lemma \ref{lem:algcosep}.) Under this additional assumption (Assumption \ref{ass:cosep} below) we obtain our general affine adjunction between $\D^{q}$ and $\R^{q}$, Theorem \ref{thm:genadj}.
In section \ref{s:further} of the paper we develop some further theory with an eye towards comparing our results to the existing literature.
\subsection{Applications to duality theory} Our third and final aim in this paper is to illustrate the connection between the theory of dualities, and the general affine adjunctions that we have hitherto summarised. This we do in Part \ref{part:alg}, where we select three landmark duality theorems in order to illustrate different aspects of our construction. Some familiarity with duality theory is assumed here. By way of a preliminary, in section \ref{s:classical} we show in detail how the classical affine adjunction can be recovered as a rather direct special case of the algebraic affine adjunction. In section \ref{s:stone} we frame Stone duality for Boolean algebras in our setting. This provides the most classical example of a duality for a finitary variety of algebras. In section \ref{s:stone-gelfand} we do the same for Gelfand duality between commutative unital $C^{*}$-algebras and compact Hausdorff spaces, an important example of a duality for an infinitary variety of algebras. Our treatment of Gelfand duality stresses its analogy with Stone duality for Boolean algebras.
\subsection{Related literature} Before turning to the proofs, we comment on related literature. The idea of generalising the classical affine adjunction to an algebraic setting is far from new. In \cite{daniyarova2012algebraic} and subsequent papers, various elements of abstract algebraic geometry for finitary varieties of algebras are developed. The authors use this to apply geometric methods in universal algebra. However, they do not relate their theory to duality theory, so the overlap with our results is modest.
In \cite{diers1999affine} Diers develops a framework generalising the classical affine adjunction for rings of polynomials to the
context of (possibly infinitary) algebraic theories. He establishes, for any algebra $L$ in a given variety, an adjunction between a
category of ``affine subsets'' over $L$ and a category of ``algebraic systems'', as well as an adjunction between a category of
``affine algebraic sets'' and the category of algebras of the given sort, specialising to a duality between the former category and a
category of ``functional algebras'' over $L$. The notion of (algebraic) affine set in the sense of Diers is significantly different from
ours: indeed, it amounts to a pair $(X, A(X))$ consisting of a set $X$ and of a subalgebra of the algebra $L^{X}$. Nonetheless, in
section \ref{ssolution} we show that Diers' ``system-solution'' adjunction can be obtained from our general categorical framework
with an appropriate choice of the parameters. Another important difference between Diers' approach and ours consists in the fact
that the categories of algebras involved in his other adjunction are not categories of \emph{presented algebras} (i.e., algebras
equipped with a presentation) as it is the case in our setting, nor the objects of his category of affine algebraic sets are presented
as \emph{subsets} of affine spaces.
There is also a strong connection between our approach and the theory of dualities generated by a dualising object (see e.g.\ \cite{barr2008isbell}, \cite{clark1998natural}, and \cite{MR1147921}). In section \ref{sec:representable} we show that, whenever $\S$ is the category of sets and maps, and $\I$ is representable, our adjunction can be seen as one induced by a dualising object. Moreover, in section \ref{universality} we show that every duality between categories satisfying mild requirements can be obtained from the general categorical framework developed in Part \ref{part:general}.
Finally, we mention that the connection between a general {\sl Nullstellensatz} theorem for varieties of algebras and Birkhoff's subdirect representation theorem is addressed in \cite{tholen2013nullstellen}, although in a context different from ours.
\part{The general adjunction}\label{part:general}
\section{The weak Nullstellensatz, and the weak affine adjunction}\label{sec:weak}
If $x$ and $y$ are objects in a category $\Cc$, and $f\colon x \to y$ is an arrow in $\Cc$, we write $\hom_{\Cc}{(x,y)}$ to denote the collection of arrows in $\Cc$ from $x$ to $y$, and $\dom{f}$ to denote the domain $x$ of $f$.
We consider the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item Two categories $\T$ and $\S$.
\item A functor $\I \colon \T \to \S$.
\item An object $\a$ of $\T$.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{The category $\D$ of subobjects and definable morphisms}\label{ss:D}
Objects are all pairs $(t,s)$ where $t$ is $\T$-object and $s \colon \dom{s} \to\I(t)$ is an $\S$-subobject. Arrows $(t,s)\to(t',s')$ are the $\T$-arrows $f \colon t \to t'$ such that $\I(f)\circ s$ factors through $s'$; that is, there exists an $\S$-arrow $g \colon S \to S'$ such that the diagram
\begin{small}
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node (S) at (0,0) {$\dom{s}$};
\node (VTS) at (0,5) {$\I(t)$};
\node (T) at (5,0) {$\dom{s'}$};
\node (VTT) at (5,5) {$\I(t')$};
\draw [->] (S) -- (T) node [below, midway] {$g$};
\draw [->] (VTS) -- (VTT) node [above, midway] {$\I(f)$};
\draw [->] (S) -- (VTS) node [left, midway] {$s$};
\draw [->] (T) -- (VTT) node [right, midway] {$s'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
\end{small}
commutes.
\subsection{The category $\R$ of relations and relation-preserving morphisms}\label{ss:R} Objects are all pairs $(t,R)$ where $t$ is a $\T$-object and $R$ is a relation on $\hom_\T{(t,\a)}$. Arrows $(t,R)\to(t',R')$ are the $\T$-arrows $f\colon t\to t'$ such that the function
\begin{align}\label{eq:Rarrow}
-\circ f\colon \hom_{\T}{(t', \a)} \to \hom_{\T}{(t, \a)}
\end{align}
satisfies the property
\begin{align*}
(p', q')\in R' \quad \Longrightarrow \quad (p' \circ f, q' \circ f)\in R.
\end{align*}
We say in this case that $f$ \emph{preserves $R'$} (\emph{with respect to $R$}).
\begin{remark}\label{rem:equivfactor}
Observe that if (\ref{eq:Rarrow}) satisfies the property above, then it must factor through the equivalence relations $\overline{R'}$ and $\overline{R}$ generated by $R'$ and $R$, respectively. In other words, if the $\T$-arrow $f\colon t\to t'$ preserves $R'$ with respect to $R$, then it also preserves $\overline
{R'}$ with respect to $\overline{R}$. Hence, if $f$ defines an $\R$-arrow $(t,R)\to (t',R')$, then it also defines an $\R$-arrow $(t,\overline{R})\to (t',\overline{R'})$.
\end{remark}
We emphasise that $\D$ will depend on $\I$ (and hence on $\T$ and $\S$) but not on $\a$, and $\R$ will depend on $\a$ (and hence on $\T$) but not on $\I$ (nor on $\S$). Hence a more informative notation would be $\D_{\I}$ and $\R_{\a}$, which however we do not adopt for the sake of legibility.
\begin{terminology}\label{term:identification}Throughout, when we say that $f \colon (t,s)\to(t',s')$ is a $\D$-arrow, we entail that $f\colon t \to t'$ is the unique $\T$-arrow that defines
it. Similarly, when we say that $f\colon (t,R)\to(t',R')$ is an $\R$-arrow, we imply that $f\colon t \to t'$ is the unique $\T$-arrow that defines it.
\end{terminology}
\subsection{The Galois connection $(\CC,\VV)$}\label{ss:Galois}
\begin{definition}\label{def:C}
For any $(t, s)\in \D$, we define the following equivalence relation on $\hom_{\T}{(t, \a)}$:
\begin{align}\label{eq:RS}
\CC{(s)}:=\left\{(p,q)\in \hom_{\T}^{2}{(t, \a)} \mid \I(p)\circ s=\I(q)\circ s\right\}.
\end{align}
\end{definition}
In order to define $\VV$ it is necessary to assume that $\S$ has enough limits. It is sufficient to make the following
\begin{assumption}\label{ass:limits} Henceforth, we always assume that $\S$ has equalisers of pairs of parallel arrows, and intersections of arbitrary families of subobjects. We denote the intersection of a family $\{E_i\}_{i\in I}$ of $\S$-subobjects by $\bigwedge_{i \in I} E_i$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{definition}\label{def:V}
For any $(t, R)$ in $\R$, we set
\begin{align}\label{eq:SR}
\VV{(R)}:=\bigwedge_{(p,q)\in R}\Eq{(\I(p),\I(q))},
\end{align}
where, for $(p,q)\in R$, $\Eq{(\I(p),\I(q))}$ denotes the $\S$-subobject of $\I(t)$ given by the equaliser in $\S$ of the $\S$-arrows $\I(p), \I(q) \colon \I(t) \rightrightarrows \I(\a)$.
\end{definition}
We now show that the operators $\VV$ and $\CC$ yield contravariant Galois connections between relations and subobjects. Let us write $\leq$ to denote the partial order on subobjects in a category. Thus, as usual, if $x$ and $y$ are subobjects of $z$, $x\leq y$ if there is an arrow $m\colon \dom{x} \to \dom{y}$ such that $x=y\circ m$.
\begin{lemma}[Galois connection]\label{lem:galois}
For any $\T$-object $t$, any relation $R$ on $\hom_\T{(t,\a)}$, and any $\S$-subobject $s \colon \dom{s}\to \I(t)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:galois}
R \subseteq \CC{(s)} \quad \quad \text{if, and only if,} \quad \quad s\leq \VV{(R)}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}We have $R \subseteq \CC(s)$ if, and only if, for any $(p,q) \in R$ it is the case that $\I{(p)}\circ s = \I{(q)}\circ s$. On the other hand, $s\leq \VV{(R)}$ if, and only if, there is an $\S$-arrow $m\colon \dom{s}\to \dom{\VV{(R)}}$ with $s=\VV{(R)}\circ m$.
Now, if the former holds then $s$ must factor through $\VV{(R)}$ because the latter is defined in (\ref{eq:SR}) as the intersection of all $\S$-subobjects of $\I(t)$ that equalise some pair in $R$. Conversely, if the latter holds then for each $(p,q)\in R$ we obtain, composing both sides of
$\I{(p)}\circ \VV{(R)} =\I{(q)}\circ\VV{(R)}$ with $m$, that $\I{(p)}\circ s =\I{(q)}\circ s$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The weak {\sl Nullstellensatz}}\label{subs:weaknull}
Recall that a collection of arrows $A\subseteq \hom_\A{(x,y)}$ in a category $\A$ is \emph{jointly epic} if whenever $f_1,f_2\colon y\rightrightarrows z$ are $\A$-arrows with $f_1\circ g = f_2\circ g$ for all $g\in A$, then $f_1=f_2$.
\begin{theorem}[Weak {\sl Nullstellensatz}]\label{thm:null}
Fix an $\R$-object $(t,R)$. For any family $\Sigma=\{\sigma_{i}\}_{i\in I}$ of subobjects of $\I{(t)}$ such that for each $\sigma_{i}$ there exists $m_{i}$ with $\sigma_{i}=\VV{(R)}\circ m_{i}$ (i.e.\ $\sigma_{i}\leq \VV{(R)}$) and the family of $\S$-arrows $\{m_{i}\}_{i\in I}$ is jointly epic in $\S$, the following are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}[\textup{(}i\textup{)}]
\item $R=\CC{(\VV{(R)})}$, i.e.\ $R$ is fixed by the Galois connection \textup{(\ref{eq:galois})}.
\item $R=\bigcap_{i\in I}\CC(\sigma_{i})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First observe that the Galois connection (\ref{eq:galois}) in Lemma \ref{lem:galois} implies the \emph{expansiveness} of $\CC\circ\VV$, i.e.
\begin{align}\label{eq:contained1}
R\subseteq \CC{(\VV{(R)})}\ .
\end{align}
Further, since each $\sigma_{i}\leq \VV{(R)}$, again by general properties of Galois connections, it follow that
\begin{align}\label{eq:contained2}
R\subseteq \bigcap_{i\in I}\CC(\sigma_{i})\ .
\end{align}
\smallskip \noindent (i)$\Rightarrow$(ii)\,
As by hypothesis $R=\CC{(\VV{(R)})}$, by (\ref{eq:contained2}) above, it is enough to prove
\[\bigcap_{i\in I}\CC(\sigma_{i})\subseteq \CC{(\VV{(R)})}\ .\]
If $(p,q)\in \bigcap_{i\in I}\CC(\sigma_{i})$, then for every $\sigma_{i}\in \Sigma$, $\I(p)\circ \sigma_{i}=\I(q)\circ \sigma_{i}$. By hypothesis, the latter can be rewritten as $\I(p)\circ \VV{(R)}\circ m_{i}=\I(q)\circ \VV{(R)}\circ m_{i}$. Now, the family of factorisations $\{m_{i}\}_{i\in I}$ is jointly epic in $\S$, hence we obtain $\I(p)\circ \VV{(R)}=\I(q)\circ \VV{(R)}$, which proves $(p,q)\in \CC{(\VV{(R)})}$.
\smallskip \noindent (ii)$\Rightarrow$(i)\,
By (\ref{eq:contained1}) above and the hypothesis (ii), it is enough to prove
\[\CC{(\VV{(R)})}\subseteq \bigcap_{i\in I}\CC(\sigma_{i}) .\]
Suppose that $(p,q)\in\CC{(\VV{(R)})}$, i.e.\ $\I(p)\circ \VV{(R)}=\I(q)\circ \VV{(R)}$. By composing on the right with $m_i$ we obtain,
for all $\sigma_{i}\in \Sigma$, $\I(p)\circ \VV{(R)}\circ m_{i}=\I(q)\circ \VV{(R)}\circ m_{i}$. Applying the above commutativity of $\sigma_{i}$ one obtains $\I(p)\circ \sigma_{i}=\I(q)\circ\sigma_{i}$. The latter entails that, for all $i\in I$, $(p,q)\in \CC{(\sigma_{i})}$, whence $(p,q)\in \bigcap_{i\in I}\CC(\sigma_{i})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Notice that one such family $\Sigma$ always exists, namely $\dom{\VV{(R)}}$ and the arrow $\VV{(R)}$. However, in this case the theorem becomes tautological. When the category $S$ is $\Set$, the category of sets and functions, one can chose as $\Sigma$ the family of maps with domain the singleton $*$ (i.e.\ the terminal object of \Set). The family $\Sigma$ is obviously jointly surjective and Theorem \ref{thm:null} can be restated in a more concrete form as follows.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:null-in-set}
Suppose $\S=\Set$. For any $\R$-object $(t,R)$ the following are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}[\textup{(}i\textup{)}]
\item $R=\CC{(\VV{(R)})}$,
\item $R=\bigcap_{\sigma\leq \VV{(R)}}\CC(\sigma)$, where $\sigma$ ranges over all $\S$-subobjects $*\to \I(t)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
The operators $\CC$ and $\VV$ naturally give rise to functors $\C$ and $\V$, as we spell out in the following.
\subsection{The functor $\C\colon \D\to\R$}
For any $\D$-object $(t, s)$, we set
\begin{align}\label{eq:Cobj}
\C(t, s):=(t, \CC(s)).
\end{align}
For a $\D$-arrow $f\colon(t, s)\to (t', s')$ we let $\C(f)$ be the $\R$-arrow $f\colon (t, \CC(s))\to (t', \CC(s'))$. To check that this is well-defined,
we need to show that the function
\begin{align*}
-\circ f\colon \hom_{\T}{(t', \a )} \to \hom_{\T}{(t, \a )}
\end{align*}
satisfies $(p' \circ f, q' \circ f)\in \CC(s)$ for any $(p', q')\in \CC(s')$. Indeed, note that for some $\S$-arrow $g\colon \dom{s} \to \dom{s'}$
\begin{align}\label{eq:welldef1}
\I(f)\circ s= s'\circ g \ ,
\end{align}
because $f\colon(t, s)\to (t', s')$ is a $\D$-arrow. Now, given $p', q'\in \hom_{\T}{(t', \a )}$, assume $(p',q')\in \CC(s')$, that is
\begin{align}\label{eq:welldef2}
\I(p')\circ s'=\I(q')\circ s'.
\end{align}
Composing both sides of (\ref{eq:welldef2}) with $g$, and applying (\ref{eq:welldef1}), we obtain $\I(p'\circ f)\circ s = \I(q'\circ f)\circ s$, which shows $(p'\circ f,q'\circ f)\in \CC(s)$.
\subsection{The functor $\V\colon \R \to \D$}
For any $\R$-object $(t, R)$, we set
\begin{align}\label{eq:Vobj}
\V(t,R):=(t,\VV{(R)}).
\end{align}
For an $\R$-arrow $f\colon (t, R)\to (t', R')$ we define $\V(f)$ to be the $\D$-arrow $f\colon (t, \VV{(R)})$ $\to (t', \VV(R'))$. To check that this is well-defined, we need to show that
$\I(f)\circ \VV{(R)}$ factors through $\VV{(R')}$. Indeed, let $p',q' \in \hom_{\T}{(t',\a)}$, and assume $(p',q') \in R'$. Then $(p' \circ f, q'\circ f)\in R$ because $f$ is an $\R$-arrow, and therefore $\I(p')\circ (\I(f) \circ \VV{(R)})=\I(q')\circ (\I(f)\circ \VV{(R)})$ for all $(p',q')\in R'$. By the universal property of the pull-back $\VV(R'):=\bigwedge_{(p',q')\in R}\Eq{(\I(p'),\I(q'))}$ it follows that $\I(f)\circ \VV{(R)}$ factors through $\VV(R')$.
\subsection{The weak adjunction}\label{subs:weak}
The Galois connection (\ref{eq:galois}) lifts to an adjunction.
\begin{theorem}[Weak affine adjunction]\label{thm:weakadj}
The functor $\C\colon \D\to \R$ is left adjoint to the functor $\V\colon \R\to\D$. In symbols, $\C\dashv \V$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let us show that for any $\D$-object $(t, s)$ and any $\R$ -object $(t', R')$ we have a natural bijective correspondence between the $\R$-arrows $\C(t, s)=(t, \CC(s))\to (t', R')$ and the $\D$-arrows $(t, s)\to (t', \VV(R'))=\V(t', R')$.
Let $f\colon t\to t'$ be a $\T$-arrow. Then $f$ defines an $\R$-arrow $(t, \CC(s))\to (t', R')$ if, and only if, for any $p', q' \in \hom_{\T}{(t', \a)}$, if $(p', q')\in R'$ then $\I(p') \circ \I(f)\circ s=\I(q') \circ \I(f) \circ s$. On the other hand, $f$ defines a $\D$-arrow $(t, s)\to (t', \VV(R'))$ in $\D$ if, and only if, $f\circ s$ factors through $\VV(R')$, i.e.\ for any $p', q' \in \hom_{\T}{(t', \a )}$, if $(p', q')\in R'$ then $\I(p') \circ \I(f)\circ s=\I(q') \circ \I(f) \circ s$. It is thereby clear that $\C\dashv\V$.
\end{proof}
\section{The general adjunction}\label{sec:general}
We now consider appropriate quotients of the categories $\D$ and $\R$. We shall need a lemma about factorisations of adjoint pairs through quotient categories \cite[II.8]{MMT87}. A \emph{congruence relation} on a category $\A$ is a family $R$ of equivalence relations $R_{x,x'}$ on $\hom_{\A}{(x,x')}$ indexed by the pairs $(x,x')$ of $\A$-objects, such that for all $\A$-arrows $f_1,g_1 \colon x \rightrightarrows x'$, $f_2,g_2\colon x' \rightrightarrows x''$, if $(f_1,g_1)\in R_{x,x'}$ and $(f_2,g_2)\in R_{x',x''}$ then $(f_2\circ f_1,g_2\circ g_1)\in R_{x,x''}$. The \emph{quotient category} $\A/R$ of $\A$ modulo the congruence $R$ has then as objects the $\A$-objects, and as hom-sets the quotients $\hom_{\A/R}{(x,x')}:=(\hom_{\A}{(x,x')})/R_{(x,x')}$ for each pair of $(\A/R)$-objects $(x,x')$; composition is defined in the obvious manner. There is a canonical projection functor
\begin{align*}\label{eq:quotientfunctori}
\F_R\colon \A \to \A/R
\end{align*}
that acts identically on $\A$-objects, and carries the $\A$-arrow $x\to x'$ to the $\A/R$ arrow given by its $R_{x,x'}$-equivalence class. The functor $\F_R$ is universal amongst functors $\G\colon \A \to \Cc$ with the property that $(f,g)\in R_{x,x'}$ implies $\G(f)=\G(g)$; see \cite[Proposition II.8.1]{MMT87}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:adjointquot}
Let $\F\colon \A\to \B$ and $\G\colon\B\to \A$ be two adjoint functors with $\F\dashv\G$. Let $R$ and $S$ be two congruence relations on $\A$ and $\B$, respectively. Suppose that $\F$ preserves $R$, in the sense that $(f,g)\in R_{x,x'}$ implies $(\F(f),\F(g))\in S_{\F(x),\F(x')}$ for all pairs $f,g \colon x \rightrightarrows x'$ of $\A$-arrows. Similarly, suppose that $\G$ preserves $S$.
Then the factorisations $\F^{q}\colon\A/R \to \B/S$ and $\G^{q}\colon \B/S\to \A/R$ of $\F$ and $\G$, respectively, through the canonical projection functors $\F_R\colon \A\to \A/R$ and $\G_S\colon \B\to \B/S$ are adjoint with $\F^{q}\dashv \G^{q}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider an $\A$-object $x$ and a $\B$-object $y$. Because $\F\dashv\G$, there is a natural bijection $\hom_\B{(\F(x),y})\cong\hom_\A{(x ,\G(y))}$. Since $\F$ and $\G$ preserve $R$ and $S$, respectively, it is elementary to verify that there is an induced natural bijection between the quotient sets $\hom_{\B/S}{(\F^q(x),y)}$ and $\hom_{\A/R}{(x ,\G^q(y))}$. Indeed, the arrow $\alpha_{f}:x \to \G(y)$ corresponding to an arrow $f:\F(x) \to y$ under the bijection above is given by the composite of $\G(f)$ with the unit $\eta_{x}:x\to \G(\F(x))$ of the adjunction between $\F$ and $G$, and hence if $(f, f')\in R$ then $(\alpha_{f}, \alpha_{f'})\in S$ since $\alpha_{f}=\G(f)\circ \eta_{x}$ and $\alpha_{f'}=\G(f')\circ \eta_{x}$ (here we use the fact that $S$ is a congruence and that $\G$ preserves $R$); the proof of the other direction is entirely analogous (it uses the counit of the adjunction between $\F$ and $\G$, the fact that $R$ is a congruence and the fact that $\F$ preserves $S$).
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}\label{d:Dq}
We define $\D^q$ to be the quotient of $\D$ modulo the congruence $\delta$ defined by declaring the $\D$-arrows $f, g\colon (t, s)\to (t', s')$ equivalent precisely when
$\I(f)\circ s=\I(g)\circ s$.
\end{definition}
It is an exercise to check that the relation above is indeed a congruence.
Specularly,
\begin{definition}\label{d:Rq}
We define $\R^{q}$ to be the quotient of $\R$ modulo the congruence $\rho$ defined by declaring the $\R$-arrows $f, g\colon(t, R)\to (t', R')$ equivalent precisely when the factorisations of $-\circ f, -\circ g\colon \hom_{\T}{(t', \a )} \rightrightarrows \hom_{\T}{(t, \a )}$
through the quotient sets $\hom_{\T}{(t', \a )}/\overline{R'}$ and $\hom_{\T}{(t, \a )}/\overline{R}$ are equal, where $\overline{R'}$ and $\overline{R}$ denote the equivalence relations generated by $R'$ and $R$, respectively. (Recall Remark \ref{rem:equivfactor}.)
\end{definition}
Once more, it is elementary to verify that the relation defined above is indeed a congruence. We therefore have canonical projection functors $\C_\delta\colon\D \to\D^q$ and $\V_\rho\colon \R\to\R^q$.
\begin{remark}\label{rem:structured}
The arrows in the categories $\D^{q}$ and $\R^{q}$ admit the following more concrete descriptions: the arrows $(t, s)\to (t', s')$ in $\D^{q}$ are precisely the functions $\dom(s)\to \dom(s')$ which are restrictions of some arrow of the form $\I{(f)}$ where $f:t\to t'$, while the arrows $(t, R)\to (t', R')$ in $R^{q}$ are precisely the functions $\hom_{\T}{(t', \a )}/\overline{R'} \to \hom_{\T}{(t, \a )}/\overline{R}$ which are induced by an arrow $t\to t'$ in the sense specified above.
In fact, in Remark \ref{r:RandD-structured-on-set} we shall define functors that, under the hypotheses of Theorem \ref{thm:schizo}, realise ${\R^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}$ and $\D^{q}$ (in case $\S=\Set$) as concrete categories structured over $\Set$.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}\label{def:coseparator}
We say that the $\T$-object $\a$ is an \emph{$\I$-coseparator} if for any $\T$-object $t$ the family of arrows $\I(\f)\colon \I(t)\to \I(\a)$, as $\f$ ranges over all $\T$-arrows $\f\colon t \to \a$, is jointly monic in $\S$. In other words, given any two $\S$-arrows $h_1,h_2\colon S \to \I(t)$, if $\I(\f)\circ h_1=\I(\f)\circ h_2$ for all $\f$, then $h_1=h_2$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:cosep}\textup{(i)}\, The functor $\C\colon \D \to \R$ preserves $\delta$. \textup{(ii)}\, If the $\T$-object $\a$ is an $\I$-coseparator, the functor $\V\colon \R \to \D$ preserves $\rho$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}(i)\,
Let $x=(t,s),x'=(t',s')$ be $\D$-objects, and let $f,g\in\hom{(x,x')}$ be such that $(f,g)\in\delta_{x,x'}$. Explicitly,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:1}\I(f)\circ s=\I(g)\circ s\ .
\end{equation}
We need to show that $(\C(f),\C(g))\in\rho_{\C(x),\C(x')}$. Since $\C(x)=(t,\CC(s))$, $\C(x')=(t',\CC(s'))$, $\C(f)=f$, and $\C(g)=g$, we equivalently need to show that the factorisations of $-\circ f, -\circ g\colon \hom_{\T}{(t', \a )} \rightrightarrows \hom_{\T}{(t, \a )}$ through the quotient sets $\hom_{\T}{(t', \a )}/\overline{\CC(s')}$ and $\hom_{\T}{(t, \a )}/\overline{\CC(s)}$ are equal. This is, for all $\f\in\hom{(t',\a)}$ the equality $(\f\circ f)/\overline{\CC(s)}=(\f\circ g)/\overline{\CC(s)}$ holds, or equivalently, $((\f\circ f),(\f\circ g))\in \CC(s)$. The latter means by definition, cf.\ (\ref{eq:RS}), that $\I(\f\circ f)\circ s=\I(\f\circ g)\circ s$, which can be obtained from (\ref{eq:1}) above by composing both sides with $\I(\f)$.
\smallskip \noindent (ii)\,
Let $(t,R), (t',R')$ be $\R$-objects, and suppose that $(f,g)\in\rho_{(t,R),(t',R')}$. This holds if, and only if, for all $\f\colon t'\to \a $, $(\f\circ f,\f\circ g)\in\overline{R}$, which in turn entails $\I(\f\circ f)\circ \VV{(R)}=\I(\f\circ g)\circ \VV{(R)}$, by the definition (\ref{eq:SR}) of $\VV{(R)}$ as an intersection of equalisers. Since $\a$ is an $\I$-coseparator we conclude that $\I(f)\circ \VV{(R)}=\I(g)\circ \VV{(R)}$. Recalling that $\V(f)=f$ and $\V(g)=g$, the last equality holds precisely when $(\V(f),\V(g))\in\delta_{\V(y),\V(y')}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{assumption}\label{ass:cosep}In light of Lemma \ref{lem:cosep}.ii,
we henceforth assume that the $\T$-object $\a$ is an $\I$-coseparator.
\end{assumption}
\begin{definition}\label{def:quotients}
We let $\C^{q}\colon\D^q \to \R^{q}$ and $\V^{q}\colon\R^q \to \D^{q}$ be the functors given by Lemma \ref{lem:cosep} as the canonical factorisations of the functors $\V_{\rho}\circ \C$ and $\C_{\delta}\circ \V$ through the projection functors $\C_{\delta}$ and $\V_{\rho}$, respectively.
\end{definition}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node (S) at (0,0) {$\D^{q}$};
\node (VTS) at (0,5) {$\D$};
\node (T) at (5,0) {$\R^{q}$};
\node (VTT) at (5,5) {$\R$};
\draw[->] (S) to [bend right] node[below, midway] {$\C^{q}$} (T);
\draw [<-] (S) to [bend left] node[above, midway] {$\V^{q}$} node [below, midway,yshift=-0.15cm]{$\top$} (T) ;
\draw [->] (VTS) to [bend right] node[below, midway] {$\C$} (VTT);
\draw [<-] (VTS) to [bend left] node [above, midway] {$\V$} node [below, midway,yshift=-0.1cm]{$\top$} (VTT) ;
\draw [<-] (S) -- (VTS) node [left, midway] {$\C_{\delta}$};
\draw [<-] (T) -- (VTT) node [right, midway] {$\V_{\rho}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\begin{theorem}[General affine adjunction]\label{thm:genadj}
Under our standing Assumption \ref{ass:cosep}, the functors $\C^{q}\colon\D^{q} \to \R^{q}$ and $\V^{q}\colon \R^{q} \to \D^{q}$ satisfy $\C^q\dashv\V^q$.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Combine Lemma \ref{lem:cosep} and Lemma \ref{lem:adjointquot}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:nullquotient}The algebraic {\sl Nullstellensatz} (Theorem \ref{thm:null}) applies {\it verbatim} to the quotient categories $\D^{q}$ and $\R^{q}$, too. Indeed, the theorem does not mention morphisms in $\D$ or $\R$ at all.
\end{remark}
\section{Further general theory}\label{s:further}
\subsection{Comprehensiveness of the framework}\label{universality}
We prove in this section that any duality meeting Assumption \ref{ass:limits} is amenable to our framework.
\begin{theorem}
Suppose a duality between two categories $\A$ and $\B$ is given by functors $\F\colon\A^{\rm op}\to \B$ and $\G\colon\B\to \A^{\rm op}$, further suppose that $\B$ satisfies the requirements in Assumption \ref{ass:limits}. Then there exist categories $\T,\S$ a functor $\I\colon \T\to\S$ and an object $\a$ in $\T$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\A^{\rm op}$ is equivalent to a full subcategory $\R_{eq}$ of $\R$,
\item $\B$ is equivalent to a full subcategory $\D_{eq}$ of $\D$,
\item the suitable compositions of the above equivalencies with $\V$ and $\C$ yield $\F$ and $\G$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let us set
\begin{itemize}
\item $\T:=\A^{\textrm{op}}$,
\item $\S:=\B$,
\item $\I\colon\T \to \S$ equals to $\F\colon\A^{\textrm{op}} \to \B$, and
\item $\Delta$ a fixed but arbitrary element of $\A$.
\end{itemize}
The categories $\R$ and $\D$ are defined as in sections \ref{ss:D} and \ref{ss:R}. Define the full subcategories $\R_{eq}$ and $\D_{eq}$ as follows. The former is given by the pairs $(t,R)$ in $\R$ such that $R$ is the identity relation on $\hom(t,\a)$, which we call $\id_{t}$. The latter is given by the pairs $(t,s)$ in $\D$ such that $s$ is the identity (subobject) of $\I(t)$, which we call $1_{t}$. Notice that if $f:t\to t'$ is \emph{any} arrow in $\T$, then $f$ is also an arrow in $R_{eq}$. Indeed, $(p,q)\in \id_{t'}$ iff $p=q$ and this implies $p\circ f=q\circ f$, i.e. $(p\circ f,q\circ f)\in \id_{t}$. Further, $f$ is also an arrow in $\D_{eq}$ for similarly trivial reasons.
It is useful to calculate how $\V$ and $\C$ operate on $\R_{eq}$ and $\D_{eq}$. Given an object $(t,\id_{t})$ in $\R_{eq}$, we have $\V(t,\id_{t})=(t,\VV(\id_{t}))$, where
\begin{align*}
\VV(\id_{t})=\bigwedge_{(p,q)\in \id_{t}}Eq(\I(p),\I(q))=\I(t)=1_{t}\ .
\end{align*}
Given an object $(t,1_{t})$ in $\D_{eq}$, we have $\C(t,1_{t})=(t,\CC(1_{t}))$, where
\begin{align}
\CC(1_{t})&=\{(p,q)\in\hom_{\T}(t,\a)\mid 1_{t}\circ\I(p)=1_{t}\circ\I(q)\}\\
&=\{(p,q)\in\hom_{\T}(t,\a)\mid \I(p)=\I(q)\}\label{eq:2}\\
&=\{(p,q)\in\hom_{\T}(t,\a)\mid p=q\}\label{eq:3}\\
&=\id_{t}\ .
\end{align}
where \eqref{eq:2} holds because $1_{t}$ is an iso and \eqref{eq:3} because $\I=\F$ is faithful. In fact, $\V$ and $\C$ induce an equivalence between $\R_{eq}$ and $\D_{eq}$.
We now define four functors as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\U_{\R^{eq}}\colon \R_{eq}\to \A^{\textrm{op}}$, is defined on objects as $\U_{\R^{eq}}(t,\id_{t}):=t$ and as the identity on arrows.
\item $\U_{\D_{eq}}\colon \D_{eq} \to \B$, is defined on objects as $\U_{\D^{eq}}(t,1_{t}):=1_{t}$ and on arrows as $\F$.
\item $\mathscr{L}\colon \A^{\textrm{op}} \to \R_{eq}$, is defined on objects as $\mathscr{L}(x):=(x,\id_{x})$ and as the identity on arrows
\item $\mathscr{R}\colon \B\to \D_{eq}$, is defined on objects as $\mathscr{R}(y):=(\G(y),1_{\G(y)})$ and on arrows as $\G$.
\end{enumerate}
So we have the following diagram:
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[every node/.style={on grid}, scale=0.4]
\node (S) at (0,0) {$\R_{eq}$};
\node (VTS) at (0,5) {$\A^{\textrm{op}}$};
\node (T) at (5,0) {$\D_{eq}$};
\node (VTT) at (5,5) {$\B$};
\draw [->] (S.10) -- (T.170) node [above, midway] {$\V$};
\draw [<-] (S.-10) -- (T.-170) node [below, midway] {$\C$};
\draw [->] (VTS.10) -- (VTT.165) node [above, midway] {$\F$};
\draw [<-] (VTS.-10) -- (VTT.-165) node [below, midway] {$\G$};
\draw [->] (S.100) -- (VTS.260) node [left, midway] {$\U_{\R_{eq}}$};
\draw [<-] (S.80) -- (VTS.280) node [right, midway] {$\mathscr{L}$};
\draw [<-] (T.100) -- (VTT.260) node [left, midway] {$\mathscr{R}$};
\draw [->] (T.80) -- (VTT.280) node [right, midway] {$\U_{\D_{eq}}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
Notice that the pairs $\mathscr{L},\U_{\R_{eq}}$ and $\mathscr{R},\U_{\D_{eq}}$ are equivalences, indeed:
\begin{itemize}
\item for any $(t,\id_{t})$ in $\R_{eq}$, $\mathscr{L}\circ\U_{\R_{eq}}(t,\id_{t})=(t,\id_{t})$ and for any $x$ in $\A$ $\U_{\R_{eq}}\circ \mathscr{L}(x)=x$;
\item for any $(t,1_{t})$ in $\D_{eq}$, $\mathscr{R}\circ\U_{\D_{eq}}(t,1_{t})=\mathscr{R}(1_{t})=\mathscr{R}(\I(t))=\mathscr{R}(\F(t))= (\G(\F(t)),1_{\G(\F(t))})$ and for any $y$ in $\B$ $\U_{\D_{eq}}\circ \mathscr{R}(y)=\U_{\D_{eq}}(\G(y),1_{\G_{y}})=1_{\G(y)}=\F(\G(y))$.
\end{itemize}
Finally we calculate the compositions:
\begin{itemize}
\item For any $x\in \A$, $\U_{\D_{eq}}\circ\V\circ\mathscr{L}(x)=\U_{\D_{eq}}\circ\V(x,\id_{x})=\U_{\D_{eq}}(x,1_{x})=1_{x}=\F(x)$
\item For any $y\in \B$, $\U_{\R_{eq}}\circ\C\circ\mathscr{R}(y)=\U_{\R_{eq}}\circ\C(\G(y),1_{\G(y)})=\U_{\R_{eq}}\circ(\G(y),\id_{\G(y)})=\G(y)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\subsection{The case of a representable $\I\colon\T\to \S$}\label{sec:representable}
In this section we show that, under the hypothesis that the functor $\I\colon\T\to \S$ is representable, a suitable restriction (spelled out in Remark \ref{rem:restradj}) of the adjunction of Theorem \ref{thm:genadj} is induced by a dualising object, in the sense of the definition below.
Recall that a functor $\F$ from a category $\Cat$ into $\Set$ is called \emph{representable} if there exists an object $c\in\Cat$ such that $\F$ is naturally isomorphic to the functor $\hom(c,-)$. A representation of $\F$ is a pair $(c, \psi)$ where $\psi\colon \hom(c,-) \to \F$ is a natural isomorphism.
\begin{definition}\label{d:schizo}
Let $\sf{A}$ and $\sf{B}$ be two categories equipped with functors $\U_{\sf{A}}:\sf{A} \to \Set$ and $\U_{\sf{B}}:\sf{B}^{\textrm{op}} \to \Set$. We say that an adjunction $\F:\sf{A}\to \sf{B}^{\rm op}$ and $\G:\sf{B}^{\rm op}\to \sf{A}$, is \emph{induced by a dualising object} if there exist objects $a\in \sf{A}$ and $b\in \sf{B}$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{d:schizo:item1} $\U_{\sf{A}}$ is representable by $a$,
\item\label{d:schizo:item2} $\U_{\sf{B}}$ is representable by $b$,
\item\label{d:schizo:item3} the composite functor ${\U_{\sf{B}}} \circ \F$ is represented by the object $\G(b)$,
\item\label{d:schizo:item4} the composite functor ${\U_{\sf{A}}} \circ \G$ is represented by the object $\F(a)$, and
\item\label{d:schizo:item5} $\U_{\sf{B}}(\F(a))=\U_{\sf{A}}(\G(b))$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
If the functors $\F$ and $\G$ define a categorical equivalence between $\sf{A}$ and $\sf{B}$, then such equivalence is induced by a dualising object if and only if conditions \eqref{d:schizo:item1},\eqref{d:schizo:item2}, and \eqref{d:schizo:item5} hold, for in this case conditions \eqref{d:schizo:item3} and \eqref{d:schizo:item4} follow from the other ones.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{r:RandD-structured-on-set}
Notice that we can always define a forgetful functor $\U_{\R^{q}}\colon{\R^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}\to \Set$ as follows. For any object $(t, R)$ of ${\R^{q}}$, we set
\begin{align*}
\U_{\R^{q}}((t, R)):=\hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R}
\end{align*}
and for any arrow $f\colon(t, R)\to (t', R')$ in ${\R^{q}}$ we set
\begin{align*}
\U_{\R^{q}}(f):=f'\ ,
\end{align*}
where $f'\colon \hom_{\T}(t', \a)\slash \overline{R'} \to \hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R}$ is the factorisation of
\begin{align*}
-\circ f\colon \hom_{\T}{(t', \a)} \to \hom_{\T}{(t, \a)}
\end{align*}
across the quotients $\hom_{\T}(t', \a)\slash \overline{R'}$ and $\hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R}$ (recall Remark \ref{rem:equivfactor}). The fact that this functor is faithful comes immediately from the fact if two arrows yield the same factorisation, then they are equal in $\R^{q}$.
If, in addition, $\S=\Set$, we can define another forgetful functor $\U_{\D^{q}}: \D^{q} \to \Set$ as follows. For any $(t, s)\in \D^{q}$, we set
\begin{align*}
\U_{\D^{q}}((t, s)):=\dom(s)\ ,
\end{align*}
and for any arrow $f\colon(t, s)\to (t', s')$ in $\D^{q}$ we set
\begin{align*}
\U_{\D^{q}}(f):=g\ ,
\end{align*}
where $g\colon\dom(s)\to \dom(s')$ is the factorisation of $\I(f)\circ s$ through $s'$, as required in section \ref{ss:D}. The functor $\U_{\D^{q}}$ is faithful, for if $f'$ and $f'$ yield the same factorisation, then they are the same arrow in $\D^{q}$.
\end{remark}
For the sequel, it is important to introduce the following notion.
\begin{definition}
Let $(t, R)$ be an object of the category $\R^{q}$. We say that the relation $R$ is $\a$-stable if for any $(h,k) \in R$ and any arrow $f\colon \a\to \a$ in $\T$, $(f\circ h, f\circ k)\in R$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:restradj}
Notice that the functor $\C^{q}\colon\D^{q} \to \R^{q}$ takes values in the full subcategory $\R^{q}_{s}$ of $\R^{q}$ on the objects $(t, R)$ such that $R$ is $\a$-stable. Therefore, if we denote by $\C^{q}_{s}\colon\D^{q} \to \R_{s}^{q}$ this restriction of the functor $\C^{q}$, and by $\V_{s}^{q}\colon \R_{s}^{q} \to \D^{q}$ the restriction of the functor $\V^{q}\colon \R^{q} \to \D^{q}$ to the subcategory $\R_{s}^{q}$, we have that the adjunction of Theorem \ref{thm:genadj} restricts to an adjunction $\C_{s}^q\dashv\V_{s}^q$. We shall denote by $\D_{i}^{q}$ the full subcategory of $\D^{q}$ whose objects are (up to isomorphism) of the form $\V_{s}^{q}(t, R)$ for some object $(t, R)$ of $\R_{s}^{q}$, and by $\C_{i}^q:\D^{q}_{i}\to \R_{s}^{q} $ and $\V_{i}^q:\R_{s}^{q} \to \D^{q}_{i}$ the restricted functors; then we clearly have an adjunction $\C_{i}^q\dashv\V_{i}^q$.
\end{remark}
In the following let us denote by $\id_{\a}$ the identical relation on the set $\hom_{\T}(\a, \a)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:representable}
The functor $\U_{\R^{q}}\colon{\R^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}\to \Set$ is represented by the object $(\a, \id_{\a})$ of ${\R^{q}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We need to provide a set-theoretical bijection $\hom_{\R^{q}}((t, R), (\a, \id_{\a}))\cong \hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R}$ naturally in $(t, R)\in \R^{q}$. By Definition \ref{d:Rq}, the arrows $(t, R)\to (\a, \id_{\a})$ in $\R^{q}$ are the arrows $f\colon t \to \a$ in $\T$ (as all of them preserve $\id_{\a}$), modulo the equivalence relation $\rho$. Recall from Definition \ref{d:Rq} that $f\rho f'$ if, and only if, the factorisations of $-\circ f, -\circ f'$ through $\hom_{\T}(\a, \a)\slash \id_{\a}$ and $\hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R'}$ (which by an abuse of notation we still indicate by $-\circ f$ and $-\circ f'$) are equal. This latter condition is equivalent to saying that $(f, f')\in \overline{R}$. Indeed, if $-\circ f= -\circ f'$ then $(-\circ f)(1_{\a})=(-\circ f')(1_{\a})$ in $\hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R}$, i.e.\ $(f, f')\in \overline{R}$. For the other implication, notice that, by assumption, $R$ is $\a$-stable. This amounts to saying that, for any arrow $g\in\hom_{\T}(\a,\a)$, $(g\circ f,g\circ f')\in \overline{R}$, hence $(-\circ f)(g)$ is equal to $(-\circ f')(g)$ in $\hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R}$. This proves that sending a $\R^{q}$-arrow from $(t,R)$ to $(\a,\id_{\a})$ into its $\overline{R}$-equivalence class in $\hom_{\T}(t,\a)$, gives a bijection.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:schizo}
Under our standing Assumption \ref{ass:cosep} that $\a$ is an $\I$-coseparator, if the category $\S$ coincides with $\Set$ and the functor $\I \colon \T \to \S$ is represented by an object $\b$ then the adjunction $\C_{i}^q\dashv\V_{i}^q$ of Remark \ref{rem:restradj} is induced by a dualising object.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Notice that the functor $\U_{\R^{q}}\colon{\R^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}\to \Set$ is represented by the object $(\a, \id_{\a})$ of ${\R^{q}}$ by Lemma \ref{l:representable}. Let us denote by $1_{\b}$ the identical subobject of $\I(\b)$.
\noindent\textbf{Claim (1)} The functor $\U_{\D^{q}_{i}}: \D_{i}^{q} \to \Set$ is represented by the object $(\b, 1_{\b})$ of $\D^{q}$.\\
A natural isomorphism from $\hom((\b, 1_{\b}), -)$ to $\U_{\D^{q}}$ amounts to a set-theoretical bijection between $\hom_{\D_{i}^{q}}((\b, 1_{\b}), (t, s))$ and $\dom(s)$, holding naturally in $(t, s)\in \D_{i}^{q}$. Notice that, by definition of the category $\D_{i}^{q}$, any $(t, s)$ in $\D_{i}^{q}$ has the form $(t, \VV{(R)})$, for some object $(t, R)$ of the category $\R^{q}_{s}$. The arrows $(\b, 1_{\b})\to (t, s)$ in $\D^{q}$ are, by Definition \ref{d:Dq}, the arrows $f\colon\b \to t$ such that $1_{\b}\circ\I(f)=\I(f)$ factors through $s=\VV{(R)}$, modulo the equivalence relation $\simeq$ given by:
\begin{align*}
f\simeq f'\text{ if and only if }\I(f)=\I(f')\ .
\end{align*}
Now, since the functor $\I$ is represented by the object $\b$ we have a natural isomorphism
\begin{align}
\label{eq:I-rep} \xi\colon\hom_{\T}(\b, -)\cong \I,
\end{align}
from which it follows at once that for any $k\in \hom_{\T}(\b, t)$ the following diagram commutes:
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{small}
\smallskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node (F) at (0,5) {$\hom_{\T}(\b, \b)$};
\node (A) at (0,0) {$\I(\b)$};
\node (C) at (8,0) {$\I(t)$};
\node (D) at (8, 5) {$\hom_{\T}(\b, t)$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (D) node [above, midway] {$k\circ -$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (A) node [left, midway] {$\xi_{\b}$} node [right, midway] {$\cong$};
\draw [->] (D) -- (C) node [right, midway] {$\xi_{t}$} node [left, midway] {$\cong$};
\draw [->] (A) -- (C) node [above, midway] {$\I(k)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{small}
\caption{The naturality diagram for the isomorphism $\I\cong \hom_{\T}(\b, -)$ with respect to $k$.}
\label{fig:nat4}
\end{figure}
It follows that for any $k\in \hom_{\T}(\b, t)$, $\xi_{t}(k)=\I(k)(\xi_{\b}(1_{\b}))$. Therefore for any $f, f'\in \hom_{\T}(\b, t)$,
\begin{align*}
\I(f)=\I(f')\text{ if and only if }\xi_{t}(f)=\xi_{t}(f').
\end{align*}
Indeed, $\xi_{t}(f)=\xi_{t}(f')$ implies $f=f'$ (since $\xi_{t}$ is an isomorphism) and hence $\I(f)=\I(f')$, while by the naturality in $t$ of $\xi_{t}$ $\I(f)=\I(f')$ implies $\xi_{t}(f)=\xi_{t}(f')$, since $\xi_{t}(f)=\I(f)(\xi_{\b}(1_{\b}))$ and $\xi_{t}(f')=\I(f')(\xi_{\b}(1_{\b}))$. Therefore for any arrow $f:\b \to t$ in $\T$, we have that $\I(f)$ factors through $s$ if and only if $\xi_{t}(f)$ lies in $\dom(s)$. This can be proved as follows. We have that $\I(f)$ factors through $s$ if and only if for any $(h, k)\in R$, $\I(h)\circ \I(f)=\I(k)\circ \I(f)$ (i.e. $\I(h\circ f)=\I(k\circ f)$); but, by the remarks above, this holds if and only if $\xi_{\Delta}(k\circ f)=\xi_{\Delta}(h\circ f)$ which, by the naturality of $\xi$ with respect to the arrows $k$ and $h$, is equivalent to the requirement $\I(k)(\xi_{t}(f)))=\I(h)(\xi_{t}(f))$, which holds if $\xi_{t}(f)$ lies in the image of $s=\VV{(R)}$ (by definition of $\VV{(R)}$). Conversely, if $\I(f)$ factors through $s$ then \emph{a fortiori} $\xi_{t}(f))=\I(f)(\xi_{\b}(\id_{\b}))\in \dom(s)$.
The arrows $(\b, 1_{\b})\to (t, \VV{(R)})$ in $\D^{q}$ can thus be naturally identified with the elements of $\I(t)$ which are in the image of the subobject $s$, i.e. with the elements of $\dom(s)$, as required.
\noindent\textbf{Claim (2)} The composite functor $\U_{\R^{q}} \circ {\C_{s}^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}:{\D_{s}^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}\to \Set$ is represented by the object $\V_{s}^{q}((\a, \id_{\a}))=(\a, 1_{\a})$.\\
To verify this, we have to exhibit a bijection $\hom_{\D^{q}}((t, s), (\a, 1_{\a}))\cong \hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \CC{(s)}$ natural in $(t, s)\in \D^{q}$. Applying Definition \ref{d:Dq}, we obtain that the arrows $(t, s)\to (\a, 1_{\a})$ in $\D_{q}$ are the arrows $f\colon t\to \a$ modulo the equivalence relation $\simeq$ defined by $f\simeq f'$ if and only if $\I(f)\circ s=\I(f')\circ s$. By Definition \ref{def:C}, this latter condition is satisfied precisely $(f, f')\in \CC{(s)}$, as required.
\noindent\textbf{Claim (3)} The composite functor $\U_{D^{q}}\circ \V_{s}^{q}\colon \R_{s}^{q}\to \Set$ is represented by the object $\C_{s}^{q}((\b, 1_{\b}))=(\b, \id_{\b})$.\\
We have to check that there exists a bijection
\[\hom_{\R^{q}}((\b, \id_{\b}), (t, R))\cong \dom(\VV{(R)}),\]
natural in $(t, R)\in \R^{q}$. By Definition \ref{d:Rq}, the arrows $(\b, \id_{\b}) \to (t, R)$ in $\R^{q}$ are the arrows $f\colon \b \to t$ such that for any $(h, k)\in R$, $f\circ h=f\circ k$, modulo the equivalence relation $\simeq$ given by: $f\simeq f'$ if and only if the factorisations of the arrows $-\circ f, -\circ f'$ though $\hom_{\T}(t, \a)\slash \overline{R}$ and $\hom_{\T}(\b, \a)$ are equal. We claim that
\begin{align}
f\simeq f'\text{ if and only if }f=f'.\label{eq:claim}
\end{align}
Recall that the functor $\I$ is represented by the object $\b$. So, for any arrow $g:t \to \a$, \eqref{eq:I-rep} gives the following commutative naturality square.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{small}
\smallskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node (F) at (0,5) {$\hom_{\T}(\b, t)$};
\node (A) at (0,0) {$\I(t)$};
\node (C) at (8,0) {$\I(\a)$};
\node (D) at (8, 5) {$\hom_{\T}(\b, \a)$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (D) node [above, midway] {$g\circ -$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (A) node [left, midway] {$\xi_{t}$} node [right, midway] {$\cong$};
\draw [->] (D) -- (C) node [right, midway] {$\xi_{\a}$} node [left, midway] {$\cong$};
\draw [->] (A) -- (C) node [above, midway] {$\I(g)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{small}
\caption{The naturality diagram for the isomorphism $\I\cong \hom_{\T}(\b, -)$ with respect to $g$.}
\label{fig:nat2}
\end{figure}
Notice that the factorisations of $-\circ f$ and $-\circ f'$ are equal if and only if for every $g\in \hom_{\T}(t, \a)$, $g\circ f=g\circ f'$, if, and only if, $(g\circ -)(f)=(g\circ -)(f')$. Hence, the commutativity of the above diagram allows to rewrite the latter condition as $\I(g)(\xi_{t}(f))=\I(g)(\xi_{t}(f'))$. Now, since $\a$ is a $\I$-coseparator, $\I(g)(\xi_{t}(f))=\I(g)(\xi_{t}(f'))$ holds for all $g\in \hom_{\T}(t, \a)$ if and only if $\xi_{t}(f)=\xi_{t}(f')$. In turn, $\xi_{t}$ being an isomorphism, the latter is equivalent to $f=f'$. This complete the proof of \eqref{eq:claim}. In order to complete the proof the claim, it remains to observe that for any $f\in \hom_{\T}(\b, t)$, $\xi_{t}(f)\in \dom(\VV(R))$ if and only if for any $(h, k)\in R$, $h\circ f=k\circ f$. Indeed, $\xi_{t}(f)\in \dom(\VV(R))$ if and only if for any $(h, k)\in R$, $\I(k)(\xi_{t}(f))=\I(h)(\xi_{t}(f))$; but, by the naturality of $\xi$, $\I(k)(\xi_{t}(f))=\xi_{\Delta}(k\circ f)$ and $\I(h)(\xi_{t}(f))=\xi_{\Delta}(h\circ f)$, whence $\I(k)(\xi_{t}(f))=\I(h)(\xi_{t}(f))$ if and only if $\xi_{\Delta}(h\circ f)=\xi_{\Delta}(k\circ f)$ i.e., if and only if $h\circ f=k\circ f$.
To conclude the whole proof, it remains to observe that $\U_{D^{q}}((\a, 1_{\a}))=\I(\a)$, $\U_{\R^{q}}((\b, \id_{\b}))=\hom_{\T}(\b, \a)$, and that, by the representability of $\I$, $\I(\a)\cong\hom_{\T}(\b, \a)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The functors $\U_{\D^{q}}: \D^{q} \to \Set$ and $\U_{\R^{q}}:{\R^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}\to \Set$ defined above are faithful and representable, that is they realise $\D^{q}$ and ${\R^{q}}^{\textrm{op}}$ as concrete categories structured over $\Set$ (cf. Remark \ref{rem:structured}).
\end{remark}
\subsection{The setting of syntactic categories}\label{syntacticcategories}
The notion of \emph{syntactic category} of a first-order theory is particularly useful in connection with the abstract categorical framework for generating affine adjunctions developed in Part \ref{part:general}. In fact, it allows us to apply this framework in contexts which go well beyond the standard setting of universal algebra investigated in Part \ref{part:alg}. In the following paragraphs we recall just the basic notions useful for our analysis; for more details we refer the reader to an introduction to categorical logic and topos theory (see e.g., \cite{CaramelloBackground}).
\begin{definition}
Let $\mathbb T$ be a theory over a signature $\mathcal{L}$ in a given fragment of first-order logic. The \emph{syntactic category} $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb T}$ of $\mathbb T$ has as objects the formulas-in-context $\{\vec{x}. \phi\}$ over the signature (considered up to `renaming' of variables), where the context $\vec{x}$ contains all the free variables appearing in the formula $\phi$. The arrows $\{\vec{x}. \phi\} \to \{\vec{y}. \phi\}$\footnote{We always suppose, without loss of generality, that the contexts $\vec{x}$ and $\vec{y}$ are disjoint.} are the $\mathbb T$-provable equivalence classes $[\theta]$ of formulas $\theta(\vec{x}, \vec{y})$ which are $\mathbb T$-provably functional from $\phi(\vec{x})$ to $\psi(\vec{y})$, in the sense that the sequents
\[
(\phi \vdash_{\vec{x}} (\exists y)\theta(\vec{x}, \vec{y})),
\]
\[
(\theta \vdash_{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \phi \wedge \psi)
\]
and
\[
(\theta(\vec{x}, \vec{y}) \wedge \theta(\vec{x}, \vec{z}\slash \vec{y}) \vdash_{\vec{x}, \vec{y}, \vec{z}} \vec{y}=\vec{z})
\]
are provable in $\mathbb T$\footnote{Recall that a sequent $(\phi \vdash_{\vec{x}} \psi)$ has the same meaning that the first-order sentence $(\forall \vec{x})(\phi \!\Rightarrow\! \psi)$.}
.
\end{definition}
The notion of $\mathbb T$-provably functional formula naturally generalises the notion of (morphism defined by) a term; indeed, for any term $t(\vec{x})$, the formula $\vec{y}=t(\vec{x})$ is provably functional from $\{\vec{x}. \top\}$ to $\{\vec{y}. \top\}$.
We shall be concerned in particular with syntactic categories of \emph{geometric theories}, i.e.\ (many-sorted) first-order theories whose axioms can be presented in the form $(\forall \vec{x})(\phi(\vec{x})\imp \psi(\vec{x}))$, where $\phi(\vec{x})$ and $\psi(\vec{x})$ are \emph{geometric formulas} that is, first-order formulas built-up from atomic formulas by only using finitary conjunctions, possibly infinitary disjunctions and existential quantifications.
One can consider models of (many-sorted) first-order theories not only in the classical set-theoretic context, but in arbitrary Grothendieck toposes. The sorts of the language over which the theory is written are interpreted as objects of the topos, the function symbols as arrows, and the relation symbols as subobjects; the interpretation of the formulas is given by subobjects defined inductively from these data by using the categorical structure present in the topos, mimicking the classical Tarskian definition of first-order structure. Recall that the category $\Set$ of sets and functions between them is a Grothendieck topos.
For any geometric theory $\mathbb{T}$, the models of $\mathbb T$ in any Grothendick topos $\mathcal{E}$ can be identified with functors ${\mathcal{C}}_{\mathbb T}\to \mathcal{E}$ preserving the geometric structure on the category ${\mathcal{C}}_{\mathbb T}$. The functor $F_{M}:{\mathcal{C}}_{\mathbb T}\to \mathcal{E}$ corresponding to a $\mathbb T$-model $M$ in $\mathcal{E}$ sends $\{\vec{x}. \phi\}$ to (the domain of) its interpretation $[[\vec{x}. \phi]]_{M}$ in $M$ and any arrow $[\theta]:\{\vec{x}. \phi\} \to \{\vec{y}. \psi\}$ in $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb T}$ to the arrow $[[\vec{x}. \phi]]_{M}\to [[\vec{y}. \psi]]_{M}$ in $\mathcal{E}$, denoted by $[[\theta]]_{M}$ abusing notation, whose graph is the interpretation of the formula $\theta$ in $M$.
To apply the categorical framework of section \ref{sec:weak}, we stipulate, for a given geometric theory $\mathbb T$:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\T$ a suitable full subcategory of $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb T}$ containing the object $\{x. \top\}$;
\item $\a$ the object $\{x. \top\}$;
\item $\S$ a Grothendieck topos (for instance, the category $\Set$ of sets);
\item $\mathcal{I}$ the functor $F_{M}:\T\to \S$ corresponding to an arbitrarily fixed $\mathbb T$-model $M$ in $\S$ as specified above.
\end{itemize}
Assumption \ref{ass:limits} of Part \ref{part:general} is satisfied as any Grothendieck topos $\S$ has small limits. The next lemma takes care of verifying the remaining requirement that $\a$ is a $\I$-coseparator.
\begin{lemma}
In the setting defined above, the object $\a$ is always a $\I$-coseparator.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have to verify that for every object $\{\vec{x}. \phi\}$ of $\T$, the family of arrows $[[\theta]]_{M}:[[\vec{x}. \phi]]_{M}\to M$, where $\theta$ varies among the $\mathbb T$-provably functional formulas from $\{\vec{x}. \phi\}$ to $\{y. \top\}$, is jointly monic in $\S$. Now, if $\vec{x}=(x_{1}, \ldots, x_{n})$, for any $i\in \{1, \ldots, n\}$ the formula $y=x_{i}\wedge \phi(\vec{x})$ is $\mathbb T$-provably functional $\{\vec{x}. \phi\}$ to $\{y. \top\}$. But the interpretations in $M$ of such formulas are nothing but the canonical projections $[[\vec{x}. \phi]]_{M}\subseteq M^{n}\to M$, which are obviously jointly monic.
\end{proof}
\begin{remarks}
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item If $\mathbb T$ is an algebraic theory, it is natural to take $\T$ equal to the subcategory of ${\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb T}}$ whose objects are the powers of $\{x. \top\}$. One can prove that the $\mathbb T$-functional formulas between formulas are all induced by terms, up to $\mathbb T$-provable equivalence (see e.g.\ \cite[p.\ 120]{blasce}, where it is proved that any $\mathbb T$-provably functional geometric formula $\theta(\vec{x}, \vec{y})$ between Horn formulas is $\mathbb T$-provably equivalent to a formula of the form $\vec{y}=\vec{t}(\vec{x})$, where $\vec{t}$ is a sequence of terms of the appropriate sorts in the context $\vec{x}$). As we shall see below, the algebraic framework of Part 3 can be precisely obtained by specialising the framework defined above to such syntactic categories.
\item Let $M$ be a \emph{conservative model} for $\mathbb T$, i.e.\ a model of $\mathbb T$ such that any assertion (in the relevant fragment of logic) over the signature of $\mathbb T$ which is valid in it is provable in $\mathbb T$. Then the arrows $\{x. \top\}^{k} \to \{x. \top\}$ in $\T$ can be identified with the $\mathbb T$-model definable homomorphisms $M^{k}\to M$, for each $k$. Indeed, for any two $\mathbb T$-provably functional formulas $\theta_{1}, \theta_{2}$ from $\{x. \top\}^{k}$ to $\{x. \top\}$, we have $[\theta_{1}]=[\theta_{2}]$ if and only if $\theta_{1}$ and $\theta_{2}$ are $\mathbb T$-provably equivalent; but this is equivalent, $M$ being conservative, to the condition that $[[\theta_{1}]]_{M}=[[\theta_{2}]]_{M}$.
As an example, let $\mathbb T$ be the algebraic theory of Boolean algebras. The algebra $\{0,1\}$ is a conservative model for $\mathbb T$, and in fact the free Boolean algebra on $k$ generators can be identified with the set of definable maps $\{0,1\}^{k}\to \{0,1\}$.
\item This framework generalises that of Part \ref{part:alg}, which relies on the existence of a free object in the variety. By working at the syntactic level, we can to carry out our constructions by replacing the underlying set of each free object on $k$ generators by the set of arrows $\{\vec{x}^{k}. \top\}\to \{x. \top\}$ in the syntactic category of the theory.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remarks}
A particularly natural class of theories to which one can apply the setting defined above is that of theories of presheaf type.
A (geometric) theory is said to be of \emph{presheaf type} if it is classified by a presheaf topos (for a self-contained introduction to the theory of classifying toposes we refer the reader to \cite{CaramelloBackground}). This class of theories is interesting for several reasons:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Every finitary algebraic theory (or, more generally, any cartesian theory) is of presheaf type;
\item There are many other interesting mathematical theories which are of presheaf type without being cartesian, such as the theory of total orders, the theory of algebraic extensions of a base field, the theory of lattice-ordered abelian groups with strong unit, the theory of perfect MV-algebras, the cyclic theory classified by Connes' topos (cf.\ \cite{CaramelloWentzlaff}) etc.
\item Every small category can be regarded, up to idempotent-splitting completion, as the category of finitely presentable models of a theory of presheaf type (cf.\ \cite{CaramelloPresheaf}).
\end{enumerate}
The class of theories of presheaf type thus represents a natural generalisation of the class of algebraic theories. For a comprehensive study of this class of theories, we refer the reader to \cite{CaramelloPresheaf}.
Interestingly, free objects in the category of set-based models of a theory of presheaf type $\mathbb T$ do not always exist, but this category is always generated by the finitely presentable (equivalently, finitely presented) models of the theory. The full subcategory spanned by such models is dual to the full subcategory of the syntactic category of the theory $\mathbb T$ on the $\mathbb T$-irreducible formulas (cf. \cite{CaramelloSyntactic}), and for each such formula $\phi(\vec{x})$ presenting a model $M_{\phi}$, we have $M_{\phi}\cong \hom_{{\mathcal C}_{\mathbb T}}(\{\vec{x}. \phi\}, \{x. \top\})$ (cf. \cite{CaramelloPresheaf}).
\begin{definition}
Let $\mathbb T$ be a geometric theory and $M$ a $\mathbb T$-model.
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item A \emph{definable map} $M^{k}\to M$ is a map of the form $[[\theta]]_{M}$ where $\theta$ is a $\mathbb T$-provably functional formula from $\{x. \top\}^{k}$ to $\{x. \top\}$.
\item A \emph{congruence} on $M$ is an equivalence relation $R$ on $M$ such that for any definable map $d:M^{k}\to M$, $(x_{i}, y_{i})\in R$ for all $i=1, \ldots, k$ implies that $(d(x_{1}, \ldots, x_{k}), d(y_{1}, \ldots, y_{k}))\in R$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
As we recalled above, if $\mathbb T$ is a finitary algebraic theory then the $\mathbb T$-provably functional formulas $\{x. \top\}^{k}$ to $\{x. \top\}$ are all induced by terms, up to $\mathbb T$-provable equivalence, so the above notions specialize to the classical universal algebraic ones.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}\label{stability}
If $\mathbb T$ is a theory of presheaf type and $M$ is a finitely presentable $\mathbb T$-model then any congruence on $M$ is $\a$-stable (regarding $M$ as $\hom_{\T}(\{\vec{x}. \phi\}, \a)$, where $\{\vec{x}.\phi\}$ is a formula presenting $M$).
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have to show that if $R$ is a congruence on $M=\hom_{\T}(\{\vec{x}. \phi\}, \a)$ then for any $([\theta_{1}], [\theta_{2}])\in R$ and any arrow $[\theta]:\a \to \a$ in $\S$, $([\theta \circ \theta_{1}], [\theta \circ \theta_{2}])\in R$. Now, $[[\theta]]_{M}$ is precisely the function $[\theta]\circ -:\hom_{\T}(\{\vec{x}. \phi\}, \a) \to \hom_{\T}(\{\vec{x}. \phi\}, \a)$, whence our thesis follows immediately.
\end{proof}
Hence, taking $\T$ to be the full subcategory of the geometric syntactic category $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb T}$ of a theory of presheaf type $\mathbb T$ on the formulas which are either $\{y. \top\}$ or $\mathbb T$-irreducible and $\S$ to be $\Set$ yields in particular an adjunction between a category of congruences on finitely presentable $\mathbb T$-models and a certain category of definable sets and $\mathbb T$-definable homomorphisms between them.
We note that the equivalence between the first two items in the algebraic \emph{Nullstellensatz} (Theorem \ref{thm:algnull}) holds more generally for any theory of presheaf type $\mathbb T$ (replacing $\F(\mu)$ with any finitely presentable $\mathbb T$-model), with essentially the same proof.
\subsection{Recovering Diers' ``system-solution'' adjunction}\label{ssolution}
In this section we show that Diers' system-solution adjunction (\cite[Proposition 3.6]{Diers}) can be recovered as an instance of Theorem \ref{thm:weakadj}.
The context in which Diers works is that of an (essentially) algebraic theory $\mathbb T$, and of a fixed model ${\mathcal{L}}$ in $\Set$. Diers defines a category $\textbf{A}f\textbf{S}ub\textbf{S}et(\mathcal{L})$ of affine subsets over $\mathcal{L}$ whose objects are the triplets $(X, A(X), Y)$, where $X$ is a set, $A(X)$ is a $\mathbb T$-subalgebra of the $\mathbb T$-algebra ${\mathcal{L}}^{X}$ and $Y$ is a subset of $X$, and whose arrows $(X, A(X), Y)\to (X', A(X'), Y')$ are the functions $f\colon X\to X'$ such that $F(Y)\subseteq Y'$ and ${\mathcal{L}}^{f}\colon{\mathcal{L}}^{X'}\to {\mathcal{L}}^{X}$ restricts to a function (in fact, a $\mathbb T$-model homomorphism) $A(X')\to A(X)$. On the other side, he considers a category $\textbf{A}lg\textbf{S}yst(\mathcal{L})$ of algebraic systems over $\mathcal{L}$, whose objects are triplets $(X, A(X), E)$, where $X$ is a set, $A(X)$ is a $\mathbb T$-subalgebra of the $\mathbb T$-algebra ${\mathcal{L}}^{X}$ and $E$ is a set of pairs $(u, v)$, where $u, v\in A(X)$. He then defines two functors defining a ``system-solution'' adjunction: $\mathcal{Z}:\textbf{A}lg\textbf{S}yst(\mathcal{L}) \to \textbf{A}f\textbf{S}ub\textbf{S}et(\mathcal{L})$ and $\mathcal{S}:\textbf{A}f\textbf{S}ub\textbf{S}et(\mathcal{L}) \to \textbf{A}lg\textbf{S}yst(\mathcal{L})$ by setting $\mathcal{Z}(X, A(X), E)$ equal to $(X, A(X), S)$, where $S$ is the locus of solutions in $X$ of the equations $u=v$ for $(u, v)\in E$ and $\mathcal{S}(X, A(X), Y)=(X, A(X), E)$, where $E$ is the set of pairs $(u, v)$ of elements of $A(X)$ such that $u(x)=v(x)$ for all $x\in Y$.
This adjunction can be recovered as a particular case of our Theorem \ref{thm:genadj} by setting:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\T$ equal to the category $\textbf{A}f\textbf{S}et(\mathcal{L})$ whose objects are the pairs $(X, A(X)$, where $X$ is a set, $A(X)$ is a $\mathbb T$-subalgebra of the $\mathbb T$-algebra ${\mathcal{L}}^{X}$ and whose arrows $(X, A(X))\to (X', A(X')) $ are the functions $f\colon X\to X'$ such that ${\mathcal{L}}^{f}\colon{\mathcal{L}}^{X'}\to {\mathcal{L}}^{X}$ restricts to a function $A(X')\to A(X)$.
\item $\S$ equal to the category $\Set$ of sets
\item $\I \colon \T \to \S$ equal to the forgetful functor sending any object $(X, A(X))$ in ${\mathcal C}$ to the set $X$ and any arrow $f\colon(X, A(X))\to (Y, A(Y))$ in $\T$ to the function $f\colon X\to Y$;
\item $\Delta$ equal to the object $({\mathcal{L}}, {\mathcal{A}}_{\mathcal{L}})$, where ${\mathcal A}_{\mathcal L}$ is the $\mathbb T$-subalgebra of ${\mathcal{L}}^{\mathcal{L}}$ generated by the set $\{1_{\mathcal{L}}\}$, where $1_{\mathcal{L}}$ is the identity on $\mathcal L$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, for any object $(X, A(X))$ of $\T$, the set $\hom_{\T}((X, A(X)), ({\mathcal{L}}, {\mathcal{A}}_{\mathcal{L}}))$ is canonically isomorphic to $A(X)$, since a function $f\colon X\to{\mathcal L}$ belongs to $A(X)$ if and only if ${\mathcal L}^{f}=-\circ f\colon {\mathcal{L}}^{\mathcal{L}}\to {\mathcal{L}}^{X}$ restricts to a function ${\mathcal A}_{\mathcal L}\to A(X)$ (note that the arrow ${\mathcal L}^{f}$ is a $\mathbb T$-algebra homomorphism and hence its restriction to ${\mathcal A}_{\mathcal L}$ factors through $A(X)\hookrightarrow {\mathcal L}^{X}$ if and only if ${\mathcal{L}}^{f}(1_{\mathcal L})=f\in A(X)$, as any element of ${\mathcal A}_{\mathcal{L}}$ can be obtained from $1_{\mathcal{L
}}$ by applying the $\mathbb T$-operations a finite number of times).
The objects of the category $\R$ can thus be identified with the pairs $((X, A(X)), R)$, where $R$ is a relation on the set $A(X)$. The arrows $((X, A(X)), R) \to ((Y, A(Y)), R')$ are the functions $f\colon X\to Y$ such that ${\mathcal L}^{f}$ restricts to a function $A(Y)\to A(X)$ which sends $R'$-pairs to $R$-pairs. In other words, $\R$ coincides with the category $\textbf{A}lg\textbf{S}yst({\mathcal L})$. On the other hand, it is immediate to see that the category $\D$ coincides with the category $\textbf{A}f\textbf{S}ub\textbf{S}et({\mathcal L})$ of affine subsets over $\mathcal L$ of \cite{Diers}. It is also clear that the adjunction of Theorem \ref{thm:weakadj} specializes precisely to the adjunction between $\mathcal{Z}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ of \cite[Proposition 3.6]{Diers}.
\part{The specialisation to varieties of algebras}\label{part:alg}
\section{The general setting}\label{sec:algebraic}
We now specialise the setting of part \ref{part:general} to algebraic categories. In particular, we shall work with \emph{varieties of algebras} (i.e., equationally definable classes of algebras) in the sense of S{\l}ominsky \cite{Slominsky:1959} and Linton \cite{Linton:1965}.
In this section we fix the following notation.
\begin{enumerate}[$-$]
\item $\Va$ is a (possibly infinitary) variety of algebras, regarded as a category whose objects are the $\Va$-algebras and whose morphisms are the $\Va$-homomorphisms.
\item $\U\colon \Va \to \Set$ is the canonical underlying set functor.
\item $\F$ is the canonical free functor, i.e.\ the left adjoint to $\U$.
\item $A$ is an arbitrary but fixed $\Va$-algebra.
\end{enumerate}
We henceforth often speak of `algebras' and `homomorphisms' (and also `isomorphisms' etc.) rather than `$\Va$-algebras' and `$\Va$-homomorphisms', the variety $\Va$ being understood.
If $I$ is any set, the algebra $\F(I)$ in $\Va$ is, as usual, \emph{a free algebra generated by $I$}. We fix canonical representatives for the isomorphism class of each free algebra in $\Va$. To this end, let
\begin{align}\label{eq:vars}
X_\mu:=\{X_\alpha\}_{\alpha<\mu}
\end{align}
be a specific set (of \emph{variables}, or \emph{free generators}) of cardinality $\mu$, where $\alpha$ ranges over ordinals (of cardinality) less than $\mu$. We often write $\mu$ as a shorthand for $X_{\mu}$, and therefore $\F(\mu)$
as a shorthand for $\F(X_\mu)$. To stress that we are selecting a specific representative for the isomorphism class of a free algebra $\F(I)$, we refer to $\F(\mu)$ as \emph{the} free algebra on $\mu$ generators.
The adjunction relation
\begin{align}\label{eq:freeforget}
\frac{\F(\mu)\to A}{\mu\to \U(A)}
\end{align}
shows that $\U(A)$ may be naturally identified (in $\Set$) with the set of homomorphisms $\F(1)\to A$, i.e.\
\begin{align}\label{eq:identification}
\U{(A)}\cong \hom_\Va{(\F(1),A)}.
\end{align}
In particular, because $\F$ is a left adjoint and therefore preserves all existing colimits,
\begin{align}\label{eq:coprod}
\F(\mu)=\coprod_\mu\F(1)
\end{align}
i.e.\ $\F(\mu)$ is the coproduct in $\Va$ of $\mu$ copies of $\F(1)$.
To specialise the general framework of section \ref{sec:weak} to varieties of algebras, we stipulate that\footnote{Notice that this framework is a particular case of that developed in section \ref{syntacticcategories}, obtained by taking as $\mathbb{T}$ the algebraic theory axiomatising the variety $\Va$ and taking $\T$ equal to the full subcategory of of the syntactic category of $\mathbb{T}$, whose objects are powers of the object $\{x. \top\}$.}:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\T$ is the opposite of the full subcategory of $\Va$ whose objects are the free $\Va$-algebras $\F(\mu)$, as $\mu$ ranges over all cardinals.
\item $\S$ is the category $\Set$.
\item $\a$ is the $\T$-object $\F{(1)}$.
\end{itemize}
It remains to provide an instantiation for the functor $\I\colon \T\to \S$. To this end notice that any algebra $A$ yields a functor
\begin{align*}
\I_{A}\colon \T \to \Set
\end{align*}
that preserves arbitrary products, in the spirit of the Lawvere-Linton functorial semantics of algebraic theories \cite{lawvere63,Linton:1965,pareigis70, gabrielulmer71, manes76, adameketal94, adameketal11}; henceforth we shall write just $\I$ for $\I_{A}$. To define $\I$ on objects, we set
\begin{align}\label{eq:defI}
\I\left(\F(\mu)\right):= \U(A)^\mu
\end{align}
for any $\mu$. Given a homomorphism $\F(\mu)\to\F(\nu)$, we construct a function $\U(A)^\nu\to\U(A)^\mu$ as follows. First, by (\ref{eq:coprod}), it suffices to consider the case that $\mu=1$, i.e.\ the free algebra be singly generated.
Thus, let
\begin{align}\label{eq:element}
p\colon\F(1)\to\F(\nu)
\end{align}
be given. Given an element of $\U(A)^{\nu}$, i.e.\ a function
\begin{align}\label{eq:pointofa}
a_\nu\colon \nu \to \U(A),
\end{align}
by the adjunction (\ref{eq:freeforget}) there is a unique $\Va$-arrow
\begin{align}\label{eq:tuple}
\widehat{a_\nu}\colon\F(\nu)\to A.
\end{align}
We then have the composition
\begin{align}\label{eq:comp}
\F(1)\overset{p}{\longrightarrow}\F(\nu)\overset{\widehat{a_\nu}}{\longrightarrow} A
\end{align}
of (\ref{eq:element}) and (\ref{eq:tuple}). Applying again the adjunction (\ref{eq:freeforget}) to (\ref{eq:comp}) we obtain an arrow in $\Set$
\begin{align}\label{eq:eval}
\ev(p,a_\nu):= 1 \to \U{(A)},
\end{align}
i.e.\ an element of $\U({A})$, called the \emph{evaluation of $p$ at $a_\nu$}.
Keeping $p$ fixed and letting $a_{\nu}$ range over all elements (\ref{eq:pointofa}) of $\U{(A)}^{\nu}$, we thus obtain the \emph{evaluation map}
\begin{align}\label{eq:dualeval}
\ev(p,-)\colon \U(A)^\nu\to\U(A).
\end{align}
We set
\begin{align}\label{eq:Ionarrows}
\I(p):=\ev(p,-),
\end{align}
and this completes the definition of the functor $\I\colon \T\to\Set$.
\begin{definition}\label{def:definablemap}A function $\U{(A)}^{\nu}\to \U{(A)}^{\mu}$ is called \emph{definable} \textup{(}\emph{in the language of $\Va$}\textup{)} if it is in the range of $\I$, as defined above. In other words, the definable functions $\U{(A)}^{\nu}\to \U{(A)}^{\mu}$ are precisely those that can be obtained by evaluating a $\mu$-tuple of elements of $\U{(\F{(\nu)})}$ at the $\nu$-tuples of elements of $\U{(A)}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:products}Observe that, in the above, $\I$ preserves all products in $\T$ by construction. Moreover, recall that the forgetful functor $\U\colon\Va\to\Set$ commutes with products in $\Set$, because it is adjoint on the right and hence preserves all existing limits. Stated otherwise, products in varieties are direct products. Hence we have an isomorphism of sets $\U{(A^{\mu})}\cong \U{(A)}^{\mu}$. Therefore, the replacement of (\ref{eq:defI}) in the definition of $\I$ by $\F{(\mu)}\longmapsto\U{(A^{\mu})}$ would be immaterial.
\end{remark}
Let us now consider the categories $\D$ and $\R$ in the present algebraic setting. Specialising the definitions in Subsection \ref{ss:D}, we see that the $\D$-objects are all subsets $S\subseteq \U{(A})^{\mu}$, as $\mu$ ranges over all cardinals. The $\D$-arrows from $S'\subseteq \U{(A})^{\nu}$ to $S\subseteq \U{(A})^{\mu}$ are the definable functions $\U{(A)}^{\nu}\to \U{(A)}^{\mu}$, in the sense of Definition \ref{def:definablemap}, that restrict to functions $S' \to S$. We stress that distinct definable functions $\U{(A)}^{\nu}\to \U{(A)}^{\mu}$ are regarded as distinct $\D$-arrows even when they yield the same restriction $S' \to S$.
Concerning the category $\R$, let us specialise the definitions in Subsection \ref{ss:R}. The $\R$-objects can be naturally identified with the relations $R$ on $\U{(\F{(\mu)})}$, as $\mu$ ranges over all cardinals. To see this, observe that an $\R$-object is, by definition, a relation $R$ on $\hom_\T{(\F{(\mu)},\F{(1)})}$. That is, by our choice of $\T$, $R$ is a relation on $\hom_\Va{(\F{(1)},\F{(\mu)})}$. By the adjunction (\ref{eq:freeforget}), homomorphisms
$\F{(1)}\to\F{(\mu)}$ are in natural bijection with the elements of $\U{(\F{(\mu)})}$, so that we can regard $R$ as a relation on $\U{(\F{(\mu)})}$. Let us henceforth write
\begin{align}
(\F{(\mu)},R)
\end{align}
to denote an $\R$-object. We show next that an $\R$-arrow
%
\begin{align*}
(\F{(\nu)}, R') \to (\F{(\mu)}, R)
\end{align*}
%
can be naturally identified with a homomorphism
%
\begin{align*}
h\colon \F{(\mu)}\to\F{(\nu)}
\end{align*}
that preserves $R$ with respect to $R'$, i.e.\ satisfies
\begin{align}\label{eq:rarrowalg}
\forall p,q\in \U{(\F{(\mu)})}\colon \ \ (p,q)\in R \ \Longrightarrow \ (h(p),h(q))\in R'.
\end{align}
Indeed, the $\R$-arrow $(\F{(\nu)}, R') \to (\F{(\mu)}, R)$ is by definition a $\Va$-arrow $h\colon \F{(\mu)}\to \F{(\nu)}$ such that the function
\begin{align*}
h\circ -\colon \hom_{\Va}{(\F{(1)},\F{(\mu)})} \longrightarrow \hom_{\Va}{(\F{(1)}, \F{(\nu)})}
\end{align*}
satisfies the property
\begin{align}\label{eq:rarrowalg1}
(p, q)\in R \quad \Longrightarrow \quad (h \circ p, h\circ q)\in R'
\end{align}
for each pair of homomorphisms $p,q\colon \F{(1)}\to \F{(\mu)}$. Identifying $p$ and $q$ with elements of $\U{(\F{(\nu)})}$ as usual via the adjunction (\ref{eq:freeforget}), we obtain (\ref{eq:rarrowalg}) from (\ref{eq:rarrowalg1}).
\begin{notation}\label{not:underlying}For the rest of this paper we follow the standard practice in algebra of omitting the underlying set functor. Thus when we write, for instance, $a \in A$, it is understood that we mean $a \in \U{(A)}$.
\end{notation}
\section{The algebraic affine adjunction}\label{sec:algadj}
Let us specialise the functors $\C\colon \D \to \R$ and $\V\colon \R\to \D$ to the algebraic setting of section \ref{sec:algebraic}.
Recall that $\Va$ is a variety of algebras, $A$ is an arbitrary $\Va$-algebra, $\T$ is the opposite of the full subcategory of $\Va$ whose objects are the free $\Va$-algebras $\F{(\mu)}$, as $\mu$ ranges over all cardinals, $\a:=\F{(1)}$, and $\I\colon \T \to \Set$ is the functor defined in (\ref{eq:defI}--\ref{eq:Ionarrows}) above. It is appropriate to recall at this stage the notions of operation and congruence.
\begin{definition}\label{def:operation}
For $\nu$ a cardinal, a \emph{$\Va$-operation \textup{(or, more simply, an} operation\textup{)} of arity $\nu$} is a $\Va$-homomorphism $t\colon \F{(1)}\to\F{(\nu)}$. The operation $h$ is \emph{finitary} if $\nu$ is finite, and \emph{infinitary} otherwise. An \emph{operation on the $\Va$-algebra} $A$ is a function $f\colon A^{\nu}\to A$ that is definable in the sense of Definition \ref{def:definablemap}, that is, such that $h=\I{(t)}:=\ev{(t,-)}$ for some $t\colon \F{(1)}\to\F{(\nu)}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:operations}Since homomorphisms $t\colon \F{(1)}\to\F{(\nu)}$ are naturally identified with elements $t \in \F{(\nu)}$ via the adjunction (\ref{eq:freeforget}), the preceding definition agrees with the usual notion of operations as \emph{term-definable functions}; one calls $t$ a \emph{defining term} for the operation in question. By a classical theorem of G.\ Birkhoff (see e.g.\ \cite[Theorem 10.10]{Burris:81}) the free algebra $\F{(\nu)}$ can indeed be represented as the algebra of \emph{terms} ---elements of absolutely free algebras--- over the set of variables $X_{\nu}$, modulo the equivalence relation that identifies two such terms if, and only if, they evaluate to the same element in any $\Va$-algebra. For the infinitary case see \cite[Ch.\ III]{Slominsky:1959}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:homscommute}When, in the sequel, we say that \emph{homomorphisms commute with operations}, we mean that given any $\Va$-homomorphism $h\colon A\to B$, any $\nu$-ary operation $t \in \F{(\nu)}$, and any element $a:=(a_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}\in A^{\nu}$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:operation}
h(\ev_{A}{(t,a)})=\ev_{B}{(\,t, (h(a_{\beta}))_{\beta < \nu}}\,),
\end{align}
where $\ev_{A}(t,-)\colon A^{\nu} \to A$ and $\ev_{B}(t,-)\colon B^{\nu} \to B$ are the evaluation maps with respect to $A$ and $B$. That (\ref{eq:operation}) holds follows by direct inspection of the definitions. It is common to write (\ref{eq:operation}) as
\begin{align}\label{eq:operationterm}
h(t(\,a_{\nu}\,))=t(\,h(a_{\nu})\,),
\end{align}
where the algebras $A$ and $B$ over which $t$ is evaluated are tacitly understood.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}\label{def:cong}
A \emph{congruence} $\theta$ on a $\Va$-algebra $A$ is an equivalence relation on $A$ that is \emph{compatible with \textup{(or} preserved by\textup{)} all operations}, i.e.\ with all definable maps $f\colon A^{\nu}\to A$, where $\nu$ is a cardinal. This means
that whenever $x_{\nu}:=(x_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}$, $y_{\nu}:=(y_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}$ are $\nu$-tuples of elements of $A$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:cong}
(x_{\beta},y_{\beta})\in \theta \text{ for each $\beta<\nu$} \ \ \ \Longrightarrow \ \ \ (f(x_{\nu}), f(y_{\nu})) \in \theta.
\end{align}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:congaed}With the notation of the preceding definition,
upon writing $f=\ev{(t,-)}$ for some defining term $t \in \F{(\nu)}$ condition (\ref{eq:cong}) reads
\begin{align}\label{eq:congterm}
(x_{\beta},y_{\beta})\in \theta \text{ for each $\beta<\nu$} \ \ \ \Longrightarrow \ \ \ (\ev{(t,x_{\nu})}, \ev{(t,(y_{\nu}))} \in \theta.
\end{align}
Equivalently, with the convention adopted in (\ref{eq:operationterm}),
\begin{align}\label{eq:congterm1}
(x_{\beta},y_{\beta})\in \theta \text{ for each $\beta<\nu$} \ \ \ \Longrightarrow \ \ \ (t(\,(x_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}\,),\, t(\,(y_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}\,))\in \theta.
\end{align}
It is a standard fact, even in the infinitary case, that congruences in the sense of Definition \ref{def:cong} coincide with congruences defined in terms of kernel pairs; see \cite[p.\ 33]{Linton:1965} and \cite[Ch.\ II.5]{Slominsky:1959}.
\end{remark}
The Galois connections $(\CC,\VV)$ of Subsection \ref{ss:Galois} now specialise as follows.
Given a subset $S\subseteq A^{\mu}$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:Calg}
\CC{(S)}=\left\{(p,q)\in\F{(\mu)} \mid \forall a\in S: \ \ \ev{(p,a)}=\ev{(q,a)} \right\},
\end{align}
where $\ev(p,-)\colon A^{\mu}\to A$ is, once more, the evaluation map (\ref{eq:dualeval}).
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:iscong}For any cardinal $\mu$, and any subset $S\subseteq A^{\mu}$, the set $\CC{(S)}\subseteq \F{(\mu)}^{2}$ is a congruence relation.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that $\CC{(S)}$ is an equivalence relation. To show it is a congruence, let $\nu$ be a cardinal and consider two $\nu$-tuples $(x_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}$, $(y_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}$ of elements of $\F{(\mu)}$. Since the pairs $(x_{\beta},y_{\beta})$ are in $\CC{(S)}$ for each $\beta<\nu$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:cond1}
\forall \beta<\nu: \ \ \ \ev{(x_{\beta},a)}=\ev{(y_{\beta},a)},
\end{align}
for all $a \in S$.
If $t\in\F{(\nu)}$ is any $\nu$-ary operation on $\F{(\mu)}$, applying $t$ to (\ref{eq:cond1}) we obtain
\begin{align}\label{eq:cond2.1}
t(\,(\ev{(x_{\beta},a)})_{\beta<\nu}\,)=t(\,(\ev{(y_{\beta},a)})_{\beta<\nu}\,),
\end{align}
that is, more explicitly,
\begin{align}\label{eq:cond2.2}
\ev{(t,(\ev{(x_{\beta},a)})_{\beta<\nu}\,))}=\ev{(t,(\ev{(y_{\beta},a)})_{\beta<\nu}\,))}.
\end{align}
Directly from the definitions one verifies
\begin{align}\label{eq:verifies}
\ev{(t,(\ev{(x_{\beta},a)})_{\beta<\nu}\,))}=\ev{(t(\,(x_\beta)_{\beta<\nu}\,),a)},
\end{align}
so that from (\ref{eq:cond2.2}--\ref{eq:verifies}) we obtain
\begin{align*}
\ev{(t(\,(x_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}\,),\, a\,)}=\ev{(t(\,(y_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}\,),\, a)},
\end{align*}
for all $a \in S$, and the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Every congruence on the free algebra $\F(\mu)$ is $\a$-stable (cf. the proof of Proposition \ref{stability}).
\end{remark}
Concerning the operator $\VV$, note first that $\Set$ obviously satisfies Assumption \ref{ass:limits}. Given a relation $R$ on $\F{(\mu)}$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:Valg}
\VV{(R)}=\bigcap_{(p,q)\in R}\left\{a\in\I{(\F{(\mu)})} \mid \ev{(p,a)}=\ev{(q,a)} \right\}.
\end{align}
Lemma \ref{lem:galois} asserts that, for any cardinal $\mu$, any relation $R$ on $\F{(\mu)}$, and any subset $S\subseteq A^{\mu}$, we have
\begin{align*}
R \subseteq \CC{(S)} \quad \quad \text{if, and only if,} \quad \quad S\subseteq \VV{(R)}.
\end{align*}
In other words, the functions $\VV\colon 2^{\F{(\mu)}^{2}}\to 2^{A^{\mu}}$ and $\CC\colon 2^{A^{\mu}}\to2^{\F{(\mu)}^{2}}$ yield a contravariant Galois connection between the indicated power sets.
Consider subsets $S'\subseteq A^{\nu}$, $S\subseteq A^{\mu}$, with $\mu$ and $\nu$ cardinals, and a $\D$-arrow $f\colon S'\subseteq A^{\nu}\to S\subseteq A^{\mu}$, i.e.\ a definable function $f\colon A^{\nu}\to A^{\mu}$ that restricts to a function $S'\to S$. Recall from (\ref{eq:defI}--\ref{eq:Ionarrows}) that $f$ is induced by a (uniquely determined) homomorphism $h\colon\F{(\mu)}\to \F{(\nu)}$ via evaluation.
We have
\begin{align}\label{eq:Calgfunct}
\C{(S)}=(\F{(\mu)}, \CC{(S)})
\end{align}
with $\CC{(S)}$ as in (\ref{eq:Calg}), and similarly for $S'$. Recall from section \ref{sec:algebraic} that an $\R$-arrow $(\F{(\nu)}, \CC{(S')})\to(\F{(\mu)}, \CC{(S)})$ is naturally identified with a homomorphism $\F{(\mu)}\to\F{(\nu)}$ that preserves $\CC{(S)}$ with respect to $\CC{(S')}$ in the sense of (\ref{eq:rarrowalg}). Now $\C$ carries the $\D$-arrow $f$ to the unique $\R$-arrow corresponding to the homomorphism $h\colon\F{(\mu)}\to \F{(\nu)}$, i.e.\ we have
\begin{align}
\C{(f)}=h.
\end{align}
%
Consider, conversely, $\R$-objects $(\F{(\nu)},R')$ and $(\F{(\mu)}, R)$, together with an $\R$-arrow $(\F{(\nu)},R')\to (\F{(\mu)}, R)$. The latter, by our choice of $\T$, can be identified with a homomorphism $h\colon \F{(\mu)}\to\F{(\nu)}$ that preserves $R$ with respect to $R'$. We have
\begin{align}\label{eq:Valgfunct}
\V{(\F{(\mu)}, R)}=\VV{(R)}\subseteq \I{(\F{(\mu)})}
\end{align}
with $\VV{(R)}$ as in (\ref{eq:Valg}), and similarly for $(\F{(\nu)},R')$. Via evaluation, $h$ induces a definable function $f\colon A^{\nu}\to A^{\mu}$ that restricts to a function $S'\to S$, and thus yields a $\D$-arrow $f\colon S'\subseteq A^{\nu}\to S\subseteq A^{\mu}$; i.e., we have
\begin{align*}
\V{(h)}=f.
\end{align*}
%
The weak affine adjunction (Theorem \ref{thm:weakadj}) applies to show $\C\dashv \V$.
\smallskip We shall carry the adjunction $\C\dashv \V$ through to the quotient categories $\D^{q}$ and $\R^{q}$ in the algebraic setting.
\subsection{The quotient $\D^{q}$: Affine subsets}\label{ss:affinesub} Specialising Subsection \ref{sec:general}, the quotient category $\D^{q}$ has the same objects as $\D$, namely, all subsets $S\subseteq A^\mu$, as $\mu$ ranges over all cardinals. The $\D$-arrows from $S'\subseteq A^{\nu}$ to $S\subseteq A^{\mu}$ are the definable functions $A^{\nu}\to A^{\mu}$, in the sense of Definition \ref{def:definablemap}, that restrict to functions $S' \to S$, up to the equivalence relation that identifies two such definable functions if, and only if, they restrict to the same function $S' \to S$. It is reasonable to call an object $S\subseteq A^{\mu}$ of $\D^{q}$ an \emph{affine subset} (\emph{relative to $A$ and $\Va$}).
\subsection{The quotient $\R^{q}$: Presented algebras}\label{ss:presalg}
Continuing our specialisation of Subsection \ref{sec:general}, the quotient category $\R^{q}$ has as objects the pairs $(\F{(\mu)},R)$, where $\mu$ ranges over all cardinals, and $R$ is a relation on (the underlying set of) $\F{(\mu)}$. The $\R^{q}$-morphisms $(\F{(\nu)},R')\to (\F{(\mu)},R)$ are the homomorphisms $h\colon \F{(\mu)}\to\F{(\nu)}$ that preserve $R$ with respect to $R'$ in the sense of (\ref{eq:rarrowalg1}), up to the equivalence relation that identifies two of them if, and only if, their factorisations through the natural quotient maps $\F{(\mu)}\twoheadrightarrow \F{(\mu)}/\overline{R}$ and $\F{(\nu)}\twoheadrightarrow \F{(\nu)}/\overline{R'}$ are equal.
As already noted, when $R$ and $R'$ are congruences, the factorisations in question are in fact homomorphisms from the algebra $\F{(\mu)}/R$ to the algebra $\F{(\nu)}/R'$. We therefore recall a standard
\begin{definition}\label{def:presentation}We call a pair $(\F{(\mu)},\theta)$, for $\mu$ a cardinal and $\theta$ a congruence on $\F{(\mu)}$, a \emph{presentation} (\emph{in the variety $\Va$}). We call the algebra $\F{(\mu)}/\theta$ the \emph{algebra presented by} $(\F{(\mu)},\theta)$. We write $\Vap$ for the category of \emph{presented $\Va$-algebras}, having as objects all presentations in $\Va$, and as morphisms the $\Va$-homomorphisms between the $\Va$-algebras presented by them.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:quotienteq}
Let $\Va$ be any \textup{(}finitely or infinitary\textup{)} variety of algebras, $\Vap$ the associated category of presented $\Va$-algebras. Set $\T$ to be the opposite of the full subcategory of $\Va$ whose objects are the free $\Va$-algebras $\F{(\mu)}$, for $\mu$ an arbitrary cardinal, $\a:=\F{(1)}$, $\I\colon \T \to \Set$ to be the functor defined in section \ref{sec:algebraic} and $\R^{q}$ be the category defined as in section \ref{sec:general}.
Then, the category $\Vap$ fully embeds into $(\R^{q})^{\rm op}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the functor that sends an object $(\F{(\mu)},\theta)$ in $\Vap$ into the object $(\F{(\mu)},\theta)$ of $(\R^{q})^{\rm op}$. The functor associates with any map $h\colon (\F{(\mu)},\theta)\to (\F{(\nu)},\theta')$, a map $\bar{h}\colon\F{(\nu)}\to \F{(\mu)}$ which is the dual of the unique homomorphism extension of the assignment $X_{\alpha}\mapsto Y_{\beta}$, where $\{X_{\alpha}\mid \alpha<\mu\}$ are the free generators of $\F{(\mu)}$ and $Y_{\beta}$ is an arbitrary representative of the $\theta'$-equivalence class $h(X_{\alpha}/\theta)$. The verification that this is indeed a well-defined functor is straightforward. It remains to prove that it is full and faithful. For the first claim, consider a (representative of the) $\R^{q}$-arrow $f\colon (\F{(\nu)},\theta')\to (\F{(\mu)},\theta)$. Since $f$ preserves $\theta$ with regard to $\theta'$, the map $h\colon (\F{(\mu)},\theta)\to (\F{(\nu)},\theta')$ defined by $h(t/\theta):=f(t)/\theta'$ is well-defined and is a homomorphism of $\Va_{p}$-algebras. Now, $\bar{h}$ as defined above, sends a free generator $X_{\alpha}$ into an arbitrary representative of the $\theta'$-equivalence class $h(X_{\alpha}/\theta)=f(X_{\alpha})/\theta'$, so $\bar{h}$ and $f$ have the same factorisation through the algebras $(\F{(\mu)},\theta)$ and $(\F{(\nu)},\theta')$, hence they are the same arrow in $\R^{q}$. To prove that the functor is faithful, notice that if two arrows $h_{1},h_{2}\colon (\F{(\mu)},\theta)\to (\F{(\nu)},\theta')$ in $\Va_{p}$ are different, then $\bar{h}_{1}$ and $\bar{h}_{2}$ are different in $\R$ and they belong do different equivalence classes in $\R^{q}$ as they factors differently through the quotients.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:Vpequiv}While $\Vap$ is clearly not a variety of algebras ---it is not closed, for example, under isomorphisms--- it is equivalent to $\Va$. Indeed, we have a functor that sends each presented algebra $(\F{(\mu)}, \theta)$ into the quotient $\F{(\mu)}/ \theta$ in $\Va$ and acts identically on maps. It is an exercise to see that such a functor is full, faithful, and dense, hence provides an equivalence of categories.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Algebraic affine adjunction}\label{ss:algaffadj}
Recall the notion of $\I$-coseparator from Definition \ref{def:coseparator}. In the algebraic setting, Assumption \ref{ass:cosep} always holds:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:algcosep}The object $\a=\F{(1)}$ is an $\I$-coseparator for the functor $\I$ defined in \textup{(\ref{eq:defI}--\ref{eq:Ionarrows})} above.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}We need to show that, for any cardinal $\mu$, the family of definable functions $f\colon A^{\mu} \to A$ is jointly monic in $\Set$. That is, given any two functions $h_1,h_2\colon S \to A^{\mu}$, if $f\circ h_1=f\circ h_2$ for all definable $f$, then $h_1=h_2$. Note that the canonical projection functions $\pi_{\alpha}\colon A^{\mu}\to A$ of the product $A^{\mu}$, for $\alpha<\mu$ an ordinal, are definable. Indeed, inspection of the definition of $\I$ shows that the unique homomorphism $\iota_{\alpha}\colon \F{(1)}\to\F{(\mu)}$ induced by $X_{1}\mapsto X_{\alpha}$ is such that $\I{(\iota_{\alpha})}=\pi_{\alpha}$. If now $h_{1}\neq h_{2}$, by the universal property of products there $\alpha<\mu$ with $\pi_{\alpha}\circ h_{1}\neq \pi_{\alpha}\circ h_{2}$, as was to be shown.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:range-of-C}
In the light of Lemma \ref{lem:iscong} and Theorem \ref{thm:quotienteq}, the image of $\C^{q}$ ranges within the full subcategory $\Va_{p}$ of $\R^{q}$. Thus, without loss of generality, we restrict our attention to this subcategory rather than the whole $\R^{q}$.
\end{remark}
Specialising Definition \ref{def:quotients}, we obtain functors $\C^{q}\colon \D^{q} \to \Vap^{\rm op}$ and $\V^{q}\colon \Vap^{\rm op}\to \D^{q}$. As an immediate consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:genadj}, Lemma \ref{lem:algcosep}, Remark \ref{rem:range-of-C}, and Theorem \ref{thm:quotienteq}, we have:
\begin{corollary}[Algebraic affine adjunction]\label{cor:algadj} Consider any \textup{(}finitary or infinitary\textup{)} variety $\Va$ of algebras, and fix any $\Va$-algebra $A$. Let $\Vap$ be the associated category of presented algebras as in Definition \ref{def:presentation}. Let $\D^{q}$ be the category of affine subsets relative to $A$ and $\Va$, as in Subsection \ref{ss:affinesub}. The functors $\C^{q}\colon \D^{q} \to \Vap^{\rm op}$ and $\V^{q}\colon \Vap^{\rm op}\to \D^{q}$ are adjoint with $\C^{q}\dashv \V^{q}$.\qed
\end{corollary}
\section{The algebraic {\sl Nullstellensatz}}\label{s:algnull}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:ontointo}It is well known that in any (finitary or infinitary) variety $\Va$ of algebras we have:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{it:into} The monomorphisms are exactly the injective $\Va$-homomorphisms, which we also call embeddings.
\item\label{it:onto} The regular epimorphisms (=the coequalisers of some pair of parallel arrows) are exactly the surjective $\Va$-homomorphisms, which we also call quotient maps.
\end{enumerate}
(See \cite[pp.\ 87--88]{Linton:1965}.) We shall use these basic facts often in this section.
\end{remark}
\subsection{A Stone-Gelfand-Kolmogorov Lemma}\label{ss:SKG}
Recall from section \ref{sec:algebraic} that, for a cardinal $\nu$ and a given element $a\in A^{\nu}$, we have the homomorphism
\begin{align*}\tag{\ref{eq:tuple}}
\widehat{a}\colon \F{(\nu)}\to A.
\end{align*}
Note that the action of (the underlying function $\U{(\widehat{a})}$ of ) (\ref{eq:tuple}) is given by
\begin{align}\label{eq:action}
p \in \F{(\nu)} \ \overset{\widehat{a}}{\longmapsto} \ \ev{(p,a)} \in A.
\end{align}
For, applying the adjunction $\F\dashv\U$ to%
\begin{align*}\tag{\ref{eq:comp}}
\F(1)\overset{p}{\longrightarrow}\F(\nu)\overset{\widehat{a}}{\longrightarrow} A
\end{align*}
we obtain the commutative diagram
\begin{small}
\begin{align*}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node (1) at (0,0) {$1$};
\node (UF) at (7,0) {$\U{(\F{(\nu)})}$};
\node (U) at (14,0) {$\U{(A)}$};
\draw [->] (1) to node [above, midway] {$\widecheck{p}$} (UF);
\draw [->] (UF) to node [above, midway] {$\U{(\widehat{a})}$} (U);
\draw [->] (1) to [bend right] node [below, midway] {$\ev{(p,a)}$} (U);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{align*}
\end{small}
where we write $\widecheck{p}\colon 1 \to \U{(\F{(\nu)})}$ for the unique function corresponding to $p\colon \F{(1)}\to \F{(\nu)}$ under the adjunction.
We also have the natural quotient homomorphism
\begin{align}\label{eq:pointquotient}
q_{a}\colon \F{(\nu)}\twoheadrightarrow \F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}.
\end{align}
By construction, $q_{a}$ preserves the relation $\CC{(\{a\})}$ on $\F{(\nu)}$ with respect to the identity relation on $\F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}$.
Now, $\widehat{a}$ preserves the relation $\CC{(\{a\})}$ on $\F{(\nu)}$ with respect to the identity relation on $A$. Indeed, if $(p,q) \in \CC{(\{a\})}$ then, by definition, $\ev{(p,a)}=\ev{(q, a)}$, whence $\widehat{a}(p)=\widehat{a}(q)$ by (\ref{eq:action}). Therefore, by the universal property of the quotient homomorphism there exists a unique homomorphism
\begin{align}\label{eq:gelfeval}
\gamma_{a}\colon \F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})} \longrightarrow A
\end{align}
that makes the diagram in Fig.\ \ref{fig:gelfand} commute.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{small}
\smallskip
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node (F) at (0,5) {$\F{(\nu)}$};
\node (A) at (0,0) {$A$};
\node (C) at (5,0) {$\frac{\F{(\nu)}}{\CC{(\{a\})}}$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (A) node [left, midway] {$\widehat{a}$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (C) node [right, midway] {$q_{a}$};
\draw [<-] (A) -- (C) node [below, midway] {$\gamma_{a}$} node [above, midway] {$!$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{small}
\caption{The Gelfand evaluation $\gamma_a$.}
\label{fig:gelfand}
\end{figure}
\begin{definition}[Gelfand evaluation]\label{def:gelfeval}Given a cardinal $\nu$ and an element $a\in A^{\nu}$, the homomorphism \textup{(\ref{eq:gelfeval})} above is called the \emph{Gelfand evaluation} (\emph{of $\F{(\nu)}$ at $a$}).
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}[Stone-Gelfand-Kolmogorov Lemma]\label{l:SGK}Fix a cardinal $\nu$.
\begin{enumerate}[\textup{(}i\textup{)}]
\item For each $a\in A^{\nu}$, the Gelfand evaluation $\gamma_{a}$ is a monomorphism, and hence its underlying function $\U{(\gamma_{a})}$ is injective.
\item Conversely, for each congruence relation $\theta$ on $\F{(\nu)}$, and each homomorphism $e\colon \F{(\nu)}/\theta\to A$, consider the commutative diagram
\begin{small}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node (F) at (0,5) {$\F{(\nu)}$};
\node (A) at (0,0) {$A$};
\node (C) at (5,0) {$\frac{\F{(\nu)}}{\theta}$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (A) node [left, midway] {$e\circ q_{\theta}$};
\draw [->] (F) -- (C) node [right, midway] {$q_\theta$};
\draw [<-] (A) -- (C) node [below, midway] {$e$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{small}
where $q_{\theta}$ is the natural quotient homomorphism. Set $a:=(e\circ q_\theta(X_\beta))_{\beta<\nu}\in A^\nu$. If $e$ is a monomorphism, then $\theta = \CC{(\{a\})}$, and the commutative diagram above coincides with the one in Fig.\ \ref{fig:gelfand}. \textup{(}That is, $q_\theta=q_a$, $e=\gamma_{a}$, and $e\circ q_\theta=\widehat{a}$.\textup{)}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\noindent$(i)$\ It suffices to check that the underlying function of $\gamma_{a}$ is injective, cf.\ Remark \ref{rem:ontointo}. Pick $p,q \in \F{(\nu)}$ such that $(p,q)\not \in\CC{(\{a\})}$. Then, by definition, $\ev{(p,a)}\neq\ev{(q, a)}$, and therefore $\widehat{a}(p)\neq \widehat{a}(q)$ by (\ref{eq:action}). But then, by the definition of Gelfand evaluation, it follows that $\gamma_{a}(p)\neq \gamma_{a}(q)$.
\noindent$(ii)$\ Since $e$ is monic, we have $\ker{(e\circ q_\theta)}=\ker{q_\theta}=\theta$. Explicitly,
\begin{align}\label{eq:kernel}
\forall s,t \in \F{(\nu)}: \ \ (s,t)\in\theta \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ e(q_\theta(s))=e(q_\theta(t)).
\end{align}
Since homomorphisms commute with operations, cf.\ Remark \ref{rem:homscommute}, and recalling the definition of $a$, (\ref{eq:kernel}) yields
\begin{align}\label{eq:kerneltuple}
\forall s,t \in \F{(\nu)}: \ \ (s,t)\in\theta \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \ev{(s,a)}=\ev{(t,a)}.
\end{align}
Therefore, by (\ref{eq:kerneltuple}), we have $a \in \VV{(\theta)}$. By the Galois connection (\ref{eq:galois}) this is equivalent to
\begin{align}\label{eq:vnotempty}
\theta\subseteq \CC{(\{a\})}.
\end{align}
For the converse inclusion, if $(u,v)\in \CC{(\{a\})}$, then $\ev{(u,a)}=\ev{(v,a)}$, and therefore $(u,v)\in\theta$ by (\ref{eq:kerneltuple}). This proves $\theta=\CC{(\{a\})}$, and therefore $q_\theta=q_a$. To show $\widehat{a}=e\circ q_a$, note that, by the definition of $\widehat{a}$ and the universal property of $\F{(\nu})$, they both are the (unique) extension of the function $X_\beta \mapsto \ev{(X_\beta,(e\circ q_\theta(X_\beta)))}$, for $\beta < \nu$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Transforms}\label{ss:trans}
For a congruence relation $\theta$ on $\F{(\nu)}$, we now consider the natural quotient homomorphism
\begin{align}\label{eq:quotth}
q_{\theta}\colon \F{(\nu)} \to \F{(\nu)}/\theta,
\end{align}
together with the product $\prod_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}$ and its projections
\begin{align}\label{eq:prodsheaf}
\pi_{a}\colon \prod_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\frac{\F{(\nu)}}{\CC{(\{a\})}}\longrightarrow\frac{\F{(\nu)}}{\CC{(\{a\})}}.
\end{align}
We also consider the power $A^{\VV{(\theta)}}$ and its projections
\begin{align}\label{eq:prodfunc}
p_{a}\colon A^{\VV{(\theta)}}\longrightarrow A.
\end{align}
The morphisms (\ref{eq:gelfeval}--\ref{eq:prodfunc}) yield the commutative diagrams ---one for each $a\in\VV{(\theta)}$--- in Fig.\ \ref{fig:birkgelf},
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\smallskip
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75]
\node (Fth) at (0,0) {$\F{(\nu)}/\theta$};
\node (P1) at (5,0) {$\prod_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\frac{\F{(\nu)}}{\CC{(\{a\})}}$};
\node (P2) at (10,0) {$A^{\VV{(\theta)}}$};
\node (FC) at (0,-3) {$\F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}$};
\node (A) at (5,-3) {$A$};
\draw [->] (Fth) to node [left, midway] {$q$} (FC);
\draw [->] (P1) to node [right, midway] {$\gamma_{a}\circ\pi_{a}$} (A);
\draw [->] (FC) to node [below, midway] {$\gamma_{a}$} (A);
\draw [->] (P2) to node [below, midway,yshift=-0.15cm] {$p_{a}$} (A);
\draw [->] (P1) to node [below, midway,yshift=-0.15cm] {$\pi_{a}$} (FC);
\draw [->] (Fth) to node [above, midway] {$\sigma_{\theta}$} node [below, midway] {$!$} (P1) ;
\draw [->] (P1) to node [above, midway] {$\iota_{\theta}$} node [below, midway] {$!$} (P2) ;
\draw [->] (Fth) to [bend left] node [above, midway] {$\gamma_{\theta}:=\iota_{\theta}\circ\sigma_{\theta}$} node [below, midway] {$!$} (P2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The Gelfand and Birkhoff transforms $\gamma_\theta$ and $\sigma_\theta$.}
\label{fig:birkgelf}
\end{figure}
where $\sigma_{\theta}$ and $\iota_{\theta}$ are the unique homomorphisms whose existence is granted by the universal property of the products $\prod_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\frac{\F{(\nu)}}{\CC{(\{a\})}}$ and $A^{\VV{(\theta)}}$, respectively.
\begin{definition}[Gelfand and Birkhoff transforms]\label{eq:gelftrans}Given a cardinal $\nu$ and a congruence $\theta$ on $\F{(\nu)}$, the homomorphisms $\gamma_{\theta}:=\iota_{\theta}\circ\sigma_{\theta}$ and $\sigma_{\theta}$ given by the commutative diagram above are called the \emph{Gelfand} and the \emph{Birkhoff transforms} (\emph{of $\F{(\nu)}/\theta$ with respect to $A$}), respectively.\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:easygelf}With the notation above, and for each $a \in A$, the homomorphisms $\pi_{a}\circ \sigma_{\theta}$ and $\iota_{\theta}$ are surjective and injective, respectively.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}It is clear that $\pi_{a}\circ \sigma_{\theta}$ is onto, because $q\colon \F{(\nu)}/\theta \to \F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}$ is onto (cf.\ Remark \ref{rem:ontointo}). Concerning
$\iota_{\theta}$, let $x,y \in \prod_{a \in \VV{(a)}}\F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}$, and suppose $\iota_{\theta}(x)=\iota_{\theta}(y)$. With reference to the commutative diagram in Fig.\ {\ref{fig:birkgelf}}, for each $a \in \VV{(\theta)}$ we have $p_a(\iota_\theta(x))=p_a(\iota_\theta(y))$, and therefore $\gamma_a(\pi_a(x))= \gamma_a(\pi_a(y))$. Since $\gamma_{a}
$ is a monomorphism for each $a$ by Lemma \ref{lem:easygelf}, we infer $\pi_a(x)=\pi_a(y)$ for each $a$, and hence $x=y$ by the universal property of the product $\prod_{a
\in \VV{(a)}}\F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The algebraic {\sl Nullstellensatz}}\label{ss:algnull}
\begin{definition}[Radical]\label{def:radical}For a cardinal $\nu$ and a relation $R$ on $\F{(\nu)}$, we call the congruence
\[
\bigcap_{a \in \VV{(R)}} \CC{(\{a\})}
\]
the \emph{radical of $R$ \textup{(}with respect to the $\Va$-algebra $A$\textup{)}}. A congruence $\theta$ on $\F{(\nu)}$ is \emph{radical \textup{(}with respect to $A$\textup{)}} if $\theta=\bigcap_{a \in \VV{(\theta)}} \CC{(\{a\})}$.
\end{definition}
Note that the inclusion
\begin{align}\label{eq:galoisincl}
\theta \subseteq \bigcap_{a \in \VV{(\theta)}} \CC{(\{a\})},
\end{align}
always holds, cf.\ \eqref{eq:contained2}.
\begin{theorem}[Algebraic {\sl Nullstellensatz}]\label{thm:algnull}
For any $\Va$-algebra $A$, any cardinal $\nu$, and any congruence $\theta$ on $\F{(\nu)}$. The following are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}[\textup{(}i\textup{)}]
\item\label{l:null-subdirect-item1} $\CC{(\VV{(\theta)})}=\theta$.
\item\label{l:null-subdirect-item2} $\theta=\bigcap_{a \in \VV{(\theta)}} \CC{(\{a\})}$, i.e.\ $\theta$ is a radical congruence with respect to $A$.
\item\label{l:null-subdirect-item3} The Birkhoff transform $\sigma_{\theta}\colon\F{(\nu)}/\theta\to\prod_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\frac{\F{(\nu)}}{\CC{(\{a\})}}$ is a subdirect embedding.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}In the proof that follows we apply three standard results in universal algebra, namely, \cite[Theorems 7.15, 6.15, and 6.20]{Burris:81}. Although in \cite{Burris:81} these results are stated and proved for finitary varieties, the same proofs work for infinitary ones.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
\noindent The hypotheses of Theorem \ref{thm:null} are satisfied: the terminal object in $\Set$ is a singleton $\{a\}$, and the family of functions $\{a\}\to \VV{(R)}$ ---i.e.\ the elements of $\VV{(R)}$--- is obviously jointly epic. This proves the equivalence of (\ref{l:null-subdirect-item1}) and (\ref{l:null-subdirect-item2}).
\noindent $(\ref{l:null-subdirect-item2})\Leftrightarrow (\ref{l:null-subdirect-item3})$. By \cite[Theorem 7.15]{Burris:81}, given any algebra $B$ and a family $\{\theta_{i}\}_{i\in I}$ of congruences on $B$, the natural homomorphism $h\colon B\to\prod_{i\in I}B/\theta_{i}$ induced by the quotient homomorphisms $q_{\theta_{i}}\colon B\to B/{\theta_{i}}$ is an embedding if, and only if, $\bigcap_{i\in I}\theta_{i}$ is the identity congruence $\Delta$ on $B$. Taking
\[B:=\F{(\nu)}/\theta\ \text{ and } \ \{\theta_{i}\}:=\{\CC{(\{a\})}\}_{a \in \VV{(\theta)}},\] we obtain the natural homomorphism
\begin{align}\label{eq:nath}
h\colon \F{(\nu)}/\theta\longrightarrow \prod_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\frac{\F{(\nu)}/\theta}{\CC{(\{a\})}/\theta},
\end{align}
where $\CC{(\{a\})}/\theta$ denotes the set $\{(p/\theta,q/\theta)\in \F{(\nu)}/\theta\mid (p,q) \in \CC{(\{a\})}\}$, which is easily seen to be a congruence relation on $\F{(\nu)/\theta}$.
It is clear by construction that if $h$ is an embedding, then it is subdirect. Hence we have:
\begin{align}\label{eq:subdirect}
h\text{ is a subdirect embedding} \ \Longleftrightarrow\ \bigcap_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\CC{(\{a\})}/\theta=\Delta/\theta\
\end{align}
For each $a\in \VV{(\theta)}$, by the Galois connection Lemma \ref{lem:galois} we have $\theta\subseteq \CC{(\{a\})}$. Therefore, by the Second Isomorphism Theorem \cite[Theorem 6.15]{Burris:81},
\begin{align}\label{eq:secondiso}
\forall a \in \VV{(a)}: \ \ \frac{\F{(\nu)}/\theta}{\CC{(\{a\})}/\theta}\cong\F{(\nu)}/\CC{(\{a\})}.
\end{align}
From (\ref{eq:subdirect}--\ref{eq:secondiso}) we see:
\begin{align}\label{eq:birkhoff}
h \text{ is a subdirect embedding} \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \sigma_{\theta} \text{ is a subdirect embedding.}
\end{align}
Finally, upon recalling that, by \cite[Theorem 6.20]{Burris:81}, the mapping $\theta'\mapsto \theta'/\theta$ is an isomorphism of lattices between the lattice of congruences of $\F{(\nu)}$ extending $\theta$ and the lattice of congruences of $\F{(\nu)}/\theta$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:lattcong}
\bigcap_{a\in \VV{(\theta)}}\CC{(\{a\})}/\theta=\Delta/\theta \ \ \Longleftrightarrow \ \ \bigcap_{a\in\VV{(\theta)}}\CC{(\{a\})}=\theta.
\end{align}
In conclusion, (\ref{eq:nath}--\ref{eq:lattcong}) amount to the equivalence between $(\ref{l:null-subdirect-item2})$ and $(\ref{l:null-subdirect-item3})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{r:finitary-vs-inifinitary}
Since Birkhoff's influential paper \cite{birkhoff1944subdirect} the theory of algebras definable by operations of finite arity only has been developed intensively. In \cite[Theorem 1]{birkhoff1944subdirect} Birkhoff pointed out, by way of motivation for his main result, that the Lasker-Noether theorem \cite{noether21} generalises easily to algebras whose congruences satisfy the ascending chain condition, even in the presence of operations of infinite arity. His main result \cite[Theorem 2]{birkhoff1944subdirect} then showed how to extend the Lasker-Noether theorem to any variety of algebras, without any chain condition, provided however that all operations be finitary. In short, Birkhoff's Subdirect Representation theorem (see e.g.\ \cite[Theorem 2.6]{jacobson80} for a textbook treatment) fails for infinitary varieties of algebras. Much of the remaining general theory, however, carries over to the infinitary case. The two classical references on infinitary varieties are \cite{Slominsky:1959, Linton:1965}. Linton's paper \cite{Linton:1965}, in particular, extended Lawvere's categorical treatment of universal algebra \cite{lawvere63, lawverereprint}.
\end{remark}
As a consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:algnull}, the adjunction $\C^{q}\dashv \V^{q}$ need not be a duality for the whole variety $\Va$. The case of MV-algebras, treated in \cite{MarSpa12}, is a non-trivial example of the adjunction $\C^{q}\dashv \V^{q}$ that only fixes a subclass of the variety $\Va$.
The following corollary provides some sufficient and some necessary conditions for the whole variety $\Va$ to be fixed under the composition $\C^{q}\circ \V^{q}$; it will also be useful to prove the dualities for Boolean algebras and $C^{*}$-algebras in sections \ref{s:stone} and \ref{s:stone-gelfand} of Part \ref{p:dualities}. In the light of Remark \ref{rem:Vpequiv}, instead than $\Vap$ we work with the equivalent category $\Va$.
\newpage
\begin{corollary}\label{c:semisimple-fixed}
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{c:semisimple-fixed-item1} Let $\Va$ be a semisimple variety and suppose there is a cardinal $\kappa$ such that the number of pairwise non-isomorphic simple algebras in $\Va$ is less than $\kappa$. Let $A$ be the coproduct of all pairwise non-isomorphic simple algebras in $\Va$, then the composition $\C^{q}\circ \V^{q}$ fixes all algebras in $\Va$.
\item\label{c:semisimple-fixed-item2} Let $\Va$ be a finitary variety and suppose there is a cardinal $\kappa$ such that the number of pairwise non-isomorphic subdirectly irreducible algebras in $\Va$ is less than $\kappa$. Let $A$ be the coproduct of all pairwise non-isomorphic subdirectly irreducible algebras in $\Va$, then the composition $\C^{q}\circ \V^{q}$ fixes all algebras in $\Va$.
\item\label{c:semisimple-fixed-item3} Let $\Va$ be a finitary variety. Suppose that functors $\C^{q}$ and $\V^{q}$ have been defined relatively to some arbitrary algebra $A$ in $\Va$. The algebra $A$ contains \textup{(}up to isomorphism\textup{)} all subdirectly irreducible algebras in the variety if, and only if, the composition $\C^{q}\circ \V^{q}$ fixes the whole variety $\Va$.
\item\label{c:semisimple-fixed-item4} Let $\Va$ be a finitary variety and suppose that the composition $\C^{q}\circ \V^{q}$ fixes all algebras in $\Va$, then $A$ generates the variety $\Va$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We prove item \eqref{c:semisimple-fixed-item1}. We set the algebra $A$ to be the aforementioned coproduct. Notice that, if an algebra $\F(\mu)/\psi$ is simple algebra, then it canonically embeds into $A$, for $A$ is the coproduct of all pairwise non isomorphic simple algebras. So, by Lemma \ref{l:SGK}, $\psi=\CC(\{a\})$ for some $a\in\VV(\psi)$. Let now $\F(\mu)/\theta$ be any algebra in $\Va$. Since the variety $\Va$ is semisimple, $\F(\mu)/\theta$ is semisimple, so by definition there is a subdirect embedding of $\F(\mu)/\theta$ into simple algebras. Each of the simple algebras in $\Va$ is isomorphic to $\F(\mu)/\CC(\{a\})$ for some cardinal $\mu$ and some $a\in A^{\mu}$. Since the decomposition is subdirect $\theta\subseteq \CC(\{a\})$, so by (\ref{eq:galois}) we have $a\in \VV(\theta)$. But as seen in Figure \ref{fig:birkgelf}, there is only one arrow from $\F(\mu)/\theta$ into $\prod_{a\in\VV(\{a\})}\F(\mu)/\CC(\{a\})$ and this is the Birkhoff transform. Thus, Theorem \ref{thm:algnull} can be applied yielding that the algebra $\F(\mu)/\theta$ is fixed by $\CC^{q}\circ \VV^{q}$ and a straightforward verification of the definitions of $\C^{q}$ and $\V^{q}$ give us $\C^{q}{(\V^{q}{(\,(\F{(\mu)},\theta)\,)})}\cong (\F{(\mu)},\theta)$.
For the proof of item \eqref{c:semisimple-fixed-item2}, replace ``simple'' for ``subdirectly irreducible'' in the proof of item \eqref{c:semisimple-fixed-item1}. The proof then goes through, upon noticing that by Birkhoff theorem in a finitary variety any algebra is the subdirect product of subdirectly irreducible algebras.
For the proof of item \eqref{c:semisimple-fixed-item3}, the sufficiency is again obtained as in \eqref{c:semisimple-fixed-item2}.
To see that also the other direction holds, notice that a congruence of $\F{(\mu)}$ presents a subdirectly irreducible algebra if, and only if, it is \emph{completely meet irreducible} in the lattice of congruences of $\F{(\mu)}$ (see e.g.\ \cite[Lemma 4.43]{MMT87}). Recall that an element $x$ of a lattice $L$ is completely meet irreducible if whenever $x=\bigvee K$ for some subset $K$ of $L$, then $x$ must belong to $K$. Now, suppose that the composition $\C\circ\V$ fixes all algebras in $\Va$, let $\F{(\mu)}/\theta$ be a subdirectly irreducible algebra. In particular we have $\CC\circ\VV(\theta)=\theta$, so by Theorem \ref{thm:algnull} $\theta=\bigcap_{a\in\VV(\theta)}\CC{(\{a\})}$. But $\theta$ is completely meet irreducible, so there exists $a\in \VV{(\theta)}$ such that $\theta=\CC{(\{a\})}$. By Lemma \ref{l:SGK} this entails that $\F{(\mu)}/\theta$ embeds into $A$ and the claim is proved.
Finally, to prove item \eqref{c:semisimple-fixed-item4}, notice that, by \eqref{c:semisimple-fixed-item3} $A$ must contain all subdirectly irreducible algebras in $\Va$, hence it generates the variety.
\end{proof}
\section{The topological {\sl Nullstellensatz}}
Having settled the characterisation of fixed points on the algebraic side, we turn to the study of the fixed points on the geometric side of the adjunction. Unfortunately, we are not able at this stage of giving a characterisation as satisfactory as the one for the algebraic side. Nonetheless, in this section we collect some general facts that will be useful to obtain Stone and Gelfand dualities in the next sections. We shall assume henceforth that the operator $\VC$ is topological\footnote{This is an actual restriction, as the condition may fail in an arbitrary variety. However it holds for all classical dualities mentioned in this paper.} i.e., $\VC{(X\cup Y)}=\VC{(X)}\cup\VC{(Y)}$. We shall topologise the set $A$ by declaring closed the sets of the form $\VC{(S)}$ for some $S\subseteq A$ . We call this the \emph{Zariski} topology or the $\VC$ topology.
For any cardinal $\mu$ the power $A^{\mu}$ can be endowed with at least two natural topologies:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The product topology w.r.t.\ the $\VC$ topology on $A$.
\item The $\VC$ topology given by definable definable functions from $A^{\mu}$ into $A$ i.e., where the closed subsets are of the form
\[\VV{(\theta)}:=\{s\in A^{\mu}\mid p(s)=q(s) \quad \forall (p,q)\in \theta \} \]
for $\theta\subseteq\F^{2}(\mu)$.
\end{enumerate}
We are interested in cases in which the two topologies above coincide on $A^{\mu}$ for any cardinal $\mu$.
\begin{definition}\label{d:spectral}
We say that a function $f\colon A^{\mu}\to A$ is \emph{strongly continuous} if the pre-images of a sets of the form $\VC{(S)}$ with $S\subseteq A$ can be written as $\VC{(T)}$ with $T\subseteq A^{\mu}$.
\end{definition}
Strong continuity generalises spectral maps in the setting of Stone duality for distributive lattices. Notice that strong continuity implies continuity.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:continuous}
Definable functions are strongly continuous \textup{(}hence in particular continuous\textup{)} with respect to the $\VC$ topology.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $f$ be a definable function from $A^{\mu}$ into $A$, with definable term $\lambda((X)_{\alpha<\mu})$ and let $C=\VC{(S)}$ for some $S\subseteq A$. Consider the set $\theta=\{\left( s(\lambda), t(\lambda)\right )\mid (s,t)\in \CC(S)\}$, we claim that $f^{-1}[C]=\VV(\theta)$. Indeed $d\in f^{-1}[C]$ if, and only if, $\exists c\in C$ such that $f(d)=c$ if, and only if, $\exists c\forall (s,t)\in \CC(S)$, $s(f(c))=t(f(c))$, if and only if, $c\in \VV(\theta)$.
\end{proof}
As an immediate consequence of Lemma \ref{l:continuous} and the fact that projections are definable functions, we observe that the product topology is coarser than the $\VC$ topology.
\begin{lemma}[Co-Nullstellensatz]\label{l:co-null}
Assume that the $\VC$ topology on $A$ is Hausdorff and that all definable functions are continuous with respect to the product topology. Then a set $S\subseteq A^{\mu}$ is closed in the product topology if, and only if, $\VV(\CC{(S)})=S$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us write $\overline{S}$ for the smallest closed set in the product topology that contains $S$. As noticed above, the product topology is coarser than the $\VC$ topology, so we have $\VC{(S)}\subseteq \overline{S}$.
To prove the other direction, notice that if $X$ is any topological space, and $Y$ is Hausdorff, then for any two continuous functions $f,g\colon X\to Y$ the solution set of the equation $f=g$ is a closed subset of $X$, \cite[1.5.4]{engelking}. Now, by assumption $A$ is Hausdorff and definable functions are continuous by Lemma \ref{l:continuous}, so for any pair of terms $(s,t)$, the set $\VV{(s,t)}$ is closed in product topology. On the other hand, $\VV(R)=\VV{\big(\bigcup_{(s,t)\in R}\{(s,t)\}\big)}=\bigcap_{(s,t)\in R}\VV{(s,t)}$ holds by Lemma \ref{lem:galois}. We conclude that $\VV(R)$ is closed in the product topology for any subset $R$ of $\F_{\mu}\times\F_{\mu}$. Thus we obtain the inclusion $\overline{S}\subseteq\VV{(\CC{(S)})}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{c:discrete-topology}
Suppose $\Va$ is finitary. If the $\VC$ topology on $A$ is discrete, then the $\VC$ topology and the product topology coincide.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If the $\VC$ topology on $A$ is discrete then it obviously is Hausdorff. In addition all finite products are also discrete, and this can be shown to imply that definable functions are continuous with respect to the product topology on $A^{\mu}$ for any cardinal $\mu$, because the variety is finitary. Thus the assumptions of Lemma \ref{l:co-null} are met and the corollary follows.
\end{proof}
\part{Three classical examples and one epilogue}\label{p:dualities}
\section{The classical affine adjunction}\label{s:classical}
Continuing the notation in the Introduction, we consider an algebraically closed field $k$, and finitely many variables $X:=\{X_{1},\ldots,X_{n}\}$, $n\geq 0$ an integer. Then $k$-algebras and their homomorphisms form a finitary variety in the sense of Birkhoff. The $k$-algebra freely generated by $X$ is
the polynomial ring $k[X]$. Congruences on any $k$-algebra are in one-one inclusion-preserving correspondence with ideals. We shall now apply the results of Part \ref{part:alg} to derive a form of the {\it Nullstellensatz}, with the {\it proviso} that congruences are conveniently represented by ideals. We let $\Va$ be the variety of $k$-algebras, and we let $A:=k$. The details then depend on what definition one takes for the notion of radical ideal. We shall use:
\begin{definition}\label{def:radideal}An ideal of a $k$-algebra is \emph{radical} if, and only if, it is an intersection of maximal ideals.
\end{definition}
We shall need a classical result from commutative algebra; see e.g.\ \cite{atyiahmacdonald}.
\begin{lemma}[Zariski's Lemma]\label{lem:zariski} Let $F$ be any field, and suppose $E$ is a finitely generated $F$-algebra that is itself a field. Then $E$ is a finite field extension of $F$.\qed
\end{lemma}
Specialising the Stone-Gelfand-Kolmogorov Lemma \ref{l:SGK} to the ring-theoretic setting now yields:
\begin{lemma}[Ring-theoretic Stone-Gelfand-Kolmogorov]\label{l:SGK-for-rings}An ideal $I$ of $k[X]$ is maximal if, and only if, there exists $a \in k^{n}$ such that $I=\CC{(\{a\})}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume $I=\CC{(\{a\})}$, and consider the Gelfand evaluation $\gamma_{a}\colon k[X]/\CC{(\{a\})}\to k$ of Definition \ref{def:gelfeval}. By Lemma \ref{l:SGK}, $\gamma_{a}$ is an embedding. From the fact that $\gamma_{a}$ is a homomorphism of $k$-algebras it follows at once that it is onto $k$, and hence an isomorphism. Moreover $k$, being a field, is evidently simple in the universal-algebraic sense, i.e.\ it has no non-trivial ideals. Hence $\CC{(\{a\})}$, the kernel of the homomorphism $q_{a}\colon k[X]\to k[X]/I$ as in (\ref{eq:pointquotient}), is maximal (by direct inspection, or using the more general \cite[Theorem 6.20]{Burris:81}).
Conversely, assume that $I$ is maximal, and consider the natural quotient map $q_{I}\colon k[X]\to k[X]/I$. Then $k[X]/I$ is a simple finitely generated $k$-algebra, and hence a field. By Zariski's Lemma \ref{lem:zariski}, $k[X]/I$ is a finite field extension of $k$; since $k$ is algebraically closed, $k$ and $k[X]/I$ are isomorphic. Applying Lemma \ref{l:SGK} with $e\colon k[X]/I\to k$ the preceding isomorphism completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[Ring-theoretic {\it Nullestellensatz}]\label{c:ringnull}For any ideal $I$ of $k[X]$, the following are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textup{(}i\textup{)}] $\CC{(\VV{(I)})}=I$.
\item[\textup{(}ii\textup{)}] $I$ is radical.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}Immediate consequence of Lemma \ref{l:SGK-for-rings} together with Theorem \ref{thm:algnull}.
\end{proof}
It is now possible to functorialise the above along the lines of the first part of this paper, thereby obtaining the usual classical algebraic adjunction. We do not spell out the details.
\section{Stone duality for Boolean algebras}\label{s:stone}
In this section we derive Stone duality for Boolean algebras from the general adjunction. Let $\Va$ be the variety of Boolean algebras and their homomorphisms, and set $A$ to be two-element Boolean algebra $\{0,1\}$.
By Corollary \ref{cor:algadj} we have a dual adjunction between $\Vap$ and $\D^{q}$ given by the functors $\C^{q}$ and $\V^{q}$. We are interested in characterising the fixed points of this adjunction. We begin with the algebraic side.
Recall the following:
\begin{lemma}[\mbox{\cite[Lemma 1]{birkhoff1944subdirect}}]\label{l:sub-boole}
To within an isomorphism, the only subdirectly irreducible Boolean algebra is $\{0,1\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{corollary}\label{c:fix-alg-boole}
With $\Va$ and $A$ as in the above, and with reference to the functors of Corollary \ref{cor:algadj}, one has
\[\C^{q}{(\V^{q}{(\,(\F{(\mu)},R)\,)})}\cong (\F{(\mu)},R) \]
for any $(\F{(\mu)},R)\in \Vap$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Apply Corollary \ref{c:semisimple-fixed} item \ref{c:semisimple-fixed-item1} in view of Lemma \ref{l:sub-boole}.
\end{proof}
We now turn to the side of affine subsets. The category $\D^{q}$ is given by subsets of $\{0,1\}^{\mu}$ for $\mu$ ranging among all cardinals, and definable maps among them. The Zariski (=$\VC$) topology on $\{0,1\}$ is discrete as $\{0\}=\VV{(0,x)}$ and $\{1\}=\VV{(1,x)}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:fix-top-boole}
Fix a cardinal $\mu$. A set $S\subseteq\{0,1\}^{\mu}$ is closed in the product topology if, and only if, $\VV{(\CC{(S)})}=S$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The topology on $A$ is discrete and Boolean algebras form a finitary variety, so the claim follows from Corollary \ref{c:discrete-topology}.
\end{proof}
So the space $\{0,1\}^{\mu}$ is a \emph{Cantor cube}, i.e.\ it is topologised by $\VC$ according to the product topology, $\{0,1\}$ having the discrete topology.
\begin{corollary}\label{c:fix-top-boole}
Let $\Va$ be the variety of Boolean algebras and their homomorphisms, and let $A$ be the Boolean algebra $\{0,1\}$. With reference to the functors of Corollary \ref{cor:algadj}, one has that for any closed set $S\in \D^{q}$,
\[\V^{q}{(\C^{q}{(S)})}\cong S \ .\]
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{l:fix-top-boole} and direct inspection of the definitions.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{c:presentedBoole-closedsubsets}
The category of Boolean algebras with their homomorphisms is dually equivalent to the category of closed subspaces of the Cantor cubes $\{0,1\}^{\mu}$ with continuous maps among them.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Corollary \ref{c:fix-alg-boole} the whole category $\Va$ is fixed by the composition $\C^{q}\circ\V^{q}$. By Corollary \ref{c:fix-top-boole} the full subcategory of closed subsets in $\D^{q}$ is fixed by the composition $\V^{q}\circ\C^{q}$.
\end{proof}
The last result needed to obtain Stone duality in classical form is an intrinsic characterisation of the closed subspaces of $\{0,1\}^{\kappa}$ for $\kappa$ any cardinal. This is a specific instance of a general problem in abstract topology: given a topological space $E$, characterise the topological spaces which are subspaces of $E^{\kappa}$. Such spaces are known as $E$-compact spaces \cite[Section 1.4]{weir1975hewitt}.
\begin{lemma}\label{stonespace-cantorset}
The category of compact, Hausdorff, totally disconnected spaces with continuous maps among them is equivalent to the category $\D^{q}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is enough to prove that for any compact, Hausdorff, totally disconnected space $X$, there exists a cardinal $\mu$ and closed subset $S$ of $\{0,1\}^{\mu}$ such that $X$ is homeomorphic to $S$. The rest is routine. To prove the claim notice that by \cite[Lemma 4.5, pag. 116]{kelley1955general} given a family $F$ of continuous functions from a Hausdorff space $X$ into spaces $Y_{f}$ the \emph{evaluation} map $e\colon X\to \prod_{f\in F}Y_{f}$ defined as $e(x)_{f}:=f(x)$ is a homeomorphism between $X$ and $f[X]$, provided that for any $p\in X$ and any closed subset $C$ such that $p\notin C$ there exists $f\in F$ such that $f(p)\notin f[C]$. Given a compact, Hausdorff, totally disconnected space $X$, we therefore consider the family $F$ of all continuous functions from $X$ to $\{0,1\}$. If $C$ is a closed subset of $X$ and $p\in X\setminus C$, then there exists a clopen $K$ which extends $C$ and does not contain $p$.
Consider the function
\[f(x):=\begin{cases}
0 & \text{if } x\in K\\
1 & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}\]
It is straightforward to see that the function $f$ belongs to $F$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[Stone 1936]\label{c:stone-duality}
The category of Boolean algebras with their homomorphisms is dually equivalent to the category of compact, Hausdorff, totally disconnected spaces with continuous maps among them.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By composing the equivalences of Corollary \ref{c:presentedBoole-closedsubsets} and the one of Lemma \ref{stonespace-cantorset}.
\end{proof}
\section{Gelfand duality for $C^{*}$-algebras}\label{s:stone-gelfand}
A \emph{\textup{(}complex, commutative, unital\textup{)} $C^*$-algebra} is a complex commutative Banach algebra $A$ (always unital, with identity element written $1$) equipped with an involution ${\cdot}^*\colon A\rightarrow A$ satisfying $\|xx^*\|=\|x\|^2$ for each $x\in A$. Henceforth, `$C^*$-algebra' means `complex commutative until $C^*$-algebra'. The category $\Cst$ has as objects
$C^*$-algebras, and as morphisms their $^{*}$-homomorphisms, i.e.\ the complex-algebra homomorphisms preserving the
involution and $1$. If $X$ is a any compact Hausdorff space, let $\Cont{(X,\Cx)}$ denote the complex algebra of all continuous
complex-valued functions on $X$, with operations defined pointwise. Equipped with the involution $^{*}$ given by pointwise
conjugation, and with the supremum norm, this is a $C^*$-algebra. The landmark Gelfand-Naimark Theorem (commutative
version) states that, in fact, any $C^*$-algebra is naturally representable in this manner. A functorial version of the theorem leads
to \emph{Gelfand duality}: the category $\Cst$ is dually equivalent to the category of $\KH$ of compact Hausdorff spaces and
continuous maps.
In this section we show how Gelfand duality fits in the framework of affine adjunctions developed above. The first important fact is that we can work at the level of the algebraic adjunction. For this, we first recall that $x\in A$ is \emph{self-adjoint} if it is fixed by $*$, i.e.\ if $x^*=x$. Further, we recall that self-adjoint elements carry a partial order which may be defined in several equivalent ways; see e.g.\ \cite[Section 8.3]{conway}. For our purposes here it suffices to define a self-adjoint element $x\in A$ to be \emph{non-negative}, written $x\geq 0$, if there exists a self-adjoint $y\in A$ such that $x=y^2$. There is a functor $U\colon \Cst\to\Set$ that takes a $C^*$-algebra $A$ to the collection of its non-negative self-adjoint elements whose norm does not exceed unity:
\[
U(A):=\{x\in A\mid x^*=x, 0\leq x, \|x\|\leq 1 \}.
\]
In particular, $U(\Cx)=[0,1]$, the real unit interval. In the following we always topologies $[0,1]$ with its Euclidean topology, and powers $[0,1]^S$ with the product topology.
It is elementary that the restriction of a $^{*}$-homomorphism $A\to B$ to $U(A)$ induces a function $U(A)\to U(B)$, for all $C^*$-algebras $A$ and $B$, so that $U$ is indeed a functor.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:negrepontis}The category $\Cst$ is equivalent to the category $\Va^*$ of models of a \textup{(}necessarily infinitary\textup{)} algebraic variety. Moreover, under this equivalence the underlying set functor of the variety naturally corresponds to the functor $U\colon \Cst\to\Set$ above. The left adoint $F$ to the functor $U$ associates to a set $S$ the $C^*$-algebra of all complex valued, continuous functions on the compact Hausdorff space $[0,1]^{S}$.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}It is well known that the unit-ball functor on $C^*$-algebras is monadic over $\Set$, see \cite[Theorem 1.7]{Negrep}. The functor $U$ that we are considering here is a variant of the unit-ball functor. See \cite{pr} for further background and results. The fact that no finitary variety can dualise $\KH$ was proved, as a consequence of a considerably stronger result, in \cite{Bana}. Together with Gelfand duality this shows that $\Va^*$ cannot be finitary.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:isbell} In \cite{Isbell}, Isbell proved that there is a finite set of finitary operations, along with a single infinitary operation of countably infinite parity, that generate all operations in $\Va^*$. It has been a long-standing open problem to provide a manageable equational axiomatisation of $\Va^*$. A solution to this problem appears in \cite{Marra-Reggio}, where a \emph{finite} axiomatisation is provided. The interested reader is referred to \cite{Marra-Reggio} for details. For our purposes here, we do not need an explicit presentation of $\Va^*$. Indeed, we shall identify $C^*$-algebras with objects of $\Va^*$ whenever convenient, it being understood that this identification is via Theorem \ref{thm:negrepontis}.
\end{remark}
We start by setting:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\Va:=\Va^{*}$, and
\item $A:=U(\Cx)=[0,1]$.
\end{enumerate}
Corollary \ref{cor:algadj} ensures that there exists a dual adjunction $\C^{q}\dashv \V^{q}$
between $\Va^{*}$ and the category of subsets of $[0,1]^{\mu}$ ---with $\mu$ ranging among all cardinals--- and definable maps.
The characterisation of the fixed points of the compositions $\C^{q}\circ \V^{q}$ and $\V^{q}\circ \C^{q}$ is now very similar to the one in Stone duality.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:c*semisimple}
\mbox{}
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{l:c*semisimple-item2} The $C^{*}$-algebra $\Cx$ is the only simple algebra in $\Va^{*}$.
\item\label{l:c*semisimple-item1} The variety $\Va^{*}$ semisimple.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The first item amounts to the standard fact that a quotient of a $C^*$-algebra modulo an ideal $I$ is isomorphic to $\Cx$ if, and only if, $I$ is maximal. The second item amounts to the equally well-known fact that each $C^*$ algebra has enough maximal ideals, hence it is a subdirect product of copies of $\Cx$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Every commutative $C^{*}$-algebra is fixed by the composition $\C^{q}\circ \V^{q}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By combining Proposition \ref{c:semisimple-fixed} and Lemma \ref{l:c*semisimple}.
\end{proof}
We now turn to the characterisation of the fixed points in the geometric side.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:continuos=definable}
A function $f$ from $S\subseteq [0,1]^{\mu}\to T\subseteq [0,1]^{\nu}$ is definable if, and only if, $f$ is continuous with respect to the product topologies, where $[0,1]$ has the Euclidean topology.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any fixed cardinal $\mu$, by Theorem \ref{thm:negrepontis} the underlying set of the algebra in ${\Va^{*}}$ freely generated by a set of cordiality $\mu$ is $U(F(\mu))$, that is, the collection of all continuous functions from $[0,1]^{\mu}$ to $[0,1]$. By definition, a function $f\colon S\subseteq A^{\mu}\to T\subseteq A^{\nu}$ is definable if, and only if, there exists a family of elements $(t_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}$ of elements of $U(F(\mu))$ such that for any $x\in S$, $f(x)=(t(x)_{\beta})_{\beta<\nu}$. This proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
A subset $S$ of $[0,1]^{\mu}$ is closed in the Zariski \textup{(}=$\VC$\textup{)} topology if, and only if, it is closed in the Euclidean topology.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We start by proving the claim for subsets of $[0,1]$. If $S$ is closed in the Zariski topology, there exists a set of pairs of definable functions $\theta$ such that
\[S=\VV(\theta)=\bigcap_{(f,g)\in\theta}\{s\in [0,1]\mid f(s)=g(s)\}.\]
It is then enough to prove that for any $(f,g)\in\theta$ the set $\{s\in [0,1]\mid f(s)=g(s)\}$ is closed in the Euclidean topology. By
Lemma \ref{l:continuos=definable} both $f$ and $g$ are continuous, so by \cite[1.5.4]{engelking} $S$ is closed. Conversely, if $S$
is closed in the Euclidean topology then there is a function $f\colon [0,1]\to [0,1]$ that vanishes exactly on $S$, because closed
sets are zero-sets in metrisable spaces. Hence $S=\VV(f,0)$ is closed in the Zariski topology. Thus the Zariski and the
Euclidean topologies coincide on $[0,1]$.
Since $[0,1]$ is Hausdorff, and since by Lemma \ref{l:continuos=definable} all definable functions are continuous, by Lemma \ref{l:co-null} the product and the Zariski topologies coincide, and the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
A topological space is compact and Hausdorff if, and only if, it is homeomorphic to a closed subset of $[0,1]^{\mu}$ for some $\mu$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This is a standard fact; see e.g.\ Kelly's embedding lemma \cite[Lemma 4.5, pag. 116]{kelley1955general}.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}The variety $\Va^*$ is dually equivalent to $\KH$.
\end{corollary}
\section{Conclusions}\label{s:conc}
The categorical and the algebraic frameworks presented above are general enough to encompass several dualities in mathematics. The algebraic framework of Part \ref{part:alg}, for example, accommodates such standard
theories as Priestley duality for distributive lattices \cite{priestley1984ordered}, Baker-Baynon duality for Riesz spaces and lattice-ordered Abelian groups~\cite{MR0376480}, or Pontryagin duality for compact Abelian groups~\cite{pontrjagin1934theory}. Also, we remark that the dualities for semisimple and finitely presented MV-algebras developed in \cite{MarSpa12, MarSpa13} arose by applying the constructions of the present paper to that specific setting, and thus motivated the present general development.
We conclude the paper with a few remarks on further research.
\begin{remark}[Galois theory of field extensions] Let $K$ be a field, $L$ a fixed extension of $K$, and let $\Gal_{K}(L)$ be the group of automorphisms of $L$ that fix $K$ (i.e.\ if $h\in \Gal_{K}(L)$ and $k\in K$ then $h(k)=k$).
The classical Galois connection between the intermediate field extensions $K\subseteq F \subseteq L$ and the subgroups of $\Aut_{K}(L)$ can be recovered as a restriction of the adjunction of Theorem \ref{thm:genadj}. To this end we set:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\T=\Gal_{K}(L)$ (i.e., the category with a single object $\a$ and with arrows the elements of the group $\Gal_{K}(L)$, composition between them being given by the group operation),
\item $\a$ is the unique object of $\T$,
\item $\S$ has field extensions of $K$ as objects and elements of $\Gal_{K}(L)$ as arrows,
\item $\I$ is the functor picking the object $L$ of $\S$ and acting identically on arrows.
\end{itemize}
In this set up the objects of the category $\R$ are pairs $(\a, R)$, where $R\subseteq \hom_{\T}^{2}(\a, \a)$. As the first component of the pairs can only be $\a$, we only write $R$ for an object of $\R$.
Further, as automorphisms always have an inverse, the condition that $p$ and $q$ act equally on some field $F$ is equivalent to the condition that the automorphism $pq^{-1}$ acts identically on $F$. We can therefore conceive of relations on $\hom{(\a,\a)}$ as subsets of $\hom{(\a,\a)}$.
The objects of the category $\D$ are pairs $(\a, F)$ where $F$ is a a field such that $K\subseteq F\subseteq L$. For the same reason as above, we only write $F$ for an object of $\D$.
For any object $R$ in $\R$, the operator $\VV$ specialises to the following:
\begin{align}
\VV{(R)}=\bigcap \{F\mid \forall h\in R\quad \restr{h}{F}=\id_{F} \}\label{eq:Gal1}
\end{align}
For any object $F$ in $\S$, the operator $\CC$ specialises to the following:
\begin{align}
\CC{(F)}= \{h\in \Gal_{K}(L)\mid \forall f\in F\quad h(f)=f \}\label{eq:Gal2}
\end{align}
The right-hand set of \eqref{eq:Gal1} is often denoted by $L^{R}$ in classical Galois theory \cite[Chapter VI]{Lang}
The right-hand side of \eqref{eq:Gal2} is actually $\Aut_{K}(F)$.
I a similar way one can also give an account of the Galois connection between fundamental groups and covering spaces of a sufficiently nice topological space; cf.\ Grothendieck's paper \cite{grothendieck1971revetements}.
\end{remark}
We have characterised the fixed points of affine adjunction in the algebraic framework through the {\sl Nullstellensatz} and the Stone-Gelfand-Kolomogorv Lemma. The topological side, however, awaits further investigation. In particular, one would like to know when the operator $\VV\circ \CC$ is topological, and one would like to be able to compare abstractly the $\VV\circ \CC$ and the product topology on $A^{\mu}$.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements.}
\noindent The first author thankfully acknowledges partial support from a Research Fellowship at Jesus College, Cambridge, a CARMIN Fellowship at IH\'ES-IHP, a Marie Curie INdAM-COFUND-2012 Fellowship and two travel grants of the Dipartimento di Matematica {\sl Federico Enriques} of the Universit\`a degli Studi di Milano.
The second author gratefully acknowledges partial support by the Italian FIRB ``Futuro in Ricerca'' grant RBFR10DGUA, which also made possible two visits of the first author to his Department. The second author is also grateful to the Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics of Cambridge University, to the Category Theory Seminar there, and to the first author, for inviting him to give a talk related to the present paper.
The second and third authors further acknowledge partial support from the Italian National Research Project (PRIN2010--11) entitled \emph{Metodi logici per il trattamento dell'informazione}. Parts of this article where written while the second and third authors were kindly hosted by the CONICET in Argentina within the European FP7-IRSES project \emph{MaToMUVI} (GA-2009-247584). The third author gratefully acknowledges partial support by the Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship for the project ``ADAMS" (PIEF-GA-2011-299071).
|
\section{Volume Integral Equations in Acoustic Scattering}
Volume integral equations have been used as a theoretical tool in scattering theory for a long time. A classical application is an existence proof for the scattering problem based on the theory of Fredholm integral equations. This approach is described for acoustic and electromagnetic scattering in the books by Colton and Kress \cite{CoKr83,CoKr98} where volume integral equations appear under the name ``Lippmann-Schwinger equations''.
In electromagnetic scattering by penetrable objects, the volume integral equation (VIE) method has also been used for numerical computations. In particular the class of discretization methods known as ``discrete dipole approximation'' \cite{PuPe73,DrFl94} has become a standard tool in computational optics applied to atmospheric sciences, astrophysics and recently to nano-science under the keyword ``optical tweezers'', see the survey article \cite{YuHo07} and the literature quoted there.
In sharp contrast to the abundance of articles by physicists describing and analyzing applications of the VIE method, the mathematical literature on the subject consists only of a few articles. An early spectral analysis of a VIE for magnetic problems was given in \cite{FriedmanPasciak1984}, and more recently \cite{Kirsch2007,KirschLechleiter2009} have found sufficient conditions for well-posedness of the VIE in electromagnetic and acoustic scattering with variable coefficients. In \cite{CoDarKo2010,CoDarSak2012}, we investigated the essential spectrum of the VIE in electromagnetic scattering under general conditions on the complex-valued coefficients, finding necessary and sufficient conditions for well-posedness in the sense of Fredholm in the physically relevant energy spaces. A detailed presentation of these results can be found in the thesis \cite{SaklyThesis2014}. Publications based on the thesis are in preparation.
Curiously, whereas the study of VIE in electromagnetic scattering has thus been completed as far as questions of Fredholm properties are concerned, the simpler case of acoustic scattering does not seem to have been covered in the same depth. It is the purpose of the present paper to close this gap.
The basic idea of the VIE method in scattering by a penetrable object is to consider the effect of the scatterer as a perturbation of a whole-space constant coefficient problem and to solve the latter by convolution with the whole-space fundamental solution. In the acoustic case, we consider the scalar linear elliptic equation
\begin{equation}
\label{e:scat}
\mathop{\mathrm{div}} a(x) \nabla u + k(x)^{2} u = f \qquad \mbox{ in }\mathbb{R}^{d}
\end{equation}
where we suppose that the (in general complex-valued) coefficients $a$ and $k$ are constant outside of a compact set:
$$
a(x) \equiv 1,\quad k(x)\equiv k\in\mathbb{C} \quad\mbox{ outside of the bounded domain } \Omega.
$$
and $f$ has compact support. We further assume that $u$ satisfies the outgoing Sommerfeld radiation condition.
It is well known that under very mild conditions on the regularity of the coefficients $a$ and $k$, there is at most one solution of this problem.
We then rewrite \eqref{e:scat} as a perturbed Helmholtz equation.
\begin{equation}
\label{e:perturb}
(\Delta + k^{2}) u = f - \mathop{\mathrm{div}}\alpha\nabla u - \beta u
\end{equation}
with
$$
\alpha(x)= a(x)-1,\; \beta(x)=k(x)^{2}-k^{2}\,.
$$
Let now $G_{k}$ be the outgoing full-space fundamental solution of the Helm\-holtz equation, i.e. the unique distribution in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ satisfying $(\Delta + k^{2}) G_{k}=-\delta$ and the Sommerfeld radiation condition. In dimension $d=3$, we have
$$
G_{k}(x) = \frac{e^{ik|x|}}{4\pi|x|}\,.
$$
We obtain the VIE from the following well known lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{l:conv}
Let $u$ be a distribution in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ satisfying $-(\Delta + k^{2}) u = v$, where $v$ has compact support, and the Sommerfeld radiation condition. Then $u=G_{k}*v$, and if $v$ is an integrable function, the convolution can be written as an integral:
$$
u(x) = \int G_{k}(x-y)\,v(y)\,dy \;.
$$
\end{lemma}
Applying this lemma to \eqref{e:perturb}, we obtain the equation
$$
u = -G_{k}*f + \mathop{\mathrm{div}} G_{k}*(\alpha\nabla u) + G_{k}*(\beta u),
$$
valid in the distributional sense on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$. This can be written as a VIE
\begin{equation}
\label{e:vie}
u(x) - \mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)\nabla u(y)\, dy
- \int_{\Omega} G_{k}(x-y)\beta(y) u(y) \,dy
= u^{\rm inc}(x)
\end{equation}
where we use the notation
$$
u^{\rm inc}(x):=-\int G_{k}(x-y)f(y)\,dy\;.
$$
The fact that the coefficients $\alpha$ and $\beta$ vanish outside of $\Omega$ permits to consider the integral equation \eqref{e:vie} on any domain $\widehat\Omega$ satisfying $\Omega\subset\widehat\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^{d}$. Once $u$ solves \eqref{e:vie} on $\widehat\Omega$, one can use the same formula \eqref{e:vie} to extend $u$ outside of $\widehat\Omega$. It is clear that the resulting function $u$ will not depend on $\widehat\Omega$ and will be a solution of the original scattering problem \eqref{e:scat}. In the following we will make the minimal choice $\widehat\Omega=\Omega$ and therefore consider \eqref{e:vie} as an integral equation on $\Omega$.
We shall abbreviate this integral equation as
\begin{equation}
\label{e:Au=f}
u - Au = u^{\rm inc}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\label{e:A}
Au(x) = \mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)\nabla u(y)\, dy
+ \int_{\Omega} G_{k}(x-y)\beta(y) u(y) \,dy \,.
\end{equation}
Assuming that $\Omega$ is a bounded Lipschitz domain, one can consider the VIE \eqref{e:Au=f} in the standard Sobolev spaces $H^{s}(\Omega)$. The natural energy space associated with the second order PDE \eqref{e:scat} is $H^{1}(\Omega)$, but other values of $s$ can be interesting, too, in particular $s=0$, i.e. the space $L^{2}(\Omega)$, which
seems naturally associated with the apparent structure of \eqref{e:Au=f} as a second kind integral equation and may be useful for analyzing certain numerical algorithms for its solution.
The convolution with $G_{k}$ is a pseudodifferential operator of order $-2$, mapping distributions with compact support and Sobolev regularity $s$ to $H^{s+2}_{\rm loc}(\mathbb{R}^{d})$ for any $s\in\mathbb{R}$, which implies immediately boundedness of the operator $A$ in low order Sobolev spaces:
\begin{proposition}
\label{p:bddL2}
Let $\alpha,\beta\in L^{\infty}(\Omega)$. Then
$$
A: H^{1}(\Omega) \to H^{1}(\Omega) \; \mbox{ is bounded }.
$$
If in addition $\nabla \alpha\in L^{\infty}(\Omega)$, then $A$ is a bounded operator in $L^{2}(\Omega)$.
\end{proposition}
Another immediate observation is that the second integral operator in \eqref{e:A} maps $L^{2}$ to $H^{2}$, and is therefore compact as an operator in $L^{2}$ and in $H^{1}$. This is relevant if $a(x)$ is constant everywhere, since then $\alpha\equiv0$ and the first integral operator in \eqref{e:A}, which is not compact, in general, is absent.
\begin{theorem}
\label{t:a=1}
Let $a(x)=1$ in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ and $k\in L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d})$. Then the VIE \eqref{e:vie} is a second kind Fredholm integral equation with a weakly singular kernel and the Fredholm alternative holds: The operator $\mathbb{I} -A$ is a Fredholm operator of index zero in $L^{2}(\Omega)$ and in $H^{1}(\Omega)$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Smooth Coefficients}
Besides the case of the Laplace operator addressed in Theorem~\ref{t:a=1}, another situation is well known and is studied for example in the book \cite{CoKr83}. This is the case of a coefficient $a(x)$ that is smooth on all of $\mathbb{R}^{d}$. In this case, $\alpha=0$ on the boundary $\Gamma=\partial\Omega$, and the first integral operator in \eqref{e:A} can be transformed by integration by parts.
\begin{multline*}
\mathop{\mathrm{div}} G_{k}*(\alpha\nabla u)(x) =
-\mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}\nabla_{y}\big(G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)\big)\,u(y)\,dy\\
= \Delta\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)u(y)\,dy
-\mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)(\nabla\alpha)(y)\,u(y)\,dy\\
= -\alpha(x)u(x) -k^{2}\!\!\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)u(y)\,dy
-\mathop{\mathrm{div}}\!\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)(\nabla\alpha)(y)\,u(y)\,dy.
\end{multline*}
This allows to write the VIE \eqref{e:vie} in an equivalent form that shows its nature as a Fredholm integral equation of the second kind with a weakly singular kernel.
\begin{equation}
\label{e:viesmooth}
\begin{split}
&a(x)u(x)
- \int_{\Omega} G_{k}(x-y)(\beta(y)-k^{2}\alpha(y)) u(y) \,dy\\
&\quad+\mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)(\nabla\alpha)(y)\,u(y)\,dy
- \int_{\Omega} G_{k}(x-y)\beta(y) u(y) \,dy
= u^{\rm inc}(x)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
\label{t:asmooth}
Let $a\in C^{1}(\mathbb{R}^{d})$ and $k\in L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d})$. Then the operator $\mathbb{I} -A$ is a Fredholm operator of index zero in $L^{2}(\Omega)$ and in $H^{1}(\Omega)$ if and only if $a(x)\ne0$ for all $x\in\Omega$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Piecewise Smooth Coefficients}
In obstacle scattering, the case of a globally smooth coefficient $a(x)$ is not natural. There one expects rather a sharp interface where the material properties change discontinuously. We thus assume that the coefficient $a$ is piecewise $C^{1}$, which means that $\alpha\in C^{1}(\overline\Omega)$.
One can then still carry out the partial integration as in the previous section, but there will appear an additional term on the boundary $\Gamma=\partial\Omega$:
\begin{multline*}
\mathop{\mathrm{div}} G_{k}*(\alpha\nabla u)(x) \\
= -\mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}\nabla_{y}\big(G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)\big)\,u(y)\,dy
+ \mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Gamma}n(y)G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)u(y)\,ds(y)\\
= -\alpha(x)u(x) -k^{2}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)u(y)\,dy
-\mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)(\nabla\alpha)(y)\,u(y)\,dy\\
- \int_{\Gamma}\partial_{n(y)}G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)u(y)\,ds(y)\,.
\end{multline*}
The additional term is just the Helmholtz double layer potential with density $\alpha u$, which we can abbreviate as
$
\mathscr{D}\gamma(\alpha u)\,.
$
Here $\gamma:H^{1}(\Omega) \to H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$ is the trace operator. We obtain our volume integral operator in the form
\begin{equation}
\label{e:A1+D}
(\mathbb{I} - A)u(x) = a(x) u(x) + A_{1}u(x) + \mathscr{D}\gamma(\alpha u)(x)
\end{equation}
with
\begin{multline*}
A_{1} u(x) =
-k^{2}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)\alpha(y)u(y)\,dy \\
+\mathop{\mathrm{div}}\int_{\Omega}G_{k}(x-y)(\nabla\alpha)(y)\,u(y)\,dy
- \int_{\Omega} G_{k}(x-y)\beta(y) u(y) \,dy\,.
\end{multline*}
The operator $A_{1}$ is bounded from $L^{2}(\Omega)$ to $H^{1}(\Omega)$, hence compact as an operator in $H^{1}(\Omega)$.
The operator $u\mapsto \mathscr{D}\gamma(\alpha u)$ is bounded in $H^{1}(\Omega)$ but not compact, in general. It is also not continuous with respect to the $L^{2}(\Omega)$-norm of $u$. This implies that the operator $\mathbb{I}-A$, despite being generated from a pseudodifferential operator of order zero, does not have a continuous extension to $L^{2}(\Omega)$ from the dense subspace $H^{1}(\Omega)$. It does have a continuous extension to $L^{2}(\Omega)$ from the subspace $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega)$, but this is a different operator, where the last term in \eqref{e:A1+D} is missing.
\subsection{Extension to a Boundary-Domain System}
From the VIE \eqref{e:Au=f} with the integral operator written in the form \eqref{e:A1+D}, we can get an equation on the boundary by taking the trace on $\Gamma$:
\begin{equation}
\label{e:onGamma}
a\gamma u + \gamma A_{1}u + \gamma \mathscr{D}\gamma(\alpha u) = \gamma u^{\rm inc}\,.
\end{equation}
We now treat the trace $\gamma u$ as if it was an additional unknown, denoted by $\phi$, and consider the two equations \eqref{e:Au=f} and \eqref{e:onGamma} as a coupled boundary-domain integral equation system.
Taking into account the jump relation for the double layer potential
$$
\gamma\mathscr{D}\phi = -\tfrac12 \phi + K\phi,
$$
where $K$ is the Helmholtz double layer potential operator evaluated on $\Gamma$, as well as the fact that the commutator $[K,\alpha]$ between $K$ and the multiplication by $\alpha$ is compact in the trace space $H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$, we can write this coupled system in the following matrix form.
\begin{equation}
\label{e:bdry-domain}
\begin{pmatrix}
a\mathbb{I}+A_{1} & \mathscr{D}(\gamma\alpha\cdot)\\
\gamma A_{1} &\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K + [K,\alpha]
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix} u\\ \phi \end{pmatrix}
=
\begin{pmatrix} u^{\rm inc}\\ \psi \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that this system is equivalent to the original VIE in the following sense.
\begin{proposition}
\label{p:equiv}
Let $\Omega$ be a bounded Lipschitz domain with boundary $\Gamma$.
Let $\alpha\in C^{1}(\overline\Omega)$ and $\beta\in L^{\infty}(\Omega)$,
and let $u^{\rm inc}\in H^{1}(\Omega)$ be given.\\
If $u\in H^{1}(\Omega)$ is a solution of the VIE \eqref{e:Au=f}, then
$\begin{pmatrix}u\\\phi\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}u\\\gamma u\end{pmatrix}$
solves the coupled system \eqref{e:bdry-domain} with $\psi=\gamma u^{\rm inc}$.\\
Conversely, let $\psi\in H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$ be given and
$\begin{pmatrix}u\\\phi\end{pmatrix}\in H^{1}(\Omega)\times H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$ be a solution of the coupled system \eqref{e:bdry-domain}.
If $\psi=\gamma u^{\rm inc}$, and if $\gamma a\ne0$ a.e. on
$\Gamma$, then $\phi=\gamma u$, and $u$ is a solution of the VIE \eqref{e:Au=f}.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The construction of the coupled system shows that it is satisfied by any solution of the VIE and its trace on the boundary. To show the converse, one subtracts the trace of the first equation in \eqref{e:bdry-domain} from the second and finds
$$
\gamma a\,\big(\gamma u - \phi\big)=0.
$$
Since we assume that $\gamma a$ does not vanish on a set of positive measure, $\phi=\gamma u$ follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Lipschitz Boundary}
The system \eqref{e:bdry-domain} is easier to analyze than the original VIE \eqref{e:Au=f}. This is due to the fact that now the main difficulty is pushed to the boundary integral operator $K$, which is a well-studied classical boundary integral operator \cite{CoLip}. Indeed, splitting off the operators that we already have identified as compact operators, and taking into account that the coupling operator
$ \phi\mapsto \mathscr{D}(\gamma\alpha\phi) $
is bounded from $H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$ to $H^{1}(\Gamma)$ \cite{CoLip}, we see that the Fredholm alternative holds for the system \eqref{e:bdry-domain} (and therefore for the VIE \eqref{e:Au=f}) if and only if the operator
$$
\widehat A =
\begin{pmatrix}
a\mathbb{I} & \mathscr{D}(\gamma\alpha\cdot)\\
0 &\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K
\end{pmatrix}
$$
is a Fredholm operator of index zero in the space $H^{1}(\Omega)\times H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$. This, in turn, is the case if and only if both
$$
a\mathbb{I}:H^{1}(\Omega)\to H^{1}(\Omega)\quad\mbox{ and }\quad
\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K: H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)\to H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)
$$
are Fredholm of index zero.
We have shown the following result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{t:lip}
Let $\Omega$ be a bounded Lipschitz domain with boundary $\Gamma$.
Let $\alpha\in C^{1}(\overline\Omega)$ and $\beta\in L^{\infty}(\Omega)$.
Then for the VIE \eqref{e:vie} the Fredholm alternative holds in $H^{1}(\Omega)$ if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{(i) }] $a(x)\ne0$ in $\overline\Omega$ and
\item[\emph{(ii)}] $\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K$ is Fredholm of index zero in $H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
Condition (ii) can be made more precise by using information about the essential spectrum of the operator $\frac12\mathbb{I}-K$. This operator differs by a compact operator from the corresponding operator for $k=0$, i.e. the trace of the harmonic double layer potential operator. The latter is known to be a positive selfadjoint contraction in $H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$ if this space is equipped with a suitable scalar product, see \cite{CoRemPos}.
Therefore its essential spectrum, which is also the essential spectrum of the operator $\frac12\mathbb{I}-K$, is a compact subset $\Sigma$ of the open interval $(0,1)$. It is known that for any Lipschitz boundary $\frac12\in\Sigma$, that for smooth boundaries
$\Sigma=\{\frac12\}$, and that for polygons in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$, $\Sigma$ is an interval depending on the corner angles.
If the coefficient function $a$ is piecewise constant, so that $\alpha=a-1$ is a constant on $\Gamma$, the operator $\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K$ is either the identity if $\alpha=0$ or a multiple of the operator $\sigma\mathbb{I} -(\frac12\mathbb{I}-K)$ with
\begin{equation}
\label{e:alphasigma}
\frac{1+a}{2(a-1)}=\sigma-\frac12 \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad
a=\frac{\sigma-1}\sigma\,.
\end{equation}
It follows that the operator $\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K$ is Fredholm of index zero if and only if $\sigma\ne\Sigma$.
If the function $\alpha$ is not constant on $\Gamma$, one can use the fact that the operator $K$ commutes modulo compact operators with multiplications by $C^{1}$ functions and apply standard localization procedures. The result is that if for each point $x\in\Gamma$, the number $\sigma$ from \eqref{e:alphasigma} does not belong to the essential spectrum $\Sigma$, then the operator $\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K$ is Fredholm. This condition
\begin{equation}
\label{e:nec}
\forall\, x\in\Gamma: \quad \frac{a(x)}{a(x)-1} \not\in \Sigma
\end{equation}
is, in general, only a sufficient condition. In order to obtain a necessary condition, one would need a ``localized'' version $\Sigma_{x}$ of $\Sigma$, which is only known in some cases, namely when $\Gamma$ has a suitable tangent cone at $x$.
We summarize this discussion.
\begin{theorem}
\label{t:lipprec}
Assume the hypotheses of Theorem \ref{t:lip}. Let $\Sigma\subset(0,1)$ be the essential spectrum of the operator $\frac12\mathbb{I}-K$ in $H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$.
If the coefficient $a\in C^{1}(\overline\Omega)$ is constant on $\Gamma$, then the volume integral operator $\mathbb{I}-A$ is Fredholm of index zero in $H^{1}(\Omega)$ if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{(i) }] $a(x)\ne0$ in $\overline\Omega$ and
\item[\emph{(ii)}] $a(x)\ne \frac{\sigma-1}\sigma\quad \mbox{ for } x\in \Gamma,\; \sigma\in\Sigma \,.$
\end{itemize}
If $a$ is not constant on $\Gamma$, then the conditions \emph{(i)} and \emph{(ii)} imply that the volume integral operator is Fredholm in $H^{1}(\Omega)$.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Smooth Boundary}
If $\Gamma$ is smooth ($C^{1+\epsilon}$ with $\epsilon>0$), then the boundary integral operator $K$ has a weakly singular kernel and is compact in $H^{\frac12}(\Gamma)$. This implies that $\Sigma=\{\frac12\}$ in Theorem~\ref{t:lipprec}. But it also implies directly that the operator $\frac12(1+a)\mathbb{I} +\alpha K$ is Fredholm of index zero if and only if $1+a$ does not vanish. We obtain immediately as a corollary of Theorem~\ref{t:lip} the following result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{t:smooth}
Let $\Omega$ be a bounded smooth (Lyapunov) domain.
Let $\alpha\in C^{1}(\overline\Omega)$ and $\beta\in L^{\infty}(\Omega)$.
Then for the VIE \eqref{e:vie} the Fredholm alternative holds in $H^{1}(\Omega)$ if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{(i) }] $a(x)\ne0$ in $\overline\Omega$ and
\item[\emph{(ii)}] $a(x)\ne-1$ on $\Gamma$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
The conditions on the coefficient $a(x)$ obtained in Theorem~\ref{t:smooth} have been known for a long time as conditions for Fredholm properties of the scattering problem \eqref{e:scat}. In \cite{CoSte85}, the case of piecewise constant coefficients was treated. Using the method of boundary integral equations, the case of smooth boundaries in any dimension and the case of polygons in dimension two was studied. In the thesis \cite{ChesnelThesis2012} and the paper \cite{Chesneletal2012}, variational methods for the interface problem were used to obtain the same conditions in the case of smooth domains and also necessary and sufficient conditions for some non-smooth domains.
\input{costabel-refs}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
The ESA astrometry satellite {\em Gaia} was launched in December 2013 with the
aim of mapping more than a billion stars ($V\la 20$) in our Galaxy
\citep{2001A&A...369..339P,2012Ap&SS.341...31D}.
For stars brighter than $V=15$~mag, it is expected to yield positions,
parallaxes and annual proper motions at an accuracy level of 5--25~$\mu$as.
This accuracy can only be achieved after a global reduction of observations
collected over an extended period of time (nominally five years), during which
each star is seen crossing the focal plane of {\em Gaia} on average about 70
times. The multiple observations of a given star over several years are crucial
for a successful disentanglement of the effects of stellar parallax and proper
motion. A certain redundancy of observations is also required to estimate the additional parameters for the spacecraft attitude and calibration.
While the final {\em Gaia} results are thus expected post-2020, intermediate
(provisional and less accurate) releases of astrometric data will be made; the
first one is expected in mid-2016. Being based on a much shorter stretch of
observations, it is envisaged that this first release will only give the mean
positions of the stars, as the remaining parameters may not be reliably
resolved. In previous work (\citealt{2014A&A...571A..85M}, hereafter the `HTPM
paper') we have shown that the inclusion of {\sc Hipparcos} data permits us to
compute an astrometric solution for all five astrometric parameters of the {\sc
Hipparcos} stars, based on only one year of {\em Gaia} observations. This
Hundred Thousand Proper Motions (HTPM, \citealt{LL:FM-040}) project benefits from the $\sim$24~yr
time difference between {\sc Hipparcos} and {\em Gaia} to improve the proper
motions and, for example, detect long-period astrometric binaries. However, a
serious limitation of HTPM is that the {\sc Hipparcos} stars are not numerous
enough to perform an adequate calibration and attitude determination of {\em
Gaia}. As described in the HTPM paper, additional `auxiliary stars' must
therefore be employed. Potentially this could bias the HTPM solution if the {\em Gaia} data alone do not allow all five astrometric
parameters to be determined for the auxiliary stars.
In the present paper we show that some problems with the HTPM solution can be
overcome if the auxiliary stars are replaced by stars from the {\em Tycho-2}
Catalogue \citep{2000A&A...355L..27H}, using their positions at the {\sc
Hipparcos} epoch to constrain the proper motions.\footnote{In the following, `{\em
Tycho}` always refers to the {\em Tycho-2} Catalogue.} This allows us to solve
the full set of astrometric parameters for the {\em Tycho} stars as well as for the
{\sc Hipparcos} stars, thus avoiding the potential bias from auxiliary stars.
Moreover, we find that such a solution is possible with even less {\em Gaia}
data than required for HTPM. The resulting {\em Tycho}--{\em Gaia} Astrometric
Solution (TGAS) could become the first full-sky astrometric solution using {\em
Gaia} data, providing an important early validation of the instrument,
calibration, and data processing, at the sub-mas level. Clearly the resulting
parallaxes and proper motions of a few million {\em Tycho} stars are extremely
interesting also from a scientific viewpoint, e.g.\ for local Galactic dynamics
and cluster studies.
{\em Tycho} refers to the star catalogues derived from the star mapper instrument
of the {\sc Hipparcos} satellite. The original {\em Tycho-1} Catalogue
\citep{1997ESASP1200.....P} gave positions and magnitudes for about 1~million
stars. The later reduction, {\em Tycho-2} \citep{2000A&A...355L..27H}, extended
this to about 2.5~million stars, almost complete to $V\la 11.5$, and with
uncertainties of 5--70~mas at the mean epoch of observation ($\sim$1991.25).
{\em Tycho-2} also gives proper motions, derived from a comparison with old
photographic catalogues. These proper motions have uncertainties of a few
mas~yr$^{-1}$, but as they may contain systematic errors from the old data,
they are not used in the TGAS solution.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{FracDeadTime000an.pdf}
\caption{Fractions of the celestial sphere covered by 1, 2, $\dots$, 20
distinct observations according to the nominal scanning law of {\em Gaia}, as
functions of duration. No dead time is assumed.\label{fig:frac}}
\end{figure}
\section{Prerequisites for a {\em Tycho}--{\em Gaia} solution}
\subsection{How much {\em Gaia} data are needed?}
A good astrometric solution for (apparently) single stars requires that five
astrometric parameters $(\alpha,\delta,\varpi,\mu_{\alpha*},\mu_\delta)$ are
determined for each star \citep[e.g.,][]{2012A&A...538A..78L}. A sixth
parameter ($\mu_r$) representing the radial motion (along the line of sight) is
formally required for a complete representation of the space motion. In the
present context it can be ignored, except for a limited number of nearby,
fast-moving stars with significant
perspective acceleration for which it is assumed to be known. Thus, at least
five distinct measurements are needed for every star, where `distinct' means
that the measurements differ significantly either in time or direction. The
scanning law of {\em Gaia} causes the direction of its spin axis to change by
$4^\circ$~day$^{-1}$ \citep{2012Ap&SS.341...31D}, so that any two scans of the
same star separated by at least 5~days may count as distinct.
Figure~\ref{fig:frac} shows that after 0.5~yr, more than 90\% of the sky is
covered by at least three distinct scans, which together with the two
measurements (in $\alpha$ and $\delta$) from {\em Tycho} should in principle
suffice to determine the five astrometric parameters.
The scans are not purely one-dimensional, but contain some across-scan
information (Sect.~\ref{sec:sim}), which is crucial for the
determination of the satellite's attitude and calibration parameters.
The real data are affected by significant dead time,
increasing the time needed for sufficient sky coverage (Sect.~\ref{sec:deadtime}). Considering that another
half year of scanning in principle adds full redundancy to the whole sky, we
estimate that the actual amount of {\em Gaia} data required for TGAS
corresponds to between 0.5 and 1.0~yr including dead time.
\subsection{Incorporating the {\em Tycho} and {\sc Hipparcos} information}
\label{sec:priorconstruction}
TGAS uses the `joint solution' method described in the HTPM paper \citep{2014A&A...571A..85M}.
That is, the prior information taken from the {\sc Hipparcos} or {\em Tycho} Catalogue is cast in the form of
normal equations $\vec{N}_\text{pri}\vec{x}=\vec{b}_\text{pri}$ for the astrometric parameters
represented by the vector $\vec{x}$. These equations are then added to the normal equations
$\vec{N}_\text{obs}\vec{x}=\vec{b}_\text{obs}$
derived from the {\em Gaia} observations before calculating the solution
$\vec{\hat{x}}=(\vec{N}_\text{pri}+\vec{N}_\text{obs})^{-1}(\vec{b}_\text{pri}+\vec{b}_\text{obs})$.
The main difference compared with HTPM concerns the setting up of the prior
information for the non-{\sc Hipparcos} stars in the {\em Tycho} Catalogue,
which is described below. For the subset of {\sc Hipparcos} stars, the prior
information is taken from \citet{book:newhip} and set up exactly as for the HTPM solution (see Sect.~2.6 in the
HTPM paper). In addition to this nominal scenario, we show in Sect.~\ref{sec:noparallaxprior} that a solution can be made without the {\sc Hipparcos} parallaxes.
For a {\em Tycho}-only star the prior information in the {\em Tycho} Catalogue consists
of the position $\alpha$, $\delta$ at the epoch J1991.25 together with its uncertainties
$\sigma_{\alpha*}$, $\sigma_{\delta}$ and correlation coefficient $\rho$. Remaining parameters
should be treated as essentially unknown, which means that they can be set to some arbitrary values
with very large uncertainties. For the simulated solutions in Sect.~\ref{sec:sim} they are set to zero
with uncertainties $\sigma_{\varpi} = 1000$~mas,
$\sigma_{\mu\alpha*} = \sigma_{\mu\delta} = 1000$~mas~yr$^{-1}$, and
$\sigma_{\mu r} = \sigma_{v r} \sigma_{\varpi}/A$, where $\sigma_{v r} = 100$~km~s$^{-1}$
is the prior radial velocity uncertainty and $A$ the astronomical unit (HTPM paper, Eq.~17).
The prior astrometric parameters at J1991.25 are thus taken to be $(\alpha, \delta, 0, 0, 0, 0)$
with covariance
\begin{align}
\vec{C}_\text{pri} = \begin{bmatrix}
\sigma_{\alpha *}^2 & \rho\sigma_{\alpha*}\sigma_{\delta} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
\rho\sigma_{\alpha*}\sigma_{\delta} & \sigma_{\delta}^2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & \sigma_{\varpi}^2 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & \sigma_{\mu\alpha*}^2 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \sigma_{\mu\delta}^2 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \sigma_{\mu r}^2\\
\end{bmatrix} .
\end{align}
The prior information including the covariance is subsequently propagated to the {\em Gaia}
reference epoch ($\sim$2015) and $\vec{N}_\text{pri}$ is calculated as the
inverse of the propagated covariance matrix. $\vec{b}_\text{pri}$ is calculated
from the difference between the prior astrometric parameters and the current
best estimate in the solution, as described in the HTPM paper, Eq.~(18).
\section{Simulations\label{sec:sim}}
In order to study the feasibility of TGAS and its potential performance we have
made numerical simulations of joint {\em Tycho}--{\em Gaia} solutions using the
AGISLab \citep{2012A&A...543A..15H} software package. AGISLab was created at
Lund Observatory to develop and test {\em Gaia} astrometric data processing strategies.
While employing the same solution algorithms as the AGIS software used to
process the real {\em Gaia} data \citep{2012A&A...538A..78L}, it runs in a much
simplified framework which also allows us to generate simulated input data (CCD
transits). The present experiments are made in a similar manner as described in
the HTPM paper, to which we refer for details. A main difference is that the
auxiliary stars in HTPM are replaced by {\em Tycho} stars, for which prior
positions are used as described in the previous section.
Another difference is that we make the more conservative assumption
that calibration errors contribute a constant RMS noise of 300~$\mu$as and
1000~$\mu$as per individual CCD observation, in the along-scan and across-scan
direction, respectively.
Finally, we use a (more realistic) dynamical attitude model (DAM;
\citealt{2013A&A...551A..19R}). DAM includes
a detailed modelling of the attitude perturbations caused by a number of effects such as
micro-propulsion thruster noise and micro-meteoroid hits.
The observations are simulated using the so-called
`astrometric attitude' \citep{2013A&A...551A..19R}, which is the physical
attitude averaged over
the time required for a source to cross a CCD. Most of the stars
are bright which implies that observations are gated \citep{2012SPIE.8442E..1PK}
and use a shorter integration time, resulting in a less smoothed attitude.
However, we use the attitude computed for the full CCD integration time of
4.4~s, since the additional noise contribution
of shorter integration times is less than 12.7~$\mu$as, see Table~1
in \citet{2013A&A...551A..19R}, and therefore negligible in the present context.
The real TGAS must cope with a number of complications which are ignored in the
present experiments aiming to demonstrate the basic feasibility of the concept.
The simplifying assumptions include (i)
that there are no data gaps in the observations;
(ii) that all stars are assumed to be single,
and their motions thus consistent with the astrometric model represented by the
five (or six) astrometric parameters;
and (iii) that it is possible to adequately calibrate the gates used to observe the bright stars.
In Sect.~\ref{sec:limits} we briefly discuss the consequences of these simplifications.
\begin{figure*}[htbp!]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{stardensity0-99th-neg}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{EQU_depth6_NUM_TRANSITS_FIELD}
\caption{All-sky maps in equatorial Hammer-Aitoff projection (pixel size 0.85~deg$^2$).
{\em Left:} Stellar distribution on the sky. {\em Right:}
Number of field of view transits per star. The cyan line denotes the ecliptic.\label{fig:maps-simulations}}
\end{figure*}
The main steps of the simulations are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Astrometric parameters and uncertainties are read from the {\em Tycho} and
{\sc Hipparcos} Catalogues and used to set up the prior information as described in
Sect.~\ref{sec:priorconstruction} and in the HTPM paper, Sects.~2.6 and 2.7.
These parameters are also used as initial values from which the iterative astrometric
solution is started.
\item An artificial sky (Fig.~\ref{fig:maps-simulations}, left) is created,
representing the simulated 'true' catalogue (see
below). This is required in order to generate {\em Gaia} observations of the stars,
and as a comparison point to evaluate the quality of the astrometric solution.
\item The {\em Gaia} observations (Fig.~\ref{fig:maps-simulations}, right) of
the {\sc Hipparcos} and {\em Tycho} stars are generated according to the
nominal scanning law, including the perturbations from DAM, and observation
noise.
For the latter we conservatively assume that all {\sc Hipparcos} and {\em
Tycho} stars are measured with the same accuracies, per CCD observation, as a
star of magnitude $G=13$, independent of the actual magnitude
($\sigma_{\textrm{AL}} = 94~\mu$as, $\sigma_{\textrm{AC}}=489~\mu$as in the
astrometric field).
\item The prior data and simulated observations are processed through the
astrometric solution which effectively computes a least-squares estimate
of all astrometric parameters together with the parameters describing the
instrument attitude as a function of time.
The components of the attitude quaternion are represented by cubic splines with
a knot interval of 30~s. No special provision is made to handle the rate and
angle discontinuities introduced by the use of DAM.
The astrometric solution is made for
the observation interval 2014.5--2015.0 (0.5~yr), with the reference epoch
centred on the observations, i.e., at J2014.75.
The reference frame is effectively determined by the positions and proper motions
in the {\em Hipparcos} subset.
\item The resulting astrometric catalogue is compared with the `true' catalogue
and the statistics of the differences are used to characterize the
uncertainties of the solution.
\end{enumerate}
The generation of the simulated `true' catalogue is done slightly differently for the
{\sc Hipparcos} stars and the {\em Tycho}-only stars (those that are not in the
{\sc Hipparcos} Catalogue). For the {\sc Hipparcos} subset, `true' astrometric parameters
are simulated by perturbing the prior data (i.e., the {\sc Hipparcos} Catalogue)
by amounts that are consistent with the prior covariances. This subset
is further described in Sect.~3.2.1 of the HTPM paper. For the {\em Tycho}-only stars,
the `true' positions are similarly obtained by perturbing the prior values according to
their assigned uncertainties and correlations. For the proper motions we regard the
values given in {\em Tycho-2} as `true' for the present purpose; this is
acceptable as they are not used anywhere in the solution, not even as priors.
As the {\em Tycho-2} Catalogue does not contain parallaxes, we simulate their true
values based on the apparent magnitudes, neglecting extinction and assuming that
the absolute magnitudes have a normal distribution with mean value $+5$~mag and standard
deviation 3~mag (see HTPM paper, footnote 4). Although it would have been possible to make the parallax
distribution dependent on the proper motion of the individual star, we do not
consider the added complication worthwhile, as the results are rather insensitive
to the assumed distributions. Radial velocities are simulated assuming a centred
normal distribution with a conservatively chosen $\sigma_{v r} = 100$~km~s$^{-1}$.
\section{Results\label{sec:results}}
\begin{table}[t]
\small
\centering
\caption{Uncertainties of the astrometric parameters when processing 0.5~yr of
simulated {\em Gaia} data jointly with {\em Tycho} and {\sc Hipparcos} priors (nominal scenario).
\label{tab:results}}
\begin{tabular}{rrrrr}
\toprule
Mag. & Number\tablefootmark{a} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Position}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{Parallax}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{Prop.~motion} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{c}{[$\mu$as]}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{[$\mu$as]}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{[$\mu$as yr$^{-1}$]} \\
\midrule[0.2pt]
\multicolumn{5}{c}{\cellcolor{black!10}Subset {\em Tycho} without {\sc Hipparcos}}\\
6--7 & 411 & 244 & 399 & 198 \\
7--8 & 8072 & 198 & 348 & 264 \\
8--9 & 63\,630 & 191 & 327 & 403 \\
9--10 & 257\,243 & 230 & 407 & 680 \\
10--11 & 686\,866 & 329 & 601 & 1145 \\
11--12 & 993\,139 & 379 & 722 & 1522 \\
$\ge$12 & 302\,511 & 349 & 702 & 1615 \\
all ($\ge$6)& 2\,311\,872 & 332 & 631 & 1259 \\
\midrule[0.2pt]
\multicolumn{5}{c}{\cellcolor{black!10}Subset {\sc Hipparcos}}\\
6--7 & 9381 & 116 & 180 & 17 \\
7--8 & 23\,679 & 120 & 192 & 21 \\
8--9 & 40\,729 & 125 & 198 & 29 \\
9--10 & 27\,912 & 133 & 217 & 39 \\
10--11 & 8563 & 154 & 253 & 58 \\
11--12 & 2501 & 128 & 211 & 87 \\
$\ge$12 & 630 & 151 & 248 & 135 \\
all ($\ge$6)& 113\,395 & 127 & 203 & 32 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{Nominal scenario refers to the results obtained from a simulation without data gaps
(see Sect.~\ref{sec:deadtime}) and using the full {\sc Hipparcos} prior (see
Sect.~\ref{sec:noparallaxprior}). Uncertainties are calculated as the Robust Scatter Estimate
\citep[RSE; see footnote 18 in][]{2012A&A...538A..78L} of the differences
between estimated parameters and `true' values.
\tablefoottext{a}{A small fraction of stars present in the {\sc Hipparcos} and
{\em Tycho} Catalogues is not observed in this simulated 0.5~yr interval of {\em Gaia}
observations.}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Nominal scenario}
Table~\ref{tab:results} summarizes the results obtained in the nominal
scenario, i.e., using the full prior information from {\sc Hipparcos} and assuming no dead time.
The upper part of the table gives statistics for the {\em Tycho}-only stars,
the lower part for the {\sc Hipparcos} stars. As the priors are very different
for the two subsets, they are separately discussed in the following.
\subsubsection{{\em Tycho}-only stars}
Any attempt to solve five parameters with 0.5~yr of {\em Gaia} data without a
prior utterly fails. Remarkably, however, the inclusion of the {\em Tycho}
positions allows us to solve not only the proper motions, but also the
parallaxes for the 2.5~million {\em Tycho} stars with sub-mas precision. Here
the proper motions rely entirely on the {\em Tycho} positions, as shown by the
strong variation of the uncertainty with magnitude, mainly reflecting the
variation of positional uncertainty in the {\em Tycho} Catalogue. In spite of
the fact that the prior parallaxes are set to zero, the posterior estimates
have very little bias (the median parallax error is $-0.7~\mu$as).
\subsubsection{{\sc Hipparcos} stars}
It is interesting to compare the {\sc Hipparcos} subset of this solution with the
(conservative) HTPM case B, where only the positions were solved for the
auxiliary non-{\sc Hipparcos} stars (see Sect.~4.1 in the HTPM paper). The
TGAS simulation is based on half as much {\em Gaia} data as HTPM-B, uses more conservative assumptions for attitude and calibration noise, but
still provides improvements in all respects: the positions are at least a
factor two better and the proper motions improved by about 16\%.
More importantly, the resulting parallax errors are 26\% smaller and centred on zero (median error
$-0.03$~$\mu$as), while HTPM-B gave systematically underestimated
parallaxes for the {\sc Hipparcos} stars (median error $-591~\mu$as). This
clearly demonstrates that the additional prior provided by the {\em Tycho}
positions also benefits the {\sc Hipparcos} subset.
\subsubsection{Spatial characteristics of the solution}
\begin{figure*}[htbp!]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{actualerror_varpiMEDIAN}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{actualerror_varpiRSE}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{formalerror_varpiMEDIAN}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{normalizederror_varpiRSE}
\caption{All-sky maps characterizing the
astrometric performance of the nominal TGAS solution (pixel size
3.4~deg$^2$). The cyan line
denotes the ecliptic. \textbf{(a)} Actual errors in
parallax (TGAS solution minus simulated true values), median per pixel to show that the solution is unbiased.
\textbf{(b)} Same as before, but RSE per pixel to characterize the size of the actual errors.
\textbf{(c)} Formal standard errors in parallax as computed in the astrometric solution.
\textbf{(d)} RSE values of the normalized errors in parallax.\label{fig:maps-results}}
\end{figure*}
The quality of the TGAS results for a particular star depends on the number and temporal
distribution of its {\em Gaia} observations, which in turn depends on the
position in the sky. Figure~\ref{fig:maps-simulations} (right) shows the number
of field-of-view transits per star as set by the scanning law,
yielding relatively few transits in areas within 45$^\circ$ of the ecliptic.
Figure~\ref{fig:maps-results} shows the error characteristics for the {\em
Tycho}-only subset. Panel~\textbf{(a)} displays the median of the actual
parallax errors (TGAS solution minus the simulated true values). In the well
observed areas these are centred on zero, showing that the parallaxes are
unbiased. The statistical scatter is larger in areas with few observations and
unfavourable temporal distributions. There the errors could also be
correlated over several degrees. The overall median of the actual parallax
errors is $-0.6~\mu$as.
The error maps for the other astrometric parameters have similar
characteristics.
The size of the actual errors is shown in panel~\textbf{(b)}, displaying the RSE per pixel.
In an astrometric solution of real data the errors cannot be assessed by
comparing the solution with the true values. Error estimates must instead come from the formal
standard errors (uncertainties), computed as the square-roots of the diagonal
elements of the covariance matrix (possibly adjusted depending on the size of
the residuals in the solution). It is important that the formal standard errors
(panel~\textbf{c}) correctly characterize the actual errors.
In the ideal case, the normalized error, i.e., the ratio of the actual error to the
formal standard error, should follow a normal distribution with zero mean and unit
standard deviation all over the sky. It was already shown (by the maps of the
actual errors) that the mean values are close to zero.
Panel~\textbf{(d)} then shows the RSE values of the normalized parallax errors.
These are around 1.0 everywhere\footnote{The scale of this panel was chosen to
emphasize that most pixel values are close to 1.0. This resulted in 13 of the
12288 pixels being saturated; the three largest values are 11.2, 3.9, and 3.4.}, with a relatively small scatter in the
Galactic plane, where there are more stars per pixel. A larger scatter is seen in
the more sparsely populated areas of the sky, where the statistical uncertainty
of the calculated RSE values is higher.
The global RSE value is 1.03, the global RMS
value 1.09. This shows that TGAS, under the given assumptions,
provides formal standard errors that essentially correctly characterize the
actual errors.
\subsection{Simulation including data gaps\label{sec:deadtime}}
\begin{figure*}[htbp!]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{EQU_depth6_NUM_TRANSITS_FIELD-DT}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{formalerror_varpiMEDIAN-DT.png}
\caption{All-sky maps for a TGAS simulation with simulated data gaps (see Sect. \ref{sec:deadtime}). {\em Left:} Number of field of view transits per star. {\em Right:} Formal standard errors (uncertainties) in parallax as computed in the astrometric solution. \label{fig:maps-results-DT}}
\end{figure*}
The results presented so far and in Table~\ref{tab:results} are based on a simulation
which includes all observations according to the nominal
scanning law over the assumed period of 0.5~yr. The real mission has numerous
data gaps of varying lengths, caused for example by orbit maintenance manoeuvres,
eclipses by the moon, and solar activity. With no observations
acquired at these times, the attitude modelling cannot take advantage of the physical
continuity of the attitude across the gaps. The result is a globally weakened astrometric
solution, which potentially could make the TGAS solution infeasible for a dataset
as short as 0.5~yr. We investigate this in a separate simulation including data gaps.
The acquisition dead time for {\em Gaia} (the fraction of time during which no
observations are acquired) is estimated to be $\simeq 6$\%. Additionally, individual
observations may be lost due to cosmic rays, CCD defects, charge injection, telemetry
losses, etc. Such losses are less damaging to the astrometric solution as they do not
create gaps in the attitude determination and sky coverage, although they do affect
the results in a statistical way. For bright stars the additional observation dead
time is estimated to be about 5\%, resulting in a total dead time of 11\%.
To explore the robustness of the TGAS solution to acquisition dead time we apply
the actual time sequence of data gaps obtained during six months of the early {\em Gaia}
operations\footnote{April to September 2014, including part of the commissioning phase
which ended on July 18th.} to the nominal simulation described in Sect.~\ref{sec:sim}.
While most of the applied gaps are shorter than 10~min, the two longest ones are 5.0
and 2.6~days. The total length of the gaps is 15.6~days, corresponding to 8.5\% of
acquisition dead time. Compared to the nominal value (6\%) this simulation is
therefore conservative, although we ignore the additional observation dead time.
Removing all observations corresponding to these
gaps we find that a stable solution is still possible. Compared with the solution
without gaps some stars are observed less, resulting in larger formal errors.
About 1000~stars are not observed at all, and were removed from the solution
and subsequent statistics. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:maps-results-DT}, the gaps
cause considerable inhomogeneity in the sky coverage and formal errors. The
white lines and wedges in the left panel show the areas most affected by the
data gaps. As expected, stars in those areas also have large formal errors, as
seen in the right panel. The formal errors are plotted on the same scale as
Fig.~\ref{fig:maps-results}, panel {\textbf c}, to show that only the areas
affected by dead time suffer from larger errors. 441 pixels are saturated, all
of these corresponding to areas affected by dead time. For 3.5\% of the sky
the formal errors are larger than 3~mas. Globally, the parallax and position errors are
about 16\% higher than in the solution without data gaps. The proper motion
errors, which are dominated by the errors in the {\em Tycho} positions, are
less affected.
\subsection{Solution without {\sc Hipparcos} parallax prior \label{sec:noparallaxprior}}
For validation purposes it is desirable to compare the
parallax values of the TGAS solution with {\sc Hipparcos}.
This is problematic when using the nominal TGAS since it already incorporates
the {\sc Hipparcos} parallaxes as a prior. As shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:correlated} (left panel) this leads to a statistical correlation
between the two datasets (correlation coefficient $+0.23$). As a result the
differences between the parallaxes have a smaller spread than expected from
their combined standard errors (right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:correlated}).
To derive independent parallaxes, we propose a TGAS solution
incorporating only the position and proper
motion information from the {\sc Hipparcos} Catalogue. This is achieved
by setting the prior parallax value and the corresponding row and column in the
{\sc Hipparcos} prior normal matrix to zero before adding the information arrays.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:uncorrelated} this removes the correlation entirely
(correlation coefficient $-0.0043$) at the expense of a moderate increase in
astrometric uncertainties of the {\sc Hipparcos} subset
(Table~\ref{tab:noParallaxPrior}). The results for the {\em Tycho} subset are not shown since
the values found are virtually identical to the nominal scenario in Table~\ref{tab:results}.
\begin{table}[t]
\small
\centering
\caption{Same as Table~\ref{tab:results} (bottom), but
without incorporation of the parallax prior from {\sc
Hipparcos}.\label{tab:noParallaxPrior}}
\begin{tabular}{rrrrr}
\toprule
Mag. & Number & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Position}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{Parallax}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{Prop.~motion} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{c}{[$\mu$as]}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{[$\mu$as]}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{[$\mu$as yr$^{-1}$]} \\
\midrule[0.2pt]
\multicolumn{5}{c}{\cellcolor{black!10}Subset {\sc Hipparcos}}\\
6--7 & 9381 & 158 & 270 & 18 \\
7--8 & 23\,679 & 147 & 241 & 23 \\
8--9 & 40\,729 & 142 & 232 & 30 \\
9--10 & 27\,912 & 147 & 244 & 40 \\
10--11 & 8563 & 164 & 276 & 60 \\
11--12 & 2501 & 129 & 212 & 90 \\
$\ge$12 & 630 & 156 & 251 & 138 \\
all ($\ge$6)& 113\,395 & 147 & 244 & 34 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{matlab/141209-093108/corr}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{matlab/141209-093108/histogram}
\caption{Comparison of the parallaxes in TGAS and the {\sc Hipparcos}
Catalogue (nominal TGAS run, i.e., using the {\sc Hipparcos} parallaxes as
prior).
{\em Left:} The normalized parallax errors (calculated minus the simulated true
values, divided by their formal standard errors) are correlated. {\em Right:}
The differences of the actual parallax values (normalized by their combined
standard errors) follow a Gaussian distribution with standard deviation 0.91,
less than 1.0 because of the correlation. The solid red line is a Gaussian distribution with unit
width.\label{fig:correlated}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{matlab/141210-144919/corr}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{matlab/141210-144919/histogram}
\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:correlated}, but for the TGAS run without parallax prior (Sect.~\ref{sec:noparallaxprior}).
{\em Left:} The normalized parallax errors are uncorrelated. {\em Right: }The
normalized differences of the actual parallax values have unit standard
deviation.
\label{fig:uncorrelated}}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion}
\subsection{Consequences of the simplifying assumptions\label{sec:limits}}
\paragraph{Data gaps:}
Our simulations show that TGAS is robust to data gaps according to a realistic
distribution of acquisition dead time. The data gaps result in an inhomogeneous
sky distribution of actual and formal errors, but do not significantly degrade
the performance in well-observed regions. Affected areas can be recovered
through additional observations after the first half year. The actual length of {\em Gaia} observations
necessary for a good solution over the whole sky is difficult to estimate without detailed
knowledge about the actual distribution of gaps. However, since the whole sky
is nominally covered by multiple scans every half year (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{fig:frac}),
it is reasonable to conclude that the required time is less than 1~yr.
\paragraph{Non-single stars:}
A large fraction of the TGAS stars are in reality binaries or multiple stars,
but not recognised as such in the {\em Tycho} Catalogue and thus treated as
single in TGAS. Some of them will be resolved by {\em Gaia} thanks to its higher
resolution, which makes it possible to discard these objects or treat them
appropriately.
For systems which are unresolved also by {\em Gaia} the space motions of their
photocentres will deviate from the linear uniform model represented by the
astrometric parameters. In the later astrometric solutions of {\em Gaia} data,
objects that do not fit the single-star astrometric model will be detected and
filtered out for special treatment, but this mechanism is not effective in TGAS
due to the small redundancy of observations. TGAS will contain some fraction of
such systems with significant deviations from the adopted five-parameter model,
which will remain unrecognised in the solution. Their actual astrometric errors
will be underestimated by the formal uncertainties. This may be a common
characteristic of the early data releases, typically based on datasets with
low redundancy and imperfect calibrations.
The impact of astrometric binaries on the derived proper motions should
nevertheless be small thanks to the 24~yr baseline of TGAS. The same is
true for the TGAS parallaxes as they are dominated by the {\em Gaia}
observations and at most only a fraction of the error in the annual proper
motion contributes to the parallax error. Comparing the proper motions from
TGAS and those in {\em Tycho-2} (which incorporate century-old ground-based
observations) could reveal not only systematic errors in the {\em Tycho-2} proper
motions but also some long-period astrometric binaries.
\paragraph{Bright-star performance and calibration issues:}
Like any other AGIS solution, TGAS will use the generic calibration model
described in \citet{2012A&A...538A..78L}, Sects.~3.4 and 3.5,
which takes into account the actual geometry of the
optics and detectors as well as calibrations linked to chromatic image
displacements, basic-angle variations, and radiation-induced image
displacements.
However, a specific complication of TGAS is that it almost exclusively uses stars brighter than magnitude $\sim$12, for which {\em Gaia} employs CCD gates
\citep{2012SPIE.8442E..1PK} to avoid saturation.
The gated observations need a separate calibration
for each gate, but with the limited amount of {\em Gaia} data in a TGAS solution there may not be sufficient
observations of bright stars to do so. Gate~4 is used for the brightest stars with
magnitudes $G\la 8.84$. If it turns out that this gate cannot be reliably calibrated
with half a year of {\em Gaia} data, we would in the worst case lose all stars brighter
than $G\simeq 8.84$ in the TGAS solution, or about 2.3\% of the {\em Tycho} stars.
The reduced number of stars degrades the solution somewhat (for example because
the attitude is less accurately determined), but we have verified that TGAS works
with as few as one million {\em Tycho} stars. The bright-star performance is a more
serious issue for the HTPM solution, as more than half of the {\sc Hipparcos} stars
are brighter than 8.84~mag.
\subsection{Systematics in the {\em Tycho-2} data}
The present TGAS experiments assume that the {\em Tycho} positions give the
barycentric directions to the stars at the standard {\sc Hipparcos} epoch J1991.25.
In reality the {\em Tycho-2} positions refer to slightly different epochs, which could
even be different in $\alpha$ and $\delta$. The actual TGAS solution should use the
mean effective epoch $(t_\alpha+t_\delta)/2$ of each star rather than J1991.25.
A potentially more serious complication is that the {\em Tycho} positions do not
strictly represent the barycentric directions at the given epochs of
observation. The positions were derived from the stacked star mapper photon
count records accumulated over the whole {\sc Hipparcos} mission
\citep{2000A&A...357..367H}. Parallaxes were typically not taken into
account in this process, and the resulting positions are therefore offset by a
fraction of the parallax. Both the fraction and direction of the offset depend in
a complex way on the distribution, geometry, and weights of the photon count
records. There is no simple way to correct for this effect in TGAS,
nor was it included in our simulations. However, we argue that its impact on the
TGAS results should be very small. The
{\em Tycho} positions are mainly used to derive the proper motions on a
baseline of 24 years. Since the parallax of a given star is typically of similar size
as its annual proper motion, and the position offset is just a fraction of the parallax,
it follows that the resulting annual proper motion is typically only offset by a few per
cent of the parallax. This, in turn, should have an almost negligible impact on the
parallax, which is mainly derived from the {\em Gaia} observations relative to
the extrapolated linear motion.
\subsection{Reference frame of TGAS}
The {\em Tycho} positions around 1991 and the {\em Gaia} observations
around 2015 are by themselves not sufficient to determine the spin of the
reference frame for TGAS, only its orientation at the {\em Tycho} epoch.
By incorporating positions and proper motions from {\sc Hipparcos} in TGAS, in
the same way as described in the HTPM paper, the TGAS results are effectively
on the {\sc Hipparcos} reference frame.
\section{Conclusions}
The currently foreseen contents of the first {\em Gaia} data release include
positions from a two-parameter solution of the early ($\la 1$~yr) data,
because a full five-parameter solution will not be feasible, or reliable enough,
based on these data alone. Incorporating prior information into the solution
makes it possible to solve all five astrometric parameters (i.e., including parallax
and proper motion) with significantly less {\em Gaia} data. The HTPM project
incorporates the {\sc Hipparcos} Catalogue, resulting in greatly improved
astrometry for the $\sim$10$^5$ {\sc Hipparcos} stars. However, as shown in
\citet{2014A&A...571A..85M}, such a solution should be based on
at least one year of continuous {\em Gaia} data, as otherwise the results will
be biased by the use of auxiliary stars for which the full set of parameters
cannot be resolved.
TGAS extends the original HTPM proposal and takes the idea of a joint solution
one step further by combining, in a single global astrometric solution,
measurements from the early {\em Gaia} mission with data from the {\em Tycho}
and {\sc Hipparcos} Catalogues. In this paper we have shown that the
approximate positions at the earlier epoch provided by {\em Tycho} are
sufficient to disentangle the ambiguity between parallax and proper motion
in a short stretch of {\em Gaia} observations. Therefore TGAS allows us to
derive positions, parallaxes, and proper motions for up to 2.5~million stars
half a year earlier than the proposed first {\em Gaia} data release containing
only two parameters, and one year earlier than the proposed second {\em Gaia}
data release containing the first five parameter solution.
Using the five parameter solutions of the {\em Tycho} stars for HTPM avoids the
risk of biasing the HTPM parallaxes and improves the resulting astrometry for
the {\sc Hipparcos} stars.
This is true even when the prior parallaxes from {\sc Hipparcos} are not used
at all in the TGAS/HTPM solution, which provides a stringent test of its consistency
with the {\sc Hipparcos} parallaxes (see Sect.~\ref{sec:noparallaxprior}).
The moderate increase in astrometric uncertainties of such a solution compared
to the nominal scenario seems to be a price worth paying for the benefit
of a catalogue of independent parallaxes. We therefore propose that
the solution not using the {\sc Hipparcos} parallaxes should be the baseline
for TGAS/HTPM.
Our simulations of TGAS suggest that the accuracy of the resulting astrometry for
the {\em Tycho} stars will be similar to the {\sc Hipparcos} Catalogue, and
possibly significantly better depending on the exact scenario of the
number of {\em Gaia} observations available, dead time intervals, calibration,
etc. Moreover, the
dataset would be almost complete to $V\simeq 11.5$, or 3--4~magnitudes
fainter than the survey part of the {\sc Hipparcos} Catalogue. Although the scientific lifetime of
the data would be limited, in view of the expected later releases from
{\em Gaia}, the potential applications cover many areas of stellar and galactic
astronomy. Perhaps even more importantly, TGAS offers the opportunity to
perform a full-sky scientific validation of the {\em Gaia} instrument,
calibration, and data processing at sub-mas level much earlier than previously
anticipated. For this reason alone, we believe TGAS should be attempted as
soon as {\em Gaia} has collected sufficient data for such a solution, which could be in early
2015.
\begin{acknowledgements}
TGAS originated from discussions with Thierry Forveille and Claus Fabricius
during the review phase of the HTPM paper. We are grateful to Ulrich Bastian,
Anthony Brown, Jos de Bruijne, José Hernández, Sergei Klioner, Uwe Lammers,
Paul McMillan, and the referee F.~van Leeuwen, for providing many supportive comments, questions, and feedback on
the manuscript. The DAM data were kindly provided by Daniel Risquez.
We gratefully acknowledge support from the Swedish National
Space Board and the Royal Physiographic Society in Lund.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
After so many years of expectations the LHC has found
a Standard-Model-like (SM-like) Higgs particle
with a mass of $M_h \approx 125$ GeV \cite{Aad:2012tfa,Chatrchyan:2012ufa}.
Current analysis of the LHC data has been
dedicated to the properties of this resonance, with the purpose of determining whether it
belongs to the SM or to some of its extensions. In the later case some
deviations from the SM expectations are expected.
The LHC has also provided important bounds on the scale
of new physics beyond the SM, either through the search for new (probably heavy) particles or by
looking for deviations from the SM predictions of properties of the SM particles. Some of the motivations
for new physics are related to cosmology,
like dark matter (DM)
or the baryon asymmetry of the Universe (BAU).
One of the simplest models for a scalar dark matter is the Inert Doublet
Model (IDM), a version of a Two Higgs Doublet Model with an exact $Z_2$ symmetry \cite{Deshpande:1977rw}.
Here the SM scalar (Higgs) sector is extended by an inert scalar doublet.
There are regions of
parameter space where this model can account for the SM-like Higgs particle, and at the same time for the correct
relic density of dark matter, while fulfilling direct and indirect DM detection limits, and being in agreement
with the LHC results [see e.g. \cite{Ma:2006km,Barbieri:2006dq,LopezHonorez:2006gr,Goudelis:2013uca, Krawczyk:2013jta,Arhrib:2013ela}].
Furthermore, the IDM can provide a strong first-order phase transition \cite{Gil:2012ya},
which is one of the Sakharov conditions needed to generate a
baryon asymmetry of the universe. Another Sakharov requirement, namely
the large enough
CP violation (CPV), the IDM fails to fulfil. This is because
it contains no additional source of CP violation and the only CPV phase from the CKM matrix, as in the SM, is known to be
too small to lead to the right amount of BAU.
Thus, we need to extend this model with some
extra source of CP violation that could allow to address this important problem.
In this paper we shall assume that the required additional CPV is
provided by a complex scalar singlet $\chi$, which accompanies the SM-like Higgs and
inert doublets, denoted here by $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$, respectively. We shall call this
model IDMS (the IDM plus singlet).
Our main aim is to study general properties of the model, and to check its agreement with all
existing Higgs- and DM data. Detailed investigation of possible tests of the CP violating effects
incorporated into the model is beyond the scope of this paper.
The content of this paper is as follows. Section \ref{sec-gen} contains the presentation
of the general model, in particular the scalar potential. In section \ref{sec-our} we present in detail our model,
positivity conditions, the mass eigenstates in the neutral and charged sectors and study the parameter space of the model.
Section \ref{sec-lhc} contains the analysis of Higgs couplings and a comparison with
LHC data. In section \ref{sec-dm} we present our study of relic density for a dark matter candidate
of the model, which is assumed to be the lightest neutral $Z_2$-odd scalar state. Conclusions are presented in section \ref{sec-con},
where we also discuss possible implications for neutrino physics. Detailed formulas, benchmark points and values related
to the LHC and dark matter analysis are presented in the appendices.
\section{The IDMS: The IDM plus a complex singlet \label{sec-gen}}
We shall consider a $Z_2$-symmetric model that contains a SM-like Higgs doublet $\Phi_1$, which is involved in a generation of
the mases of gauge bosons and fermions, as in the SM. There is also an inert scalar doublet $\Phi_2$,
which is odd under a $Z_2$ symmetry.
$\Phi_2$ has VEV$=0$ and can provide a stable dark matter candidate. Then, we have the neutral
complex singlet $\chi$ with hypercharge $Y=0$ and a non-zero complex VEV.
Singlet $\chi$ can be introduced to play several roles in models with two doublets and a singlet, leading to different scenarios.
CP violation can be explicit, provided by the singlet interaction terms, or spontaneous, if $\langle \chi \rangle \in \mathbb{C}$.
The singlet $\chi$ could be even or odd under a $Z_2$ symmetry, and it could
mix with the SM-like Higgs doublet and/or with the inert doublet. Furthermore, one could even
use the complex singlet to induce all sources of CP violation, including the SM one contained
in the CKM mixing matrix, as it was done in Ref. \cite{Branco:2003rt}.
Here we shall
take $\chi$ to be even under a $Z_2$ transformation defined as:
\begin{equation}
Z_2\;:\; \Phi_1 \to \Phi_1, \; \Phi_2 \to - \Phi_2, \; \textrm{SM fields} \to \textrm{SM fields}, \; \chi \to \chi,
\end{equation}
and allow its mixing only with the neutral components of $\Phi_1$; furthermore, we shall consider the case when the
CP symmetry can be violated by a non-zero complex $\langle \chi \rangle$.
The full Lagrangian of the model looks as follows:
\begin{equation}
{ \cal L}={ \cal L}^{SM}_{ gf } +{ \cal L}_{scalar} + {\cal L}_Y(\psi_f,\Phi_{1}) \,, \quad { \cal L}_{scalar}=T-V\, ,
\label{lagrbas}
\end{equation}
where ${\cal L}^{SM}_{gf}$ gives boson-fermion interaction as in the SM, ${ \cal L}_{scalar}$ describes the scalar
sector of the model, while ${\cal L}_Y(\psi_f,\Phi_{1})$ -- the Yukawa interaction. The kinetic term in ${ \cal L}_{scalar}$
has the standard form:
\begin{eqnarray}
T = \left( D_{\mu} \Phi_{1} \right)^{\dagger} \left( D^{\mu} \Phi_{1} \right) + \left( D_{\mu} \Phi_{2}
\right)^{\dagger} \left( D^{\mu} \Phi_{2} \right) + \partial \chi \partial \chi^*, \label{kinet}
\end{eqnarray}
with $D^\mu$ being a covariant derivative for an $SU(2)$ doublet. We take the Yukawa interaction
in the form of the Model I in the 2HDM, where only $\Phi_1$ couples to fermions.
Within our model the scalar singlet $\chi$ does not couple with the SM fermions and therefore the singlet-fermion
interaction are present only through mixing of singlet
with the first doublet $\Phi_1$.
In our model only $Z_2$-even fields $\Phi_1$ and $\chi$ acquire vacuum expectation values $v$ and $w e^{i\xi}$,
respectively, where $v,w\in \mathbb{R}$. We shall use the following field decomposition around the
vacuum state $(v,0,w e^{i\xi})$:
\begin{eqnarray}
& \Phi_{1} = \left( \begin{array}{c} \phi^+_1 \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( v + \phi_1 + i \phi_6 \right)\\
\end{array} \right), \qquad \Phi_{2} = \left( \begin{array}{c}\phi^+_2 \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( \phi_4 +
i \phi_5 \right)\\ \end{array} \right), \label{dec_doublets}&\\[2mm]
& \chi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (w e^{i \xi} + \phi_2 + i \phi_3). \label{dec_singlet}&
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the $Z_2$ symmetry is not violated spontaneously. Also, $U(1)_{EM}$
is not broken, and there is no mixing between the neutral and charged components. Masses of gauge bosons and
fermions are given by the VEV of the first doublet as in the SM, e.g $M_W^2 = g^2 v^2/4$ for the $W$ boson.
The full scalar potential of the model can be written as
\begin{equation}
V=V_{IDM}+V_S+V_{DS}, \label{potgen}
\end{equation}
where we have separated the pure doublet and the pure singlet parts (respectively $V_{IDM}$ and $V_{S}$)
and their interaction term $V_{DS}$.
The IDM part of the potential, $V_{IDM}$ is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
&
\begin{array}{c}
V_{IDM} = - \frac{1}{2}\left[{m_{11}^2} \Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1 + {m_{22}^2} \Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2 \right]
+ \frac{1}{2}\left[\lambda_1 \left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1\right)^2
+ \lambda_2 \left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2 \right)^2\right]\\[6mm]
+ \lambda_3 \left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1 \right) \left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2\right) + \lambda_4 \left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_2\right)
\left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_1\right) +\frac{\lambda_5}{2}\left[\left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_2\right)^2\!+\!\left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_1\right)^2\right].
\end{array}&
\label{potIDM}
\end{eqnarray}
The most general singlet part of the potential for a complex singlet is equal to:
\begin{eqnarray}
&
\begin{array}{c}
V_{S} = -\frac{m_3^2}{2} \chi^* \chi -\frac{m_4^2}{2} (\chi^{*2} + \chi^2) + \lambda_{s1} (\chi^*\chi)^2 + \lambda_{s2}
(\chi^*\chi)(\chi^{*2} + \chi^2) + \lambda_{s3} (\chi^4 + \chi^{*4})\\[2mm]
+ \kappa_1 (\chi + \chi^*) + \kappa_2 (\chi^3 + \chi^{*3}) + \kappa_3( \chi(\chi^*\chi) + \chi^*(\chi^*\chi)).
\end{array}&
\label{potS}
\end{eqnarray}
The doublet-singlet interaction terms are:
\begin{eqnarray}
&
\begin{array}{c}
V_{DS} = \Lambda_1(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1)(\chi^* \chi) + \Lambda_2 (\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2)(\chi^* \chi) +
\Lambda_3 (\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1)(\chi^{*2}+ \chi^2) + \Lambda_4 (\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2)(\chi^{*2} +\chi^2)\\[2mm]
+ \kappa_4 (\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1) ( \chi +\chi^*) + \kappa_5 (\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2) ( \chi +\chi^*). \end{array}&
\label{potMix}
\end{eqnarray}
We assume that all parameters of $V$ (\ref{potgen}) are real.
This potential is $Z_2$-symmetric and the chosen vacuum state (\ref{dec_doublets},\ref{dec_singlet}) will not
spontaneously break this symmetry, therefore the problem of cosmological domain walls will not arise in this model.
In total, there are four quadratic parameters, twelve dimensionless quartic parameters and five dimensionful
parameters $\kappa_{1,2,3,4,5}$. The linear term $\kappa_1$ can be removed by a translation of the singlet field, and
we will omit it below. It is useful to re-express dimensionful parameters $\kappa_i$ by dimensionless parameters $\rho_i$
(we consider them being of order $\mathcal{O}(1)$) as:
\begin{equation}
\kappa_i = w \rho_i,
\end{equation}
with $w$ being an absolute value of the singlet VEV.
One could reduce this general model by invoking
additional symmetries besides the imposed $Z_2$ one. In particular, to simplify the model
one can apply a global $U(1)$ symmetry,
as we discuss below. Similarly,
had we chosen to assign a $Z_2$-odd quantum number also to $\chi$ (or if singlet was odd under an additional
$Z_2'$ symmetry), it would have also resulted in a variant
of the model with a simplified potential, where all terms with an odd number of field $\chi$ would be absent.
Obviously, in those cases having a $Z_2$ (or $Z_2'$) symmetric vacuum state would require $\langle \chi \rangle =0$,
and thus there would be no additional CP violation in the model.
\section{The constrained IDMS: cIDMS \label{sec-our}}
We will reduce the most general IDMS potential (\ref{potgen}-\ref{potMix})
by imposing a global $U(1)$ symmetry:
\begin{equation}
U(1): \;\; \Phi_1 \to \Phi_1,\, \Phi_2 \to \Phi_2, \, \chi \to e^{i\alpha} \chi \label{u1def}.
\end{equation}
However, a non-zero VEV $\langle \chi \rangle$ would lead to a spontaneous breaking of this continuous symmetry and
appearance of massless Nambu-Goldstone scalar particles, which are not phenomenologically viable.
Keeping some $U(1)$-soft-breaking terms in the potential would solve this problem and at the same time
would still lead to a reduction of the number of parameters of $V$.
The parameters of the IDMS potential can be divided into the following groups:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $U(1)$-symmetric terms: $m_{11}^2, m_{22}^2, m_{3}^2, \lambda_{1,2,3,4,5}, \lambda_{s1}, \Lambda_{1,2}$,
\item $U(1)$-soft-breaking terms\footnote{Recall that $\rho_1$ can be removed from (\ref{potgen})
by translation of $\chi$.}: $m_{4}^2, \rho_{2,3}, \rho_{4,5}$,
\item $U(1)$-hard-breaking terms $\lambda_{s2}, \lambda_{s3}, \Lambda_{3,4}$.
\end{enumerate}
In what follows we shall consider a potential with a soft-breaking of $U(1)$ symmetry by the singlet
cubic terms $\rho_{2,3}$ and quadratic term $m_4^2$ only, neglecting the remaining ones ($\rho_{4,5}$).
As it was pointed out $\Phi_1$ is the SM-like Higgs doublet responsible
for the EW symmetry breaking and for providing masses of gauge bosons and fermions. Moreover,
we also want to use it as a
portal for DM interactions with the visible sector, as in the IDM. We shall assume
therefore that there is no direct coupling
of $\Phi_2$ to $\chi$, thus setting the $U(1)$-invariant term $\Lambda_2 = 0$.
The field $\chi$ shall then interact
with the DM particles only through mixing with the neutral component of $\Phi_1$.
We are therefore left with the following $U(1)$-symmetric terms
($m_{11}^2, m_{22}^2, m_{3}^2, \lambda_{1-5}, \lambda_{s1}, \Lambda_{1}$) and $U(1)$-soft-breaking
terms ($m_{4}^2, \rho_{2,3}$).
We shall call our model, the model
with this choice of parameters, cIDMS. {The cIDMS potential is then given by:}
\begin{eqnarray}
&
\begin{array}{c}
V = -\frac{1}{2}\left[{m_{11}^2} \Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1 + {m_{22}^2} \Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2 \right]
+ \frac{1}{2}\left[\lambda_1 \left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1\right)^2
+ \lambda_2 \left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2 \right)^2\right]\\[6mm]
+ \lambda_3 \left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1 \right) \left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2\right) + \lambda_4
\left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_2\right) \left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_1\right) +\frac{\lambda_5}{2}\left[\left(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_2\right)^2\!
+\!\left(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_1\right)^2\right] \\[3mm]
-\frac{m_3^2}{2} \chi^* \chi + \lambda_{s1} (\chi^*\chi)^2 + \Lambda_1(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1)(\chi^* \chi)\\[2mm]
-\frac{m_4^2}{2} (\chi^{*2} + \chi^2) + \kappa_2 (\chi^3 + \chi^{*3}) + \kappa_3 [ \chi(\chi^*\chi) + \chi^*(\chi^*\chi)].
\end{array}&
\label{potIDM1S}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Positivity conditions}
In order to have a stable minimum, the parameters of the potential need to
satisfy the positivity conditions. Namely, the potential should be bounded from below, i.e. should not go to negative
infinity for large field values. As this behavior is dominated by the quartic terms, the cubic terms will
not play a role here. Thus the following conditions will apply to
a variety of models that will differ only by their cubic interactions.
We use the method of \cite{Kannike:2012pe}, which uses the concept of co-positivity for a matrix build of
coefficients in the field directions. For the cIDMS, the
positivity conditions read:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \lambda_{s1} \geq 0, \; {\bar{\lambda}_{12}} = \lambda_3 + \theta[-\lambda_4+|\lambda_5|]
(\lambda_4-|\lambda_5|) + \sqrt{\lambda_1 \lambda_2} \geq 0, \\[3mm]
{\bar{\lambda}_{1S}} = \Lambda_1 + \sqrt{2 \lambda_1 \lambda_{s1}} \geq 0,\\[3mm]
\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\lambda_1 \lambda_2\lambda_{s1}} +
[\lambda_3 + \theta[-\lambda_4+|\lambda_5|] (\lambda_4-|\lambda_5|)] \sqrt{\lambda_{s1}}+
\Lambda_1 \sqrt{ \frac{\lambda_2}{2}}
+ \sqrt{ {\bar{\lambda}_{12}} {\bar{\lambda}_{1S}} {\bar{\lambda}_{2S}} } \geq 0,
\end{array} \label{pos}
\end{equation}
where ${\bar{\lambda}_{2S}} = \sqrt{2 \lambda_2 \lambda_{s1}} >0$.
\subsection{Extremum conditions} The minimization conditions lead to the following constraints for three quadratic
parameters from $V$ (\ref{potIDM1S}):
\begin{eqnarray}
&& m_{11}^2 = w^2 \Lambda_1 + v^2 \lambda_1, \\
&& m_{3}^2 = v^2 \Lambda_1 + 2w^2\lambda_{s1}+\frac{w^2}{\sqrt{2}\cos\xi}(-3 \rho_2 + 3\rho_3 + 2\rho_3 \cos2\xi),\\
&& m_4^2 = \frac{w^2}{2\sqrt{2}\cos\xi} (3 \rho_2 + \rho_3 + 6\rho_2 \cos2\xi).
\end{eqnarray}
The $m_{22}^2$ parameter is not determined by the extremum conditions, just like in the IDM.
The squared-mass matrix $M_{ij}^2$, for $i,j=1,...6$, is given by:
\begin{equation}
M_{ij}^{2} = \frac{\partial^{2} V}{\partial \phi_{i} \phi_{j}}\biggr\vert_{\Phi_{i} =\left\langle \Phi_{i}
\right\rangle,\chi = \left\langle \chi \right\rangle}, \label{massmat_def}
\end{equation}
with $\phi_i$ being the respective fields from decomposition (\ref{dec_doublets},\ref{dec_singlet}).
This definition along with the normalization defined in (\ref{dec_doublets},\ref{dec_singlet}) gives the proper
mass terms of $M_\varphi^2 \varphi^+ \varphi^-$ in case of the charged scalar fields and
$\frac{M_\varphi^2}{2} \varphi^2$ for the neutral scalar fields.
\subsection{Comments on vacuum stability}
The tree-level positivity conditions (\ref{pos}), which ensure the existence of a global minimum correspond to $\lambda>0$
in the Standard Model. It is well known, that the radiative corrections
coming from the top quark contribution can lead to negative values of the Higgs self-coupling, resulting in the
instability of the SM vacuum for larger energy scales. Full analysis of the stability of the cIDMS potential beyond
the tree-level approximation is beyond the scope of this paper. However, it has been shown in
Ref.~\cite{Goudelis:2013uca} that for the IDM the contributions from additional scalar states will in general
lead to the relaxation of the stability bound and allow the IDM to be valid up to the Planck scale. Since cIDMS
contains two more scalar states, this condition should hold here as well.
\subsection{Mass eigenstates }
\subsubsection{The neutral sector \label{mass-neutral-intro}}
The form of the neutral part of the squared-mass matrix (\ref{massmat_def}) for $\phi_i, (i=1,...,6)$ allows us to
identify the physical states and their properties:
\begin{equation}
M^2 = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
M_{mix(3\times3)}^2 & 0_{(3\times3)} \\
0_{(3\times3)} & \begin{array}{ccc}
M_H^2 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & M_A^2 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{array} \\
\end{array}
\right)\label{mass_neutral}
\end{equation}
As there is no mixing between four $Z_2$-even fields $\phi_{1,2,3,6}$, and $\phi_{4,5}$,
which are $Z_2$-odd, we can divide the particle content of the model into two separate sectors:
the $Z_2$-even sector, called \textit{the Higgs sector}, and the $Z_2$-odd sector, called \textit{the inert sector}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The Goldstone field , $G_z = \phi_6$, is a purely imaginary part of the first doublet $\Phi_1$.
\item There is a mixing between the singlet $\chi$ and the
real neutral fields of $\Phi_1$ (namely $\phi_1, \phi_2$ and $\phi_3$) resulting in three neutral scalars $h_1, h_2, h_3$.
Due to the non-zero complex phase of the singlet
VEV ($w e^{i\xi}$) the fields $h_1, h_2, h_3$ are composed of the states of different CP. Therefore among
the possible vertices there are vertices like $Z Z h_i$ and all $h_i$ particles couple to fermions.
Masses of the these particles depend only on the following parameters of the potential: $\lambda_1, \Lambda_1, \rho_{2,3}, \lambda_{s1}$.
\item In the inert sector the dark matter candidate from the IDM is stable and it is the
lighter of the two neutral components of $\Phi_2$ ($ \phi_4$ or $ \phi_5$), which we identify
as the scalar particles $H$ and $A$. Masses of those particles are just like in the IDM:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& M_H^2 = \frac{1}{2} ( -m_{22}^2 + v^2 \lambda_{345}) , \quad \; H = \phi_4,\\
&& M_A^2 = \frac{1}{2} ( -m_{22}^2 + v^2 \lambda_{345}^-), \quad \; A = \phi_5,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda_{345} = \lambda_3 + \lambda_4 + \lambda_5$, $\lambda_{345}^- = \lambda_3 + \lambda_4 - \lambda_5$.
Notice, that the IDM relation for masses still holds:
\begin{equation}
\lambda_5 = \frac{M_H^2-M_A^2}{v^2}. \label{lam5IDM}
\end{equation}
If $\lambda_5 < 0$ then $H$, as a neutral lighter state, is our dark matter candidate.
Since $Z_2$ symmetry is exact in our model, the $Z_2$-odd particles have limited gauge
and scalar interactions (they interact in pairs only) and they do not couple to fermions.
Masses of inert particles depend only on $\lambda_{3,4,5}$ and $m_{22}^2$.
Those parameters do not influence masses of the Higgs particles from the $Z_2$-even sector.
In that sense, masses of particles from the Higgs and inert sectors can be studied separately.
On this level, the only connection between parameters from those two sectors is through the positivity constraints.
As in the IDM, $\lambda_2$ does not influence the mass sector and it appears only as a quartic
coupling between the $Z_2$-odd particles.
\end{enumerate}
\subsubsection{The charged sector}
The $Z_2$-odd charged scalar $H^\pm$ comes
solely from the second doublet, as in the IDM; its mass is given by
\begin{equation}
M_{H^\pm}^2 = \frac{1}{2} (- m_{22}^2 + v^2 \lambda_3).
\end{equation}
Notice, that the mass relations for the $Z_2$-odd sector from the IDM still hold, namely
\begin{equation}
M_H^2 = M_{H^\pm}^2 + \frac{v^2 (\lambda_4 + \lambda_5)}{2}, \quad M_A^2 = M_{H^\pm}^2 +
\frac{v^2 (\lambda_4 - \lambda_5)}{2}. \label{relIDM}
\end{equation}
Neutral particle $H$ is a DM candidate, therefore $\lambda_4+\lambda_5 <0$, resulting in $M_H < M_{H^\pm}$.
If we allow an additional mixing between $\Phi_2$ and $\chi$ through a non-zero $\Lambda_{2,4}$ or
$\rho_5$ then the squared-mass formulas are modified as $M_{H,A,H^\pm}^2 \to M_{H,A,H^\pm}^2 + \Delta$, with
$
\Delta= \frac{1}{2} w^2 (\Lambda_2 + 2 \Lambda_4 \cos2\xi + 2\sqrt{2} \rho_5 \cos\xi ).\nonumber
$
Sill, the IDM relations (\ref{lam5IDM}) and (\ref{relIDM}) hold.
\subsection{Physical states in the Higgs sector \label{ssec-phys}}
The mass matrix that describes the singlet-doublet mixing, in the basis of neutral fields $(\phi_1, \phi_2, \phi_3)$,
is given by:
\begin{equation}
M^2_{mix} = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\mu_{11} & \mu_{12} & \mu_{13}\\
\mu_{12} & \mu_{22} & \mu_{23}\\
\mu_{13} & \mu_{23} & \mu_{33}
\end{array} \right),\label{massneut}
\end{equation}
where matrix elements $\mu_{ij}$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\mu_{11} = \lambda_1 v^2,\\
&&\mu_{12}= w v \Lambda_1 \cos \xi, \\
&&\mu_{13}= w v \Lambda_1 \sin \xi, \\
&&\mu_{22} = \frac{w^2}{2 \cos \xi} \left(3\sqrt{2} \rho_2 + \sqrt{2}\rho_3(1+ 2\cos2\xi) +
\lambda_{s1} (3\cos\xi+ \cos3\xi) \right),\\
&&\mu_{23} = w^2 \left(\sqrt{2}(-3\rho_2+\rho_3)+2 \lambda_{s1} \cos\xi \right) \sin \xi,\\
&&\mu_{33} =2 w^2 \sin^2 \xi \lambda_{s1}. \label{matrixel}
\end{eqnarray}
Only if $\Lambda_1 \not=0$ and $w, \, \sin \xi \not =0$ then there is a mixing between states of
different CP properties $\phi_1$ or $\phi_2$ and $\phi_3$ (entries $\mu_{13}$ and $\mu_{23}$ respectively).
Diagonalization of $M^2_{mix}$ (\ref{massneut}) gives the mass eigenstates, which can be also obtained by
the rotation of the field basis:
\begin{eqnarray}
& \left( \begin{array}{c} h_1\\ h_2\\ h_3\\ \end{array} \right) = R \left( \begin{array}{c}
\phi_1\\ \phi_2\\ \phi_3\\ \end{array} \right), \quad \widetilde{M}^2 = R M_{mix}^2 R^T = diag(M_{h_1}^2,M_{h_2}^2,M_{h_3}^2). & \label{neutr_diag}
\end{eqnarray}
The rotation matrix $R = R_1 R_2 R_3$ in principle depends on three mixing angles ($\alpha_1, \alpha_2, \alpha_3$).
The individual rotation matrices are given by (here and below $c_i = \cos \alpha_i, s_i = \sin \alpha_i$):
\begin{equation}
R_1 = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
c_1 & s_1 & 0\\
-s_1 & c_1 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{array} \right), \quad R_2 = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
c_2 & 0 & s_2\\
0 & 1 & 0\\
-s_2 & 0 & c_2
\end{array} \right), \label{gen_rot}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
R_3 = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & c_3 & s_3\\
0 & -s_3 & c_3
\end{array} \right).\label{rot23}
\end{equation}
All $\alpha_i$ vary over an interval of length $\pi$.
The full rotation matrix depends on the mixing angles in the following way:
\begin{equation}
R = R_1 R_2 R_3 = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
c_1 c_2 & c_3 s_1 - c_1 s_2 s_3 & c_1 c_3 s_2 + s_1 s_3\\
-c_2 s_1 & c_1 c_3 + s_1 s_2 s_3 & -c_3 s_1 s_2 + c_1 s_3\\
-s_2 & -c_2 s_3 & c_2 c_3
\end{array} \right).\label{rotfull}
\end{equation}
The inverse of $R$ can be used to obtain the reverse relation between $h_i$ and $\phi_i$:
\begin{equation}
R^{-1}= \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
c_1 c_2 & -c_2 s_1 & -s_2\\
c_3 s_1 - c_1 s_2 s_3 & c_1 c_3 + s_1 s_2 s_3&-c_2 s_3\\
c_1 c_3 s_2 + s_1 s_3 & -c_3 s_1 s_2 + c_1 s_3 & c_2 c_3
\end{array} \right)\label{rotinvfull}.
\end{equation}
The two important relations can be read from those rotation matrices, namely:
\begin{equation}
h_1 = c_1 c_2 \phi_1 + (c_3 s_1 - c_1 s_2 s_3) \phi_2 + (c_1 c_3 s_2 + s_1 s_3) \phi_3
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\phi_1 = c_1 c_2 h_1 - c_2 s_1 h_2 - s_2 h_3 \label{phi1DM}.
\end{equation}
They describe the composition of the SM-like Higgs boson $h_1$, in terms of real components $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$,
which provide a CP-even part, as well as the $\phi_3$ component,
which signals the CP violation in the model. Equivalently, one can look at it as the modification of
the real component of the SM-like Higgs doublet $\Phi_1$ from the cIDMS with respect to the SM and the IDM.
Especially important is the first element both in $R$ and $R^{-1}$ equal to:
\begin{equation}
R_{11} = R^{-1}_{11} = c_1 c_2. \label{r11}
\end{equation}
This matrix element gives the relative modification of the interaction of the Higgs boson ($h_1$) with respect to the IDM, and will be important both in the LHC analysis (section \ref{sec-lhc}), and in the DM studies (sec. \ref{sec-dm}).
\subsection{Parameter space in the Higgs sector \label{ssec-cor}}
In what follows we shall numerically analyze the allowed regions of parameters of our model. In scans the positivity (\ref{pos}) and
perturbativity conditions, where all quartic parameters in the potential are taken to be below 1, are fulfilled.
As LHC data is favouring a SM-like interpretation of the observed 125 GeV Higgs signal, we shall
require that the lightest neutral Higgs state comes predominantly from the doublet $\Phi_1$. If
there was no $\Phi_1 - \chi$ mixing, then the SM-like Higgs boson's mass would have been given by $M_{h_1}^2 = v^2 \lambda_1 \Rightarrow \lambda_1 \approx 0.23$ (for $v =246$ GeV). We are going to consider the variation of $\lambda_1$ in range:
\begin{eqnarray}
0.2 < \lambda_1 < 0.3,
\end{eqnarray}
and demand that the mass of the lightest Higgs particle $h_1$ lies in range [124.69, 125.37] GeV.
\footnote{The considered mass range [124.69, 125,37] GeV is in the 2$\sigma$ range in agreement with the newest LHC data \cite{Khachatryan:2014ira, Aad:2014eva} for the Higgs mass.}
The additional two Higgs scalars are heavier, we take
\begin{equation}
M_{h_3} > M_{h_2} > 150\, \,\mbox{GeV}.
\end{equation}
Remaining parameters of the Higgs sector change in the following ranges:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{newlimits}
&&-1 < \Lambda_1 <1, \quad 0 < \lambda_{s1} < 1, \quad -1 <\rho_{2,3} < 1, \quad 0 <\xi < 2 \pi.
\end{eqnarray}
Parameters from the inert sector, i.e. $\lambda_{2-5}, m_{22}^2$ do not directly influence values
of masses of Higgs particles (\ref{massneut}-\ref{matrixel}). One must remember however,
that allowed values of $\lambda_{2-5}$ are related to the ranges of Higgs parameters through
the positivity constraints (\ref{pos}). In the scans, inert parameters change in the range allowed by
the perturbativity constraints, with $H$ being the DM candidate (see sec.\ref{ssec-cordm}):
\begin{equation}
0<\lambda_2<1, \quad -1<\lambda_{3,4} < 1, \quad -1 <\lambda_5<0.
\end{equation}
We performed the scanning for $w \sim v=246 \,\mbox{GeV}$, in particular for $w = 300, 500, 1000 \,\mbox{GeV}$.
{However, after noting that the results} do not depend strongly on the exact value of this
parameter, {we opted here to present results with plots only} for $w=300 \,\mbox{GeV}$.
$\bullet$ Fig. \ref{ls1L1} and \ref{r2ls1} show the allowed regions
in the planes
$(\lambda_{s1},\Lambda_1)$ and $(\lambda_{s1},\rho_2)$.
Here we can see that there is a lower bound on $\lambda_{s1}$ of order 0.1.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[$(\lambda_{s1}, \Lambda_1)$]{\label{ls1L1}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ls1-L1-a1.png}} \quad
\subfloat[$(\Lambda_{1}, \xi)$]{\label{L1xi}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{L1-xi-a1.png}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Correlations between parameters in the Higgs sector. Results of scanning for $w = 300$ GeV,
with ranges of parameters defined by (\ref{newlimits}). Notice the limited range of $\Lambda_1$ and the
lower limit for $\lambda_{s1}$. \label{scan1}}
\end{figure}
$\bullet$ Results of scanning presented in Fig. \ref{ls1L1} and Fig. \ref{L1xi} also show that the range
of $\Lambda_1$ is further limited with respect to the initial assumptions (\ref{newlimits}), and that good solutions
require $|\Lambda_1|\lesssim 0.25$. Recall that this parameter describes mixing between $\Phi_1$ and $\chi$,
effectively giving the non-SM contribution to the SM-like Higgs doublet.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[$( \lambda_{s1},\rho_2)$]{\label{r2ls1}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ls1-rho2-a1.png}} \quad
\subfloat[$(\rho_2, \rho_3)$]{\label{r2r3}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{rho2-rho3-a1.png}}\\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Correlations between parameters in the Higgs sector. Results of scanning for $w = 300$ GeV,
with ranges of parameters defined by (\ref{newlimits}). Again, limit for $\lambda_{s1}$ appears.
Points in the $(\rho_2,\rho_3)$ plane are almost uniformly distributed. \label{scan1b}}
\end{figure}
$\bullet$ There is a correlation between a sign of $\rho_2$ (but not of $\rho_3$) and the value of $\xi$
as presented in Fig. \ref{r2xi} and Fig. \ref{r3xi}, respectively.
This correlation is related to the positivity of $M_{h_2}^2$ -- by taking a wrong assignment of $(\rho_2, \xi)$
pair, e.g. $\pi/2 < \xi < 3\pi/2$ and $\rho_2>0$, we end up with negative $M_{h_2}$.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[$(\rho_{2}, \xi)$]{\label{r2xi}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{rho2-xi-a1.png}} \quad
\subfloat[$(\rho_{3}, \xi)$]{\label{r3xi}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{rho3-xi-a1.png}}
\\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Correlations between parameters in the Higgs sector. Results of scanning for $w = 300$ GeV,
with ranges of parameters defined
by (\ref{newlimits}). Notice the correlation present in $(\rho_{2}, \xi)$,
but not in $(\rho_{3}, \xi)$. \label{scan1c}}
\end{figure}
$\bullet$ $\xi$ was initially varied in range $[0,2 \pi]$. We found that
there is a symmetry in the plans for reflection with respect to $\xi \sim \pi$, as seen in
Figs. \ref{L1xi}, \ref{r2xi} and Fig. \ref{r3xi}.
Therefore, remaining analysis in this paper is limited to values of $\xi\in[0,\pi]$ without affecting the results. \\
$\bullet$ Fig. \ref{scan2} displays $M_{h_2,h_3}$ versus $\lambda_{s1}$. Here we see that the maximum
allowed value of $M_{h_2}$ depends on the value of $\lambda_{s1}$ (Fig. \ref{h2ls1}): for $\lambda_{s1}=0.2$
we can expect masses in range $ 150 < M_{h_2} < 200$ GeV, while for $\lambda_{s1}=1$ the upper limit goes
up to about $430$ GeV. Allowed values for the mass of
$h_3$ are higher than for $h_2$, $ 170 \,\mbox{GeV} < M_{h_3} < \mathcal{O}(10\, \text{TeV})$,
and are almost independent of $\lambda_{s1}$.
Fig.\ref{h3ls1} shows that
the mass of $h_{3}$ lays in the range $ 170 < M_{h_3} < 2000$ GeV. \\
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[$(\lambda_{s1}, M_{h_2})$]{\label{h2ls1}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ls1-Mh2-a1.png}}\quad
\subfloat[$(\lambda_{s1}, M_{h_3})$]{\label{h3ls1}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ls1-Mh3-a1.png}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Correlations between parameters in the Higgs sector. Results of scanning for $w = 300$ GeV,
with ranges of parameters defined by (\ref{newlimits}). Upper bound for $M_{h_2}$ strongly depends on
the value of $\lambda_{s1}$, but there is no such effect of $M_{h_3}$. \label{scan2} }
\end{figure}
$\bullet$ Fig. \ref{scan3} displays $M_{h_2}$, $M_{h_3}$ versus $\rho_{2}$.
Now the allowed range for the mass of $h_2$ is almost independent of $\rho_2$ and is given by $ 150 < M_{h_2} < 430$ GeV,
while the allowed masses for $h_3$ go from
$ 170 < M_{h_3} < 2000$ GeV for $\rho_2=0$, and are reduced to
$ 600 < M_{h_3} < 2000$ GeV for $\rho_2= \pm 1$.\\
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[$(\rho_2, M_{h_2})$]{\label{h2r2}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{rho2-Mh2-a1.png}}\quad
\subfloat[$(\rho_2, M_{h_3})$]{\label{h3r2}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{rho2-Mh3-a1.png}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Correlations between parameters in the Higgs sector. Results of scanning for $w = 300$ GeV,
with ranges of parameters defined by (\ref{newlimits}). Notice the seagull-like shape for the lower
limit for $M_{h_3}$, but not for $M_{h_2}$. \label{scan3} }
\end{figure}
$\bullet$ Fig. \ref{scan4} displays $M_{h_2}$, $M_{h_3}$ versus $\xi$. Here we observe a symmetry for
reflection at $\xi \sim\pi/2$. The allowed range, which
is $ 150 < M_{h_2} < 200$ GeV for $\xi=0.5$, extends up to
$ 150 < M_{h_2} < 430$ GeV for $\xi= 1.6$
Very high mass values for $h_3$ can be obtained for $\xi\sim \pi/2$ (up to $2$ TeV). \\
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[$(\xi, M_{h_2})$]{\label{h2xi}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{xi-Mh2-a1.png}}\quad
\subfloat[$(\xi, M_{h_3})$]{\label{h3xi}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{xi-Mh3-a1.png}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Correlations between parameters in the Higgs sector. Results of scanning for $w = 300$ GeV, with ranges of parameters
defined by (\ref{newlimits}). \label{scan4}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Parameter space in the inert sector \label{ssec-cordm}}
As discussed in section \ref{mass-neutral-intro}, masses of $Z_2$-odd particles are given by a different
set of parameters than masses of $Z_2$-even particles, which were analyzed in the previous subsection. Here, relevant
are three quartic parameters, $\lambda_{3,4,5}$, and one quadratic parameter $m_{22}^2$. The remaining
quartic parameter, $\lambda_2$, appears only in the quartic interaction of $Z_2$-odd particles and is
therefore not constrained by the analysis of the mass spectrum. However, we expect that -- as in the IDM --
combined unitarity, perturbativity and global minimum conditions may provide constraints for this,
otherwise unlimited, parameter \cite{Swiezewska:2012ej}.
Masses of $Z_2$-odd scalars, and therefore parameters of the potential given by relations (\ref{lam5IDM})
and (\ref{relIDM}), are already constrained by experimental and theoretical results.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Measurements done at LEP limit the invisible decays of $Z$ and $W^\pm$ gauge bosons,
require that there is no decay of $W^\pm,Z$ into inert particles resulting in \cite{Cao:2007rm,Lundstrom:2008ai}:
\begin{equation}
M_{H^\pm} + M_{H,A} > M_{W^\pm}, \quad M_{H} + M_{A} > M_Z , \quad 2M_{H^\pm} > M_Z.
\end{equation}
\item Searches for charginos and neutralinos at LEP have been translated into limits of region of
masses in the IDM \cite{Lundstrom:2008ai} excluding
\begin{equation}
M_A - M_H > 8 \,\mbox{GeV} \mbox{ if } M_H < 80 \,\mbox{GeV} \wedge M_A < 100 \,\mbox{GeV}.
\end{equation}
We shall adopt the same limit for inert particles in the studied cIDMS.
\item Note that, as in the IDM, the value of $M_{H^\pm}$ provides limits for $m_{22}^2$,
which is not constrained by the extremum conditions. Demanding that $M_{H^\pm} > 0$ results
in $m_{22}^2 < \lambda_{3} v^2$, which for discussed range of $-1\leq\lambda_{3}\leq1$ reduces
to $m_{22}^2 < v^2$. This constraint is modified by taking into account the model-independent
limit for the charged scalar mass \cite{Heister:2002ev}:
\begin{equation}
M_{H^\pm} > 70-90 \,\mbox{GeV} \Rightarrow m_{22}^2 \lesssim 5 \cdot 10^4 \,\mbox{GeV}^2
\end{equation}
Fig.(\ref{m222Mch}) shows the correlation between the charged-scalar mass and $m_{22}^2$.
Large values of $M_{H^\pm}$ correspond to large values of $-m_{22}^2$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\vspace{-10pt}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{m222-Mch-a1.png}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Charged scalar mass $M_{H^{\pm}}$ as a function of $m_{22}^2$. \label{m222Mch}}
\end{figure}
\item Mass splittings between the $Z_2$-odd particles are given by combinations of
$\lambda_4, \lambda_5$ parameters,
which are constrained by the perturbativity conditions. If we demand that $|\lambda_{3,4,5}|<1$
then in the heavy mass regime all particles
will have similar masses, as they are all driven to high scales by the value of $-m_{22}^2$ (\ref{relIDM}).
This is visible in Fig. \ref{MHMAMch}. Notice that mass splitting of the order of 200 GeV is allowed for the lighter particles.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[$(M_A, M_H)$]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MA-MH-a1.png}}\quad
\subfloat[$(M_{H^{\pm}}, M_H)$]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Mch-MH-a1.png}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Left: Relation between $M_H$ and $M_A$. Right: Relation between $M_{H}$ and $M_{H^{\pm}}$. Both correlations
for random scanning with $|\lambda_{3,4,5}|<1$ and $|m_{22}^2| < 10^{6}\,\mbox{GeV}^2$.\label{MHMAMch}}
\end{figure}
\item Electroweak precision measurements provide strong constraints for New Physics beyond the SM.
In particular, additional particles may introduce important radiative corrections to gauge boson propagators.
Those corrections can be parameterized by the oblique parameters $S$, $T$ and $U$. The value of these parameters
will be influenced both by the presence of extra (heavy) Higgses present in the cIDMS and by inert particles
$H^\pm$, $H$ and $A$. $T$ is sensitive to the isospin violation, i.e. it measures the difference between the new physics contributions of neutral and charged current processes at low energies, while $S$ gives new physics contributions to neutral current processes at different energy scales. $U$ is generally small in new physics models. The latest values of the oblique parameters, determined from a fit with reference mass-values of top and Higgs boson $M_{t,ref}=173 \,\mbox{GeV}$ and $M_{h,ref}=125 \,\mbox{GeV}$ are \cite{Baak:2014ora}:
\begin{equation}
S = 0.05\pm0.11, \quad T = 0.09\pm0.13, \quad U = 0.01\pm0.11.
\end{equation}
In our work we have checked the compatibility of our benchmark points with the 3$\sigma$ bounds on $S$ and $T$, following the method described in \cite{Grimus:2008nb}. For detailed formulas see Appendix \ref{app-stu}. Specific values for given sets of parameters are presented in Table \ref{tab-stu} in Appendix \ref{app-rggdm}. In general, we took the IDM results as the guidance points for our analysis, and the cIDMS represents the same behaviour: additional heavy particles, including the heavy Higgses, can be accommodated in the model without violating EWPT constraints.
\item Measurements of invisible decays of the SM-like Higgs at the LHC set very strong constraints on
Higgs-portal type of DM models [see e.g. \cite{Djouadi:2012zc} and detailed use of constraints in
\cite{Krawczyk:2013jta} for the IDM, or \cite{Keus:2014jha} for the 3HDM].
In general, a DM candidate with mass below approximately 53 GeV annihilating mainly into $b\bar{b}$
through the Higgs exchange cannot be in agreement with
the LHC limits and relic density constraints. The remaining region, $53 \,\mbox{GeV} \lesssim M_H \lesssim 62.5 \,\mbox{GeV}$,
corresponds to the Higgs-resonance,
and the tree-level behaviour is roughly the same in all Higgs-portal-type DM models.
In principle, calculations in this region require loop corrections both for the annihilation cross-section,
and the scattering cross-section, which is beyond the scope of this work. Therefore, in our analysis we will
focus on $M_H>M_{h_1}/2$, i.e. region where Higgs invisible decay channels are
closed and comment on region $M_H<M_{h_1}/2$ in sections \ref{sec-lhc} and \ref{sec-dm} for completeness.
\item For $M_{H}>M_{h_1}/2$, where $h_1$ is the SM-like Higgs particle, all invisible decay channels are closed and
the most important LHC constraint is now the measured value of $h\to \gamma \gamma$ signal strength, which will be discussed
in detail in the next section.
\end{enumerate}
Further constraints for the DM candidate $H$ come obviously from the astrophysical measurements of DM relic density,
and direct and indirect detection. Those will be discussed in section \ref{sec-dm}.
\section{LHC constraints on Higgs parameters in cIDMS \label{sec-lhc}}
\subsection{Higgs signal strength in cIDMS}
Further constraints on the parameters of our model (cIDMS) can be obtained by comparing the
light Higgs signal ($h_1$), and the one arising from the SM, with the LHC results.
This is done by introducing the following signal strength:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{R}_{XX} = \frac{ \sigma( gg\to h_1 ) }{ \sigma( gg\to \phi_{SM} ) }
\frac{\text{BR}(h_1 \to XX) }{\text{BR} (\phi_{SM} \to XX) } ,
\end{equation}
for $X=\gamma, Z,...$, assuming the gluon fusion is the dominant Higgs production channel at the LHC.
Within the narrow-width approximation, the expression for
$\mathcal{R}_{XX}$ reduces to:
\begin{equation}\label{Rxx}
\mathcal{R}_{XX} = \frac{ \Gamma(h_1 \to gg) }{ \Gamma(\phi_{SM} \to gg ) } \,
\frac{\text{BR}(h_1 \to XX)}{\text{BR}(\phi_{SM} \to XX)} .
\end{equation}
In our model the couplings of the lightest Higgs particle ($h_1$) with
vector bosons and top quark get modified, as compared with the SM,
only by a factor $R_{11}$ (where $R_{11}$ is the (11) element of $R^{-1}$ defined by (\ref{r11}))
Thus we can write the Higgs ($h_1$) decay width into gluons as follows:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(h_1 \to gg)= R_{11}^2 \Gamma(\phi_{SM} \to gg ).
\end{equation}
Similarly, for the Higgs boson decay into vector bosons ($V=Z,W$) we have
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(h_{1} \to VV^{*})= R_{11}^{2} \Gamma(\phi_{SM} \to VV^{*} ).
\end{equation}
The one-loop coupling of $h_1$ to photons receives contributions mainly
from the W boson and top quark, as well as the charged scalar $H^\pm$ from the inert sector, so
the amplitude can be written as\footnote{See Appendix \ref{htoVV0} and references therein for more details.}:
\begin{equation}
A(h_1\to \gamma \gamma) = R_{11} ( A^{SM}_W+ A^{SM}_t) + A_{H^\pm}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, the decay widths into two photons and into a photon plus a $Z$ boson,
are given, respectively, by
\begin{equation}
\Gamma (h_1\to \gamma \gamma) = \Gamma (\phi_{SM} \to \gamma \gamma) |1+ \eta_{1}|^2,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(h_1\to Z\gamma)=R_{11}^2 |1+\eta_{2}|^{2}\Gamma(\phi_{SM}\to Z\gamma),
\end{equation}
wher
\begin{eqnarray}
\eta_{1}= \frac{ g_{h_1 H^+ H^-} v } { 2 R_{11} M^2_{H^{\pm}}}\frac{A_{H^\pm}}{(A^{SM}_W+ A^{SM}_t)},\ \
\eta_{2}=\frac{ g_{h_{1}H^{+}H^{-}} v}{2R_{11}M_{H^{\pm}}^{2}}\left(\frac{\mathcal{A}_{H^{\pm}}}{\mathcal{A}_{W}^{SM}+\mathcal{A}_{t}^{SM}}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
The triple coupling $\lambda_{h_1 H^+ H^-}$ is given b
\begin{equation}\label{lhchch}
g_{h_1 H^+ H^-}=v \lambda_{3} R_{11},
\end{equation}
meaning it is also modified with respect to the IDM by a factor of $R_{11}$.
As a good approximation\footnote{Bear in mind that this approximation is established in order to obtain
some analytical expressions for the corresponding ratios, $R_{\gamma\gamma}$, $R_{Z\gamma}$ and $R_{ZZ}$
whose results will guide our dark matter analysis.} in the total SM width of the Higgs boson we can neglect
the contributions
coming from the Higgs decay into $Z\gamma$ and $\gamma\gamma$.
The total Higgs decay width can be significantly modified with respect to the SM if $h_1$ can decay invisibly into inert particles. The
partial decay width for the invisible channels $h_1 \to \varphi \varphi$, where $\varphi=A,H$, is:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(h_1\to \varphi\varphi)=\frac{g_{h_1\varphi\varphi}^{2}}{32\pi M_{h_{1}}}\left(1-\frac{4M_{\varphi}^{2}}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}\right)^{1/2},\label{invdec}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
g_{h_1AA}=\lambda^{-}_{345} v R_{11}\ \ \text{and} \ \ g_{h_1HH}=\lambda_{345}vR_{11}.\notag
\end{equation}
Therefore, including regions of masses where Higgs-invisible decays could take place, the total width of the Higgs boson in
the cIDMS is given by
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{tot}\approx R_{11}^{2} \Gamma_{tot}^{SM}+\Gamma_{inv},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{inv}=\sum_{\varphi_i} \Gamma(h_1\to \varphi_i \varphi_i) \textrm{ for } M_{\varphi_i} < M_{h_{1}}/2, \varphi_i = A,H.
\end{equation}
Finally, the signal strengths from Eq.(\ref{Rxx}) can be written as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{rgc}
&\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}= R_{11}^2\zeta^{-1}, \ \ \mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}= R_{11}^2 |1+ \eta_{1}|^2\zeta^{-1},\ \
\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}=R_{11}^2 |1+\eta_{2}|^{2}\zeta^{-1},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\zeta$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\zeta\equiv1+\frac{\Gamma_{inv}}{R_{11}^2\Gamma_{tot}^{SM}}
\end{equation}
which becomes important when the Higgs is decaying invisibly, otherwise $\zeta^{-1}=1$.
For the cIDMS case $R_{11} = c_1 c_2$, where $c_{1}=\cos\alpha_1$ and $c_{2}=\cos\alpha_2$ are defined by the rotation angles in the
scalar sector, Eq.(\ref{rotfull}), and thus
\begin{eqnarray}\label{rgc2}
\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}= c_{1}^{2}c_{2}^2\zeta^{-1}, \quad \mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}= c_{1}^{2}c_{2}^2 |1+ \eta_{1}|^2\zeta^{-1}, \quad
\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}=c_{1}^{2}c_{2}^2 |1+\eta_{2}|^{2}\zeta^{-1}.
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that there is a limit of $\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}$, i.e. $\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}\leq1$. It is not possible to enhance
this decay with respect to the SM. $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma \gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ can be bigger than 1 if
there is a constructive interference between the SM and the cIDMS contributions.
\subsection{Numerical analysis}
As discussed in sections \ref{ssec-cor} and \ref{ssec-cordm} we accept a value of $M_{h}$ if it lies within the range
(124.69, 125.37) GeV, while
the rest of the parameters are allowed to run over the following ranges,
\begin{align}
&0.2\leq\lambda_{1}\leq0.3,\ \ -1\leq\Lambda_{1},\lambda_{3,4},\rho_{2,3}\leq1, \ \ 0\leq\xi\leq \pi, \ \ \notag\\
& 0 < \lambda_{s1} < 1,\ \ 0<\lambda_2 <1, \ \ -1 < \lambda_{5} < 0, \label{A1param}\\
&\text{and}\ \ |m_{22}^{2}| < 10^{6}(\,\mbox{GeV})^2. \notag
\end{align}
with $v=246\,\text{GeV}$ and $w = 300 \,\mbox{GeV}$.
From Fig.\ref{Fa1} it is clear the ratios $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$, $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$
and $\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}$ can present deviations from the SM value up to $20 \%$. Fig.\ref{Fa1-1} shows the
correlation between $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and
$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$, while Fig. \ref{Fa1-2} correspond to $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $R_{ZZ}$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[($R_{\gamma\gamma}$,$R_{Z\gamma}$)]{\label{Fa1-1}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Rgg-RZg-a1}} \quad
\subfloat[($R_{\gamma\gamma}$,$R_{ZZ}$)]{\label{Fa1-2}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Rgg-RZZ-a1}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{(a) Correlation between $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$.
(b): Correlation between $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}$.}
\label{Fa1}
\end{figure}
If $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}<1$ then both $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}$ are correlated
with $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$, $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}\sim\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}\sim\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}$.
Notice that there is a possibility of enhancement of both $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$. This is in agreement
with the IDM, where a correlation between enhancement in $\gamma\gamma$ and $Z\gamma$ channels exists \cite{Swiezewska:2012eh}.
$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ as functions of $M_{H^{\pm}}$ are shown in Fig.\ref{Fa1-3} and Fig.\ref{Fa1-4}, respectively
For smaller masses of the charged scalar there is a possibility of enhancement of both $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and
$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$. For heavier $M_{H^\pm}$ the maximum values tend to the SM value, however deviation up to 20 \%, i.e.
$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma,Z\gamma} \approx 0.8$, is possible. Note that the situation is similar to the one from the IDM,
where significant enhancement, e.g. $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma} = 1.2$ ,
was possible only if $M_{H^\pm} \lesssim 150 \,\mbox{GeV}$, and for heavier masses $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma} \to 1$ \cite{Swiezewska:2012eh}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[($M_{H^{\pm}}$,$R_{\gamma\gamma}$)]{\label{Fa1-3}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Mch-Rgg-a1}} \quad
\subfloat[($M_{H^{\pm}}$,$R_{Z\gamma}$)]{\label{Fa1-4}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Mch-RZg-a1}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{(a) $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ as function of $M_{H^{\pm}}$.
(b) $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ as function of $M_{H^{\pm}}$. Note that the upper limit for $M_{H^{\pm}}$ comes
from the lower limit for $m_{22}^2$ from set (\ref{A1param}).}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[($M_{H}$,$R_{\gamma\gamma}$)]{\label{Fa1-5}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MH-Rgg-a1}}\quad
\subfloat[($M_{H}$,$R_{Z\gamma}$)]{\label{Fa1-6}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MH-RZg-a1}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{(a) $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ as function of $M_{H}$.
(b) $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ as function of $M_{H}$.}\label{RsVsMH}
\end{figure}
Similar result is presented in Fig. \ref{Fa3-1}, which depicts $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ as function of the dimensionful
parameter $m_{22}^{2}$. Significant enhancement is possible only for small values of $|m_{22}^2|$, which correspond to small
values of $M_{H^\pm}$. For large negative values of $m_{22}^2$, i.e. heavy masses of all $Z_2$-odd scalars, the preferred value
of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ is close to the SM value. Then the heavy particles effectively
decouple from the SM sector and their influence on the SM observables is minimal, as expected.
This effect it also visible in the IDM.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{m222-Rgg-a1}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ as function of $m_{22}^{2}$.\label{Fa3-1}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Comment on invisible Higgs decays}
As it was already mentioned in section \ref{ssec-cordm} measurement of Higgs invisible decays is a powerful tool to
constrain models, which contain additional scalar particles with couple to the SM-like Higgs $h_1$ and have masses smaller than $M_{h_1}/2$.
The partial decay width of Higgs into invisible particles, for example a DM candidate from the cIDMS, is given by (\ref{invdec}), and therefore
depends on the DM candidate's mass and its coupling to the Higgs.
The cIDMS acts here as a standard Higgs-portal type of DM model and we obtain results known already for the IDM. Figure \ref{inv5}
shows the relation between the coupling of DM candidate to Higgs (which is $c_1c_2\lambda_{345}$ with $c_1 c_2 \approx 0.99$ for all considered benchmark points) and $M_H$ assuming that $Br(h_1\to inv)$
is smaller than $0.37$ (which is the value from ATLAS, denoted by dashed line \cite{atlasbr}) and $0.2$ (which is the value coming from global
fit analysis, solid line \cite{Belanger:2013xza}).
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{invisible.pdf}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Constraints for $\lambda_{345}$ from measurements of Higgs invisible decays branching ratio, with the assumption that only $h_1 \to HH$ channel is open. Solid line: $Br(h\to inv)=0.2$, dashed line: $Br(h\to inv) = 0.37.$ \label{inv5}}
\end{figure}
If we demand that $Br(h_1\to inv)<0.37$ allowed region of DM-Higgs coupling is $c_1c_2\lambda_{345} \lesssim 0.02$.
For $Br(h_1\to inv)<0.20$ we obtain $c_1c_2\lambda_{345} \lesssim 0.015$. This limit will be combined with the relic density
measurements in section \ref{sec-dm} and it will provide strong constrain, comparable with the one obtained from DM direct
detection searches, for low DM mass region.
In Fig.~\ref{inv1} we see that for a $20\%$ deviation of $R_{\gamma\gamma}$
from the SM model value, the invisible branching ratio is actually
$Br(h_1\to inv)<0.20$. On the other hand, Fig.~\ref{inv3} shows that when the invisible channels are open,
the dimensionless parameter $\lambda_{345}$ should be small (as mentioned above) in order to get an invisible branching
ratio below $20\%$. Notice that when the invisible decay channel of the Higgs is closed, that is
$Br(h_1\to inv)=0$, then $\lambda_{345}\gtrsim -0.5$. In both figures the horizontal line
at $Br(h_1\to inv)=0.2$ should be understood as a reference point, so that all the points above
it are ruled out by current experiment results.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\label{inv1}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Rgg-Brh2in}} \quad
\subfloat[]{\label{inv3}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{l345-Brh2in}} \\
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{(a) $Br(h_1\to inv)$ as a function of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$. (b) $Br(h_1\to inv)$
as a function of $\lambda_{345}$. In both panels, all the points above $Br(h_1\to inv)=0.2$
are ruled out by current experiment results.}
\end{figure}
\section{Dark Matter in the cIDMS \label{sec-dm}}
In this section we will discuss properties of DM in the model. Because we can treat the cIDMS as an extension of the IDM,
we will start with the brief description of DM phenomenology of the later. In both models $H$ is a DM candidate if
$\lambda_5<0$. In the IDM the DM annihilation channels that are dominant for the DM relic density are
$HH \to h \to f \bar{f}$ for $M_H \lesssim M_W$ and
$HH \to WW$ and $HH \to h \to WW$ for $M_H \gtrsim M_W$. If the mass splittings $M_A - M_H$ or $M_{H^\pm} - M_H$
are small then also the coannihilation channels $H A(H^\pm) \to Z(W^\pm) \to f f'$ play an important role.
Regions of masses and couplings that correspond to the proper relic density have been studied in many papers
(see e.g. \cite{Barbieri:2006dq,LopezHonorez:2006gr,Cao:2007rm,Dolle:2009fn,Honorez:2010re,LopezHonorez:2010tb,Sokolowska:2011aa}).
In general, there are four regions of DM mass where the measured relic density can be reproduced:
light DM particles with mass below $10 \textrm{ GeV}$, medium mass regime of $50-80 \textrm{ GeV}$
with two distinctive regions: with or without coannihilation of $H$ with the neutral $Z_2$-odd particle~$A$,
medium mass region $80-150$ GeV with very large mass splittings, and heavy DM of mass larger than roughly
$550 \textrm{ GeV}$, where all inert particles have almost degenerate masses and so coannihilation processes
between all inert particles are crucial. Those regions are further constrained or excluded (as it is the case
with the low DM mass region) by direct and indirect detection experiments, and by the LHC data (see
e.g. \cite{Krawczyk:2013jta, Goudelis:2013uca,Arhrib:2013ela} for recent results).
Addition of the singlet field $\chi$ changes this picture, although certain properties of the IDM are kept.
In our model there is no direct coupling between the inert doublet $\Phi_2$ and the singlet $\chi$, and the
only interaction is through mixing of $\chi$ with the first doublet $\Phi_1$. This means, that the
inert particles' interaction with gauge bosons is like in the IDM, while the inert scalars-Higgs
interaction changes with respect to the IDM in the way. The IDM Higgs particle $h$ corresponds
in our case to $\phi_1$, so $h \to \phi_1$, where $\phi_1 = \beta_1 h_1 + \beta_2 h_2 + \beta_3 h_3$
is given by the mixing parameters in (\ref{phi1DM}), and obviously $\sum_{i=1}^3 \beta_i^2 = 1$.
The IDM case corresponds to $\beta_{2,3} \to 0$. The important processes for the cIDMS are now:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& HH \to h_i \to f \bar{f}, \quad HH \to h_i \to WW (ZZ), \label{dmdiag}\\
&& HH \to WW,\label{dmgauge}\\
&& H A(H^\pm) \to Z(W^\pm) \to f f', \label{dmcoan}
\end{eqnarray}
with couplings $g_{h_iHH} = \beta_i g_{h HH}^{\textrm{IDM}}$, \,\, $g_{h_i f \bar{f}} = \beta_i g_{h f \bar{f}}^{\textrm{IDM}}$, $g_{h XX}^{\textrm{IDM}}$ being the respective couplings of $h$ to $HH$ and $f \bar{f}$ in the IDM. Following sum rules hold:
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i=1}^3 g_{h_iHH}^2 = (g_{h HH}^{\textrm{IDM}})^2=\lambda_{345}^2,\quad \sum_{i=1}^3 g_{h_i f \bar{f}} = (g_{h f \bar{f}}^{\textrm{IDM}})^2.
\end{equation}
Since both $g_{h_iHH}$ and $g_{h_i f \bar{f}}$ have an extra $\beta_i$ coefficient with respect to the IDM,
the rate for Higgs-mediated processes (\ref{dmdiag}) will change by $\beta_i^2$. If we are to consider an
IDM-like case with $\beta_{2,3} \ll \beta_1$ then we could expect to reproduce results for the IDM. However,
the interference between diagrams may be in principle important, and as our analysis shows, they
do influence the results. Notice also, that since CP symmetry is not preserved in this model,
additional channels like $HH\to h_i \to Z h_j$ can appear if DM particle is heavy enough.
\subsection{DM constraints}
Masses of inert scalars and the DM candidate are constrained in cIDMS, like in the IDM, by
various experimental limits. Collider constraints for inert particles were discussed in section
\ref{ssec-cordm}, below we present results and limits from the dedicated dark matter experiments.
\begin{enumerate}
\item We expect the relic density of $H$ to be in agreement with Planck data \cite{Ade:2013zuv}:
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{DM} h^2 = 0.1199 \pm 0.0027,
\end{equation}
which leads to the 3$\sigma$ bound:
\begin{equation}
\quad 0.1118<\Omega_{DM}h^2 <0.128. \label{PLANCK_lim}
\end{equation}
If a DM candidate fulfils this requirement, then it constitutes 100 \% of dark matter in the Universe.
A DM candidate with $\Omega_{DM} h^2 $ smaller than the observed value is allowed, however in this case
one needs to extend the model to have more DM candidates to complement the missing relic density.
Regions of the parameter space corresponding to the value of $\Omega_{DM}h^2$ larger than the Planck upper limit are excluded.
In this work calculation of $\Omega_{DM} h^2$ was performed with an aid of micrOMEGAs 3.5 \cite{Belanger:2013oya}.
In these calculations all (co)annihilation channels are included, with states with up to two virtual gauge bosons allowed.
\item
The strongest constraints for light DM annihilating into $bb$ or $\tau\tau$ from indirect detection experiments
are provided by the measurements of the gamma-ray flux from Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies by the Fermi-LAT satellite,
ruling out the canonical cross-section
$\langle \sigma v\rangle \approx 3\times 10^{-26}~{\rm cm}^3/{\rm s}$ for $M_{DM} \lesssim 25-40 \mbox{ GeV}$
\cite{Ackermann:2013yva,Ackermann:2011wa}.
For the heavier DM candidates PAMELA and Fermi-LAT experiments provide similar limits of
$ \langle \sigma v\rangle \approx 10^{-25}~{\rm cm}^3/{\rm s}$ for $M_{DM}=200 \mbox{ GeV} $
in the $bb,\tau\tau$ or $WW$ channels \cite{Cirelli:2013hv}. H.E.S.S. measurements of signal
coming from the Galactic Centre set limits of $ \langle \sigma v\rangle \approx 10^{-25}-10^{-24}~{\rm cm}^3/{\rm s}$
for masses up to TeV scale \cite{Abramowski:2011hc}.
\item Current strongest upper limit on the spin independent (SI) scattering cross section of DM particles on nuclei
$\sigma_{DM-N}$ is provided by the LUX experiment \cite{Akerib:2013tjd}:
\begin{equation}
\quad \sigma_{DM-N} < 7.6 \times 10^{-46}~{\rm cm}^2 \quad \mbox{for} \quad M_{DM}= 33 \mbox{ GeV}.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Benchmarks}
In this section we discuss properties of DM for chosen benchmarks in agreement with constraints from LHC/LEP:
\begin{eqnarray}
\textrm{\textbf{A1}: }\; M_{h_1} = 124.83 \,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_2} = 194.46 \,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_3} = 239.99 \,\mbox{GeV}, \\
\textrm{\textbf{A2}: }\; M_{h_1} = 124.85 \,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_2} = 288.16 \,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_3} = 572.25 \,\mbox{GeV}, \\
\textrm{\textbf{A3}: }\; M_{h_1} = 125.01 \,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_2} = 301.41\,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_3} = 1344.01 \,\mbox{GeV},\\
\textrm{\textbf{A4}: }\; M_{h_1} = 125.36 \,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_2} = 149.89\,\mbox{GeV}, \; M_{h_3} = 473.95 \,\mbox{GeV}.
\end{eqnarray}
By choosing values of $M_{h_1,h_2,h_3}$ we determine parameters from the Higgs sector: $\lambda_1, \lambda_{s1},\Lambda_1,\rho_2,\rho_3,\xi$, as discussed in sec.\ref{ssec-cor}. Corresponding values of parameters of the potential for each benchmark are presented in Appendix \ref{app-bench}.
Above values were chosen to illustrate different possible scenarios:
\begin{itemize}
\item For A1 all Higgs particles are relatively light, although only one, the SM-like Higgs $h_1$, is lighter than $2M_W$.
\item Cases A2 and A3 are similar to A1; the important difference is the value of $M_{h_3}$, which is of the order of 500 GeV or 1 TeV, respectively.
\item In scenario A4 there are two Higgs particles that have mass below $2M_W$: $h_1$ (the SM-like Higgs) and $h_2$.
\end{itemize}
We treat $2M_W$ as the distinguishing value because two Higgs particles of masses smaller than $2 M_{W}$ influence the DM phenomenology by introducing another resonance region in the medium DM mass regime.
Below we shall discuss properties of DM for the listed benchmark points. In this paper we focus on three different mass regions\footnote{Very light DM particle from the IDM with $M_H \lesssim 10$ GeV is excluded by combined relic density and Higgs-invisible decay limits from the LHC \cite{Krawczyk:2013jta}.}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item light DM mass: $50 \,\mbox{GeV} < M_H < M_{h_1}/2$ with $M_A = M_H + 50 \,\mbox{GeV}, M_{H^\pm} = M_H + 55 \,\mbox{GeV}$,
\item medium DM mass: $M_{h_1}/2 < M_H < M_W$ with $M_A = M_H + 50 \,\mbox{GeV}, M_{H^\pm} = M_H + 55 \,\mbox{GeV}$,
\item heavy DM mass: $M_H \gtrsim 500 \,\mbox{GeV}$ with $M_A = M_{H^\pm} = M_H + 1 \,\mbox{GeV}$,
\end{enumerate}
which are based on studies of the IDM. Those mass splittings are in agreement with all collider constraints, including the EWPT limits, for all studied benchmark points (see Table \ref{tab-stu} in Appendix \ref{app-rggdm} for exact values).
We are not going to address the possibility of accidental cancellations in region $M_W <M_H <160-200 \,\mbox{GeV}$ \cite{LopezHonorez:2010tb}, leaving it for the future work. Note however, that this region could in principle be modified with respect to the IDM in benchmarks A2 and A3.
\subsection{Light DM}
In this work we define the light DM region as $50 \,\mbox{GeV} < M_H < 62 \,\mbox{GeV}$. As mentioned in
section \ref{ssec-cordm} and \ref{sec-lhc}, the SM-like Higgs particle can decay invisibly
into a $HH$ pair (or also into $AA$, if we allow $M_A < M_{h_1}/2$). Measurements of invisible
decays constrain strongly the value of the DM-Higgs coupling, which in case of cIDMS is $c_1 c_2 \lambda_{345}$.
Results presented in this section were obtained for benchmark $A1$. Other benchmarks were also tested
and they provide no noticeable change in the results. In all considered benchmarks $c_1 c_2 \approx 1$
and the main annihilation channel of DM particles is $HH \to h_1 \to b\bar{b}$, regardless of the values of $M_{h_2}$ and $M_{h_3}$.
In the Fig. \ref{lightDM} relation between $\Omega_{DM}h^2$ and $M_H$ is presented, for a few chosen
values of $\lambda_{345}$. As discussed before, $\lambda_{345}\sim0.015-0.02$ is the boundary value which is in agreement with LHC limits for $Br(h\to inv)$. From plot \ref{lightDM} one can see that this value gives proper relic density for masses of the order of $53 \,\mbox{GeV}$, which is a that had been previously obtained for One- and Two-Inert Doublet Models \cite{Krawczyk:2013jta,Keus:2014jha}. This value of coupling for masses below $53 \,\mbox{GeV}$ results in relic density well above the Planck limits, which leads to the overclosing of the Universe. For those smaller masses, to obtain a proper relic density, one needs to enhance the DM annihilation by taking a bigger value of coupling ($\lambda_{345} \sim 0.05,0.07$), which at the same time will lead to the enhanced Higgs invisible decays and this is not in agreement with the LHC results. For masses bigger than $53 \,\mbox{GeV}$ coupling corresponding to the proper relic
abundance gets smaller $(\lambda_{345}\sim 0.002)$, fitting into LHC constraints.
As discussed in section \ref{sec-lhc}, if the Higgs can decay invisibly, its total decay width is strongly affected with respect to
the SM, and therefore it is not possible to obtain enhancement in the Higgs di-photon decay channel, i.e. $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma} <1$, see Fig.~\ref{RsVsMH}.
This was confirmed by the direct check we performed, and the detailed values are presented in the Appendix \ref{app-rggdm} in Table \ref{tab-low}. Maximum allowed value of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ for parameters which are in agreement both with the relic density constraints, and with the LHC invisible branching ratio limits, is between $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma} \approx 0.85-0.91$ for benchmarks A1-A3. It is interesting to note, that for benchmark A4, i.e. the one with two relatively light Higgs particles, results are different -- $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ differs from the SM value for more than 20\%. This is an important difference, because for light DM particles calculation of relic density does not depend on the chosen benchmark.
Similar situation happens with values of $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$, which are close to the SM value for benchmarks A1-A3 (depending on the values of parameters one can obtain both an enhancement and a suppression with respect to $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma} = 1$), however for benchmark A4 this channel is suppressed by more than 20 \%.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{lightDM2}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Values of DM relic density ($\Omega_{DM} h^2$) with respect to DM mass ($M_H$) for chosen values of $\lambda_{345}$ parameter, for benchmark A1. Horizontal lines represent 3$\sigma$ Planck bounds, region above is excluded, in region below additional DM candidate is needed to complement missing DM relic density. Calculations done for $M_{A} = M_{H} + 50 \,\mbox{GeV}, M_{H^\pm}=M_H + 55 \,\mbox{GeV}$, however exact values of those parameters do not influence the output, as the coannihilation effects are surpressed. \label{lightDM} }
\end{figure}
\subsection{Medium DM}
In this section we focus on the medium mass region from the IDM, i.e. masses of DM candidate between
$M_{h_1}/2 \approx 62 \,\mbox{GeV}$ and $M_{W} \approx 83 \,\mbox{GeV}$.
Figures \ref{mid1} show the behaviour of relic density with respect to $\lambda_{345}$ for masses of
dark matter candidate changing between $M_{h_1}/2$ and $M_W$, for chosen cIDMS benchmark points
A1-A3 (Fig. \ref{a13}) and A4 (Fig. \ref{a4}). Results for the IDM are well known in the literature
and this case is added for comparison in Fig. \ref{idm}.
There is a near-resonance region, $M_H \sim M_h/2$, symmetric around $\lambda_{345} \approx 0$.
Larger DM mass corresponds to the greater significance of annihilation into gauge bosons, causing
the asymmetry with respect to $\lambda_{345} = 0$. Also, the increased annihilation rate leads to the lowered relic density.
This behaviour is repeated by benchmark points A1-A3 of cIDMS, where both additional Higgs particles
are heavier than $2M_W$. However, one can see that the presence of those additional states is non-negligible.
It is important to stress that even for $\beta_{2,3} \ll \beta_1$, i.e. the case that was supposed to
be close to the IDM, the impact of three Higgs states on the value of relic density is significant.
Annihilation channel (\ref{dmdiag}) gives
\begin{equation}
\sigma(HH \to \bar{f}f)_{cIDMS} = \sigma(HH \to \bar{f}f)_{IDM} + \sigma_\textrm{int}.
\end{equation}
In general,
annihilation of DM particles is enhanced and therefore the relic density for a given mass is lower
than the one corresponding to DM candidate from the IDM.
It means, that in the cIDMS for the masses of DM candidate bigger than $79 \,\mbox{GeV}$ relic density is
below Planck limit, while for the IDM masses up to $83 \,\mbox{GeV}$ can be in agreement with the measured value.
A new phenomena with respect to the IDM can happen if one of the extra Higgs bosons is lighter than $2M_W$,
which is the case for benchmark A4. As the mass of DM candidate gets closer to this $h_2$-resonance,
i.e. $M_{DM}\gtrsim 70 \,\mbox{GeV}$, the effective annihilation cross-section increases, resulting in the relic
density below the observed value. Clearly, the annihilation rate is enhanced and dominated by the Higgs-type
exchange through $h_2$ (note the symmetric distribution around $\lambda_{345} = 0$), in contrast
to the previously discussed cases, whereas for the heavier masses the annihilation into gauge bosons
is starting to dominate, therefore pushing the good region towards negative values of $\lambda_{345}$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\subfloat[A1-A3]{\label{a13}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{A2}} \quad
\subfloat[A4]{\label{a4}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{A4}} \\
\subfloat[IDM]{\label{idm}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{IDM}} \quad
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Relation between DM relic density $\Omega_{DM}h^2$ and $\lambda_{345}$ for chosen values of $M_H$ for (a) benchmark A2,
(b) benchmark A4, (c) the IDM. Horizontal lines represent Planck limits for $\Omega_{DM} h^2 = 0.1199 \pm 3 \sigma$,
region above is excluded. Calculations done for $M_{A} = M_{H} + 50 \,\mbox{GeV}, M_{H^\pm}=M_H + 55 \,\mbox{GeV}$, however exact values
of those parameters do not influence the output, as the coannihilation effects are surpressed.\label{mid1} }
\end{figure}
The difference between benchmarks is even more striking if one studies good regions of relic density in
plane $(M_H, \lambda_{345})$, as presented in Fig. \ref{mid2}. For cases A1-A3 the behaviour follows
the one from the IDM, with corresponding couplings being slightly smaller. Nevertheless, the scenario is
repeated and one can clearly see the shift towards the negative values of coupling. In case of benchmark
A4 the situation is completely different; not only the mass range is significantly reduced with respect
to the previous cases and the IDM, but also the values of coupling are much smaller, concentrated symmetrically around zero.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{mid}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Relic density constraints on the mass of the DM candidate and its coupling to SM Higgs boson,
with the white and gray regions representing too little and too much relic abundance respectively.
Red and blue regions corresponds to relic density in agreement with Planck measurements for
benchmark A2 and A4, respectively. \label{mid2} }
\end{figure}
The cIDMS, as other scalar DM models, can be strongly constrained by results of direct detection experiments.
Current strongest limits come from LUX experiment, and are presented in Fig. \ref{ddmid}. There are also
results of calculation of DM-nucleus scattering cross-section, $\sigma_{DM,N}$ for the benchmark points discussed
in this section. Red round points denote benchmarks A1-A3, while blue triangle points correspond
to benchmark A4. The difference between those two groups is clear. In case of benchmark A4, the coupling
is usually much smaller than in cases A1-A3, therefore the resulting cross-section will be also
smaller\footnote{Recall that the DM scattering off nuclei is mediated by the Higgs particles, $h_1,h_2,h_3$,
therefore the strength of this scattering will directly depend on the value of DM-Higgs couplings.},
falling well below the current experimental limits.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{cIDMS_DD}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Direct detection constraints for considered benchmarks (A1-A3: red points, A4: blue triangles). All points are in agreement with relic density measurements and collider constraints. Black line: upper LUX limit. \label{ddmid} }
\end{figure}
LHC analysis provides us with further constraints for the studied region. For benchmarks A1-A4 values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and
$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ are within the ATLAS \& CMS experimental errors, although the preferred value of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ is below 1.
The value of these signal strengths depends on the exact values of parameters and an enhancement is possible,
but not automatic. All values are listed in Table \ref{tab-mid} in Appendix \ref{app-rggdm}.
Case A4 differs from the other three benchmarks because of the presence of an extra light Higgs particle.
For points that have good relic density, allowed values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ are close to $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma} \approx 0.75$,
with $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ also below 1, namely $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma} \sim 0.79$ (see the Table \ref{tab-mid} in Appendix \ref{app-rggdm}).
Recall however, that in contrast with the low DM mass region, here difference between two groups
of benchmarks is visible already during calculations of DM relic density.
\subsection{Heavy DM}
In the heavy mass regime all inert particles have similar masses, because of perturbativity limits for
self-couplings $\lambda_i$. Those masses are driven by the value of $m_{22}^2$, which can reach large negative values.
Therefore, the mass splittings given by combination of $\lambda_{4,5}$ are small. In this analysis we choose them to be:
\begin{equation}
M_{A} = M_{H^\pm} = M_H + 1 \,\mbox{GeV}.
\end{equation}
Fig. \ref{heavy} presents the relation between relic density $\Omega_{DM}h^2$ and DM-Higgs coupling $\lambda_{345}$ for
benchmarks A1 and A3, for fixed values of DM mass. Difference between A1 and A3 lies in the fact that for
benchmark A3 there is one very heavy Higgs particle. Note however, that the obtained results are very similar,
and a very small difference is visible only for masses $M_H \sim 625-650 \,\mbox{GeV} \sim M_{h_3}/2$. For heavy
masses the 4-vertex annihilation and coannihilation channels into gauge bosons dominate the annihilation
cross-section, therefore the contribution from additional Higgs states is not nearly as relevant as it was
for the medium mass region. Therefore we conclude that the presence of heavy Higgs particles of different
masses does not differentiate between the cases.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{heavy}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Heavy DM candidate: relation between relic density and DM-Higgs coupling $\lambda_{345}$ for benchmarks A1 (dashed lines) and A3 (solid lines) for chosen values of $M_H$. Results for A2 and A4 are equivalent to A1. Horizontal lines denote 3$\sigma$ Planck limits.
\label{heavy} }
\end{figure}
It is interesting to note, that this region of masses is more similar to the low DM mass region,
that to the medium mass region. Although all benchmarks result in the very similar values of
$\Omega_{DM}h^2$, just like for the light DM, there is a difference when it comes to $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$.
Again, for cases A1-A3 the preferred value of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ is bigger, this time tending towards the close neighbourhood of 1. For case A4
resulting values are smaller, of the order of $0.8$. Detailed values are presented in Table \ref{tab-heavy} in Appendix \ref{app-rggdm}.
\section{Conclusions and Outlook \label{sec-con}}
In this work we have studied the cIDMS -- an extension of the Standard Model, namely a $Z_2$ symmetric Two-Higgs
Doublet Model with a complex singlet. This model, apart from having a $Z_2$-odd scalar doublet, which may
provide a good DM candidate, contains a complex singlet with a non-zero complex VEV, which can bring additional
sources of CP violation. This is a feature that is missing from the IDM.
Within the model different scenarios can be realized. We have focused on the case where the SM-like Higgs particle,
existence of which has been confirmed by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at the LHC, comes predominantly from the first,
SM-like doublet, with a small modification coming from the singlet. In addition to the SM-like Higgs there are two other
Higgs particles, and their presence can influence Higgs and DM phenomenology strongly.
We constrain our model by comparing the properties of the light Higgs particle ($h_1$) from the cIDMS with
the one arising from the SM. LHC results provide limits for the Higgs-decay signal strengths, in particular $h_1\to\gamma \gamma$.
There are correlations $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}\sim\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}\sim\mathcal{R}_{ZZ}$. Maximum value for $h_1 \to ZZ$ signal strength is 1.
For smaller masses of the charged scalar there is a possibility of enhancement of both $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and
$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$. For heavier $M_{H^\pm}$ the maximum values tend to the SM value.
$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma \gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ can be bigger than 1 if
there is a constructive interference between the SM and the cIDMS contributions.
Notice, that this enhancement is possible simultaneously as in the IDM,
i.e. there is a correlation between enhancement in $\gamma\gamma$ and $Z\gamma$
channels.
The cIDMS can provide a good DM candidate, which is in agreement with the current experimental results.
The low DM mass region, which we define as masses of $H$ below $M_{h_1}/2$, reproduces behaviour of
known Higgs-portal DM models, like the IDM. For $M_{H} \lesssim 53$ GeV it is not possible to fulfil LHC constraints for the Higgs
invisible decay branching ratio and relic density measurements at the same time.
For $53 \,\mbox{GeV} \lesssim M_H \lesssim 63 \,\mbox{GeV}$ we are in the resonance region of enhanced annihilation with very
small coupling $\lambda_{345}$ corresponding to proper relic density. This region is in agreement with
collider and DM direct detection constraints, however we expect the loop corrections to play an important
role here. It is important to stress that, while DM phenomenology does not depend on the chosen
benchmark point (A1-A4), there is a difference when it comes to the LHC observables. Values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$
for benchmark A4 are smaller than in all other cases.
For heavier DM mass, the mere presence of heavier Higgs particles changes the annihilation rate of
DM particles. Our studies show that the annihilation cross-section is enhances with respect to the
IDM and therefore relic density in the cIDMS is usually lower than for the corresponding point in the
IDM. This is the case both in medium and heavy DM mass region.
The most striking change with respect to the IDM arises in the relic density analysis with the possibility
of having an additional resonance region if mass of one of additional Higgs particles is smaller than $2M_W$.
For our chosen benchmark points it happens in case A4. Corresponding DM-Higgs couplings, and therefore the
resulting DM-nucleus scattering-cross-section constrained by results of direct detection experiments, are
much smaller for A4 than for other benchmark points.
This point, however, results in the much smaller values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$. Those values are on the edge
of 20 \% difference with respect to the SM value, and -- while not being yet excluded by the experiments within
current experimental errors, they are not favoured. For other studied benchmark points, both relic density
calculations, and the LHC observables, do not depend very strongly on the exact values of masses of
Higgs particles. Preferred values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ are of the order of $0.95$.
In the heavy mass region all inert particles are heavier than the particles from the SM sector and
the impact on the Higgs phenomenology can be minimal. For example, this is the region where $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$
is the closest to the SM value.
Significant modification of our model with respect to the IDM, is the possibility of having
additional source of CP violation. In a CP-conserving Higgs sector, only real components of Higgs
multiplets would couple to vector boson pairs (e.g. $h_iZZ$, $h_iW^+W^-$). In the CP-conserving
2HDM with a real singlet model we would have two CP-conserving neutral states, $h_1,h_2$,
that couple to $VV$ pair. In a CP-violating Higgs sector, as in the case of cIDMS,
there is mixing between the real and imaginary parts of Higgs multiplets, resulting in all
three states $h_1$, $h_2$ and $h_3$ coupling to $VV$ pairs. LHC constraints that make $h_1VV$
couplings so SM-like, suggest the corresponding couplings
of $h_2$ and $h_3$ would be small.
Further CP violating effects may appear in the fermionic sector, when the general Yukawa coupling is
modified by the CP-violating phases. However,
by construction only $\Phi_1$ couples to fermions (up-, down-type quarks and charged leptons),
and such effects are not present, except maybe in the
neutrino sector.
Therefore we suggest the only possible signal of CP violation would come from the scalar interactions arising
from the Higgs potential, and in particular those
proportional to parameters $\kappa_2$ or $\kappa_3$. It may be needed to study the triple interactions
from the Higgs potential, in order to identify 3-point coupling of the type $h_i h_j h_k$, which would
only appear when there is CP violation present in the model.
The purpose of this paper was to find general properties of the model, which allows for
additional source of CP violation, at the same time being in agreement with all existing collider data,
especially on Higgs sector, and dedicated dark matter experiments. Further investigation is needed to
establish the amount of CP violation provided by the model, which is our plan for the future work.
\paragraph{Acknowledgements}
C.B. was supported by MINECO grants FPA2011-22975
and MULTIDARK Consolider CSD2009-00064.
J.L. Diaz-Cruz acknowledge support from CONACYT-SNI (Mexico). Work of MK, DS and ND was supported in part by
the grant NCN OPUS 2012/05/B/ST2/03306 (2012-2016). We are thankful for valuable discussions with Bogumila Swiezewska.
\begin{appendix}
\section{Decays $h\to \gamma\gamma$ and $h\to Z\gamma$}\label{htoVV0}
The decay width, $\Gamma(h\to \gamma\gamma)$, in the IDMS model is given by, \cite{Swiezewska:2012eh,Djouadi:2005gj},
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(h\to \gamma\gamma)=R_{11}^2 |1+\eta_{1}|^{2}\Gamma(\phi_{SM}\to Z\gamma).
\end{equation}
Then the ratio $R_{\gamma\gamma}$ turns out,
\begin{equation}\label{Rgaga}
\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}=R_{11}^2 |1+\eta_{1}|^{2},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eta1}
\eta_{1}=
\frac{g_{h_{1}H^{+}H^{-}} v}{2 R_{11} M_{H^{\pm}}^{2}}\left(\frac{A_{H^{\pm}}}{A_{W}^{SM}+A_{t}^{SM}}\right).
\end{equation}
The form factors for this decay are,
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{H^{\pm}}&=& A_{0}\left(\frac{4M_{H^{\pm}}^{2}}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}\right),\notag \\
A_{t}^{SM}&=&\frac{4}{3} A_{1/2}\left(\frac{4M^{2}_{t}}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}\right), \\
A_{W}^{SM}&=& A_{1}\left(\frac{4M^{2}_{W}}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}\right),\notag
\end{eqnarray}
where,
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{1/2}(\tau)&=&2\tau\left[1+(1-\tau)f(\tau)\right],\notag\\
A_{1}(\tau)&=&-\left[2+3\tau+3\tau(2-\tau)f(\tau)\right],\\
A_{0}(\tau)&=&-\tau\left[1-\tau f(\tau)\right],\notag
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
f(\tau) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\arcsin^{2}(1/\sqrt{\tau}) & \mbox{for } \tau\geq1 \\
-\frac{1}{4}\left(\log\frac{1+\sqrt{1-\tau}}{1-\sqrt{1-\tau}}-i\pi\right)^2 & \mbox{for } \tau<1.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}\\
The decay width, $\Gamma(h\to Z\gamma)$, in the IDMS model is given by,
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(h\to Z\gamma)=R_{11}^2 |1+\eta_{2}|^{2}\Gamma(\phi_{SM}\to Z\gamma)
\end{equation}
and the ratio for this process turns out,
\begin{equation}\label{RZga}
\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}=R_{11}^2 |1+\eta_{2}|^{2},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eta2}
\eta_{2}=
\frac{g_{h_{1}H^{+}H^{-}} v}{2R_{11}M_{H^{\pm}}}\left(\frac{\mathcal{A}_{H^{\pm}}}{\mathcal{A}_{W}^{SM}+\mathcal{A}_{t}^{SM}}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{A}_{H^{\pm}}&=&-\frac{(1-2\sin^{2}\theta_{W})}{\cos\theta_{W}}
I_{1}\left(\frac{4M^{2}_{H^{\pm}}}{M_{h}^{2}},\frac{4M^{2}_{H^{\pm}}}{M_{Z}^{2}}\right),\notag \\
\mathcal{A}_{t}^{SM}&=&2\frac{(1-\frac{8}{3}\sin^{2}\theta_{W})}{\cos\theta_{W}}
A_{1/2}^{h}\left(\frac{4M^{2}_{t}}{M_{h}^{2}},\frac{4M^{2}_{t}}{M_{Z}^{2}}\right),\notag \\
\mathcal{A}_{W}^{SM}&=&A_{1}^{h}\left(\frac{4M^{2}_{W}}{M_{h}^{2}},\frac{4M^{2}_{W}}{M_{Z}^{2}}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{1/2}^{h}(\tau,\lambda)&=&I_{1}(\tau,\lambda)-I_{2}(\tau,\lambda),\notag\\
A_{1}^{h}(\tau,\lambda)&=&\cos\theta_{W}\left\lbrace 4\left(3-\frac{\sin^{2}\theta_{W}}{\cos^{2}\theta_{W}}\right)I_{2}(\tau,\lambda)+\left[\left(1+\frac{2}{\tau}\right)\frac{\sin^{2}\theta_{W}}{\cos^{2}\theta_{W}}-\left(5+\frac{2}{\tau}\right)\right]I_{1}(\tau,\lambda)\right\rbrace,\notag\\
I_{1}(\tau,\lambda)&=&\frac{\tau\lambda}{2(\tau-\lambda)}+\frac{\tau^{2}\lambda^{2}}{2(\tau-\lambda)^{2}}\left[f(\tau)-f(\lambda)\right]+\frac{\tau^{2}\lambda}{(\tau-\lambda)^{2}}\left[g(\tau^{-1})-g(\lambda^{-1})\right],\notag\\
I_{2}(\tau,\lambda)&=&-\frac{\tau\lambda}{2(\tau-\lambda)}\left[f(\tau)-f(\lambda)\right],
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
g(\tau) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\sqrt{\frac{1}{\tau}-1}\arcsin\sqrt{\tau} & \mbox{for } \tau\geq1 \\
\frac{\sqrt{1-\frac{1}{\tau}}}{2}\left(\log\frac{1+\sqrt{1-1/\tau}}{1-\sqrt{1-1/\tau}}-i\pi\right) & \mbox{if } \tau<1.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Oblique parameters \label{app-stu}}
To study contributions to oblique parameters in the cIDMS we use the method presented in \cite{Grimus:2008nb}. There are 6 neutral fields (including a Goldstone boson), related to the physical fields $h_{1-3},H,A$ through:
\begin{equation}
\left(\begin{array}{c}
\varphi_1 + i G^0 \\
H + i A \\
\varphi_2 + i \varphi_3 \\
\end{array}\right)= V\left(\begin{array}{c}
G^0 \\
h_1 \\
H \\
A \\
h_2 \\
h_3 \\
\end{array} \right),
\end{equation}
The $3\times6$ rotation matrix $V$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
V=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}
i & R_{11} & 0 & 0 & R_{21} & R_{31} \\
0 & 0 & 1 & i & 0 & 0 \\
0 & R_{12}+i R_{13}& 0 & 0 & R_{22}+i R_{23} & R_{32}+i R_{33} \\
\end{array}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $R_{ij}$ are the elements of the inverse rotation matrix defined in section \ref{ssec-phys}.
Charged sector contains only a pair of charged scalars $H^\pm$ from doublet $\Phi_2$.
$S$ and $T$ parameters in the cIDMS are given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&T=\frac{g^2}{64 \pi^2 M_W^2 \alpha_{em}}\bigg\{F(M^2_{H^{\pm}}, M_{H}^2)+F(M^2_{H^{\pm}},M_{A}^2)-F(M_H^2,M_{A}^2)\nonumber\\&&-(R_{12}R_{23}-R_{13} R_{22})^2 F(M_{h_1}^2,M_{h_2}^2)\nonumber
\\&&-(R_{12} R_{33} -R_{13} R_{32} )^2F(M_{h_1}^2,M_{h_3}^2)-(R_{22} R_{33} -R_{32} R_{32} )^2F(M_{h_2}^2,M_{h_3}^2)
\\&&+3(R_{11} )^2(F(M_Z^2,M_{h_1}^2)-F(M_W^2,M_{h_1}^2))-3(F(M_Z^2,M_{h_{ref}}^2)-F(M_W^2,M_{h_{ref}}^2))\nonumber
\\&&+3(R_{21} )^2(F(M_Z^2, M_{h_2}^2)-F(M_{W}^2,M_{h_2}^2))+3(R_{31} )^2(F(M_Z^2, M_{h_3}^2)-F(M_{W}^2,M_{h_3}^2))\nonumber
\bigg\}
\label{T}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
&&S=\frac{g^2 }{384 \pi^2 C_w^2}\bigg\{ (2s_w^2-1)^2 G(M_{H^\pm}^2,M_{H^\pm}^2,M_Z^2)+G(M_H^2,M_A^2,M_Z^2)\notag\\
&&+(R_{12}R_{23}-R_{13}R_{22})^2 G(M_{h_1}^2,M_{h_2}^2,M_Z^2)
+(R_{12} R_{13}-R_{13} R_{32} )^2 G(M_{h_1}^2,M_{h_3}^2,M_Z^2)\notag
\\&&+(R_{22} R_{33}-R_{32} R_{32} )^2 G(M_{h_2}^2,M_{h_3}^2,M_Z^2)
+(R_{11} )^2\widehat{G}(M_{h_1}^2,M_Z^2)
\\&&-\widehat{G}(M_{h_{ref}}^2,M_Z^2)+(R_{21} )^2\widehat{G}(M_{h_2}^2,M_Z^2)+(R_{31} )^2\widehat{G}(M_{h_3}^2,M_Z^2)\notag
\\&&
-2log(M_{H^\pm}^2)+log(M_A^2)+log(M_H^2)+log(M_{h_1})^2-log(M_{h_{ref}})^2+log(M_{h_2})^2+log(M_{h_3})^2 \bigg\},\notag
\label{S}
\end{eqnarray}
where used functions are defined as:
\begin{eqnarray}
F(M_1^2,M_2^2)=\frac{1}{2}(M_1^2+M_2^2)-\frac{M_1^2M_2^2}{M_1^2-M_2^2}log(\frac{M_1^2}{M_2^2}),
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{align}
G(m_1,m_2,m_3)=&\frac{-16}{3}+\frac{5(m_1+m_2)}{m_3}-\frac{2(m_1-m_2)^2}{m_3^2}\nonumber
\\& +\frac{3}{m_3} \left[\frac{m_1^2+m_2^2}{m_1-m_2}-\frac{m_1^2-m_2^2}{m_3}+\frac{(m_1-m_2)^3}{3m_3^2}\right]log\frac{m_1}{m_2}+\frac{r f(t, r)}{m_3^3},
\label{G}
\end{align}
The function $f$ of
\begin{equation}
t\equiv m_1+m_2-m_3 \, \, and \, \, r\equiv m_3^2-2m_3(m_1+m_2)+ (m_1-m_2)^2
\end{equation}
is given by
\begin{equation}
f(t, r)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\sqrt{r} \ln|\frac{t-\sqrt{r}}{t+\sqrt{r}}| & r > 0,\\
0 & r = 0,\\
2\sqrt{-r} \arctan\frac{\sqrt{-r}}{t} & r < 0,
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align}
\widehat{G}(m_1,m_2)=&\frac{-79}{3}+9\frac{m_1}{m_2}-2\frac{m_1^2}{m_2^2}\nonumber
\\& +\left(-10+18\frac{m_1}{m_2}-6\frac{m_1^2}{m_2^2}+\frac{m_1^3}{m_2^3}-9\frac{m_1+m_2}{m_1-m_2}\right)log\frac{m_1}{m_2}. \label{'G'}
\end{align}
\section{Benchmarks \label{app-bench}}
Based on analysis done in section \ref{ssec-cor} we propose four benchmark points to be used in DM analysis\footnote{In tables in appendices \ref{app-bench} and \ref{app-rggdm} we are listing parameters with a larger precision to allow the reader to reproduce our results}. Chosen values of masses of Higgs particles and corresponding parameters are listed in Table \ref{T1}. We also present rotation matrices $R_{Ai}$ for each benchmark. These matrices diagonalize the scalar mass matrix, $M_{mix}^{2}$ in the following way,
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{M}^{2}=R_{Ai}M_{mix}^{2}R_{Ai}^{T}=\text{diag}(M_{h_{1}}^{2},M_{h_{2}}^{2},M_{h_{3}}^{2}).
\end{equation}
\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& $M_{h_{1}}$ & $M_{h_{2}}$ & $M_{h_{3}}$\\ \hline
$A1$) & 124.838 & 194.459 & 239.994 \\ \hline
$A2$) & 124.852 & 288.161 & 572.235 \\ \hline
$A3$) & 125.011 & 301.407 & 1344.01 \\ \hline
$A4$) & 125.364 & 149.889 & 473.953 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\\[5mm]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
&$\lambda_{1}$ & $\lambda_{s1}$ & $\Lambda_{1}$ & $\rho_{2}$ & $\rho_{3}$ & $\xi$ \\ \hline
$A1$) & 0.2579 & 0.2241 & -0.0100 & 0.0881 & 0.1835 & 1.4681 \\ \hline
$A2$) & 0.2869 & 0.8894 & -0.1563 & 0.6892 & 0.6617 & 0.8997 \\ \hline
$A3$) & 0.2816 & 0.8423 & -0.1391 & 0.7010 & -0.5150 & 1.4758 \\ \hline
$A4$) & 0.2830 & 0.6990 & 0.0928 & 0.3478 & 0.2900 & 0.4266 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{In the first subtable we show the masses of the scalars in GeV. In the
second the values of Higgs sector dimensionless parameters which are involved in the scalar potential are listed .}\label{T1}
\end{table}
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{A1}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
0.999465 & 0.00682726 & 0.0319988 \\
-0.0324672 & 0.328031 & 0.944109 \\
-0.0040509 & -0.944642 & 0.328077
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{A2}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
0.987153 & 0.0555822 & 0.149795 \\
-0.159095 & 0.255572 & 0.95361 \\
0.0147203 & -0.965191 & 0.261131
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{A3}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
0.990547 & 0.0252929 & 0.134822 \\
-0.137173 & 0.186514 & 0.972829 \\
-0.000540612 & -0.982127 & 0.188221
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{A4}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
0.90504 & -0.0113276 & -0.425176 \\
0.424229 & -0.0477451 & 0.904295 \\
-0.0305436 & -0.998795 & -0.0384057
\end{array}
\right)
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Values of $S, T$ and $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma},\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ for studied cases \label{app-rggdm}}
Table \ref{tab-stu} presents values of oblique parameters $S$ and $T$ for chosen values of masses studied in the paper. 3$\sigma$ bounds are:
\begin{equation}
-0.28 < S <0.38, \quad -0.30 < T < 0.48, \quad -0.32 < U <0.34.
\end{equation}
Table \ref{tab-low}, \ref{tab-mid} and \ref{tab-heavy} contain values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ for different values of DM mass, for benchmarks A1-A4. All those points are in agreement with collider and DM constraints.
\begin{table}[h!tb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& $M_{h_{1}}$ &$M_{h_{2}}$&$M_{h_{3}}$&$ \delta_A$&$\delta_{\pm}$&$M_H$ &$S$&$T$& $3\sigma$ \\ \hline
& & & & 50 & 55 & 50 & 0.0025 & 0.0050 & Yes \\
$A1$) &124.838 &194.459 &239.994 & 50 & 55 & 75 & 0.0024 & 0.0051 & Yes \\
& & & & 1 & 1+$\epsilon$ & 600 &-0.0078 & 0.0000 & Yes \\ \hline
& & & & 50 & 55 & 50 & 0.0029 & -0.0378 & Yes \\
$A2$) &124.852 &288.161 &572.235 & 50 & 55 & 75 & 0.0028 & -0.0377 & Yes \\
& & & & 1 & 1+$\epsilon$ & 600 &-0.0075 & -0.0418 & Yes \\ \hline
& & & & 50 & 55 & 50 & 0.0031 & -0.2177 & Yes \\
$A3$) &125.011 &301.407 &1344.01 & 50 & 55 & 75 & 0.0030 & -0.2176 & Yes \\
& & & & 1 & 1+$\epsilon$ & 600 &-0.0072 & -0.2228 & Yes \\ \hline
& & & & 50 & 55 & 50 & 0.0027 & -0.1968 & Yes \\
$A4$) &125.364 &149.889 &473.953 & 50 & 55 & 75 & 0.0026 & -0.1967 & Yes \\
& & & & 1 & 1+$\epsilon$ & 600 &-0.0077 & -0.2019 & Yes \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Values of oblique parameters $S$ and $T$ for benchmark points $A1-A4$ and chosen masses of inert scalars. All studied cases are in agreement with EWPT constraints.}\label{tab-stu}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A1}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$|\lambda_{345}|$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
50&0.015&0.8770&0.9365\\ \hline
53&0.015&0.8826&0.9405\\ \hline
56&0.015&0.8886&0.9449\\ \hline
59&0.015&0.8952&0.9503\\ \hline
50&0.002&0.9014&0.9596\\ \hline
53&0.002&0.9045&0.9611\\ \hline
56&0.002&0.9073&0.9624\\ \hline
59&0.002&0.9100&0.9636\\ \hline
50&0.001&0.9020&0.9601\\ \hline
53&0.001&0.9050&0.9615\\ \hline
56&0.001&0.9078&0.9627\\ \hline
59&0.001&0.9104&0.9639\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A2}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$|\lambda_{345}|$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
50&0.015&0.8556&0.9136\\ \hline
53&0.015&0.8610&0.9175\\ \hline
56&0.015&0.8668&0.9218\\ \hline
59&0.015&0.8733&0.9270\\ \hline
50&0.002&0.8793&0.9361\\ \hline
53&0.002&0.8823&0.9375\\ \hline
56&0.002&0.8851&0.9388\\ \hline
59&0.002&0.8877&0.9400\\ \hline
50&0.001&0.8799&0.9366\\ \hline
53&0.001&0.8829&0.9379\\ \hline
56&0.001&0.8856&0.9392\\ \hline
59&0.001&0.8882&0.9403\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}\\[2mm]
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A3}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$|\lambda_{345}|$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
50&0.015&0.8615&0.9199\\ \hline
53&0.015&0.8670&0.9239\\ \hline
56&0.015&0.8728&0.9281\\ \hline
59&0.015&0.8794&0.9334\\ \hline
50&0.002&0.8854&0.9426\\ \hline
53&0.002&0.8884&0.9440\\ \hline
56&0.002&0.8912&0.9453\\ \hline
59&0.002&0.8939&0.9465\\ \hline
50&0.001&0.8860&0.9430\\ \hline
53&0.001&0.8890&0.9444\\ \hline
56&0.001&0.8917&0.9456\\ \hline
59&0.001&0.8943&0.9468\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A4}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$|\lambda_{345}|$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
50&0.015&0.7192&0.7679\\ \hline
53&0.015&0.7238&0.7712\\ \hline
56&0.015&0.7287&0.7748\\ \hline
59&0.015&0.7341&0.7792\\ \hline
50&0.002&0.7391&0.7870\\ \hline
53&0.002&0.7417&0.7881\\ \hline
56&0.002&0.7440&0.7892\\ \hline
59&0.002&0.7463&0.7902\\ \hline
50&0.001&0.7396&0.7872\\ \hline
53&0.001&0.7421&0.7884\\ \hline
56&0.001&0.7445&0.7894\\ \hline
59&0.001&0.7466&0.7904\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Low DM mass region: values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ for chosen values of $M_H$ and $\lambda_{345}$ for $M_A = M_H + 50 \,\mbox{GeV}, M_{H^\pm} = M_H + 55 \,\mbox{GeV}$. Points listed above correspond to DM relic density in agreement with Planck results. Values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ do not depend on the sign of $\lambda_{345}$. \label{tab-low}}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A1}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
64&0.0125&0.9116&0.9646\\ \hline
66&0.019&0.9116&0.9646\\ \hline
68&0.02&0.9130&0.9665\\ \hline
70&0.018&0.9149&0.9660\\ \hline
72&-0.097&0.94010&0.9764\\ \hline
74&-0.039&0.9295&0.9719\\ \hline
76&-0.116&0.9458&0.9783\\ \hline
77&-0.123&0.9474&0.9800\\ \hline
78&-0.136&0.9501&0.9800\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A2}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
64&0.0125&0.8893&0.9410\\ \hline
66&0.019&0.8893&0.9410\\ \hline
68&0.02&0.8906&0.9416\\ \hline
70&0.018&0.8925&0.9424\\ \hline
72&-0.097&0.9179&0.9525\\ \hline
74&-0.039&0.9067&0.9481\\ \hline
76&-0.116&0.9227&0.9544\\ \hline
77&-0.123&0.9242&0.9550\\ \hline
78&-0.136&0.9268&0.9560\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}\\[2mm]
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A3}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
64&0.0125&0.8954&0.9475\\ \hline
66&0.019&0.8955&0.9475\\ \hline
68&0.02&0.8968&0.9481\\ \hline
70&0.018&0.8987&0.9490\\ \hline
72&-0.097&0.9243&0.9590\\ \hline
74&-0.039&0.9130&0.9546\\ \hline
76&-0.116&0.9290&0.9610\\ \hline
77&-0.123&0.9306&0.9616\\ \hline
78&-0.136&0.9332&0.9626\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A4}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
64&-0.02&0.7542&0.7936\\ \hline
66&-0.017&0.7546&0.7938\\ \hline
68&0.006&0.7513&0.7925\\ \hline
69&0.004&0.7523&0.7929\\ \hline
70&-0.003&0.7540&0.7937\\ \hline\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Medium DM mass region: values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ for chosen values of $M_H$ and $\lambda_{345}$ for $M_A = M_H + 50 \,\mbox{GeV}, M_{H^\pm} = M_H + 55 \,\mbox{GeV}$. Points listed above correspond to DM relic density in agreement with Planck results. \label{tab-mid}}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A1}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
550&0&0.9986&0.9989\\ \hline
575&0.2&0.9967&0.9981\\ \hline
575&-0.2&1.0005&0.9995\\ \hline
600&0.23&0.9966&0.9981\\ \hline
600&-0.23&1.0006&0.9995\\ \hline
625&0.25&0.9966&0.99981\\ \hline
625&-0.25&1.0006&0.9995\\ \hline
650&0.28&0.9966&0.9980\\ \hline
650&-0.28&1.0007&0.9996\\ \hline
675&0.3&0.9966&0.9981\\ \hline
675&-0.3&1.0007&0.9996\\ \hline
700&0.33&0.9965&0.9980\\ \hline
700&-0.33&1.0007&0.9996\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A2}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
550&0&0.9741&0.9743\\ \hline
575&0.2&0.9723&0.9737\\ \hline
575&-0.2&0.9760&0.9750\\ \hline
600&0.23&0.9722&0.9736\\ \hline
600&-0.23&0.9761&0.9751\\ \hline
625&0.25&0.9722&0.9736\\ \hline
625&-0.25&0.9761&0.9751\\ \hline
650&0.28&0.9722&0.9736\\ \hline
650&-0.28&0.9762&0.9751\\ \hline
675&0.3&0.9722&0.9736\\ \hline
675&-0.3&0.9762&0.9751\\ \hline
700&0.33&0.9721&0.9736\\ \hline
700&-0.33&0.9762&0.9751\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}\\[2mm]
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A3}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
550&0&0.9808&0.9810\\ \hline
575&0.2&0.978982&0.9804\\ \hline
575&-0.2&0.9827&0.9817\\ \hline
600&0.23&0.9789&0.9803\\ \hline
600&-0.23&0.9828&0.9818\\ \hline
625&0.25&0.9789&0.9803\\ \hline
625&-0.25&0.9828&0.9818\\ \hline
650&0.28&0.9788&0.9803\\ \hline
650&-0.28&0.9829&0.9818\\ \hline
675&0.3&0.9789&0.9803\\ \hline
675&-0.3&0.9829&0.9818\\ \hline
700&0.33&0.9788&0.9803\\ \hline
700&-0.33&0.9830&0.9818\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{3in}
\centering
\textbf{Benchmark A4}\\[2mm]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M_H$~(GeV)&$\lambda_{345}$&$\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$&$\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$\\ \hline
550&0&0.8188&0.8190\\ \hline
575&0.2&0.8173&0.8184\\ \hline
575&-0.2&0.8203&0.8196\\ \hline
600&0.23&0.8172&0.8184\\ \hline
600&-0.23&0.8204&0.8196\\ \hline
625&0.25&0.8172&0.8184\\ \hline
625&-0.25&0.8205&0.8196\\ \hline
650&0.28&0.8172&0.8184\\ \hline
650&-0.28&0.8205&0.8196\\ \hline
675&0.3&0.8172&0.8184\\ \hline
675&-0.3&0.8205&0.8196\\ \hline
700&0.33&0.81714&0.8196\\ \hline
700&-0.33&0.82057&0.81964\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Heavy DM mass region: values of $\mathcal{R}_{\gamma\gamma}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{Z\gamma}$ for chosen values of $M_H$ and $\lambda_{345}$ for $M_A = M_{H^\pm} = M_H + 1 \,\mbox{GeV}$. Points listed above correspond to DM relic density in agreement with Planck results. \label{tab-heavy}}
\end{table}
\end{appendix}
\baselineskip 16pt
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
A Peccei--Quinn axion~\cite{Peccei:1977hh} is considered the most economical solution to the strong CP-problem (see~\cite{Kim:1986ax} for a review and the references therein). The current astrophysical and cosmological bounds impose that the QCD axion decay constant should be in the narrow window $10^9-10^{12}$ GeV, a scale which is difficult to realise in string models with the fundamental scale close to the Planck scale. A detailed study of string theory axions was undertaken by Svr\varphi{c}ek and Witten in Ref.~\cite{Svrcek:2006yi}. In particular, they showed that in certain heterotic string scenarios it is problematic to find axions with decay constants much smaller that the GUT scale.\footnote{Some string models with a low axion decay constant were studied in~Ref.~\cite{Conlon:2006tq} in the context of Type IIB large volume compactifications and in~Ref.~\cite{Dasgupta:2008hb} in the context of warped heterotic compactifications. See also Ref.~\cite{Honecker:2013mya} for a recent axion construction in Type IIA string theory and the Ref.~\cite{Choi:2014uaa} for a recent review of QCD axions in string theory.}
In the present note, we propose a heterotic string mechanism which evades the no-go arguments of~Ref.~\cite{Svrcek:2006yi} and can lead to a QCD axion with a small decay constant. The key to our solution is the existence of enhanced symmetry loci in the moduli space of heterotic string compactifications. These correspond to loci where the heterotic bundle splits into a direct sum of sub-bundles. The enhanced symmetry amounts to one or several $U(1)$ factors, which are generically Green-Schwarz anomalous and have super-heavy associated gauge bosons.
Large classes of phenomenologically interesting heterotic compactifications with such loci are known to exist (see, for example, Ref.~\cite{Anderson:2009nt}). In practice, one starts by constructing the compactification at the enhanced symmetry locus, as it is done for heterotic line bundle models \cite{Anderson:2011ns, Anderson:2012yf, Anderson:2013xka, He:2013ofa, Anderson:2014hia}. The full moduli space in which these special loci reside can subsequently be explored \cite{Buchbinder:2013dna, Buchbinder:2014qda, Buchbinder:2014sya}. Such models are phenomenologically interesting, particularly because the $U(1)$ symmetries can severely constrain the low-energy theory. For example, a supersymmetric standard model with a stable proton has recently been constructed relying on the line bundle approach~\cite{Buchbinder:2013dna, Buchbinder:2014qda, Buchbinder:2014sya}.
We will be working within the context of such $E_8\times E_8$ heterotic Calabi-Yau models equipped with a bundle that splits somewhere in the moduli space. The Fayet-Iliopoulos (FI) term associated to the resulting $U(1)$ symmetry is K\"ahler moduli dependent and vanishes at the split locus. In terms of the underlying 10-dimensional theory, this vanishing property can be understood as the zero-slope condition on the vector bundle. Close to the split locus, the FI term is small but non-zero and the D-term equations can be satisfied by cancelling the FI term with a small vacuum expectation value (VEV) of a bundle modulus. Coupling this bundle modulus to an exotic pair of vector-like quarks \cite{Kim:1979if, Shifman:1979if}, leads to an axion which originates from the bundle moduli phase. Its decay constant is proportional to the bundle moduli VEVs and is, hence, set by the size of the FI term. In this way, an axion with a small decay constant can be obtained close to the split locus in moduli space.
Our note is organised as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:axion_pheno} we describe the mechanism in four-dimensional language. We show that an axion which is the phase of a bundle modulus can indeed couple to QCD and that there are no obstructions to having its decay constant within the observational bound. In Section~\ref{sec:10d} we give the details of the ten-dimensional compactifications of the heterotic string that can lead to the proposed set-up. Finally, in Section~\ref{sec:example}, we provide a concrete example, based on a heterotic line bundle standard model.
\section{The four-dimensional picture}\label{sec:axion_pheno}
We start out by fixing the conventions for the axion and its coupling to QCD.
The QCD axion is a periodic scalar field $\phi$ with a global $U(1)$ shift symmetry $\phi\rightarrow \phi + \text{const}$, which is broken by QCD instanton effects. We normalise the field $\phi$ such that its period is $2\pi$. Moreover, since $\phi$ has mass dimension zero, we can introduce a mass parameter $f$ and define the field $a=f \phi$, which is canonically normalised. Its kinetic term and coupling to QCD are given by the action
\begin{equation}
S[a]~=\, -\frac{1}{2} \int d^4 x\, \partial_{\mu} a\, \partial^{\mu} a + \frac{r}{8 \pi^2} \frac{1}{f} \int a \ {\rm tr} (F \wedge F)_{\text{\text{QCD}}}\,,
\label{eq:Saxion}
\end{equation}
where $r$ is an integer. We use a normalisation of the field strength $F$ in which the instanton number is given~by
\begin{equation}
N= \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \int {\rm tr} (F \wedge F)_{\text{\text{QCD}}}~.
\label{eq:instantonnumber}
\end{equation}
The purpose of this section is to illustrate the mechanism for a heterotic axion with a small decay constant from the point of view of the relevant four-dimensional effective theories. These are ${\cal N}=1$ supergravity theories with the standard model gauge group $G_{\text{SM}}= SU(3) \times SU(2) \times U(1)$ and with one or several additional $U(1)$ symmetries. The additional $U(1)$ symmetries are, generically, anomalous in the Green-Schwarz sense; consequently the associated gauge bosons are massive and, at low-energies, the $U(1)$ symmetries only survive as global symmetries.
Let us now describe the general structure of the spectrum for these theories, focusing on the fields that are relevant to our discussion.
The gravitational spectrum of the model consists of the dilaton, $S= s+i \sqrt{2} \sigma$ (where $\sigma$ is the dilatonic axion), a number of K\"ahler moduli $T^i=t^i+2i\chi^i$ (where $t^i$ are the geometrical fields, measuring the size of Calabi-Yau two-cycles, and $\chi^i$ are the associated axions) plus complex structure moduli which will not play an essential role in our discussion. We assume a general situation with several $U(1)$ symmetries labelled by the index $a$ and with associated gauge fields $A_\mu^a$. Under a gauge transformation $\delta A_\mu^a = -\partial_\mu \eta^a$, the axions $\chi^i$ transform non-linearly
\begin{equation}
\delta\chi^i=-\epsilon\,{k}_a^i\,\eta^a\; , \label{chishifts}
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon$ is a constant defined in terms of eleven-dimensional quantities, and $k_a^i$ are topological integers defined by the compactification data, as will be discussed in the next section. The dilatonic axion also receives a non-trivial gauge transformation at one-loop level which leads to a one-loop correction to the FI term \cite{Blumenhagen:2005ga}. This correction will not change any of our conclusions, and will henceforth be ignored.
The matter spectrum of the model contains the MSSM fields. In addition, we assume that we have an exotic vector-like pair of quarks, $\cal{Q}-\widetilde{\cal{Q}}$, in order to facilitate the KSVZ mechanism, and several singlet matter fields which correspond to bundle moduli and are neutral under the standard model group. All matter fields~$C^I$, including the aforementioned singlet matter fields, carry charges $q_{a,I}$ under the $a^{\rm th}$ $U(1)$ symmetry and transform linearly as
\begin{equation}
\delta C^I = -i\,\eta^a\,q_{a,I}\,C^I\;.
\end{equation}
The K\"ahler potential for the model is given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal K}\,=\,-M_{\text{P}}^2\left(\log(S\,+\,\overbar{S})\,+\,\log(\kappa)\,-\,{\cal K}_{\rm cs}\right)\,+\,G_{IJ}\,C^I\,\overbar{C}^J\; ,
\end{equation}
where ${\cal K}_{\rm cs}$ is the complex structure K\"ahler potential and $C^I$ collectively denote all matter fields listed previously. The specific form of the matter field K\"ahler metric $G_{IJ}$ is not relevant to our discussion and it will be sufficient to know that it is positive definite. The pre-potential, $\kappa$, for the K\"ahler moduli is explicitly given by $\kappa=d_{ijk}\,t^i\,t^j\,t^k$, where the topological numbers $d_{ijk}$ are defined by the underlying string compactification and $\kappa$ is related to the Calabi-Yau volume through the relation $\kappa = {\cal V}/6$. To simplify our discussion, we assume that the K\"ahler moduli space is given by $t^i>0$, which can indeed be achieved in many cases.
From this K\"ahler potential and the $U(1)$ transformations given above, standard four-dimensional supergravity fixes the D-terms, which take the general form~\cite{Anderson:2009nt}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Dterm}
D_a=\frac{M^2_P}{\cal V}\, \epsilon\,\,d_{ijk}\,{k_a}^i\, t^j\,t^k - \sum_{I,J}q_{a,I}\,G_{IJ}\,C^I\,\overbar{C}^J~.
\end{equation}
In general, the superpotential $W$ is constrained by the $U(1)$ symmetries. We assume the $U(1)$ charges are such that a cubic coupling between the exotic vector-like quark pair and one of the singlet fields $C$ is allowed. Hence, the superpotential has the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:W}
W = \lambda{\cal Q}\, C\, \widetilde{\cal Q} + W_{\text{sing}} + \ldots ~,
\end{equation}
where $W_{\text{sing}}$ is the superpotential for the singlet matter fields and the dots refer to the usual MSSM superpotential terms. The coupling ${\cal Q}\, C\, \widetilde{\cal Q}$ will be crucial in our discussion of the axion mechanism. In addition, we assume that the singlet superpotential is such that the field $C$ remains an F-flat direction.
The final ingredient of the low-energy field theory is the gauge kinetic function for the standard model gauge fields, which is universal and is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gkf}
f_{\rm SM} = S + \pi\epsilon_S \beta_i\, T^i~.
\end{equation}
Here $\epsilon_S$ is the strong coupling expansion parameter and $\beta_i$ are topological numbers defined by the compactification data. In the next sections we will show that low-energy theories with all the above ingredients can indeed be obtained from the $E_8\times E_8$ heterotic string and an explicit example will be provided in Section~\ref{sec:example}.
The theory schematically described above contains several axionic fields $\sigma, \chi^i$ which couple to $\text{tr}(F\wedge F)_{\text{QCD}}$ via the gauge kinetic function~\eqref{eq:gkf}. These axions represent the traditional candidates for resolving the strong CP problem within the heterotic string context. However, it has been known for a long time (see, for example, Ref.~\cite{Svrcek:2006yi} and the references therein) that the decay constants for these axions are of order of the GUT scale and, therefore, are too large to comply with the phenomenological constraints.
\vspace{8pt}
This situation is radically different if one considers the axions which are the phases of the singlet fields. We now turn to the discussion of these axions. We write the singlet field as $C= h e^{i\phi}$, so that the $U(1)$ symmetries act on $\phi$ by shifts
\begin{equation}
\phi \rightarrow \phi - q_a\, \eta^a\;,
\end{equation}
where $q_a$ denote the $U(1)$ charges of $C$. It is convenient to define a new basis for the $U(1)$ generators, such that the field $C$ is charged under a single $U(1)$, with a charge that we denote by $q$. Integrating out ${\cal Q}$ and $\widetilde{\cal Q}$ at energies
below $\langle |C|\rangle =h$ gives a contribution to the effective action consistent with the chiral anomaly
\begin{equation}
-\frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \int \phi \ {\rm tr} (F \wedge F)_{\text{QCD}}\,,
\label{3.7}
\end{equation}
which provides the coupling of the axion $\phi$ to $(F \wedge F)_{\text{QCD}}$. Thus, the effective action for the axion becomes
\begin{equation}
S[\phi]~=~ -\int d^4 x\, \left( h^2 (\partial_{\mu} \phi - q A_{\mu})^2 + D^2\right)-\frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \int \phi \ {\rm tr} (F \wedge F)_{\text{QCD}}\,.
\label{3.6}
\end{equation}
The same effect can also be understood from a different viewpoint.
Integrating out a massive ${\cal Q}-\widetilde{\cal Q}$ pair produces a 1-loop threshold correction to the gauge coupling given by~\cite{Kaplunovsky:1994fg}
\begin{equation}
- \frac{T (r)}{8\pi^2} \log h = -\frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \log h \,,
\label{3.8}
\end{equation}
where $T(r)$ is the quadratic Casimir which is equal to $1/2$ if the ${\cal Q}-\widetilde{\cal Q}$ pair transforms in the fundamental (antifundamental) representation of $SU(3)$. This means that we have a contribution to the effective
action of the form
\begin{equation}
-\frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \int d^4 x \log h \ {\rm tr} F^2\,.
\label{3.9}
\end{equation}
By supersymmetry this implies~\eqref{3.7}. From Eq.~\eqref{3.6}, we see that $\phi$ indeed couples to QCD and, comparing with Eq.~\eqref{eq:Saxion}, we obtain the axion decay constant
\begin{equation}
f= \sqrt{2} h\,.
\label{3.10}
\end{equation}
The value of $h$ in the supersymmetric vacuum is controlled by the $D$-term equation (see Eq.~\eqref{eq:Dterm})
\begin{equation}
D=\frac{M^2_P}{\cal V}\, \epsilon\,\,d_{ijk}\,{k}^i\, t^j\,t^k - q\, h^2 =0\;,
\label{3.11}
\end{equation}
where $(k^i)$ represents a linear combination of the vectors $(k_a^i)$ that corresponds to the linear combination of the $U(1)$ generators discussed above. The first term represents the FI contribution. Provided the vector $(k^i)$ contains both positive and negative entries this FI term can vanish at a certain locus in moduli space, which we will also refer to as the split locus. This indeed happens for many examples. From a 10-dimensional point of view, the vanishing of the FI term is linked to the zero-slope condition on the vector bundle, as will be discussed in the next section. It is clear that, at the split locus, $h$ must vanish in order to preserve supersymmetry.
Moving away from the split locus, the magnitude of the FI term can be smoothly varied in an interval around zero.
Hence, there is no obstruction to having $h$ small, so that the axion decay constant $f$ is consistent with the observational bound $ 10^9< f< 10^{12}$ GeV.
Note that this mechanism does not work in the case of the universal anomalous $U(1)$ symmetry considered in Ref.~\cite{Svrcek:2006yi}. In this case, the FI term is proportional to $1/s$ and is of the order of the GUT scale as long as the gauge coupling has a value in the phenomenologically required range.
Apart from generating the coupling of $\phi$ to $\text{tr}( F\wedge F)_{\rm QCD}$, the superpotential term ${\cal Q}\,C\widetilde{\cal Q}$ also generates a mass for the exotic vector-like pair well above the TeV scale, thus removing it from the low-energy spectrum.
Moreover, given that the value of $h$ is much below the compactification scale, the mass of the $U(1)$ gauge boson receives its leading contribution from the $\chi^i$ and $\sigma$ kinetic terms, thereby breaking the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry close to the GUT scale. Below this scale, the $U(1)$ appears only as a global symmetry which is then spontaneously broken by a non-vanishing VEV $\langle |C|\rangle =h$.
\section{The higher-dimensional picture}\label{sec:10d}
In this section, we briefly review the structure of $E_8\times E_8$ heterotic string compactifications on Calabi-Yau manifolds with split vector bundles, following Refs.~\cite{Anderson:2011ns,Anderson:2012yf}. Our emphasis will be to show how the various ingredients in the effective four-dimensional theory required for a successful axion model, as described in the previous section, can be obtained in such compactifications.
We consider a compactification of the $E_8\times E_8$ heterotic string (in the weak or strong coupling limit) on a Calabi-Yau (CY) three-fold $X$ with a rank five vector bundle $V\rightarrow X$ which splits as
\begin{equation}
V=\bigoplus_{a=1}^A V_a
\end{equation}
where $V_a$ are bundles with structure groups $U(n_a)$, subject to the constraints $\sum_a n_a=5$ and $c_1(V)=0$. In this way, the structure group of $V$ is contained in $S(U(n_1)\times\dots\times U(n_A))\subset SU(5)\subset E_8$ whose commutant in $E_8$ -- the observable low-energy gauge group -- is given by $SU(5)\times S(U(1)^A)$. In general, there is another vector bundle in the hidden $E_8$ sector but this will not be relevant to our discussion.
For the above compactification to preserve supersymmetry the bundle $V$ needs to be poly-stable with slope zero. This is equivalent to saying that each sub-bundle $V_a$ is slope-stable and has vanishing slope. The slope of $V_a$ is explicitly given by
\begin{equation}
\mu (V_a)=\frac{1}{{\rm rk} (V_a)}\int_X c_1 (V_a)\wedge J \wedge J\, = \frac{1}{{\rm rk} (V_a)} d_{ijk}\,c_1^i(V_a)\,t^j\,t^k\stackrel{!}{=}0
\label{2.3}
\end{equation}
where $J=t^iJ_i$ is the K\"ahler form on $X$, the $J_i$, $i=1,\ldots ,h^{1,1}(X)$, form a basis of the second cohomology of $X$ and $t^i$ are the K\"ahler moduli. We note that the slope is proportional to the numerator of the FI term in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Dterm}, when the topological numbers $k^i_a$ are identified as $k^i_a=c_1^i(V_a)$. In this way, the vanishing of the FI term, which is a crucial ingredient in our scenario, is directly tied to the supersymmetry of the internal vector bundle.
The matter spectrum of the four-dimensional GUT theory with gauge group $SU(5)\times S(U(1)^A)$ is controlled by the cohomology of $V$ and its associated tensor bundles and is summarised in the table below.
\begin{center}
\vspace{8pt}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}\hline
\varstr{12.4pt}{7pt}~~~multiplet~~~&$~~S(U(1)^A)$ charge~~~&~~~~~bundle~~~~~&~~~~~~~cohomology~~~~~~~\\\hline\hline
\varstr{12.4pt}{7pt}${\bf 10}_a$&$~~{\bf e}_a$&$V_a$&$H^1(X,V_a)$\\\hline
\varstr{12.4pt}{7pt}$\overline{\bf 10}_a$&$-{\bf e}_a$&$V_a^*$&$H^1(X,V_a^*)$\\\hline
\varstr{12.4pt}{7pt}$\overline{\bf 5}_{a,b}$&$~~{\bf e}_a+{\bf e}_b$&$V_a\otimes V_b$&$H^1(X,V_a\otimes V_b)$\\\hline
\varstr{12.4pt}{7pt}${\bf 5}_{a,b}$&$-{\bf e}_a-{\bf e}_b$&$V_a^*\otimes V_b^*$&$H^1(X,V_a^*\otimes V_b^*)$\\\hline
\varstr{12.4pt}{7pt}${\bf 1}_{a,b}$&$~~{\bf e}_a-{\bf e}_b$&$V_a\otimes V_b^*$&$H^1(X,V_a\otimes V_b^*)$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{8pt}
\end{center}
Here, ${\bf e}_a$ denotes the $a^{\rm th}$ standard unit vector in $A$ dimensions, so that, for example, the multiplet ${\bf 10}_a$ carries charge one under the $a^{\rm th}$ $U(1)$ symmetry and is uncharged under the others. Provided that the Calabi-Yau manifold $X$ has a freely-acting symmetry $\Gamma$ (which lifts to the bundle $V$), the above GUT model can be quotioned by $\Gamma$ and a Wilson line can be introduced in order to break the GUT group to $G_{\rm SM}\times S(U(1)^A)$. Then, the GUT multiplets in the above table break up into the usual standard model multiplets. For a model with a phenomenologically viable field content we require that $h^1(X,V)=3|\Gamma|$ (three ${\bf 10}$ multiplets), $h^1(X,V^*)=0$ (no $\overline{\bf 10}$ multiplets), $h^1(X,\wedge^2 V)=3|\Gamma|+n$ and $h^1(X,\wedge^2 V^*)=n$ (three $\overline{\bf 5}$ multiplets plus whatever remains from the additional $n$ vector-like $\overline{\bf 5}\,$--$\,{\bf 5}$ pairs). The vector-like $\overline{\bf 5}\,$--$\,{\bf 5}$ pairs can lead to a pair of Higgs doublets and, depending on the Wilson line choice, also to a vector-like pair of exotic quarks, as required for our axion models. Whether this can be achieved depends on the details of the model, specifically the Wilson line choice, and a concrete example will be given in the next section.
Further, we note that all matter fields in the above table carry charges under the additional $U(1)$ symmetries. This includes the singlet matter fields ${\bf 1}_{a,b}$, which describe deformations away from the split locus. The existence of a trilinear superpotential coupling between a singlet matter field and the exotic quark pair, which is crucial for the axion model (see Eq.~\eqref{eq:W}), depends on the specific charges of the fields in a given model. However, we note that the general structure of charges, as in the above table, is consistent with such a term. In the next section, we will present an example model where this trilinear term is indeed allowed.
Finally, we should explain the higher-dimensional origin of the FI term in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Dterm}. For this, it is sufficient to explain the non-linear transformations of the axion fields $\chi^i$ in Eq.~\eqref{chishifts}. These fields originate from the M-theory three-form $C$ (here we use the strong-coupling version of the theory, but the weak coupling formulation leads to identical results) as
\begin{equation}
C_{11 a \bar b}= \chi^i (J_i)_{a \bar b}\; ,
\label{2.9}
\end{equation}
and they combine into four-dimensional supermultiplets as $T^i=t^i+2i\chi^i$. It is a general feature of heterotic theories, induced by the Bianchi identity, that three-form $C$ transforms non-trivially under $E_8\times E_8$ gauge transformations~\cite{Horava:1995qa, Horava:1996ma}. For the present compactifications with split bundles, this implies
\begin{equation}
\delta C_{11 a\bar b}= -\Big( \frac{\kappa_{11}}{4 \pi}\Big)^{2/3} \frac{1}{4 \pi}\, \delta (x^{11})\, {\rm tr} (\eta F_{a \bar b})\,.
\label{2.11}
\end{equation}
where $F$ is the internal field strength of any of the additional $U(1)$ symmetries, $\eta$ is the corresponding four-dimensional transformation parameter and $\kappa_{11}$ is the 11-dimensional Newton constant. Integrating this equation over CY two-cycles ${\cal C}^i$ dual to the basis $J_i$, as well as over the orbifold $S^1/\mathbb{Z}_2$, and taking into account Eq.~\eqref{2.9}, we have
\begin{equation}
\delta \chi^i= -\frac{\epsilon}{4 \pi} \int_{{\cal C}^i } {\rm tr} (\eta F)\,.
\label{2.12}
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon=\epsilon_S\epsilon_R^2$ and
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_S = \left( \frac{\kappa_{11}}{4 \pi}\right)^{2/3} \frac{1}{\pi \rho v^{1/3}}\;,\quad
\epsilon_R=\frac{v^{1/6}}{\pi\rho}
\end{equation}
are the relevant expansion parameters in the strong coupling limit \cite{Lukas:1997fg, Lukas:1998hk}. Here $v$ and $\pi\rho$ are the reference volumes of the CY manifold and the orbi-circle, respectively, so that the four-dimensional Planck mass is determined by $M_{\text{P}}^2 =\pi \rho\, v/\kappa_{11}^2$. Eq.~\eqref{2.12} immediately implies the non-linear transformation law \eqref{chishifts} for the axions $\chi^i$, identifying $k_a^i=c_1^i(V_a)$, as before.
In summary, we have seen that all the required ingredients for a successful axion model are present in heterotic CY models with split bundles. We obtain additional, Green-Schwarz anomalous $U(1)$ symmetries with associated FI terms which can vanish at specify loci in K\"ahler moduli space. Standard multiplets as well as additional singlet matter fields are charged under these $U(1)$ symmetries and vector-like pairs of exotic quarks with a trilinear superpotential coupling to a singlet matter field can be obtained for suitable model building choices. In the next section, we will provide an explicit example, in the context of heterotic line bundle bundles, which realises all these properties.
\section{An explicit example}\label{sec:example}
The database \cite{lbdatabase} contains a large number of phenomenologically promising $SU(5)$--GUT models, derived from the $E_8\times E_8$ heterotic string compactified on smooth Calabi-Yau manifolds with line bundle sums. These models have the right field content to lead to three families of quarks and leptons after the inclusion of a Wilson line; they also have a number of vector-like $\overline{\bf 5}$--${\bf 5}$ pairs, intended to account for a pair of Higgs doublets. In the model building approach pursued in Refs.~\cite{Anderson:2011ns,Anderson:2012yf}, the Wilson line was chosen to project out the triplets from the $\overline{\bf 5}$--${\bf 5}$ pairs while keeping at least one pair of Higgs doublets -- clearly the simplest and cleanest way to arrive at an MSSM-like spectrum. In the present context, we will slightly modify this approach in order to implement the KSVZ axion. We will choose a Wilson line which leads to one pair of Higgs triplets, in addition to the pair of Higgs doublets. The database \cite{lbdatabase} can, in principle, be searched systematically for models which allow for such a choice and we expect that a large number of possibilities will emerge in this way. Here, we are merely interested in a proof of existence and we will, therefore, focus on a single example with the right properties.
\subsection{The manifold}
The model in question is defined as a compactification on a smooth Calabi-Yau threefold $X$ realised as an intersection of two hypersurfaces in a product of five $\mathbb C\mathbb P^1$ spaces, as summarised by the following configuration matrix:
\begin{equation}\label{Xconf}
X~=~~
\cicy{\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^1 \\ \mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^1\\ \mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^1\\ \mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^1\\ \mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^1}
{ ~1 & 1\!\!\!\! & \\
~1 & 1\!\!\!\! & \\
~1 & 1\!\!\!\! & \\
~1 & 1\!\!\!\! & \\
~0 & 2\!\!\!\!}_{-80}^{5,45}\
\end{equation}
Manifolds in this class have Euler number $\eta = - 80$, Hodge numbers $h^{1,1}(X)=5$ and $h^{2,1}(X)=45$. A basis $\{J_i\}$ of the second cohomology is provided by the pull-backs of the hyperplane classes of the five $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^1$ spaces. We can expand the K\"ahler forms on $X$ as $J=t^i\,J_i$, where $t^i$ are the K\"ahler moduli whose K\"ahler cone is defined by $t^i\geq 0$. Relative to the basis $\{J_i\}$, the triple intersection numbers have the following simple form
\begin{equation}
d_{ijk} = \int_X J_i\wedge J_j\wedge J_k = \begin{cases} ~2 & \mbox{ if } i\neq j, j\neq k \\ ~0 &\mbox{ otherwise } \end{cases}\; .\label{tqisec}
\end{equation}
The second Chern class of the tangent bundle is given by $c_2(TX)=(24,24,24,24,24)$, relative to a basis of the fourth cohomology dual to $\{J_i\}$. We will denote line bundles ${\cal L}$ with first Chern class $c_1({\cal L})=k^iJ_i$ by ${\cal L}={\cal O}_X({\bf k})$. Then, from Eq.~\eqref{Xconf}, $X$ is defined as the common zero set of two sections $p_1\in \Gamma({\cal O}_X(1,1,1,1,0))$ and $p_2\in \Gamma ({\cal O}_X(1,1,1,1,2))$. For specific choices of these sections, $X$ has a freely-acting $\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry~\cite{Braun:2010vc}. Denoting by $x_{m,0}$, $x_{m,1}$ the homogeneous coordinates of the $m$-th projective space, the action of the two generators on these coordinates is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:groupaction}
g_1:~ x_{m,\alpha}\mapsto (-1)^\alpha x_{m,\alpha}~, \qquad g_2:~ x_{m,\alpha}\mapsto x_{m,\alpha+1}\; ,
\end{equation}
where the index $\alpha$ is understood to take values in $\mathbb{Z}_2$. At the same time, the generators act on the two defining polynomials as $\tilde{g}_1={\rm diag}(1,-1)$ and $\tilde{g}_2={\rm diag}(-1,1)$. The quotient manifold $\widehat{X}=X/(\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2)$ has a non-trivial fundamental group, $\pi_1(\widehat{X}) = \mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2$, and allows for the introduction of discrete Wilson lines. This manifold has Hodge numbers $h^{1,1}(\widehat X)=5$ and $h^{2,1}(\widehat X)=15$, as can be computed following the methods used in Refs.~\cite{Candelas:2008wb, Candelas:2010ve}.
\subsection{The GUT model at the split locus}
The bundle $V$ is chosen as a sum of five line bundles
\begin{equation}
V ~=~ \bigoplus_{a=1}^5 \,{\cal L}_a ~ = ~ \bigoplus_{a=1}^5 \,{\cal O}_X({\bf k}_a)
\end{equation}
explicitly given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:kmatrix}
({k^i}_a)=
\cicy{ \\ \\ \\ \\ }
{ -2 & ~~1 & ~~1 & ~~0 & ~~0~ \\
~~1 & -2 & ~~0 & ~~1 & ~~0~ \\
~~0 & ~~1 & -2 & ~~0 & ~~1 ~\\
~~1 & ~~0 &~~ 0 & -1 & ~~0 ~\\
~~0 & ~~0 &~~ 1 & ~~0 & -1 ~\\}\; .
\end{equation}
Since the columns of this matrix sum up to zero we have $c_1(V)=0$ and the structure group is given by $S\big(U(1)^5\big)\subset SU(5)$. The second Chern class of this bundle is given by $c_2(V)=(10,10,10,18,18)$ and, hence, comparing with $c_2(TX)$, we see that it is consistent with anomaly cancelation. The index of $V$ is $\chi(V)=-12$, appropriate for obtained a three-family model after dividing by the order four symmetry $\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2$. Using the definition~\eqref{2.3} and the explicit values~\eqref{tqisec} for the intersection numbers, it is easy to show that the slopes, $\mu({\cal L}_a)$, of these five line bundles vanish simultaneously at the split locus $t_1=t_2=t_3=t_4=t_5$. At this locus, the low-energy GUT group is $SU(5)\times S(U(1)^5)$ (with all $U(1)$ vector bosons massive, as can be seen by inspecting the rank of the matrix~\eqref{eq:kmatrix}), and the matter spectrum is given by
\begin{gather}
4\,\mathbf{10}_1, ~4\,\mathbf{10}_2, ~4\,\mathbf{10}_3, \nonumber\\[4pt]
~4\,\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{1,3}, ~4\,\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{1,5}, ~4\,\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{3,4}, ~3\,\mathbf{5}_{1,4}, ~3\,\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{1,4}, ~\mathbf{5}_{4,5}, ~\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{4,5},\\[4pt]
12\,\mathbf{1}_{1,3}, ~4\,\mathbf{1}_{1,5}, ~16\, \mathbf{1}_{2,4}, ~4\,\mathbf{1}_{2,5}, ~12\, \mathbf{1}_{3,2}, ~4\,\mathbf{1}_{3,4}, ~12\, \mathbf{1}_{3,5}, ~3\,\mathbf{1}_{1,4}, ~3\,\mathbf{1}_{4,1},~\mathbf{1}_{4,5},~\mathbf{1}_{5,4} \nonumber
\end{gather}
Evidently, we have 12 chiral families in ${\bf 10}\oplus\overline{\bf 5}$, which will lead to three families after carrying out the $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ quotient, plus four vector-like $\overline{\bf 5}\,$--$\,{\bf 5}$ pairs and a spectrum of singlet matter fields. It is important that we have $\overline{\bf 5}\,$--$\,{\bf 5}$ pairs from two different $U(1)$ charge sectors, one of which can lead to the Higgs doublets, the other one to Higgs triplets. In this way, it is possible to have a trilinear superpotential coupling between the Higgs triplets and a singlet matter field but avoid the analogous trilinear coupling between the Higgs doublets and the same singlet matter field.
\subsection{The MSSM with a vector-like pair of quarks}
The line bundle sum $V$ descends to a bundle $\widehat{V}$ on the quotient manifold $\widehat{X}=X/(\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2)$ if and only if it has a $(\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2)$--equivariant structure. Moreover, when each line bundle ${\cal L}_a$ is individually equivariant, as will be the case for our example, the bundle $\widehat{V}$ is also a direct sum of line bundles. As a result, the number of $U(1)$ symmetries and the $U(1)$ charges of the various multiplets remain unchanged after taking the quotient.
It can be checked that all five line bundles ${\cal L}_a$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:kmatrix} admit an equivariant structure with respect to the group action \eqref{eq:groupaction}. However, this equivariant structure is not unique, and two equivariant structures can differ by a fiber-wise action of the group. Thus, we can classify the equivariant structures of the line bundles~${\cal L}_a$ by five irreducible $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ representations. In general we denote $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ representations by $(p,q)$, where $p,q=0,1$ and also introduce the regular representation ${\cal R}$ and the representation $\widetilde{\cal R}$ given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal R}=(0,0)\oplus (0,1)\oplus(1,0)\oplus(1,1)\; ,\quad \widetilde{\cal R}= (0,0)\oplus (1,0)\oplus (1,1)\; .
\end{equation}
For our specific model, we choose the following equivariant structure:
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_1^{(0,1)}\oplus {\cal L}_2^{(0,0)}\oplus {\cal L}_3^{(0,0)}\oplus {\cal L}_4^{(0,0)}\oplus {\cal L}_5^{(0,0)}~.
\end{equation}
Given this choice, we can compute the decomposition of the relevant cohomologies into $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ representations. These are given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{rrlrrrlrrrl}
H^1(X,{\cal L}_1)&=&{\cal R}&\quad& H^1(X,{\cal L}_2)&=&{\cal R}&\quad& H^1(X,{\cal L}_3)&=& \cal R\\[4pt]
H^1(X,{\cal L}_1\otimes {\cal L}_3)&=& \cal R&\quad&H^1(X,{\cal L}_1\otimes {\cal L}_5)&=&{\cal R}&\quad&H^1(X,{\cal L}_3\otimes {\cal L}_4)&=&{\cal R}\\[4pt]
\end{array}
\vspace{-12pt}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}\label{lbcohgrad}
\begin{array}{rrlrrrl}
H^1(X,{\cal L}_1\otimes {\cal L}_4)&=&\widetilde{\cal R}&\quad&H^1(X,{\cal L}_1^*\otimes {\cal L}_4^*)&=&\widetilde{\cal R} \\[4pt]
H^1(X,{\cal L}_4\otimes {\cal L}_5)&=&(0,1)&\quad&H^1(X,{\cal L}_4^*\otimes {\cal L}_5^*)&=&(0,1) \\[4pt]
H^1(X,{\cal L}_1\otimes {\cal L}_4^*)&=&\widetilde{\cal R}&\quad&H^1(X,{\cal L}_1^*\otimes {\cal L}_4)&=&\widetilde{\cal R} \\[4pt]
H^1(X,{\cal L}_4\otimes {\cal L}_5^*)&=&(0,1)&\quad&H^1(X,{\cal L}_4^*\otimes {\cal L}_5)&=&(0,1) \\[4pt]
\end{array}
\end{equation}
All remaining singlet cohomologies that have been omitted in \eqref{lbcohgrad} correspond to multiples of the regular representation $\cal{R}$.
In order to break the GUT group to the gauge group of the Standard Model and to project out the unwanted states, we complete the bundle on the quotient manifold to $\widehat{V}\oplus \cal{W}$, where $\cal{W}$ is a flat rank one bundle (a Wilson line), with structure group $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$, embedded in the hypercharge direction of $SU(5)$. The Wilson line can be specified by two irreducible $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ representations, denoted by ${\cal W}_2$ and ${\cal W}_3$, satisfying ${\cal W}_2\neq {\cal W}_3$ and ${\cal W}_2^{\otimes 2}\otimes {\cal W}_3^{\otimes 3}=(0,0)$. We aim to obtain the exact chiral matter spectrum of the MSSM, with the chiral $SU(5)$--multiplets being broken in the usual way as $\overline{\bf 5}_{a,b}\rightarrow (d_{a,b},L_{a,b})$ and ${\bf 10}_a\rightarrow (Q_a,u_a,e_a)$. In addition, we would like to project out the triplets from the $(\overline{\mathbf 5}_{4,5}, {\mathbf 5}_{4,5})$ vector-like pair and retain a pair of Higgs doublets. From the three $(\overline{\mathbf 5}_{1,4}, {\mathbf 5}_{1,4})$ vector-like pairs we would like to retain a single vector-like pair of triplets $T-\overline{T}$ (exotic quarks). The appropriate choice of Wilson line is given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal W}_2=(0,1)\;,\quad {\cal W}_3=(0,0)~.
\end{equation}
The $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ charges of the various standard model multiplets, including the exotic vector-like quark pair, are listed below:
\begin{equation}\label{Wf}
\begin{array}{rlr}
{\cal W}(d)={\cal W}(T)=\overline{\cal W}_3=(0,0)&\quad\quad\quad&{\cal W}(L)={\cal W}(H)=\overline{\cal W}_2=(0,1)\\[4pt]
{\cal W}(\overline{ T}) = {\cal W}_3 = (0,0) & \quad & {\cal W}(\overbar H) = {\cal W}_2 = (0,1)\\[4pt]
{\cal W}(Q)={\cal W}_2\otimes {\cal W}_3=(0,1) & \quad & {\cal W}(u)={\cal W}_3\otimes {\cal W}_3=(0,0)\\[4pt]
&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!{\cal W}(e)={\cal W}_2\otimes {\cal W}_2=(0,0)~.\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\end{array}
\end{equation}
With these charges, we can compute the number of multiplets of any given type $\psi$ resulting from the GUT symmetry breaking. Thus, if $\psi$ is associated with a cohomology group $H^1(X,{\cal L})$, we have to extract the $\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ singlets from $H^1(X,{\cal L})\otimes {\cal W}(\psi)$. From Eqs.~\eqref{lbcohgrad}, \eqref{Wf} and the identification of cohomologies and particles discussed in the previous section, we obtain the following standard model spectrum:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\mathbf{10}_1, ~\mathbf{10}_2, ~\mathbf{10}_3, ~\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{1,3}, ~\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{1,5}, ~\overline{\mathbf{5}}_{3,4}, \\[4pt]
~T_{1,4}, ~\overline{T}_{1,4}, ~H_{4,5}, ~\overbar{H}_{4,5},~3\,S_{1,3},
~S_{1,4},~S_{4,1},~S_{1,5}, ~4\, S_{2,4}, ~S_{2,5}, ~3\,
S_{3,2}, ~S_{3,4}, ~3\, S_{3,5} \; ,
\end{gathered}
\label{SMAb}
\end{equation}
where we have denoted the singlet fields by $S_{a, b}$ and
we have used the compressed $SU(5)$--notation, where appropriate. The spectrum contains, apart from the MSSM multiplets, a vector-like pair $T$ -- $\overline{T}$ of exotic quarks and a number of singlet matter fields, which correspond to bundle moduli. These singlet fields can be given VEVs, which corresponds to deforming the bundle away from the split locus and into a non-abelian bundle. However, not all deformations of the bundle lead to supersymmetric vacua. In fact, for our example, the following terms
\begin{equation}\label{Wsing}
W_{\text{sing}}~ \sim~ S_{1,4}^p S_{4,1}^p~,
\end{equation}
where $p\geq 2$, are allowed by the $U(1)$ symmetries.
These operators are the only possible contributions to the singlet superpotential, $W_{\rm sing}$.
If indeed present, they obstruct switching on VEVs $\langle S_{1,4}\rangle$ and
$\langle S_{4,1}\rangle$ simultaneously and hence, we
require that either $\langle S_{1,4}\rangle = 0$ or $\langle S_{4,1}\rangle = 0$.
With this assumption, the D-term equations can be satisfied for generic (small) VEVs of the
remaining singlet fields, indicating the existence of supersymmetric vacua near the split
locus $t_1=t_2=t_3=t_4=t_5$ in K\"ahler moduli space.
The superpotential is further constrained. At the abelian locus, the coupling $H\overbar H$ must
be absent, as indicated by the cohomology computations. However, the superpotential
coupling $\overbar H_{4,5} L_{1, 5} S_{4,1}$ is allowed by the $U(1)$ symmetries.
We assume that $\langle S_{4,1}\rangle = 0$ in order to avoid generating a large Higgs mass from this term.
For the discussion of the QCD axion, the relevant superpotential couplings allowed by the $U(1)$ symmetries are
\begin{equation}
W\supset \overline{ T}_{1,4} \,d_{3,4}\, S_{1,3} ~.
\label{superpot}
\end{equation}
For a non-zero $S_{1,3}$ VEV, this coupling removes the $d_{3,4}$ -- $\overline{ T}_{1,4}$ pair from the massless spectrum and, hence, these fields play the role of the exotic quark fields ${\cal Q}$ and $\widetilde{\cal Q}$ from our general set-up. (The ``missing" $d$-type quark is replaced by $T_{1,4}$ which carries the same standard model quantum numbers.) Altogether, this provides a realisation of the axion mechanism discussed in the previous sections. If $\langle S_{1,3}\rangle$ can be stabilised at a small value, $10^{-7}\, \lower .75ex \hbox{$\sim$} \llap{\raise .27ex \hbox{$<$}} \, \langle S_{1,3}\rangle\, \lower .75ex \hbox{$\sim$} \llap{\raise .27ex \hbox{$<$}} \,10^{-4}$ in GUT units, the axion coupling parameter will be in the phenomenologically allowed range.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
In this note, we have shown that a KSVZ axion with a decay constant in the phenomenologically required range can be realised in the context of heterotic Calabi-Yau compactifications with split bundles. At the split locus, the low-energy symmetry is enhanced by one or several $U(1)$ factors. Their associated FI terms vanish at the split locus and can assume arbitrarily small values close to it. Hence, solving the D-term equations in the vicinity of the split locus leads to a small VEV for a matter field singlet. Provided this singlet is coupled to a pair of exotic quarks, its phase becomes an axion with a decay constant set by the size of the FI term. We have presented an explicit line bundle standard model where all the required ingredients are present.
Hence, a phenomenologically viable axion scale can be obtained provided the moduli are dialled to the right values close to the split locus. This shows that there is no in-principle obstruction to implementing the axion solution to the strong CP problem in the context of the heterotic string. However, in this note we have not attempted to {\it explain} the axion scale, that is, to stabilise the moduli in the required region of moduli space. While it is not implausible that moduli are stabilised in the vicinity of a locus with enhanced symmetry, implementing this explicitly remains the subject of future work.
In the present note, we have presented one explicit example. It is worth noting that the database \cite{lbdatabase} contains a large number of potentially interesting models, thus opening up a large area for exploring axion physics in heterotic string theory.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank Kiwoon Choi for helpful discussions.
The work of EIB~is supported by the ARC Future Fellowship FT120100466. AL~is partially supported by the EPSRC network grant EP/l02784X/1 and by the STFC grant~ST/L000474/1. EIB and AC~would like to thank the Theoretical Physics Department at Oxford University for hospitality during part of the preparation of this paper.
\newpage
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}\begingroup\raggedright |
\section{Introduction}
Let $[m]=\{1,2,\ldots,m\}$ if $m \geq 1$, with $[0]=\varnothing$. By a \emph{partition} of $[m]$, we will mean a collection of non-empty, pairwise disjoint subsets of $[m]$, called \emph{blocks}, whose union is $[m]$. A \emph{Lah distribution} will refer to a partition of $[m]$ in which elements within each block are ordered (though there is no inherent ordering for the blocks themselves). Following the notation from \cite{NR}, let $\Lah{n}{k}_r$ denote the number of Lah distributions of the elements of $[n+r]$ having $k+r$ blocks such that the elements of $[r]$ belong to distinct (ordered) blocks. The $\Lah{n}{k}_r$ are called $r$-\emph{Lah numbers} and have only recently been studied.
The numbers $\Lah{n}{k}_r$ were once mentioned in \cite{Ch} (together with $r$-Whitney-Lah numbers) and appear in \cite{Sl} under the name of restricted Lah numbers. A few properties of the $\Lah{n}{k}_r$ were established in \cite{Be}, and a systematic study of these numbers was undertaken in \cite{NR}. When $r=0$, the $r$-Lah number reduces to the Lah number $\Lah{n}{k}$ (named for the mathematician Ivo Lah \cite{La1} and often denoted by $L(n,k)$), which counts the number of partitions of $[n]$ into $k$ ordered blocks (see, e.g., \cite{BeB,Wa}).
Earlier, analogous $r$-versions of the Stirling numbers of the first and second kind were introduced by Broder \cite{Br}, and later rediscovered by Merris \cite{Mer}, where $r$ distinguished elements have to be in distinct cycles or blocks. Following the parametrization and notation used in \cite{NR}, let $\stirling{n}{k}_r$ be the number of permutations of $[n+r]$ into $k+r$ cycles in which members of $[r]$ belong to distinct cycles and let $\Stirling{n}{k}_r$ be the number of partitions of $[n+r]$ into $k+r$ blocks in which members of $[r]$ belong to distinct blocks. There are several algebraic properties for which $\stirling{n}{k}_r$ and $\Stirling{n}{k}_r$ satisfy analogous identities, among them various recurrences and connection constant relations (see \cite[Section 2]{NR} for a comparative study). Analogues of some of these properties involving $r$-Lah numbers were established in \cite{NR}.
In this paper, we consider a two-parameter polynomial generalization of the number $\Lah{n}{k}_r$ which reduces to it when both parameters are unity. Denoted by $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$, it will also be seen to specialize to $\stirling{n}{k}_r$ when $a=1,b=0$ and to $\Stirling{n}{k}_r$ when $a=0,b=1$. Since the $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ reduce to the $r$-Lah numbers when $a=b=1$, we will refer to them as \emph{generalized} $r$-\emph{Lah numbers}. We note that the special case $r=0$ is equivalent to a re-parametrized version of the numbers $\mathfrak{S}_{s;h}(n,k)$ (see \cite{MSS,MSS2}) which arise in conjunction with the normal ordering problem from mathematical physics. Furthermore, it is seen that $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ is a variant of the generalized Stirling polynomial introduced by Hsu and Shiue in \cite{HS} and studied from an algebraic standpoint. Finally, we remark that $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ can be reached by a special substitution into the partial $r$-Bell polynomials introduced in \cite{MiR}, but here we look at some specific properties of $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ that were not considered more generally in \cite{MiR} (several of which do not seem to hold in the more general setting).
The paper is organized as follows. We define the polynomial $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ in terms of two statistics on Lah distributions and derive several of its properties, mostly by combinatorial arguments. This furnishes a common generalization for several of the earlier identities proven for $r$-Stirling and $r$-Lah numbers (see \cite{Br,Me,NR}). Some recurrences are also given for the row sum $\sum_{k=0}^n \mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$, among them a generalization of Spivey's Bell number formula \cite{Sp1}.
In the third section, we provide combinatorial proofs of four identities involving $\Lah{n}{k}_r$, which were shown in \cite{NR} by algebraic arguments. To do so, in three cases, we define appropriate sign-changing involutions on certain ordered pairs of combinatorial configurations, while in the other case, a suitable bijection is defined between the ordered pairs and a subset of the Lah distributions. Modifying the proofs will give orthogonality-type relations satisfied by the generalized $r$-Lah numbers.
We will make use of the following notation and conventions. Empty sums will take the value zero, and empty products the value one. The binomial coefficient $\binom{n}{k}$ is defined as $\frac{n!}{k!(n-k)!}$ if $0 \leq k \leq n$, and will be taken to be zero otherwise. If $m$ and $n$ are positive integers, then $[m,n]=\{m,m+1,\ldots,n\}$ if $m \leq n$, with $[m,n]=\varnothing$ if $m>n$. Finally, if $n$ is an integer, then let $n^{\overline{m}}=\prod_{i=0}^{m-1} (n+i)$ and $n^{\underline{m}}=\prod_{i=0}^{m-1} (n-i)$ if $m \geq 1$, with $n^{\overline{0}}=n^{\underline{0}}=1$ for all $n$.
\section{Generalized $r$-Lah relations}
Given $0 \leq k \leq n$ and $r \geq 0$, let $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ denote the set of Lah distributions enumerated by $\Lah{n}{k}_r$, i.e., partitions of $[n+r]$ into $k+r$ ordered blocks in which the elements of $[r]$ belong to distinct blocks. We will say that the elements of $[r]$ within a member of $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ are \emph{distinguished} and apply this term also to the blocks in which they belong. We will sometimes refer to the members of $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ as $r$-\emph{Lah distributions}.
Note that when $r=0$ or $r=1$, there is no restriction introduced by distinguished elements so that $\Lah{n}{k}_0=\Lah{n}{k}$ and $\Lah{n}{k}_1=\Lah{n+1}{k+1}$. Accordingly, when $r=0$, we will often omit the subscript and let $\mathcal{L}(n,k)$ denote the set of all Lah distributions of size $n$ having $k$ blocks. Note that $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ is a proper subset of $\mathcal{L}(n+r,k+r)$ when $r \geq 2$ and $n>k$.
We consider a generalization of the numbers $\Lah{n}{k}_r$ obtained by introducing a pair of statistics on $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ as follows. If $\lambda \in \mathcal{L}(n,k)$ and $i \in [n]$, then we will say that $i$ is a \emph{record low} of $\lambda$ if there are no elements $j<i$ to the left of $i$ within its block in $\lambda$. For example, if $n=9$, $k=3$ and $\lambda=\{1,5,3\},\{8,4,7,2,9\},\{6\} \in \mathcal{L}(9,3)$, then the element 1 is a record low in the first block, 8, 4 and 2 are record lows in the second, and 6 is a record low in the third block for a total of five record lows altogether. Note that the first element within a block as well as the smallest are always record lows.
We now recall the following statistic from \cite{MSS}.
\begin{definition}\label{d1}
Given $\lambda \in \mathcal{L}(n,k)$, let $rec^*(\lambda)$ denote the total number of record lows of $\lambda$ which are not themselves the smallest element of a block. Let $nrec(\lambda)$ denote the number of elements of $[n]$ which are not record lows of $\lambda$.
\end{definition}
To illustrate, if $\lambda$ is as above, then $rec^*(\lambda)=2$ (for the 8 and 4) and $nrec(\lambda)=4$ (for 5, 3, 7 and 9). We now consider the restriction of the $rec^*$ and $nrec$ statistics to $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ and define the distribution polynomial $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ by
$$\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)=\sum_{\lambda \in \mathcal{L}_r(n,k)}a^{nrec(\lambda)}b^{rec^*(\lambda)},$$
where $a$ and $b$ are indeterminates.
Note that $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ reduces to $\Lah{n}{k}_r$ when $a=b=1$, by definition. Furthermore, it is seen that $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ reduces to $\stirling{n}{k}_r$ when $a=1,b=0$ and to $\Stirling{n}{k}_r$ when $a=0,b=1$. Note that in the former case, the first element must be the smallest within each block in order for $\lambda \in \mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ to have a non-zero contribution towards $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$, while in the latter case, the elements must be arranged in decreasing order within each block of $\lambda$.
Given $\lambda \in \mathcal{L}(n,k)$, let $w(\lambda)=a^{nrec(\lambda)}b^{rec^*(\lambda)}$ denote the \emph{weight of} $\lambda$, and by the weight of a subset of $\mathcal{L}(n,k)$, we will mean the sum of the weights of all the members contained therein. Note that $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ can only assume non-zero values when $0 \leq k \leq n$ and $r \geq 0$. We now write a recurrence for $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n+1,k;r)$ where $1 \leq k \leq n+1$. First note that the total weight of all members of $\mathcal{L}_r(n+1,k)$ in which the element $n+r+1$ belongs to its own block is $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k-1;r)$ since $n+r+1$ in this case contributes to neither the $nrec$ nor $rec^*$ values. The weight of all members of $\mathcal{L}_r(n+1,k)$ in which $n+r+1$ starts a block containing at least one member of $[n+r]$ is $b(k+r)G_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ since $rec^*$ is increased by one by the addition of $n+r+1$. Finally, if $n+r+1$ directly follows some member of $[n+r]$ within a block, then $nrec$ is increased by one, which implies a contribution of $a(n+r)G_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ in this case. Combining the three previous cases gives the recurrence
\begin{equation}\label{rec1}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n+1,k;r)=\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k-1;r)+(an+bk+(a+b)r)\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r), \qquad 1 \leq k \leq n+1,
\end{equation}
with boundary values $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(0,k;r)=\delta_{k,0}$ and $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,0;r)=\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}(a(i+r)+br)$.
\textbf{Remark:} By \eqref{rec1}, one sees that the $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$ occur as a special case of the solution to a general bivariate recurrence in \cite{BSV1,BSV2}, which was approached algebraically (wherein general formulas for the relevant exponential generating functions were found).
The $a=b=1$ case of the following result occurs as \cite[Theorem 3.2]{NR}.
\begin{theorem}\label{gt1}
If $n\geq 0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{gt1e1}
\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}(x+(a+b)r+ai)=\sum_{k=0}^n \mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)\prod_{i=0}^{k-1}(x-bi).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Proceed by induction on $n$, the $n=0$ case clear. If $n \geq 0$, then
\begin{align*}
\prod_{i=0}^n(x+(a+b)r+ai)&=(x+(a+b)r+an)\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}(x+(a+b)r+ai)\\
&=(x+(a+b)r+an)\sum_{k=0}^n \mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)\prod_{i=0}^{k-1}(x-bi)\\
&=\sum_{k=0}^n \mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)\left[\prod_{i=0}^k(x-bi)+(an+bk+(a+b)r)\prod_{i=0}^{k-1}(x-bi)\right]\\
&=(an+(a+b)r)\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,0;r)+\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k-1;r)\prod_{i=0}^{k-1}(x-bi)\\
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
&\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}(an+bk+(a+b)r)\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)\prod_{i=0}^{k-1}(x-bi)\\
&\quad\quad=\sum_{k=0}^{n+1} G_{a,b}(n+1,k;r)\prod_{i=0}^{k-1}(x-bi),
\end{align*}
by \eqref{rec1}, which completes the induction.
\end{proof}
The $a=b=1$ case of \eqref{gt2e1} below occurs as \cite[Theorem 3.3]{NR}.
\begin{theorem}\label{gt2}
We have
\begin{equation}\label{gt2e1}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)=\sum_{i=k}^n\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i-1,k-1;r)\prod_{j=i}^{n-1}(aj+bk+(a+b)r), \qquad 1 \leq k \leq n,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{gt2e2}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)=\sum_{i=0}^{k}(a(n+r-i-1)+b(k+r-i))\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n-i-1,k-i;r), \qquad 0 \leq k <n.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
To show \eqref{gt2e1}, we may assume that the blocks within an $r$-Lah distribution are arranged from left to right in ascending order according to the size of the smallest element. Then the right-hand side of \eqref{gt2e1} gives the total weight of all members of $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ by considering the smallest element, $i+r$, belonging to the right-most block where $k \leq i \leq n$. Note that there are $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i-1,k-1;r)$ possibilities concerning placement of the members of $[i+r-1]$ and $\prod_{j=i}^{n-1}(aj+bk+(a+b)r)$ ways in which to arrange the members of $[i+r+1,n+r]$. Summing over all possible $i$ gives \eqref{gt2e1}.
To show \eqref{gt2e2}, consider the largest element, $n+r-i$, not going by itself in a block where $0 \leq i \leq k$ (note $k<n$ implies the existence of such an element). Observe that then the elements of $[n+r-i-1]$ comprise a member of $\mathcal{L}_r(n-i-1,k-i)$ and that there are $a(n+r-i-1)+b(k+r-i)$ possibilities concerning placement of $n+r-i$. Finally, the members of $[n+r-i+1,n+r]$ must all belong to singleton blocks and hence contribute to neither the $nrec$ nor the $rec^*$ values.
\end{proof}
Extending the proofs of Theorems 3.4 and 3.6 in \cite{NR} yields the following identities.
\begin{theorem}\label{gt3}
If $0 \leq k \leq n$, then
\begin{equation}\label{gt3e1}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r+s)=\sum_{i=k}^n \binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i,k;r)\prod_{j=0}^{n-i-1}(aj+(a+b)s).
\end{equation}
If $0 \leq k \leq n-m$, then
\begin{equation}\label{gt3e2}
\binom{k+m}{k}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k+m;r+s)=\sum_{i=k}^{n-m}\binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i,k;r)\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n-i,m;s).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The $a=0,b=1$ case of the following identity is a refinement of the $r$-Bell number relation \cite[Theorem 2]{Me}.
\begin{theorem}\label{gt4}
If $n,m,k \geq 0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{gt4e1}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n+m,k;r)=\sum_{i=0}^n\sum_{j=0}^m \binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(m,j;r)\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i,k-j;0)\prod_{\ell=0}^{n-i-1}(a\ell+a(m+r)+b(j+r)).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given $\lambda \in \mathcal{L}_r(n+m,k)$, consider the number, $n-i$, of elements in $I=[m+r+1,n+m+r]$ that lie in a block containing an element of $[m+r]$ and the number, $j+r$, of blocks occupied by the members of $[m+r]$. There are then $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(m,j;r)$ possibilities regarding placement of the members of $[m+r]$. Once these positions have been determined, there are $\binom{n}{i}\prod_{\ell=0}^{n-i-1}(a\ell+a(m+r)+b(j+r))$ ways in which to choose and arrange the aforementioned elements of $I$. Finally, the remaining elements of $I$ can be arranged in $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i,k-j;0)$ ways as none of them can belong to distinguished blocks. Summing over all possible $i$ and $j$ gives \eqref{gt4e1}.
\end{proof}
If $n \geq 0$, then let $G_{a,b}(n;r)=\sum_{k=0}^n G_{a,b}(n,k;r)$. Note that $G_{a,b}(n;0)$ reduces to the Bell number \cite[A000110]{Sl} when $a=0,b=1$ and to the sequence \cite[A000262]{Sl} when $a=b=1$. Summing \eqref{gt3e1} and \eqref{gt4e1} over $k$ gives, respectively, the formulas
\begin{equation}\label{Bne1}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n;r+s)=\sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i;r)\prod_{j=0}^{n-i-1}(aj+(a+b)s)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Bne2}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n+m;r)=\sum_{i=0}^n\sum_{j=0}^m \binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(m,j;r)\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(i;0)\prod_{\ell=0}^{n-i-1}(a\ell+a(m+r)+b(j+r)).
\end{equation}
Note that the $a=0,b=1,s=1$ case of \eqref{Bne1} occurs as \cite[Theorem 7.1]{Me0}, see also \cite[Theorem 1]{Mi}; moreover, the $a=0,b=1$ case of \eqref{Bne2} occurs as \cite[Theorem 2]{Me}.
We have the following additional recurrences satisfied by the $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n;r)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{gt5}
If $n \geq 0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{gt5e1}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n;r)=\sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n-i;0)\prod_{j=0}^{i-1}(aj+(a+b)r)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n+1;r)&=r\sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i} \mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n-i;r-1)\prod_{j=0}^{i}(aj+a+b)\notag\\
&\quad +\sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n-i;r)\prod_{j=0}^{i-1}(aj+a+b).\label{gt5e2}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
To show \eqref{gt5e1}, consider the number, $i$, of elements in $[r+1,r+n]$ that belong to distinguished blocks within $\mathcal{L}_r(n)=\cup_{k=0}^n \mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$. Note that there are $\binom{n}{i}$ ways to select these elements and $\prod_{j=0}^{i-1}(aj+(a+b)r)$ ways in which to arrange them, once selected, within the distinguished blocks. (Note that the $j$-th smallest element chosen is the $j$-th to be arranged and thus contributes $a(j-1)+(a+b)r$ for $1 \leq j \leq i$.) The remaining $n-i$ elements of $[r+1,r+n]$ may then be partitioned in $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n-i;0)$ ways. Summing over all possible $i$ gives \eqref{gt5e1}.
To show \eqref{gt5e2}, we consider whether or not the element $n+r+1$ belongs to a distinguished block within a member of $\mathcal{L}_r(n+1)$. If it does, then there are $r$ choices for the block, which we will denote by $B$. If there are $i$ other elements of $[r+1,r+n+1]$ in $B$, then there are $\binom{n}{i}$ ways in which to select these elements and $\prod_{\ell=0}^i(a\ell+a+b)$ ways in which to arrange all $i+2$ elements within $B$. The remaining $n-i$ elements of $[r+1,r+n+1]$ and the other $r-1$ elements of $[r]$ can then be arranged together according to any member of $\mathcal{L}_{r-1}(n-i)$. Thus, the first sum on the right-hand side of \eqref{gt5e2} gives the weight of all members of $\mathcal{L}_r(n+1)$ in which $n+r+1$ belongs to a distinguished block. By similar reasoning, the second sum gives the weight of all members of $\mathcal{L}_r(n+1)$ in which $n+r+1$ belongs to a non-distinguished block according to the number $i$ of other elements in this block.
\end{proof}
Taking $a=0,b=1$ in \eqref{gt5e1} gives
$$B_{n,r}=\sum_{i=0}^n r^i\binom{n}{i}B_{n-i}, \qquad n \geq 0,$$
which is equivalent to the $x=1$ case of \cite[Equation 4]{Me0}, where $B_{n,r}=\sum_{k=0}^n \Stirling{n}{k}_r$ denotes the $r$-Bell number and $B_n$ denotes the usual Bell number.
Taking $a=0,b=1$ in \eqref{gt5e2}, and applying \eqref{Bne1} when $s=1$ to both sums, gives
$$B_{n+1,r}=rB_{n,r}+B_{n,r+1}, \qquad n \geq 0,$$
which is \cite[Theorem 8.1]{Me0}.
\textbf{Remark:} Adding a variable $x$ that marks the number of non-distinguished blocks within members of $\mathcal{L}_r(n)$, identity \eqref{gt5e2} can be generalized to
\begin{align*}
G_{a,b,x}(n+1;r)&=r\sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i} \mathcal{G}_{a,b,x}(n-i;r-1)\prod_{j=0}^{i}(aj+a+b)\\
&\quad +x\sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i}\mathcal{G}_{a,b,x}(n-i;r)\prod_{j=0}^{i-1}(aj+a+b),
\end{align*}
which reduces to \cite[Theorem 4.2]{Me0} when $a=0,b=1$. The other identities above for $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n;r)$ can also be similarly generalized.
\section{Combinatorial proofs of $r$-Lah formulas}
In this section, we provide combinatorial proofs of the following relations involving the $r$-Lah numbers which were given in \cite[Theorem 3.11]{NR}.
\begin{theorem} Let $0 \leq k \leq n$ and $r,s \geq 0$. Then
\begin{align*}
(i)& \quad\binom{n}{k}(2r-2s)^{\overline{n-k}}=\sum_{j=k}^n (-1)^{j-k}\Lah{n}{j}_r \Lah{j}{k}_s,\\
(ii)& \quad \stirling{n}{k}_{2r-s}=\sum_{j=k}^n (-1)^{j-k}\Lah{n}{j}_r \stirling{j}{k}_s, \quad \text{if} \quad 2r \geq s,\\
(iii)& \quad \Stirling{n}{k}_{2s-r}=\sum_{j=k}^n (-1)^{n-j} \Stirling{n}{j}_r \Lah{j}{k}_s, \quad \text{if} \quad 2s \geq r,\\
(iv)& \quad \Lah{n}{k}_{\frac{r+s}{2}}=\sum_{j=k}^n \stirling{n}{j}_r \Stirling{j}{k}_s, \quad \text{if r and s have the same parity}.
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
\textbf{Proof of (i):}\\
First suppose $r \geq s$. Consider the set of ordered pairs $(\alpha,\beta)$, where $\alpha \in \mathcal{L}_r(n,j)$ for some $k \leq j \leq n$ and $\beta$ is an arrangement of the $j+s$ blocks of $\alpha$ not containing the elements of $[s+1,r]$ according to some member of $\mathcal{L}_s(j,k)$. Note that within $\beta$, the blocks of $\alpha$ are ordered according to the size of the smallest elements. Let $\mathcal{A}$ ($=\mathcal{A}_{n,k}$) denote the set of all such ordered pairs $(\alpha,\beta)$. Define the sign of $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathcal{A}$ by $(-1)^{j-k}$, where $j$ denotes the number of non-distinguished blocks of $\alpha$. Then the right-hand side of (i) gives the sum of the signs of all members of $\mathcal{A}$.
Let $\mathcal{A}^*\subseteq \mathcal{A}$ comprise those pairs in which each block of $\beta$ contains only one block of $\alpha$, with this block being a singleton. Then each member of $\mathcal{A}^*$ has positive sign and $|\mathcal{A}^*|=\binom{n}{k}(2r-2s)^{\overline{n-k}}$. To show the latter statement, first note that the blocks of $\beta$ for each $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathcal{A}^*$ contain $k$ elements of $[r+1,r+n]$, together with the members of $[s]$. Thus, there are $\binom{n}{k}$ choices concerning the elements of $[r+1,r+n]$ to go in these blocks. The remaining $n-k$ elements of $[r+1,r+n]$ then belong to the blocks of $\alpha$ containing the members of $[s+1,r]$. Note that these $n-k$ elements may be positioned in any one of $(2r-2s)^{\overline{n-k}}$ ways amongst these blocks, as there are $2r-2s+i-1$ ways to position the $i$-th smallest element for $1 \leq i \leq n-k$ (upon selecting the position first for the smallest element and then for the second smallest and so on). This implies the cardinality formula for $|\mathcal{A}^*|$ above.
We now define a sign-changing involution of $\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}^*$, which will complete the proof for the case $r \geq s$. To do so, given $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}^*$, suppose that the blocks of $\beta$ are arranged from left to right in increasing order according to the size of the smallest element of $[n+r]$ contained therein. Identify the left-most block of $\beta$ containing at least two elements of $[n+r]$ altogether, which we will denote by $B$. If the first block of $\alpha$ within $B$ is a singleton, whence $B$ contains at least two blocks of $\alpha$, then erase brackets and move the element contained therein to the initial position of the block that follows. If the first block of $\alpha$ within $B$ contains at least two elements of $[n+r]$, then form a singleton block using the initial element which then becomes the first block within the sequence of blocks comprising $B$. One may verify that this mapping provides the desired involution, which completes the proof in the case when $r \geq s$.
If $r<s$, then we show equivalently
\begin{equation}\label{Lahe1}
\binom{n}{k}(2s-2r)^{\underline{n-k}}=\sum_{j=k}^n (-1)^{n-j}\Lah{n}{j}_r \Lah{j}{k}_s.
\end{equation}
In this case, we define ordered pairs $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathcal{A}$, where $\alpha$ is as before and $\beta$ is an arrangement of all of the blocks of $\alpha$, together with $s-r$ singleton blocks $\{-1\}, \{-2\}, \ldots, \{-(s-r)\}$ (which we will refer to as \emph{special}), according to some member of $\mathcal{L}_s(j,k)$. Note that the distinguished blocks of $\alpha$, together with the special blocks, are to be regarded as distinguished elements within $\beta$ (with similar terminology applied to the blocks of $\beta$). Furthermore, let us refer to the blocks of $\beta$ containing $\{-i\}$ for some $i$ as \emph{special} and the other blocks of $\beta$ as \emph{non-special}. Define the sign by $(-1)^{n-j}$, where $j$ is the number of non-distinguished blocks of $\alpha$.
Let $\mathcal{A}^*$ consist of all ordered pairs $(\alpha,\beta)$ in which all blocks of $\alpha$ are singletons and are distributed within $\beta$ such that the non-special blocks of $\beta$ contain only one block of $\alpha$, while the special blocks of $\beta$ have (i) at most one block of $\alpha$ to the right of the special singleton contained therein, and (ii) at most one to the left of it. Then each member of $\mathcal{A}^*$ has positive sign and $|\mathcal{A}^*|=\binom{n}{k}(2s-2r)^{\underline{n-k}}$. This follows from first observing that there are $\binom{n}{k}$ ways in which to choose and arrange the elements of $[r+1,r+n]$ that are not to be contained within the special blocks of $\beta$. It is then seen that there are $(2s-2r)^{\underline{n-k}}$ ways in which to arrange the remaining elements of $[r+1,r+n]$ in the special blocks of $\beta$ according to the restrictions above.
To define the sign-changing involution of $\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}^*$, first apply the mapping used in the prior case if some non-special block of $\beta$ contains two or more elements of $[n+r]$ altogether. Otherwise, identify the smallest $i \in [r-s]$, which we will denote by $i_0$, such that the block of $\beta$ containing $\{-i\}$ violates condition (i) or (ii). Apply the involution used in the prior case to the blocks of $\alpha$ to the left of $\{-i_0\}$ within its block in $\beta$ if (i) is violated, and if not, then apply this mapping to the blocks of $\alpha$ occurring to the right of $\{-i_0\}$. Combining the two mappings yields the desired involution of $\mathcal{A}-\mathcal{A}^*$ and completes the proof in the case when $r<s$. \qed \hfill\\
\textbf{Proof of (ii):}\\
In what follows, let $\mathcal{C}_r(n,k)$ denote the subset of $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ enumerated by $\stirling{n}{k}_r$, i.e., those distributions in which the smallest element is first within each block. First assume $r=s$. In this case, let $\mathcal{B}$ ($=\mathcal{B}_{n,k}$) denote the set of ordered pairs $(\gamma,\delta)$ such that $\gamma \in \mathcal{L}_r(n,j)$ for some $k \leq j \leq n$ and $\delta$ is an arrangement of all the blocks of $\gamma$ according to some member of $\mathcal{C}_r(j,k)$. Here, it is understood that the blocks of $\gamma$ are ordered according to the size of the smallest element, with the distinguished blocks of $\gamma$ considered distinguished as elements of $\delta$. Furthermore, the first block of $\gamma$ within each cycle of $\delta$ is the smallest (i.e., it contains the smallest element of $[n+r]$ contained within all of the blocks in the cycle). Define the sign of $(\gamma,\delta)$ as $(-1)^{j-k}$, where $j$ denotes the number of non-distinguished blocks of $\gamma$. Then the right-hand side of (ii) when $r=s$ is the sum of the signs of all members of $\mathcal{B}$.
Let $\mathcal{B}^* \subseteq \mathcal{B}$ comprise those pairs $(\gamma, \delta) \in \mathcal{B}$ satisfying the conditions (i) within each block of $\gamma$, the first element is smallest, and (ii) no block of $\delta$ contains two or more blocks of $\gamma$. Note that members of $\mathcal{B}^*$ must contain $k$ non-distinguished blocks for otherwise (ii) would be violated, whence each member of $\mathcal{B}^*$ has positive sign. Furthermore, members of $\mathcal{B}^*$ are seen to be synonymous with members of $\mathcal{C}_r(n,k)$.
We define a sign-changing involution of $\mathcal{B}-\mathcal{B}^*$ as follows. Suppose that the cycles of $\delta$ within $(\gamma,\delta) \in \mathcal{B}-\mathcal{B}^*$ are arranged in increasing order according to the size of the smallest element of $[n+r]$ contained therein. Let $B$ be the left-most cycle of $\delta$ that either contains at least two blocks of $\delta$ or contains a block of $\delta$ in which the first element fails to be the smallest. Consider the first block $x$ within $B$. If $x$ is of the form $\{a,\ldots,b,\ldots\}$, where $b$ is the smallest element of the block and $b \neq a$, then replace it within $B$ with the two blocks $\{b,\ldots\},\{a,\ldots\}$. On the other hand, if the first element of $x$ is the smallest, whence $B$ contains at least two blocks, then write all elements of $x$ in order at the end of the second block of $B$. This mapping provides the desired involution and establishes the result in the case $r=s$.
Now suppose $r<s\leq 2r$ and write $s=2r-\ell$ for some $0 \leq \ell \leq r-1$. We modify the proof given in the prior case as follows. Let $\mathcal{B}$ consist of all ordered pairs $(\gamma,\delta)$, where $\gamma \in \mathcal{L}_r(n,j)$ and $\delta$ is an arrangement of all the blocks of $\gamma$, together with the special singletons $\{-i\}$ for $i \in [r-\ell]$, arranged according to some member of $\mathcal{C}_s(j,k)$. Blocks are ordered according to the size of the smallest elements contained therein and the cycles of $\delta$ are arranged as before. The distinguished elements of $\delta$ are the distinguished blocks of $\gamma$, together with the special singletons. Let $\mathcal{B}^*\subseteq \mathcal{B}$ consist of those pairs satisfying conditions (i) and (ii) above, where for (ii), we exclude from consideration cycles of $\delta$ containing $\{-i\}$ for some $i$. Given $(\gamma,\delta) \in \mathcal{B}-\mathcal{B}^*$, apply the prior involution to the cycles of $\delta$ not containing the special singletons.
Let $\mathcal{B}'\subseteq \mathcal{B}^*$ consist of those $(\gamma,\delta)$ in which the numbers $\pm i$ for $i \in [r-\ell]$ all belong to singleton blocks of $\gamma$ each occupying its own cycle of $\delta$. Note that $|\mathcal{B}'|=\stirling{n}{k}_{2r-s}$ since there are $\ell=2r-s$ distinguished cycles (i.e., those containing a block with an element of $[r-\ell+1,r]$
in it), with all cycles containing a single contents-ordered block whose first element is also the smallest. To complete the proof in this case, we extend the involution to $\mathcal{B}^*-\mathcal{B}'$ as follows. Let $i_0$ be the smallest $i \in [r-\ell]$ such that either (a) a cycle of $\delta$ containing $\{-i\}$ also has one or more elements of $[r+1,r+n]$ in it, or (b) a cycle of $\delta$ containing $\{-i\}$ has only that block in it, with $i$ not occurring as a singleton block of $\gamma$.
If (a) occurs and there are at least two elements of $[r+1,r+n]$ altogether in the cycle of $\delta$ containing $\{-i_0\}$, then apply the mapping used in the proof of the $r\geq s$ case of (i) above to the blocks of this cycle excluding $\{-i_0\}$. Otherwise, if (a) occurs and there is only one element of $[r+1,r+n]$ in the cycle containing $\{-i_0\}$ or if (b) occurs, then replace one option with the other by either moving the element in the other block of the cycle containing $\{-i_0\}$ to the last position of the block containing $i_0$ within its cycle or vice-versa. Combining the last two mappings provides the desired involution of $\mathcal{B}^*-\mathcal{B}'$ and completes the proof in the $r<s \leq 2r$ case.
Finally, if $r>s$, then consider ordered pairs $(\gamma,\delta)$, where $\delta$ is an arrangement in cycles of all the non-distinguished blocks of $\gamma$, together with those containing $i$ for some $i \in [s]$. Apply the involution used in the $r=s$ case above, but this time excluding from consideration those blocks of $\gamma$ containing $i$ for some $i \in [s+1,r]$. The set of survivors $(\gamma,\delta)$ of this involution then consists of all $(\gamma,\delta)$ where any block of $\gamma$ (other than one containing some $i \in [s+1,r]$) has its smallest element first, with the cycles of $\delta$ each containing one block of $\gamma$. We add $r-s$ to all of the elements in $[r+1,r+n]$. Then to a block of $\gamma$ containing $i \in [s+1,r]$, we write $i+r-s$ at the front of it. For each $i$, split the block now containing $i+r-s$ and $i$ into two separate blocks starting with these elements. Designate all blocks starting with $i \in [2r-s]$ as distinguished. From this, it is seen that the set of survivors of the involution in this case are synonymous with members of $\mathcal{C}_{2r-s}(n,k)$, which completes the proof. \qed \\
\textbf{Proof of (iii):}\\
One can give a similar proof to (ii) above. We describe the main steps. Let $\mathcal{S}_r(n,k)$ denote the subset of $\mathcal{L}_r(n,k)$ enumerated by $\Stirling{n}{k}_r$, i.e., those distributions in which the elements occur in increasing order within each block. In the case $r=s$, consider the set $\mathcal{D}$ of ordered pairs $(\rho,\tau)$ such that $\rho \in \mathcal{S}_r(n,j)$ for some $j$ and $\tau$ is an arrangement of the blocks of $\rho$ according to some member of $\mathcal{L}_r(j,k)$. Define an involution of $\mathcal{D}$ by considering the first block of $\tau$ containing a non-singleton block of $\rho$ or in which the blocks of $\rho$ are not arranged in increasing order of smallest elements (possibly both). Within this block of $\tau$, in a left-to-right scan of the blocks of $\rho$ contained therein, consider the first occurrence of either (i) consecutive blocks of the form $B=\{x\}$, $C=\{y,\ldots\}$, where $x > \max(C)$, or (ii) $C=\{y,\ldots\}$, where $|C|\geq 2$ and the block directly preceding $C$ (if it exists) contains a single element $x$ that is strictly smaller than $\max(C)$. We replace one option with the other by either moving the element in $B$ to the end of block $C$ in (i) or taking the last element of block $C$ as in (ii) and forming a singleton that directly precedes it.
If $r<s$, then add $s-r$ special singleton blocks to the arrangement $\tau$ to be regarded as distinguished. Apply the involution used in the previous case to the blocks of $\tau$ not containing a special singleton. To the blocks of $\tau$ containing a special singleton, we apply the involution separately to the sections to the left and to the right of it. Given a survivor of this involution, we break the blocks of $\tau$ into two sections with the special singleton starting the second section and then add a distinguished element to the first section. Note that this results in $r+2(s-r)=2s-r$ distinguished blocks in all.
If $s<r\leq2s$, then consider ordered pairs $(\rho,\tau)$, where $\tau$ consists of contents-ordered blocks whose elements are the non-distinguished blocks of $\rho$, together with the first $s$ distinguished blocks of $\rho$. Apply the involution used in the $r=s$ case, excluding from consideration those blocks of $\rho$ containing a member of $[s+1,r]$. We extend this involution by considering the smallest $i \in [r-s]$, if it exists, such that there is at least one member of $[r+1,r+n]$ in either the block of $\tau$ containing $i$ or in the block of $\rho$ containing $r+1-i$ (possibly both). Let $M$ denote the largest element of $[r+1,r+n]$ contained in either of these blocks. If $M$ belongs to the block of $\tau$ containing $i$, necessarily as a singleton $\{M\}$, then erase the brackets enclosing $M$ and move it to the final position of the block of $\rho$ containing $r+1-i$, and vice-versa, if $M$ belongs to the block of $\rho$ containing $r+1-i$. The set of survivors of this extended involution is seen to have cardinality $\Stirling{n}{k}_{2s-r}$. \qed\\
\textbf{Proof of (iv):}\\
Suppose $r$ and $s$ have the same parity. First assume $r \geq s$. Let $\mathcal{E}$ denote the set of ordered pairs $(\alpha,\beta)$ such that $\alpha \in \mathcal{C}_r(n,j)$ for some $k \leq j \leq n$ and $\beta$ is an arrangement of the $j$ non-distinguished cycles of $\alpha$, together with $s$ special singleton cycles $(-1), (-2),\ldots, (-s)$ into $k+s$ blocks according to some member of $\mathcal{S}_s(j,k)$. Then the right-hand side of (iv) gives the cardinality of $\mathcal{E}$. To complete the proof in this case, we define a bijection between the sets $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\frac{r+s}{2}}(n,k)$.
To do so, given $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathcal{E}$, let $C_i$, $1 \leq i \leq r$, denote the cycles of $\alpha$ containing the members of $[r]$. We assume that the smallest element is written first within a cycle. If $1 \leq i \leq s$, then let $C_1^{(i)},C_2^{(i)},\ldots,C_{t_i}^{(i)}$ for some $t_i \geq 0$ denote the other cycles (if any) within the block of $\beta$ containing $(-i)$, arranged in decreasing order of smallest elements. For each $i$, we remove the parentheses enclosing these cycles and concatenate the resulting words into one long word, which we write to the left of the elements in cycle $C_i$ in a single block. (If there are no other cycles in the block of $\beta$ containing $(-i)$, then only the elements in cycle $C_i$ are written.) This yields $s$ contents-ordered blocks containing the distinguished elements $1,\ldots,s$.
For $\frac{r+s}{2}<j \leq r$, consider the word $W_j$ obtained by reading the contents of cycle $C_j$ from left to right, excluding the initial letter $j$. We then write the letters of $W_j$ in order, followed by the contents of cycle $C_{j-\frac{r-s}{2}}$, in a single block for each $j$. This yields $\frac{r-s}{2}$ additional blocks containing the distinguished elements $s+1,\ldots,\frac{r+s}{2}$. For the other $k$ blocks of $\beta$ (which contain cycles of $\alpha$ having only elements in $[r+1,r+n]$), express the permutation corresponding to the sequence of cycles contained therein as a word. Putting these blocks together with the prior ones yields a Lah distribution containing all the elements of the set $[\frac{r+s}{2}]\cup[r+1,r+n]$ in which members of $[\frac{r+s}{2}]$ all belong to distinct blocks. Subtracting $\frac{r-s}{2}$ from each letter in $[r+1,r+n]$ yields a member of $\mathcal{L}_{\frac{r+s}{2}}(n,k)$, which we will denote by $f(\alpha,\beta)$.
To reverse the mapping $f$, given $L \in \mathcal{L}_{\frac{r+s}{2}}(n,k)$, we reconstruct its pre-image $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathcal{E}$ as follows. First observe that within the block of $L$ containing $i$ for some $i \in [s]$, a left-to-right minima (excepting $i$), taken together with the sequence of letters between it and the next minima, corresponds to a cycle belonging to the block of $\beta$ containing $(-i)$, with the letters to the right of and including $i$ forming the cycle $C_i$ of $\alpha$. Within blocks of $L$ containing $i$ for $i \in [s+1,\frac{r+s}{2}]$, elements to the right of and including $i$ constitute cycle $C_i$ of $\alpha$, while those to the left of $i$ (if any) constitute the letters beyond the first of cycle $C_{i+\frac{r-s}{2}}$ in $\alpha$. Finally, writing the permutations in the undistinguished blocks of $L$ as cycles (and adding $\frac{r-s}{2}$ to each letter in $[\frac{r+s}{2}+1,\frac{r+s}{2}+n]$) yields the remaining cycles of $\alpha$ and blocks of $\beta$.
Now assume $r<s$ and let $\mathcal{E}$ consist of the ordered pairs $(\alpha,\beta)$ as before. To define the mapping $f$ in this case, we proceed as follows. For each $i \in [\frac{s-r}{2}+1,s]$, we delete the cycle $(-i)$ from its block within $\beta$ and then concatenate the contents of the remaining cycles, where cycles within a block are arranged in decreasing order of size of their first elements. We then write the resulting word in a block followed by the contents of cycle $C_{i-\frac{s-r}{2}}$ if $\frac{s-r}{2}<i \leq \frac{s+r}{2}$, or followed by the contents of the cycles in the block containing the special cycle $(-(i-\frac{s+r}{2}))$ if $\frac{s+r}{2}<i \leq s$. In the latter case, cycles within a block are arranged by decreasing order of first elements, except for the special cycle, which is first.
For each of the remaining blocks of $\beta$, we express the permutation corresponding to the sequence of cycles contained therein as a word. At this point, we have $k+\frac{s+r}{2}$ contents-ordered blocks of the set $S\cup [r+n]$ in which members of $S\cup[r]$ belong to distinct blocks, where $S=\{-1,-2,\ldots,-\frac{s-r}{2}\}$. To each element of $[r+1,r+n]$, we add $\frac{s-r}{2}$, and to each element of $S$, we add $\frac{s+r}{2}+1$. This results in a member of $\mathcal{L}_{\frac{r+s}{2}}(n,k)$ and the prior steps are seen to be reversible. This completes the proof in the case $r<s$. \qed\\
Modifying appropriately the proofs given above for (i) and (iv) in the case $r=s$ yields the following generalization in terms of $\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{genor}
If $0 \leq k \leq n$ and $r \geq 0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{genore1}
\delta_{n,k}=\sum_{j=k}^n (-1)^{j-k}\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,j;r)\mathcal{G}_{b,a}(j,k;r)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{genore2}
\mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)=\sum_{j=k}^n \mathcal{G}_{a,t}(n,j;r)\mathcal{G}_{-t,b}(j,k;r).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}\label{genorc1}
Let $(a_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ and $(b_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ be sequences of complex numbers. Then we have $b_n=\sum_{k=0}^n \mathcal{G}_{a,b}(n,k;r)a_k, ~ n \geq 0,$ if and only if $a_n=\sum_{k=0}^n(-1)^{n-k}\mathcal{G}_{b,a}(n,k;r)b_k, ~ n \geq 0.$
\end{corollary}
|
\section{Introduction}
In his famous article ``The elusive fixed point property" of 1969 \cite{Bing}, R.H. Bing stated twelve questions which were a motivation for the development of several methods in the fixed point theory of polyhedra and continua. In the last 45 years, eight of these questions have been answered while four of them remain still open \cite{Hagopian}. In this paper we make an advance on Bing's Question 1.
Recall that a space $X$ is said to have the \textit{fixed point property} if every continuous self-map $f:X\to X$ has a fixed point. The fixed point property is clearly a topological invariant, but W. Lopez showed in \cite{Lopez} that it is not a homotopy invariant in the category of compact polyhedra (although it is \textit{almost} a homotopy invariant, see Theorem \ref{JiangFPPInvariante} below). In order to provide an example Lopez constructed an eight-dimensional polyhedron with the fixed point property and even Euler characteristic. This example motivated the following question.
\begin{preg}[Bing's Question 1]\label{Bing1} Is there a compact two-dimensional polyhedron with the fixed point property which has even Euler characteristic?
\end{preg}
It is not hard to find examples of two-dimensional complexes with the fixed point property. For any finite group $G$ with deficiency equal to $0$, there exists a $2$-complex $X$ with $\pi_1(X)=G$ and $\widetilde{H}_*(X;\mathbb{Q})=0$. By the Lefschetz fixed point theorem, any compact two-dimensional polyhedron $X$ with trivial rational homology has the fixed point property. However, it is unknown whether the converse of the latter statement holds. Therefore
we will also consider the following variation of Bing's question:
\begin{preg}\label{Bing2} Is there a compact two-dimensional polyhedron with the fixed point property such that $\widetilde{H}_*(X;\mathbb{Q})\neq 0$?
\end{preg}
Of course, an affirmative answer to Question \ref{Bing1} implies an affirmative answer to Question \ref{Bing2}.
It is well-known that a polyhedron $X$ with $H_1(X;\mathbb{Q})\neq 0$ lacks the fixed point property since $S^1$ is a retract of any such space. Therefore, for a compact $2$-complex with the fixed point property it is equivalent to saying that $\widetilde{H}_*(X;\mathbb{Q})\neq 0$, that $\chi (X)> 1$ or that $H_2(X)\neq 0$.
A higher dimensional analogue to Question \ref{Bing2} has been settled by Waggoner \cite{Waggoner} for dimension $n\geq 4$ and later extended to dimension $3$ by Jiang \cite{Jiang}.
\begin{teo}[Waggoner, Jiang] \label{Waggoner} If $X$ is a compact $(n-2)$-connected polyhedron of dimension $n>2$ and $\widetilde{H}_*(X;\mathbb{Q})\neq 0$, then $X$ does not have the fixed point property.
\end{teo}
In this article a compact two-dimensional polyhedron will be called a \textit{Bing space} if it has the fixed point property and $\widetilde{H}_*(X;\mathbb{Q})\neq 0$. The main result of this paper is the following
\begin{teoppal}
There are no Bing spaces with abelian fundamental group.
\end{teoppal}
In particular, no space of those considered by Question 1.1 can have abelian fundamental group. The ideas involved in the proof include the relationship between $2$-complexes and group presentations, the homotopy classification of $2$-complexes with finite abelian fundamental group, Nielsen fixed point theory, elementary results on two-dimensional homotopy theory and obstruction theory.
The strategy in the proof will also be used to prove that there are no Bing spaces with fundamental group isomorphic to the alternating groups $A_4, A_5$, the symmetric group $S_4$ or to any dihedral group.
The first part of the paper is devoted to proving that there are no Bing spaces whose fundamental group has trivial Schur multiplier.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{Prelim}
We will denote by $H_*(X)$ the homology of $X$ with integral coefficients. A Bing space must necessarily be path-connected, therefore the basepoint will be omitted in the notation for fundamental groups. By the comments above, if $X$ is a Bing space, $H_1(X)$ must be a torsion group, since otherwise $S^1$ would be a retract of $X$, and the fixed point property is preserved by retracts. It is easy to see that $X\vee Y$ has the fixed point property if and only if both $X$ and $Y$ have the fixed point property.
\begin{defi}
Let $X$ be a connected polyhedron. We say that $x\in X$ is a \textit{local separating point} if there is a connected open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ such that $U-\{x\}$ is not connected. We say that $x\in X$ is a \textit{global separating point} if $X-\{x\}$ is not connected. In particular, any global separating point is a local separating point.
\end{defi}
Note that for a given triangulation every local separating point is a vertex or lies in a maximal $1$-simplex.
The following result was proved by Jiang in \cite[Theorem 7.1]{Jiang}.
\begin{teo}[Jiang]\label{JiangFPPInvariante}
In the category of compact connected polyhedra without global separating points, the fixed point property is a homotopy type invariant.
Moreover, if $X\simeq Y$ are compact connected polyhedra such that $Y$ lacks the fixed point property and $X$ does not have global separating points, then $X$ lacks the fixed point property.
\end{teo}
The second part of the result above does not appear in Jiang's original formulation. It can be deduced from its proof or, alternatively, from the first part by replacing $Y$ by $Y\times I$.
Recall that a presentation $\mathcal{P}=\langle a_1,\ldots, a_n\mid r_1,\ldots , r_k \rangle$ of a group $G$ has associated a CW-complex $K_{\mathcal{P}}$, called the \textit{standard complex} of $\mathcal{P}$, with one $0$-cell, a $1$-cell for each generator $a_i$ and a $2$-cell for every relator $r_j$. The fundamental group of $K_{\mathcal{P}}$ is $G$. The second barycentric subdivision of this complex is a triangulation of $K_{\mathcal{P}}$, so any standard complex is in fact a polyhedron. Conversely, every compact connected $2$-complex $X$ is homotopy equivalent to the standard complex of a presentation $\mathcal{P}$ of $\pi_1(X)$.
\begin{defi} The \textit{deficiency} of a presentation $\mathcal{P}=\langle a_1,\ldots,a_n \mid r_1,\ldots , r_k \rangle$ is defined by $\mathrm{def}(\mathcal{P})=k-n$. Therefore, $\chi(K_{\mathcal{P}})=\mathrm{def}(\mathcal{P})+1$. Given a finitely presented group $G$, its \textit{deficiency} $\mathrm{def}(G)$ is the minimum possible deficiency of a presentation of $G$. Then, for any compact connected $2$-complex $X$ with fundamental group $G$, $\chi (X)\ge \mathrm{def}(G)+1$. We say that $X$ has \textit{minimum Euler characteristic} if $\chi(X)=\mathrm{def}(G)+1$.
\end{defi}
For every connected CW-complex $X$ there is a short exact sequence (\cite[Chapter II, Theorem 5.2]{BrownCohomology})
$$0\to \Sigma_2(X)\to H_2(X)\to H_2(G)\to 0.$$
Here $\Sigma_2(X)$ stands for the subgroup of spherical cycles in $H_2(X)$, that is the image of the Hurewicz map $h:\pi_2(X)\to H_2(X)$, and $G=\pi_1(X)$. The second homology group $H_2(G)$ of $G$ is called the \textit{Schur multiplier} of $G$. When $G$ is a finitely presented group, the sequence above provides a lower bound for the deficiency of $G$. If in addition $H_1(G)$ is a torsion group, we have
$$\mathrm{def}(G)\geq \text{number of invariant factors of } H_2(G).$$
If the bound above is sharp we say that $G$ is an \textit{efficient} group.
\section{Primitive spherical elements and Waggoner's Theorem}
A strategy for proving that a space $X$ without global separating points lacks the fixed point property is to show that there exists a space $Y\simeq X$ that has $S^n$ as a retract. Waggoner used this idea to prove Theorem \ref{Waggoner}, which involves only simply-connected spaces. In this section we show to what extent we can apply this strategy in the case of an arbitrary $2$-complex. The exact sequence of spherical elements will be used instead of the Hurewicz Theorem to characterize precisely the situations in which this idea can be applied. In particular we will deduce that there are no Bing spaces with fundamental group $G$ if $H_2(G)=0$. We will also show that if the fundamental group $G$ of a Bing space $X$ is freely indecomposable, then $X$ must have minimum Euler characteristic and $G$ must be efficient.
The following result appears essentially in \cite{Waggoner}. We exhibit here a shorter proof.
\begin{lema}[Waggoner]\label{LemaWaggoner} Let $(X,S^n)$ be a CW-pair with $\dim(X)\leq n+1$, $n\geq 1$. If $i_*:H_{n}(S^n)\to H_n(X)$ is a split monomorphism, then $S^n$ is a retract of $X$.
\begin{proof}
By the naturality of the short exact sequence in the universal coefficient theorem $i^*:H^n(X;\pi_n(S^n))\to H^n(S^n;\pi_n(S^n))$ is surjective. Then, the connecting homomorphism $\delta: H^n(S^n; \pi _n (S^n))\to H^{n+1}(X,S^n; \pi _n (S^n))$ is trivial. By obstruction theory \cite[Theorem 8.4.1]{Spanier}, $i:S^n\hookrightarrow X$ can be extended to $X$.
\end{proof}
\end{lema}
Let $F$ be a free abelian group. We say that $a\in F$ is \textit{primitive} in $F$ if the homomorphism $\mathbb{Z}\to F$ defined by $1\mapsto a$ is a split monomorphism. This is equivalent to saying that $a$ can be extended to a basis of $F$.
The proof of the following lemma is an easy application of the Smith normal form.
\begin{lema}\label{LemaSmith}
Consider an exact sequence $0 \to S \to \mathbb{Z}^k \to A \to 0$ of abelian groups. Then the number of invariant factors of $A$ is strictly smaller than $k$ if and only if there exists $a\in S$ primitive in $\mathbb{Z}^k$.
\end{lema}
\begin{prop}\label{CuandoS2EsRetracto}
Let $X$ be a compact connected $2$-dimensional polyhedron. The following are equivalent:
(i) $X$ is homotopy equivalent to a polyhedron $Y$ having $S^2$ as a retract.
(ii) There exists $a\in \Sigma_2(X)$ primitive in $H_2(X)$.
(iii) The number of invariant factors of $H_2(\pi_1(X))$ is strictly smaller than the rank of $H_2(X)$.
\begin{proof}
If $S^2$ is a retract of a space $Y$ homotopy equivalent to $X$, there are maps $f:S^2\to X$ and $g:X\to S^2$ such that $gf\simeq 1_{S^2}$. Then $h([f])\in \Sigma_2 (X)$ is a primitive element of $H_2(X)$. Conversely, if $\Sigma _2(X)$ contains a primitive element $h([f])$ of $H_2(X)$, then $f_*:H_2(S^2)\to H_2 (X)$ is a split monomorphism. We may assume that $f$ is a simplicial map for some triangulations of $S^2$ and $X$, so the mapping cylinder $Y=M(f)$ is a three-dimensional polyhedron. The canonical inclusion $i:S^2\hookrightarrow Y$ induces a split monomorphism in $H_2$ and Lemma \ref{LemaWaggoner} says then that $S^2$ is a retract of $Y$.
The equivalence between (ii) and (iii) is immediate from Lemma \ref{LemaSmith}.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\begin{teo}\label{H2Trivial} If $H_2(G)=0$ there are no Bing spaces with fundamental group $G$.
\begin{proof}
Suppose $X$ is a Bing space with $\pi_1(X)=G$. Note that $X=X_1\vee \ldots \vee X_m$, where each $X_i$ is a polyhedron without global separating points or a $1$-simplex (the basepoints of the wedges may not be the same). For some $i$, we must have $H_2(X_i)\neq 0$. Since $X_i$ is a retract of $X$, it must have the fixed point property. On the other hand, $\pi _1(X_i)$ is a free factor of $G$, and then $H_2(G)=0$ implies $H_2(\pi_1 (X_i))=0$ (\cite[Corollary 6.2.10]{Weibel}). By Proposition \ref{CuandoS2EsRetracto} and Theorem \ref{JiangFPPInvariante}, $X_i$ lacks the fixed point property, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\end{teo}
The particular case $G=0$ in Theorem \ref{H2Trivial} was previously studied by Waggoner in \cite{Waggoner2}.
\begin{coro}\label{Largo}
There are no Bing spaces with fundamental group isomorphic to the trivial group, cyclic groups, dihedral groups of order $2\pmod 4$, $\mathrm{SL}(n,\mathbb{F}_q)$ (for $(n,q)\neq (2,4)$, $(2,9)$, $(3,2)$, $(3,4)$, $(4,2)$), deficiency-zero groups (e.g. the quaternion group), groups of square-free order (more generally, any group in which every Sylow subgroup has trivial Schur multiplier), $13$ of the $26$ sporadic simple groups and many infinite families of finite simple groups of Lie type.
\begin{proof}
All these groups have trivial Schur multiplier. For cyclic groups, dihedral groups and $\mathrm{SL}(n,\mathbb{F}_q)$ this appears in \cite{Weibel}. For deficiency-zero groups it follows from the bound given in section \ref{Prelim}. For groups in which every Sylow subgroup has trivial Schur multiplier, it follows from \cite[Chapter III, Corollary 10.2 and Theorem 10.3]{BrownCohomology}. For the statement about finite simple groups, see \cite[Section 6.1]{GLS}.
\end{proof}
\end{coro}
A group $G$ is said to be \textit{freely indecomposable} if $G\simeq H*K$ implies $H\simeq 1 \text{ or } K\simeq 1$. Finite groups and abelian groups clearly are freely indecomposable.
The following reduction will also be helpful in section \ref{SeccionAbelianos}.
\begin{prop}\label{Reduccion} Let $X$ be a Bing space with freely indecomposable fundamental group $G$. Then there is a Bing space $Y\simeq X$ without global separating points.
\begin{proof}
Fix a triangulation of $X$. If $X$ has a global separating point and is not a $1$-simplex, then $X$ is a wedge of two polyhedra $X_1,X_2$, each with fewer vertices than $X$. By van-Kampen's theorem $G\simeq \pi_1(X_1)*\pi_1(X_2)$ and since $G$ is freely indecomposable, one of these two polyhedra, say $X_2$, is simply-connected. By Theorem \ref{H2Trivial} there are no simply-connected Bing spaces, so $\widetilde{H}_*(X_2)=0$. Therefore $X_2$ is contractible and then $X_1\simeq X$. By induction there exists a Bing space $Y\simeq X_1$ without global separating points.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\begin{prop} If $G$ is freely indecomposable, and $X$ is a Bing space with fundamental group $G$, the rank of $H_2(X)$ must equal the number of invariant factors of $H_2(G)$.
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{Reduccion} we may assume $X$ does not have global separating points. If the rank of $H_2(X)$ is strictly greater than the number of invariant factors of $H_2(G)$, by Proposition \ref{CuandoS2EsRetracto} and Theorem \ref{JiangFPPInvariante} we get a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
We deduce the following
\begin{coro}\label{CasoChiNoMinima}
Let $G$ be a freely indecomposable group. Suppose $X$ is a Bing space with fundamental group $G$. Then $G$ is efficient and $X$ has minimum Euler characteristic.
\end{coro}
Finite abelian groups which are non-cyclic are efficient and have non-trivial Schur multiplier. A different strategy will be developed in the
next section to deal with these cases.
\section{Two-complexes with abelian fundamental group}\label{SeccionAbelianos}
In this section we prove that there are no Bing spaces with abelian fundamental group. We will need some basic concepts from Nielsen theory, namely fixed point class, fixed point index and the Nielsen number. We refer the reader to \cite{JiangLibro}, \cite{Brown} for definitions and basic results. We will also need the following theorem of Jiang:
\begin{teo}[Jiang, {\cite[Main Theorem]{Jiang}}]\label{JiangNIgualM}
Let $X$ be a compact connected polyhedron and $f:X\to X$ be a continuous map. If $X$ does not have local separating points and $X$ is not a $2$-manifold (with or without boundary), then there exists $g\simeq f$ with $\# \mathrm{Fix}(g)=N(f)$.
\end{teo}
The following case will be central in our argument.
\begin{lema}\label{FamiliaSinFPP} Let $\mathcal{P}=\langle a,b \mid a^m, b^n, [a,b]\rangle$. Then $K_{\mathcal{P}}$ does not have the fixed point property.
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{JiangNIgualM} it suffices to find a map $f:K_\mathcal{P}\to K_\mathcal{P}$ such that $N(f)=0$. Let $T=S^1\times S^1\subseteq \mathbb{C}\times \mathbb{C}$. The complex $K_\mathcal{P}$ can be identified with the following pushout:
\begin{displaymath}
\xymatrix@C=20pt{ S^1_a\coprod S^1_b \ar@{->}^(.55){ (z^m,1) \coprod (1,z^n) }[rrr] \ar@{->}[d] & & & T \ar@{->}^{i_T}[d]\\
D^2_a \coprod D^2_b \ar@{->}_(.55){{i_a\coprod i_b}}[rrr] & & & K_\mathcal{P} }
\end{displaymath}
Here $S^1_a, S^1_b, D^2_a,D^2_b\subseteq \mathbb{C}$ denote copies of $1$-dimensional spheres and $2$-dimensional disks.
We define $f_T:T\to K_\mathcal{P}$ by $$f_T(z,w)=i_T\left(-z,-\overline{w}\right).$$
Now we define $f_a:D_a^2\to K_\mathcal{P}$ and $f_b:D_b^2\to K_\mathcal{P}$ by
$$
f_a(z)=
\begin{cases}
i_a(2z) & \text{ if } 0\leq |z|\leq \frac{1}{2} \\
i_T\left(\frac{z^m}{|z|^m} \exp(i\pi (2|z|-1)) , \exp(i\pi (2|z|-1))\right) &\text{ if } \frac{1}{2}\leq |z| \leq 1
\end{cases}
$$
$$
f_b(z)=
\begin{cases}
i_b(2\overline{z}) & \text{ if } 0\leq |z|\leq \frac{1}{2} \\
i_T\left(\exp(i\pi (2|z|-1)) , \frac{\overline{z}^n}{|z|^n} \exp(i\pi (2|z|-1)) \right) &\text{ if } \frac{1}{2}\leq |z| \leq 1
\end{cases}
$$
A simple verification shows that $f_T, f_a$ and $f_b$ are well-defined and continuous and that they determine a continuous map $f:K_\mathcal{P}\to K_\mathcal{P}$.
It is easy to see that the only fixed points of $f$ are $i_a(0)$ and $i_b(0)$. We will show that the two fixed points are in the same fixed point class. Concretely, we exhibit a path $c$ from $i_a(0)$ to $i_b(0)$ such that $c$ and $f\circ c$ are homotopic. Consider the paths $\gamma_a, \delta_a, \delta_b, \gamma_b:[0,1]\to K_\mathcal{P}$ defined by
\begin{align*}
\gamma_a(t)& =i_a\left(t/2\right) \\
\delta_a(t)&=i_a\left(1/2 + t/2\right) \\
\delta_b(t)&=i_b\left(1- t/2\right) \\
\gamma_b(t)& =i_b\left(1/2-t/2\right)
\end{align*}
The concatenation $\gamma_a*\delta_a*\delta_b*\gamma_b$ is a well-defined path from $i_a(0)$ to $i_b(0)$.
In order to prove
$$\gamma_a*\delta_a*\delta_b*\gamma_b \simeq f\circ(\gamma_a*\delta_a*\delta_b*\gamma_b)$$
it suffices to show that
\begin{align}
\gamma_a * \delta_a & = f \circ \gamma_a \\
\delta_b * \gamma_b & = f \circ \gamma_b \\
e_{i_T(1,1)} &\simeq (f\circ \delta_a) * (f\circ \delta_b),
\end{align}
where $e_{i_T(1,1)}$ denotes the constant loop at $i_T(1,1)$. Equalities (1) and (2) are clear, (3) follows from
$$(f\circ\delta_a)(t)=i_T\left(\exp(i\pi t), \exp(i\pi t)\right)= (f\circ\delta_b)(1-t).$$
Now we show that the unique fixed point class of $f$ is inessential (i.e. the fixed point indices of $i_a(0)$ and $i_b(0)$ add up to zero). One way to see this is by noting that the fixed point indexes of $i_a(0)$ and $i_b(0)$ are $1$ and $-1$ respectively.
Another way is proving that the Lefschetz number $\Lambda(f)$ is $0$ and invoking the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem \cite[VII, Proposition 6.6]{Dold}.
Then, $N(f)=0$ and by Theorem \ref{JiangNIgualM} there exists $g\simeq f$ without fixed points.
\end{proof}
\end{lema}
If $G$ is any finite group, above the minimum Euler characteristic all $2$-complexes with fundamental group $G$ are homotopy equivalent. That fact along with Theorem \ref{clasificacion} below constitutes the classification of homotopy types of compact $2$-complexes with finite abelian fundamental group. We refer to \cite[Chapter III]{TwoDimensional} and \cite{GutierrezLatiolais} for a detailed exposition on this topic.
\begin{teo}[Browning, {\cite[Chapter III, Theorem 2.11]{TwoDimensional}}]\label{clasificacion}
Let $G$ be a finite abelian group with invariant factors $m_1\mid m_2\mid \ldots \mid m_n$. The number of homotopy types of compact connected $2$-complexes with fundamental group $G$ and minimum Euler characteristic is $\left|\mathbb{Z}_{m_1}^*/\pm (\mathbb{Z}_{m_1}^*)^{n-1}\right|$. Every such complex is homotopy equivalent to the standard complex of a presentation
$$\mathcal{T}_d=\langle a_1,\ldots,a_n \mid a_1^{m_1}, \ldots , a_n^{m_n}, [a_1^d,a_2], [a_i,a_j], i < j, (i,j)\neq(1,2) \rangle$$
with $(d,m_1)=1$.
\end{teo}
\begin{coro}\label{clasificacion2factores} Let $G$ be a finite abelian group with invariant factors $m_1\mid m_2$ and let $X$ be a compact connected $2$-complex with $\pi_1(X)=G$. If $X$ has minimum Euler characteristic, then $X\simeq K_{\mathcal{P}}$ where $\mathcal{P}=\langle a_1,a_2 \mid a_1^{m_1}, a_2^{m_2}, [a_1,a_2]\rangle$.
\end{coro}
The last result we need for the proof of Theorem \ref{CasoAbeliano} is the following
\begin{lema}\label{retracto}Let
$$\mathcal{T}_d=\langle a_1,\ldots,a_n \mid a_1^{m_1}, \ldots ,a_n^{m_n}, [a_1^d,a_2], [a_i,a_j], i < j, (i,j)\neq(1,2) \rangle$$
with $n\ge 2$ and
$$\mathcal{R}_d=\langle a_1,a_2 \mid a_1^{m_1}, a_2^{m_2}, [a_1^d,a_2] \rangle .$$
Then $K_{\mathcal{R}_d}$ is a retract of $K_{\mathcal{T}_d}$.
\begin{proof}
Clearly $K_{\mathcal{R}_d}$ is a subcomplex of $K_{\mathcal{T}_d}$. We will define a cellular retraction $r:K_{\mathcal{T}_d}\to K_{\mathcal{R}_d}$. The unique $0$-cell of $K_{\mathcal{T}_d}$ and the $1$-cells $a_1$, $a_2$ are fixed by $r$. The remaining $1$-cells $a_3,\ldots, a_n$ are mapped to the $0$-cell. In the $2$-skeleton, $r$ fixes the $2$-cells $a_1^{m_1}$, $a_2^{m_2}$ and $[a_1^d,a_2]$, and we must extend $r$ to the remaining $2$-cells. This can be achieved since the composition of $r$ with the attaching maps of those cells is null-homotopic.
\end{proof}
\end{lema}
\begin{teo}
\label{CasoAbeliano}
There are no Bing spaces with abelian fundamental group.
\begin{proof}
Let $X$ be a Bing space with abelian fundamental group $G$. Since $H_1(X)=G$ is a finitely generated torsion group, $G$ is finite abelian. Let $m_1\mid m_2\mid \ldots \mid m_n$ be its invariant factors.
Since $G$ is freely indecomposable, by Proposition \ref{Reduccion} we can assume $X$ does not have global separating points. By Corollary \ref{CasoChiNoMinima} we know that $X$ has minimum Euler characteristic. By Theorem \ref{H2Trivial}, $G$ is not cyclic, so $n\geq 2$. From Theorem \ref{clasificacion}, there is a presentation
$$\mathcal{T}_d=\langle a_1,\ldots,a_n \mid a_1^{m_1}, \ldots ,a_n^{m_n}, [a_1^d,a_2], [a_i,a_j], i < j, (i,j)\neq(1,2) \rangle$$
with $(d,m_1)=1$ such that $X\simeq K_{\mathcal{T}_d}$. By Theorem \ref{JiangFPPInvariante}, $K_{\mathcal{T}_d}$ has the fixed point property. Let
$$\mathcal{R}_d=\langle a_1,a_2 \mid a_1^{m_1}, a_2^{m_2}, [a_1^d,a_2]\rangle .$$
By Lemma \ref{retracto}, $K_{\mathcal{R}_d}$ is a retract of $K_{\mathcal{T}_d}$ so $K_{\mathcal{R}_d}$ has the fixed point property. Finally consider
$$\mathcal{R}_1=\langle a_1,a_2 \mid a_1^{m_1}, a_2^{m_2}, [a_1,a_2]\rangle .$$
By Corollary \ref{clasificacion2factores}, $K_{\mathcal{R}_1}\simeq K_{\mathcal{R}_d}$, therefore by Theorem \ref{JiangFPPInvariante}, $K_{\mathcal{R}_1}$ has the fixed point property, contradicting Lemma \ref{FamiliaSinFPP}.
\end{proof}
\end{teo}
The ideas used in the proof of the last result can be applied to other cases. The classification of $2$-complexes has been achieved for a few finite groups, aside finite abelian groups. Our last theorem relies on a result of Hambleton and Kreck. In the proof we will use the following
\begin{lema}\label{LemaIndice}
Let $X$ be a compact polyhedron, $f:X\to X$ a map and $F$ a fixed point class of $f$. Suppose there is a subspace $K\subseteq X$ which is itself a compact polyhedron that satisfies:
\begin{itemize}
\item $f(K)\subseteq K$.
\item $K$ deformation retracts to $F$.
\item $F\subseteq K^\circ$.
\item $F=K\cap \mathrm{Fix}(f)$.
\end{itemize}
Then the fixed point index of $F$ equals its Euler characteristic, that is $i(f,F)=\chi(F)$.
\begin{proof} Let $U=K^\circ$. The fixed point index of $F$ is given by $i(f,F)=i(f|_U:U\to X)$ (\cite[I, Definition 3.8 and Section 4]{JiangLibro}).
We have $$i(f|_U:U\to X)=i(f|_U:U\to K)=i(f|_K:K\to K)=\Lambda(f|_K)=\Lambda(1_F)=\chi(F).$$ The first equality follows from the definition of the fixed point index (\cite[VII, Proposition 5.10]{Dold}). The second equality follows from \cite[VII, (5.11)]{Dold}, the third from the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem (\cite[VII, Proposition 6.6]{Dold}) and the fourth from the fact that $F\hookrightarrow K$ induces isomorphisms in homology.
\end{proof}
\end{lema}
\begin{teo}
There are no Bing spaces with fundamental group $A_4$, $S_4$, $A_5$ or $D_{2n}$.
\begin{proof}
By \cite[Theorem 2.1]{HambletonKreck} for these groups, the homotopy type of a $2$-complex is determined by the Euler characteristic. Consider the following presentations with deficiency $1$:
\begin{align*}
A_4 &=\langle a,b,c\mid a^2, b^3, c^3, abc\rangle, \\
S_4 &=\langle a,b,c\mid a^2, b^3, c^4, abc\rangle, \\
A_5 &=\langle a,b,c\mid a^2, b^3, c^5, abc\rangle, \\
D_{2n} &=\langle a,b,c\mid a^2, b^2, c^n, abc\rangle .
\end{align*}
We only need to prove that the complexes associated to these presentations lack the fixed point property (we do not need to check whether these presentations have minimum deficiency or not).
Let $\mathcal{P}=\langle a,b,c\mid a^l, b^m, c^n, abc\rangle$. Consider the space $X=X(l,m,n)$ obtained by deleting three disjoint disks from $S^2$ and then gluing three $2$-cells on the boundaries of these disks, with attaching maps of degrees $l$, $m$ and $n$ (Figure \ref{figura}). We note that $K_\mathcal{P}$ is a quotient of $X$ by a contractible subcomplex, therefore $K_\mathcal{P}\simeq X$. We will show $X$ lacks the fixed point property.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{minipage}{6cm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figureL.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{7.2cm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.24]{figureR.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{The space $K_{\mathcal{P}}$ at the left and the space $X(2,3,4)$ at the right, along with the fixed points of $f$.}\label{figura}
\end{figure}
The space $X=X(l,m,n)$ can be obtained from the surface $S=\{(x,y,z) \,:\, x^2+y^2+z^2$ $=1 \text{ and }x\leq \frac{4}{5}$ and $-\frac{4}{5}\leq y\leq \frac{4}{5} \}$ by attaching three $2$-cells with attaching maps $\phi_a, \phi_b, \phi_c:S^1\to S$ given by $\phi_a(z)=\left(\frac{3}{5}\mathrm{Re}(z^l),-\frac{4}{5},\frac{3}{5}\mathrm{Im}(z^l)\right)$, $\phi_b(z)=\left(\frac{4}{5},\frac{3}{5}\mathrm{Re}(z^m),\frac{3}{5}\mathrm{Im}(z^m)\right)$ and
$\phi_c(z)=\left(-\frac{3}{5}\mathrm{Re}(z^n),\frac{4}{5},\frac{3}{5}\mathrm{Im}(z^n)\right)$. Let $i_a,i_b, i_c:D^2\to X$ denote the characteristic maps of the cells and let $i_S: S\hookrightarrow X$ be the inclusion.
The maps $f_S:S\to X$, $f_a, f_b, f_c:D^2\to X$ given by $f_S(x,y,z)=i_S(x,y,-z)$, $f_a(w)=i_a(\overline{w})$, $f_b(w)=i_b(\overline{w})$, $f_c(w)=i_c(\overline{w})$, determine a map $f:X\to X$.
Each connected component of $\mathrm{Fix}(f)$ is homotopy equivalent to $S^1$, as depicted in Figure \ref{figura}. A fixed point class $F$ of $f$ is a union of connected components of $\mathrm{Fix}(f)$. Therefore, $\chi(F)=0$ for every fixed point class $F$ of $f$. An application of Lemma \ref{LemaIndice} yields $i(f,F)=0$. Thus, $N(f)=0$ and we are done.
\end{proof}
\end{teo}
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the biggest challenges in contemporary high energy physics is determining the identity of dark matter (DM). Unfortunately, all of the astrophysical and cosmological evidence for dark matter does not answer our most basic phenomenological question: does it have non-gravitational interactions with the Standard Model (SM)? Having a new field coupled to the SM non-gravitationally offers the possibility of both a near-term discovery and the elucidation of other open questions, such as the hierarchy and strong-CP problems.
The WIMP Miracle presents a particularly compelling link between the weak scale and dark matter (see \cite{Dimopoulos:1990gf}). Demanding the correct relic abundance from cosmological freeze-out leads one to an $\mathcal{O}$(TeV)-mass particle with electroweak-strength coupling. We consider here the case of one particular DM candidate, the wino, that belongs to a supersymmetric explanation of the weak scale. Despite the lack of direct evidence for the MSSM, the discovery of a SM-like Higgs at 125 GeV leaves open the possibility of a modestly-tuned supersymmetry scenario that retains a simple mechanism of SUSY-breaking and a standard, thermal-relic DM particle \cite{minisplit}. In fact, the only feature of the MSSM we use is the presence of a stable, electroweak triplet fermion. Thus, our result does not depend on the larger supersymmetric story, but holds for any DM scenario with the same quantum numbers, annihilating primarily through its gauge interactions. Extensions to scalar triplet or other SU(2) representations are straightforward.
A nearly pure wino offers one of the simplest supersymmetric DM candidates. In theories of anomaly-mediated SUSY-breaking, it emerges as the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) \cite{amsb}. Furthermore, thermal-relic bino dark matter generically overcloses the universe by several orders of magnitude. If we assume that the wino constitutes all of
the dark matter - which is an assumption we will relax below - and that its relic density was set at freeze-out, then the mass is constrained to the window $M_{\rm Wino} \equiv (M_{\chi})$ = 2.7-2.9 TeV \cite{Fan:2013faa,constraint}.
In principle, we may further constrain the wino (DM) via direct detection. However, the cross section for a TeV wino to scatter off nucleons is $\sigma \sim 10^{-46-48}$cm$^{2}$, putting it far below current limits \cite{Hisano:2011cs}. However, since the wino can annihilate directly to photons, by searching for monochromatic, $\mathcal{O}$(TeV) photon lines, we can hope to discover it via indirect detection. The authors of \cite{Fan:2013faa,Cohen:2013ama} used limits from the HESS Cherenkov telescope to argue that the nonobservation of such a photon feature put wino DM in severe tension with experiment.\footnote{They also consider the constraints from continuum gamma ray emission provided by the Fermi experiment. These are most useful for constraining low-mass, few-hundred GeV winos. As the radiative corrections we investigate are much weaker in this regime, we do not investigate it here.} In particular \cite{Cohen:2013ama} calculated the annihilation rate to be $\sim15\times$ larger at $M_{\chi}$ = 3 TeV than the HESS limit.
However, as with any indirect detection experiment, we must take into account astrophysical uncertainties. In particular, \cite{Fan:2013faa,Cohen:2013ama} consider variations of the DM halo profile for the galaxy. While cuspy profiles are preferred by simulations, it is possible that the dark matter density flattens out to a ``core'' about the galactic center, and such a distribution would lead to fewer DM annihilation events along our line of sight to the galactic center. To alleviate the tension with HESS, some amount of coring will be necessary to return pure wino dark matter to viability, but the question, which we answer in Section \ref{sec:conc}, is how much?
The annihilation rate of two neutral nonrelativistic particles, cannot be reliably calculated at tree level since it is plagued by infrared (IR) divergences which are cut-off by the gauge boson mass, $M_W \sim$ 100 GeV. These divergences manifest themselves as large radiative corrections of two types.\footnote{The term "divergences" is used despite the fact that the rate is physical.} One set comes from the potential interactions of the slowly-moving DM and scales as powers of $\frac{\alpha_W M_\chi}{M_W} \gtrsim 1$; the resummation of these corrections results in a Sommerfeld enhancement to the rate \cite{Hisano:2004ds}. This effect can increase the rate by as much as $\mathcal{O}(10^4)$ relative to a perturbative calculation and is therefore a crucial step in analyzing wino DM. The second type of IR sensitivity is a Sudakov double-log, $\alpha_W \log (\frac{M_\chi^2}{M_W^2})^2$, that can enter inclusive observables due to the non-singlet nature of our external states. This effect is known as ``Bloch-Nordsieck Theorem Violation'' and is generically found in the Higgs phase of non-Abelian gauge theories \cite{Ciafoloni, Manohar}, such as the electroweak sector. Computations of fixed, NLO corrections to the exclusive, two-body annihilation rate found a 75\% reduction relative to tree level plus Sommerfeld enhancement \cite{Hryczuk:2011vi,Cohen:2013ama}. This opened up the possibility that the wino could still be viable, even with a non-cored dark matter profile. This result motivated the need for a systematic approach to the calculation of the rate since such a large radiative
correction gives the appearance of series which is diverging too soon for an asymptotic expansion with such a small coupling.
In a previous paper, we derived a factorization theorem that was used to derive the leading-log (LL) semi-inclusive wino annihilation rate ($\chi^0 \chi^0 \rightarrow \gamma + X$) \cite{Baumgart:2014vma} in terms of a model-dependent set of matrix elements. The semi-inclusive rate is the relevant observable for constraining the wino with HESS since only a single hard photon from annihilation is measured and the resolution of the experiment ($\sim$ 400 GeV at 3 TeV) is too poor to distinguish two-body from $n$-body annihilation ({\it e.g.}~$\chi^0 \chi^0 \rightarrow \gamma + W^+ W^-$) \cite{hess}. Despite the fact that both the Sommerfeld and Sudakov effects arise from the same hierarchy, $M_\chi \gg M_W$, they can be factorized through a mode decomposition of the relevant fields. Physically, we are separating the regime of the slowly-moving WIMPs evolving in the presence of the electroweak potential from the highly-energetic gauge bosons in the final state. We therefore employ a theory that combines a nonrelativistic treatment of the WIMPs, similar to NRQCD \cite{NRQCD}, with Soft-Collinear Effective Theory (SCET) \cite{SCET} for the light annihilation products. Hybrid theories of this form have appeared in the analysis of the photon spectrum in radiative decays of quarkonium \cite{Leibovich} and electroweak SCET was elucidated in \cite{aneesh}. More recently, other groups performed the Sudakov resummation for WIMP annihilation, albeit for the exclusive two-body rate, employing the same effective field theory (EFT) \cite{Bauer:2014ula,Ovanesyan:2014fwa}.
In this paper, we give more details of of the factorization theorem presented in \cite{Baumgart:2014vma} in Section \ref{sec:fact} and elucidate the role of the soft and collinear Higgs fields at higher orders in Section \ref{sec:higgs}. In Section \ref{sec:ad} we review the anomalous dimension calculations that allow Sudakov log resummation and provide additional detail on our use of the rapidity renormalization group \cite{RRG}. To obtain a full calculation of the annihilation rate, in Section \ref{sec:se} we present our analysis of the Sommerfeld enhancement for the particular case of wino dark matter with a parametrically large Higgsino mass. We find that compared to tree level plus Sommerfeld corrected rate, the leading-log radiative corrections lead to a modest, few-percent reduction in the semi-inclusive rate to an observable photon.
In Section \ref{sec:conc}, we also present exclusion plots for wino dark matter as a function of the mass and the amount of coring in the dark matter profile and the wino fraction of the dark matter.
After concluding, we detail in an appendix the derivation of the quantum mechanical potential used in our Sommerfeld enhancement calculation from the underlying, relativistic quantum field theory.
\section{Factorization}
\label{sec:fact}
To develop a factorization theorem it helps to work in an EFT, which in our case is a hybrid of SCET and NRQCD
that power counts in a double expansion in $v$, the relative velocity of the DM particles and $\lambda=M_W/M_\chi$.
We will work to leading order in both these parameters, which seems quite reasonable until
a discovery is made.
\subsection{NR``QCD"}
The nonrelativistic (NR) piece of the Hilbert space is described by an effective theory which is analogous to
NRQCD, but differs in two important aspects. First off, our theory of interest is in the weakly coupled Higgs phase
and moreover, the potential between the DM particles is screened by the gauge boson mass. This latter distinction
changes the way in which we power count as we shall see below. For various power counting schemes in NR theories see
\cite{manohar}. Despite these distinctions, the modal analysis of the effective theory follows from the general discussion in \cite{lmr} and
furthermore we will still use the acronym NRQCD.
NRQCD can be formulated in terms of three distinct types of modes, each with a unique scaling of momenta: Potentials $(E\sim mv^2, p\sim mv)$, soft ($E\sim mv, p \sim mv)$
and ultra-soft (US) ($E\sim mv^2,p\sim mv^2$), where $v$ is the relative velocity of the massive nonrelativistic states. The massive states have energy-momenta scaling as potential modes but nonetheless are on-shell, due to their NR dispersion relation. On the other hand, the potential gauge bosons are off-shell and can be integrated out to form non-local potentials. The soft modes are necessary to generate the correct running of the potentials, but will not play a role in the theory at hand as all of their effects
will be of higher order. The same can be said for the US modes. However, the US modes will play a crucial role in determining the gauge invariant structures
allowed in the theory.
It is important to understand that $v$ is NOT necessarily the incoming relative velocity of the NR particles. $v$ can also be the virialized velocity.
That is, if $v$ is sufficiently small then the particles can inspiral, gaining kinetic energy until the system virializes such that $V(r)\sim mv^2$.
In the Coulomb phase (or for sufficiently large source masses in the confining phase of an asymptotically free theory) we have the
relation
\begin{equation}
\frac{g^2}{r} \sim mv^2
\end{equation}
which leads to the scaling $v \sim \alpha$ given the Bohr radius $r\sim 1/(\alpha m)$. If the incoming relative velocity is large
enough then the system may not virialize. The condition for virialization is that the leading order potential be non-perturbative. In the Coulombic case this condition is
$\frac{\alpha}{v}\sim 1$. When this condition is met we must sum the box graphs. In such cases the incoming relative
velocity becomes irrelevant for the power counting.\footnote{This is true only if we are interested in time averaged quantities. If we wanted to
track the explicit time dependence of the power counting parameter, the use of the in-in formalism \cite{galley}
is called for.}
The NRQCD-like theory in our case is more complicated since gauge boson exchange flips a neutralino to a chargino
which is taken to be a few hundred MeV heavier. Moreover the charge state admits Coulomb exchange, although the off-shell nature
of the chargino intermediate plays the role of an IR cut-off. Since we are only interested in working at leading order in the $v$, the
exact details of the correct effective theory will be irrelevant. All that matters for the present analysis is that there exist some
virialized velocity, $v$, which will play the role of the power counting parameter. Given that additional rungs on ladder diagrams bring inverse powers of $v$, we need to sum over an infinite ladder of potential mode gauge boson exchanges between the massive fermions resulting in the so-called Sommerfeld enhancement which we will discuss in Section \ref{sec:se}.
NRQCD is invariant under both soft and US gauge transformations \footnote{The theory developed in \cite{lmr} is not explicitly soft
gauge invariant at the level of the action. However, the theory can be re-derived in such a way at to preserve soft gauge invariance \cite{RSS}}.
Under a US gauge transformation all fields which are left on shell can transform non-trivially. Given that US transformations shift momenta and energy by an amount of order $mv^2$, the potential (matter)
fields transform under US but not soft gauge transformation. This fact will play an important role below when we write down a factorization theorem.
\subsection{SCET-II}
The relevant SCET modes for our kinematics are soft, with momentum scaling, $p \sim (\lambda,\lambda,\lambda)$
and collinear with $p\sim(1,\lambda,\lambda^2)$. Where $\lambda=M_W/M_\chi$ and we work in units of $M_\chi$ which is the largest scale in the problem.
SCET with this set of modes is called SCET-II. The collinear modes compose the jet in which the observed photon is produced. SCET is invariant under two distinct gauge symmetries, collinear (in however many collinear directions there are, in our case just one) and soft. This soft transformation is, in general, distinct from the soft or US transformations
in the NRQCD sector.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\scalebox{.5}{\includegraphics{semiInclusive-2.png}}}
\vskip-0.2cm
\caption[1]{Integrating out the final state - unobserved- jet. The open curly lines correspond to the observed photon which is accompanied
by any amount of collinear radiation.}
\label{semi}
\end{figure}
We build a factorization theorem at the level of the amplitude squared. This entails performing an operator product expansion
at the scale $M_\chi$, integrating out all final state particles except the final state jet containing {\it observed} photons and accompanying unobserved particles .
This is illustrated in figure (\ref{semi}). Note that even if the balancing jet is composed of only one particle and has vanishing
invariant mass, the integration over the final state phase space shrinks the propagator to a point in the reduced Feynman
diagram (\ref{semi}). We thus match the full theory onto a set of operators with six fields, corresponding to the
incoming winos and the outgoing, collinear, photon.
The minimal operator basis in the effective theory that we can write down is
\begin{eqnarray}
O_1&=& \left( \bar \chi \gamma^5 \chi \right) |0\rangle \langle 0 | \left( \bar \chi \gamma^5 \chi \right) B^{\mu A \perp} B_\mu^{ A \perp}\nn\\
O_2&=& \frac{1}{2}\Big\{\left( \bar \chi \gamma^5 \chi \right) |0\rangle \langle 0 | \left( \bar \chi_A \gamma^5 \chi_B \right) \nn \\
&&+ \left(\bar \chi_A \gamma^5 \chi_B \right) |0\rangle \langle 0 | \left( \bar \chi \gamma^5 \chi \right) \Big\} B_\mu^{\perp A} B^{\mu B \perp}\nn\\
O_3&=& \left( \bar \chi_C\gamma^5 \chi_D \right) |0\rangle \langle 0 | \left( \bar \chi_D \gamma^5 \chi_C \right) B^{\mu A \perp} B_\mu^{ A \perp}\nn\\
O_4&=& \left( \bar \chi_A \gamma^5 \chi_C \right) |0\rangle \langle 0 | \left( \bar \chi_C \gamma^5 \chi_B \right) B_\mu^{\perp A} B^{\mu B \perp},
\label{ops}
\end{eqnarray}
where we use the vacuum insertion approximation in the WIMP sector, which is valid up to $\mathcal{O}(v^2)$ corrections. Henceforth, we drop the explicit vacuum projector. Implicitly, there is also a projection onto a single-photon state between the $B^{\mu \perp}$ fields i.e.
\begin{equation}
B_\mu^{\perp A} B^{\mu B \perp}\equiv \sum_X B_\mu^{\perp A}\mid \gamma+X\rangle\langle \gamma+X\mid B^{\mu B \perp}.
\end{equation}
where X contains the accompanying particles in the collinear jet.
All operators which arise in the matching can be reduced to one of these four using
the Majorana condition. The only relevant nonrelativistic bilinear is $\bar \chi \gamma_5 \chi$. The spin one operators are irrelevant
since Fermi statistics would lead to an antisymmetric SU(2) initial state, and we are interested
in the annihilation of two neutral particles. Furthermore, P-wave annihilation is velocity suppressed. We have also used the definition
\begin{equation}
B^{A \perp}_\mu \equiv f^{ABC}\, W_n^T (D^\perp_\mu)^{BC} \, W_n ,
\end{equation}
where the $\perp$ symbol implies the component perpendicular to the large light cone momentum $n \cdot p$, where $n^\mu=(1,0,0,1)$ and $D^\perp_\mu$ is the covariant derivative
in the collinear sector (for details see \cite{SCET}).
This field interpolates for a collinear gauge boson and is invariant under collinear gauge transformations
due to the placement of the two collinear adjoint Wilson lines defined by
\begin{equation}
W_n^{BC}= P(e^{ g\int_{-\infty}^0 n \cdot A^A_n(n\lambda )f^{ABC} d\lambda}).
\end{equation}
The collinear Wilson lines are also implicit in the fermionic $\chi$ fields, where they also guarantee manifest collinear gauge invariance,
\begin{equation}
\chi_n^A \equiv W_n^{AB\dag} \zeta_n^B,
\end{equation}
where $\zeta_n^B$ is the fermion obtained by expanding QCD in the $n$-collinear limit and integrating out the small spinor components.
For a general kinematic configuration, the $\chi$ fields do not transform under
SCET-II soft gauge transformations, since such a transformation would throw the
$\chi$ field off-shell. Thus naively it appears that these
operators are trivially soft gauge invariant. Indeed this is true, but it does not
mean that the soft
mode does not play a role in this process.
The soft contribution to the operators arises after one integrates out the
off-shell intermediate states which arise when softs couple to collinear.
The question then becomes, where should the soft Wilson lines be inserted into our
operators?
We could perform a matching calculation, however there is a much simpler method
which we call
the ``method of descent", developed in \cite{descent}. Here we will use a
variation of those arguments.
The idea is to choose a kinematic scenario in which the the invariant masses of the
external states are such that the soft momenta in SCET-II and the US modes in the NRQCD
sector have the same scaling. We also raise the virtuality of the collinear modes so that
soft radiation leaves the collinear lines on-shell\footnote{When there is a
hierarchy between the invariant masses of the soft and collinear momenta the theory
is usually called SCET-I and the soft fields are called ultra-soft. For the sake of
clarity we will call all non-collinear fields in SCET ``soft''.}.
In this scenario soft gauge invariance uniquely fixes the positions of the Wilson
lines.
The invariant mass of the external states is then lowered to its physical value,
keeping
the soft Wilson lines fixed.
To apply this methodology to the case at hand we tune $M_\chi$ such that
$M_\chi v^2 \sim M_W$, and we raise the virtuality of the collinear modes to be of
order $p_c^2\sim M_\chi M_W$.
This would be appropriate if we were to, say, measure the jet mass and not the photon
energy, in which
case the color structure of the operator basis would remain as in Eq.~\ref{ops}. Physically, in this limit, US can communicate between the NR matter fields
and the collinear modes of SCET because such interactions leave both modes on shell. This apparent breakdown of factorization is
remedied by performing a BPS \cite{SCET} field redefinition
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi &\rightarrow& S_v \chi \nn \\
B &\rightarrow& S_nB,
\end{eqnarray}
where there are two types of path ordered adjoint soft Wilson lines $S_v$ and $S_n$ defined by
\begin{equation}
S_{(v,n)bc}=P[ e^{g \int_{-\infty}^0 (v,n) \cdot A^a((v,n)\lambda)f^{abc} d\lambda}].
\label{eq:wilsonline}
\end{equation}
This field redefinition decouples the US and collinear fields at the level of the action
and dresses the operators such
that $O_2$ and $O_4$ become
\begin{eqnarray}
O_2&=& \frac{1}{2}\Big\{(\bar \chi \gamma^5\chi) (\bar \chi_{A^\prime} \gamma^5 \chi_{B^\prime}) + (\bar \chi_{A^\prime} \gamma^5 \chi_{B^\prime}) (\bar \chi \gamma^5\chi) \Big\} B^{\tilde A} B^{\tilde B} \nn\\
&&S_{v A^\prime A}^\top \, S_{vB B^\prime} \, S_{n \tilde A A}^\top \, S_{n B \tilde B}\nn\\
O_4&=& (\bar \chi_{A^\prime} \gamma^5 \chi_C) (\bar \chi_C \gamma^5 \chi_{B^\prime}) B^{\tilde A} B^{\tilde B} \, S_{v A^\prime A}^\top \, S_{vB B^\prime} \, S_{n \tilde A A}^\top \, S_{n B \tilde B}.
\end{eqnarray}
The operators $O_1$ and $O_3$ receive no soft corrections.
We now continuously deform $M_\chi$ back to its physical value.
In doing so, the soft fields retain their invariant mass of order $M_W$,
and the soft Wilson lines remain fixed by continuity.
The annihilation spectrum may be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{cross}
&& \frac{1}{E_\gamma} \frac{d\sigma}{dE_\gamma} = \frac{1}{4M_\chi^2 v} \langle 0 | O^a_s | 0 \rangle \Bigg[ \int d n \cdot p \, \Bigg\{ C_2(M_\chi, n \cdot p) \langle p_1 p_2 \mid \frac{1}{2}\Big\{(\bar \chi \gamma^5\chi) \, (\bar \chi_{A^\prime} \gamma^5 \chi_{B^\prime}) \nn \\
&+& (\bar \chi_{A^\prime} \gamma^5 \chi_{B^\prime}) (\bar \chi \gamma^5\chi) \Big\}(0) \mid p_1 p_2 \rangle + C_4(M_\chi, n \cdot p) \langle p_1 p_2 \mid (\bar \chi_{A^\prime} \gamma^5 \chi_C) \, (\bar \chi_C \gamma^5 \chi_{B^\prime}) (0) \mid p_1 p_2 \rangle \Bigg\} F^\gamma_{\tilde A \tilde B}\left( \frac{2E_\gamma}{n \cdot p} \right) \Bigg] \nn\\
&&+ \Bigg[ \int d n \cdot p \,\Bigg\{ C_1(M_\chi, n \cdot p)\langle p_1 p_2 \mid (\bar \chi \gamma^5 \chi) \, (\bar \chi \gamma^5 \chi) (0) \mid p_1 p_2 \rangle +C_3(M_\chi, n \cdot p) \nn \\
&\times& \langle p_1 p_2 \mid (\bar \chi_C \gamma^5 \chi_D) \, \bar (\chi_D \gamma^5 \chi_C) (0) \mid p_1 p_2 \rangle\Bigg\} F_\gamma\left( \frac{2E_\gamma}{n \cdot p} \right) \Bigg] ,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
O^a_s= S_{v A^\prime A}^T S_{vB B^\prime}S_{n \tilde A A}^TS_{n B \tilde B}
\end{eqnarray}
and $F^\gamma_{\tilde A \tilde B}$ is a fragmentation function defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
F^\gamma_{\tilde A \tilde B}\left( \frac{n\cdot k}{n\cdot p} \right) &=& \int \frac{ dx_-}{2\pi}e^{in \cdot p x_-}\langle 0 \mid B^{\perp \mu}_{\tilde A}(x_-) \mid \gamma(k_n)+X_n \rangle \nn \\
&\times& \langle \gamma(k_n)+X_n \mid B^\perp _{\mu \tilde B}(0) \mid 0 \rangle ,
\label{eq:fragdef}
\end{eqnarray}
and $F_\gamma = F^\gamma_{\tilde A \tilde B} \delta_{\tilde A \tilde B}$.
Note that this is an unusual fragmentation function in that we are measuring states which are not gauge singlets. However, electroweak symmetry breaking makes
this physically meaningful since it is trivial for observers to agree on the appropriate, EM-preserving gauge.
$C_{1\textendash 4}$ are the matching coefficients that give the probability for the dark matter to annihilate and create a photon with momentum $ n \cdot p$.
$F^\gamma$ is the canonical fragmentation function giving the probability of an initial photon with momentum $k$ to yield
a photon with momentum fraction $n\cdot k /n \cdot p$ after splitting. Since the contribution in Eq.~(\ref{cross}) proportional to $F^\gamma$
is not sensitive to the nonsinglet nature of the initial state, it will only contribute large double logs from mixing with $O_{2,4}$.
In writing down Eq.~\ref{eq:wilsonline}, we factorized the collinear and soft fields, as the total Hilbert
space of the system is a tensor product of the soft and collinear sector. In general, none of the NRQCD modes can interact with the SCET mode without throwing them off-shell, thus leading to power suppressed interactions. Of course, the size of the power corrections will be dictated by this offshellness, but independently of the system's details, these interactions will not lead to large double logs.
\section{The Role of the Higgs}
\label{sec:higgs}
Given that the Higgs mass is of order the weak scale, in principle we should consider
both soft and collinear Higgs emissions in our factorization theorem. However, as we shall
now show, the couplings of both collinear and soft Higgses are power suppressed. Assuming that the
Higgsino is sufficiently heavier than the winos we may neglect the couplings of the Higgs to
the nonrelativistic sector of the Lagrangian. In cases with light Higgsinos, the potential is
affected, as discussed in \cite{Beneke:2014gja}.
The coupling of the Higgs to the gauge bosons is given by
\begin{equation}
S_H \sim \int d^4x \, W_\mu W^\mu H^\dagger H.
\end{equation}
Let us consider the coupling of a soft Higgs to collinear gauge bosons.
Recall that for a collinear gauge field with large momentum $n \cdot p$, the
polarizations scale as
\begin{equation}
(n\cdot W \sim 1, \bar n \cdot W \sim \lambda^2, W_\perp \sim \lambda),
\end{equation}
where the power counting parameter is $\lambda \sim M_W/M_\chi$.
The soft higgs field scales as $\lambda$, while the measure scales as
$\lambda^{-3}.~$\footnote{The scaling of the measure is based on the support of the
fields in momentum space, or equivalently by power counting the delta (see for instance \cite{TASI}). }
Thus the coupling of a soft Higgs to a collinear jet is down by one factor of $\lambda$.
Now suppose we are interested in the coupling of a collinear Higgs to a collinear gauge boson.
In principle this could, as in the case of soft Higgs emission, lead to non-analyticity that
must be reproduced by the effective theory. The coupling of collinear Higgs with collinear gauge
bosons (in the same light cone direction) is leading order since the measure will now scale as $\lambda^{-4}$.
Such interactions will be written in the effective theory as
\begin{equation}
S^n_{HW}= \int d^4x g^2(B^A_{n\mu} \tau^A H_n)^T (B^{B\mu}_n \tau^B H_n) \sim O(1).
\end{equation}
This interaction will generate running in the fragmentation functions at subleading orders only.
It is interesting to ask whether or not the emission of a collinear Higgs in the $n^\prime$ direction
off of a particle in the $n$ direction can generate leading order interactions. The analogous emission of
an arbitrary number of gauge bosons in the matching procedure is what builds up the Wilson lines in the effective theory.
Thus one might suspect that the analogous mechanism should {\bf not} occur in the case of Higgs emission given
that Wilson lines are already there to insure gauge invariance. This suspicion is proven true by noting a crucial
distinction between collinear Higgs and gauge boson emission. The Higgs field scales as $\lambda$ whereas the
gauge boson component $n\cdot A\sim 1$. This is why one can emit an arbitrary number of gauge bosons
in an amplitude without power suppression. Thus when matching, the emission of a Higgs in the $n^\prime$
direction off a parton in the $n$ direction is power suppressed and will be neglected.
\section{Calculating the Anomalous Dimension}
\label{sec:ad}
Much of the analysis in this section we first presented in \cite{Baumgart:2014vma}. To calculate the anomalous dimensions we first introduce an operator basis in the collinear and soft sectors
\begin{eqnarray}
O_s^a&=&S_{v A^\prime A}^T S_{vB B^\prime}S_{n \tilde A A}^TS_{n B \tilde B}~~~~~~~~~O_s^b=\mathbb{1} \, \delta_{\tilde A \tilde B} \delta_{A^\prime B^\prime}
\nn \\
O_c^a &=& B^\perp_{\tilde A}\mid \gamma(k_n)+X_n \rangle \langle \gamma(k_n)+X_n \mid B^\perp_{\tilde B}\nn\\
O_c^b&=& B^\perp_D \mid \gamma(k_n)+X_n \rangle \langle \gamma(k_n)+X_n \mid B^\perp_D \delta_{\tilde A \tilde B}.
\end{eqnarray}
where there is an implicit sum over the polarizations of the photon.
The operator $O_s^b$ has a trivial structure and hence does not receive radiative corrections, meaning its anomalous dimension is 0. Since it is a color singlet operator, the real and virtual poles cancel in the corrections to $O_c^b$, thus its anomalous dimension is 0 as well. At tree level, the vacuum matrix element of the operator $O_s^a$ is simply $\delta_{ A^\prime \tilde A} \delta_{B^\prime \tilde B}$.
At one loop, the diagrams that contribute to this matrix element are shown in Fig.~\ref{soft}.
The soft and collinear modes have the same virtuality and hence the divergences that arise from the factorization of the soft sector from the collinear cannot be regulated by dimensional regularization, which respects boost symmetry. Hence, we need to introduce a rapidity regulator, which manifestly breaks boosts \cite{RRG}. This requires a corresponding factorization scale which we call $\nu$. Using this formalism for the soft sector gives us
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle 0|O_s^a|0 \rangle =\! \delta_{ A^\prime \tilde A} \delta_{B^\prime \tilde B} \!+ \{\delta_{\tilde A \tilde B} \delta_{A^\prime B^\prime} \!-\! 3\, \delta_{ A^\prime \tilde A} \delta_{B^\prime \tilde B}\}\frac{g^2}{4\pi^2}\left[2 \log(\frac{\nu}{\mu}) \log(\frac{\mu}{M_W})\!+\log^2(\frac{\mu}{M_W})\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, we see that even though $O_s^a$ itself has a nontrivial color structure, at one loop it generates a color singlet piece in addition to nonsinglet.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{soft.png}}}
\caption[1]{Diagrams which contribute rapidity divergences to the soft factor. The dashed/solid line represents
the time/light-like Wilson line. }
\label{soft}
\end{figure}
We can do a similar calculation for the vacuum matrix elements in the collinear sector ({\it cf.}~Fig.~\ref{coll}).
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle 0|O_c^b|0 \rangle &=& 2\delta_{\tilde A \tilde B}\nn\\
\langle 0|O_c^a|0 \rangle &=& 2\delta_{ \tilde A 3} \delta_{\tilde B 3} + 2\{\delta_{\tilde A \tilde B}-3\delta_{ \tilde A 3} \delta_{\tilde B 3}\}\frac{g^2}{4\pi^2}\{2 \log(\frac{M_{\chi}}{\nu}) \log(\frac{\mu}{M_W})\}
\end{eqnarray}
These operators clearly mix within their respective sectors and we can define anomalous dimension matrices for the scales $\mu$ and $\nu$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.6}{\includegraphics{frag.png}}}
\vskip-0.2cm
\caption[1]{The two diagrams which lead to rapidity divergences in the fragmentation function.
The dashed line represents the cut throughout which final states pass. The solid dot represents
the gauge invariant field strength $B_\mu^\perp$.}
\label{coll}
\vskip-0.3cm
\end{figure}
\begin{equation} \mu \frac{d}{d\mu}\left(\begin{array}{c} O^{c,s}_a \\ O^{c,s}_b \end{array}\right)=\left( \begin{array}{cc} \gamma^{c,s}_{\mu,aa} & \gamma^{c,s}_{\mu,ab} \\ 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) \left(\begin{array}{c} O^{c,s}_a \\ O^{c,s}_b \end{array}\right). \end{equation}
\begin{equation} \nu \frac{d}{d\nu}\left(\begin{array}{c} O^{c,s}_a \\ O^{c,s}_b \end{array}\right)=\left( \begin{array}{cc} \gamma^{c,s}_{\nu,aa} & \gamma^{c,s}_{\nu,ab} \\ 0 & 0 \end{array} \right) \left(\begin{array}{c} O^{c,s}_a \\ O^{c,s}_b \end{array}\right). \end{equation}
The anomalous dimensions are thus given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma^c_{\mu,aa} &=& \frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\nu^2}{4M^2_\chi}), \;\;\; \gamma^s_{\mu,aa} = \frac{-3g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\nu^2}{\mu^2}), \nn \\
\gamma^c_{\mu,ba} &=& \frac{-g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\nu^2}{4M^2_\chi}), \;\; \gamma^s_{\mu,ba} = \frac{g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\nu^2}{\mu^2}).
\label{ads}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma^c_{\nu,aa} &=& \frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\mu^2}{M_W^2}), \;\;\; \gamma^s_{\nu,aa} = \frac{-3g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\mu^2}{M_W^2}), \nn \\
\gamma^c_{\nu,ba} &=& \frac{-g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\mu^2}{M_W^2}), \;\; \gamma^s_{\nu,ba} = \frac{g^2}{4\pi^2} \log(\frac{\mu^2}{M_W^2}).
\label{ads2}
\end{eqnarray}
Since the rapidity regulator was needed to handle the divergence that arose from our artificial cut between the soft and collinear sector, any trace of it, including dependence on the scale $\nu$ should vanish when we combine soft and collinear results. Therefore,
the fact that the $\nu$ anomalous dimension matrices in the soft and collinear sector are equal and opposite and that $\nu$-dependence cancels when we sum soft and collinear $\mu$ anomalous dimensions provides a powerful cross check of our effective theory calculation.
The soft and collinear sectors have no large logs if we choose the $(\mu,\nu)$ scales to be $(M_W,M_W)$ and
$(M_W,M_\chi)$ respectively. At leading double log accuracy we can resum all of the relevant terms
by choosing $\mu=M_W$. In this case all the large logs reside in the renormalized parameter $C_{i}(\mu=M_W)$
and the rapidity running may be neglected. We can read off the running of the hard matching coefficients $C_{1 \textendash 4}$ of the operators in Eq.~\ref{ops} by imposing that the cross section be RG invariant
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu \frac{d}{d\mu}C_{2,4}(\mu) &=& - (\gamma^c_{\mu,aa}+\gamma^s_{\mu,aa}) C_{2,4} \nn \\
\mu \frac{d}{d\mu}C_{1,3}(\mu) &=& - (\gamma^c_{\mu,ba}+\gamma^s_{\mu,ba}) C_{2,4}.
\label{wilsonrg}
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that the RHS of Eq.~\ref{wilsonrg} is independent of the rapidity scale as it must be.
To present a model independent form we have used the fact that the tree level result for $\chi^0 \chi^0 \rightarrow \gamma + \gamma/Z$ must vanish in which case there is only one independent matching coefficient. This gives us that $C_1=C_4$, $C_3=0$ and $C_2=-2C_1$ for matching at the high scale $M_{\chi}$. Using these boundary conditions we can solve for the Wilson coefficents at the low scale $\mu$ $\sim$ $M_{W}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
C_2(M_W)&=& \exp \left[ -\frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2}\log^2(M_\chi/M_W)\right] C_2(M_\chi) = -2 \exp\left[ -\frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2}\log^2(M_\chi/M_W)\right] C_1(M_\chi) \nn \\
C_1(M_W) &=&C_1({M_\chi})+\frac{1}{3}\left\{1-\exp\left[-\frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2}\log^2(M_W/M_\chi)\right]\right\}C_2(M_\chi) \nn\\
&=& \left\{\frac{1}{3} +\frac{2}{3}\exp\left[-\frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2}\log^2(M_W/M_\chi) \right] \right\} C_1({M_\chi})
\label{eq:wilsonrunone}
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly for $C_3$ and $C_4$
\begin{eqnarray}
C_4(M_W)&=& \exp\left[ -\frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2}\log^2(M_\chi/M_W)\right] C_1(M_\chi) \nn \\
C_3(M_W) &=&\frac{1}{3}\left\{ 1-\exp\left[-\frac{3g^2}{4\pi^2}\log^2(M_W/M_\chi)\right] \right \} C_1(M_\chi)
\label{eq:wilsonruntwo}
\end{eqnarray}
By running the Wilson coefficients, we resum all the leading double log contributions. The cross section can now be obtained by evaluating the effective theory matrix elements at their natural scale $\mu \sim M_W$. Here, all matrix elements are merely their values at tree level.
\begin{eqnarray}
F^\gamma_{\tilde A \tilde B}(n\cdot k/n\cdot p) &\equiv& \int \frac{ dx_-}{2\pi}e^{i n \cdot p \, x_-}
\langle 0 | O_c^a | 0 \rangle \nn \\
&=& \int \frac{ dx_-}{2\pi}e^{i(n \cdot p x_--n \cdot k_n x_-)} \delta_{\tilde A 3} \delta_{\tilde B 3}\eta^{\mu \nu} \sum_{pols} \epsilon_{\mu \perp}(k_n)\epsilon^{*}_{\nu \perp}(k_n)\nn\\
&=& 2 \delta_{\tilde A 3} \delta_{\tilde B 3} \delta(n \cdot p -n \cdot k_n) \nn \\
\langle 0 \mid O_s^a \mid 0 \rangle &=& \delta_{A^\prime \tilde A} \delta_{B^\prime \tilde B}
\end{eqnarray}
At the low scale, we are working in the broken theory, where the mass eigenstates are the neutralino $\chi^0$ and the charginos, $\chi^{\pm}$, which are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi^0= \chi^3\nn\\
\chi^{\pm}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\chi^1 \mp i\chi^2)
\end{eqnarray}
Anticipating the form of the Wilson coefficient at the scale $M_{\chi}$, we pull out a delta function $\delta(E_\gamma-M_\chi)$. Thus, utilizing the simplifications above along with the new basis we obtain the final form of the cross section up to corrections in the relative velocity \cite{Baumgart:2014vma}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{final}
\frac{1}{E_\gamma}\frac{d\sigma}{dE_\gamma} &=& \frac{C_1(\mu=E_{\gamma})}{4M^2_{\chi} \, v}\delta(E_\gamma-M_\chi) \left[ \frac{2}{3}f_- \mid \! \psi_{00}(0)\!\mid^2+2 f_+\mid \! \psi_{+-}(0)\!\mid^2\nn \right. \\
&+& \left. \frac{2}{3}f_-(\psi_{00}\psi_{+-}+{\rm h.c.}) \right]
\label{eq:diffrate}
\end{eqnarray}
where $f_\pm \equiv 1\pm\exp[- \frac{3\alpha_W}{\pi}\log^2(\frac{M_W}{E_{\gamma}})]$, which we plot in Figs.~\ref{fm} and \ref{fp}. Because $f_+ > f_-$ by a factor of a few throughout our range of interest and the numerical prefactor and Sommerfeld factors, as we will discuss in the Sections \ref{sec:se}, maintain this modest hierarchy, one can obtain a quick estimate of the effects of radiative corrections and resummation to the rate by looking at Fig.~\ref{fp}.
We define the wavefunctions as
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi_{00} &=& \langle 0 | \bar{\chi}^0 \gamma^5 \chi^0 |\chi^0 \chi^0 \rangle_S \nn \\
\psi_{\pm} &=& \langle 0| \bar{\chi}^+ \gamma^5 \chi^+ | \chi^0 \chi^0 \rangle_S
\label{eq:wfxn}
\end{eqnarray}
where $|\chi^0 \chi^0 \rangle_S = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\chi^0_{\uparrow}(p_1) \chi^0_{\downarrow}(p_2)\rangle-|\chi^0_{\downarrow}(p_1) \chi^0_{\uparrow}(p_2)\rangle)$, and here after we drop the ``$S$'' subscript since our nearly-static, annihilating Majorana fermions are automatically in the spin singlet.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{fminus.png}}}
\vskip-0.25cm
\caption{The resummed Sudakov factor $f_-$ as a function of the neutralino mass $M_{\chi}$. }
\label{fm}
\vskip-0.5cm
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{fplus.png}}}
\vskip-0.3cm
\caption{The resummed Sudakov factor $f_+$ as a function of the neutralino mass $M_{\chi}$. }
\label{fp}
\vskip-0.5cm
\end{figure}
Writing in terms of two component fields makes the singlet structure manifest.
This gives us
\begin{eqnarray}
\bar{\chi}^0 \gamma^5 \chi^0 &=& 2 (\chi^0)^T i\sigma^2 \chi^0 \nn\\
\bar{\chi}^+ \gamma^5 \chi^+ &=& 2(\chi^-)^T i\sigma^2 \chi^+ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where the two-component fermions on the RHS are the large-component subset of the four-component spinors on the LHS in the nonrelativistic limit. In order to fix the Wilson coefficient $C_1$, we match onto the tree level annihilation cross section of a spin singlet chargino state $ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|\chi^+_{\uparrow}(p_1) \chi^-_{\downarrow}(p_2)\rangle-|\chi^+_{\downarrow}(p_1) \chi^-_{\uparrow}(p_2)\rangle)$.
The leading order cross section to $\gamma + X$ $(\chi^+ \chi^- \rightarrow \gamma \gamma + \frac{1}{2} (\chi^+ \chi^- \rightarrow \gamma Z))$ is given as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma v = \frac{\pi \alpha_W^2 \sin^2\theta_W}{M_{\chi}^2}
\end{eqnarray}
From the effective theory description, we calculate this particular cross section in the notation of Eq.~\ref{eq:diffrate} as
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{E_\gamma}\frac{d\sigma}{dE_\gamma} &=& \frac{C_1(\mu=E_{\gamma})}{4M^2_{\chi} \, v}\delta(E_\gamma-M_\chi) (2 f_+ | \langle0| (\chi^-)^T i\sigma^2 \chi^+ |\chi^+ \chi^- \rangle_S|^2)
\label{eq:match}
\end{eqnarray}
At tree level, $f_+ =2$ and $\langle 0| (\chi^-)^T i\sigma^2 \chi^+ |(\chi^+ \chi^-)_S \rangle= \sqrt{2} M_{\chi}$.\\
which gives us
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma v = C_1(\mu=M_{\chi}) 2M_{\chi}
\end{eqnarray}
Comparing the two results we fix
\begin{equation}
C_1(M_{\chi}) = \frac{\pi \alpha_W^2 \sin^2\theta_W}{2M_{\chi}^3}.
\end{equation}
\section{Sommerfeld Enhancement}
\label{sec:se}
In order to quantify the semi-inclusive rate calculation, we need to determine the wavefunction-at-the-origin factors that enter our final, LL-resummed differential cross section in Eq.~\ref{eq:diffrate}. The wavefunctions themselves are defined in Eq.~\ref{eq:wfxn} and can be computed in principle in the nonrelativistic effective theory by summing the ladder exchange of electroweak gauge bosons between winos to all orders. Fortunately, this is equivalent to the operationally simpler task of solving the Schr\"odinger equation for our two, two-body states $| \chi^0 \chi^0 \rangle$ and $| \chi^+ \chi^- \rangle$ in the presence of the electroweak potential \cite{Hisano:2004ds,Iengo:2009ni,Cassel:2009wt}. In Appendix \ref{app:pot}, we detail the process of obtaining this potential from the underlying quantum field theory. Since it contains Coulomb, Yukawa, and mass-shift pieces and is off-diagonal for the two states, we solve it numerically. As expected for slowly moving particles in the presence of an attractive potential, we find Sommerfeld enhancement for the annihilation, that for some regions of $M_{\chi}$ is orders of magnitude above the perturbative rate.
Taking into account appropriate state normalization, the Schr\"odinger potential is
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r) = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
2\delta M -\frac{\alpha}{r} - \alpha_W c_W^2 \frac{ e^{-m_Z r}}{r} & -\sqrt{2}\alpha_W \frac{e^{-m_W r}}{r} \\
-\sqrt{2}\alpha_W \frac{e^{-m_W r}}{r} & 0
\end{array} \right),
\label{eq:potl}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta M \equiv M_{\chi^+} - M_{\chi^0}$. For numerical analysis, we use $\delta M$ = 0.17 GeV, which is its value over much of MSSM parameter space. To solve the system, we also need appropriate boundary conditions for our wavefunctions $\psi_{1} \equiv \langle r| \chi^0 \chi^0 \rangle $ ($\psi_{2} \equiv \langle r| \chi^+ \chi^- \rangle $), where $r$ is the relative distance between the two particles in the state, and we always work in the center of mass frame. The total wavefunction for our two state system is $\boldsymbol{\psi}^\top = (\psi_1 \; \psi_2)$. We are ultimately interested in the annihilation of the neutral state, which is controlled by physics at length scales $\sim \frac{1}{M_\chi} \ll \frac{1}{M_W}$, and is therefore quantified by the wavefunction-at-the-origin, $\psi_{1,2}(0)$. We thus see that for the boundary condition of an incoming neutral, spin-singlet state, in the notation of Eqs.~\ref{eq:diffrate} and \ref{eq:wfxn},
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi_{1}(0) &=& \psi_{00}(0)/(2\sqrt{2}M_\chi) \nn \\
\psi_{2}(0) &=& \psi_{\pm}(0)/(2M_\chi),
\label{eq:wfrat}
\end{eqnarray}
where the numerical factors account for the difference between our definition in Eq.~\ref{eq:wfxn} and the interpolating fields for the two-body states and the tree-level normalization of the matrix element below Eq.~\ref{eq:match}. The latter can be found by comparing the potential we use for Schr\"odinger evolution (Eq.~\ref{eq:potl}) with the nonrelativistic field theory interactions we obtain in Eq.~\ref{eq:qftpotl}. Since the annihilation process is perturbative, we can calculate $\psi_{1,2}(0)$ by turning off the annihilation and solving the scattering problem for the electroweak potential.\footnote{In the literature the Sommerfeld enhancement is sometimes quantified as $S \equiv |\psi(0)|^2/|\psi^{(0)}(0)|^2$, the ratio of the potential-modified wavefunction at the origin to the wavefunction of a plane wave, $\psi^{(0)} = e^{ikz}$. However, since $|\psi^{(0)}(0)|^2$ = 1, and our expression for the differential rate, Eq.~\ref{eq:diffrate}, is written explicitly in terms proportional to $\psi_{1,2}(0)$, our notation only refers to the wavefunctions.} This is equivalent to our factorized effective field theory setup ({\it cf.}~Eq.~\ref{eq:diffrate}), where the wavefunctions are computed in the nonrelativistic effective theory, but the annihilation process is given by the perturbative, high-energy Wilson coefficient.
To proceed, we adopt the general analysis of \cite{Slatyer:2009vg,Beneke:2014gja}, and stick to the former's notation as much as possible, for our state of interest. As is generic for a scattering problem in the presence of a central potential, for our wavefunction,
\begin{equation}
\psi_{n}(r \rightarrow \infty) = c_n e^{i k_n z} + f_n(\theta) \frac{e^{i k_n r}}{r},
\label{eq:scattinf}
\end{equation}
where we recognize the incoming plane wave and scattered, outgoing radial wave. The index $n$ labels the charged or neutral component of the two-body state, with $n=1$ being neutral. Since our asymptotic, physical state is a pair of neutral winos with CM frame $E = \frac{M_\chi v^2}{4}$, we demand that the incoming plane wave only be in the neutral component of the state, {\it i.e.}~$c_n = \delta_{n1}$, and
\begin{equation}
k_n = \frac{M_\chi}{2}\sqrt{v^2 - 8 \frac{\delta M}{M_\chi}\delta_{n2}}.
\end{equation}
The presence of the mass shift, $\delta M$, causes the charged component of the state to decay exponentially at large $r$. A generic wavefunction in a spherical potential can be decomposed in terms of a radial wavefunction $R_{kl}(r)$ and Legendre polynomials as,
\begin{equation}
\psi_{n}(r) = \sum_\ell A_{n\ell} \, P_\ell (\cos \theta) R_{n,k\ell}(r),
\label{eq:decomp}
\end{equation}
We wish to determine the unknown coefficient, $A_{n\ell}$, by matching to Eq.~\ref{eq:scattinf} as $r \rightarrow \infty$.
For this, we expand the incoming plane wave into partial waves and also use the general form of the radial wavefunction for central potential scattering at long distances,
\begin{equation}
R_{nkl}(r \rightarrow \infty) = b_{n\ell} \, \sin (k_n r -\ell \pi/2 +\delta_{n\ell})/r,
\label{eq:rgen}
\end{equation}
where $b_{n\ell}$ is a constant and $\delta_{n \ell}$ is the ``phase shift.'' Strictly speaking, only the radial component of $\psi_{1}$ asymptotes to this form. As mentioned above, the radial component of $\psi_{2}$ decays exponentially. We can analytically continue $k_2$ and $\delta_{2\ell}$ though, to complex values to keep the decaying solution in the form of Eq.~\ref{eq:rgen}. Formally, $\delta_{2\ell}$ diverges to cancel the exponentially growing mode for complex $k_2$, but as we will see, we never need to input its value to determine Sommerfeld enhancement.
To proceed with matching, it is useful to include the other, regular, linearly-independent solution to the Schr\"odinger equation (generically an $N$-component state has $N$ regular and $N$ irregular solutions, that latter will be useful for our numerical analysis as described below). Since we were already considering the case of an incoming neutral state in Eq.~\ref{eq:scattinf}, $c_n = \delta_{n1}$, we can take the orthogonal solution to be that of an incoming charged state, $c_n = \delta_{n2}$. Thus, anything with a $n$ index becomes a tensor with indices, $n,j$ (except $k_n$, since it is kinematic and thus invariant across solutions), where $j$ determines whether the incoming plane wave is neutral ($j=1$) or charged. For $c$, we therefore get $c_{nj} = \delta_{nj}$, and $j$ iterates between an incoming $\chi^0 \chi^0$ state, what we were already considering, or an incoming $\chi^+ \chi^-$. We can now define matrices, $C_{nj} \equiv c_{nj}/k_n$ and $(M_\ell)_{nj} \equiv e^{-i(\delta_\ell)_{nj}} (b_\ell)_{nj}$. This allows us to find the matching coefficient in Eq.~\ref{eq:decomp},
\begin{equation}
A_\ell = i^\ell (2\ell+1)M_\ell^{-1}C,
\label{eq:acoeff}
\end{equation}
where the first column of $A_\ell$ gives the coefficients for our state of interest.
In the opposite limit, $R_{kl}(r \rightarrow 0) \sim r^\ell$, and since our only concern is the wavefunction at the origin, we need only keep track of the $S$-wave component. As a further simplification, we define $\chi_k \equiv r R_{k,\ell=0}$, such that the Schr\"odinger equation reduces to
\begin{equation}
-\frac{1}{M_\chi}\frac{d^2}{dr^2}\chi(r) + V(r) \, \chi(r) = \frac{k^2}{M_\chi}\chi(r).
\label{eq:redschro}
\end{equation}
Combined with our matching coefficient, this gives a matrix of Sommerfeld enhancement factors,
\begin{equation}
\psi_{nj}(0) = (\chi^\prime(0) M_0^{-1} C)_{nj},
\label{eq:sommphys}
\end{equation}
where $j$ labels the external state and $n$ determines whether the 00 or $\pm$ component undergoes perturbative annihilation.
As setup currently though, we are on the hook for calculating the phase shifts, $\delta_{nj}$, and amplitudes, $b_{nj}$, of the asymptotic solutions. To remove this difficulty and any subtleties about the decaying nature of the charged-component term, it is useful build the Wronskian with the other two linearly-independent solutions of Eq.~\ref{eq:redschro}, those that give irregular radial wavefunctions. Denoting them as $(\tilde{\chi}_\ell)_{nj} (r)$, we demand
\begin{eqnarray}
(\tilde{\chi}_\ell)_{nj} (r \rightarrow \infty) &=& T_{nj} e^{i k_n r} \nn \\
(\tilde{\chi}_\ell)_{nj} (r \rightarrow 0) &=& r^{-\ell} \delta_{nj}.
\end{eqnarray}
Dropping $\ell$, since we are only interested in the $S$-wave case, $W = \tilde{\chi}^\top \chi^\prime - \tilde{\chi}^{\prime\top} \chi$. $W$ is invariant with respect to $r$, and so we evaluate it at 0 and $\infty$,
\begin{eqnarray}
W(0) &=& \chi^\prime(0) \nn \\
W(r \rightarrow \infty) &=& \sum_{m} T_{mn} (M)_{mj} k_m \nn \\
&=& (T^\top C^{-1} M)_{nj},
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used that the $C$ matrix is diagonal, with elements $k_m^{-1}$. Finally, we can get a simpler expression for Sommerfeld enhancement, since equating $W(0)=W(\infty)$ gives
\begin{equation}
(\chi^\prime(0) M^{-1} C)_{nj} = T^\top_{nj}.
\label{eq:sommeq}
\end{equation}
However, the LHS is exactly what we obtained in Eq.~\ref{eq:sommphys}. Thus, for numerical analysis, we only need to find the neutral component of the wavefunction at infinity, $\tilde{\chi}_{11}(r \rightarrow \infty)$ and $\tilde{\chi}_{12}(r \rightarrow \infty)$, where the different solutions correspond to imposing the boundary conditions
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{cc}
\tilde{\chi}_{11}(0) = 1 & \;\;\;\; \tilde{\chi}_{12}(0) = 0 \\
\tilde{\chi}_{21}(0) = 0 & \;\;\;\; \tilde{\chi}_{22}(0) = 1
\end{array}
\label{eq:bc}
\end{eqnarray}
Furthermore, since $\tilde{\chi}_{1i}(r \rightarrow \infty) \propto e^{ikr}$ we can extract the phase part, defining $\xi_{i} \equiv \tilde{\chi}_{1i} e^{-ikr}$ such that $\xi^\prime(\infty) = 0$, giving an even simpler numerical implementation.
We take the reduced Schr\"odinger equation, Eq.~\ref{eq:redschro}, and solve for $\xi_{i} (\equiv \tilde{\chi}_{1i} e^{-ikr})$ and $\tilde{\chi}_{2i}$ with the potential in Eq.~\ref{eq:potl} and boundary conditions at the origin given in \ref{eq:bc}. Defining $x\equiv k r$, where $k=M_\chi v/2$, this gives the following coupled equations,
\begin{eqnarray}
\xi^{\prime\prime}_i(x) + 2i \xi^\prime_i(x) &=& -\sqrt{2} \left( \frac{\alpha_W M_\chi}{x \, k}\right) e^{-(i+M_W/k)x} \tilde{\chi}_{2i}(x) \nn \\
\tilde{\chi}^{\prime\prime}_{2i}(x) &=& -\sqrt{2} \left( \frac{\alpha_W M_\chi}{x \, k} \right) e^{-(i+M_W/k)x} \xi_i(x) \nn \\
&&+ \left( \frac{2 M_\chi \delta M}{k^2} - \frac{\alpha M_\chi}{x \, k} - \left( \frac{\alpha_W M_\chi c_W^2}{x \, k} \right) e^{-(M_Z/k)x} -1 \right) \tilde{\chi}_{2i}(x).
\label{eq:coupl}
\end{eqnarray}
We solve them numerically, obtaining quantitative agreement with the earlier literature \cite{Hisano:2004ds,Cohen:2013ama}.\footnote{Thank you to T.~Slatyer for providing a detailed comparison over a range of data points}. There are nonetheless a couple provisos to the analysis. Firstly, Eq.~\ref{eq:coupl} requires us to input a WIMP velocity. In accord with previous references, we have chosen $v=10^{-3}$. Scanning over a range of velocities, we found insensitivity to the precise number as long as it was below $M_W/M_\chi$ and we were not in the immediate vicinity of the one of the resonance peaks in Fig.~\ref{somm}. However, since the annihilation rate is so large at these peaks, a WIMP mass at these values is sufficiently ruled out to make this detail beyond our scope. Additionally, the formal boundary conditions demand $\tilde{\chi}_{2i}(X) =0$ and calculate the Sommerfeld enhancement from $\xi_i(X)$, with $X \rightarrow \infty$, but in practice we must take finite $X$. For our $M_\chi$ range of interest, the longest decay length for the charged state is determined by the $\delta M$ plus Coulomb part of the potential, and is given by $x_{\rm dec.}=1/\sqrt{2 M_\chi \delta M/k^2 - 1}$. We find that taking $X = \mathcal{O}(10) x_{\rm dec.}$ leads to numerical stability.
Looking at the results of our Sommerfeld analysis in Fig.~\ref{somm}, we see the expected resonance structure, with values of $|\psi(0)|^2$ that exceed $10^4$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{sommerfeld.pdf}}}
\caption[1]{Sommerfeld enhancement factors, $|\psi_2(0)|^2$ (red) and $|\psi_1(0)|^2$ (blue) vs.~WIMP mass. The former is promotional to $|\psi_{\pm}(0)|^2$ and the latter to $|\psi_{00}(0)|^2$, as shown in Eq.~\ref{eq:wfrat}.}
\label{somm}
\end{figure}
The Sommerfeld factors $|\psi_2(0)|^2$ and $|\psi_1(0)|^2$ are comparable throughout our range and maintain the modest hierarchy of the perturbative charged-state annihilation due to $f_+$ exceeding $f_-$ and its contribution having a larger numerical prefactor in Eq.~\ref{eq:diffrate}.
\section{Dark Matter Constraints and Conclusion}
\label{sec:conc}
Having calculated tree level matching, LL resummation, and computed the Sommerfeld enhancement numerically, we can now evaluate the differential cross section for $\chi^0 \chi^0 \rightarrow \gamma + X$, given in Eq.~\ref{eq:diffrate}. We plot this in Fig.~\ref{sigma}, where we have digitized the HESS limits given \cite{Ovanesyan:2014fwa}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.6}{\includegraphics{wino_hess.png}}}
\caption[1]{Annihilation cross section to $\gamma + X$. Exclusion taken from \cite{Ovanesyan:2014fwa}, assuming an NFW profile.}
\label{sigma}
\end{figure}
We note that in contrast to those groups that performed an exclusive two-body calculation, \cite{Bauer:2014ula,Ovanesyan:2014fwa}, we find the effect of higher order correction to be very modest. For example, at the thermal relic mass of 3 TeV, we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \sigma v\rangle_{\rm LO} &=& 5.4\times 10^{-26} \; {\rm cm^3/s} \nn \\
\langle \sigma v\rangle_{\rm NLO-fixed} &=& 5.3\times 10^{-26} \; {\rm cm^3/s} \nn \\
\langle \sigma v\rangle_{\rm LL} &=& 5.3\times 10^{-26} \; {\rm cm^3/s} ,
\end{eqnarray}
where for each value we have included Sommerfeld enhancement, and ``NLO-fixed'' includes only those one-loop effects that are resummed by our LL operator running.
Thus, at this value for $M_\chi$, the leading corrections shift the semi-inclusive annihilation by just a few percent. Comparing directly to \cite{Ovanesyan:2014fwa}, which also investigated annihilation of a triplet fermion, they find that at 3 TeV, higher order effects lead to a $\sim$50\% reduction in the exclusive rate. This difference is to be expected given the distinct difference in our choice of observables. From Eq.~\ref{eq:diffrate} and Fig.~\ref{somm}, we see that the leading contribution by a factor of few to our rate in our range of interest comes from perturbative $\chi^+ \chi^-$ annihilation and is proportional to $|\psi_{\pm}|^2$ and therefore $f_+ \big(= 1 + \exp(- \frac{3\alpha_W}{\pi}\log^2[\frac{M_W}{E_\gamma})]\big)$. Thus $f_+$, which has a tree level value of 2, drops to 1 in the limit $M_\chi,E_\gamma \rightarrow \infty$, meaning the $|\psi_{\pm}|^2$ term decreases by 50\% only in this {\it infinite} limit. Furthermore, in this asymptotic case, $f_- \rightarrow 1$ from its tree-level value of 0, so the $|\psi_{00}|^2$ and $\psi_\pm \psi_{00}$ terms can boost overall rate above this 50\% reduction. Comparing to the LL results in Eqs.~13-16 of \cite{Ovanesyan:2014fwa}, their Sudakov factor goes like $\exp(-\frac{\alpha_W}{\pi} \log^2(\frac{M_W}{E_\gamma}))$. Thus, in the limit of infinite DM mass, their rate drops to 0. This is expected from the general result that exclusive rates vanish in the limit of infinite energy.
The limit from HESS in Fig.~\ref{sigma} shows that the thermal relic wino, $M_\chi \approx$ 3 TeV is ruled out by more than an order of magnitude. Unfortunately, the astrophysical uncertainties in the halo profile are sufficient to evade an excess of even this size. This is because the flux of photons measured by the HESS experiment is proportional to the ``$J$-factor'',
\begin{equation}
J = \frac 1 R_\odot \left( \frac 1 \rho_{\rm loc} \right)^2 \int_{\Delta \Omega} \int_{\rm l.o.s.} \rho^2(s,\Omega) ds,
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{\rm loc}$ is the local density, $R_\odot$ = 8.5 kpc is the distance to the galactic center, and $s$ is the line of sight distance to the experiment, where $r = \sqrt{s^2 + R_\odot^2 - 2 s R_\odot \cos\theta}$. Discussions on the ability of different halo models to evade constraints can be found in the earlier papers that found the wino to be in tension with HESS \cite{Cohen:2013ama,Fan:2013faa}. The exclusion curve we have taken from \cite{Ovanesyan:2014fwa} assumes an NFW profile \cite{Navarro:1995iw} with a local density, $\rho_{\rm loc} = 0.4$ GeV/cm$^3$ \cite{Catena:2009mf}, and $r_s$ = 20 kpc \cite{Iocco:2011jz},
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\rm NFW}(r) = \frac{\rho_0}{(r/r_s)(1+r/r_s)^2}.
\end{equation}
This is a cusped profile, diverging as $1/r$ toward the galactic center.\footnote{Typically, there will be deviations from strict spherical symmetry in the halo (axial, triaxial), and these can effect $J$ at the 10-20\% level \cite{Bernal:2014mmt}. This uncertainty though, is far below the orders of magnitude shift in $J$ one can obtain by changing the profile shape between cusped and a large core.} In the discussion that follows, we fix the local density $\rho_{\rm loc} = 0.4$ GeV/cm$^3$, but we will change the functional form of the distribution along with a possible core radius. It is possible though, that the local density could lie somewhere in the range of 0.2-0.6 GeV/cm$^3$ \cite{Iocco:2011jz}.
The cusped vs.~cored (where the distribution flattens out at some distance) debate on the nature of the DM halo is an old one that experiment is far from resolving. A recent observational analysis found good fits both for NFW profiles similar to the one in our constraint and for ones with relatively large, $\sim$10 kpc cores \cite{Nesti:2013uwa}. Looking at simulation, DM-only models generically yield cusped distributions \cite{Pieri:2009je}. However, observations of dwarf spheroidal galaxies found evidence for cored profiles, which was subsequently found in numerical models that included effects from baryons \cite{DiCintio:2013qxa}. It is thought that supernovas near the galactic center may eject enough mass to flatten the DM distributions. The question is whether sufficient mass could be ejected in a much more massive, $(100-1000)\times$ larger, Milky Way-like galaxy, or if the larger baryon density near the galactic center results in an even more cusped distribution. Simulations of Milky Way-like galaxies that include baryons continue to show a preference for cusped distributions, at least into distances $\sim$1 kpc \cite{DiCintio:2013qxa,Kuhlen:2012qw,Marinacci:2013mha}. One can ask, how much coring is needed to save the wino, given our LL-resummed annihilation rate? For an NFW profile that becomes constant below a certain radius,
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\rm cutoff-NFW}(r) = \left \{ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{\rho_0}{(r/r_s)(1+r/r_s)^2} & r>r_c \nn \\
\frac{\rho_0}{(r_c/r_s)(1+r_c/r_s)^2} & r\leq r_c
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:nfwcut}
\end{equation}
in Fig.~\ref{coring} we plot the value of the core radius, $r_c$, needed to make our semi-inclusive rate calculation consistent with the limit from HESS.
For the thermal relic wino mass, $M_\chi$ = 3 TeV, if we consider the Burkert profile \cite{Burkert:1995yz},
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\rm Burk.}(r) = \frac{\rho_0}{(1+r/r_c)(1+r/r_c)^2},
\end{equation}
where $r_c$ again gives the core radius, and a cutoff-NFW distribution, we find that we need cores of 4-4.5 kpc and 1-1.5 kpc, respectively, to avoid the bounds. Both distributions are well within the region allowed by observation \cite{Nesti:2013uwa}, and the wino in a cutoff-NFW profile (but not Burkert) is consistent with simulation, as well.
The observation of wino dark matter near the thermal relic mass of 3 TeV would point to the existence of a nontrivial amount of coring in the halo of the galaxy which would require an explanation. Of course, there are other possible ways to evade the HESS constraints, even if the profile were nearly NFW. There is the possibility that the lightest neutralino may not be a pure wino. For example, a thermal relic higgsino is far from constrained, and thus admixtures between these states could certainly be allowed \cite{Fan:2013faa}. Sticking with the pure wino, if there were some non-thermal mechanism for its production, then the limit at values other than 3 TeV would be relevant, and $M_\chi$ could be in one of the allowed regions shown in Fig.~\ref{sigma}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.7}{\includegraphics{DMfraction.png}}}
\vskip-0.3cm
\caption[1]{Exclusion plot for an NFW profile with the wino making up only some fraction of the dark matter. Expression for NFW profile with coring given in Eq.~\ref{eq:nfwcut}.}
\label{fraction}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centerline{\scalebox{0.6}{\includegraphics{coring.png}}}
\vskip-0.3cm
\caption[1]{The amount of coring required for the wino to become viable with respect to the HESS constraint shown in Fig.~\ref{sigma} for the cutoff-NFW profile (Eq.~\ref{eq:nfwcut}). The three curves display the effect of variation in the local dark matter density.}
\label{coring}
\end{figure}
Alternatively, whether or not its production were thermal, the wino could make up just a fraction of the dark matter, and thus much of parameter space would remain open, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fraction}. With the theoretical uncertainty on its annihilation rate now under control at the $\mathcal{O}(1\%)$ level,\footnote{It would be an interesting exercise to extend this analysis to NLL. We have computed the running of our Wilson coefficients from the one-loop cusp anomalous dimensions. One would also need one-loop non-cusp, two-loop cusp, and the $\beta$-function running of $\alpha_W$. These were included in the exclusive-observable calculations of \cite{Bauer:2014ula,Ovanesyan:2014fwa}. Additionally, the one-loop running of our fragmentation functions, Eq.~\ref{eq:fragdef}, is needed.} the discovery of a wino at future indirect detection experiments, such as CTA \cite{Doro:2012xx}, could give us important windows into further open questions such as the halo distribution, cosmological history of DM production, and the presence of multi-component dark matter.
\vspace{0.1in}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Aneesh Manohar, Tracey Slatyer, Iain Stewart, and Brock Tweedie for discussions. The authors are supported by DOE grants DOE DE-FG02-04ER41338 and FG02-06ER41449.
M.B. acknowledges the Aspen Center for Physics where a portion of this work was completed.
\vspace{-0.2in}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Skyrme model is a nonlinear field theory model of atomic nuclei \cite{Skyrme}. As a classical field theory, this model has soliton solutions, known as Skyrmions\xspace, which are stabilised by a conserved topological charge. Skyrmions have been calculated for various charges, see e.g. \cite{Battye:2001qn} for a comprehensive summary, and \cite{Battye:2004rw, Battye:2006tb,Feist:2012ps} for more recent results when it became apparent that massive pions play an important role. When these Skyrmions are quantised, as fermions, they model protons and neutrons \cite{Adkins:1983ya, Adkins:1983hy}. An important ingredient in the quantisation are the so-called Finkelstein-Rubinstein constraints \cite{Finkelstein:1968hy}, which guarantee that Skyrmions can be consistently quantised as fermions. Using the symmetries of classical Skyrmions, these constraints also allow the quantum numbers of the ground and excited states to be calculated \cite{Irwin:1998bs, Krusch:2002by, Krusch:2005iq}.
Reference \cite{Battye:2009ad} included massive pions and found that the energies of quantum ground and excited states of Skyrmions had good qualitative and reasonable quantitive agreement with experimental results, for even topological charges.
However, the approach does not produce good results for odd values of the topological charge greater than three. This may be related to the fact that Skyrmions deform when they are spinning \cite{Battye:2005nx} or isospinning \cite{Battye:2014qva}. More recently, properties of Carbon-12 have been successfully modelled using the Skyrme model \cite{Lau:2014baa}. These calculations helped to understand the structure of Carbon-12 and the so-called Hoyle state.
In nuclear physics, scattering experiments are very important. However, relatively little progress has been made with Skyrmion-Skyrmion scattering, and its applications to nuclear physics. Classical Skyrmion scattering was first discussed using an axially-symmetric approximation in \cite{Verbaarschot:1986rj}. The first numerical full field simulation of Skyrmion scattering for two $B=1$ Skyrmions was performed in \cite{Allder:1987kq}. Skrymion scattering for different charges with symmetric initial conditions was discussed in \cite{Battye:1996nt}. The similarity with monopole scattering led to various important developments \cite{Manton} including the rational map ansatz \cite{Houghton:1997kg}.
From a more analytical point of view, Manton discussed low energy Skyrmion scattering using the idea of an unstable manifold \cite{Manton:1988ba, Gisiger:1994gj} and the geodesic approximation \cite{Manton:1981mp}. This unstable manifold can be mapped out exactly for well-separated Skyrmions \cite{Irwin:1996nj} and has been calculated numerically in \cite{Waindzoch:1997rq}. Schroers discussed the interaction of well-separated moving and spinning Skyrmions in \cite{Schroers:1993yk}.
Braaten discussed in \cite{Braaten:1987hk} how to calculate scattering cross sections from the Skyrme model.
In this paper, we focus on classical scattering of two charge one Skyrmions with variable impact parameter. The paper is organised as follows. In section \ref{SkyrmeModel} we review the Skyrme model with a particular emphasis on the dipol interaction. In section \ref{SkyrmionScattering} we present a numerical study of Skyrmion scattering.
We then describe Skyrmion-Skyrmion scattering in the attractive channel using the classical dipol approximation. We also derive the dynamics in the relativistic case and discuss the modifications for nonzero pion mass. We observe the interesting effect of ``rotation without rotating''. In section
\ref{Visualisation} we introduce a new way of visualising Skyrmions which explains this effect. We then discuss scattering of two spinning Skyrmions. In section \ref{Monopoles} we give a brief comparison of monopole and Skyrmion scattering. We end with a conclusion and discuss open problems.
\section{The Skyrme model}
\label{SkyrmeModel}
The Skyrme model is a three dimensional non-linear theory of pions where the field $U(t,\mbox{\boldmath $x$})$ is an $\mbox{SU}(2)$-valued scalar. It is a low energy effective theory of QCD and is defined by the Lagrangian \cite{Manton},
\begin{equation}
\label{Lag}
L=\int\left\{-\frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\,(R_\mu R^\mu)+
\frac{1}{16}\mbox{Tr}([R_\mu,R_\nu][R^\mu,R^\nu]) - {m_\pi}^2 \mbox{Tr} (1_2-U)
\right\}\mbox{d}^3x,
\end{equation}
where $R_\mu = \partial_\mu U U^\dagger,$ $1_2$ is the unit matrix in two dimensions and $m_\pi$ parametrizes the pion mass. Here we have expressed the model in so-called Skyrme units, where we have chosen an energy unit $\frac{F_\pi}{4e}$ and a length unit $\frac{2}{eF_\pi}$. $F_\pi$ is the pion decay constant and $e$ is a dimensionless parameter. Field configurations can only have finite energy provided that the field $U({\bf x},t) \to 1_2$ as $|{\bf x}| \to \infty.$ Hence, finite-energy fields are defined on the one-point compactification of ${\mathbb R}^3$, namely ${\mathbb R}^3 \cup \{\infty\} \cong S^3.$ Furthermore, the target space $SU(2)$ is homeomorphic to $S^3.$ Therefore, finite-energy configurations belong to an element of the third homotopy group $\pi_3(S^3)\cong \mathbb{Z}$ and are indexed by an integer. This integer is the topological charge, $B$, and is interpreted as the baryon number. In atomic nuclei, $B$ corresponds to the sum of the number protons and neutrons. The topological charge can be calculated as an integral over the baryon density ${\cal B}(\mbox{\boldmath $x$})$ namely,
\begin{equation}
\label{Bd}
B = \int_{{\mathbb R}^3} {\cal B}(\mbox{\boldmath $x$}) \mbox{d}^3x, \quad {\rm where} \quad
{\cal B}(\mbox{\boldmath $x$}) = -\frac{\epsilon_{ijk}}{24 \pi^2} \mbox{Tr} \left(R_i R_j R_k\right).
\end{equation}
It is often more convenient to reparameterise the Skyrme field with three pion fields $\mbox{\boldmath $\pi$}=(\pi_1,\pi_2,\pi_3)^{T}$ and a constrained field $\sigma$ as $U=\sigma 1_2+i\mbox{\boldmath $\pi$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}$, where $\sigma^2+\mbox{\boldmath $\pi$}\cdot\mbox{\boldmath $\pi$}=1$ and $\mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}$ is the triplet of Pauli matrices. We shall be making use of this later. Numerical evidence suggests that the $B=1$ Skyrmion is spherically symmetric. This is best described with the so-called hedgehog ansatz,
\begin{equation}
U_{\rm H} = \cos f(r)\, 1_2 +i \sin f(r) \hat{\mbox{\boldmath $x$}} \cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}, \label{hog}
\end{equation}
where $r=|{\bf x}|$ and ${\hat{\bf x}} = {\bf x}/r.$ For minimum-energy solutions the shape function $f(r)$ has to be calculated numerically subject to the boundary conditions $f(0) = \pi$ and $f(\infty)=0.$
For massless pions, $m_\pi=0,$ the interaction of two well-separated $B=1$ Skyrmions can be approximated by the dipole-dipole interaction \cite{Manton}
\begin{equation}
\label{Eint0}
E_{{\rm int}} = -\frac{2C^2}{3 \pi} \left(1-\cos \psi\right)
\frac{1-3\left({\bf {\hat X}} \cdot {\bf {\hat n}}\right)^2}{X^3},
\end{equation}
where $C$ is the dipol strength, ${\bf X}$ is the separation between the two Skyrmions and $X = |{\bf X}|.$ For a $B=1$ Skyrmion the constant $C$ is given by $C=2.16$ ($m_\pi=0$) \cite{Manton}. The value of $C$ corresponds to the leading order term in the large $r$ expansion of the shape function $f(r) \sim \frac{C}{r^2}$. This can be shown by linearising the equations of motion for $f(r)$. In this paper we are only interested in when the interaction energy \eqref{Eint0} is minimal, namely when $\psi = \pi$ and ${\bf {\hat X}} \cdot {\bf {\hat n}} = 0.$ We define this as the attractive channel, and the interaction energy simplifies to
\begin{equation}
\label{Eint0a}
E_{{\rm int}}^{{\rm att}} = -\frac{4C^2}{3 \pi}
\frac{1}{X^3}.
\end{equation}
As a point of notation we define the Skyrmion\xspace locations as the points in $\mathbb{R}^3$ where $U(\mbox{\boldmath $x$})=-1_2, (\sigma=-1, \pi_a=0)$. This is the antipodal point of the vacuum and is hence a region of large energy density.
\section{Skyrmion Scattering} \label{SkyrmionScattering}
In this article we are investigating Skyrmion\xspace scattering. There has been some analytical progress using the instanton ansatz \cite{Atiyah:1989dq, Atiyah:1992if}, but so far the most productive method is to use numerical simulations.
To achieve this we first need an initial configuration to evolve. We create a suitable configuration by numerically solving the equations of motion for the hedgehog ansatz, for the value of $m_\pi$ which we are interested in. This gives us a shapefunction $f(r)$ for the single Skyrmion\xspace. We use this with the hedgehog ansatz and the product ansatz,
\begin{equation}
U(t,x,y,z)=U_1(\gamma(x-vt), y,z) U_2(\gamma(x+vt), y,z),
\end{equation}
to give a two-Skyrmion\xspace initial configuration. Here, $U_1$ is the hedgehog solution $U_1=U_{\rm H}(x+\frac{D}{2},y+\frac{b}{2},z)$ and $U_2$ is the hedgehog solution $U_2=\tau_3 U_{\rm H}(x-\frac{D}{2},y-\frac{b}{2},z) \tau_3$, which has been rotated by $\pi$ about the $z$-axis in target space by the $SU(2)$ matrix $\tau_3.$ This isorotation ensures that the Skyrmions\xspace are in the attractive channel. Here, $\gamma =1/\sqrt{1-v^2}$ is the usual Lorentz factor.
Throughout this paper we consistently chose the hedgehog ansatz \eqref{hog} to be orientated such that under $z \mapsto -z$, $\pi_3 \mapsto -\pi_3$.
We then evolved this initial configuration using a finite difference
leap-frog method on a discretised regular lattice. We chose a lattice
spacing of $\delta_x =0.1$ with either $100$ lattice points or $120$ lattice
points for large $b$. Therefore, $x,y$ and $z$ had the ranges $(-5,5)$ or
$(-6,6)$, depending on the number of lattice points. To minimise the effects
of radiation, and to replicate the infinite plane, we damped the boundary of
the box by smoothly introducing an extra ${\dot{U}}$ term in the equations
of motion at the boundary. This term damped the radiation and reduced the
reflection off the boundary. We chose to use leap-frog as it is a symplectic integrator, and we argue that preserving momentum is very important during a scattering process.
\subsection{Numerical Results}
In figures \ref{Fig5} and \ref{Fig6} we display snapshots of the scattering of two $B=1$ Skyrmions. Throughout the text we colour the Skyrmion\xspace baryon-density\xspace level-set plots to show the angle the pion fields have from the $\hat{\pi}_2$-axis on the $\hat{\pi}_1,\hat{\pi}_2$ plane. It is coloured such that when the field lies slightly above the $\hat{\pi}_2$-axis the colour is orange and when it is slightly below the colour is red. There is a detailed discussion of this colouring scheme and its physical interpretation in \cite{Manton:2011mi}.
In figure \ref{Fig5} the top row shows Skyrmion scattering for $m_\pi=0$ and zero impact parameter, $b=0$, with initial speed $v=0.2.$ The initial configuration is on the left. With the colouring scheme it is easy to see that the second Skyrmion is rotated by $\pi$ around the $z$-axis. The Skyrmions keep their orientation even as they merge and form the torus. However, when they reemerge as individual Skyrmions after passing through the torus configuration their orientation has changed. This is a rather intriguing effect of changing orientation without actually rotating. We discuss this phenomenon further in section \ref{preimages}.
Figure \ref{Fig6} shows the same set of snapshots but for $m_\pi=1.$ In the initial configuration the Skyrmions are more spherical, since the interaction force is weaker, leading to less deformation. The torus in the intermediate configuration is more compact with a smaller hole as expected for massive Skyrmions, see \cite{Foster:2013bw} for a detailed discussion.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0-m0-v0pt2-init.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0-m0-v0pt2-half.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0-m0-v0pt2-final.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0pt4-m0-v0pt2-init.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0pt4-m0-v0pt2-half.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0pt4-m0-v0pt2-final.png}
\caption{Skyrmion scattering plots for $m_\pi=0$ and $v=0.2.$ Each row displays the initial, intermediate and final configuration. In the first row the impact parameter is $b=0,$ in the second row $b=0.4.$
\label{Fig5}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0-m1-v0pt2-init.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0-m1-v0pt2-half.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0-m1-v0pt2-final.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0pt4-m1-v0pt2-init.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0pt4-m1-v0pt2-half.png}
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{B1-B-1-gap0pt4-m1-v0pt2-final.png}
\caption{Skyrmion scattering plots for $m_\pi=1$ and $v=0.2.$ Each row displays the initial, intermediate and final configuration. In the first row the impact parameter is $b=0,$ in the second row $b=0.4.$
\label{Fig6}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Throughout the numerical simulation we tracked the Skyrmion\xspace locations and to increase accuracy we
interpolated field values in-between lattice points. This gives the curves
in figures\xspace \ref{m0-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side} and
\ref{m0pt5-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side} which show the trajectories of the
location in the scattering plane.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{m0-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side.pdf}
\caption{$m_\pi=0$}
\label{m0-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{m0pt5-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side.pdf}
\caption{$m_\pi=0.5$}
\label{m0pt5-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side}
\end{subfigure}
~
\caption{Trajectories of the location of a single Skyrmion\xspace throughout a
scattering process.} \label{Trajs}
\end{figure}
These images show how the pion mass, $m_\pi$, affects the scattering process. For example it can be seen that for large separation the Skyrmion\xspace with $m_\pi=0.5$ is deflected less.
\subsection{Dipole approximation}
As discussed earlier, for $m_\pi=0$, the attractive channel has the interaction energy
$$
E_{{\rm int}}^{{\rm att}} = -\frac{4C^2}{3 \pi}
\frac{1}{X^3}.
$$
For simplicity, we firstly describe the non-relativistic dynamics. Two $B=1$ Skyrmions can be approximated as point particles of mass $M \approx 1.232$, which is the rest mass of a single $B=1$ Skyrmion. We can then separate off the centre of mass motion, and the equations of motion can be written in terms of the relative coordinate ${\bf X}$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eom}
\mu {\ddot{\bf X}} = -\nabla E_{{\rm int}}^{{\rm a}},
\end{equation}
where $\mu = M/2$ is the reduced mass. Note that in the attractive channel the force between the Skyrmions is a central force, hence the relative angular momentum
\begin{equation}
\label{lrel}
{\bf l}_{{\rm rel}} = \mu {\bf X} \times {\dot {\bf X}}
\end{equation}
is conserved, and the dynamics takes place in a plane orthogonal to ${\bf n}.$
This two dimensional plane contains the non-trivial dynamics in the attractive channel and is known as the scattering plane. In the following we choose coordinates such that the scattering plane is given by $z=0.$
We can generalise this approach in two ways. Firstly, we can introduce the pion mass $m_\pi \neq 0.$ Then the interaction energy can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{Eintma}
E_{{\rm int,} m_\pi}^{{\rm att}} = -\frac{2C_{m_\pi}^2}{3\pi}\exp(-m_\pi X)
\left(m_\pi^2 X^2+2m_\pi X+2\right)\frac{1}{X^3},
\end{equation}
in the attractive channel, \cite{Feist:2011aa}. Note that $C_{m_\pi}$ is now a function of the pion mass $m_\pi,$ which is plotted in figure \ref{Cm}. This figure agrees with the results in \cite{Feist:2011aa}.
A point worth noting is that we find $C_{m_\pi}=2.16$ for $m_\pi=0$ as in \cite{Manton,Feist:2011aa}. We also calculated $C_{m_\pi} = 1.93$ and $C_{m_\pi} = 1.79$ for $m_\pi=0.5$ and $m_\pi=1,$ respectively. These are the values of $m_\pi$ which will be important later.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{Fig1.png}
\caption{The value of the constant $C_{m_\pi}$ as a function of the pion mass $m_\pi.$ \label{Cm}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As a second generalisation we also include relativistic corrections since we are interested in describing high velocities. The relativistic Lagrangian for point particles interacting via a radial potential $V$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{Lrel}
L_{{\rm point}}= -\sum\limits_{k=1}^{2} M\sqrt{1 - ({\bf v}^{(k)})^2}
- V\left(|{\bf r}^{(1)} -{\bf r}^{(2)}|\right),
\end{equation}
where ${\bf r}^{(k)}$ and ${\bf v}^{(k)} = \frac{d}{dt}{\bf r}^{(k)}$ are position and velocity of the $k$th particle.\footnote{Here we treat the particles relativistically, but we make the approximation that $V$ can be treated as a function of separation only -- ignoring retarded potentials.}
Note that the relativistic momentum is given by
\begin{equation}
{\bf p}^{(k)} = \nabla_{{\bf v}^{(k)}} L_{{\rm point}}
= \frac{M {\bf v}^{(k)}}{\sqrt{1 - ({\bf v}^{(k)})^2} }.
\end{equation}
The Euler-Lagrange equations then result in the usual force law
\begin{equation}
\label{Lag12eq}
\frac{d {\bf p}^{(k)}}{dt} = {\bf F}^{(k)}, \quad {\rm where} \quad
{\bf F}^{(k)} = -\nabla_{{\bf r}^{(k)}} V\left(|{\bf r}^{(1)} -{\bf r}^{(2)}|\right).
\end{equation}
In the following, we work in the center of momentum frame ${\bf p}^{(1)} = - {\bf p}^{(2)},$ and we restrict our consideration to the nontrivial part of the attractive channel, namely, ${\bf r}^{(1)}=-{\bf r}^{(2)},$ with ${\bf r}^{(1)} \cdot {\bf n} =0$ and ${\bf p}^{(1)}\cdot {\bf n} =0.$\footnote{There are different definition of a relativistic center of mass in the literature. Working in the center of momentum frame avoids these difficulties.} Then we can use the identity
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{{\bf r}^{(1)}} V\left(|{\bf r}^{(1)} -{\bf r}^{(2)}|\right)
= -\nabla_{{\bf r}^{(2)}} V\left(|{\bf r}^{(1)} -{\bf r}^{(2)}|\right)
\end{equation}
to show that if (\ref{Lag12eq}) is satisfied for $k=1$ it is also satisfied for $k=2.$ The relativistic particle equations of motion become
\begin{equation}
\label{eomrel}
\frac{d^2{\bf r}}{dt^2} = \frac{1}{M \gamma({\bf v})} \left({\bf F} - \frac{({\bf F}\cdot {\bf v}) {\bf v}}{c^2}\right),
\end{equation}
where, for simplicity, we have suppressed the superscripts and
\begin{equation}
{\bf F} = -\frac{{\bf r}}{|{\bf r}|} \left.
\frac{dV(R)}{d R}\right|_{R=|2{\bf r}|}.
\end{equation}
The relativistic particle equations of motion (\ref{eomrel}) can now be solved for the dipol approximation $V(X)=E_{{\rm int}}^{{\rm att}}(X)$ in (\ref{Eint0a}), or the interaction potential for massive pions $V(X)= E_{{\rm int,} m_\pi}^{{\rm a}}(X)$ in (\ref{Eintma}). Since we are interested in scattering processes our initial conditions are that the Skyrmions are located at $\pm \frac{1}{2}(D,b,0)$ with initial velocities $\mp \frac{1}{2}(v,0,0)^T.$ This gives the initial conditions for ${\bf X}$ as ${\bf X}(0) = (D,b,0)^T,$ and ${\dot {\bf X}} = -(v,0,0)^T.$ Hence the relative angular momentum (\ref{lrel}) is ${\bf l}_{{\rm rel}} = \mu (0,0,bv)^T.$ Scattering is defined in the limit $D \to \infty.$ For finite $D$ not all velocities $v$ correspond to scattering solutions. For example for $m_\pi=0$ in the dipole approximation, starting with $b=0$ and $v=0$ at infinity ($D=\infty$) gives rise to $v=0.08$ at $D=10$ by energy conservation. If $v$ is chosen lower than $0.08$ at $D=10$ then the trajectories cannot escape to infinity.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.1cm]{Fig2a.png}
\includegraphics[width=7.1cm]{Fig2b.png}
\caption{Scattering trajectories of two Skyrmions in the dipol approximation with zero pion mass $m_\pi=0.$ The solid blue lines are the position of one Skyrmion for impact parameters $b=0,0.5,\dots,8.$ The dashed red line is the trajectory for the critical value of the impact parameter $b.$ The dashed-dotted green lines are the non-relativistic approximation. In the left figure the initial speed $v$ of one Skyrmion is $v=0.2$ with $b_{{\rm crit}}/2 = 2.35,$ while in the right figure $v=0.4$ and $b_{{\rm crit}}/2 = 1.47.$
\label{Fig2}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In figures \ref{Fig2} we show the trajectories in the dipol approximation $(m_\pi=0)$ with $v = 0.2$ and $v=0.4$ for various $b.$ Here $D$ is chosen sufficiently large. As can be seen from figure \ref{Fig2}, the Skyrmions attract each other for small impact parameter $b$ and collide at the origin when the particle equation of motion is no longer well defined. Once the impact parameter $b$ is larger than a critical value $b_{{\rm crit}}$ we observe scattering behaviour. The collision at the origin is an artefact of our approximation which does not include any short range repulsive force. Therefore the trajectories are only physical for $b > b_{{\rm crit}}.$ We plot both relativisitic and non-relativistic dynamics and can see that there is reasonable agreement for most trajectories. The error becomes particularly noticable for trajectories close to the critical impact parameter $b_{{\rm crit}}.$
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{Fig3.png}
\caption{The critical impact parameter $b_{{\rm crit}}$ as a function of the initial velocity $v.$ The solid red line corresponds to $m_\pi=0,$ the dashed blue line to $m_\pi = 0.5$ and the dashed-dotted green line to $m_\pi=1.$\label{Fig3}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{Fig3} shows the critical impact parameter $b_{{\rm crit}}$ as a function of $v$ for $m_\pi= 0.$ As can be expected $b_{{\rm crit}}$ decreases as $v$ increases, and $b_{{\rm crit}}$ tends to zero in the limit $v \to 1.$ In figure \ref{Fig4} we show how the scattering changes when the pion mass is increased to $m_\pi = 0.5.$ The scattering becomes less pronounced and $b_{{\rm crit}}$ is smaller than in the massless case. Figure \ref{Fig3} also shows the critical impact parameter $b_{{\rm crit}}$ as a function of $v$ for $m_\pi=0.5$ and $m_\pi = 1.$
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.1cm]{Fig4a.png}
\includegraphics[width=7.1cm]{Fig4b.png}
\caption{Scattering trajectories of two Skyrmions in the dipol approximation with pion mass $m_\pi=0.5$ The solid blue lines are the position of one Skyrmion for impact parameters $b=0,0.5,\dots,8.$ The dashed red line is the trajectory for the critical value of the impact parameter $b.$ The dashed-dotted green lines are the non-relativistic approximation. In the left figure the initial speed $v$ of one Skyrmion is $v=0.2$ with $b_{{\rm crit}}/2 = 1.99,$ while in the right figure $v=0.4$ and $b_{{\rm crit}}/2 = 1.28.$
\label{Fig4}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Tracking the Skyrmions\xspace location show how the pion mass, $m_\pi$, affects the scattering process. For example in figure \ref{Trajs}, it can be seen that, for large separation, the Skyrmion\xspace with $m_\pi=0.5$ is deflected less. Figure\xspace \ref{m0pt5-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side} also shows the two distinct scattering processes. One scattering process is for small $b$ where the Skyrmions\xspace combine and then repel. This repulsion is a consequence of the geometry of the Skyrmion\xspace moduli space and is analogous to monopole scattering. Only the scattering regime for large $b$ where the Skyrmions\xspace are deflected towards each other can be approximated by dipole scattering. In fact, for $m_\pi=0$ in figure \ref{m0-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side} all scattering trajectories have $b<b_{\rm{crit}}$ and, therefore, cannot be described by the dipole approximation. For $m_\pi=0.5,$ the critical impact parameter is $b_{{\rm crit}}/2 = 1.47.$ Therefore, the outer three trajectories satisfy $b > b_{{\rm crit}}.$ The outer two show a qualitatively similar behaviour to the trajectories in figure \ref{Fig2}b while the third trajectories clearly experiences an additional repulsive force.
For intermediate impact parameters, $b\sim 0.6,$ the geometric effect and the dipole attraction compete. A point worth noting is that this competitive effect might effectively cancel for a scattering with impact parameter between $0.6$ and $0.8$, for both $m_\pi=0$ and $m_\pi=0.5$. This is the range of trajectories for which the $y$ value at $x=1.5$ swaps from being below the corresponding impact parameter to above it. This cancelation would not give a flat trajectory, but it would have the same $x$ values at $y=1.5$ as at $y=-1.5$. Figure\xspace \ref{m0-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side} shows that the trajectories for $b=1.8$ and $b=2$ crossover for $m_\pi=0$. It can be seen from figure\xspace\ref{m0pt5-v0pt2-trajectories-one-side} that does not happen for the same trajectories when $m_\pi=0.5$. This is can be understood because both the geometric repulsive and dipole attraction effects are less for the increasingly localised $m_\pi=0.5$ Skyrmion\xspace.
\section{Skyrmions visualisation}
\label{Visualisation}
For a long time Skyrmions have been visualised as level sets of baryon density, and recently it has become standard practice to colour the level sets in order to show the value of the pion fields. This is a good method to visualise Skyrmions\xspace, especially as it uses an invariant of the model. It clearly displays the symmetry of Skyrmions\xspace and shows how the Skyrmions\xspace can potentially be combined to make larger Skyrmions\xspace. It is also a good method to visualise Skyrmion\xspace scattering as shown in the previous images. But level sets of baryon density do not show how the Skyrmions\xspace recombine during a scattering process. For example, as previously shown, when two Skyrmions\xspace are in the attractive channel and collide head-on then they scatter perpendicularly. From the simulations it seems as though half of each Skyrmion\xspace is exchanged, and the corresponding two halves recombine to make two new Skyrmions\xspace travelling perpendicularly to the original velocities. Our aim is to quantify this exchange and to visualise it in a new way which could shine light onto Skyrmion\xspace dynamics.
Our construction is to track the preimages, $U(p_i)^{-1}$, of a range of points $p_i \in SU(2)$ throughout a collision.
\subsection{Preimages} \label{preimages}
So far we have defined the location of Skyrmions\xspace as the points $U(-1_2)^{-1}$ in $\mathbb{R}^3$. We shall now describe how we chose the preimages to track.
Our aim is to visualise a Skyrmion\xspace scattering using preimages. Our initial configuration and initial velocities are symmetric under the combined reflections
\begin{equation}
\left(
\begin{array}{r}
x\\ y\\ z
\end{array} \right)
\mapsto
\left(
\begin{array}{r}
x\\ y\\ -z
\end{array} \right)
\quad {\rm and} \quad
\left(
\begin{array}{r}
\pi_1\\ \pi_2\\ \pi_3
\end{array} \right)
\mapsto
\left(
\begin{array}{r}
\pi_1\\ \pi_2\\ -\pi_3
\end{array} \right),
\end{equation}
where $z=0$ corresponds to the scattering plane. The reflection symmetry implies that $\pi_3=0$ in the scattering plane, namely $\pi_3(x,y,0)=0.$ Hence we can define the equatorial two-sphere as $S^2_{{\rm eq}} =\{(\sigma, \pi_i)|\sigma^2+\pi_1^2+\pi_2^2 = 1, \pi_3=0\} \subset S^3 \cong SU(2)$. Then, for a single $B=1$ hedgehog \eqref{hog} all of the points $U(p_i)^{-1}$ in $\mathbb{R}^3$ for $p_i\in S^2_{{\rm eq}}$ will lie on the scattering plane. This gives a two-dimensional way to visualise the three-dimensional Skyrmion\xspace using preimages which lie in the scattering plane, namely, we track the preimages of points in $S^2_{{\rm eq}}$ to visualise a scattering process.
As much as we would like to, numerically we cannot track all of the preimages of $S^2_{{\rm eq}}$. As we know, Skyrmions\xspace in this model are not discrete objects, but they are actually extended objects. When visualising a two-Skyrmion\xspace solution, with large separation, as a level set of baryon density\xspace we have to arbitrarily choose a value of baryon density\xspace which shows two distinct Skyrmions\xspace. As our aim is to use preimages to represent a two-Skyrmion\xspace system, where we can identify single Skyrmions\xspace, we choose a cut-off and do not sample points on $S^2_{{\rm eq}}$ where $\sigma >0.5.$ This is an arbitrary aesthetic choice. A cut-off is needed, so that we do not track points too near to the vacuum, $\sigma =1$. These points can move very rapidly due to radiation propagating around the system since perturbations about the vacuum have very little mass. Therefore, tracking points near the vacuum would give an unrealistic representation of the collision.
We chose to track the points,
\begin{align}\label{points}
\sigma_k &=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{3k}{2 k_{\max}}, \\ \nonumber
\pi_{1,n}&=\sqrt{1-\sigma_k^2} \cos\left(\frac{2\pi n}{n_{\max}-1}\right), \\ \nonumber
\pi_{2,n}&=\sqrt{1-\sigma_k^2} \sin\left(\frac{2\pi n}{n_{\max}-1}\right), \nonumber
\end{align}
where $k$ and $n$ are integers, $1\leq k<k_{\max}$ and $1\leq n<n_{\max}$. This range is appropriate because if $k=k_{\max}$ then there would be $n_{\max}$ points where $\sigma=-1, \pi_1=\pi_2=0.$ Hence this value of $k$ is excluded. The preimage of $\sigma = -1$ is also the location which we have already tracked. This defines $(n_{\max}-1)(k_{\max}-1)$ points on $S^2_{{\rm eq}}$. Figure\xspace \ref{single-palm} shows, for a single $B=1$ Skyrmion\xspace, the preimages of $n_{\max}=k_{\max}=11$ points given by \eqref{points}, and compares it with the standard baryon-density\xspace level-set image in figure\xspace \ref{Single-skyrmion-colored}. Note that for a two-Skyrmion\xspace configuration there are $2(n_{\max}-1)(k_{\max}-1)$ points.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.4\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Single-skyrmion-colored.png}
\caption{~}
\label{Single-skyrmion-colored}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.4\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{single-palm.pdf}
\caption{~}
\label{single-palm}
\end{subfigure}
~
\caption{Comparison of the baryon-density\xspace plot, \ref{Single-skyrmion-colored}, and the preimage plot, \ref{single-palm}, of a sinlge Skyrmion\xspace.}
\end{figure}
For each time slice we tracked the movement of each preimage using a search algorithm to find the point in $\mathbb{R}^3$ which has the required field value and is the closest to the same point of the previous time step. We are only interested in tracking how the preimages in the initial configuration move. It should be noted that the algorithm interpolated the field values in between the lattice sites to increase accuracy. This gives us a new insight into scattering. We can now see how the preimages move during a scattering process. For example, for $b=0$ the preimages scatter perpendicularly giving figure\xspace \ref{gap-0-palm}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gap-0-palm-scattering0.pdf}
\caption{Before collision.}
\label{t0perp}
\end{subfigure}%
\!
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gap-0-palm-scattering1.pdf}
\caption{$B=2$ toroidal Skyrmion\xspace.}
\label{t1perp}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[!htb]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gap-0-palm-scattering2.pdf}
\caption{After collision.}
\label{t2perp}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Preimages of perpendicularly scattering Skyrmions\xspace}
\label{gap-0-palm}
\end{figure}
This new way of visualising Skyrmions\xspace immediately shows that half of each Skyrmion\xspace is used to form two new Skyrmions\xspace, and the new recombined Skyrmions\xspace are now rotated. This is the cause of the rotationless rotation observed previously. This is implied by the baryon-density\xspace plots, and it clearly shown in the preimage plots. What is not obvious from the baryon-density\xspace plots is that this preimage exchange also occurs for large impact parameters. An example of two Skyrmions\xspace scattering with impact parameter $b=2$ is displayed in figure\xspace \ref{gap-2-palm}. Figure\xspace \ref{gap-2-palm-scattering0} shows the preimages of two Skyrmions\xspace. In figure\xspace \ref{gap-2-palm-scattering1} the two Skyrmions\xspace exchange four preimages as they pass each other. Figure\xspace \ref{gap-2-palm-scattering2} shows the preimages of the final scattered Skyrmions\xspace. Hence, Skyrmions\xspace do exchange preimages. Also, figure\xspace \ref{gap-2-palm-scattering3} shows the initial preimages (red circles) and the final preimages (green crosses) of a single Skyrmion\xspace. In figure\xspace \ref{gap-2-palm-scattering3} we have also included the trajectory of a preimage. This shows that the Skyrmion\xspace has rotated even for a large impact parameter.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gap-2-palm-scattering0.pdf}
\caption{Before collision.}
\label{gap-2-palm-scattering0}
\end{subfigure}%
\!
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gap-2-palm-scattering1.pdf}
\caption{Preimage exchange}
\label{gap-2-palm-scattering1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[!htb]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gap-2-palm-scattering2.pdf}
\caption{After collision.}
\label{gap-2-palm-scattering2}
\end{subfigure}
\!
\begin{subfigure}[!htb]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gap-2-palm-scattering3.pdf}
\caption{Initial and final preimages of the scattered Skyrmion\xspace. Also shows the trajectory of one preimage explicitly showing the rotation.}
\label{gap-2-palm-scattering3}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Trajectories of the location of a single Skyrmion\xspace throughout a scattering process ($k_{\max} =11, n_{\max}=11,m_\pi=0$).}\label{gap-2-palm}
\end{figure}
In our algorithm we were also able to track preimages for different scattering processes in order to quantify how many preimages are exchanged as a function of the impact parameter $b$. This is shown in figure\xspace \ref{points_ex}. As the Skyrmions\xspace pass each other they exchange preimages, and the number of exchanged preimages reduces with separation. This reduction in exchange is intuitive because Skyrmions\xspace are localized objects.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{points-exchanged.pdf}
\caption{Fraction of points exchanged for $m_\pi=0$ (solid line) and $m_\pi=1$ (dashed line).}
\label{points_ex}
\end{figure}
By carefully tracking these preimages we can measure the rotation angle of one Skyrmion\xspace during a scattering process. We achieved this by tracking the relative orientation between the location point and the set of preimages which are constant $\pi_1,\pi_2$~-- this is one `arm' of the preimage plot in figure\xspace \ref{single-palm}. Care must be taken not to choose points which are exchanged. By tracking the relative average orientation between the location and the set of points of constant $\pi_1,\pi_2,$ and not just one point, reduces the effect of radiation. The rotation angle is shown as a function of time in figure\xspace \ref{m0-rot}. The oscillations in the rotation angle at large times are due to radiation propagating around the numerical lattice. Figure\xspace \ref{m0-rot} shows that the Skyrmions\xspace maximally rotate for $b=0$ when the rotation angle is approximately $\frac{\pi}{2}.$ The rotation angle decreases as $b$ increases. This is can be understood because Skyrmions\xspace are localized objects. Hence as $b$ increases they exchange less preimages as they overlap less, and therefore the Skyrmions\xspace experience less rotation.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{m0-Rotation.pdf}
\caption{Rotation of a single Skyrmion\xspace throughout a scattering, $m_\pi=0$.}
\label{m0-rot}
\end{figure}
Another way of gaining an understanding of this phenomenon is to consider the attractive channel approximation in \cite{Schroers:1993yk}. Since the initial configurations are not spinning or isospinning, the total isospin ($M_2$ in \cite{Schroers:1993yk}) is zero. Since the total isospin is conserved, this sets the rotation angular frequency $\omega_2$ equal to the isorotation angular frequency $\Omega_2$ using the attractive Lagrangian in \cite{Schroers:1993yk}. Since both rotation and isorotation angles are zero, initially, they remain equal during the scattering process. If there was right-angle scattering, then the position of one Skyrmion would be rotated by $\frac{\pi}{2}$ and the phase would also be rotated by $\frac{\pi}{2},$ as observed in figure\xspace \ref{m0-rot}. However, in this approximation, head-on collision does not lead to right angle scattering as the approximation breaks down for small separation.
\subsection{Spinning Skyrmions\xspace}
Instead of simply colliding Skyrmions\xspace, we also investigated colliding spinning Skyrmions\xspace. We achieved this by numerically evolving an initial condition of two rotating hedgehog Skyrmions\xspace boosted towards each other. We chose the Skyrmions\xspace to be orientated in the attractive channel, and rotate in the same direction and angular frequency. This is similar to a constant global isorotation, and the Skyrmions remain in the attractive channel. This is similar to a constant global isorotation. It is known that for $m_\pi=0$ spinning Skyrmions\xspace are not stable as they radiate pions \cite{Schroers:1993yk, Battye:2005nx}. This is not a problem when we considered $m_\pi=0$ as the scattering takes place well before the Skyrmions\xspace stop spinning.
There has been some recent interest in spinning Skyrmions\xspace, namely \cite{Hata:2010zy} and \cite{Hata:2011zz}, which investigate an extension of the collective coordinate quantisation procedure. The related question of isospin was examined in \cite{Battye:2014qva} where the authors considered the deformation introduced by isospinning Skyrmions\xspace.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images1-s.png}
\caption{Before collision.}
\label{palm-spinning1-s}
\end{subfigure}%
\!
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images24-s.png}
\caption{Preimage exchange}
\label{palm-spinning2-s}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images59-s.png}
\caption{After collision.}
\label{palm-spinning3-s}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Preimage plots of two scattering Skyrmions\xspace initially spinning at $0.05$ radians per unit time.}
\label{palm-spinning-s}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images1-m.png}
\caption{Before collision.}
\label{palm-spinning1-m}
\end{subfigure}%
\!
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images34-m.png}
\caption{Preimage exchange}
\label{palm-spinning2-m}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images59-m.png}
\caption{After collision.}
\label{palm-spinning3-m}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Preimage plots of two scattering Skyrmions\xspace initially spinning at $0.5$ radians per unit time. }
\label{palm-spinning-m}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images1-f.png}
\caption{Before collision.}
\label{palm-spinning1-f}
\end{subfigure}%
\!
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images34-f.png}
\caption{Preimage exchange}
\label{palm-spinning2-f}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Pre-images59-f.png}
\caption{After collision.}
\label{palm-spinning3-f}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Preimage plots of two scattering Skyrmions\xspace initially spinning at $1$ radians per unit time. }
\label{palm-spinning-f}
\end{figure}
Figures\xspace \ref{palm-spinning-s}, \ref{palm-spinning-m} and \ref{palm-spinning-f} show the strange effect that the spinning Skyrmions\xspace exchange preimages in a spiral pattern. Also, the Skyrmions\xspace no longer scatter perpendicularly. This is obvious by the trajectories of the location, shown in figure\xspace \ref{trajectories-spinning}. As the Skyrmions\xspace spin faster they deflect more. These spinning scattering results could help gain a better understanding of the spin-orbit coupling
of nuclei \cite{Kaelbermann:1995ed, Riska:1988zm,Otofuji:1992fw}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{m0-v0pt2-spinning-trajectories-one-side.pdf}
\caption{Trajectories for spinning scattering Skyrmions\xspace of different initial rotational speeds}
\label{trajectories-spinning}
\end{figure}
\section{Comparison to monopole scattering}
\label{Monopoles}
In the following, we compare Skyrmion scattering in the attractive channel with monopole scattering. Two-monopole scattering for low velocities can be calculated from geodesic motion in the Atiyah-Hitchin manifold $M_2^0$ \cite{Atiyah}. This four dimensional manifold can be parametrized by a radial coordinate $\rho \in [\pi,\infty),$ and three angular coordinates $\theta,$ $\phi,$ and $\psi.$ The radial coordinate is basically the separation of the two monopoles, and $\rho=\pi$ corresponds to the torus configuration. The angles $\theta$ and $\phi$ parametrize how the monopoles are positioned in ${\mathbb R}^3$ whereas the angle $\psi$ gives the orientation of the monopoles along the axis of separation. The moduli space of monopoles has two important geodesic submanifolds, namely the ``trumpet'' which describes head on collision of monopoles with time-dependent $\psi$, and the ``cone'' which describes monopole scattering in the plane (with $\psi$ constant). We are interested whether there is an analogy of ``rotation without rotating'' in the monopole picture. Skyrmion scattering without rotation in the plane corresponds to monopole scattering along the cone. As we have seen in section \ref{preimages} the effect of ``rotation without rotating'' is related to how much the two Skyrmions overlap. On the monopole moduli space there is a quantity which measures this overlap: the Sen-form \cite{Sen:1994yi} which is exponentially localised at the centre of the monopole moduli space, known as the bolt.
The hyperk\"ahler $SO(3)$ invariant metric on $M_2^0$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = f^2 d\rho^2 +a^2 {\sigma_1}^2 + b^2 {\sigma_2}^2+c^2 {\sigma_3}^2,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_k$ are left-invariant one-forms and the coefficient functions satisfy the following differential equations
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{2bc}{f}\frac{da}{d\rho} &=& (b-c)^2-a^2,\\
\frac{2ca}{f}\frac{db}{d\rho} &=& (c-a)^2-b^2,\\
\frac{2ab}{f}\frac{dc}{d\rho} &=& (a-b)^2-c^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $a(\frac{\pi}{2}) = 0,$ $b(\frac{\pi}{2})=\frac{\pi}{2},$ and
$c(\frac{\pi}{2})=-\frac{\pi}{2}.$ Here, we follow the conventions in \cite{Gibbons:1986df} and set $f = - b/\rho.$ Then, the Sen form
is the unique normalisable anti-self dual harmonic two-form given by
\begin{equation}
\omega = F(\rho) \left(d\sigma_1 - \frac{fa}{bc} d\rho \wedge \sigma_1 \right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
F(\rho) = F_0 \exp\left(-\int\limits_{\pi}^\rho \frac{fa}{bc} d\rho^\prime\right).
\end{equation}
The Sen form is exact as we can write $\omega = dA$ where $A = F(\rho) \sigma_1.$ Note that $F(\pi) = F_0$ at the bolt. Now, consider a geodesic $\gamma$ in the moduli space $M_2^0.$ Then the path integral
$
\int_\gamma A
$
is equivalent to the loop integral
$
\oint_\gamma A,
$
where we closed the loop via a circle segment at infinity. This does not contribute to the integral due to the asymptotics of $F(\rho),$ namely, $F(\rho)$ is exponentially localised. Using Stokes theorem,
$$
\oint_\gamma A = \int_D \omega,
$$
where $D$ is the surface bounded by $\gamma.$ This can be interpreted as a holonomy on $M_2^0$ with respect to the Sen form. This holonomy is conjectured to show a very similar behaviour to the ``rotation without rotating'' angle.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper we discuss Skyrmion-Skyrmion scattering for non-zero impact parameter. Here we focus on the attractive channel where the two Skyrmions are orientated in such a way that the attraction between them is maximal.
For large separation, the scattering can be described in the dipol approximation which ignores the short-range repulsive interaction. We also discussed the necessary modifications needed to include non-zero pion mass and relativistic corrections. This approximation clearly breaks down at the critical value $b_{{\rm crit}}$ when the two dipoles no longer escape to infinity but collide with each other. For small velocities, Skyrmion scattering in the attractive channel is similar to monopole scattering which in turn can be described as geodesic motion on the Atiyah-Hitchin manifold. We have calculated Skyrmion trajectories numerically for different velocities and impact parameters, and find good qualitative agreement with the dipol approximation for large impact parameters.
When two non-rotating Skyrmions scatter head on, namely with zero impact parameter, in the attractive channel then they scatter by 90 degrees. Using our colouring scheme we observed the following. Initially, the Skyrmions have a relative phase of $\pi.$ During scattering, the Skyrmions move towards each other but do not rotate. Then they form a torus and emerge again from the torus but in a different orientation. While both Skrymions still have a relative phase of $\pi$ there overall phase has changed by $\frac{\pi}{2}.$ What seemed to have happened is that half of the left Skyrmion has gone up and half of the left Skyrmion has gone down, and similar for the Skyrmion coming from the right. Hence the Skyrmions have rearranged each other, and this leads to a ``rotation without rotating.'' This effect can be explored further by looking at preimages. In a Skyrmion configurations of degree $B=2$ each point in target space generically has at least two preimages. When there are more than two preimages there has to be negative baryon density, see \cite{Foster:2013bw} for further details. In our simulations, we did not find significants amounts of negative baryon density.
Since for large separations, two Skyrmions are well approximated as hedgehog, we choose the position of the Skyrmions to be $U=-1_2.$ During the scattering process we can generically track the preimages of any point on the sphere and calculate to which final state it belongs. This gives a way of quantifying rotation without rotating, also for non-zero impact parameter. By plotting preimages rather than baryon density we have created a novel way of visualizing Skyrmions.
We also briefly discussed the scattering of spinning Skyrmions. Spinning Skyrmion solutions are not stable for massless pions due to pion radiation. However, we observed pion radiation before the Skyrmions stopped spinning. Spinning Skyrmions no longer scatter at right angles during head-on collision. The configuration of closest approach is also no longer the torus but a configuration which is similar to the stationary solution of isorotation $B=2$ Skyrmions found in \cite{Battye:2014qva}. It would be interesting to compare the dynamics of spinning Skyrmions with the attractive channel approximation in \cite{Schroers:1993yk}.
There are still many open problems in classical Skyrmion-Skyrmion scattering. For example, how do Skyrmions behave for more general initial conditions?
To what extend can the attractive channel be used to approximate more general scattering events? Scattering for higher charges is also an interesting topic. Our preimage technique could provide novel insights into what happens to an individual Skyrmion during scattering.
While we are currently studying classical scattering, our long-term goal is to understand scattering of nucleons or even the scattering of nuclei. Braaten has outlined how to calculate scattering cross sections in the Skyrme model \cite{Braaten:1987hk}. We intend to combine this approach with our scattering results to model experimental results.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors are grateful for fruitful discussions with Nick Manton at various stages of the project. We would also like to thank Mareike Haberichter for useful discussions. This work was financially supported by the U.K. Engineering and Physical Science Research Council (Grant No. EP/I034491/1).
\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1}
\begin{small}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Supervised learning methods come in a variety of ways. They are typically based on local averaging methods, such as $k$-nearest neighbors, decision trees, or random forests, or on optimization of the empirical risk over a certain function class, such as least-squares regression, logistic regression or support vector machine, with positive definite kernels, with model selection, structured sparsity-inducing regularization, or boosting~\citep[see, e.g.,][and references therein]{gyorfi2002distribution,hastie2009,shaibook}.
Most methods assume either explicitly or implicitly a certain class of models to learn from. In the non-parametric setting, the learning algorithms may adapt the complexity of the models as the number of observations increases: the sample complexity (i.e., the number of observations) to adapt to any particular problem is typically large. For example, when learning Lipschitz-continuous functions in $\mathbb{R}^d$, at least $n = \Omega(\varepsilon^{-\max\{d,2\}})$ samples are needed to learn a function with excess risk~$\varepsilon$~\citep{luxburg2004distance}. The exponential dependence on the dimension $d$ is often referred to as the \emph{curse of dimensionality}: without any restrictions, exponentially many observations are needed to obtain optimal generalization performances.
At the other end of the spectrum, parametric methods such as linear supervised learning make strong assumptions regarding the problem. The generalization performance will only be optimal if these are met, and the sample complexity to attain an excess risk of $\varepsilon$ grows as $n = \Omega( d/\varepsilon^2)$, for linear functions in $d$ dimensions and Lipschitz-continuous loss functions. While the sample complexity is much lower, when the assumptions are not met, the methods underfit and more complex models would provide better generalization performances.
Between these two extremes, there are a variety of models with structural assumptions that are often used in practice. For input data in $x \in \mathbb{R}^d$, prediction functions $f: \mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ may for example be parameterized as:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] \emph{Affine functions}: $f(x) = w^\top x +b $, leading to potential severe underfitting, but easy optimization and good (i.e., non exponential) sample complexity.
\item[(b)] \emph{Generalized additive models}: $f(x) = \sum_{j=1}^d f_j(x_j)$, which are generalizations of the above by summing functions $f_j: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ which may not be affine~\citep{hastie_GAM,spam,grouplasso}. This leads to less strong underfitting but cannot model interactions between variables, while the estimation may be done with similar tools than for affine functions (e.g., convex optimization for convex losses).
\item[(c)] \emph{Nonparametric ANOVA models}: $f(x) = \sum_{A \in \mathcal{A} } f_A(x_A)$ for a set $\mathcal{A}$ of subsets of $\{1,\dots,d\}$, and non-linear functions $f_A:\mathbb{R}^A \to \mathbb{R}$. The set $\mathcal{A}$ may be either given~\citep{gu2013smoothing} or learned from data~\citep{cosso,hkl}. Multi-way interactions are explicitly included but a key algorithmic problem is to explore the $2^d-1$ non-trivial potential subsets.
\item[(d)] \emph{Single hidden-layer neural networks}: $f(x) = \sum_{j=1}^k \sigma(w_j^\top x + b_j)$, where $k$ is the number of units in the hidden layer~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{rumelhart1986learning,haykin1994neural}. The activation function $\sigma$ is here assumed to be fixed. While the learning problem may be cast as a (sub)differentiable optimization problem, techniques based on gradient descent may not find the global optimum. If the number of hidden units is fixed, this is a parametric problem.
\item[(e)] \emph{Projection pursuit}~\citep{friedman1981projection}: $f(x) = \sum_{j=1}^k f_j(w_j^\top x )$ where $k$ is the number of projections. This model combines both (b) and (d); the only difference with neural networks is that the non-linear functions $f_j:\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ are learned from data. The optimization is often done sequentially and is harder than for neural networks.
\item[(e)] \emph{Dependence on a unknown $k$-dimensional subspace}: $f(x) = g(W^\top x )$ with $W \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times k}$, where $g$ is a non-linear function. A variety of algorithms exist for this problem \citep{li1991sliced,fukumizu2004dimensionality,DalalyanJS08}. Note that when the columns of $W$ are assumed to be composed of a single non-zero element, this corresponds to \emph{variable selection} (with at most $k$ selected variables).
\end{itemize}
In this paper, our main aim is to answer the following question: \textbf{Is there a \emph{single} learning method that can deal \emph{efficiently} with all situations above with \emph{provable adaptivity}?} We consider single-hidden-layer neural networks, with non-decreasing homogeneous activation functions such as
$$\sigma(u) = \max\{u,0\}^\alpha = (u)_+^\alpha,$$
for $\alpha \in \{0,1,\dots\}$, with a particular focus on $\alpha = 0$, that is $\sigma(u) = 1_{u >0} $ (a threshold at zero), and $\alpha=1$, that is, $\sigma(u) = \max\{u,0\} = (u)_+$, the so-called \emph{rectified linear unit}~\citep{nair2010rectified,krizhevsky2012imagenet}. We follow the convexification approach of~\citet{bengio2006convex,rosset2007L1}, who consider potentially infinitely many units and let a sparsity-inducing norm choose the number of units automatically.
We make the following contributions:
\vspace*{-.125cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] We provide in \mysec{general} a review of functional analysis tools used for learning from continuously infinitely many basis functions, by studying carefully the similarities and differences between $L_1$- and $L_2$-penalties on the output weights.
\item[--] We provide a detailed theoretical analysis of the generalization performance of (single hidden layer) convex neural networks with monotonic homogeneous activation functions, with study of both the approximation and the estimation errors, with explicit bounds on the various needed weights. We relate these new results to the extensive literature on approximation properties of neural networks~\citep[see, e.g.,][and references therein]{pinkus1999approximation} in \mysec{related}.
\item[--] In \mysec{adaptivity}, we show that these convex neural networks are adaptive to all situations mentioned earlier.
When using an $\ell_1$-norm on the input weights, we show in \mysec{highdim} that high-dimensional non-linear variable selection may be achieved, without any strong assumption regarding the data (note that we do not present a polynomial-time algorithm to achieve this).
\item[--] In Sections~\ref{sec:FW1}, \ref{sec:FW2} and \ref{sec:FW3}, we provide simple geometric interpretations to the non-convex problems of additions of new units, which constitute the core potentially hard computational tasks in our framework of learning from continuously many basis functions.
\item[--] We provide in \mysec{sufficient} simple conditions for convex relaxations to achieve the same generalization error bounds, even when constant-factor approximation cannot be found (e.g., because it is NP-hard such as for the zero-homogeneous activation function). We were not able to find strong enough convex relaxations and leave open the existence or non-existence of polynomial-time algorithms.
\end{itemize}
\section{Learning from continuously infinitely many basis functions}
\label{sec:general}
In this section we present the functional analysis framework underpinning the methods presented in this paper. While the formulation from Sections~\ref{sec:variation} and~\ref{sec:rep} originates from the early work on the approximation properties of neural networks~\citep{barron1993universal,kurkova}, the algorithmic parts that we present in \mysec{conditional} have been studied in a variety of contexts, such as ``convex neural networks''~\citep{bengio2006convex}, or $\ell_1$-norm with infinite dimensional feature spaces~\citep{rosset2007L1}, with links with conditional gradient algorithms~\citep{dunn1978conditional,jaggi} and boosting~\citep{rosset2004boosting}.
In the following sections, note that there will be two orthogonal notions of \emph{infinity}: infinitely many inputs $x$ and infinitely many basis functions $x \mapsto \varphi_v(x)$. Moreover, two orthogonal notions of \emph{Lipschitz-continuity} will be tackled in this paper: the one of the prediction functions $f$, and the one of the loss $\ell$ used to measure the fit of these prediction functions.
\subsection{Variation norm}
\label{sec:variation}
We consider an arbitrary measurable input space $\mathcal{X}$ (this will be $\mathbb{R}^d$ from \mysec{neural}), with a set of \emph{basis functions} (a.k.a.~\emph{neurons} or \emph{units}) $\varphi_v : \mathcal{X} \to \mathbb{R}$, which are parameterized by $v \in \mathcal{V}$, where $ \mathcal{V}$ is a compact topological space (typically a sphere for a certain norm on $\mathbb{R}^d$ starting from \mysec{neural}). We assume that for any given $x \in \mathcal{X}$, the functions $v \mapsto \varphi_v(x)$ are continuous.
In order to define our space of functions from $\mathcal{X} \to \mathbb{R}$, we need real-valued Radon measures, which are continuous linear forms on the space of continuous functions from $\mathcal{V}$ to $\mathbb{R}$, equipped with the uniform norm~\citep{rudin1987real,evans1991measure}. For a continuous function $g: \mathcal{V} \to \mathbb{R}$ and a Radon measure $\mu$, we will use the standard notation
$\int_{ \mathcal{V}} g(v) d \mu(v)$ to denote the action of the measure $\mu$ on the continuous function $g$. The norm of $\mu$ is usually referred to as its \emph{total variation}, and we denote it as $|\mu|( \mathcal{V})$, and is equal to the supremum of $\int_{ \mathcal{V}} g(v) d \mu(v)$ over all continuous functions with values in $[-1,1]$.
As seen below, when $\mu$ has a density with respect to a probability measure, this is the $L_1$-norm of the density.
We consider the space $ \mathcal{F}_1$ of functions $ f $ that can be written as
$$
f(x) = \int_{ \mathcal{V}} \varphi_v(x) d \mu(v),
$$
where $\mu$ is a signed Radon measure on $ \mathcal{V}$ with finite total variation $|\mu|( \mathcal{V})$. When $ \mathcal{V}$ is finite, this corresponds to
$$f(x) = \sum_{v \in \mathcal{V} } \mu_v \varphi_{v}(x),$$
with total variation $\sum_{v \in \mathcal{V}} |\mu_v|$, where the proper formalization for infinite sets $ \mathcal{V}$ is done through measure theory.
The infimum of $|\mu|( \mathcal{V})$ over all decompositions of $f$ as $f = \int_{ \mathcal{V}} \varphi_v d \mu(v)$, turns out to be a norm $\gamma_1$ on~$ \mathcal{F}_1$, often called the \emph{variation} norm of $f$ with respect to the set of basis functions \citep[see, e.g.,][]{kurkova}.
Given our assumptions regarding the compactness of $ \mathcal{V}$, for any $f \in \mathcal{F}_1$, the infimum defining $\gamma_1(f)$ is in fact attained by a signed measure $\mu$, as a consequence of the compactness of measures for the weak topology~\citep[see][Section 1.9]{evans1991measure}.
In the definition above, if we assume that the signed measure $\mu$ has a density with respect to a fixed \emph{probability} measure $\tau$ with full support on $\mathcal{V}$, that is, $d \mu(v) = {p}(v) d \tau (v)$, then, the total mass
$|\mu|( \mathcal{V})$ is equal to the infimal value of
$$|\mu|( \mathcal{V}) = \int_ \mathcal{V} |{p}(v)| d \tau(v),$$
for decompositions $f(x) = \int_ \mathcal{V} {p}(v) \varphi_v(x) d \tau(v)$. Note however that not all measures have densities but that the two infimums are the same as all Radon measures are limits of measures with densities. This implies that the infimum in the definition above is not attained in general; however, it often provides a more intuitive definition of the variation norm.
\paragraph{Finite number of neurons.} If $f: \mathcal{X} \to \mathbb{R}$ is decomposable into $k$ basis functions, that is,
$f(x) = \sum_{j=1}^k \eta_j \varphi_{v_j}(x)$, then this corresponds to $\mu = \sum_{j=1}^k \eta_j \delta(v=v_j)$, and the total variation of $\mu$ is equal to $\| \eta \|_1$. Thus the function $f$ has variation norm less than $\| \eta\|_1$. This is to be contrasted with the number of basis functions, which is the $\ell_0$-pseudo-norm.
\subsection{Representation from finitely many functions}
\label{sec:rep}
When minimizing any function $J$ that depends only on a subset $\hat{ \mathcal{X}}$ of values in $ \mathcal{X}$ over the ball $\{ f \in \mathcal{F}_1, \ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta\}$, then we have a ``representer theorem''. The problem is indeed simply equivalent to minimizing
$J(f_{|\hat{\mathcal{X}}})$ over $f_{|\hat{ \mathcal{X}}} \in \mathbb{R}^{\hat{ \mathcal{X}}}$, such that $ \gamma_{1|\hat{ \mathcal{X}}}(f_{|\hat{ \mathcal{X}}}) \leqslant \delta$, where
$$
{\gamma}_{1|\hat{ \mathcal{X}}}( f_{|\hat{ \mathcal{X}}} ) = \inf_\mu |\mu|( \mathcal{V}) \mbox{ such that } \forall x \in \hat{ \mathcal{X}}, \ f_{|\hat{ \mathcal{X}}}(x) = \int_{ \mathcal{V}}{\varphi}_{v}(x) d\mu(v).
$$
Moreover, by Carath\'eodory's theorem for cones~\citep{rockafellar97}, if $\hat{ \mathcal{X}}$ is composed of only~$n$ elements, as often in machine learning, $f$ (and hence $f_{|\hat{ \mathcal{X}}}$) may be decomposed into at most~$n$ functions $\varphi_v$, that is, $\mu$ is supported by at most $n$ points. Note that these $n$ functions are not known in advance, and thus there is a significant difference with the representer theorem for positive definite kernels~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{Cristianini2004}, where the set of $n$ functions are known from the knowledge of the points $x \in \hat{ \mathcal{X}}$ (i.e., kernel functions evaluated at $x$).
\subsection{Corresponding reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS)}
\label{sec:RKHS}
\label{sec:rkhs}
We have seen above that if the real-valued measures $\mu$ have density $p$ with respect to a fixed probability measure $\tau$ with full support on $\mathcal{V}$, that is, $d \mu(v) = {p}(v) d \tau (v)$, then,
the norm $\gamma_1(f)$ is the infimum of the total variation
$|\mu|( \mathcal{V})= \int_ \mathcal{V} |{p}(v)| d \tau(v),$
over all decompositions $f(x) = \int_ \mathcal{V} {p}(v) \varphi_v(x) d \tau(v)$.
We may also define the infimum of $ \int_ \mathcal{V} |{p}(v)|^2 d \tau(v)$ over the same decompositions (squared $L_2$-norm instead of $L_1$-norm).
It turns out that it defines a squared norm and that the function space of functions with finite norms happens to be a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS). When $ \mathcal{V}$ is finite, then it is well-known~\citep[see, e.g.,][Section~4.1]{berlinet2004reproducing} that the infimum of $\sum_{v \in \mathcal{V}} \mu_v^2$ over all vectors $\mu$ such that $f = \sum_{v \in V} \mu_v \varphi_v$ defines a squared RKHS norm with positive definite kernel $k(x,y) = \sum_{v \in V} \varphi_v(x) \varphi_v(y)$.
We show in Appendix~\ref{app:rkhs} that for any compact $ \mathcal{V}$, we have defined a squared RKHS norm
$\gamma_2^2$ with positive definite kernel $ \displaystyle k(x,y) = \int_ \mathcal{V} \varphi_v(x) \varphi_v(y) d \tau(v)$.
\paragraph{Random sampling.}
Note that such kernels are well-adapted to approximations by sampling several basis functions $\varphi_v$ sampled from the probability measure $\tau$~\citep{neal1995bayesian,rahimi2007random}. Indeed, if we consider $m$ i.i.d.~samples $v_1,\dots,v_m$, we may define the approximation
$\hat{k}(x,y) = \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m \varphi_{v_i}(x) \varphi_{v_i}(y)$, which corresponds to an explicit feature representation. In other words, this corresponds to sampling units $v_i$, using prediction functions of the form $\frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m \eta_i \varphi_{v_i}(x)$ and then penalizing by the $\ell_2$-norm of $\eta$.
When $m$ tends to infinity, then $\hat{k}(x,y)$ tends to $k(x,y)$ and random sampling provides a way to work efficiently with explicit $m$-dimensional feature spaces. See~\citet{rahimi2007random} for a analysis of the number of units needed for an approximation with error $\varepsilon$, typically of order $1/\varepsilon^2$.
\paragraph{Relationship between $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and $ \mathcal{F}_2$.}
The corresponding RKHS norm is always greater than the variation norm (because of Jensen's inequality), and thus the RKHS $ \mathcal{F}_2$ is included in $\mathcal{F}_1$. However, as shown in this paper, the two spaces $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and $ \mathcal{F}_2$ have very different properties; e.g., $\gamma_2$ may be computed easily in several cases, while $\gamma_1$ does not; also, learning with $ \mathcal{F}_2$ may either be done by random sampling of sufficiently many weights or using kernel methods, while $ \mathcal{F}_1$ requires dedicated convex optimization algorithms with potentially non-polynomial-time steps (see~\mysec{cg}).
Moreover, for any $v \in \mathcal{V}$, $\varphi_v \in \mathcal{F}_1$ with a norm $\gamma_1(\varphi_v) \leqslant 1$, while in general $\varphi_v \notin \mathcal{F}_2$. This is a simple illustration of the fact that $ \mathcal{F}_2$ is too small and thus will lead to a lack of adaptivity that will be further studied in \mysec{comp}.
\subsection{Learning with Lipschitz-continuous losses}
\label{sec:learning-losses}
Given some distribution over the pairs $(x,y) \in \mathcal{X}\times \mathcal{Y}$, a loss function $\ell: \mathcal{Y} \times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$, our aim is to find a function $f: \mathcal{X}\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $J(f) = {\mathbb E} \big[ \ell(y,f(x)) \big]$ is small, given some i.i.d.~observations $(x_i,y_i)$, $i=1,\dots,n$. We consider the empirical risk minimization framework over a space of functions $ \mathcal{F}$, equipped with a norm $\gamma$ (in our situation, $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and $\F2$, equipped with $\gamma_1$ or $\gamma_2$). The empirical risk $\hat{J}(f) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \ell(y_i,f(x_i))$, is minimized either (a) by constraining $f$ to be in the ball $\mathcal{F}^\delta = \{ f \in \mathcal{F}, \ \gamma(f) \leqslant \delta \}$ or (b) regularizing the empirical risk by $\lambda \gamma(f)$.
Since this paper has a more theoretical nature, we focus on constraining, noting that in practice, penalizing is often more robust~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{harchaoui2013conditional} and leaving its analysis in terms of learning rates for future work.
\paragraph{Approximation error vs. estimation error.}
We consider an $\varepsilon$-approximate minimizer of $\hat{J}(f) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \ell(y_i,f(x_i))$ on the convex set $\mathcal{F}^\delta$, that is a certain $\hat{f} \in \mathcal{F}^\delta$ such that
$\hat{J}(\hat{f}) \leqslant \varepsilon + \inf_{f \in \mathcal{F}^\delta} \hat{J}(f)$. We thus have, using standard arguments~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{shaibook}:
$$
J(\hat{f}) - \inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}} J(f)
\leqslant \bigg[ \inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}^\delta } J(f) - \inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}} J(f) \bigg] + 2 \sup_{ f \in \mathcal{F}^\delta} | \hat{J}(f) - J(f) | + \varepsilon,
$$
that is, the excess risk $J(\hat{f}) - \inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}} J(f)$ is upper-bounded by a sum of an \emph{approximation error} $\inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}^\delta } J(f) - \inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}} J(f)$, an \emph{estimation error}
$ 2 \sup_{ f \in \mathcal{F}^\delta} | \hat{J}(f) - J(f) | $ and an \emph{optimization error} $\varepsilon$ \citep[see also][]{bottou-bousquet-2008b}.
In this paper, we will deal with all three errors, starting from the optimization error which we now consider for the space $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and its variation norm.
\subsection{Incremental conditional gradient algorithms}
\label{sec:condgrad}
\label{sec:cg}
\label{sec:conditional}
In this section, we review algorithms to minimize a smooth function $J: L_2(d\rho) \to \mathbb{R}$, where~$\rho$ is a probability measure on $ \mathcal{X}$. This may typically be the expected risk or the empirical risk above.
When minimizing $J(f)$ with respect to $f \in \mathcal{F}_1$ such that $\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta$, we need algorithms that can efficiently optimize a convex function over an infinite-dimensional space of functions. Conditional gradient algorithms allow to incrementally build a set of elements of $\mathcal{F}_1^\delta = \{ f \in \mathcal{F}_1, \ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta\}$; see, e.g.,~\citet{frank2006algorithm,dem1967minimization,dudik2012lifted,harchaoui2013conditional,jaggi,bach2012duality}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{cg_jmlr.eps}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.5cm}
\caption{Conditional gradient algorithm for minimizing a smooth function $J$ on $\mathcal{F}_1^\delta = \{ f \in \mathcal{F}_1, \ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta\}$: going from $f_t$ to $f_{t+1}$; see text for details.}
\label{fig:cg}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Conditional gradient algorithm.}
We assume the function $J$ is convex and $L$-smooth, that is for all $h \in L_2(d\rho)$, there exists a gradient $J'(h) \in L_2(d\rho)$ such that for all $f \in L_2(d\rho)$,
$$
0 \leqslant J(f) - J(h) - \langle f - h, J'(h) \rangle_{L_2(d\rho)} \leqslant \frac{L}{2} \| f - h\|^2_{L_2(d\rho)}.
$$
When $ \mathcal{X}$ is finite, this corresponds to the regular notion of smoothness from convex optimization~\citep{nesterov2004introductory}.
The conditional gradient algorithm is an iterative algorithm, starting from any point $f_0 \in \mathcal{F}_1^\delta$ and with the following recursion, for $t \geqslant 0$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\bar{f}_t & \in & \arg\min_{ f \in \mathcal{F}_1^\delta} \ \langle f, J'(f_t) \rangle_{ L_2(d\rho)}\\
f_{t+1} & = & ( 1- \rho_t) f_t + \rho_t \bar{f}_t.
\end{eqnarray*}
See an illustration in \myfig{cg}.
We may choose either $\rho_t = \frac{2}{t+1}$ or perform a line search for $\rho_t \in [0,1]$. For all of these strategies, the $t$-th iterate is a convex combination of the functions $\bar{f}_0,\dots,\bar{f}_{t-1}$, and is thus an element of $ \mathcal{F}_1^\delta$. It is known that for these two strategies for $\rho_t$, we have the following convergence rate:
$$
J(f_t) - \inf_{ f \in \mathcal{F}_1^\delta} \leqslant \frac{2L}{t+1} \sup_{f,g \in \mathcal{F}_1^\delta} \| f - g\|^2_{ L_2(d\rho)}.
$$
When, $r^2 = \sup_{ v \in \mathcal{V}} \| \varphi_v \|^2_{ L_2(d\rho)}$ is finite, we have
$\| f\|^2_{ L_2(d\rho)} \leqslant r^2 \gamma_1(f)^2$ and thus we get a convergence rate of $\frac{2Lr^2 \delta^2}{t+1}$.
Moreover, the basic FW algorithm may be extended to handle the regularized problem as well \citep{harchaoui2013conditional,siammatrix,zhang2012accelerated}, with similar convergence rates in $O(1/t)$. Also, the second step in the algorithm, may be replaced by the optimization of $ {J}$ over the convex hull of all functions $\bar{f}_0, \dots, \bar{f}_{t}$, a variant which is often referred to as \emph{fully corrective}. In our context where $ \mathcal{V}$ is a space where local search techniques may be considered, there is also the possibility of fine-tuning the vectors $v$ as well~\citep{bengio2006convex}.
\paragraph{Adding a new basis function.}
The conditional gradient algorithm presented above relies on solving at each iteration the ``Frank-Wolfe step'':
$$ \max_{ \gamma(f) \leqslant \delta} \ \langle f, g \rangle_{ L_2(d\rho)}.$$
for $g = - J'(f_t) \in L_2(d\rho)$. For the norm $\gamma_1$ defined through an $L_1$-norm, we have for
$f = \int_{ \mathcal{V}} \varphi_v d \mu(v)$ such that $\gamma_1(f) = |\mu|( \mathcal{V})$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\langle f, g \rangle_{ L_2(d\rho)}
& = & \int_ \mathcal{X} f(x) g(x) d\rho(x)
= \int_ \mathcal{X} \bigg( \int_ \mathcal{V} \varphi_v(x) d \mu(v) \bigg) g(x) d\rho(x) \\
&
= & \int_ \mathcal{V} \bigg( \int_ \mathcal{X} \varphi_v(x) g(x) d\rho(x) \bigg) d \mu(v) \\
& \leqslant & \gamma_1(f) \cdot \max_{v \in V} \bigg| \int_ \mathcal{X} \varphi_v(x) g(x) d\rho(x) \bigg|,
\end{eqnarray*}
with equality if and only if $\mu = \mu_+ - \mu_-$ with $\mu_+$ and $\mu_-$ two non-negative measures, with $\mu_+$ (resp.~$\mu_-$) supported in the set of maximizers $v$ of
$ \big| \int_ \mathcal{X} \varphi_v(x) g(x) d\rho(x) \big|$ where the value is positive (resp. negative).
This implies that:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:incpop}
\max_{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta} \ \langle f, g \rangle_{ L_2(d\rho)}
= \delta \max_{v \in V} \bigg| \int_ \mathcal{X} \varphi_v(x) g(x) d\rho(x) \bigg|,
\end{equation}
with the maximizers $f$ of the first problem obtained as $\delta$ times convex combinations of $\varphi_v$ and $-\varphi_v$ for maximizers $v$ of the second problem.
\paragraph{Finitely many observations.}
When $ \mathcal{X}$ is finite (or when using the result from \mysec{rep}), the Frank-Wolfe step in \eq{incpop} becomes equivalent to
for some vector $g \in \mathbb{R}^n$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:incr}
\sup_{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta } \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n g_i f(x_i)
\ = \ \delta \max_{v \in \mathcal{V} } \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n g_i \varphi_v(x_i) \bigg| ,
\end{equation}
where the set of solutions of the first problem is the convex hull of the solutions of the second problem.
\paragraph{Non-smooth loss functions.}
In this paper, in our theoretical results, we consider non-smooth loss functions for which conditional gradient algorithms do not converge in general. One possibility is to smooth the loss function, as done by~\citet{nesterov2005smooth}: an approximation error of $\varepsilon$ may be obtained with a smoothness constant proportional to $1/\varepsilon$. By choosing $\varepsilon$ as $1/\sqrt{t}$, we obtain a convergence rate of $O(1/\sqrt{t})$ after $t$ iterations. See also~\citet{lan}.
\paragraph{Approximate oracles.}
The conditional gradient algorithm may deal with approximate oracles; however, what we need in this paper is not the additive errors situations considered by~\citet{jaggi}, but multiplicative ones on the computation of the dual norm (similar to ones derived by~\citet{siammatrix} for the regularized problem).
Indeed, in our context, we minimize a function $J(f)$ on $f \in L_2(d\rho)$ over a norm ball $\{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta\}$. A multiplicative approximate oracle outputs for any $g \in L_2(d\rho)$, a vector $\hat{f} \in L_2(d\rho)$ such that $\gamma_1(\hat{f})=1$, and
$$
\langle \hat{f}, g \rangle \leqslant \max_{\gamma_1(f) \leqslant 1} \langle f, g \rangle \leqslant \kappa \, \langle \hat{f}, g \rangle,
$$
for a fixed $\kappa \geqslant 1$. In Appendix~\ref{app:cg}, we propose a modification of the conditional gradient algorithm that converges to a certain $h\in L_2(d\rho)$ such that $\gamma_1(h) \leqslant \delta$ and for which
$\inf_{\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta} J(f) \leqslant J(h) \leqslant \inf_{\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta / \kappa} J(f)$.
Such approximate oracles are not available in general, because they require uniform bounds over all possible values of $g \in L_2(d\rho)$. In \mysec{oracle}, we show that a weaker form of oracle is sufficient to preserve our generalization bounds.
\paragraph{Approximation of any function by a finite number of basis functions.}
The Frank-Wolfe algorithm may be applied in the function space $ \mathcal{F}_1$ with $J(f) = \frac{1}{2} {\mathbb E} \big[ (f(x) - g(x))^2 \big] $, we get a function~$f_t$, supported by $t$ basis functions such that
$\displaystyle {\mathbb E} \big[ (f_t(x) - g(x))^2\big] = O( \gamma(g)^2 /t) $.
Hence, any function in $ \mathcal{F}_1$ may be approximated with averaged error $\varepsilon$ with $t = O \big( \big[ \gamma(g) / \varepsilon \big]^2 \big)$ units.
Note that the conditional gradient algorithm is one among many ways to obtain such approximation with $\varepsilon^{-2}$ units~\citep{barron1993universal,kurkova}. See \mysec{neuron} for a (slightly) better dependence on $\varepsilon$ for convex neural networks.
\section{Neural networks with non-decreasing positively homogeneous activation functions}
\label{sec:neural}
In this paper, we focus on a specific family of basis functions, that is, of the form
$$ x \mapsto \sigma( w^\top x + b ),$$
for specific activation functions $\sigma$. We assume that $\sigma $ is non-decreasing and positively homogeneous of some integer degree, i.e., it is equal to $\sigma(u) = (u)_+^\alpha$, for $\alpha \in \{0,1,\dots\}$. We focus on these functions for several reasons:
\vspace*{-.125cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] Since they are not polynomials, they may approach any measurable function~\citep{leshno1993multilayer}.
\item[--] By homogeneity, they are invariant by a change of scale of the data; indeed, if all observations~$x$ are multiplied by a constant, we may simply change the measure $\mu$ defining the expansion of $f$ by the appropriate constant to obtain exactly the same function. This allows us to study functions defined on the unit-sphere.
\item[--] The special case $\alpha=1$, often referred to as the \emph{rectified linear unit}, has seen considerable recent empirical success~\citep{nair2010rectified,krizhevsky2012imagenet}, while the case $\alpha=0$ (hard thresholds) has some historical importance~\citep{rosenblatt1958perceptron}.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Boundedness assumptions.} For the theoretical analysis, we assume that our data inputs $x \in \mathbb{R}^d$ are almost surely bounded by $R$ in $\ell_q$-norm, for $q \in [2,\infty]$ (typically $q=2$ and $q=\infty$). We then build the augmented variable
$z \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ as $z = ( x^\top, R)^\top \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ by appending the constant~$R$ to $x \in \mathbb{R}^d$. We therefore have $\| z\|_q \leqslant \sqrt{2} R$. By defining the vector $v=(w^\top,b/R)^\top \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$, we have:
$$\varphi_v(x) = \sigma( w^\top x + b ) = \sigma( v^\top z ) = (v^\top z)_+^\alpha,$$
which now becomes a function of $z \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$.
Without loss of generality (and by homogeneity of $\sigma$), we may assume that the $\ell_p$-norm of each vector $v$ is equal to $1/R$, that is $ \mathcal{V}$ will be the $(1/R)$-sphere for the $\ell_p$-norm, where $1/p+1/q=1$ (and thus $p\in [1,2]$, with corresponding typical values $p=2$ and $p=1$).
This implies that $\varphi_v(x)^2 \leqslant 2^\alpha $. Moreover this leads to functions in $ \mathcal{F}_1$ that are bounded everywhere, that is, $ \forall f \in \mathcal{F}_1$, $ f(x)^2 \leqslant 2^\alpha \gamma_1(f)^2$.
Note that the functions in $ \mathcal{F}_1$ are also Lipschitz-continuous for $\alpha \geqslant 1$. Noth that this normalization ensures that $\gamma_1(f)$ is homogeneous to the values that $f$ takes, that is, it has the same units.
Since all $\ell_p$-norms (for $p \in [1,2]$) are equivalent to each other with constants of at most $\sqrt{d}$ with respect to the $\ell_2$-norm, all the spaces $ \mathcal{F}_1$ defined above are equal, but the norms $\gamma_1$ are of course different and they differ by a constant of at most $d^{\alpha/2}$---this can be seen by computing the dual norms like in \eq{incr} or \eq{incpop}.
\paragraph{Homogeneous reformulation.}
In our study of approximation properties, it will be useful to consider the the space of function $\mathcal{G}_1$ defined for $z$ in the unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^d \subset \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ of the Euclidean norm, such that $ g(z) = \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \sigma(v^\top z ) d \mu(v)$,
with the norm $\gamma_1(g)$ defined as the infimum of $|\mu|(\mathbb{S}^d)$ over all decompositions of $g$. Note the slight overloading of notations for $\gamma_1$ (for norms in $ \mathcal{G}_1$ and $ \mathcal{F}_1$) which should not cause any confusion.
In order to prove the approximation properties (with unspecified constants depending only on $d$), we may assume that $p=2$, since the norms $\| \cdot\|_p$ for $p \in [1,\infty]$ are equivalent to $\| \cdot\|_2$ with a constant that grows at most as $d^{\alpha/2}$ with respect to the $\ell_2$-norm. We thus focus on the $\ell_2$-norm in all proofs in \mysec{approx}.
We may go from $\mathcal{G}_1$ (a space of real-valued functions defined on the unit $\ell_2$-sphere in $d+1$ dimensions) to the space $\mathcal{F}_1$ (a space of real-valued functions defined on the ball of radius $R$ for the $\ell_2$-norm) as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] Given $g \in \mathcal{G}_1$, we define $ f \in \mathcal{F}_1$, with $f(x) = \Big( \frac{\| x\|_2^2}{R^2} + 1 \Big)^{\alpha/2} g\bigg( \displaystyle
\frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \| x\|_2^2 + R^2 }} {x \choose R} \bigg)$. If $g$ may be represented as
$\int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \sigma(v^\top z ) d \mu(v)$, then the function $f$ that we have defined may be represented
as
\begin{eqnarray*}
f(x) & = & \Big( \frac{\| x\|_2^2}{R^2} + 1 \Big)^{\alpha/2} \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \bigg( v^\top \displaystyle
\frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \| x\|_2^2 + R^2 }} {x \choose R} \bigg)_+^\alpha d \mu(v) \\
& = & \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \bigg( v^\top \displaystyle
{x/R \choose 1} \bigg)_+^\alpha d \mu(v) =
\int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \sigma(w^\top x + b) d \mu(Rw,b),
\end{eqnarray*} that is $\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \gamma_1(g)$, because we have assumed that $(w^\top,b/R)^\top $ is on the $(1/R)$-sphere.
\item[--] Conversely, given $f \in \mathcal{F}_1$, for $z = (t^\top, a)^\top \in \mathbb{S}^{d}$, we define
$g(z) = g(t,a) = f\big( \frac{Rt}{a} \big) a^\alpha $, which we define as such on the set of $z= (t^\top, a)^\top \in \mathbb{R}^d \times \mathbb{R}$ (of unit norm) such that $a \geqslant \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$. Since we always assume $\| x\|_2 \leqslant R$, we have $ \sqrt{ \| x\|_2^2 + R^2 } \leqslant \sqrt{2}R$, and the value of $g(z,a)$ for $a \geqslant \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$ is enough to recover $f$ from the formula above.
On that portion $\{ a \geqslant 1/\sqrt{2} \}$ of the sphere $\mathbb{S}^d$, this function exactly inherits the differentiability properties of $f$. That is, (a) if $f$ is bounded by $1$ and $f$ is $(1/R)$-Lipschitz-continuous, then $g$ is Lipschitz-continuous with a constant that only depends on $d$ and $\alpha$ and (b), if all derivatives of order less than $k$ are bounded by $R^{-k}$, then all derivatives of the same order of $g$ are bounded by a constant that only depends on $d$ and $\alpha$. Precise notions of differentiability may be defined on the sphere, using the manifold structure~\cite[see, e.g.,][]{absil2009optimization} or through polar coordinates~\cite[see, e.g.,][Chapter 3]{atkinson2012spherical}. See these references for more details.
The only remaining important aspect is to define $g$ on the entire sphere, so that (a) its regularity constants are controlled by a constant times the ones on the portion of the sphere where it is already defined, (b) $g$ is either even or odd (this will be important in \mysec{approx}). Ensuring that the regularity conditions can be met is classical when extending to the full sphere~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{whitney1934analytic}. Ensuring that the function may be chosen as odd or even may be obtained by multiplying the function $g$ by an infinitely differentiable function which is equal to one for $a \geqslant 1/\sqrt{2}$ and zero for $a \leqslant 0$, and extending by $-g$ or $g$ on the hemi-sphere $a<0$.
\end{itemize}
In summary, we may consider in \mysec{approx} functions defined on the sphere, which are much easier to analyze. In the rest of the section, we specialize some of the general concepts reviewed in \mysec{general} to our neural network setting with specific activation functions, namely, in terms of corresponding kernel functions and geometric reformulations of the Frank-Wolfe steps.
\subsection{Corresponding positive-definite kernels}
\label{sec:kersigma}
In this section, we consider the $\ell_2$-norm on the input weight vectors $w$ (that is $p=2$). We may compute for
$x,x' \in \mathbb{R}^{d}$ the kernels defined in \mysec{RKHS}:
$$
k_\alpha(x,x') = {\mathbb E} \big[ (w^\top x + b)_+^\alpha (w^\top x' + b)_+^\alpha \big],
$$
for $(Rw,b)$ distributed uniformly on the unit $\ell_2$-sphere $\mathbb{S}^{d}$,
and $x,x' \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$. Given the angle $\varphi \in[0,\pi]$ defined through $\displaystyle \frac{x^\top x'}{R^2} + 1 = \cos \varphi \sqrt{\frac{\|x\|_2^2 }{R^2} + 1 } \sqrt{\frac{\|x'\|_2^2 }{R^2} + 1 }$, we
have explicit expressions~\citep{roux2007continuous,cho2009kernel}:
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_0(z,z') & = &
\frac{1}{2\pi}
\big(
\pi - \varphi
\big)
\\
k_1(z,z') & = &
\frac{ \sqrt{\frac{\|x\|_2^2 }{R^2} + 1 } \sqrt{\frac{\|x'\|_2^2 }{R^2} + 1 } }{2(d+1)\pi}
\big(
( \pi - \varphi) \cos \varphi + \sin \varphi
\big)
\\
k_2(z,z') & = &
\frac{ \Big({\frac{\|x\|_2^2 }{R^2} + 1 }\Big) \Big({\frac{\|x'\|_2^2 }{R^2} + 1 } \Big) }{ 2 \pi [ (d+1)^2 + 2(d+1) ]}
\big(
3 \sin \varphi
\cos \varphi + ( \pi - \varphi) ( 1 + 2 \cos^2 \varphi)
\big).
\end{eqnarray*}
There are key differences and similarities between the RKHS $ \mathcal{F}_2$ and our space of functions $ \mathcal{F}_1$. The RKHS is smaller than $ \mathcal{F}_1$ (i.e., the norm in the RKHS is larger than the norm in $ \mathcal{F}_1$); this implies that approximation properties of the RKHS are transferred to $ \mathcal{F}_1$. In fact, our proofs rely on this fact.
However, the RKHS norm does not lead to any adaptivity, while the function space $ \mathcal{F}_1$ is (see more details in \mysec{adaptivity}). This may come as a paradox: both the RKHS $ \mathcal{F}_2$ and $ \mathcal{F}_1$ have similar properties, but one is adaptive while the other one is not. A key intuitive difference is as follows: given a function
$f$ expressed as $ f(x) = \int_ \mathcal{V} \varphi_v(x) {p}(v) d \tau(v)$, then $\gamma_1(f) = \int_ \mathcal{V} |{p}(v)| d \tau(v)$, while the squared RKHS norm is $\gamma_2(f)^2 = \int_ \mathcal{V} |{p}(v)|^2 d \tau(v)$. For the $L_1$-norm, the measure ${p}(v) d \tau(v)$ may tend to a singular distribution with a bounded norm, while this is not true for the $L_2$-norm. For example, the function $(w^\top x + b)_+^\alpha$ is in $\mathcal{F}_1$, while it is not in $ \mathcal{F}_2$ in general.
\subsection{Incremental optimization problem for $\alpha=0$}
\label{sec:FW1}
We consider the problem in \eq{incr} for the special case $\alpha=0$. For $z_1,\dots,z_n \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ and a vector $y \in \mathbb{R}^n$, the goal is to solve (as well as the corresponding problem with $y$ replaced by $-y$):
$$
\max_{ v \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1} } \sum_{i=1}^n y_i 1_{ v^\top z_i > 0 }
=\max_{ v \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1} } \ \ \sum_{i \in I_+ } |y_i| 1_{ v^\top z_i > 0 }
- \sum_{i \in I_- } |y_i| 1_{ v^\top z_i > 0 } ,
$$
where $I_+ = \{i, y_i \geqslant 0\}$ and $I_- = \{i, y_i < 0\}$. As outlined by~\citet{bengio2006convex}, this is equivalent to finding an hyperplane parameterized by $v$ that minimizes a weighted mis-classification rate (when doing linear classification). Note that the norm of $v$ has no effect.
\paragraph{NP-hardness.}
This problem is NP-hard in general. Indeed, if we assume that all $y_i$ are equal to $-1$ or $1$ and with $\sum_{i=1}^n y_i = 0$, then we have a balanced binary classification problem (we need to assume $n$ even).
The quantity $\sum_{i=1}^n y_i 1_{ v^\top z_i > 0 } $ is then $\frac{n}{2}(1-2 e)$ where $e$ is the corresponding classification error for a problem of classifying at positive (resp.~negative) the examples in $I_+$ (resp.~$I_-$) by thresholding the linear classifier $v^\top z$. \citet{guruswami2009hardness} showed that for all $(\varepsilon,\delta)$, it is NP-hard to distinguish between instances (i.e., configurations of points $x_i$), where a halfspace with classification error at most $\varepsilon$ exists, and instances where all half-spaces have an error of at least $1/2-\delta$. Thus, it is NP-hard to distinguish between instances where there exists $v \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^n y_i 1_{ v^\top z_i > 0 }
\geqslant \frac{n}{2}(1-2 \varepsilon)$ and instances where for all $v \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$,
$\sum_{i=1}^n y_i 1_{ v^\top z_i > 0 }
\leqslant n \delta$. Thus, it is NP-hard to distinguish instances where $\max_{ v \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1} } \sum_{i=1}^n y_i 1_{ v^\top z_i > 0 } \geqslant \frac{n}{2} ( 1- 2 \varepsilon)$ and ones where it is less than $\frac{n}{2}\delta$. Since this is valid for all $\delta$ and $\varepsilon$, this rules out a constant-factor approximation.
\paragraph{Convex relaxation.}
Given linear binary classification problems, there are several algorithms to approximately find a good half-space. These are based on using convex surrogates (such as the hinge loss or the logistic loss). Although some theoretical results do exist regarding the classification performance of estimators obtained from convex surrogates~\citep{bartlett2006convexity}, they do not apply in the context of linear classification.
\subsection{Incremental optimization problem for $\alpha=1$}
\label{sec:FW2}
We consider the problem in \eq{incr} for the special case $\alpha=1$. For $z_1,\dots,z_n \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1} $ and a vector $y \in \mathbb{R}^n$, the goal is to solve (as well as the corresponding problem with $y$ replaced by $-y$):
$$
\max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1 } \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+
=\max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1 } \ \ \sum_{i \in I_+ } (v^\top |y_i| z_i)_+
- \sum_{i \in I_- } (v^\top |y_i| z_i)_+,
$$
where $I_+ = \{i, y_i \geqslant 0\}$ and $I_- = \{i, y_i < 0\}$. We have, with $t_i = |y_i| z_i \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$,
using convex duality:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1 } \ \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+
& = & \max_{\| v\|_p \leqslant 1} \ \sum_{i \in I_+ } (v^\top t_i)_+
- \sum_{i \in I_- } (v^\top t_i)_+\\
& = &
\max_{\| v\|_p \leqslant 1} \ \sum_{i \in I_+ } \max_{ b_i \in [0,1]} b_i v_i^\top t_i
- \sum_{i \in I_- } \max_{ b_i \in [0,1] } b_i v^\top t_i \\
& = &
\max_{b \in [0,1]^{I_+}}
\max_{\| v\|_p \leqslant 1} \min_{b \in [0,1]^{I_-}} v^\top \big[ T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_- \big]
\\
& = &
\max_{b \in [0,1]^{I_+}} \min_{b \in [0,1]^{I_-}}
\max_{\| v\|_p \leqslant 1} v^\top \big[ T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_- \big]
\mbox{ by Fenchel duality,}\\
& = &
\max_{b_+ \in [0,1]^{I_+}} \min_{b_- \in [0,1]^{I_-}}
\big\| T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_- \big\|_q,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $T_+ \in \mathbb{R}^{n_+ \times d}$ has rows $t_i$, $i \in I_+$ and
$T_- \in \mathbb{R}^{n_- \times d}$ has rows $t_i$, $i \in I_-$,
with $v \in \arg \max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1} v^\top ( T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_- )$.
The problem thus becomes
$$
\max_{b_+ \in [0,1]^{n_+}} \min_{b_- \in [0,1]^{n_-}}
\big\| T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_-\big\|_q.
$$
For the problem of maximizing $\big|\sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+ \big|$, then this corresponds to
$$
\max\bigg\{ \max_{b_+ \in [0,1]^{n_+}} \min_{b_- \in [0,1]^{n_-}}
\big \| T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_-\big\|_q
,
\max_{b_- \in [0,1]^{n_-}} \min_{b_+ \in [0,1]^{n_+}}
\big\| T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_-\big\|_q
\bigg\}.
$$
This is exactly the Hausdorff distance between the two convex sets $\{
T_+^\top b_+, \ b_+ \in [0,1]^{n_+}\}$ and $\{
T_-^\top b_-, \ b_- \in [0,1]^{n_-}\}$ (referred to as zonotopes, see below).
Given the pair $(b_+,b_-)$ achieving the Hausdorff distance, then we may compute the optimal $v$ as
$v =\arg \max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1} v^\top \big(T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_-\big)$.
Note this has not changed the problem at all, since it is equivalent. It is still NP-hard in general~\citep{Konig14}. But we now have a geometric interpretation with potential approximation algorithms. See below and \mysec{approximation}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.85]{zonotope_new.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.85]{zonoid.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Two zonotopes in two dimensions: (left) vectors, and (right) their Minkowski sum (represented as a polygone).}
\label{fig:zonotope}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Zonotopes.} A \emph{zonotope} $A$ is the Minkowski sum of a finite number of segments from the origin, that is, of the form
$$A = [0 , t_1] + \cdots + [ 0, t_r ] = \Big\{ \sum_{i=1}^r b_i t_i, \ b \in [0,1]^r \Big\},$$ for some vectors $t_i$, $i=1,\dots,r$~\citep{bolker1969class}. See an illustration in \myfig{zonotope}.
They appear in several areas of computer science~\citep{edelsbrunner1987algorithms,guibas2003zonotopes} and mathematics~\citep{bolker1969class,bourgain1989approximation}. In machine learning, they appear naturally as the affine projection of a hypercube; in particular, when using a higher-dimensional distributed representation of points in~$\mathbb{R}^d$ with elements in $[0,1]^r$, where $r $ is larger than $d$~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{hinton1997generative}, the underlying polytope that is modelled in $\mathbb{R}^d$ happens to be a zonotope.
In our context, the two convex sets $\{
T_+^\top b_+, \ b_+ \in [0,1]^{n_+}\}$ and $\{
T_-^\top b_-, \ b_- \in [0,1]^{n_-}\}$ defined above are thus zonotopes. See an illustration of the Hausdorff distance computation in \myfig{haus} (middle plot), which is the core computational problem for $\alpha=1$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.85]{hausdorff_distance.eps}
\hspace{1.5cm}
\includegraphics[scale=.85]{hausdorff_distance_ellipsoid.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: two zonotopes (with their generating segments) and the segments achieving the two sides of the Haussdorf distance. Right: approximation by ellipsoids.}
\label{fig:haus}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Approximation by ellipsoids.}
Centrally symmetric convex polytopes (w.l.o.g.~centered around zero) may be approximated by ellipsoids. In our set-up, we could use the minimum volume enclosing ellipsoid~\citep[see, e.g.][]{alexander2002course}, which can be computed exactly when the polytope is given through its vertices, or up to a constant factor when the polytope is such that quadratic functions may be optimized with a constant factor approximation. For zonotopes, the standard semi-definite relaxation of~\citet{nesterov1998semidefinite} leads to such constant-factor approximations, and thus the minimum volume inscribed ellipsoid may be computed up to a constant. Given standard results~\citep[see, e.g.][]{alexander2002course}, a $(1/\sqrt{d})$-scaled version of the ellipsoid is inscribed in this polytope, and thus the ellipsoid is a provably good approximation of the zonotope with a factor scaling as $\sqrt{d}$. However, the approximation ratio is not good enough to get any relevant bound for our purpose (see \mysec{sufficient}), as for computing the Haussdorff distance, we care about potentially vanishing differences that are swamped by constant factor approximations.
Nevertheless, the ellipsoid approximation may prove useful in practice, in particular because the $\ell_2$-Haussdorff distance between two ellipsoids may be computed in polynomial time (see Appendix~\ref{app:ellipsoid}).
\subsection{Incremental optimization problem for $\alpha \geqslant 2$}
\label{sec:FW3}
We consider the problem in \eq{incr} for the remaining cases $\alpha \geqslant 2$. For $z_1,\dots,z_n \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ and a vector $y \in \mathbb{R}^n$, the goal is to solve (as well as the corresponding problem with $y$ replaced by $-y$):
$$
\max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1 } \frac{1}{\alpha} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+^\alpha
=\max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1 } \sum_{i \in I_+ } \frac{1}{\alpha} (v^\top |y_i|^{1/\alpha} z_i)_+^\alpha
- \sum_{i \in I_- } \frac{1}{\alpha} (v^\top |y_i|^{1/\alpha} z_i)_+^\alpha,
$$
where $I_+ = \{i, y_i \geqslant 0\}$ and $I_- = \{i, y_i < 0\}$. We have, with $t_i = |y_i|^{1/\alpha} z_i \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$, and $\beta \in (1,2]$ defined by $1/\beta + 1/\alpha = 1$ (we use the fact that the function $u \mapsto u^\alpha/\alpha$ and $v \mapsto v^\beta / \beta $ are Fenchel-dual to each other):
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1 } \ \frac{1}{\alpha} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+ ^\alpha
& = & \max_{\| v\|_p \leqslant 1} \ \sum_{i \in I_+ } \frac{1}{\alpha} (v^\top t_i)_+^\alpha
- \sum_{i \in I_- } \frac{1}{\alpha} (v^\top t_i)_+^\alpha \\
\nonumber & = &
\max_{\| v\|_p \leqslant 1} \ \sum_{i \in I_+ } \max_{b_i \geqslant 0 } \Big\{ b_i v_i^\top t_i - \frac{1}{\beta} b_i^\beta \Big\}
- \sum_{i \in I_- } \max_{ b_i \geqslant 0 } \Big\{ b_i v^\top t_i - \frac{1}{\beta} b_i^\beta \Big\}\\
\nonumber & = &
\max_{b \in \mathbb{R}_+^{I_+}} \min_{b \in \mathbb{R}_+^{I_-}}
\max_{\| v\|_p \leqslant 1} v^\top \big[ T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_- \big]
- \frac{1}{\beta} \| b_+\|_\beta^\beta
+ \frac{1}{\beta} \| b_-\|_\beta^\beta \\
& & \hspace{7cm}
\nonumber \mbox{ by Fenchel duality,}\\
\label{eq:alpha} & = &
\max_{b_+ \in [0,1]^{I_+}} \min_{b_- \in [0,1]^{I_-}}
\big\| T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_- \big\|_q - \frac{1}{\beta} \| b_+\|_\beta^\beta
+ \frac{1}{\beta} \| b_-\|_\beta^\beta,
\end{eqnarray}
where $T_+ \in \mathbb{R}^{n_+ \times d}$ has rows $t_i$, $i \in I_+$ and
$T_- \in \mathbb{R}^{n_- \times d}$ has rows $t_i$, $i \in I_-$,
with $v \in \arg \max_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1} \big( T_+^\top b_+ - T_-^\top b_-\big)^\top v$.
Contrary to the case $\alpha=1$, we do not obtain exactly a formulation as a Hausdorff distance. However, if we consider the convex sets $K^+_\lambda = \{ T_+^\top b_+, \ b_+ \geqslant 0, \ \| b_+ \|_\beta \leqslant \lambda\}$ and $K^-_\mu = \{ T_-^\top b_-, \ b_- \geqslant 0, \ \| b_- \|_\beta \leqslant \mu\}$, then, a solution of \eq{alpha} may be obtained from Hausdorff distance computations between $K^+_\lambda$ and $K^-_\mu$, for certain $\lambda$ and $\mu$.
\section{Approximation properties}
\label{sec:approx}
In this section, we consider the approximation properties of the set $ \mathcal{F}_1$ of functions defined on $\mathbb{R}^d$.
As mentioned earlier, the norm used to penalize input weights $w$ or $v$ is irrelevant for approximation properties as all norms are equivalent. Therefore, we focus on the case $q=p=2$ and $\ell_2$-norm constraints.
Because we consider homogeneous activation functions, we start by studying the set $ \mathcal{G}_1$ of functions defined on the unit $\ell_2$-sphere $\mathbb{S}^d \subset \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$. We denote by $\tau_d$ the uniform probability measure on $\mathbb{S}^d$. The set $ \mathcal{G}_1$ is defined as the set of functions on the sphere
such that $ g(z) = \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \sigma(v^\top z ) p(z) d\tau_d(z)$, with the norm $\gamma_1(g)$ equal to the smallest possible value of $\int_{\mathbb{S}^d} |p(z)| d\tau_d(z)$. We may also define the corresponding squared RKHS norm by the smallest possible value of $\int_{\mathbb{S}^d} |p(z)|^2 d\tau_d(z)$, with the corresponding RKHS $ \mathcal{G}_2$.
In this section, we first consider approximation properties of functions in $ \mathcal{G}_1$ by a finite number of neurons (only for $\alpha=1$). We then study approximation properties of functions on the sphere by functions in $ \mathcal{G}_1$. It turns out that all our results are based on the approximation properties of the corresponding RKHS $ \mathcal{G}_2$: we give sufficient conditions for being in $ \mathcal{G}_2$, and then approximation bounds for functions which are not in $ \mathcal{G}_2$. Finally we transfer these to the spaces $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and $ \mathcal{F}_2$, and consider in particular functions which only depend on projections on a low-dimensional subspace, for which the properties of $ \mathcal{G}_1$ and $ \mathcal{G}_2$ (and of $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and $ \mathcal{F}_2$) differ.
Approximation properties of neural networks with finitely many neurons have been studied extensively~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{petrushev1998approximation,pinkus1999approximation,makovoz1998uniform,burger2001error}. In \mysec{related}, we relate our new results to existing work from the literature on approximation theory, by showing that our results provide an explicit control of the various weight vectors which are needed for bounding the estimation error in \mysec{bounds}.
\subsection{Approximation by a finite number of basis functions}
\label{sec:neuron}
A key quantity that drives the approximability by a finite number of neurons is the variation norm $\gamma_1(g)$. As shown in \mysec{condgrad}, any function $g$ such that $\gamma_1(g)$ is finite, may be approximated in $L_2(\mathbb{S}^d)$-norm with error $\varepsilon$ with $n = O( \gamma_1(g) ^2\varepsilon^{-2})$ units.
For $\alpha=1$ (rectified linear units), we may improve the dependence in $\varepsilon$, through the link with zonoids and zonotopes, as we now present.
If we decompose the signed measure $\mu$ as $\mu = \mu_+ - \mu_-$ where $\mu_+$ and $\mu_-$ are positive measures, then, for $g\in \mathcal{G}_1$, we have
$g(z) = \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} (v^\top z)_+ d\mu_+(v) - \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} (v^\top z )_+ d\mu_-(v) = {g}_+(z) - {g}_-(z)$, which is a decomposition of $g$ as a difference of positively homogenous convex functions.
Positively homogenous convex functions $h$ may be written as the \emph{support function} of a compact convex set $K$~\citep{rockafellar97}, that is, $h(z) = \max_{ y \in K} y^\top z$, and the set $K$ characterizes the function $h$. The functions $g_+$ and $g_-$ defined above are not \emph{any} convex positively homogeneous functions, as we now describe.
If the measure $\mu_+$ is supported by finitely many points, that is, $\mu_+(v) = \sum_{i=1}^r \eta_i \delta(v-v_i)$ with $\eta \geqslant 0$, then $g_+(z) = \sum_{i=1}^t \eta_i ( v_i^\top z)_+
= \sum_{i=1}^t ( \eta_i v_i^\top z)_+ = \sum_{i=1}^t ( t_i^\top z)_+$ for $t_i = \eta_i v_i$. Thus the corresponding set $K_+$ is the \emph{zonotope}
$[0 , t_1] + \cdots + [ 0, t_r ] = \big\{ \sum_{i=1}^r b_i t_i, \ b \in [0,1]^r \big\}$ already defined in~\mysec{FW2}. Thus the functions $g_+ \in \mathcal{G}_1$ and $g_- \in \mathcal{G}_1$ for finitely supported measures $\mu$ are support functions of zonotopes.
When the measure $\mu$ is not constrained to have finite support, then the sets $K_+$ and $K_-$ are limits of zonotopes, and thus, by definition, \emph{zonoids}~\citep{bolker1969class}, and thus functions in $ \mathcal{G}_1$ are differences of support functions of zonoids.
Zonoids are a well-studied set of convex bodies. They are centrally symmetric, and in two dimensions, all centrally symmetric compact convexs sets are (up to translation) zonoids, which is not true in higher dimensions~\citep{bolker1969class}. Moreover, the problem of approximating a zonoid by a zonotope with a small number of segments~\citep{bourgain1989approximation,matouvsek1996improved} is essentially equivalent to the approximation of a function $g$ by finitely many neurons. The number of neurons directly depends on the norm $\gamma_1$, as we now show.
\begin{proposition}[Number of units - $\alpha=1$]
\label{prop:neurons}
Let $\varepsilon \in (0,1/2)$. For any $g $ function in $ \mathcal{G}_1$, there exists a measure ${\mu}$ supported on at most $r$ points in $ \mathcal{V}$, so that for all $z \in \mathbb{S}^{d}$.
$\big| g(z) - \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} (v^\top z)_+ d{\mu}(v) \big| \leqslant \varepsilon \gamma(g) $, with
$ r \leqslant C(d) \varepsilon ^{-2d/ ( d +3 )} $, for some constant $C(d)$ that depends only on $d$. \end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, we assume $\gamma(g)=1$.
It is shown by~\citet{matouvsek1996improved} that for any probability measure $\mu$ (positive and with finite mass) on the sphere $\mathbb{S}^d$, there exists a set of $r$ points $v_1,\dots,v_r$, so that
for all $z \in \mathbb{S}^d$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:matousek}
\bigg| \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} |v^\top z| d \mu (v) - \frac{1}{r} \sum_{i=1}^r |v_i^\top z| \bigg| \leqslant \varepsilon,
\end{equation}
with $r \leqslant C(d) \varepsilon^{-2 + 6 / ( d + 3 )} = C(d) \varepsilon ^{-2d/ ( d +3 )}$, for some constant $C(d)$ that depends only on $d$. We may then simply write
$$\!g(z)\! =\! \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \! (v^\top z)_+ d \mu(v) \!=\! \frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{S}^d}\! (v^\top z) d \mu(v)
+ \frac{\mu_+( {\mathbb{S}^d}) }{2 }\! \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \!|v^\top z| \frac{d \mu_+(v)}{\mu_+( {\mathbb{S}^d})} - \frac{\mu_-( {\mathbb{S}^d})}{2}\!\int_{\mathbb{S}^d} \! |v^\top z|\frac{ d \mu_-(v) }{\mu_-( {\mathbb{S}^d})},$$
and approximate the last two terms with error $\varepsilon \mu_\pm(\mathbb{S}^d) $ with $r$ terms, leading to an approximation of $\varepsilon \mu_+(\mathbb{S}^d) + \varepsilon\mu_-(\mathbb{S}^d) = \varepsilon \gamma_1(g) = \varepsilon$, with a remainder that is a linear function $q^\top z$ of $z$, with $\| q\|_2 \leqslant 1$. We may then simply add two extra units with vectors $q/\|q\|_2$ and weights $-\|q\|_2$ and $\|q\|_2$. We thus obtain, with $2r+2$ units, the desired approximation result.
Note that \citet[Theorem 6.5]{bourgain1989approximation} showed that the scaling in $\varepsilon$ in \eq{matousek} is not improvable, if the measure is allowed to have non equal weights on all points and the proof relies on the non-approximability of the Euclidean ball by centered zonotopes. This results does not apply here, because we may have different weights $\mu_-( {\mathbb{S}^d})$ and $\mu_+( {\mathbb{S}^d})$.
\end{proof}
Note that the proposition above is slightly improved in terms of the scaling in $\varepsilon$. The simple use of conditional gradient leads to $r \leqslant \varepsilon^{-2} \gamma(g)^2$, with a better constant (independent of $d$) but a worse scaling in $\varepsilon$---also with a result in $L_2(\mathbb{S}^d)$-norm and not uniformly on the ball $\{ \| x\|_q \leqslant R\}$. Note also that the conditional gradient algorithm gives a constructive way of building the measure.
Moreover, the proposition above is related to the result from~\citet[Theorem 2]{makovoz1998uniform}, which applies for $\alpha=0$ but with a number of neurons growing as $\varepsilon ^{-2d/ ( d +1 )}$, or to the one of~\citet[Example 3.1]{burger2001error}, which applies to a piecewise affine sigmoidal function but with a number of neurons growing as $\varepsilon ^{-2(d+1)/ ( d +3 )}$ (both slightly worse than ours).
\subsection{Sufficient conditions for finite variation}
In this section and the next one, we study more precisely the RKHS $ \mathcal{G}_2$ (and thus obtain similar results for $ \mathcal{G}_1 \supset \mathcal{G}_2$). The kernel $k(x,y) = \int_{\mathbb{S}^d} ( v^\top x)_+ ( v^\top y)_+ d \tau_d(v) $ defined on the sphere $\mathbb{S}^d$ belongs to the family of dot-product kernels~\citep{smola2001regularization} that only depends on the dot-product $x^\top y$, although in our situation, the function is not particularly simple (see formulas in \mysec{kersigma}). The analysis of these kernels is similar to one of translation-invariant kernels; for $d=1$, i.e., on the $2$-dimensional sphere, it is done through Fourier series; while for $d>1$, \emph{spherical harmonics} have to be used as the expansion of functions in series of spherical harmonics make the computation of the RKHS norm explicit (see a review of spherical harmonics in Appendix~\ref{app:review} with several references therein). Since the calculus is tedious, all proofs are put in appendices, and we only present here the main results. In this section, we provide simple sufficient conditions for belonging to $ \mathcal{G}_2$ (and hence $ \mathcal{G}_1$) based on the existence and boundedness of derivatives, while in the next section, we show how any Lipschitz-function may be approximated by functions in $ \mathcal{G}_2$ (and hence $ \mathcal{G}_1$) with precise control of the norm of the approximating functions.
The derivatives of functions defined on $\mathbb{S}^d$ may be defined in several ways, using the manifold structure~\cite[see, e.g.,][]{absil2009optimization} or through polar coordinates~\cite[see, e.g.,][Chapter 3]{atkinson2012spherical}. For $d=1$, the two-dimensional sphere $S^1$ may be parameterized by a single angle and thus the notion of derivatives and the proof of the following result is simpler and based on Fourier series (see Appendix~\ref{app:proof11}). For the general proof based on spherical harmonics, see Appendix~\ref{app:harmonics}.
\begin{proposition}[Finite variation on the sphere]
\label{prop:finites-sphere}
Assume that $g: \mathbb{S}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ is such that all $i$-th order derivatives exist and are upper-bounded
by $ \eta $ for $i \in \{0,\dots,s\}$,
where $s$ is an integer such that $s \geqslant (d - 1)/2 + \alpha + 1$. Assume $g$ is even if $\alpha$ is odd (and vice-versa);
then $g \in \mathcal{G}_2$ and $\gamma_2(g) \leqslant C(d,\alpha) \eta$, for a constant $C(d,\alpha)$ that depends only on $d$ and $\alpha$.
\end{proposition}
We can make the following observations:
\vspace*{-.125cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] \emph{Tightness of conditions}: as shown in Appendix~\ref{app:tightness}, there are functions $g $, which have bounded first $s$ derivatives and do not belong to $ \mathcal{G}_2$ while $s \leqslant \frac{d}{2} + \alpha$ (at least when $s-\alpha$ is even). Therefore, the affine scaling in $\frac{d}{2}+ \alpha$ is not improvable (but the constant may be).
\item[--] \emph{Dependence on $\alpha$}: for any $d$, the higher the $\alpha$, the stricter the sufficient condition. Given that the estimation error grows slowly with $\alpha$ (see \mysec{rademacher}), low values of $\alpha$ would be preferred in practice.
\item[--] \emph{Dependence on $d$}: a key feature of the sufficient condition is the dependence on $d$, that is, as $d$ increases the number of derivatives has to increase linearly in $d/2$. This is another instantiation of the curse of dimensionality: only very smooth functions in high dimensions are allowed.
\item[--] \emph{Special case $d=1$, $\alpha=0$}: differentiable functions on the sphere in $\mathbb{R}^2$, with bounded derivatives, belong to $ \mathcal{G}_2$, and thus all Lipschitz-continuous functions, because Lipschitz-continuous functions are almost everywhere differentiable with bounded derivative \citep{adams2003sobolev}.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Approximation of Lipschitz-continuous functions}
In order to derive generalization bounds for target functions which are not sufficiently differentiable (and may not be in $ \mathcal{G}_2$ or $ \mathcal{G}_1$), we need to approximate any Lipschitz-continuous function, with a function $g \in \mathcal{G}_2$ with a norm $\gamma_2(g)$ that will grow as the approximation gets tighter. We give precise rates in the proposition below. Note the requirement for parity of the function $g$. The result below notably shows the density of $ \mathcal{G}_1$ in uniform norm in the space of Lipschitz-continuous functions of the given parity, which is already known since our activation functions are not polynomials~\citep{leshno1993multilayer}.
\begin{proposition}[Approximation of Lipschitz-continuous functions on the sphere]
\label{prop:approx-sphere}
For $\delta $ greater than a constant depending only on $d$ and $\alpha$, for any function $g: \mathbb{S}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ such that for all $x,y \in \mathbb{S}^d$, $g(x) \leqslant \eta$ and $|g(x) - g(y) | \leqslant \eta \| x - y\|_2$, and
$g$ is even if $\alpha$ is odd (and vice-versa),
then there exists $h \in \mathcal{G}_2$, such that $\gamma_2(h) \leqslant \delta$ and
$$\sup_{
x \in \mathbb{S}^d } | h(x) - g(x) | \leqslant C(d,\alpha) \eta
\Big(\frac{\delta}{\eta}\Big)^{-1/(\alpha+(d-1)/2)} \log \Big(\frac{\delta}{\eta}\Big)
.$$
\end{proposition}
This proposition is shown in Appendix~\ref{app:appsphere2} for $d=1$ (using Fourier series) and in Appendix~\ref{app:proofapp} for all $d \geqslant 1$ (using spherical harmonics). We can make the following observations:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] \emph{Dependence in $\delta$ and $\eta$}: as expected, the main term in the error bound $\big( {\delta}/{\eta}\big)^{-1/(\alpha+(d-1)/2)}$ is a decreasing function of $\delta / \eta$, that is when the norm $\gamma_2(h)$ is allowed to grow, the approximation gets tighter, and when the Lipschitz constant of $g$ increases, the approximation is less tight.
\item[--] \emph{Dependence on $d$ and $\alpha$}: the rate of approximation is increasing in $d$ and $\alpha$. In particular the approximation properties are better for low $\alpha$.
\item[--] \emph{Special case $d=1$ and $\alpha=0$}: up to the logarithmic term we recover the result of Prop.~\ref{prop:finites-sphere}, that is, the function $g$ is in $ \mathcal{G}_2$.
\item[--] \emph{Tightness}: in Appendix~\ref{app:tightness}, we provide a function which is not in the RKHS and for which the tightest possible approximation scales as
$\delta^{-2 /( d/2 + \alpha - 2)}$. Thus the linear scaling of the rate as $d/2 + \alpha$ is not improvable (but constants are).
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Linear functions}
In this section, we consider a linear function on $\mathbb{S}^d$, that is $g(x) = v^\top x$ for a certain $v \in \mathbb{S}^d$, and compute its norm (or upper-bound thereof) both for $ \mathcal{G}_1$ and $ \mathcal{G}_2$, which is independent of $v$ and finite. In the following propositions, the notation $\approx$ means asymptotic equivalents when $d \to \infty$.
\begin{proposition}[Norms of linear functions on the sphere]
\label{prop:linear-sphere}
Assume that $g: \mathbb{S}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ is such $g(x) = v^\top x$ for a certain $v \in \mathbb{S}^d$.
If $\alpha=0$, then $\gamma_1(g) \leqslant \gamma_2(g) = \frac{ 2 d \pi}{d-1} \approx 2 \pi$.
If $\alpha=1$, then $\gamma_1(g) \leqslant 2$, and for all $\alpha \geqslant 1$,
$\gamma_1(g) \leqslant \gamma_2(g) =
\frac{d}{d-1}\frac{4\pi}{\alpha} \frac{\Gamma(\alpha/2+d/2+1)}{\Gamma(\alpha/2) \Gamma(d/2+1)} \approx C d^{\alpha/2}$.
\end{proposition}
We see that for $\alpha=1$, the $\gamma_1$-norm is less than a constant, and is much smaller than the $\gamma_2$-norm (which scales as $\sqrt{d}$). For $\alpha \geqslant 2$, we were not able to derive better bounds for $\gamma_1$ (other than the value of $\gamma_2)$.
\subsection{Functions of projections}
If $g(x) = \varphi(w^\top x)$ for some unit-norm $w \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ and $\varphi$ a function defined on the real-line, then the value of the norms $\gamma_2$ and $\gamma_1$ differ significantly. Indeed, for $\gamma_1$,
we may consider a new variable $\tilde{x} \in \mathbb{S}^1 \subset \mathbb{R}^2$, with $\tilde{x}_1 = w^\top x$, and the function $\tilde{g}(x) = \varphi(\tilde{x}_1)$. We may then apply Prop.~\ref{prop:finites-sphere} to $\tilde{g}$ with $d=1$. That is, if $\varphi$ is $(\alpha+1)$-times differentiable with bounded derivatives, there exists a decomposition $\tilde{g}(\tilde{x}) = \int_{\mathbb{S}^1} \tilde{\mu}(\tilde{v}) \sigma( \tilde{v}^\top \tilde{x}) d \tilde{\mu}$, with $\gamma_1(\tilde{g}) = |\tilde{\mu}|(\mathbb{S}^1)$. If we consider any vector $t \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ which is orthogonal to $w$ in $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$, then, we may define a measure $\mu$ supported in the circle defined by the two vectors $w$ and $t$ and which is equal to $\tilde{\mu}$ on that circle. The total variation of $\mu$ is the one of $\tilde{\mu}$ while $g$ can be decomposed using $\mu$ and thus $\gamma_1(g) \leqslant
\gamma_1(\tilde{g})$. Similarly,
Prop.~\ref{prop:approx-sphere} could also be applied (and will for obtaining generalization bounds), also our reasoning works for any low-dimensional projections: the dependence on a lower-dimensional projection allows to reduce smoothness requirements.
However, for the RKHS norm $\gamma_2$, this reasoning does not apply. For example, a certain function~$\varphi$ exists, which is $s$-times differentiable, as shown in Appendix~\ref{app:tightness}, for $s \leqslant \frac{d}{2} + \alpha$ (when $s-\alpha$ is even), and is not in $ \mathcal{G}_2$. Thus, given Prop.~\ref{prop:finites-sphere}, the dependence on a uni-dimensional projection does not make a difference regarding the level of smoothness which is required to belong to $ \mathcal{G}_2$.
\subsection{From the unit-sphere $\mathbb{S}^d$ to $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$}
\label{sec:tosphere}
We now extend the results above to functions defined on $\mathbb{R}^d$, to be approximated by functions in $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and $ \mathcal{F}_2$.
More precisely, we first extend Prop.~\ref{prop:finites-sphere} and Prop.~\ref{prop:approx-sphere}, and then consider norms of linear functions and functions of projections.
\begin{proposition}[Finite variation]
\label{prop:finite}
Assume that $f : \mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ is such that all $i$-th order derivatives exist and are upper-bounded on the ball
$\{ \| x\|_q \leqslant R\}$
by $ \eta / R^{i}$ for $i \in \{0,\dots,k\}$,
where $s$ is the smallest integer such that $s \geqslant (d - 1)/2 + \alpha + 1$; then $f \in \mathcal{F}_2$ and $\gamma_2(f) \leqslant C(d,\alpha) \eta$, for a constant $C(d,\alpha)$ that depends only on $d$ and $\alpha$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By assumption, the function $x\mapsto f(Rx)$ has all its derivatives bounded by a constant times~$\eta$. Moreover, we have defined $g(t,a) = f\big( \frac{Rt}{a} \big) a^\alpha $ so that all derivatives are bounded by $\eta$. The result then follows immediately from Prop.~\ref{prop:finites-sphere}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}[Approximation of Lipschitz-continuous functions]
\label{prop:approx}
For $\delta$ larger than a constant that depends only on $d$ and $\alpha$, for any function $f : \mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ such that for all $x,y$ such that $\|x\|_q \leqslant R$ and $\| y\|_q \leqslant R$, $|f(x)| \leqslant \eta$ and $|f(x) - f(y) | \leqslant \eta R^{-1} \|x-y\|_q$, there exists $g \in \mathcal{F}_2$ such that $\gamma_2(g) \leqslant \delta$ and
$$\sup_{
\| x\|_q \leqslant R} | f(x) - g(x) | \leqslant C(d,\alpha) \eta
\Big(\frac{ \delta }{\eta} \Big)^{-1/(\alpha+(d-1)/2)} \log \Big(\frac{ \delta }{\eta} \Big) .
$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
With the same reasoning as above, we obtain that $g$ is Lipschitz-continuous with constant $\eta $, we thus get the desired approximation error from Prop.~\ref{prop:approx-sphere}.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Linear functions.}
If $f(x) = w^\top x + b$, with $\|w\|_2 \leqslant \eta$ and $ b \leqslant \eta R$,
then for $\alpha=1$, it is straightforward that $\gamma_1(f) \leqslant 2 R\eta$. Moreover, we have $\gamma_2(f) \sim C R\eta$. For other values of $\alpha$, we also have $\gamma_1$-norms less than a constant (depending only of $\alpha$) times $R\eta$. The RKHS norms are bit harder to compute since linear functions for $f$ leads to linear functions for $g$ only for $\alpha=1$.
\paragraph{Functions of projections.}
If $f(x) = \varphi(w^\top x)$ where $\|w\|_2\leqslant \eta$ and $\varphi:\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ is a function, then the norm of $f$ is the same as the norm of the function $\varphi$ on the interval $[-R\eta, R\eta]$. This is a consequence of the fact that the total mass of a Radon measure remains bounded even when the support has measure zero (which might not be the case for the RKHS defined in \mysec{rkhs}).
For the RKHS, there is no such results and it is in general not adaptive.
More generally, if $f(x) = \Phi(W^\top x)$ for $W \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times s}$ with the largest singular value of $W$ less than~$\eta$, and $\Phi$ a function from $\mathbb{R}^s$ to $\mathbb{R}$, then for $\|x\|_2 \leqslant R$, we have $\| W^\top x\|_2 \leqslant R\eta$, and thus we may apply our results for $d=s$.
\paragraph{$\ell_1$-penalty on input weights ($p$=1).}
When using an $\ell_1$-penalty on input weights instead of an $\ell_2$-penalty, the results in Prop.~\ref{prop:finite} and \ref{prop:approx} are unchanged (only the constants that depend on $d$ are changed). Moreover, when $\| x\|_\infty \leqslant 1$ almost surely, functions of the form $f(x) = \varphi(w^\top x)$ where $\|w\|_1\leqslant \eta$ and $\varphi:\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ is a function, will also inherit from properties of $\varphi$ (without any dependence on dimension). Similarly, for functions of the form $f(x) = \Phi(W^\top x)$ for $W \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times s}$ with all columns of $\ell_1$-norm less than $\eta$, we have $\|
W^\top x\|_\infty \leqslant R\eta$ and we can apply the $s$-dimensional result.
\subsection{Related work}
\label{sec:related}
In this section, we show how our results from the previous sections relate to existing work on neural network approximation theory.
\paragraph{Approximation of Lipschitz-continuous functions with finitely many neurons.} In this section, we only consider the case $\alpha=1$, for which we have two approximation bounds: Prop.~\ref{prop:approx} which approximates any $\eta$-Lipschitz-continuous function by a function with finite $\gamma_1$-norm less than $\delta$ and uniform error less than $\displaystyle \eta
\big({ \delta }/{\eta} \big)^{-2/(d+1)} \log \big({ \delta }/{\eta} \big) $, and Prop.~\ref{prop:neurons} which shows that a function with $\gamma_1$-norm less than $\delta$, may be approximated with $r$ neurons with uniform error $\delta r ^{- ( d +3 )/(2d)}$.
Thus, given $r$ neurons, we get an approximation of the original function with uniform error
$$
\eta
\big({ \delta }/{\eta} \big)^{-2/(d+1)} \log \big({ \delta }/{\eta} \big)
+\delta r ^{- ( d +3 )/(2d)}.
$$
We can optimize over $\delta$, and use $\delta = \eta n^{(d+1)/(2d)}$, to obtain a uniform approximation bound proportional to $ {\eta (\log n)}{n^{-1/d}}$, for approximating an $\eta$-Lipschitz-continuous function with $n$ neurons.
\paragraph{Approximation by ridge functions.} The approximation properties of single hidden layer neural networks have been studied extensively, where they are often referred to as ``ridge function'' approximations. As shown by \citet[Corollary 6.10]{pinkus1999approximation}---based on a result from~\citet{petrushev1998approximation}, the approximation order of $n^{-1/d}$ for the rectified linear unit was already known, but only in $L_2$-norm (and without the factor $\log n$), and without any constraints on the input and output weights. In this paper, we provide an explicit control of the various weights, which is needed for computing estimation errors.
Moreover, while the two proof techniques use spherical harmonics, the proof of~\citet{petrushev1998approximation} relies on quadrature formulas for the associated Legendre polynomials, while ours relies on the relationship with the associated positive definite kernels, is significantly simpler, and offers additional insights into the problem (relationship with convex neural networks and zonoids). \citet[Theorem 2.3]{maiorov2006approximation} also derives a similar result, but in $L_2$-norm (rather than uniform norm), and for sigmoidal activation functions (which are bounded). Note finally, that the order $O(n^{-1/d})$ cannot be improved~\citep[][Theorem 4.2]{devore1989optimal}. Also, \citet[Theorem 5]{maiorov2000near} derive similar upper and lower bounds based on a random sampling argument which is close to using random features in the RKHS setting described in \mysec{RKHS}.
\section{Generalization bounds}
\label{sec:adaptivity}
\label{sec:bounds}
Our goal is to derive the generalization bounds outlined in \mysec{learning-losses}. That is, given some distribution over the pairs $(x,y) \in \mathcal{X}\times \mathcal{Y}$, a loss function $\ell: \mathcal{Y} \times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$, our aim is to find a function $f: \mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ such that $J(f) = {\mathbb E} \big[ \ell(y,f(x)) \big]$ is small, given some i.i.d.~observations $(x_i,y_i)$, $i=1,\dots,n$. We consider the empirical risk minimization framework over a space of functions $ \mathcal{F}$, equipped with a norm $\gamma$ (in our situations, $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and $ \mathcal{F}_2$, equipped with $\gamma_1$ or $\gamma_2$). The empirical risk $\hat{J}(f) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \ell(y_i,f(x_i))$, is minimized by constraining $f$ to be in the ball $\mathcal{F}^\delta = \{ f \in \mathcal{F}, \ \gamma(f) \leqslant \delta \}$.
We assume that almost surely, $\| x\|_q \leqslant R$, that the function $u \mapsto \ell(y,u)$ is $G$-Lipschitz-continuous on $\{ |u| \leqslant \sqrt{2} \delta \}$, and that almost surely, $\ell(y,0) \leqslant G \delta $.
As before $z$ denotes $z=(x^\top, R)^\top$ so that $\| z\|_q \leqslant \sqrt{2} R$.
This corresponds to the following examples:
\vspace*{-.125cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] Logistic regression and support vector machines: we have $G = 1$.
\item[--] Least-squares regression: we take $G = \max\big\{ \sqrt{2} \delta + \| y\|_\infty , \frac{\| y\|_\infty^2}{\sqrt{2} \delta} \big\}$. \end{itemize}
Approximation errors $\inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}^\delta } J(f) - \inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}} J(f)$ will be obtained from the approximation results from \mysec{approx} by assuming that the optimal target function $f_\ast$ has a specific form. Indeed, we have:
$$\inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}^\delta } J(f) - J(f_\ast)
\leqslant G \inf_{f\in \mathcal{F}^\delta } \Big\{ \sup_{\| x\|_q \leqslant R} | f(x) - f_\ast(x) | \Big\}.$$
We now deal with estimation errors $ \sup_{ f \in \mathcal{F}^\delta} | \hat{J}(f) - J(f) | $ using Rademacher complexities.
\subsection{Estimation errors and Rademacher complexity}
\label{sec:rademacher}
The following proposition bounds the uniform deviation between $J$ and its empirical counterpart $\hat{J}$. This result is standard~\citep[see, e.g.,][]{bartlett2003rademacher} and may be extended in bounds that hold with high-probability.
\begin{proposition}[Uniform deviations]
\label{prop:rademacher}
We have the following bound on the expected uniform deviation:
$${\mathbb E} \bigg[ \sup_{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta } | J(f) - \hat{J}(f)| \bigg]
\leqslant 4 \frac{G \delta}{\sqrt{n}} C(p,d,\alpha),$$
with the following constants:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] for $\alpha \geqslant 1$, $C(p,d ,\alpha) \leqslant \alpha \sqrt{ 2 \log (d+1)}$ for $p=1$ and $C(p,d,\alpha) \leqslant \frac{\alpha}{\sqrt{p-1}}$ for $p \in (1,2]$
\item[--] for $\alpha =0$, $C(p,d ,\alpha) \leqslant C\sqrt{d+1}$, where $C$ is a universal constant.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We use the standard framework of Rademacher complexities and get:
\begin{eqnarray*}
& & {\mathbb E} \sup_{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta } | J(f) - \hat{J}(f)| \\
& \leqslant & 2 {\mathbb E} \sup_{\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta} \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i \ell(y_i,f(x_i) ) \bigg| \mbox{ using Rademacher random variables } \tau_i, \\
& \leqslant & 2 {\mathbb E} \sup_{\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta} \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i \ell(y_i, 0 ) \bigg|
+ 2 {\mathbb E} \sup_{\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta} \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i \big[ \ell(y_i, f(x_i) ) - \ell(y_i,0) \big]\bigg|
\\
& \leqslant & 2 \frac{G \delta}{\sqrt{n}}
+ 2 G {\mathbb E} \sup_{\gamma(f) \leqslant \delta } \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i f(x_i) \bigg|
\mbox{ using the Lipschitz-continuity of the loss},\\
& \leqslant & 2 \frac{G \delta}{\sqrt{n}}
+ 2 G {\delta} {\mathbb E} \sup_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1/R } \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i (v^\top z_i)_+ ^\alpha \bigg| \mbox{ using \eq{incr}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We then take different routes for $\alpha \geqslant 1$ and $\alpha = 0$.
For $\alpha \geqslant 1$, we have the upper-bound
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathbb E} \sup_{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta } | J(f) - \hat{J}(f)| & \leqslant & 2 \frac{G \delta}{\sqrt{n}}
+ 2 {G\delta \alpha} {\mathbb E} \sup_{ \| v\|_p \leqslant 1/R } \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i v^\top z_i \bigg| \\
& & \hspace*{4cm} \mbox{ using the $\alpha$-Lipschitz-cont.~of } (\cdot)_+^\alpha \mbox{ on } [-1,1],
\\
& \leqslant & 2 \frac{G \delta}{\sqrt{n}}
+ 2 \frac{ G \alpha\delta}{R n} {\mathbb E} \bigg\| \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i z_i \bigg\|_q .
\end{eqnarray*}
From~\citet{kakade2009complexity}, we get the following bounds on Rademacher complexities:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--]
If $ p \in (1,2]$, then $q \in [2,\infty)$, and
${\mathbb E} \big\| \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i z_i \big\|_q \leqslant {\sqrt{q-1}} R\sqrt{n}
= \frac{1}{\sqrt{p-1}} R\sqrt{n}$
\item[--]
If $p=1$, then $q = \infty$, and
$ {\mathbb E} \big\| \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i z_i \big\|_q \leqslant R\sqrt{n} \sqrt{ 2 \log(d+1) }$.
\end{itemize}
Overall, we have ${\mathbb E} \big\| \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i z_i \big\|_q \leqslant \sqrt{n} R C(p,d)$ with $C(p,d)$ defined above, and thus
$$
{\mathbb E} \sup_{ \gamma(f) \leqslant \delta } | J(f) - \hat{J}(f)|
\leqslant 2 \frac{G \delta}{\sqrt{n}} ( 1 + \alpha C(p,d)) \leqslant 4 \frac{G \delta \alpha}{\sqrt{n}} C(p,d).$$
For $\alpha =0$, we can simply go through the VC-dimension of half-hyperplanes, which is equal to $d$, and Theorem 6 from~\citet{bartlett2003rademacher}, that shows that
$ {\mathbb E} \sup_{ v \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1} } \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \tau_i 1_{v^\top z_i} \bigg|
\leqslant C \frac{\sqrt{d+1}}{\sqrt{n}}$, where $C$ is a universal constant.
Note that using standard results from Rademacher complexities, we have, with probability greater than $1-u$,
$ \displaystyle
\sup_{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta } | J(f) - \hat{J}(f)|
\leqslant {\mathbb E} \sup_{ \gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta } | J(f) - \hat{J}(f)| + \frac{2 G \delta}{\sqrt{n}} \sqrt{\log \frac{2}{u}}
$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Generalization bounds for $\ell_2$-norm constraints on input weights ($p=2$)}
We now provide generalization bounds for the minimizer of the empirical risk given the contraint that $\gamma_1(f) \leqslant \delta $ for a well chosen $\delta$, that will depend on the assumptions regarding the target function~$f_\ast$, listed in \mysec{intro}. In this section, we consider an $\ell_2$-norm on input weights $w$, while in the next section, we consider the $\ell_1$-norm. The two situations are summarized and compared in Table~\ref{tab:table}, where we consider that $\| x\|_\infty \leqslant r$ almost surely, which implies that our bound $R$ will depend on dimension as $R \leqslant r\sqrt{d}$.
Our generalization bounds are expected values of the excess expected risk for a our estimator (where the expectation is taken over the data).
\paragraph{Affine functions.} We assume $f_\ast(x) = w^\top x +b $, with $\|w\|_2 \leqslant \eta$ and
$|b| \leqslant R \eta$. Then, as seen in \mysec{tosphere}, $f_\ast \in \mathcal{F}_1$ with $\gamma_1(f_\ast) \leqslant C(\alpha) \eta R$.
From Prop.~\ref{prop:rademacher}, we thus get a generalization bound proportional to $\frac{GR\eta}{\sqrt{n}}$ times a constant (that may depend on $\alpha$), which is the same as assuming directly that we optimize over linear predictors only.
The chosen $\delta$ is then a constant times $R \eta$, and does not grow with $n$, like in parametric estimation (although we do use a non-parametric estimation procedure).
\paragraph{Projection pursuit.} We assume $f_\ast(x) = \sum_{j=1}^k f_j(w_j^\top x )$, with
$\|w_j\|_2 \leqslant \eta$ and each $f_j$ bounded by $\eta R$ and $1$-Lipschitz continuous. From Prop.~\ref{prop:approx}, we may approach each $x \mapsto f_j(w_j^\top x )$ by a function with $\gamma_1$-norm less than $\delta \eta R$ and uniform approximation $C(\alpha) \eta R \delta^{-1/\alpha} \log \delta$. This leads to a total approximation error of $k C(\alpha) G \eta R \delta^{-1/\alpha} \log \delta$ for a norm
less than $k \delta \eta R$.
For $\alpha \geqslant 1$, from Prop.~\ref{prop:rademacher}, the estimation error is
$\frac{kGR\eta \delta}{\sqrt{n}}$, with an overall bound
of $ C(\alpha) kGR\eta \big( \frac{\delta}{\sqrt{n}} + \delta^{-1/\alpha} \log \delta \big)$.
With $\delta = n^{\alpha/2(\alpha+1)}$ (which grows with $n$), we get an optimized generalization bound of
$ C(\alpha) kGR\eta \frac{ \log n }{ n^{1/(2\alpha+2)} }$, with a scaling independent of the dimension $d$ (note however that $R$ typically grow with $\sqrt{d}$, i.e., $r\sqrt{d}$, if we have a bound in $\ell_\infty$-norm for all our inputs $x$).
For $\alpha = 0$, from Prop.~\ref{prop:finite}, the target function belongs to $ \mathcal{F}_1$ with a norm less than
$ k GR \eta$, leading to an overall generalization bound of $\frac{kGR\eta \sqrt{d} }{\sqrt{n}}$.
Note that when the functions $f_j$ are exactly the activation functions, the bound is better, as these functions directly belong to the space $ \mathcal{F}_1$.
\paragraph{Multi-dimensional projection pursuit.} We extend the situation above, by assuming $f_\ast(x) = \sum_{j=1}^k F_j(W_j^\top x )$ with each $W_j \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times s}$ having all singular values less than $\eta$ and each $F_j$
bounded by $\eta R$ and $1$-Lipschitz continuous. From Prop.~\ref{prop:approx}, we may approach each $x \mapsto F_j(W_j^\top x )$ by a function with $\gamma_1$-norm less than $\delta \eta R$ and uniform approximation $C(\alpha,s) \eta R \delta^{-1/( \alpha+(s-1)/2)} \log \delta$. This leads to a total approximation error of $k C(\alpha,s) G \eta R \delta^{-1/( \alpha+(s-1)/2)} \log \delta$.
For $\alpha \geqslant 1$, the estimation error is
$ {kGR\eta \delta}/{\sqrt{n}}$, with an overall bound
of $ C(\alpha,s) kGR\eta \big( {\delta}/{\sqrt{n}} + \delta^{-1/( \alpha+(s-1)/2)} \log \delta \big)$. With $\delta = n^{(\alpha+(s-1)/2)/ (2\alpha+s-1)}$, we get an optimized bound of
$ \frac{ C(\alpha,s) kGR\eta }{ n^{1/(2\alpha+s+1)} }\log n$.
For $\alpha = 0$, we have
an overall bound
of $ C(s) kGR\eta \big( \delta^{-2/(s-1)} \log \delta + \frac{\delta \sqrt{d}}{\sqrt{n}}\big)$, and with
$\delta = (n/d)^{(s-1)/(s+1)}$, we get a generalization bound scaling as
$ \frac{ C(s) kGR\eta }{ (n/d)^{1/(s+1)} }\log (n/d)$.
Note that for $s=d$ and $k=1$, we recover the usual Lipschitz-continuous assumption, with a rate of
$ \frac{ C(\alpha,d) kGR\eta }{ n^{1/(2\alpha+d+1)} }\log n$.
\begin{table}
\hspace*{-.25cm}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\textcolor{white}{$ \Big|$} function space & $\| \cdot \|_2$, $\alpha \geqslant 1$ & $\| \cdot \|_1$, $\alpha \geqslant 1$ & $\alpha=0$ \\
\hline
\textcolor{white}{$ \bigg|$} $w^\top x + b$ & $\frac{\displaystyle d^{1/2}}{\displaystyle n^{1/2}}$ &$\sqrt{q} \big( \frac{ \displaystyle \log d}{ \displaystyle n}\big)^{1/2}$ & $
\frac{\displaystyle ( dq )^{1/2} }{ \displaystyle n^{1/2}} $\\
\hline
\textcolor{white}{$ \bigg|$} $\displaystyle \!\!\!\!\!\! \sum_{j=1}^k f_j( w_j^\top x)$, $w_j \in \mathbb{R}^d \!\!\!$ &
$
\frac{\displaystyle k d^{1/2}}{ \displaystyle n^{1/(2\alpha+2)}} \log n $
& $
\frac{\displaystyle k q^{1/2} (\log d)^{ 1/(\alpha+1)} }{ \displaystyle n^{1/(2\alpha+2)}} \log n $ & $
\frac{\displaystyle k ( dq )^{1/2} }{ \displaystyle n^{1/2}} $ \\
\hline
\textcolor{white}{$ \bigg|$} $ \displaystyle \!\!\!\!\! \sum_{j=1}^k f_j( W_j^\top x)$, $W_j \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times s}\!\! $ &
$ \!\!
\frac{\displaystyle k d^{1/2} }{ \displaystyle n^{1/(2\alpha+s+1)}} \log n \!\! $
& $ \!
\frac{\displaystyle k q^{1/2} (\log d)^{ 1/(\alpha+(s+1)/2)} }{ \displaystyle n^{1/(2\alpha+s+1)}} \log n \! \!$
& $ \!\!
\frac{\displaystyle ( dq )^{1/2} d^{ 1/(s+1)} }{ \displaystyle n^{1/( s+1)}} \log n \!\! $ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of generalization bounds. See text for details.}
\label{tab:table}
\end{table}
\vspace*{.5cm}
We can make the following observations:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] \emph{Summary table}: when we know a bound $r$ on all dimensions of $x$, then we may take $R = r \sqrt{d}$; this is helpful in comparisons in Table~\ref{tab:table}.
\item[--] \emph{Dependence on $d$}: when making only a global Lipschitz-continuity assumption, the generalization bound has a bad scaling in $n$, i.e., as $n^{-1/(2\alpha+d+1)}$, which goes down to zero slowly when $d$ increases. However, when making structural assumptions regarding the dependence on unknown lower-dimensional subspaces, the scaling in $d$ disappears.
\item[--] \emph{Comparing different values of $\alpha$}: the value $\alpha=0$ always has the best scaling
in $n$, but constants are better for $\alpha \geqslant 1$ (among which $\alpha=1$ has the better scaling in $n$).
\item[--] \emph{Bounds for $ \mathcal{F}_2$}: The simplest upper bound for the penalization by the space $ \mathcal{F}_2$ depends on the approximation properties of $ \mathcal{F}_2$. For linear functions and $\alpha=1$, it is less than $\sqrt{d} \eta R$, with a bound
$\frac{GR\eta \sqrt{d}}{\sqrt{n}}$. For the other values of $\alpha$, there is a constant $C(d)$. Otherwise, there is no adaptivity and all other situations only lead to upper-bounds of $O(n^{-1/(2\alpha + d+ 1)})$. See more details in \mysec{comp}.
\item[--] \emph{Sample complexity}: Note that the generalization bounds above may be used to obtain sample complexity results such as
$d \varepsilon^{-2}$ for affine functions, $( \varepsilon k^{-1} d^{-1/2} )^{-2\alpha-2}$ for projection pursuit, and
$
( \varepsilon k^{-1} d^{-1/2} ) ^{ -s-1-2\alpha}
$ for the generalized version (up to logarithmic terms).
\item[--] \emph{Relationship to existing work}: \citet[Theorem 1.1]{maiorov2006approximation} derives similar results for neural networks with sigmoidal activation functions (that tend to one at infinity) and the square loss only, and for a level of smoothness of the target function which grows with dimension (in this case, once can get easily rates of $n^{-1/2}$). Our result holds for problems where only bounded first-order derivatives are assumed. \end{itemize}
\paragraph{Lower bounds.}
In the sections above, we have only provided generalization bounds. Although interesting, deriving lower-bounds for the generalization performance when the target function belongs to certain function classes is out of the scope of this paper. Note however, that results from~\citet{karthik} suggest that the Rademacher complexities of the associated function classes provide such lower-bounds. For general Lipschitz-functions, these Rademacher complexities decreases as $n^{- \max\{d,2\}}$ \citep{luxburg2004distance}.
\subsection{Generalization bounds for $\ell_1$-norm constraints on input weights ($p=1$)}
\label{sec:highdim}
We consider the same three situations, assuming that linear predictors have at most $q$ non-zero elements. We assume that each component of $x$ is almost surely bounded by $r$ (i.e., a bound in $\ell_\infty$-norm).
\paragraph{Affine functions.} We assume $f_\ast(x) = w^\top x +b $, with $\|w\|_2 \leqslant \eta$ and
$|b| \leqslant R \eta$. Given that we have assumed that $w$ has at most $w$ non-zeros, we have $\|w\|_1 \leqslant \sqrt{q} \eta$.
Then, $f_\ast \in \mathcal{F}_1$ with $\gamma_1(f) \leqslant C(\alpha) \eta r \sqrt{q}$.
From Prop.~\ref{prop:rademacher},
we thus get a rate of $\frac{Gr\eta\sqrt{q \log(d)}}{\sqrt{n}}$ times a constant (that may depend on $\alpha$), which is the same as assuming directly that we optimize over linear predictors only~\citep{buhlmann2011statistics}. We recover a high-dimensional phenomenon (although with a slow rate in $1/\sqrt{n}$), where $d$ may be much larger than $n$, as long as $\log d$ is small compared to $n$.
The chosen $\delta$ is then a constant times $r \eta \sqrt{q}$ (and does not grow with $n$).
\paragraph{Projection pursuit.} We assume $f_\ast(x) = \sum_{j=1}^k f_j(w_j^\top x )$, with
$\|w_j\|_2 \leqslant \eta$ (which implies $\|w_j\|_1 \leqslant \sqrt{q} \eta$ given our sparsity assumption) and each $f_j$ bounded by $\eta r \sqrt{q}$ and $1$-Lipschitz continuous. We may approach each $x \mapsto f_j(w_j^\top x )$ by a function with $\gamma_1$-norm less than $\delta \eta r \sqrt{q}$ and uniform approximation $C(\alpha) \eta r \sqrt{q} \delta^{-1/\alpha} \log \delta$. This leads to a total approximation error of $k C(\alpha) G \eta r \sqrt{q} \delta^{-1/\alpha} \log \delta$ for a norm
less than $k \delta \eta r\sqrt{q} $.
For $\alpha \geqslant 1$, the estimation error is
$\frac{kGr \eta \delta \sqrt{q \log d}}{\sqrt{n}}$, with an overall bound
of $ C(\alpha) kGr \sqrt{q} \eta \big( \delta^{-1/\alpha} \log \delta + \frac{\delta\sqrt{\log d}}{\sqrt{n}}\big)$. With $\delta = (n/\log d) ^{\alpha/2(\alpha+1)}$, we get an optimized bound of
$ C(\alpha) kGr \sqrt{q} \eta \frac{ \log n (\log d)^{1/(2\alpha+2)} }{ n^{1/(2\alpha+2)} }$, with a scaling only dependent in $d$ with a logarithmic factor.
For $\alpha = 0$, the target function belongs to $ \mathcal{F}_1$ with a norm less than
$ k Gr \sqrt{q} \eta$, leading to an overal bound of $\frac{kGr \eta \sqrt{q \log d} }{\sqrt{n}}$ (the sparsity is not helpful in this case).
\paragraph{Multi-dimensional projection pursuit.} We assume
$f_\ast(x) = \sum_{j=1}^k F_j(W_j^\top x )$ with each $W_j \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times s}$, having all columns with $\ell_2$-norm less than $\eta$ (note that this is a weaker requirement than having all singular values that are less than $\eta$). If we assume that each of these columns has at most~$q$ non-zeros, then the $\ell_1$-norms are less than $r \sqrt{q}$ and we may use the approximation properties described at the end of \mysec{tosphere}. We also assume that each $F_j$
is bounded by $\eta r \sqrt{q}$ and $1$-Lipschitz continuous (with respect to the $\ell_2$-norm).
We may approach each $x \mapsto F_j(W_j^\top x )$ by a function with $\gamma_1$-norm less than $\delta \eta r \sqrt{q}$ and uniform approximation $C(\alpha,s) \eta r \sqrt{q} \delta^{-1/( \alpha+(s-1)/2)} \log \delta$. This leads to a total approximation error of $k C(\alpha,s) G \eta r \sqrt{q} \delta^{-1/( \alpha+(s-1)/2)} \log \delta$.
For $\alpha \geqslant 1$, the estimation error is
$ {kGr\sqrt{q}\eta \delta \sqrt{ \log d }}/{\sqrt{n}}$, with an overall bound which is equal to
$ C(\alpha,s) kGr\sqrt{q}\eta \big( \delta^{-1/( \alpha+(s-1)/2)} \log \delta + \frac{\delta \sqrt{\log d}}{\sqrt{n}}\big)$. With $\delta = (n/\log d)^{(\alpha+(s-1)/2)/ (2\alpha+ s-1)}$, we get an optimized bound of
$ \displaystyle \frac{ C(\alpha,s) kGr\sqrt{q}\eta (\log d)^{1/(2\alpha+s+1)}}{ n^{1/(2\alpha+s+1)} }\log n$.
For $\alpha = 0$, we have the bound
$ \frac{ C(s) kGr \sqrt{q}\eta }{ (n/d)^{1/(s+1)} }\log (n/d)$, that is we cannot use the sparsity as the problem is invariant to the chosen norm on hidden weights.
\vspace*{.5cm}
We can make the following observations:
\vspace*{-.125cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] \emph{High-dimensional variable selection}: when $k=1$, $s = q$ and $W_1$ is a projection onto $q$ variables, then we obtain a bound proportional to
$ \frac{ \sqrt{q}\eta (\log d)^{1/(2\alpha+s+1)}}{ n^{1/(2\alpha+s+1)} }\log n $, which exhibits a high-dimensional scaling in a non-linear setting. Note that beyond sparsity, no assumption is made (in particular regarding correlations between input variables), and we obtain a high-dimensional phenomenon where $d$ may be much larger than $n$.
\item[--] \emph{Group penalties}: in this paper, we only consider $\ell_1$-norm on input weights; when doing joint variable selection for all basis functions, it may be worth using a group penalty~\citep{yuan2006model,grouplasso}.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Relationship to kernel methods and random sampling}
\label{sec:comp}
The results presented in the two sections above were using the space $ \mathcal{F}_1$, with an $L_1$-norm on the outputs weights (and either an $\ell_1$- or $\ell_2$-norm on input weights). As seen in Sections~\ref{sec:RKHS} and \ref{sec:kersigma}, when using an $L_2$-norm on output weights, we obtain a reproducing kernel Hilbert space $ \mathcal{F}_2$.
As shown in \mysec{approximation}, the space $ \mathcal{F}_2$ is significantly smaller than $ \mathcal{F}_1$, and in particular is not adaptive to low-dimensional linear structures, which is the main advantage of the space $ \mathcal{F}_1$. However, algorithms for $ \mathcal{F}_2$ are significantly more efficient, are there is no need for the conditional gradient algorithms presented in \mysec{cg}. The first possibility is to use the usual RKHS representer theorem with the kernel functions computed in \mysec{kersigma}, leading to a computation complexity of $O(n^2)$. Alternatively, as shown by~\citet{rahimi2007random}, one may instead sample $m$ basis functions that is $m$ different hidden units, keep the input weights fixed and optimize only the output layer with a squared $\ell_2$-penalty. This will quickly (i.e., the error goes down as $1/\sqrt{m}$) approach the non-parametric estimator based on penalizing by the RKHS norm $\gamma_2$. Note that this argument of random sampling has been used to study approximation bounds for neural networks with finitely many units~\citep{maiorov2000near}.
Given the usage of random sampling with $L_2$-penalties, it is thus tempting to sample weights, but now optimize an $\ell_1$-penalty, in order to get the non-parametric estimator obtained from penalizing by $\gamma_1$. When the number of samples $m$ tends to infinity, we indeed obtain an approximation that converges to $\gamma_1$ (this is simply a uniform version of the law of large numbers). However, the rate of convergence does depend on the dimension $d$, and in general exponentially many samples would be needed for a good approximation---see~\citet[Section 6]{siammatrix} for a more precise statement in the related context of convex matrix factorizations.
\subsection{Sufficient condition for polynomial-time algorithms}
\label{sec:oracle}
\label{sec:sufficient}
In order to preserve the generalization bounds presented above, it is sufficient to be able solve the problem, for any $y \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and $z_1,\dots,z_n \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:incrGGG}
\sup_{ \| v\|_p=1 } \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+^\alpha \bigg| ,
\end{equation}
\emph{up to a constant factor}. That is, there exists $\kappa \geqslant 1$, such that for all $y$ and $z$, we may compute $\hat{v}$ such that $\|\hat{v}\|_p=1$ and
$$
\bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (\hat{v}^\top z_i)_+^\alpha \bigg| \geqslant
\frac{1}{\kappa}
\sup_{ \| v\|_p=1 } \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+^\alpha \bigg|.$$
This is provably NP-hard for $\alpha=0$ (see \mysec{FW1}), and we conjecture it is the same for $\alpha \geqslant 1$. Once such algorithm is available, the approximate conditional gradient presented in \mysec{condgrad} leads to an estimator with the same generalization bound.
However, this is only a sufficient condition, and a simpler sufficient condition may be obtained. In the following, we consider $ \mathcal{V} = \{ v \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}, \ \| v\|_2 = 1\}$ and basis functions $\varphi_v(z) = (v^\top z)_+^\alpha$ (that is we specialize to the $\ell_2$-norm penalty on weight vectors). We consider a new variation norm $\hat{\gamma}_1$ which has to satisfy the following assumptions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] \emph{Lower-bound on $\gamma_1$}: It is defined from functions $\hat{\varphi}_{\hat{v}}$, for $\hat{v} \in \hat{ \mathcal{V}}$, where for any $v \in \mathcal{V}$, there exists $\hat{v} \in \hat{ \mathcal{V}}$ such that $\varphi_v = \hat{\varphi}_{\hat{v}}$. This implies that
the corresponding space $\hat{ \mathcal{F}}_1$ is larger than $ \mathcal{F}_1$ and that if $f \in \mathcal{F}_1$, then $\hat{\gamma}_1(f) \leqslant \gamma_1(f)$.
\item[--] \emph{Polynomial-time algorithm for dual norm}: The dual norm
$\displaystyle \sup_{\hat{v} \in \hat{ \mathcal{V}}} \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i \hat{\varphi}_{\hat{v}}(z_i) \bigg|$
may be computed in polynomial time.
\item[--] \emph{Performance guarantees for random direction}: There exists $\kappa>0$, such that for any vectors $z_1,\dots,z_n \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ with $\ell_2$-norm less than $R$, and random standard Gaussian vector $y \in \mathbb{R}^{n}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:incrG}
\sup_{\hat{v} \in \hat{ \mathcal{V}}} \bigg| \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i \hat{\varphi}_{\hat{v}}(x_i) \bigg| \leqslant \kappa \frac{R}{\sqrt{n}}.
\end{equation}
We may also replace the standard Gaussian vectors by Rademacher random variables.
\end{itemize}
We can then penalize by $\hat{\gamma}$ instead of $\gamma$. Since $\hat{\gamma}_1\leqslant \gamma_1$, approximation properties are transferred, and because of the result above, the Rademacher complexity for $\hat{\gamma}_1$-balls scales as well as for $\gamma_1$-balls.
In the next section, we show convex relaxations which cannot achieve these and leave the existence or non-existence of such norm $\hat{\gamma}_1$ as an open problem.
\section{Convex relaxations of the Frank-Wolfe step}
\label{sec:approximation}
\label{sec:gauge}
In this section, we provide approximation algorithms for the following problem of maximizing, for a given
$y \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and vectors $z_1,\dots,z_n$:
$$
\sup_{ \| v\|_p=1 } \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i (v^\top z_i)_+^\alpha
$$
These approximation algorithms may be divided in three families, as they may be based on (a) geometric interpretations as linear binary classification or computing Haussdorff distances (see \mysec{FW1} and \mysec{FW2}), (b) on direct relaxations, on (c) relaxations of sign vectors. For simplicity, we only focus on the case $p=2$ (that is $\ell_2$-constraint on weights) and on $\alpha=1$ (rectified linear units).
\subsection{Semi-definite programming relaxations}
We present two relaxations, which are of the form described in \mysec{oracle} (leading to potential generalization bounds) but do not attain the proper approximation scaling (as was checked empirically).
Note that all relaxations that end up being Lipschitz-continuous functions of $z$, will have at least the same scaling than the set of these functions. The Rademacher complexity of such functions is well-known, that is $1/\sqrt{n}$ for $d=1$, $\sqrt{ \frac{\log n}{n}}$ for $d=2$ and $n^{-1/d}$ for larger $d$~\citep{luxburg2004distance}. Unfortunately, the decay in $n$ is too slow to preserve generalization bounds (which would require a scaling in $1/\sqrt{n}$).
\paragraph{$d$-dimensional relaxation.}
We denote $u_i = (v^\top z_i)_+ = \frac{1}{2} v^\top z_i + \frac{1}{2}|v^\top z_i|$. We may then use
$
2 u_i - v^\top z_i = |v^\top z_i|
$
and, for $\| v\|_2=1$, $\| vv^\top z_i\|_2 = |v^\top z_i| = \sqrt{ z_i ^\top vv^\top z_i}$. By denoting $V = vv^\top$, the constraint that $u_i = (v^\top z_i)_+ = \frac{1}{2} v^\top z_i + \frac{1}{2}|v^\top z_i|$ is equivalent to
$$
\| V z_i \|_2 \leqslant 2 u_i - v^\top z_i \leqslant \sqrt{ z_i^\top V z_i }
\ \mbox{ and } \ V \succcurlyeq 0, \ \mathop{ \rm tr} V = 1, \ {\rm rank}(V) = 1.
$$
We obtain a convex relaxation when removing the rank constraint, that is
$$
\sup_{ V \succcurlyeq 0, \ \mathop{ \rm tr} V = 1, \ u \in \mathbb{R}^n } u^\top y
\ \mbox{ such that } \ \forall i \in \{1,\dots,n\}, \ \| V z_i \|_2 \leqslant 2 u_i - v^\top z_i \leqslant \sqrt{ z_i^\top V z_i }.
$$
\paragraph{$(n+d)$-dimensional relaxation.}
We may go further by also considering quadratic forms in $u \in \mathbb{R}^n$ defined above. Indeed, we have:
$$
(2 u_i - v^\top z_i )(2 u_j - v^\top z_j ) = |v^\top z_i| \cdot | v^\top z_j|
= | v^\top z_i z_j^\top v |
= |\mathop{ \rm tr} V z_i z_j^\top |, $$
which leads to a convex program in $U = uu^\top$, $V = vv^\top $ and $J = uv^\top$, that is a semidefinite program with $d+n$ dimensions, with the constraints
$$
4U_{ij} + x_j^\top V z_i - 2\delta_i^\top J z_j - 2 \delta_j^\top J z_i
\geqslant |\mathop{ \rm tr} V z_i z_j^\top |,
$$
and the usual semi-definite contraints $\displaystyle
\left( \begin{array}{cc} U & J \\ J^\top & V \end{array}\right) \succcurlyeq
\left( \begin{array}{c} u \\ v \end{array}\right)\left( \begin{array}{c} u \\ v \end{array}\right)^\top $, with the additional constraint that $4U_{ii} + z_i^\top V z_i - 4\delta_i^\top J z_i = \mathop{ \rm tr} V z_i z_i^\top$
If we add these constraints on top of the ones above, we obtain a tighter relaxation. Note that for this relaxation, we must have $\big[ (2 u_i - v^\top z_i ) - (2 u_j - v^\top z_j ) \big]$ less than a constant times $\| z_i - z_j\|_2$. Hence, the result mentioned above regarding
Lipschitz-continuous functions and the scaling of the upper-bound for random $y$ holds (with the dependence on $n$ which is not good enough to preserve the generalization bounds with a polynomial-time algorithm).
\subsection{Relaxation of sign vectors}
By introducing a sign vector $s \in \mathbb{R}^n$ such that $s_i \in\{-1,1\}$ and $s_i v^\top x_i = |v^\top x_i|$, we have the following relaxation with $S = ss^\top$, $V = vv^\top$ and $J = sv^\top$:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] Usual semi-definite constraint: $\displaystyle
\left( \begin{array}{cc} S & J \\ J^\top & V \end{array}\right) \succcurlyeq
\left( \begin{array}{c} s \\ v \end{array}\right)\left( \begin{array}{c} s \\ v \end{array}\right)^\top $,
\item[--] Unit/trace constraints: $\mathop{\rm diag}(S)=1$ and $\mathop{ \rm tr} V = 1$,
\item[--] Sign constraint: $\delta_i^\top J x_i \geqslant \max_{j \neq i} | \delta_j^\top J x_i |$.
\item[--] Additional constraint: $(x_i^\top V x_i)^{1/2} \leqslant \delta_i^\top J x_i$.
\end{itemize}
We then need to maximize $
\frac{1}{2n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i \delta_i^\top J x_i + \frac{1}{2n} \sum_{i=1}^n y_i v^\top x_i
$, which leads to a semidefinte program. Again empirically, it did not lead to the correct scaling as a function of $n$ for random Gaussian vectors $y \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have provided a detailed analysis of the generalization properties of convex neural networks with homogenous non-decreasing activation functions. Our main result is the adaptivity of the method to underlying linear structures such as the dependence on a low-dimensional subspace, a setting which includes non-linear variable selection.
All our current results apply to estimators for which no polynomial-time algorithm is known to exist and we have proposed sufficient conditions under which convex relaxations could lead to the same bounds, leaving open the existence or non-existence of such algorithms. Interestingly, these problems have simple geometric interpretations, either as binary linear classification, or computing the Haussdorff distance between two zonotopes.
In this work, we have considered a single real-valued output; the functional analysis framework readily extends to outputs in a finite-dimensional vector-space where vector-valued measures could be used, and then apply to multi-task or multi-class problems. However, the extension to multiple hidden layers does not appear straightforward as the units of the last hidden layers share the weights of the first hidden layers, which should require a new functional analysis framework.
|
\section{Multimode Laser Theory}
\label{sec:derivation_of_the_model}
The complex structure and the extreme openness of Random Lasers make these optical systems different from traditional cavity lasers.
From a theoretical point of view, the strong coupling to the external world requires a different treatment from the standard approach of traditional laser textbooks.
The problem of describing quantum systems strongly interacting with the environment has large interest and it is relevant not only for the physics of lasers
(see, e. g., Ref [\onlinecite{RotterReview}]).
The difficulty originates from the non-Hermiticity of the problem as the openness becomes relevant, so that the standard methods
to solve or quantize Hermitian operators do not apply in this case.
The quantum
system is localized in space. However, there is always a natural environment into which the quantum system with discrete states is embedded.
The environment consists of the continuum of extended scattering states into which the
discrete states of the system are embedded and can decay.
The coupling matrix between the discrete states of the system and the scattering
states of the continuum determine the lifetime of the states, which is, therefore, usually finite.
Several approaches are presented in literature to build a set of modes suitable for a separation of time and coordinates dependencies of various physical observables,
in particular the electric and magnetic fields. \cite{FoxLi,QuasimodeDutra,TureciPRA06,ZaitsevReview}
Here, we start from the system-and-bath approach of Ref. [\onlinecite{HackenbroichViviescasPRA03}],
in which a rigorous quantization of the field is possible.
We note, in particular, that the quantum treatment is necessary to compute the linewidth or the photon statistics of the output radiation.
In this approach, the contributions of radiative and localized
modes can be separated by the Feshbach projection method onto two orthogonal subspaces.\cite{Feshbach}
This leads to an effective theory in the subspace of localized modes with an effective
linear off-diagonal damping coupling.\cite{HackenbroichViviescasPRL02,HackenbroichViviescasPRA03,HackenbroichViviescasJOB04}
The atom-field system can, then, be described
via the complex amplitudes of the localized electromagnetic modes $\alpha_\lambda$
and the atomic raising operator $\sigma^\dagger_{-} =\ket{e} \bra{g} $ and inversion operator $\sigma_z = \ket{e} \bra{e} - \ket{g} \bra{g}$,
being $\ket{g}$ and $\ket{e}$ the ground and excited atom states.
The evolution of the operators can be expressed by the Jaynes-Cumming
Hamiltonian,\cite{JC_Hamiltonian1,JC_Hamiltonian2}
and, including the cavity loss, is expressed in the Heisenberg representation as \cite{HackenbroichSemiclassical}
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\alpha}_\lambda &=&
- \mathrm{i} \omega_\lambda \alpha_\lambda
- \sum_\mu \gamma_{\lambda \mu}
\alpha_\mu
\label{eq:JK_1}
\\
&&
+ \int d \mathbf{r} \, g^\dagger_\lambda (\mathbf{r}) \sigma_- (\mathbf{r}) + F_\lambda \, ,
\nonumber
\\
\dot{\sigma}_- (\mathbf{r}) &=&
-( \gamma_\perp + \mathrm{i} \omega_a ) \sigma_- (\mathbf{r})
\label{eq:JK_2}
\\
\nonumber
&& + 2 \sum_\mu g_\mu (\mathbf{r}) \sigma_z (\mathbf{r}) \alpha_\mu + F_- (\mathbf{r}) \, ,
\\
\dot{\sigma}_z(\mathbf{r}) &=&
\gamma_\parallel \left( S \rho(\mathbf{r}) -\sigma_z(\mathbf{r}) \right)
\label{eq:JK_3}
\\
&&
-\sum_\mu \left( g_\mu^\dagger (\mathbf{r}) \alpha^\dagger_\mu \sigma_- (\mathbf{r}) + \text{h.c.} \right) + F_z(\mathbf{r}) \, ,
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\gamma_{\lambda \mu}$ is the damping matrix associated to the openness of the cavity, \cite{HackenbroichViviescasPRL02,HackenbroichViviescasPRA03}
$\rho(\mathbf{r})$ the atom density,
$\omega_a$ the frequency of the atomic transition,
$\gamma_\perp$ the polarization decay rate,
$\gamma_\parallel$ the population-inversion decay rate
and
$S$ the pump intensity resulting from the interaction between the atoms and the external bath.
The noise term $F_\lambda$ follows from the coupling with the bath.
The field-atoms coupling constants are
\begin{align}
g_\lambda (\mathbf{r}) \equiv \frac{\omega_a p}{\sqrt{2 \hbar \epsilon_0 \omega_\lambda}} \mu_\lambda (\mathbf{r}) \, ,
\label{eq:couplings_g_definition}
\end{align}
where $p$ is the atomic dipole matrix element and the $\mu_\lambda(\mathbf{r})$ are the orthogonal set of the resonator eigenstates. \cite{HackenbroichViviescasPRL02,HackenbroichViviescasPRA03}
The interaction also gives rise to the noises $F_- (\mathbf{r})$ and $F_z (\mathbf{r})$, due, for example, to the finite lifetime of the excited states for the decay to states not involved in the stimulated emission process.
The semiclassical theory consists in replacing the operators with their expectation values.
It is assumed that the lifetimes of the modes are much longer than the characteristic times of pump and loss:
the atomic variables can then be adiabatically removed to obtain the (non-linear) equations for the field alone.
Consider first the case of weak pumping, so that it is possible to assume $\sigma_z (\mathbf{r}) = S \rho (\mathbf{r}) $ and
the unique stationary solution is $\alpha_\lambda = 0$ for all the modes.
In this case the deviations from the stationary state relax to zero with complex frequency $\omega_k$
given by the eigenvalues of the non-Hermitian matrix \cite{HackenbroichSemiclassical}
\begin{align}
& H_{\lambda \mu} =
\omega_\lambda \delta_{\lambda \mu}
- \mathrm{i} \gamma_{\lambda \mu}
+ \mathrm{i} G^{(2)}_{\lambda \mu} (\omega_k)
\, ,
\label{eq:G_linear_regime}
\\
&\text{with}
\quad
G_{\lambda \mu}^{(2)} (\omega) \equiv 2 S \int d \mathbf{r} \, \rho(\mathbf{r})
\frac{g_\mu^* (\mathbf{r}) g_\lambda (\mathbf{r})}{\mathrm{i} (\omega_a - \omega) + \gamma_\perp} \, .
\nonumber
\end{align}
In general, if the cavity is open and/or the atoms are not uniformly distributed in the resonator, the matrix $H_{\lambda \mu}$
is not diagonal:
the eigenvalues and eigenvectors are, hence, different from the case of cold cavity and depend parametrically on the pump strength $S$.
In particular, increasing $S$ the eigenvalues move up in the complex plane. The lasing threshold is reached when
one eigenvalue takes a positive imaginary part. In this case the gain exceeds the loss and the solution
$\alpha_\lambda = 0$ becomes unstable.
At the lasing threshold is, then, necessary to consider the time evolution of the atom operators that provides an effective non-linear coupling among the electromagnetic modes.
In this case the standard approach is to consider an expansion in power of the mode amplitudes.
One starts neglecting the quadratic term in Eq. (\ref{eq:JK_3}) obtaining the zero-order approximation, that replaced in Eq. (\ref{eq:JK_2}) gives the first order approximation
that replaced back in Eq. (\ref{eq:JK_3}) gives the second-order approximation and so forth.
Inserting the result into Eq. (\ref{eq:JK_1}) one can construct a perturbative approximation of the effective evolution of the mode amplitudes.
In the particular case of the \emph{free-running approximation}, \cite{HackenbroichSemiclassical}
that is assuming that the different lasing modes oscillate independently from each other (so that the phases are uncorrelated and the interaction concerns the intensities alone),
it is possible to resum the equation and obtain an expression for the mode intensities valid to all the orders in the perturbation theory (cf. Ref. [\onlinecite{ZaitsevDiagrammatic}]).
This approximation may be valid for the so-called non-resonant or incoherent feedback emission in disordered cavities,\cite{letokhov1968generation} where the interference effects do not play any role.
In this case the emission is due solely to amplified spontaneous emission, and, then, the spectrum is determined only by the gain curve of the active material.
This approach explains some simple properties of emission from disordered cavities. \cite{Markushev86, gouedard1993generation}
For the lasing regime, however, it is the multiple-scattering induced feedback that defines optical modes, with a well resolved frequency, a given bandwidth and spatial
profile.\cite{wiersma2008physics}
It, thus, becomes essential to include the phases into the analysis and consider the non-linear interactions non-perturbatively.
Since we are mainly interested in the characterization of the random lasing regime,
we do not assume the free-running approximation and limit ourselves to the non-linear third order theory. The subsequent orders may become relevant far above the threshold. From a statistical mechanics point of view
the orders beyond the third are not expected to change the universality class of the transition
for a large class of models (see, e.~g., Ref. [\onlinecite{CrisantiLeuzzi_sp_NPB}]).
Being specific, if one considers
$g^2 |a|^2 \ll \gamma_\perp \gamma_\parallel$, where $|a|^2$ is the typical intensity in the lasing regime,
the third order theory is exact.
\subsection{Cold Cavity vs Slow Amplitude Modes}
The evolution in the lasing regime is conveniently expressed in the basis of the slow amplitude modes.
A \emph{slow amplitude mode} with index $l$ is a solution such that it has a harmonic form for $t \gg 1$ and, therefore, its Fourier transform is proportional to $\delta (\omega-\omega_l)$.
By definition, a \emph{lasing mode} is a slow amplitude mode with a positive intensity at the solution.
In general the lasing modes are different from the cold cavity ones.
The steady-state solutions are different already in the linear regime, as $G^{(2)}_{\lambda \mu}$ is not diagonal, cf. Eq. (\ref{eq:G_linear_regime}).
We express the relationship between cold cavity modes $\alpha_\lambda$ and laser modes $a_k$ in the form
\begin{equation}
\alpha_\lambda (t) = \sum_k A_{\lambda k} \overline{a}_k (t)
, \qquad
\overline{a}_k (t) = a_k (t) \, \mathrm{e}^{- \mathrm{i} \omega_k t}
\label{eq:lasing_modes_decomposition}
\end{equation}
with $a_k (t)$ evolving on time scales much longer than $\omega_k^{-1}$, so that
$ \overline{a}_k (\omega) \simeq \delta (\omega - \omega_k) $.
Here and in the following we use Greek letters for cold cavity modes and Latin letters for the slow amplitude modes.
We consider a complete \emph{slow amplitude modes basis} in order to expand any mode and, in particular, invert Eq. (\ref{eq:lasing_modes_decomposition})
\begin{align}
& \overline{a}_k (t) = \sum_\lambda B_{k \lambda}^* \, \alpha_\lambda (t)
\quad , &
& B_{k \lambda}^*
=
\left( A_{k \lambda} \right)^{-1} \, .
\label{eq:decomposition_inverse}
\end{align}
Using the expansion in the slow amplitude modes
we can express the mode evolution Eq. (\ref{eq:JK_1}) at the third order as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:langevin_equation_lasing_modes}
\dot{a}_l(t) &= &
\sum_{k \mid \text{FMC} (l,k)} \Bigl[
\tilde{\gamma}_{lk} - S\, G^{(2)}_{lk}
\Bigr] a_k (t)
\\
&&
\nonumber - S
\sum_ { \mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (l,\mathbf{k}) }
G_{l \mathbf{k}}^{(4)}\,
a_{k_1} (t)\,
a_{k_2}^* (t)\,
a_{k_3} (t)
\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where the matrix $\tilde{\gamma}_{lk} $
is
\begin{align}
\tilde{\gamma}_{lk} &\equiv \sum_{\lambda \mu} B^*_{\lambda l} \gamma_{\lambda \mu} A_{\mu k}
\, ,
\end{align}
the left and right coupling constants for the slow amplitude modes are given by
\begin{align}
&g^{L }_{k} = \sum_\mu B_{\mu k} g_\mu
\, , &
&g^{R }_{k} = \sum_\mu A_{\mu k} g_\mu \, ,
\end{align}
and $G_{lk}^{(2)}$ and $G_{l\mathbf{k}}^{(4)}$ are functions of the frequencies
$\omega_{k}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:G2_coldcavity}
G_{l k}^{(2)} =& M^{(2)}_k \int d \mathbf{r} \, \rho(\mathbf{r}) \, g_l^{L *} (\mathbf{r}) \, g_k^{R} (\mathbf{r})
\, ,
\\
G_{ l \mathbf{k}}^{(4)} = &
M^{(4)}_{\mathbf{k}}
\int d \mathbf{r} \rho(\mathbf{r})
g^{L *}_l (\mathbf{r}) g_{k_1}^R (\mathbf{r}) g_{k_2}^{R *} (\mathbf{r}) g_{k_3}^R (\mathbf{r}) \, .
\label{eq:G4_coldcavity}
\end{eqnarray}
The coefficients $ M^{(2)}_{ k}$ and $ M^{(4)}_{ \mathbf{k}}$ are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
M_k^{(2)} &\equiv &
- \frac{1 }{ \pi \gamma_\perp }
\, D(\omega_k) \, ,
\nonumber
\\
\label{eq:definition_nonlinearCoupling}
M^{(4)}_{ \mathbf{k}}
&\equiv &
\frac{D(\omega_{k_3}) + D^* (\omega_{k_2}) }{2 \pi^3 \gamma_\perp^2 \gamma_\parallel }
\\
&&
\nonumber
\times D(\omega_{k_1}-\omega_{k_2}+\omega_{k_3})
D_\parallel (\omega_{k_3}-\omega_{k_2})
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{align}
& D_\parallel (\delta\omega) \equiv \left( 1 - \mathrm{i} \frac{\delta\omega}{\gamma_\parallel} \right)^{-1}
, &
D(\omega) \equiv \left( 1- \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega-\omega_a}{\gamma_\perp} \right)^{-1}
\label{eq:D}
\end{align}
In Eq. (\ref{eq:langevin_equation_lasing_modes}) we have stressed that by definition of slow amplitude,
$\overline{a}_k (\omega) \simeq \delta(\omega-\omega_k)$,
the sums are restricted to terms that meet the \emph{frequency matching conditions}
which, for generic $2n$ interacting modes, reads FMC$(k_1, \ldots, k_{2n})$:
\begin{align}
| \omega_{k_1} - \omega_{k_2} + \ldots + \omega_{k_{2n-1}} - \omega_{k_{2n}} | \lesssim \gamma \, .
\label{eq:frequencyMatching}
\end{align}
The finite linewidth $\gamma$ of the modes can be thoroughly derived only in a complete quantum theory.
In particular, the noise factors in Eqs. (\ref{eq:JK_1})-(\ref{eq:JK_3}) have to be included,
resulting in a weak time dependence of $\overline{a}_k(t)$ in Eq. (\ref{eq:lasing_modes_decomposition}).
Here, we include it in an effective way, as a parameter to suitably conform to different experimental situations.
We stress as, in general, the linear term of Eq.
(\ref{eq:langevin_equation_lasing_modes}) may have non-zero
off-diagonal terms. They are all zero when the frequencies are well
distinct, i.e., the spectral interspacing $\delta \omega \gg \gamma$,
so that the frequency matching condition of the linear term is never
satisfied but for the modes with overlapping frequency. While this is
generally true for standard high quality-factor lasers,
\cite{HausPaper} for RL there can be a significant frequency overlap
between the lasing modes, $\delta \omega \sim \gamma$, and off-diagonal
linear contributions must be considered in the slow amplitude basis.
The actual values of the couplings are in principle, and in some simple case, entirely computable in
the cold cavity basis, cf. Eqs. (\ref{eq:G2_coldcavity})-(\ref{eq:G4_coldcavity}) and, e.~g., Ref. [\onlinecite{HackenbroichViviescasJOB04}].
The main problem remains how
to express the interactions in the slow amplitude mode basis actually used in the dynamics.
In some cases the solution can be found using some self-consistent procedures proceeding
iteratively starting from the solution
obtained without the non-linear coupling.\cite{Tureci08, TureciAbInitio09, Rotter14}
In particular, when the non-linear term is entirely neglected, a possible (though not unique) solution is the one that
diagonalizes the linear interaction.
Nonetheless, when the lasing threshold is exceeded, the non-linear term becomes non-perturbatively relevant
and the diagonalization of the linear term does not correspond to a slow amplitude basis
in the most general case of lasing in random media.
\subsection{The role of the noise }
\label{sec:hamiltonian_formulation}
In the previous semiclassical derivation we have neglected all noise sources.
However, to obtain a complete statistical description the noise, and, hence, the spontaneous emission and the heat-bath temperature,
must be taken into account.
Indeed, we will show that the role of the entropy becomes crucial for disordered multimode lasers, where a
random first order transition \cite{RFOT} is expected, at least in the mean-field approximation.
We, then, consider the presence of a noise $F_l(t)$ in Eq. (\ref{eq:langevin_equation_lasing_modes}), that we standardly assume Gaussian, white and uncorrelated
\begin{align}
\nonumber
& \langle F_{k_1}^* (t_1) \, F_{k_2} (t_2) \rangle = 2 T \, \delta_{k_1 k_2 } \, \delta (t_1-t_2) \, ,
\\
& \langle F_{k_1} (t_1) \, F_{k_2} (t_2) \rangle = 0 \, ,
\label{eq:uncorrelated_noise}
\end{align}
with $T$ being the spectral power of the noise, proportional to the heat-bath temperature.
In general, different noise sources occur (see $F_\lambda$, $F_-$ and $F_z$ in Eqs. (\ref{eq:JK_1})-(\ref{eq:JK_3})).
Further on, in the case of open cavities, it is known that the noise $F_\lambda$ due
to the external bath coupling is correlated
in the cold cavity modes basis. \cite{HackenbroichViviescasPRL02, HackenbroichViviescasPRA03}
Also, a non-unitary change of basis affects the noise correlation. Indeed,
\begin{align}
a_l =& \sum_\lambda A^{-1}_{l \lambda} \alpha_\lambda
\quad \to \quad
F_l = \sum_\lambda A^{-1}_{l \lambda} F_\lambda
\nonumber
\end{align}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle F_{k_1}^* (t_1) F_{k_2} (t_2) \rangle
=
\sum_{\lambda_1 \lambda_2}
\left( A^{*} \right)^{-1}_{l_1 \lambda_1}
\langle F_{\lambda_1}^* (t_1) \, F_{\lambda_2} (t_2) \rangle
A^{-1 }_{l_2 \lambda_2}
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The decomposition in the slow amplitude modes, Eq. (\ref{eq:lasing_modes_decomposition}), is by no means unique.
This freedom may be used to try to build a mode basis where the noise is approximately uncorrelated.
In the following, we assume that the various independent noise sources act so that such basis construction is possible
and, then, the noise can be assumed white and uncorrelated also in the general case of open and irregular cavities.
Notice that, in this way, the request of uncorrelated noise results in a further possible source of off-diagonal terms
in the linear coupling in Eq. (\ref{eq:langevin_equation_lasing_modes}), independent from the presence of the non-linear interaction.
In analogy with the standard mode locking case, \cite{GordonFisherPRL} we, hence, eventually define the complex valued functional
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\mathcal{H}
=&
- \sum_{\mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) } \left[
\tilde{\gamma}_{k_1 k_2}
- S\, G^{(2)}_{k_1 k_2}
\right] \, a_{k_1}^* a_{k_2}
\nonumber
\\
& + \sum_ { \mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) }
S\, G^{(4)}_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} \,
a_{k_1} \,
a_{k_2}^* \,
a_{k_3} \,
a_{k_4}^*
\nonumber
\\
\equiv &
\sum_{\mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) } g^{(2)}_{k_1 k_2} \, a_{k_1} a^*_{k_2}
\nonumber
\\
& +
\frac{1}{2} \sum_ { \mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) }
g^{(4)}_{k_1 k_2 k_2 k_4}\, a_{k_1} a_{k_2}^* a_{k_3} a_{k_4}^*
\label{eq:general_hamiltonian}
\end{align}
yielding the complex Langevin equation for the stochastic dynamics of the amplitudes
\begin{equation}
\dot a_k = -\frac{\partial {\cal H}}{\partial a_k^*}+F_l
\label{eq:cLang}
\end{equation}
This can be rewritten in terms of its real and imaginary parts ${\cal H}_R+\mathrm{i} {\cal H}_I$:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{H}_R
=&
\sum_{\mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k})} G_{k_1 k_2} \, a_{k_1} a^*_{k_2}
\\
&
\nonumber
+
\frac{1}{2} \sum_ { \mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) }
\Gamma_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} \, a_{k_1} a_{k_2}^* a_{k_3} a_{k_4}^*
\, ,
\\
\mathcal{H}_I
=&
\sum_{\mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k})} D_{k_1 k_2} \, a_{k_1} a^*_{k_2}
\\
&\nonumber+
\frac{1}{2} \sum_ { \mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) }
\Delta_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} \, a_{k_1} a_{k_2}^* a_{k_3} a_{k_4}^*
\, ,
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align}
\label{eq:def_G}
G_{k_1 k_2} \equiv &
\frac{1}{2} \left( g^{(2)}_{k_1 k_2} + g^{(2) *}_{k_2 k_1} \right)
\, ,
\\
\Gamma_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} \equiv &
\frac{1}{2} \left( g^{(4)}_{k_1 k_2 k_2 k_4} + g^{(4) *}_{k_2 k_1 k_4 k_3} \right)
\label{eq:def_Gamma}
\\
\mathrm{i} D_{k_1 k_2} \equiv &
\frac{1}{2} \left( g^{(2)}_{k_1 k_2} - g^{(2) *}_{k_2 k_1} \right)
\, ,
\label{eq:def_D}
\\
\mathrm{i} \Delta_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} \equiv &
\frac{1}{2} \left( g^{(4)}_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} - g^{(4) *}_{k_2 k_1 k_4 k_3} \right)
\, .
\label{eq:def_Delta}
\end{align}
Considering, as well,
real and imaginary parts of mode amplitudes $a_l \equiv \sigma_l + \mathrm{i} \tau_l$,
the stochastic Eq. (\ref{eq:cLang}) can be expressed as
\begin{align}
& \frac{\partial \sigma_l}{\partial t}
= - \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial \mathcal{H}_R}{\partial \sigma_l}
+ \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial \mathcal{H}_I}{\partial \tau_l}
+ F^R_l
\, ,
\nonumber
\\
& \frac{\partial \tau_l}{\partial t}
= - \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial \mathcal{H}_R}{\partial \tau_l}
- \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial \mathcal{H}_I}{\partial \sigma_l}
+ F_l^I
\, .
\label{eq:langevin_real_and_immaginary}
\end{align}
From Eqs. (\ref{eq:langevin_real_and_immaginary})
it is clear that $\mathcal{H}_R$ is associated with a purely dissipative motion (a gradient flow in the $2N$ dimensional space $\sigma_1 , \ldots \sigma_N , \tau_1, \ldots \tau_N$ ),
while $\mathcal{H}_I$ generates a purely Hamiltonian motion for the $N$ conjugated variables $(\sigma_l , \, \tau_l )$.
If $\mathcal{H}_R = 0$ the total optical intensity $\mathcal{E} \equiv \sum_k |a_k |^2$ is a constant of motion under the previous Langevin equations (like $\mathcal{H}$ itself).
When $\mathcal{H}_R \neq 0$ this is no longer true, though the system is still stable
because the gain decreases as the optical intensity increases.\cite{Chen_94}
For standard lasers this is usually modeled assuming that the gain is such that
\begin{equation}
G_{kk} = \frac{G_0 }{1+\mathcal{E}/E_{\text{sat}}}, \quad \forall k
\end{equation}
where $E_{\text{sat}}$ is the saturation power of the amplifier.
To study the equilibrium properties of the model, it is possible to consider a simpler model:
at any instant the gain is supposed to assume exactly the value that keeps $\mathcal{E}$ a constant of the motion,
as Gordon and Fisher have proposed in Ref. [\onlinecite{GordonFisherPRL}].
In this way the system evolves over the hypersphere $\mathcal{E} \equiv \mathcal{E}_0$.
The relation between the thermodynamics in the fixed-power ensemble and a variable-power ensemble
might be seen as similar to the relation between the canonical and grand canonical ensembles in statistical mechanics.\cite{GatGordonFisher04}
The constraint $\mathcal{E} \equiv \mathcal{E}_0$ will induce a correlation of order $N^{-1}$ in the noise $F_l$.
However, as far as we are interested in the limit $N \gg 1$, such correlation can be neglected and the noise considered as white.
The request $\partial \mathcal{E} / \partial t = 0 $
implies that $G_0$, expressed as $ G_{k k} \equiv G_0 + G^{ \delta}_{k k} $, is given by
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{ E}G_0 = &
-
\sum_{\mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k})} G^{ \delta}_{k_1 k_2} \, a_{k_1} a^*_{k_2}
\\
&-
\sum_ { \mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) }
\Gamma_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} \, a_{k_1} a_{k_2}^* a_{k_3} a_{k_4}^*
\, .
\end{align*}
In particular for $G^{ \delta}_{k_1 k_2} = G^{ \delta}_{k_1} \delta_{k_1 k_2}$ and
$\Gamma_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} = \Gamma$, the known result
for the standard mode-locking case is recovered.\cite{GordonFisherPRL}
Inserting this expression for $G_0$ in the Langevin equations (\ref{eq:cLang}),
one finds that in this case the functional $\mathcal{H}_R$ becomes
\begin{align}
\label{eq:effective_Hamiltonian}
\mathcal{H}_R \equiv &
- \frac{\mathcal{E}_0}{\mathcal{E}}
\sum_{\mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k})} G^{ \delta}_{k_1 k_2} \, a_{k_1} a^*_{k_2}
\\
\nonumber
&
- \frac{\mathcal{E}_0^2}{2 \mathcal{E}^2}
\sum_ { \mathbf{k} \mid \text{FMC} (\mathbf{k}) }
\Gamma_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4} \, a_{k_1} a_{k_2}^* a_{k_3} a_{k_4}^* \, .
\end{align}
where now coupling coefficients $G^\delta$ and $\Gamma$ do not depend from complex amplitudes $a$'s.
This expression for the Hamiltonian includes the condition that
the total optical power $\mathcal{E}$ is a constant of motion.
Imposing the spherical constraint simplifies the coefficients ${\cal E}_0/{\cal E}=1$.
\subsection{Purely Dissipative Case}
In the case $\mathcal{H}_R \gg \mathcal{H}_I$
the functional $\mathcal{H}$ is approximately real.
For the standard mode-locking lasers this corresponds to the physical situation where
the group velocity dispersion and the Kerr effect can be neglected.\cite{HausPaper}
The purely dissipative case does also apply to the important case of soliton
lasers.\cite{GordonFisherOC}
In the general case of Eq. (\ref{eq:general_hamiltonian}) the situation is more complex.
If the coefficients $g_{k_1 k_2}^{(2)}$ and $g_{k_1 k_2 k_3 k_4}^{(4)}$ are real
then the imaginary part of ${\cal H}$ clearly vanishes, see Eqs. (\ref{eq:def_D},\ref{eq:def_Delta}).
The requirement of real coefficients is, however, not necessary to ensure a real valued
${\cal H}$, cf. Eq. (\ref{eq:general_hamiltonian}), of the form given by Eq. (\ref{eq:effective_Hamiltonian}).
A less strict, though sufficient condition is that, cf. Eqs. (\ref{eq:lasing_modes_decomposition}), (\ref{eq:D}),
\begin{align}
& A_{\lambda l}=A^*_{l\lambda}
\, ; &
& \omega_l - \omega_a \ll \gamma_\perp
\, ; &
& \delta \omega \ll \gamma_\parallel
\end{align}
This is consistent with, but stronger than, the usual rotating-wave approximation, $\delta \omega \ll \omega_l$, $\forall l$.
The case with a real functional $\mathcal{H}$ is of particular interest because it can be studied using the standard methods of the equilibrium statistical physics.
In fact, when the functional $\mathcal{H}$ is real, the Eqs. (\ref{eq:langevin_real_and_immaginary})
reduce to the familiar ``potential form'':
the evolution is the derivative of a ``potential'' respect to the considered variables plus white Gaussian noise.
Hence, the steady-state solution of the associated Fokker-Plank equation
\begin{align}
\dot{\rho} =&
- \sum_k \frac{\partial}{\partial \sigma_k} \left\{ \frac{\partial \mathcal{H}_R}{\partial \sigma_k} \rho \right\}
- \sum_k \frac{\partial}{\partial \tau_k} \left\{ \frac{\partial \mathcal{H}_R}{\partial \tau_k} \rho \right\}
\nonumber
\\
& + T \sum_k \left( \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \sigma^2_k} + \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \tau^2_k} \right) \rho
\end{align}
is given by the familiar Gibbs distribution
\begin{align}
\rho \left( \sigma_1 , \tau_1 \ldots \sigma_N , \tau_N \right) = \frac{\mathrm{e}^{- \mathcal{H}_R/T_{\rm ph}}}{\int \mathrm{e}^{- \mathcal{H}_R/T_{\rm ph}} d \sigma_1 d \tau_1 \ldots d \sigma_N d \tau_N} \, .
\label{eq:gibbs_distribution}
\end{align}
where $T_{\rm ph}$ is an effective "photonic'' temperature proportional to the heat-bath temperature.
This case, then, is the most interesting for the application of statistical mechanics and it will analyzed in this paper.
The general case of $\mathcal{H}_I \neq 0$ is harder to study analytically.
We note that, in general, it is expected that transitions of the first order are not removed by slight modification of the dynamics.
The analysis of the complete complex Langevin dynamics is postponed to a future work.
\section{The Statistical Mechanics Approach}
\label{sec:leading_model}
In the rest of this work we shall discuss the properties of mean-field solution of the model described
by the Hamiltonian Eq. (\ref{eq:effective_Hamiltonian}) with the global {\em
spherical} ~\footnote{It is said spherical using the naming adopted in
spin systems \cite{Berlin52} where spins $\sigma_i$ are approximated
by continuous real fields taking values on the $N$-dimensional
hypersphere $\sum_{i=1}^N\sigma_i^2$. Here, in the photonic
amplitude model, unlike the classic spherical spin model, the global
spherical constraint is formally in the $\mathbb{C}^N$ space of $N$
complex degrees of freedom.}
constraint $\mathcal{E} \equiv \sum_k |a_k|^2 = \mathcal{E}_0 $.
We notice that, because of this constraint on the power,
adding a constant diagonal term to the pairwise coupling is irrelevant
for the thermodynamics of the system.
The mean-field solution is exact when the probability distribution of the couplings is the same for all the mode couples $(k_1 , \, k_2)$
and quadruplets $(k_1 , \, k_2 , \, k_3, \, k_4)$.
This corresponds to the physical situation in which the two following conditions hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{narrow-bandwidth:}
the linewidth of the mode frequencies $\gamma$ is comparable with the total emission bandwidth $\Delta \omega$ so that
the frequency-matching conditions are always satisfied, cf. Eq. (\ref{eq:frequencyMatching});
\item \emph{extended modes:}
all the mode localizations are extended to a spatial region which scales
with the total volume $V$ of the active medium.
\end{itemize}
The first condition also implies that the diagonal elements of $G_{k_1 k_2}$ are all equal
and do not depend on the frequency.
In particular, then, for a \emph{strong cavity} and a regular medium these disappear from the equilibrium dynamics because of the spherical constraint.\cite{AngelaniZamponiPRB, ContiLeuzziPRB11}
The couplings are related to the spatial overlaps of the modes,
cf. Eqs. (\ref{eq:G2_coldcavity})-(\ref{eq:G4_coldcavity}), and are, therefore, not independent.
However, in the mean-field limit off-diagonal correlations vanish for large system sizes
and we can assume that the couplings are statistically independent.
Before discussing the properties of this solution we first rewrite the Hamiltonian
in the mean-field form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:effective_Hamiltonian_3}
\mathcal{H} = - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{j k}^{1,N} J_{j k} a_{j} a^\ast_{k}
- \frac{1}{4!} \sum_{j k l m}^{1,N} J_{j k l m} a_{j} a_{k} a^\ast_{l} a^\ast_{m},
\end{equation}
where $a_i$ are $N$ complex amplitude variables subject to the spherical constraint
$ \sum_k | a_k |^2 = \mathcal{E}_0 \equiv \epsilon N$.
The couplings $J_{i_1,\dotsc,i_p}$ ($p=2,4$) are symmetric under index permutation and
vanish if two or more indexes are equal. The non-null $J_{i_1,\dotsc,i_p}$
are quenched independent identically distributed real random variables.
In the mean-field limit only the first two moments are relevant, so we can take
a Gaussian distribution:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:disorder}
\mathcal{P} \left( J_{i_1 \ldots i_p} \right) =
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi \sigma_{p}^2} } \exp \left[ - \frac{\left( J_{i_1 \ldots i_p} - \tilde{J}_0^{(p)} \right)^2}{2 \sigma_{p}^2} \right] \, .
\end{equation}
The requirement of an extensive Hamiltonian, i.e., proportional to $N$,
requires that the variance
and the average
scale with $N$ as
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{p}^2 & = \frac{p! \, J^2_p}{2 N^{p-1}} \, , &
\tilde{J}_0^{(p)} = & \frac{J_0^{(p)}}{N^{p-1}}\, ,
\end{align*}
where $J_p$ and $J_0^{(p)}$ are intensive parameters fixing the relative strength of various terms in the
Hamiltonian.
To have a direct interpretation in terms of optical quantities we express them as
\begin{align}
J_0^{(4)} =& \alpha_0 J_0
\, , &
J_0^{(2)} =& (1-\alpha_0) J_0 \, ,
\\
J_4^2 =& \alpha^2 J^2
\, , &
J_2^2 =& (1-\alpha)^2 J^2 \, .
\end{align}
where the parameters $J_0$ and $J$ fix the cumulative strength of the ordered and disordered
part of the Hamiltonian, while $\alpha_0$ and $\alpha$ the degree (i. e., relative strength) of the non-linear quartic ($p=4$) contribution in the ordered and disordered parts, respectively.
Then we introduce the usual parameters of RL models: the \emph{degree of disorder} $R_J$
and the \emph{pumping rate} $\mathcal{P}$ as:\cite{ContiLeuzziPRB11}
\begin{align}
R_J & \equiv \frac{J}{J_0}
\, , &
\mathcal{P} \equiv \epsilon \sqrt{\beta J_0},
\label{eq:def_pumping_cap3}
\end{align}
where $\beta = T^{-1}$ is the ordinary inverse thermal bath temperature, cf. Eq. (\ref{eq:uncorrelated_noise}).
The definition of the pumping rate encodes the experimental fact that the effect of decreasing the temperature of the bath or increasing
the energy of the pump source is qualitatively the same on the onset of a random lasing regime. \cite{Wiersma2001,Nakamura10}
We stress that the effective ``photonic" temperature $T_{\rm ph}\equiv T/\epsilon^2$, coupled to ${\cal H}$ in the Gibbs measure
Eq. (\ref{eq:gibbs_distribution}) in units of $J_0$ is nothing else than $\sqrt{\cal P}$.
With this parametrization the mean-field solution is conveniently expressed through the
parameters
\begin{align}
\nonumber
b_2 &= \frac{1-\alpha_0}{4} \mathcal{P} \sqrt{\beta J_0}
\, , &
b_4 &= \frac{\alpha_0}{96} \mathcal{P}^2 \, ,
\\
\xi_2 &= \frac{(1-\alpha)^2}{4} \beta J_0 \mathcal{P}^2 R_J^2
\, , &
\xi_4 &= \frac{\alpha^2}{6} \mathcal{P}^4 R_J^2,
\label{eq:standard_to_photonics}
\end{align}
which are the \emph{photonics} counterpart of the standard $p$-spin-like \cite{Crisanti92}, or mode coupling theory like \cite{Goetze09} parameters
\begin{align}
& b_2 = \frac{\epsilon}{4} \beta J_0^{(2)} \; , &
& b_4 = \frac{\epsilon^2}{96} \beta J_0^{(4)} \, ,
\nonumber
\\
& \xi_2 = \frac{\epsilon^2}{4} \beta^2 J_2^2 \; , &
& \xi_4 = \frac{\epsilon^4}{6} \beta^2 J_4^2 \, ,
\label{eq:definition_parameters_b_xi_mu}
\end{align}
used in the statistical mechanics study of these type of models.
Notice that, without loss of
generality,
in the standard parametrization $\epsilon$ can be fixed to any value by a suitable rescaling of the other
parameters. Analogously, in the photonic parametrization, Eq. (\ref{eq:standard_to_photonics}), the
parameters can be rescaled to maintain $\beta J_0$ fixed.
\subsection{Statistical Mechanics of Quenched Disordered Systems}
The couplings in the effective Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:effective_Hamiltonian_3}) are extracted for an appropriate probability distribution
and remain fixed - \emph{quenched} - in the dynamics.
Then the free-energy density $\phi_N[J]$, as any other observable,
depends on the particular realization $J$ of the disordered couplings.
For a vast class of observables, including $\phi_N[J]$, however, the
dependence disappears as the system becomes sufficiently large. \cite{MPVBook}
Such property, called \emph{self-averaging}, implies that
\begin{align}
\lim_{N \to \infty} \phi_N [J] = \phi,
\end{align}
where $\phi$ does not depend on $J$
and is equal to the thermodynamic limit $N\to\infty$
of the average of $\phi_N[J]$ over the distribution
$P[J]$ of $J$:
\begin{align}
\phi = {\overline{\phi}} =&
\lim_{N \to \infty} \int \mathcal{D} J \, P[J] \, \phi_N [J]
\\
\nonumber
=& - \lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{1}{\beta N}\, \overline{\log Z_N[J]} \, .
\end{align}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
Z_N[J]&=& \int {\cal D} a \; \mathrm{e}^{- \beta \mathcal{H}[a,J]}
\\
\nonumber
&&{\cal D}a \equiv \prod_{k=1}^N da_k~da^*_k
\end{eqnarray}
The average of the logarithm of the partition function
can be performed using the replica trick: \cite{EdwardsAnderson,MPVBook}
one considers $n$ copies of the system and evaluates the replicated partition function
\begin{align}
\label{eq:zrep_ave}
\overline{Z_N^n} =& \,
\int D J \; P(J) \, \int {\cal D} a_1 \cdots {\cal D} a_n \;
\\
\nonumber
& \times \mathrm{e}^{- \beta
\left[ \mathcal{H}(a_1,J) + \ldots + \mathcal{H}(a_n,J) \right] }
\end{align}
as function of $n$. A continuation to real $n$ is considered down to values $n<1$, so that the free energy density is eventually obtained as the limit
\begin{align}
\phi = - \lim_{N \to \infty} \lim_{n \to 0} \frac{1}{\beta N} \frac{ \overline{Z_N^n}-1}{n} \, .
\end{align}
The replicated partition function $\overline{Z_N^n}$ for large $N$, and fixed $n$,
can be evaluated using the saddle-point method. Therefore, the
thermodynamic limit $N \to \infty$ and the limit $n \to 0$ are essentially inverted in the evaluation.
The mathematical foundations of the method are not simple and many efforts have been
necessary to investigate this problem.
In this scenario the well known Replica Symmetry Breaking scheme has been proposed by Parisi \cite{Parisi79, Parisi80}
in the late 70's
and rigorously proved by Guerra \cite{Guerra03} and Talagrand \cite{Talagrand06} about 25 years later.
This Ansatz solves the problem showing a distinctive picture of the underlying structure of the phase space \cite{Parisi84PRL}
and, hence, conferring a key role to the replica trick.
\subsection{Order Parameters in the Replica Formalism}
To apply the replica method to the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:effective_Hamiltonian_3})
it is convenient to express first the complex mode amplitude $a_j$ in term of its rescaled real and imaginary part,
respectively $\sigma_j$ and $\tau_j$, as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:param}
a_j = \sqrt{\epsilon} \left( \sigma_j +\mathrm{i} \tau_j \right) \, ,
\qquad j= 1, \ldots N .
\end{equation}
The spherical constraint then takes the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:spherical_constraint_1}
\sum_{j=1}^N \left( \sigma_j^2+\tau_j^2 \right) = N
\end{equation}
while the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:effective_Hamiltonian_3}) becomes
\begin{align}
\label{eq:effective_Hamiltonian_realImmaginary}
\mathcal{H} = &- \epsilon\sum_{j<k} J_{jk} \left( \sigma_{jk}+\tau_{jk} \right)
\\
&
- \epsilon^2 \sum_{j<k<l<m} J_{jklm} \left( \sigma_{jklm}+\tau_{jklm} + \varphi_{jklm} \right),
\nonumber \end{align}
where
we have introduced the short-hand notation
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\sigma_{jk} &\equiv& \sigma_j \sigma_k
\\
\nonumber
\sigma_{jklm} &\equiv& \sigma_j \sigma_k \sigma_l \sigma_m
\end{eqnarray}
and similarly
for $\tau$, and
\begin{eqnarray}
\varphi_{jklm} &=& \left( \psi_{jk,lm}+\psi_{jl,km}+\psi_{jm,kl} \right) / 3
\nonumber
\\
\nonumber
\psi_{jk,lm} &= &\sigma_{jk} \tau_{lm} + \sigma_{lm} \tau_{jk}.
\end{eqnarray}
In the limit of large $N$ the replicated partition function averaged over the coupling probability distribution
(\ref{eq:disorder}) can be written as an integral in the replica space of a functional
of two matrices $Q$ and $R$ and two parameters $m_\sigma$ and $m_\tau$,
details can be found in Appendix \ref{averages_quenched_disorder}:
\begin{align}
\label{eq_Z_BZ}
\overline{Z_N^n} = \int \mathcal{D} Q \, \mathcal{D} R \, \mathcal{D} m_\sigma \, \mathcal{D} m_{\tau} \,
\mathrm{e}^{- N G[Q,R,m_\sigma,m_\tau]} \, ,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\label{eq:functional_F_general}
-G[Q,R,&m_\sigma,m_\tau] =
\frac{1}{2} \sum_{a,b} g (Q_{\a\b},R_{\a\b})
+ n\, k(m_{\sigma}, m_{\tau})
\nonumber
\\
&+ \frac{1}{2} \ln \det (Q+R)
- \frac{m_{\sigma}^2}{2} \sum_{a,b} \left( Q+R \right)^{-1}_{\a\b}
\\
& + \frac{1}{2} \ln \det (Q-R)
- \frac{m_{\tau}^2}{2} \sum_{a,b} \left( Q-R \right)^{-1}_{\a\b}.
\nonumber
\end{align}
The sums over the replica indexes $\a$ and $\b$ run from $1$ to $n$, and
$g(x,y)$ and $k(x,y)$ are the two-variable functions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:definition_g}
g (x,y) &=&
\xi_2 (x^2+y^2)
+ \frac{\xi_4}{2} (x^4 + y^4+ 4 x^2 y^2),
\\
\label{eq:definition_k}
k(x, y) &=&
b_2 \left( x^2 + y^2 \right)
+ b_4 \left(
x^2 + y^2
\right)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
The matrices $Q$ and $R$ and $m_\sigma$ and $m_\tau$
are related to the mode amplitudes by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:Q_mat}
Q_{\a\b} &
= \frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^N (\sigma^{\a}_j \sigma^{\b}_j + \tau^{\a}_j \tau^{\b}_j)
=\frac{1}{\cal E} \sum_{j=1}^N \Re\bigl[a^{\a}_j \left( a^{\b}_j \right)^\ast \bigr]
\\
R_{\a\b} &
=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{j=1}^N (\sigma^{\a}_j \sigma^{\b}_j- \tau^{\a}_j \tau^{\b}_j)
= \frac{1}{\cal E} \sum_{j=1}^N \Re \left[ a^{\a}_j a^{\b}_j \right]
\label{eq:def_overlap_ReIm}
\end{align}
and\footnote{
The $\sqrt{2}$ is chosen to have real and imaginary parts of the magnetization ranging
from $-1$ to $1$ in the case of total energy equipartition among modes, i.e., $|a_j|=1$, for all
$j$, and between real and imaginary part, i.e.,
$\sigma^2=\tau^2$.
}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:def_mag}
m_{\sigma} = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{N} \sum_{j=1}^N \sigma_j^{\a} , \qquad
m_{\tau} = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{N} \sum_{j=1}^N \tau_j^{\a},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
m_{\sigma}+\mathrm{i}\, m_{\tau}
= \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\cal E}\sum_{j=1}^N a^{\a}_j.
\end{equation}
These are the order parameters of the theory.
The ``magnetization'' $m_\sigma$ and $m_\tau$ are single replica quantities
and cannot depend on the particular replica $\a$ because replicas are identical.
In the thermodynamic limit $N\to\infty$ the integral in the replica space can be evaluated using the
saddle point method, leading to
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:free-en}
\beta \phi = \beta \phi_0
+ \lim_{n\to 0} \mbox{\rm Extr}\,\frac{1}{n}\,G[R,Q,m_\sigma,m_\tau]
\end{equation}
where $\phi_0$ is an irrelevant constant.
The functional $G[Q,R,m_\sigma,m_\tau] $
must be evaluated at its stationary point that, as $n\to 0$, gives the maximum
with respect to variations of $Q$ and $R$ and the minimum with respect to
variations of $m_\sigma$ and $m_\tau$.
To find the stationary point of $G[Q,R,m_\sigma,m_\tau] $
an ansatz on the structure of the matrices $Q$ and $R$ is necessary.
It turns out that the simplest ansatz of assuming $Q_{\a\b} = Q$ and $R_{\a\b}=R$
for all $\a \neq \b$,
i.e., of assuming that all replicas are equivalent under pair exchange,
is not thermodynamically stable in the whole phase space, specifically
at low temperature/high power.
Therefore, one must allow for a spontaneous Replica Symmetry Breaking (RSB) and
construct the solution accordingly.
Following the Parisi scheme, \cite{MPVBook} a
$n\times n$ matrix $M$ in a $\mathcal{R}$-step RSB state\footnote{
We use the symbol $\mathcal{R}$ instead of the usual $R$ for
number of RSB to avoid possible confusion with the matrix $R_{\a\b}$.}
is
described by $\mathcal{R}+2$ parameters
$\left( M_{\mathcal{R}+1}, M_\mathcal{R}, \ldots M_0 \right)$
by dividing it along the diagonal into blocks of decreasing linear size $p_r$, with
$1=p_{\mathcal{R}+1} < p_\mathcal{R} < \ldots < p_0 = n$, and
assigning $M_{\a\b} = M_r$ if the replicas $\a$ and $\b$ belong to the same block
of size $p_r$ but to two distinct blocks of size $p_{r+1}$.
Introducing the $\sigma$ and $\tau$ overlap matrices $A$ and $B$
\begin{align}
\nonumber
A_{\a\b} =& Q_{\a\b} + R_{\a\b}
= \frac{2}{N} \sum_{j=1}^N \sigma^{\a}_j \sigma^{\b}_j
\, ,
\\
\label{eq:definition_matrix_AandB}
B_{\a\b} =& Q_{\a\b} - R_{\a\b}
= \frac{2}{N} \sum_{j=1}^N \tau^{\a}_j \tau^{\b}_j
\, ,
\end{align}
the functional $G$ for a generic $\mathcal{R}$-RSB solution is conveniently written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:freeEnergy_RSB}
-2 G = & \sum_{r=0}^{\mathcal{R}+1} (p_r-p_{r+1}) g(Q_r,R_r)
\\
\nonumber
&+ 2 k(m_\sigma, m_\tau)
- \frac{m_\sigma^2}{A_{\widehat{0}}}
- \frac{m_\tau^2}{B_{\widehat{0}}}
\\
\nonumber
& + \log (A_{\mathcal{R}+1}-A_\mathcal{R}) + \sum_{r=1}^{\mathcal{R}+1} \frac{1}{p_r} \log \frac{A_{\widehat{r}}}{A_{\widehat{r+1}}} + \frac{A_0}{A_{\widehat{1}}}
\\
& + \log (B_{\mathcal{R}+1}-B_\mathcal{R}) + \sum_{r=1}^{\mathcal{R}+1} \frac{1}{p_r} \log \frac{B_{\widehat{r}}}{B_{\widehat{r+1}}} + \frac{B_0}{B_{\widehat{1}}},
\nonumber
\end{align}
where the hatted quantities are the Replica Fourier Transform (RFT)
of a $\mathcal{R}$-RSB matrix $M_r$
defined as\cite{ParisiFourier,ReplicaFourier97, CrisantiRFT}
\begin{align}
& M_{\widehat{k}} = \sum_{r=k}^{\mathcal{R}+1} p_r \left( M_r-M_{r-1} \right)
\nonumber
\\
&
M_r = \sum_{k=0}^r \frac{1}{p_k} \left( M_{\widehat{k}}-M_{\widehat{k+1}} \right),
\label{eq:def_RFT}
\end{align}
where it is intended that terms with indices outside the respective interval of definition are null.
The solutions of the stationarity equations, see
Appendix \ref{App:Solutions}, are either of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m_choice}
m_\tau = 0 \ \text{and}\ B_r = 0 \to R_r = Q_r, \quad
r=0, \ldots \mathcal{R},
\end{equation}
or (because of the symmetry $\sigma \leftrightarrow \tau$):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:mt-sol}
m_\sigma = 0 \ \text{and}\ A_r = 0 \to R_r = -Q_r, \quad
r=0, \ldots \mathcal{R}.
\end{equation}
In the following, without loss of generality, we consider the first form, Eq. (\ref{eq:m_choice}), and,
for simplicity, we drop the subscript in the magnetization writing
$m_\sigma = m$.
\section{Optical Regimes and Phase Diagram}
\label{sec:results}
The phase diagram obtained from the analysis of the solution of the mean-field model
consists of four different phases distinguished by the values
of the order parameters $Q$, $R$ and $m$:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Incoherent Wave (IW):}
replica symmetric solution with all order parameters equal to zero.
The modes oscillate incoherently in this regime and the light is emitted in the form of a continuous wave.
At low pumping, else said high temperature,
this is the only solution.
It corresponds to the Paramagnetic phase in spin models.
\item \emph{Standard Mode-Locking Laser (SML):}
solutions with $m\not=0$, with or without replica symmetry breaking.
The modes oscillate coherently with the same phase and the light is emitted in form of optical pulses.
It is the only regime at high pumping (low temperature) when $b_2$ and $b_4$ are large with respect to $\xi_2$ and $\xi_4$, that is when the degree of disorder $R_J$ is small.
It corresponds to the Ferromagnetic phase in spin models.
\item \emph{Random Laser (RL):}
the modes do not oscillate coherently in intensity, so that $m=0$,
but $R_{aa} = \langle \sigma^2 \rangle - \langle \tau^2 \rangle \neq 0$ implying a phase coherence
and the overlap matrices have a nontrivial structure.
It is the only phase in the high pumping limit for large disorder, i.e., when $\xi_2$ and $\xi_4$ are large with respect to $b_2$ and $b_4$.
It corresponds to the Spin Glass phase in spin models with disordered interactions.
\item \emph{Phase Locking Wave (PLW):}
all order parameters vanish but $R_{aa}$, so that $\langle \sigma^2 \rangle \neq \langle \tau^2 \rangle $, signaling a locking of the mode phases in a specific direction.
This regime occurs in a region of the phase space intermediate between the IW and RL regimes
if $\xi_4 > 0$ ($R_J>0$).
This new thermodynamic phase, to our knowledge never observed in spin models,
follows from the peculiar kind of spins considered, displaying both a phase and a magnitude,
that leads to a combination of XY (only phase) and real spherical
(only magnitude) spins.
The locking in the two degrees of freedom of each
complex amplitude does not happen concurrently as the
temperature is lowered in presence of (even a small amount of)
disorder. Mode phases lock first, in what we call the PLW regime.
\end{itemize}
The narrow band approximation, in which the present model is exact,
makes the study of the pulsed emission particularly delicate. Indeed,
if the magnetization is nonzero, as in the SML phase, the light is
generated in form of short pulses when the presence of different
frequencies in the spectrum is considered and this property cannot be reproduced in the narrow-band limit. Besides, we note that a
ML phase with a nonzero phase delay, as described in Ref.
[\onlinecite{Antenucci14b, Marruzzo14}], associated with pulsed emission in an
unmagnetized state is not feasible, as the frequency does not play any
role in the mode evolution. Nevertheless, it is possible to analytically solve the model in the whole phase diagram and describe all regimes for optically active media.
Different replica symmetry breaking solutions, and corresponding RL regimes,
occur by varying the ratio $r \equiv \xi_2 / \xi_4$, or, equivalently,
varying the strength of disordered nonlinearity $\alpha$. In particular, for
$r$ large enough ($\alpha$ small enough) the stable thermodynamic phase is
expected to be characterized by a Full Replica Symmetry Breaking (FRSB)
state.\cite{CrisantiLeuzzi_sp_NPB} In realistic optical systems the
$2$-body interaction is usually not dominant above the lasing threshold,
cf. discussion in Sect. \ref{sec:derivation_of_the_model}.
However, there can be systems where the
damping due to the openness of the cavity is strong enough to compete
with the non-linearity and a FRSB state may emerge. In this case the transition turns out to be continuous in the
order parameters: the overlap is zero at the critical point and grows continuously as the power is increased above threshold.
In this work we shall limit ourselves to the analysis of the first step of
replica symmetry breaking, by considering solutions with only one step of replica symmetry
breaking (1RSB). We, hence, provide the exact mean-field laser solution for $r$ low
enough (specifically, $r < 0.517 $ for $ b_2 = b_4 = 0 $). Due the continuous nature of the transition to the FRSB regime, though, the 1RSB solution is also a
reliable approximation of the lasing solution not far from threshold
for larger $r$.
\subsection{RS and 1RSB phases}
Solutions with non-null magnetization $m$ originates because of the ordered, non-random,
part of the Hamiltonian.
These are more easily described by
introducing a suitable external field $h$
and considering the fully-disordered model, i.e., with $J_0^{(p)}=0$,
with Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ham_with_ext_field}
\mathcal{H}_h = \mathcal{H} - \sqrt{2} h \sum_j \sigma_j,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{H}$ is given in (\ref{eq:effective_Hamiltonian_realImmaginary})
and, the $\sqrt{2}$ follows from the definition \eqref{eq:def_mag} of
$m_\sigma$.
Absorbing the factor $\beta$ into the field writing $b = \beta h$,
the solutions of the two models are identical provided
\begin{equation}
b = \frac{\partial }{\partial m} k(m,0),
\end{equation}
so that we have the \emph{unfolding equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:unfolding_equation}
b = \left( 2 b_2 + 4 b_4 m^2 \right) m,
\end{equation}
which relates the $m\not=0$ states of the original model (\ref{eq:effective_Hamiltonian_3})
to the ones of model (\ref{eq:ham_with_ext_field}).
For the solution with $m_\sigma=0$ and $m_\tau=m$ there is an equivalent mapping.
The origin of this connection is discussed in Appendix \ref{App:Solutions}.
Note that for $b\not=0$ all solutions have $m\not=0$, and hence correspond to the SML regime.
The other phases with $m=0$ correspond to the $b=0$ case.
The appearance of nontrivial solutions of the unfolding equation (\ref{eq:unfolding_equation})
then signals the transition to the SML regime.
The parameterization $a\to (\sigma,\tau)$ given in \eqref{eq:param}
ensures that the diagonal elements $Q_{\a\a}$ are equal to $1$.
The diagonal elements of $R_{\a\a}$ are also independent from the replica index
$a$ but the value depends on the control parameters.
The analysis of the solution \eqref{eq:m_choice} is then simplified by introducing the ``scaling factor"
\begin{equation}
\overline{a} = Q_{\a\a} + R_{\a\a} = 1 + R_{\mathcal{R}+1},
\end{equation}
varying between $1$ and $2$,
and using the rescaled overlap parameters $q_r$ defined as
\begin{equation}
Q_r + R_r = 2 Q_r = \overline{a}\, q_r,
\quad r = 0,\dotsc,\mathcal{R}.
\end{equation}
For the solution \eqref{eq:mt-sol} one has a similar parameterization.
In this work we shall only consider solutions with $\mathcal{R}=0$ (RS) and
$\mathcal{R}=1$ (1RSB). The study of solution with more complex RSB structure
will not be reported here.
The RS solution is described by the three parameters
$q_0$, $\overline{a}$ and $m$ and, neglecting all unnecessary terms, the free energy
functional \eqref{eq:free-en} reads:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:free_energy_RS}
2 \beta \phi (q_0,&\overline{a},m) =
- \overline{g}
+ g_0
- \frac{q_0 - m^2 / \overline{a}}{1-q_0}
\nonumber \\
&
- \log \left[ \overline{a} \left( 2-\overline{a} \right) (1-q_0) \right]
- 2 b m,
\end{align}
where we have used the short-hand notation:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\overline{g} = & g \left( 1,\overline{a}-1 \right), \\
g_{r} = & g \left( \frac{\overline{a}}{2} q_{r} , \frac{\overline{a}}{2} q_{r} \right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Stationarity of $\phi(q_0,\overline{a},m)$
with respect to variation of $q_0$, $\overline{a}$ and $m$ leads to
the stationary equations:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:RS_stationarity_field}
\nonumber
\overline{a}\, \Lambda_0 =&
\frac{q_0}{(1-q_0)^2} - \overline{a} \, b^2 \, ,
\\
\overline{a}\, \overline{\Lambda} - \overline{a} \Lambda_0
=& - \frac{1}{1 - q_0} + \frac{\overline{a}}{2-\overline{a}} \, ,
\end{align}
and $m = b\, \overline{a}(1-q_0)$,
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\overline{\Lambda} = & \Lambda \left( \overline{a}-1,1 \right),
\\
\Lambda_{r} = & \Lambda \left( \frac{\overline{a}}{2} q_{r} , \frac{\overline{a}}{2} q_{r} \right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Lambda}
\Lambda \left(x, y \right) = \frac{\partial}{\partial x} g(x,y) =
2 x \left[ \xi_2 + \xi_4 \left( x^2+ 2 y^2 \right) \right].
\end{equation}
The 1RSB solution
requires five parameters: $q_0$, $q_1$, $\overline{a}$, $m$ and
the ``block size'' $p_1$. The latter becomes a real number for $n\to 0$, the RSB parameter
$p_1=x\in[0,1]$.
The free energy for the 1RSB solution then reads:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:free_energy_1RSB}
\nonumber
2 \beta \phi(q_0,q_1,&x,\overline{a},m) =
- \overline{g} + (1-x) g_1 + x g_0
\\
&
- \frac{ q_0 -m^2/\overline{a} }{q_{\hat{1}}}
- \log \left[ \overline{a} (2-\overline{a}) (1- q_1) \right]
\nonumber
\\
&
- \frac{1}{x} \log \frac{q_{\hat{1}}}{q_{\hat{2}}}
- 2 b m,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
q_{\hat{2}} &= 1 -q_1 \, , & q_{\hat{1}} = 1-q_1 + x (q_1-q_0) \, .
\label{eq:definiton_parameters_chi}
\end{align}
Stationarity of the functional with respect to variations of
$q_0$, $q_1$, $\overline{a}$, $m$ gives the stationarity equations:
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\overline{a} \Lambda_0 =&
\frac{q_0}{q_{\hat{1}}^{\, 2}} - \overline{a} \, b^2 \, ,
\\
\overline{a} \Lambda_ 1
- \overline{a} \Lambda_0
=& \frac{q_1 - q_0}{q_{\hat{2}}\, q_{\hat{1}} },
\label{eq:stat_1RSB}
\\
\overline{a}\, \overline{\Lambda} - \overline{a} \Lambda_1
=& - \frac{1}{1-q_1} + \frac{\overline{a}}{2-\overline{a}} ,
\nonumber
\\
m =& \overline{a} \, b \, q_{\hat{1}}.
\nonumber
\end{align}
The role of the parameter $x$ is more subtle. If the free energy functional is required to be
stationary also with respect to variations of $x$, one then obtains the additional stationarity equation:
\begin{align}
g_1 - g_0
=& - \frac{1}{x^2} \log \frac{q_{\hat{2}}}{q_{\hat{1}}}
\label{eq:stat_x_1RSB}
\\
\nonumber
& - (q_1-q_0) \left[ \frac{1}{x q_{\hat{1}}} - \frac{q_0-m^2 / \overline{a}}{q_{\hat{1}}^{\, 2}} \right],
\end{align}
which describes the \emph{static} solution with null complexity, see
Sect. \ref{sec:complexity} for more detail.
This equation can be rewritten, making use of the other Eqs. (\ref{eq:stat_1RSB}), as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_1RSB_h}
2 \frac{g_1 - g_0 - \overline{a} \Lambda_0 (q_1-q_0)}
{\overline{a} (\Lambda_1 - \Lambda_0) (q_1-q_0)} = z(y),
\end{equation}
where $y = q_{\hat{2}}/q_{\hat{1}} \in [0,1]$ and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:def_zFunction}
z(y) = -2 y \frac{1-y+ \ln y}{(1-y)^2},
\end{equation}
is the CS $z$-function.\cite{CrisantiSommers}
This form is particularly useful for the numerical solution of the stationary equations, in particular to
find solutions for fixed value of $x$ (that is, along a $x$-line).
Note also that it depends only on the ratio $r = \xi_2/\xi_4$
and not on $\xi_2$ and $\xi_4$ separately.
Alternatively, the value of $x$ can be fixed by requiring that the complexity, i.e., the number of
equivalent metastable states - or ergodic components - is maximal. This choice leads to the
{\sl dynamic} solution, and to the following equation for $x$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:x_dyn}
\left.
\left[ \frac{\partial}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \right]\, \Lambda(x,y)
\right|_{x = y= \overline{a} q_1 / 2}
= \frac{2}{\overline{a}^{\, 2}\,(1-q_1)^2}.
\end{equation}
We defer a more detailed discussion to Sect. \ref{sec:complexity}.
The analysis of the solutions can be done in two steps. First we discuss the solutions
in presence of
a fixed field $b = \beta h$. Then, once the different phases have been identified, we shall
{\sl unfold} $b$ in terms of $m$ using the unfolding equation to recover the original
RL problem.
For this reason the phase diagrams will be reported in the
$(\xi_2,\xi_4,b)$, $(\xi_2,\xi_4, b_2, b_4)$ and
$({\cal P}, \alpha, \alpha_0, R_J)$ spaces, as appropriate.
The relation among the different spaces are given in Eqs.
\eqref{eq:standard_to_photonics} and the unfolding equation (\ref{eq:unfolding_equation}).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{lines_DynamicStaticFieldless}
\caption{ Phase diagram $\xi_2$, $\xi_4$ for $b=0$ with static (solid
green) and dynamic (dashed green) $x$-lines. In the 1RSB phase,
$x$-lines with different value of $x$ are shown both in the static and dynamic cases:
$x= 0.45, 0.6, 0.8$ and $x=1$ top to bottom. The $x=1$
static $x$-line is the static glassy RFOT line between the PLW phase and the RL with 1RSB
phase. The $x=1$ dynamic $x$-line is where the dynamics arrests
because of the exponential number of metastable states characteristic of the RFOT.
The solid black line marks the end point of the $x$-lines and a 1-FRSB appears.
The dashed black line is the analogous critical line of dynamic $x$-lines.
Both static and dynamic 1-FRSB phases end on the
solid magenta line. Here the complexity vanishes and
a transition to a FRSB phase occurs.
Finally the solid blue line marks the direct transition between the PLW and the FRSB phases.
The order parameters are continuous crossing this line.
The $\blacksquare$ and $\blacktriangle$ symbols correspond to the positions of the data shown in Fig. \ref{fig:complexity_eigenvalues_newStable}.
}
\label{fig:dynamic_lines}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{lines_Photonic_DynStatFieldless}
\caption{ Phase diagrams for $b=0$ in the photonic parameters, pumping
rate ${\cal P}$ and degree of openness $\alpha$, for $R_J = \beta
J_0 = 1$. }
\label{fig:dynamic_lines_PP}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Phase Diagram at Fixed Field}
To study the transition to the RL state we consider first the case of zero external field $h$.
The complete phase diagram for $b=0$, including phases with RSB structure
more complex than RS or 1RSB, is shown in Figs. \ref{fig:dynamic_lines}
and \ref{fig:dynamic_lines_PP}.
In particular, the IW is the only phase at high enough temperature. Lowering the temperature, for $
\xi_4>0$, the IW becomes metastable as the PLW phase appears continuously.
The case of $\xi_4=0$ is different: increasing $\xi_2$ the IW phase becomes unstable and a
transition occurs to replica symmetric RL phase.
For $r = \xi_2 / \xi_4 < 0.517$, i.e., $\alpha>\alpha_{\rm nl}\simeq (3-1.76382 \epsilon) (3-1.03703 \epsilon^2)^{-1} $,
increasing $\xi_4$
the PLW regime undergoes a Random First Order Transition (RFOT) \cite{RFOT} to a glassy RL phase with 1RSB:
a jump is present in the order parameters $Q$ and $R$ but the internal energy remains
continuous. Thus, no latent heat is exchanged.
For $r = \xi_2 / \xi_4 > 0.517$ the PLW becomes unstable at a critical temperature
where the transition occurs to a RL regime with FRSB, of the kind reported in Ref. [\onlinecite{CrisantiLeuzzi_sp_NPB}].
The complete phase diagram at non-zero external field is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h}.
In this case it is useful to introduce the ratio $t =q_0/q_1\in[0,1]$.
\if 0
For the 1RSB solutions there are, then, 4 equations depending on the 7 variables $x$ , $ y$, $ t$, $ \overline{a}$, $ h$, $ \xi_4$ and $ r$ defined in the intervals
\begin{align*}
x , \, y, \, t \in [0,1] \, ;&& \overline{a} \in [1,2] \, ;&& h , \, \xi_4 , \, r \in [0,\infty) \,.
\end{align*}
A convenient procedure to obtain the line at $x$ fixed is to fix also the values of $r$ and
$t$ and find a solution for $y , \, \overline{a} \, , h , \, \xi_4$.
Since $\overline{a}$ appears in an irreducible way in all the four equations, one can proceed self-consistently
choosing a test value $a_t$ for $\overline{a}$ and, then, continue iteratively till $a_t$ solves the equations in the desired precision.
\fi
The 1RSB solutions can be found fixing the parameters $r, \, x, \, t$ and using
the stationary point equations to find the value of $\xi_4$, $b$, $y$ and $\overline{a}$.
Two surfaces are of particular interest: the surface $x=1$, corresponding to the RFOT between the RS and 1RSB solution (Fig. \ref{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h}: green surface),
and the surface $t=1 \leftrightarrow q_0 = q_1$ corresponding to the continuous transition between the RS and RSB phase (Fig. \ref{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h}: red surface).
A condition for the existence of the 1RSB solution can be derived considering the stationarity equations for $t$ close to $1$.
In this case the ratio $w \equiv (1-t)/(1-y)$ has the finite limit
\begin{align*}
w = -\frac{-9 \overline{a}^2 +8 r x + 3 \sqrt{9 \overline{a}^4-16 \overline{a}^2 r x^2-16 \overline{a}^2 r x}}{8 r x^2} \, .
\end{align*}
as $t\to 1$ and $y\to 1$ simultaneously.
The 1RSB solution thus exist only if
\begin{align*}
16 rx (x+1) \leq 9\, \overline{a}^2 \, .
\end{align*}
This critical line is drawn in black in Fig. \ref{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h}.
Since the condition becomes more and more stringent increasing $x$,
this line does not exist for $r< 9/32$.
The line lies on the RS instability surface,
drawn in blue in Fig. \ref{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h},
where the eigenvalue
\begin{align}
\leftidx{_{2}}\Lambda(0;1,1)
= -2 \xi_2 - \frac{9}{2} \xi_4 \overline{a}^2 q_0^2 + \frac{2}{\overline{a}^2 (1-q_0)^2},
\label{eq:eigenvalues_RS_text_field}
\end{align}
of the fluctuations about the RS saddle point, with
$\overline{a}$ and $q_0$ are evaluated at RS saddle point \eqref{eq:RS_stationarity_field},
vanishes.
The eigenvalue can be computed by extending the calculation of Appendix \ref{app:RS_Fluct}
to the case $Q_0\not=0$. Alternatively it can be derived from the 1RSB stability
analysis of Appendix \ref{app:1RSB_Fluct} by setting $x=0$ and replacing $Q_1$
of the 1RSB solution with $Q_0$ of the RS solution. The eigenvalue
\eqref{eq:eigenvalues_RS_text_field} then follows from \eqref{eq:E7}.
As for the zero-field case, the RS solution is stable in the whole
phase space. For high
$r$ the 1RSB solution disappears for
values of $x$ smaller than a threshold value that decreases as $r$
increases and it is replaced by a FRSB solution,
as it occurs for real spherical spin
models. \cite{CrisantiLeuzzi_sp_NPB}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{Phase_diagram_RL_Thesis}
\caption{
Phase diagram of the $2+4$ complex spherical model at fixed external
field in the $(\xi_2,\xi_4,b)$ space. Only the static solution is shown.
The green surface, given by the 1RSB solution with $x=1$,
is the critical RFOT surface between
the RS and 1RSB phases.
The red surface, given by the 1RSB solution with $t=1 \to q_1 = q_0$,
gives critical surface of the continuous transition between the
RS and 1RSB phases.
The black line marks the end-line of the the 1RSB solution.
The blue surface is critical surface where the (continuous)
transition between the RS to FRSB phases
occurs.}
\label{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{PhDi_P_alpha_h_v2}
\caption{
Same as in Fig. \ref{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h} in the photonic
$({\cal P}, \alpha, b)$ diagram.
}
\label{fig:PhDi_P_alpha_h_PP}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Complexity}
\label{sec:complexity}
Looking at Fig. \ref{fig:dynamic_lines} one sees that
when $b=0$ and $r = \xi_2 / \xi_4 < 0.517 $
the static transition line, the solid $1$-line, from the PLW to the RL regime is
anticipated by a dynamic transition line, dashed $1$-line.
Approaching this line from the PLW side a critical slowing down, followed by
a dynamic arrest on the line, is observed in the time correlation functions.
This behavior, typical of glassy systems, is due to the breaking of ergodicity of the phase space.
The phase space breaks down into a large number $\mathcal{N}$,
increasing {\sl exponentially} with the size of the system, of degenerate metastable
states that dominate the dynamical behavior
before the true thermodynamic (static) transition is reached, see, e.g.,
Refs. [\onlinecite{Kirkpatrick87}], [\onlinecite{Crisanti93}] and [\onlinecite{Goetze09}].
Lasing in random media is hence expected to
display a {\it glassy} coherent behavior. With glassy we mean that (i)
a sub-set of modes out of an extensive ensemble of localized passive
modes are activated in a non-deterministic way
and (ii) the whole
set of activated modes behaves cooperatively and belongs to one state
out of (exponentially) many possible ones.
We stress that in characterizing the glassy behavior, by \emph{non-deterministic} we do not mean
deterministic chaos, i.e., high sensitivity to
initial conditions. Chaos is, actually, a dynamic phenomenon
occurring in laser systems, \cite{Weiss91} but it is independent from
possible glassy properties. In other words, chaos can occur in these systems, but it does not affect the presence or
absence of glassiness, as, e.g., shown in Ref.
[\onlinecite{Crisanti96}]: it is not a necessary nor a sufficient
feature for random lasers.
The role of the metastable states can be
captured by introducing the \emph{complexity}, aka \emph{configurational entropy},
\begin{align}
\Sigma \equiv \frac{1}{N}\log \mathcal{N}.
\end{align}
The complexity $\Sigma$ as function of the free energy of the metastable states can
obtained from the Legendre transform of $\phi(x)$:\cite{Monasson95,Mezard99,Mueller07}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq_x_complexity}
&\Sigma (f) + \beta x \phi (x) = \beta x f,
\\
\label{eq:x_f}
&f = \dfrac{\partial x \phi(x)}{\partial x}
\end{eqnarray}
where $f$ is the free energy of a single metastable state and
$x=x(f)$ is the solution of Eq. \eqref{eq:x_f}.
When $h=0$ the overlap $q_0$ vanishes and the 1RSB free energy functional
\eqref{eq:free_energy_1RSB} evaluated on the stationary point
\eqref{eq:stat_1RSB}
reduces to:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:free_energy_1RSB_0}
\nonumber
2 \beta \phi(x) = - \overline{g} &+ (1-x) g_1
- \log \left[ \overline{a} (2-\overline{a}) (1- q_1) \right]
\nonumber
\\
&
- \frac{1}{x} \log \frac{q_{\hat{1}}}{q_{\hat{2}}},
\end{align}
which replaced into the Legendre transform \eqref{eq_x_complexity}, yields
\begin{equation}
\label{complexity_noField}
\Sigma =
\frac{\beta}{2}\left[ -\frac{q_1 x}{q_{\hat{1}}}- g_1 x^2
+\ln \frac{q_{\hat{1}}}{q_{\hat{2}}} \right],
\end{equation}
where $q_1=q_1(x)$.
To obtain the complexity $\Sigma(f)$ one should replace
$x=x(f)$ or, alternatively, use $x$ or $q_1$ as a free parameter and
evaluate $f$ from Eq. \eqref{eq:x_f}.
Stationarity of $\Sigma(f) - \beta xf$ with respect to variation of $f$
for fixed $x$ leads to $x = \beta^{-1}(\partial /\partial f)\Sigma(f)$.
Physically acceptable solutions $f$ must have $x\in[0:1]$ and, hence,
$\Sigma(f)$ is a non-decreasing function of $f$.
The static solution corresponds to the metastable states with the lowest free energy
and null complexity, i. e., the lowest acceptable value of $\Sigma$.
For these states $f = \phi$ and from Eq. \eqref{eq:x_f} one easily recovers
the static stationary condition $\partial_x \phi(x) = 0 $.
The dynamical behavior of the system is dominated by the large number of
metastable states with the highest physically acceptable free energy $f$,
for which the complexity reaches its maximum value.
The range of allowable $f$ is fixed by stability condition of the saddle point replica
calculation, i.e., that
the two relevant eigenvalues, see Appendix \ref{app:1RSB_Fluct}:
\begin{align}
\leftidx{_1}\Lambda (0;1,1)
=& - 2\xi_2 + \frac{2}{\overline{a}^2 [1 - q_1 (1-x) ]^2},
\\
\leftidx{_1}\Lambda (1;2,2)
= &
-2 \xi_2 - \frac{9}{2} \, \xi_4 \, \overline{a}^2 q^2_1
+ \frac{2}{\overline{a}^{\, 2}(1 - q_1)^2},
\end{align}
of the fluctuations about the 1RSB saddle point are non-negative.
The eigenvalue $\leftidx{_1}\Lambda(0;1,1)$ controls the fluctuations with
respect to $q_0=0$ and its vanishing marks the end of the 1RSB phase and the
appearance of a 1-FRSB phase.\cite{Crisanti04,CrisantiLeuzzi06}
The eigenvalue $\leftidx{_1}\Lambda(1;2,2)$ controls the
stability with respect to fluctuations of $q_1$. It can be shown that
it also controls the critical slowing down of the dynamics, \cite{Crisanti07} and, hence, its vanishing
leads to the {\sl marginal condition} for the arrested dynamics.
The requirement of a maximal complexity is then equivalent to
$\leftidx{_1}\Lambda(1;2,2)=0$, cf. Eq. \eqref{eq:x_dyn}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{complexity_081_08}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{complexity_11_065}
\caption{
Complexity $\Sigma$ (blue solid line) as function of $q_1$ for
$\xi_4=0.81$, $\xi_2=0.8$ (upper panel, $\blacktriangle$ symbol in Fig. \ref{fig:dynamic_lines})
and
$\xi_4=1.1$, $\xi_2=0.65$ (lower panel, $\blacksquare$ symbol in Fig. \ref{fig:dynamic_lines}).
The red dashed line indicates the region where the eigenvalue
$\protect\leftidx_{1}\Lambda(1;2,2)$ is positive.
The green dashed line indicates the region where the eigenvalue
$\protect\leftidx_{1}\Lambda(0;1,1)$ is positive.
The interval of $q_1$ where they are both positive identify the region where
the 1RSB solution is stable for the given $\xi_2,\xi_4$.
In the upper panel the static 1RSB solution is unstable, $\Sigma=0$ lies outside the
allowed region, and only the dynamic 1RSB solution exists. The static solution here exists
but with a more complex RSB structure.
}
\label{fig:complexity_eigenvalues_newStable}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:complexity_eigenvalues_newStable}
the form of $\Sigma(q_1)$ is shown for two representative cases.
In the upper panel only the dynamic 1RSB solution exists. The minimum $\Sigma=0$ lies indeed
outside the stability region of the 1RSB phase and the static 1RSB solution is unstable.
Here the static solution is replaced by a solution with a more complex
RSB structure, namely a 1-FRSB phase.
Decreasing $\xi_2$ reduces the stability region of the 1RSB solution and eventually also the
dynamic 1RSB solution becomes unstable. This occurs on the dashed black line shown in
in Fig. \ref{fig:dynamic_lines}. Beyond this line only a 1-FSRB phase, both static and dynamic,
exists. We shall not enter into the detail of this phase, it is enough to say that,
as it occurs for the 1RSB phase, they differ in complexity. A further decrease of $\xi_2$
reduces the complexity of the dynamic solution and it eventually vanishes when the
magenta solid line is reached. Here the distinction between static and dynamic solution
disappears and both solutions merge into a FRSB state.
\subsection{Unfolding the field}
In the low temperature phase all solutions with null external field $b$ described so far
belong to the SML phase $m\not=0$,
since $m = b\, \overline{a}q_{\hat{1}}$.
The description of the SML phase in terms of $b$ is then trivial.
To switch to the description in terms of the parameters $b_2$ and $b_4$,
cf. Eq. \eqref{eq:definition_parameters_b_xi_mu}, we have to unfold the
value of the field $b$ in terms of $b_2$ and $b_4$ using the
\emph{unfolding equation} \eqref{eq:unfolding_equation}.
The unfolding equation admits the trivial solution $m=0$ and a non-trivial $m\not=0$ solution
if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:SML_cond}
2 b_2 + 4 b_4
m^2 = \frac{1}{\overline{a}\, q_{\hat{1}}}.
\end{equation}
The SML phase exists only in the regions of the phase space where this condition is satisfied.
As in ordinary ferromagnetic first order transition, the SML phase may appear
discontinuously with a finite value of $m$ and
higher free energy on the spinodal line.
If this happens the SML phase becomes thermodynamically favorable only
when the SML free energy becomes equal to the free energy of the $m=0$ solution.
This condition defines the transition line in the phase space.
Since the two phases have equal free energy at the transition they coexist
and latent heat is exchanged during the transition.
Using the stationary point equations \eqref{eq:stat_1RSB}
and defining $\gamma = b_2 /b_4$, from Eq. \eqref{eq:SML_cond} one easily gets:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:b4_q0}
b_4 = \frac{1}{\overline{a}\,q_{\hat{1}} } \,
\frac{1}{2 \, \gamma + 4 \, b^2 \, \overline{a}^{\,2} q_{\hat{1}} },
\end{equation}
which relates the value of $b_4$ for fixed $\gamma$ to the that of the parameters of the
model with fixed $b$.
With this parametrization the SML spinodal line corresponds to the minimum values of $b_4$
where the $m\neq 0$ solution first appears.
Since when $m=0$ the field $b$ vanishes and consequently $q_0=0$, it is useful to use $q_0$ as
free parameter in the model with fixed $b$. The SML spinodal line for fixed $\gamma$ then
occurs at $ b_4^\star = \min_{q_0} b_4(q_0)$.
The value of $b_4^\star$ is strictly positive, and a rough estimate gives the bound:
\begin{align*}
b^\star_4 \geq
\left[ 2(1+\mathcal{R})(\gamma +2 \, \epsilon) \right]^{-1}.
\end{align*}
Note that the bound decreases with the number of steps $\mathcal{R}$ of RSB, thus SML phases with higher replica symmetry
breaking steps appear first, if they exists. In the following we shall only discuss the
RS SML phase with $\mathcal{R}=0$. While the discussion of SML phases with more complex
RSB structures, though feasible, will not be presented here.
For large values of $\gamma$
the minimum of $b_4(q_0)$ occurs at $q_0=0$ and the SML appears continuously with $m=0$.
The spinodal line then coincides with the transition line and
the transition between the IW/PWL and SML phases is continuous in $m$, with
no phase coexistence and latent heat.
For sufficiently small $\gamma$ the minimum of $b_4(q_0)$ moves to $q_0>0$ and
the SML phase appears discontinuously with $m\not=0$.
Thermodynamic transitions between the IW or PWL phases and the SML phase occur
at the critical value $b_4^c > b_4^\star$ where the free energy of the phases becomes equal.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{q0_vs_mu_myR_0500_Allgamma}
\caption{ Curves of $q_0$ where $b_4(q_0)$ is minimal
as function of $\xi_4$ for fixed $\gamma$ and $r=0.5$
Bottom to top: $\gamma = 10^3 ,
\, 4, \, 2.5 , \, 1.5, \, 1 , \, 0.75, \, 0.5,\, 0.25$.
The vertical dashed line marks the value $\xi_4 \simeq 0.67$
where the 1RSB solution for $r=0.5$ appears.
For $\gamma$ small enough the spinodal line of the RS SML phase enters into
the 1RSB region. }
\label{fig:q0_vs_mu_rPM}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:q0_vs_mu_rPM} the value of $q_0$ is shown at which $b_4(q_0)$ attains its minimum as a function of $\xi_4$ for different values of $\gamma$.
In figure \ref{fig:q0_vs_mu_rPM} it is $r=0.5$ but the scenario remains qualitative the same by changing $r$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99
\columnwidth]{b4_myR_0500_spinodal_gamma_07}
\caption{ Phase diagram for the model with $r=0.5$ and
$\gamma=0.7$. For this value of $\gamma$ the spinodal line of the
RS SML phase enters into the 1RSB region.
Dashed red line: spinodal line of the RS SML phase.
Dashed green line: thermodynamic transition line.
Solid black line: $b_4(q_0= 0)$ line.
Horizontal lines: transition lines between the $m=b=0$ phases.}
\label{fig:b4_r05_G07_allLines}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:b4_r05_G07_allLines} we report the phase diagram
for $r=0.5$ and $\gamma=0.7$ in the plane $(b_4,\xi_4)$.
Similarly, in Fig. \ref{fig:b4_r0_g0} it is shown the phase diagram for
$r=\gamma=0$ when only the 4-body interaction term is present.
In this latter case as $\xi_4 \to 0$ the transition occurs at $b_4^c = 0.613852$,
green dashed line in Figure \ref{fig:b4_r0_g0}, in agreement with the result of
Ref. [\onlinecite{GordonFisherPRL}]
($b_4 = \gamma_s P_0^2 /(12T)$ in the units of Ref. [\onlinecite{GordonFisherPRL}]).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{b4_freeEnergyComp_r0_gamma0}
\caption{ Phase diagram for the model with $r=\gamma=0$.
Dashed red line: spinodal line of the RS SML phase.
Dashed green line: thermodynamic transition line.
Solid black line: $b_4(q_0= 0)$ line.
Horizontal lines: transition lines between the $m=b=0$ phases.
}
\label{fig:b4_r0_g0}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The unfolding can be also done using the photonics parameters.
The procedure is conceptually similar but
more involved because the unfolding equation is now:
\begin{align}
&b = \frac{1}{2 } \, \mathcal{P} \sqrt{\beta J_0} \,
\left[ 1 + \left( \frac{\mathcal{P}}{12 \sqrt{\beta J_0}} m^2 -1 \right) \alpha_0 \right]
m.
\end{align}
Regardless of which approach one uses, this procedure allows to obtain the phase diagram
for general values of the photonic control parameters,
which eventually may be compared in experimental setups;
see, in particular, Ref. [\onlinecite{PhysRevLett.111.233903}].
As an example, in
Figs. \ref{fig:FM_PM_diagramRL_a0_05_a_05}-\ref{fig:FM_PM_diagramRL_a1_a1_spinodal}
we show the phase diagram in the photonic parameters for
$\alpha=\alpha_0=0.5$, $0.7$ and $1$.
For $\alpha=\alpha_0=1$ only the 4-body interaction term is present,
corresponding to the limit of ideally
closed cavity. The transition from IW to SML is discontinuous, first order,
as $\alpha_0$ is large.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{FM_PM_diagramRL_a0_05_a_05paper}
\caption{ Phase diagram in the photonics parameters for $a = a_0 =
0.5$.
Dashed red line: spinodal line of the RS SML phase.
Dashed green line: thermodynamic transition line.
Solid black line: $b_4(q_0= 0)$ line.
Blue lines: transition lines between the $m=0$ phases.
The transition between the PLW and RL phases
is continuous with null complexity. }
\label{fig:FM_PM_diagramRL_a0_05_a_05}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Consider the common experimental situation where we have an
increasing pumping rate $\mathcal{P}$ for fixed degree disorder $R_J$,
$\alpha$ and $\alpha_0$.
Then:
\begin{itemize}
\item For $R_J$ not too large a direct transition between the IW and the SML phases
is observed as the pumping increases.
The transition is robust with respect to the introduction of a small amount of
disorder;
\item for systems with intermediate disorder, the high pump regime
remains the ordered SML regime,
but an intermediate unmagnetized, phase-coherent PLW regime
appears between SML and IW regime;
\item
for large $R_J$, a further transition from the SML to the RL
phase is observed at high ${\cal P}$.
Moreover, if $R_J$ exceeds a disorder threshold the SML disappears and the only high pumping lasing phase remains the RL.
\end{itemize}
This scenario is rather
general and remains valid for different choices of $\alpha$ and $\alpha_0$.
See for example Fig. \ref{fig:all_Phase_diagram_a_eq_a0} where the whole phase diagram
for the case $\alpha=\alpha_0$ is reported. The global picture, however,
does not change using different values of
the ratio $\alpha/\alpha_0$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{FM_PM_diagramRL_a0_07_a_07_spinodal}
\caption{ Phase diagram in the photonics parameters for $a = a_0 =
0.7$.
Dashed red line: spinodal line of the RS SML phase.
Dashed green line: thermodynamic transition line.
Solid black line: $b_4(q_0= 0)$ line.
Blue lines: transition lines between the $m=0$ phases.
The dashed blue line is the dynamic
transition with finite complexity. }
\label{fig:FM_PM_diagramRL_a0_07_a_07_spinodal}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{freeEnergy_comp_a0One_aOne}
\caption{ Phase diagram in the photonics parameters for $a = a_0 = 1$.
Dashed red line: spinodal line of the RS SML phase.
Dashed green line: thermodynamic transition line.
Solid black line: $b_4(q_0= 0)$ line.
Blue lines: transition lines between the $m=0$ phases.
The dashed blue line is the dynamic
transition with finite complexity. }
\label{fig:FM_PM_diagramRL_a1_a1_spinodal}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In general, the value of $\alpha_0$ affects the transition toward the ordered SML
regime: for high $\alpha_0$ the transition is always first order. In
particular, in the standard closed cavity laser limit
$\alpha_0=1$ and no disorder ($R_J=0$).\cite{GordonFisherPRL}
On the contrary, if $\alpha_0$ is low, regions in the phase diagram may appear where
the transition is second order.
The value of $\alpha$ controls the transition to a
RL regime.
For
\begin{equation}
\alpha > \alpha_{\text{nl}} =\frac{3-1.76382 \epsilon}{3-1.03703
\epsilon^2}
\end{equation}
(in this work $\epsilon=1$ and $\alpha_{\text{nl}}= 0.6297\ldots$) the transition is
toward a RL phase with a 1RSB structure via a RFOT typical of glassy sistems.
For $\alpha <\alpha_{\rm nl}$ at the lasing threshold the 1RSB phase is unstable,
and the transition is toward a RL phase with a FRSB structure. In the latter case the transition
is continuous also in the order parameters.
Though we stress here that in any realistic non-linear
optical system the $4$-body
interaction is generally expected to be dominant above the lasing threshold, cf. Sect.
\ref{sec:derivation_of_the_model}, in cavity-less
random lasers and in laser cavities with strong leakages
the contribution from linear interactions plays an important role
on the stimulated emission and
the values of $\alpha_0$ and $\alpha$
are not expected to be always close to one.
A further important point is that the transition from IW
to SML only occurs for a strictly positive value of the coupling
coefficient $J_0$. This is effectively shown in Fig.
\ref{fig:multiplot_FMPM_digramAP_inverseY}, where the phase diagrams
for $\alpha=\alpha_0=1$ and $\alpha=\alpha_0=0.7$ are displayed in
terms of $R_J^{-1} = J_0/J$ and $\mathcal{P}^2 R_J$. In standard
passive mode locking lasers, e.g., the coefficient $J_0$ accounts for
the presence of a saturable absorber in the cavity. \cite{HausPaper}
In cavity-less RL this device, or any analogue one, is obviously not
present so that the occurrence of the lasing transition as a
mode-locking is not to be given for granted. However, as shown in
Fig. \ref{fig:all_Phase_diagram_a_eq_a0}, starting
from a standard laser supporting passive mode-locking and increasing
the disorder $R_J$, we find that the IW/SML mode-locking transition acquires the character of a
glassy IW/RL mode-locking transition. This is present even for $J_0<0$, as
explicitly shown in Fig. \ref{fig:multiplot_FMPM_digramAP_inverseY}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99 \columnwidth ]{3DAllTogether_diagramRL_a0_eq_a_freeEnergy_denseA}
\caption{ Phase diagram in the photonics parameters for $\alpha =
\alpha_0$ (and $\beta J_0 = 1$). The solid (dashed) red lines
correspond to continuous (discontinuous) IW-SML transition;.
The blue surface is the RL-SML transition,
the orange surface the PLW-RL transition
and the green surface the IW-PLW transition.
The two
black lines mark the intersection between the
orange-blue and green-red surfaces, respectively. }
\label{fig:all_Phase_diagram_a_eq_a0}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.99\columnwidth ]{multiplot_FMPM_digramAP_inverseY}
\caption{ Phase diagram in the parameters $J_0/J$ vs $\mathcal{P}^2
R_J$ for $\alpha = \alpha_0 = 1$ and $\alpha = \alpha_0 = 0.7$
(inset). The green dashed line corresponds to the equilibrium
thermodynamic transition towards the SML phase, the dashed blue
line is the dynamic transition between the PLW and RL phases.
The continuous blue lines
denote thermodynamic IW/PWL and PWL/RL transitions.}
\label{fig:multiplot_FMPM_digramAP_inverseY}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
In this paper we have reported the detailed study of a
statistical mechanical model whose degrees of freedom are complex
continuous spins satisfying a global spherical constraint and
interacting via $2-$ and $4-$body interactions.
The model gives a statistical description of the complex wave amplitude dynamics in
non-linear wave systems. They include, in particular, the multimode laser systems
in presence of a non-perturbative degree of randomness and
the very interesting limit of random lasers.
We examine in depth the framework of our equilibrium statistical mechanics
description of optical systems in stationary, i.e., off-equilibrium,
non-linear regimes, among which the paradigmatic laser case, and we
discuss the limits of applicability of our theory.
The dynamics of the electromagnetic modes is described by Langevin
equations with linear and nonlinear terms whose couplings derive from
the spatial overlap of the modes mediated by the spatial profile of
the active medium susceptibility. We have shown that the presence of
a continuous spectrum of radiative modes leads to a further
contribution to the linear coupling term. We have critically reported how
the major difficulty in open and random optically active systems is
to express the couplings in the slow amplitude mode basis, i.e.,
the modes with a {\em definite} frequency, to which the thermodynamic
approach effectively applies.
The primary condition assumed in the model is the absence of
dispersion in the Master equation, so that the multimode laser system is
Hamiltonian and the steady-state solution of the associated
Fokker-Plank equation is given by the Gibbs distribution and the
methods of equilibrium statistical mechanics apply. The purely
dissipative case
corresponds to some well know
physical situations, like negligible group velocity dispersion and
Kerr effect in standard mode locking lasers and the relevant case of
soliton lasers. In the general case the condition is hardly
verifiable, though we have shown that in most cases, where the degree
of nonlinearity is high enough, there are first order transitions
that are expected to be robust by slight
modification of the complex coefficients of the dynamics.
We have reported the results for the mean field theory of the model
that includes the whole complex mode amplitude dynamics when coupled
by both ordered and disordered and linear ($2$-body) and nonlinear
($4$-body) interactions.
The whole phase diagram obtained via the replica theory has been
reported in terms of different sets of external parameters. We
adopted, in particular, the description typical of glassy systems
undergoing slow relaxation at criticality and dynamic arrest at the
transition. In this case the parameters ($\xi_{2,4}$, $b_{2,4}$) are
the coefficients of the linear and third order terms in the memory
Kernel of a related schematic Mode Coupling Theory
\cite{Crisanti04,Crisanti06, Goetze09} for the hypothetical dynamics
of complex-valued density fluctuations in fluid glass-formers.
Further on, we used an equivalent photonic description in terms of
degree of disorder, source pumping rate and degree of non-linearity.
Four different optical regimes are found: incoherent fluorescence (IW),
standard mode locking (SML), random lasing (RL) and phase locking wave (PLW).
In the incoherent
wave the modes oscillate independently as in a paramagnet or in a warm
liquid. In the standard mode locking the modes are coherent both in
phase and in intensity and ultrashort electromagnetic pulses are
generated. This ordered regime corresponds to a ferromagnet, or a
crystal solid. In the random lasing regime the mode oscillations are
frustrated, so the phases are locked but without global ordering and
any regular pattern in the intensities. This is a glassy phase,
occurring both as a mean-field window glass, for moderately open cavities
$\alpha>\alpha_{\rm nl}$ or a spin-glass phase, for very open cavities where
linear dumping is not negligible and cannot be treated perturbatively. At last, in the phase locking wave, a
novel regime not foreseen in previous statistical mechanical works,
phase coherence is attained, without any intensity coherence (it is an
unmagnetized phase). This regime takes place between the incoherent
wave and the lasing regimes in presence of a given amount of quenched
disorder and it is achievable only when a model includes the
dynamics of both phases and intensities.
In this context the random lasing threshold is characterized by the
replica symmetry breaking and, at high enough degree of nonlinearity,
a whole region with nonvanishing complexity is observed to anticipate
the transition. In this sense the light propagating and amplifying in
the disordered medium displays glassy behavior. We have shown that
this picture is stable against the introduction of a linear coupling
and the transition becomes continuous only when the linear coupling is
actually dominant. The presence of a small linear coupling, even if not
changing the transition, is shown to alter, nevertheless, the
structure of the phase diagram non-trivially, so that, e. g., even a
transition from standard mode locking to random lasing can be observed
increasing the pumping at fixed degree of disorder.
The inclusion of the full complex amplitudes of the modes as fundamental degrees of freedom,
rather than the mere mode phases as in previous works \cite{AngelaniZamponiPRL,ContiLeuzziPRL09,ContiLeuzziPRB11}
may be prominent
for an experimental test and, in particular, to observe the replica
symmetry breaking predicted by the theory.\cite{Ghofraniha15, Antenucci15} Indeed,
the measure of the phase-phase correlations required for measuring the
theoretical overlap among the modes is not generally available in the
experiments, as the random lasing emission is hardly intense enough to
use second-harmonic generation techniques, but intensity correlations
can be easily measured.
There are few possible extensions of the previous mean field model
considered in this paper. To name some, one could consider the
inclusion of correlations in the quenched disordered interactions,
further orders of nonlinear interaction, fluctuations of the spherical
constraint. Nevertheless, none of these extensions is expected to
change the general mean-field picture described in this work, in
particular the kind of phases and the nature of the transitions
involved.
A more relevant generalization of this approach is the extension to
random laser models beyond the mean-field theory, where new features
may arise and a more direct comparison with experimental setups is
possible, e. g., by generalizing the numerical approach of
Refs. [\onlinecite{Antenucci14b,Antenucci16}] for the pulsed ultrashort mode-locked lasing
in ordered statistical mechanical mode networks to the case of
quenched disordered interactions and random lasing.
Different approaches are, instead, needed to study the evolution of
the system in the general case with a non-negligible presence of
dispersion, to discuss the robustness of the picture presented in this paper.
The direct analysis of the stochastic dynamics of a finite
number of modes is necessary to this aim. Moreover, in this case
also the approach to the stationary state would be
accessible, providing an appealing integration of the results
presented here.
\section*{Acknowledgments} The research leading to these
results has received funding from the People Programme (Marie Curie
Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme
FP7/2007-2013/ under REA grant agreement no. 290038, NETADIS
project, from the European Research Council through ERC grant
agreement no. 247328 - CriPheRaSy project - and from the Italian MIUR
under the Basic Research Investigation Fund FIRB2008 program, grant
No. RBFR08M3P4, and under the PRIN2010 program, grant code
2010HXAW77-008.
|
\section{Introduction}
This paper considers a stochastic game where each player has incomplete information.
A central issue is whether or not this information should be shared. Indeed, players with special access to desirable information may prefer to keep this information private. The goal of this paper is to design an efficient collaborative strategy that allows players to share information without sacrificing their own interests.
The general game structure is as follows: There are $N$ players that repeatedly play a game over
a sequence of rounds $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$. On each round $t$, there is a random event vector $\omega(t)=(\omega_1(t), \ldots, \omega_M(t))$ that describes characteristics of the game for that round. The value $M$ is a positive integer that can be different from $N$. Each player can observe a \emph{portion} of the components of the $\omega(t)$ vector. Specifically, for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, N\}$, define $\script{S}_i$ as the subset of indices in $\{1, \ldots, M\}$ that are observable by player $i$. Every round $t$, each player $i$ observes its components of $\omega(t)$ and then chooses an action $\alpha_i(t)$ based on this (incomplete) information. Define $\alpha(t) = (\alpha_1(t), \ldots, \alpha_N(t))$ as the joint action vector. The resulting round-$t$ payoff for player $i$ is $u_i(t)$, also called the \emph{utility}. The utility $u_i(t)$ is a general function of $\alpha(t)$ and $\omega(t)$:
\[ u_i(t) = \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \: \: \forall i \in \{1, \ldots, N\} \]
Each player wants to earn a large time average utility $\overline{u}_i$:
\[ \overline{u}_i = \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1} u_i(\tau) \]
Pooling information about the $\omega(t)$ vector and making a \emph{team decision} can improve the sum utility. However, individual players may want to keep their information private to increase their own utility.
\subsection{Example game structure} \label{section:location-reward}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{figs/games-grid-color}
\caption{An illustration of a 3-player location-reward game. Locations known only to player $i$ are blue, yellow, red for $i \in \{1,2,3\}$, respectively. Locations known to both players 1 and 2 are green, players 2 and 3 are orange, and players 3 and 1 are purple.}
\label{fig:games-grid-color}
\end{figure}
Consider a square region that is partitioned into $M$ disjoint sub-regions, called \emph{locations} (see Fig. \ref{fig:games-grid-color} with $M=16$ locations).
Every round, a random reward $\omega_m(t)$ appears in each location $m \in \{1, \ldots, M\}$.
Let $\omega(t) = (\omega_1(t), \ldots, \omega_M(t))$ be the vector of current rewards.
For example, $\omega(t)$ might be a random vector that is independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) over rounds $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$ with some arbitrary joint probability distribution.
Suppose there are 3 players:
\begin{itemize}
\item Player 1 knows rewards for the blue, purple, and green squares.
\item Player 2 knows rewards for the yellow, green, and orange squares.
\item Player 3 knows rewards for the red, orange, and purple squares.
\end{itemize}
Every round, each player chooses a single location where it competes for the current reward.
Specifically,
for each $i \in \{1, 2, 3\}$, let $\script{A}_i$ be a subset of $\{1, \ldots, M\}$ that represents the set of locations player $i$ is allowed to choose from, called the \emph{action set} for player $i$. The sets $\script{A}_i$ and $\script{S}_i$ can be different, so that a player might choose a location in which she does not know the reward.
Let $\alpha_i(t)$ be the location in $\script{A}_i$ chosen by player $i$ on round $t$. If a player is the only one to choose a certain location $m$, she earns the full reward $\omega_m(t)$. Else, the reward is split evenly amongst all players who choose that location. Specifically, for each $m \in \{1, \ldots, M\}$
define $K_m(t)$ as the number of players who choose location $m$ on round $t$. The resulting utility for player $i\in \{1, 2, 3\}$ is:
\[ u_i(t) = \frac{\omega_{\alpha_i(t)}(t)}{K_{\alpha_i(t)}(t)} \]
This utility is indeed a function of the vectors $\alpha(t)$ and $\omega(t)$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:example-utility}
\hat{u}_i(\alpha, \omega) = \frac{\omega_{\alpha_i}}{\sum_{n=1}^3 1\{\alpha_n=\alpha_i\}}
\end{equation}
where $1\{\alpha_n= \alpha_i\}$ is an indicator function that is $1$ if $\alpha_n=\alpha_i$, and $0$ else. The denominator in \eqref{eq:example-utility}
is always nonzero since $1\{\alpha_i = \alpha_i\}=1$ for all $i \in \{1, 2, 3\}$.
For the scenario illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:games-grid-color}, player 1 is the only one to see the highly desirable reward of 10 that is currently in the top left location. Player 1 might want to keep this information private to reduce the chance of other players competing for the same location.
\subsection{Prior work on repeated games}
Adaptive methods that converge to a \emph{correlated equilibrium} for repeated play of
static games are developed in \cite{foster-vohra-games-CE}\cite{hart-correlated-games-CE}\cite{fudenberg-games-CE}. Correlated equilibrium in stochastic games is
considered in \cite{cor-eq-stochastic-games}\cite{repeated-games-arxiv}. The formulation of the current paper is the most similar to \cite{repeated-games-arxiv}, where a game manager helps to achieve
correlated and coarse correlated equilibrium in repeated stochastic games. However, the prior work \cite{foster-vohra-games-CE}\cite{hart-correlated-games-CE}\cite{fudenberg-games-CE}\cite{cor-eq-stochastic-games}\cite{repeated-games-arxiv} does not consider the problem of information sharing, and so the notions of equilibrium they study do not directly apply in the current context. Further, the work on stochastic games in \cite{cor-eq-stochastic-games}\cite{repeated-games-arxiv} considers an ergodic regime, while the current paper considers arbitrary sample paths that are possibly non-ergodic.
\subsection{Inadequacy of standard equilibrium definitions}
Standard definitions of Nash equilibrium \cite{nash-games}\cite{nash-n-person-games}, correlated equilibrium \cite{aumann-correlated-eq1}\cite{aumann-correlated-eq2}, and coarse correlated equilibrium \cite{CCE} are inadequate in the scenario of this paper. That is because such equilibrium definitions require the utility of each player $i$ to be at least as large as it would be if player $i$ individually deviated from the intended strategy \emph{while all other players continue to
use the intended strategy}. However, if player $i$ deviates by choosing
not to share information, the intended strategies of others may no longer be possible because they might rely on this information.
In principle, one could circumvent this difficulty by forcing the repeated game structure to look like a 1-shot game for which standard notions of equilibrium exist. For example, this could be done by allowing each player to make a binary decision at the start that determines whether or not she will share information. Her remaining decisions can be viewed as an
element of a strategy space defined over infinite sequences of actions. This approach is taken in \cite{cor-eq-stochastic-games}
by using the concept of \emph{infinitely punishing deviant behavior} (also see discussions in
\cite{game-theory-book}). There, players are assigned strategies that require them to maximally punish any non-conformist by taking actions (for all time) that are solely designed to yield poor utility
for the non-conformist. This can lead to an equilibrium because such punishment never occurs
(since all players conform out of fear), and so (mathematically) players do not object to having
an unused requirement to punish others as part of their decision strategy.
However, this approach does not necessarily capture realistic behavior. Human players will \emph{not} spend the rest of their lives punishing a non-conformist. Rather, human players will adapt their behavior to emerging conditions. The mathematical threat of infinite punishment is seen to be a sham that lacks power to realistically influence behavior.
A modified definition of \emph{subgame perfect equilibrium} is often used as an attempt to make punishment threats credible \cite{game-theory-book}. It requires equilibrium-type conditions to be met even for unused punishment modes of a strategy. Such conditions can often be met by using finite-length punishment modes. However, in many repeated games, such modes can be appended to almost any strategy to endow that strategy with the subgame perfect equilibrium property (see theorems on repeated games with time average utility metrics in \cite{game-theory-book}).
Overall, while prior notions of equilibrium for repeated games exist and have well defined mathematical properties, they can be complex and difficult for humans to interpret.
Arguably, a human player wants a more direct comparison of the suggested strategy with some other reasonable course of action. This paper uses a much simpler ``no regret'' guarantee that compares the suggestions to a single
baseline strategy, rather than to all possible strategies. The baseline strategy is defined by any alternative sequence of actions that a player wants to consider. The challenge is to dynamically make suggestions as the game is being played. The suggestions must meet the desired performance for arbitrary sample paths, and therefore must adapt as new events emerge.
\subsection{The game manager}
This paper deviates from the standard equilibrium approach by assuming the existence of a \emph{game manager} to which players pass their information. Further, every round
it is assumed that each player $i \in \{1, \ldots, N\}$ has a \emph{baseline decision} $b_i(t) \in \script{A}_i$.
The baseline decision $b_i(t)$ is any decision the human player would choose if she were operating on her own without a manager and without information sharing. The manager takes the given information every round $t$ and produces \emph{suggested actions} for each player. The suggested actions must have the property that, if every player uses the suggestions, a concave function of average utilities across players is maximized subject to the constraint that each player receives an average utility at least as large as the average
value it would earn if all players used their baseline strategies. The running average utility gains between the suggested and baseline strategies can be given to each player on each round. The understanding is that players have more incentive to take suggested actions if they see the
gains of doing so.
This approach does not rely on punishment modes in a complex strategy space.
This formulation is interesting because it defines a specific optimization problem that uses the (possibly human-generated) sequence of baseline strategies as part of the optimization. The solution approach uses Lyapunov optimization theory in this new context. Lyapunov optimization is known to have \emph{universal scheduling} properties that provide analytical guarantees for arbitrary sequences \cite{sno-text}. Those properties are used in the game theory context of this paper to provide a simple online algorithm for making manager decisions as the game is played. This paper shows that the resulting algorithm provides analytical guarantees for arbitrary baseline sequences and arbitrary event sequences, including sequences with no probabilistic description.
\section{Examples}
To gain intuition, this section provides examples of a 2-player location-reward game with only two locations.
The random event vectors
$\omega(t)=(\omega_1(t), \omega_2(t))$ are assumed to be independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) over rounds $t \in \{0, 1,2, \ldots\}$. This allows exact computation of average utility associated with
different strategies.
The examples are designed to show that willingness to share information can depend on the statistical distribution of rewards and also on the constraint sets of individual players.
For simplicity, the examples in this section assume the full joint probability distribution of $(\omega_1(t), \omega_2(t))$ is known by both players. The general model of Section \ref{section:problem} treats a more complex scenario where
the event vectors $\omega(t)$ are arbitrary sequences, possibly non-ergodic sequences with no known probabilistic structure.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{figs/two-player-locations}
\caption{A location-reward game with two locations and two players. Player 1 knows the reward in the left location, but this reward is always 2.2. Player 2 knows the random reward $\omega_2(t)$ in the right location.}
\label{fig:two-player-locations}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Example 1: Beneficially withholding information} \label{section:example1}
Consider a location-reward game (as described in Section \ref{section:location-reward}) with
two players and two locations, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:two-player-locations}. Player 1 knows the reward $\omega_1(t)$ associated with location 1 and player 2 knows the reward $\omega_2(t)$ associated with location 2. Every round, player 1 can choose from either of the two locations. However, suppose that player 2 is restricted to only choosing location 2. The reward probabilities are:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\omega_1(t) &=& 2.2 \: \: \mbox{ with probability 1} \\
\omega_2(t) &=& \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
10 &\mbox{ with probability $1/5$} \\
2 & \mbox{ with probability $4/5$}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
The vectors $\omega(t) = (\omega_1(t), \omega_2(t))$ are i.i.d. over rounds $t$, and the above probabilities are known to both players. Player 2 is the only one with knowledge of the actual realization of the time-varying reward in location 2.
\subsubsection{Without sharing information} Suppose player 2 does not share its knowledge. If player 1 chooses location 2, its expected utility is $5(1/5) + 1(4/5) = 1.8$, which is strictly less than the utility of 2.2 it would achieve by choosing location 1. Hence, the optimal strategy for player 1 is to always choose location 1. Assuming that player 1 uses this optimal strategy, the resulting average utilities are:
\begin{eqnarray}
\overline{u}_1 &=& 2.2 \label{eq:earned1} \\
\overline{u}_2 &=& 10(1/5) + 2(4/5) = 3.6 \label{eq:earned2}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsubsection{Sharing information} Suppose player 2 chooses to always
divulge the value of $\omega_2(t)$ before either player makes a decision. In this case, it is optimal for player 1 to choose location 2 whenever $\omega_2(t)=10$, and to choose location 1 otherwise. The resulting utilities under this strategy
are:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{u}_1 &=& 2.2(4/5) + 5(1/5) = 2.76\\
\overline{u}_2 &=& 2(4/5) + 5(1/5) = 2.6
\end{eqnarray*}
In comparison to the utilities of \eqref{eq:earned1}-\eqref{eq:earned2}, it is clear that player 1 increases her utility by taking advantage of the shared information. However, player 2 \emph{reduces} her utility because she now competes for the desirable reward of 10 when that reward appears. Thus, in this example, player 2 has no incentive to share information. Player 2 prefers to keep her information private.
\subsection{Example 2: Beneficially sharing information} \label{section:example2}
Consider the same two-player location-reward game as the previous subsection.
The only difference is that the reward probabilities are different:
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_1(t) &=& 2.2 \: \: \mbox{ with probability 1} \label{eq:example1} \\
\omega_2(t) &=& \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
10 &\mbox{ with probability $1/2$} \\
2 & \mbox{ with probability $1/2$}
\end{array}
\right. \label{eq:example2}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsubsection{Without sharing information}
Without sharing information, it is optimal for player 1 to always choose location 2. The resulting utilities under this strategy are:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{u}_1 = \overline{u}_2 = 5(1/2) + 1(1/2) = 3
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsubsection{Sharing information}
If player 2 shares $\omega_2(t)$ with player 1 every round $t$, then the optimal strategy for player 1 is to choose location 2 whenever $\omega_2(t)=10$, and choose location 1 otherwise. The resulting utilities under this optimal strategy are:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{u}_1 &=& 2.2(1/2) + 5(1/2) = 3.6 \\
\overline{u}_2 &=& 2(1/2) + 5(1/2) = 3.5
\end{eqnarray*}
In this example, sharing information allows \emph{both} players to increase their average utility. Player 2 wins by revealing the value of $\omega_2(t)$ because it discourages player 1 from competing
when the reward is small.
The examples in Sections \ref{section:example1} and \ref{section:example2} show that changing the probability distribution of random events can impact the optimality or sub-optimality of sharing information.
The problem treated in this paper is even more challenging
because the probabilities are unknown and can possibly change.
\subsection{Example 3: Unrestricted actions}
Now consider the same example of the previous subsection, with the same reward probabilities as \eqref{eq:example1}-\eqref{eq:example2}. The only difference is that now both players 1 and 2 are free to select either of the two locations.
\subsubsection{Without sharing information}
Without knowledge of $\omega_2(t)$, it is optimal for player 1 to always choose location 2. Indeed, the \emph{smallest} expected reward it can earn by doing this is computed by assuming it must always share its rewards in location 2, and this leads to a value of $5/2 + 1/2 = 3 > 2.2$. If player 2 assumes that player 1 uses its optimal policy, then its best strategy is to choose location 2 whenever $\omega_2(t)=10$, and to choose location 1 if $\omega_2(t)=2$. Under these optimized strategies, the utilities are:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{u}_1 &=& 5(1/2) + 2(1/2) = 3.5 \\
\overline{u}_2 &=& 5(1/2) + 2.2(1/2) = 3.6
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsubsection{Sharing information}
Suppose player 2 shares $\omega_2(t)$ with player 1 every round $t$. In this case, it is optimal for both players to choose location 2 whenever $\omega_2(t)=10$. However, the optimal decisions for players 1 and 2 are unclear when $\omega_2(t)=2$, since optimality of each player depends on the policy implemented by the other. However, the \emph{highest} utility that player 2 can achieve is $3.6$ (which assumes it always gets exclusive access to the 2.2 reward in location 1 when $\omega_2(t)=2$). Thus, at best, player 2 can only achieve the same utility by sharing its information, but more likely stands to \emph{loose} utility when this information is shared. Therefore, in this example, a rational and self-interested player 2 would not want to share information.
\section{The general model} \label{section:problem}
Fix $N$ as an integer larger than 1.
Suppose there are $N$ players that play a game over rounds $t\in\{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$.
Define $\script{N} = \{1, \ldots, N\}$ as the set of players.
Fix $M$ as a positive integer (possibly different from $N$) and suppose that $\omega(t) = (\omega_1(t), \omega_2(t), \ldots, \omega_M(t))$ is a sequence of event vectors over rounds $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$. Assume that $\omega(t)$ takes values in some abstract (possibly infinite) set $\Omega$ on each round $t$.
The vector sequence $\omega(t)$ is otherwise
arbitrary and can have arbitrary correlations over entries and over time. A probabilistic description of $\omega(t)$ is not necessarily known to the players, and such a probabilistic description may not even exist.
For each $i \in \script{N}$, define $\script{S}_i$ as the subset of $\{1, \ldots, M\}$ associated with components of $\omega(t)$ that player $i$ can observe at the beginning of each round. That is, player $i$ knows $\omega_j(t)$ for all $j \in \script{S}_i$ and for all $t$. It is assumed that $\cup_{i=1}^N \script{S}_i = \{1, \ldots, M\}$, so that the combined knowledge of all players gives the full $\omega(t)$ vector.
Every round $t$, each player $i\in \script{N}$ observes its components of $\omega(t)$ and
chooses an \emph{action} $\alpha_i(t)$ as an element in some abstract (possibly infinite)
action set $\script{A}_i$. Let $\alpha(t) = (\alpha_1(t), \ldots, \alpha_N(t))$ be the action vector. The resulting utility $u_i(t)$ earned by player $i$ on round $t$ is a general function of $\alpha(t)$ and $\omega(t)$:
\[ u_i(t) = \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \]
\subsection{Assumptions}
The functions $\hat{u}_i(\alpha, \omega)$ are assumed to be non-negative and upper-bounded. Specifically, for each $i \in \script{N}$, assume there is a maximum utility value $u_i^{max}<\infty$ such that:
\[ 0 \leq \hat{u}_i(\alpha, \omega) \leq u_i^{max} \: \: \: \: \forall (\alpha, \omega) \in \script{A}_1\times \cdots \times \script{A}_N \times \Omega \]
For simplicity, further assume the utility functions are such that for every
$\omega \in \Omega$, the problem of choosing an action vector $\alpha = (\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_N)$ to maximize a weighted sum of utilities has a well defined (possibly non-unique)
maximizing solution $\alpha^*$. Specifically, the following problem has a well defined maximum (so that the supremum objective function value is achievable)
for all possible real numbers $\beta_i$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Maximize:} & \sum_{i=1}^N \beta_i \hat{u}_i(\alpha, \omega) \label{eq:simplicity1} \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & \alpha_i \in \script{A}_i \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:simplicity2}
\end{eqnarray}
This is a mild assumption that holds in most practical cases.\footnote{Assuming existence of a maximizer $\alpha^*$ for the problem \eqref{eq:simplicity1}-\eqref{eq:simplicity2} simplifies exposition but is not crucial to the analysis. This assumption can be avoided by using the \emph{$C$-additive approximation} theory in \cite{sno-text}.} For example,
\eqref{eq:simplicity1}-\eqref{eq:simplicity2} is guaranteed to have a maximizing solution $\alpha^* = (\alpha_1^*, \ldots, \alpha_N^*)$ when all sets $\script{A}_i$ are finite. It is also guaranteed to have a well defined maximizer when the sets $\script{A}_i$ are infinite but are
compact subsets of a finite-dimensional vector space, and when the utility functions $\hat{u}_i(\alpha, \omega)$ are continuous in $\alpha$ for all $\omega \in \Omega$.
The utility functions are otherwise arbitrary. In particular, they are not required to have
convexity or concavity properties.
\subsection{Baseline actions and the game manager}
Every round $t$, each player $i$ observes $\omega_j(t)$ for all $j \in \script{S}_i$ and then
makes a \emph{baseline decision} $b_i(t) \in \script{A}_i$. The resulting sequence $\{b_i(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ can be arbitrary and has no assumed structure.
However, the understanding is that the baseline decision on round $t$ is an action that player $i$ would want to take if
it did not have access to shared information or to suggestions of a game manager. It can be based on
the player $i$ observations of current and past events.
At the beginning of each round $t$, all players $i \in \script{N}$ privately
upload their observations $\omega_j(t)$ (for all $j \in \script{S}_i$) and their baseline decisions $b_i(t)$ to the game manager. Thus, on round $t$, the manager knows the full $\omega(t)$ vector, all of the baseline decisions $b_i(t)$,
and the complete history of past events. It is assumed that the manager has only \emph{causal knowledge}, and hence it does not know the future values $\omega(\tau)$ and $b_i(\tau)$ for $\tau>t$.
The manager uses its information on round $t$ to compute \emph{suggested actions} $\tilde{\alpha}_i(t) \in \script{A}_i$ that it delivers to each individual player. Define $\tilde{\alpha}(t) = (\tilde{\alpha}_1(t), \ldots, \tilde{\alpha}_N(t))$ and $b(t) = (b_1(t), \ldots, b_N(t))$.
\subsection{An (overly?) ambitious optimization problem}
Define $u_i(t)$ and $x_i(t)$ for each $i \in \script{N}$ and each $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$ by:
\begin{eqnarray*}
u_i(t) &=& \hat{u}_i(\tilde{\alpha}(t), \omega(t)) \\
x_i(t) &=& \hat{u}_i(b(t), \omega(t))
\end{eqnarray*}
The value $u_i(t)$ is the utility earned by player $i$ on round $t$ if all players choose the suggested actions, while $x_i(t)$ is the corresponding utility if all players choose their baseline decisions.
Define time averages for all $t>0$ by:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{u}_i(t) &=& \frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1} \hat{u}_i(\tilde{\alpha}(t), \omega(t)) \\
\overline{x}_i(t) &=& \frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1} \hat{u}_i(b(t), \omega(t))
\end{eqnarray*}
It is useful to introduce an ambitious optimization problem that will be modified later.
Subject to the emerging $\omega(t)$ and $b(t)$ sequences, the goal is for the manager to make suggestions $\tilde{\alpha}(t)$ that solve the following:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Maximize:} & \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}_1(t), \ldots, \overline{u}_N(t)) \label{eq:p10} \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} [\overline{u}_i(t) - \overline{x}_i(t)] \geq 0 \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:p20} \\
& \tilde{\alpha}_i(t) \in \script{A}_i \: \: \forall i \in \script{N}, \forall t \in \{0, 1,2, \ldots\} \label{eq:p30}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\phi(u_1, \ldots, u_N)$ is a continuous and concave function defined over the hyper-rectangle of all
$(u_1, \ldots, u_N) \in \prod [0, u_i^{max}]$. The constraint \eqref{eq:p20} ensures the time average utility player $i$ receives if all players use the suggestions of the manager is at least as good as the utility it would receive
if all players used their baseline strategies.
The \emph{definition} of optimality for \eqref{eq:p10}-\eqref{eq:p30} requires a more careful treatment, and this issue is discussed more precisely in the next subsection.
In particular, the \emph{causality constraint} of the game manager does not explicitly appear anywhere in
\eqref{eq:p10}-\eqref{eq:p30}.
Regardless, it can be shown that the above problem is always \emph{feasible}, so that it is always possible
to satisfy constraints \eqref{eq:p20}-\eqref{eq:p30} via a simple causal algorithm for game manager decisions: Consider the trivial decisions $(\tilde{\alpha}_1(t), \ldots, \tilde{\alpha}_N(t)) = (b_1(t), \ldots, b_N(t))$ for all $t\in \{0, 1,2, \ldots\}$. This means that the game manager suggests nothing more than the baseline actions for all rounds $t$. These suggestions are implementable in a causal manner because they only use the baseline decisions given to the game manager at the beginning of each round. Since $b_i(t) \in \script{A}_i$ for all $i$ and all $t$, one has $\tilde{\alpha}_i(t) = b_i(t) \in \script{A}_i$ for all $i$, and so the constraints \eqref{eq:p30} are satisfied. Further, this trivial suggestion strategy immediately implies
$u_i(t) = x_i(t)$ for all $t$, and so constraint \eqref{eq:p20} is trivially satisfied.
Thus, it is \emph{always possible} for a game manager to achieve the constraints \eqref{eq:p20}-\eqref{eq:p30}.
The constraints \eqref{eq:p20} provide rational players an incentive to use the suggested actions, since it ensures the resulting time average utilities are at least as good as those of the baseline decisions. Thus, it is assumed throughout this paper
that all players choose the suggestions of the manager, so that $\tilde{\alpha}_i(t) = \alpha_i(t)$ for all $i$ and all $t$. In particular, one has for all rounds $t$:
\begin{eqnarray}
u_i(t) &=& \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \label{eq:ui} \\
x_i(t) &=& \hat{u}_i(b(t), \omega(t)) \label{eq:xi}
\end{eqnarray}
Define:
\begin{eqnarray*}
u(t) &=& (u_1(t), \ldots, u_N(t)) \\
\overline{u}(t) &=& (\overline{u}_1(t), \ldots, \overline{u}_N(t))
\end{eqnarray*}
Under the assumption $\tilde{\alpha}_i(t)=\alpha_i(t)$ for all $i$ and all $t$, the problem becomes:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Maximize:} & \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(t)) \label{eq:p1} \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} [\overline{u}_i(t) - \overline{x}_i(t)] \geq 0 \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:p2} \\
& \alpha_i(t) \in \script{A}_i \: \: \forall i \in \script{N}, \forall t \in \{0, 1,2, \ldots\} \label{eq:p3}
\end{eqnarray}
where $u_i(t)$ and $x_i(t)$ are defined in \eqref{eq:ui} and \eqref{eq:xi}.
The problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} shall be referred to as the \emph{infinite future knowledge optimization problem}.
\subsection{A modified objective}
The infinite sequences $\omega(t)$ and $b(t)$ for $t \in \{0, 1,2, \ldots\}$ are arbitrary. In practice, these sequences might depend on previous suggestions of the game manager. However, the problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} does not specify how future values of $\omega(\tau)$ and $b(\tau)$ depend on control decisions.
Thus, to understand optimal utility in \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3}, it useful to view
$\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ as arbitrary sequences
that are defined at the start of the game but with values that are only sequentially revealed as the game progresses. In this way, future values of $\omega(\tau)$ and $b(\tau)$ are not influenced by the emerging decisions of the manager.
With this structure, optimality
of \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3}
is defined over all possible action sequences $\{\alpha(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ that provide utilities with respect to the given $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ sequences.
In principle, the supremum time average utility in \eqref{eq:p1} can
be computed offline based on non-causal
knowledge of the full sequences $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$.
Since optimality is defined in terms of full knowledge of the future, the problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} is called the \emph{infinite future knowledge optimization problem}.
It is not clear if the supremum objective function value for this problem
can be achieved by a practical algorithm that makes causal decisions. The stochastic optimization theory in \cite{sno-text} shows that the supremum \emph{can} be achieved in a causal manner in the special case when the sequences $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ have an \emph{ergodic} structure.\footnote{Specifically, \cite{sno-text} shows optimality can be achieved (arbitrarily closely) in the case when the random event process is modulated by a finite state irreducible (possibly periodic) discrete time Markov chain.} That is because, in the ergodic case, the problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} fits into the general framework of \cite{sno-text}.
However, this paper considers problems with possibly non-ergodic input sequences $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$. In this context, it is not clear if
the supremum in \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} can be causally achieved. Remarkably, this paper shows that a modified objective, defined in terms of a finite but arbitrarily large window of time in which the future is known, \emph{can in fact be causally achieved} (to within any arbitrarily small but positive error). This is done using the \emph{$T$-slot lookahead utility} developed in \cite{sno-text}: Fix $T$ as a positive integer and partition the rounds $t \in \{0, 1,2, \ldots\}$ into successive frames of size $T$, so that frame $k$
consists of rounds $\{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}$ (for each $k \in \{0, 1,2, \ldots\}$). For each round $k$ and for given
realizations of
$\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$, define
$\psi_T[k]$ as the supremum objective value in the following optimization problem, optimized over all choices of the decision vector $\alpha(t) = (\alpha_1(t), \ldots, \alpha_N(t))$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Max:} & \phi\left(\gamma_1, \ldots, \gamma_N\right) \label{eq:tslot-1} \\
\mbox{Subj to:} & \gamma_i = \frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1} u_i\left(\alpha(\tau), \omega(\tau)\right) \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:tslot-2} \\
& \gamma_i \geq \frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}u_i(b(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:tslot-3} \\
& \alpha_i(\tau) \in \script{A}_i \: \: \forall \tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\} \label{eq:tslot-4} \\
& \gamma_i \in [0, u_i^{max}] \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:tslot-5}
\end{eqnarray}
In particular, if $(\gamma_1^*, \ldots, \gamma_N^*)$ and $\{\alpha^*(\tau)\}_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}$ forms an optimal solution to the above problem, then $\psi_T[k] = \phi(\gamma_1^*, \ldots, \gamma_N^*)$. The above problem is always feasible with a well defined and finite supremum $\psi_T[k]$. In general, the supremum may not be achievable. However, for all $\epsilon>0$, there are vectors $(\gamma_1^*, \ldots, \gamma_N^*)$ and $\{\alpha^*(\tau)\}_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}$ that satisfy the constraints of the above problem and that satisfy:
\[ \psi_T[k] - \epsilon \leq \phi(\gamma_1^*, \ldots, \gamma_N^*) \leq \psi_T[k] \]
The value $\psi_T[k]$ represents the maximum average utility achievable over frame $k$ provided that the regret constraints are satisfied by averages over that frame, and assuming that future values of the vectors
$b(t)$ and $\omega(t)$ are fully known over the frame. Since $\psi_T[k]$ requires knowledge of the future to compute, it seems unlikely that a practical algorithm could achieve performance that is competitive with the $\psi_T[k]$ values. Remarkably,
this paper develops a \emph{causal} algorithm (without requiring knowledge of the future) that satisfies the
constraints \eqref{eq:p2}-\eqref{eq:p3} and that achieves:
\[ \liminf_{K\rightarrow\infty} \left[\overline{u}_i(KT) - \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]\right] \geq -BT/V \]
where $B$ is a constant and $V$ is a parameter that can be chosen as large as desired (with a tradeoff in the corresponding convergence time).
This holds under the same algorithm
\emph{for all possible (finite) values of $T$}. In particular, for any desired value of $T$, it is possible to choose a sufficiently large value of $V$ so that long term performance is arbitrarily close to the average of the $\psi_T[k]$ values.
It can be shown that, for any $T$ and for any $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ sequences, the $\liminf$ average of $\psi_T[k]$ is less than or equal
the optimal objective function value in \eqref{eq:p1} for the infinite future knowledge optimization problem. In cases when sequences $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ are ergodic and mild additional assumptions are satisfied, the limiting average of $\psi_T[k]$ converges to this value
as $T\rightarrow\infty$.
However, this is not true in general non-ergodic situations. In particular, example sequences can be given for which the optimal value in \eqref{eq:p1} is strictly larger than the following value:
\[ \liminf_{T\rightarrow\infty} \left[ \liminf_{K\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]\right] \]
Nevertheless, the average of $\psi_T[k]$ still provides a meaningful
and challenging utility target.
\section{Weighted sum of utilities}
This subsection considers a weighted sum of utilities, so that:
\[ \phi(u_1, \ldots, u_N) = \sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i \]
for given real numbers $\theta_i$. Subsection \ref{section:convex} considers the more general
case when $\phi(\gamma_1, \ldots, \gamma_N)$ is any concave function.
\subsection{Virtual queues}
To achieve the time average constraint \eqref{eq:p2}, for each $i \in \script{N}$ define a \emph{virtual queue} $Q_i(t)$ that is initialized to $Q_i(0)=0$ and that has update equation:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:q-update}
Q_i(t+1) = \max[Q_i(t) + x_i(t) - u_i(t), 0]
\end{equation}
where $u_i(t)=\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t))$ and $x_i(t)=\hat{u}(\alpha(t), \omega(t))$. These virtual queues are kept in the game manager and updated at the end of every round $t$ based on its suggestion $\alpha(t)$ and on
knowledge of the $\omega(t)$ vector. Recall that the manager knows all entries of $\omega(t)$ since each player $i$ tells it the values of
$\omega_j(t)$ for $j \in \script{S}_i$, and $\cup_{i\in\script{N}} \script{S}_i = \{1, \ldots, M\}$.
The following queueing lemma is standard for stochastic network optimization \cite{sno-text}. The proof is given for completeness.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:virtual-queues} (Virtual queues \cite{sno-text}) If $Q_i(t)$ satisfies \eqref{eq:q-update} then:
a) For all $t \in \{1, 2, 3, \ldots\}$ one has:
\[ \overline{u}_i(t) \geq \overline{x}_i(t) - \left[\frac{Q_i(t)-Q_i(0)}{t}\right] \]
b) If $\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty} Q_i(t)/t=0$ for all $i \in \script{N}$, then constraints \eqref{eq:p2} are satisfied.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
From \eqref{eq:q-update} one has for all $\tau \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$:
\[ Q_i(\tau+1) \geq Q_i(\tau) + x_i(\tau) - u_i(\tau) \]
Thus:
\[ Q_i(\tau+1) - Q_i(\tau) \geq x_i(\tau) - u_i(\tau) \]
Fix $t>0$. Summing the above over $\tau \in \{0, 1, \ldots, t-1\}$ gives:
\[ Q_i(t)-Q_i(0) \geq \sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1} [x_i(\tau) - u_i(\tau)] \]
Dividing the result by $t$ and rearranging terms gives the result of part (a). Part (b) immediately follows.
\end{proof}
A queue $Q_i(t)$ that satisfies $\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty} Q_i(t)/t = 0$ with probability 1 is said to be \emph{rate stable}.
\subsection{Drift-plus-penalty}
Define $Q(t) = (Q_1(t), \ldots, Q_N(t))$ and define $\norm{Q(t)}^2 = \sum_{i\in\script{N}} Q_i(t)^2$.
Define $L(t) = \frac{1}{2}\norm{Q(t)}^2$, called a \emph{Lyapunov function}. Define $\Delta(t) = L(t+1)-L(t)$. The \emph{drift-plus-penalty} method of \cite{sno-text} observes $Q(t)$, $\omega(t)$, and $b(t)$ every round $t$, and then takes a control action $\alpha(t)$ to minimize a bound on the following expression:
\[ \Delta(t) -V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(t) \]
where $V$ is a non-negative parameter that affects a performance tradeoff.
The intuition is as follows: Including the drift term $\Delta(t)$ in the above minimization maintains stable queues so that the time average constraints can be satisfied. Including the penalty term $-V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(t)$ encourages the controller to make decisions that give a desirable weighted sum of utilities.
Using larger values of $V$ places more emphasis on this ``penalty minimization.''
\begin{lem} \label{lem:compute} Under any algorithm for choosing $\alpha(t) \in \script{A}_1\times \cdots \times \script{A}_N$, one has for all $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$:
\begin{align}
&\Delta(t) - V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(t) \nonumber \\
&\leq B - V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \nonumber \\
& + \sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(t)\left[\hat{u}_i(b(t),\omega(t)) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t),\omega(t))\right] \label{eq:DPP}
\end{align}
where $B = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^N(u_i^{max})^2$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Squaring \eqref{eq:q-update} and using $\max[y,0]^2 \leq y^2$ gives:
\[ Q_i(t+1)^2 \leq Q_i(t)^2 + (x_i(t)-u_i(t))^2 + 2Q_i(t)[x_i(t)-u_i(t)] \]
Summing over $i \in \{1, \ldots, N\}$ and dividing by $2$ gives:
\begin{align*}
\Delta(t) &\leq \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^N(x_i(t)-u_i(t))^2 + \sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(t)[x_i(t)-u_i(t)] \\
&\leq B + \sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(t)[x_i(t)-u_i(t)]
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows because $(x_i(t)-u_i(t)) \in [-u_i^{max}, u_i^{max}]$ for all $t$.
Subtracting $V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(t)$ from both sides and using $u_i(t) = \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t))$ and $x_i(t) = \hat{u}_i(b(t), \omega(t))$ gives the result.
\end{proof}
The algorithm takes actions every round $t$ to greedily minimize the right-hand-side of the drift-plus-penalty expression \eqref{eq:DPP}. The only terms on the right-hand-side of \eqref{eq:DPP} that are affected by control decisions $\alpha(t)$ are:
\[ -\sum_{i=1}^NV\theta_i\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) - \sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(t)\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \]
The resulting algorithm is as follows: Initialize $Q_i(0)=0$ for $i \in\script{N}$. Every round $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$, the game manager observes vectors $Q(t)$, $\omega(t)$, and $b(t)$ and does the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item (Decisions) Choose suggestion vector $\alpha(t) = (\alpha_1(t), \ldots, \alpha_N(t))$ as the solution to the following:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mbox{Maximize:} &
\sum_{i=1}^N\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t),\omega(t))[V\theta_i+ Q_i(t) ] \nonumber \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & \alpha_i(t) \in \script{A}_i \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray*}
\item (Send suggestions) Send suggestions $\alpha_i(t)$ to each player $i \in \script{N}$.
\item (Queue update) For each $i \in \script{N}$, update $Q_i(t)$ via \eqref{eq:q-update}.
\end{itemize}
It is clear that the above algorithm is causal: It only requires knowledge of the current $Q(t), \omega(t), b(t)$ and does not require knowledge of the future.
\subsection{Performance for weighted utilities}
The following theorem shows that the algorithm satisfies constraints \eqref{eq:p2}-\eqref{eq:p3} with constraint violations that decay like $O(\sqrt{V/t})$.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:constraints} (Constraint satisfaction) Fix $V\geq 0$ and assume the algorithm in the previous subsection is used with this $V$ and with $Q_i(0)=0$ for all $i\in\script{N}$.
For all $t \in \{1, 2, 3, \ldots\}$ one has:
a) $\frac{\norm{Q(t)}}{t} \leq \sqrt{\frac{2B + 2V\sum_{i=1}^N|\theta_i|u_i^{max}}{t}}$.
b) $\overline{u}_i(t) - \overline{x}_i(t) \geq -\sqrt{\frac{2B + 2V\sum_{i=1}^N|\theta_i|u_i^{max}}{t}}$.
c) The constraints \eqref{eq:p2}-\eqref{eq:p3} are satisfied.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Fix $\tau \in \{0, 1,2 , \ldots\}$.
Since the algorithm makes decisions for $\alpha(\tau)$ to minimize the right-hand-side of \eqref{eq:DPP}, one has:
\begin{align}
&\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(\tau) \nonumber \\
&\leq B - V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \nonumber \\
& + \sum_{i=1}^N Q_i(\tau)[\hat{u}_i(b(\tau), \omega(\tau)) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))] \label{eq:plug}
\end{align}
where $\alpha^*(\tau)=(\alpha_1^*(\tau), \ldots, \alpha_N^*(\tau))$ is any alternative vector that
satisfies $\alpha_i^*(\tau) \in \script{A}_i$ for all $i \in \script{N}$. A valid choice is $\alpha^*(\tau)=b(\tau)$. Substituting $\alpha^*(\tau)=b(\tau)$ into the right-hand-side of \eqref{eq:plug} gives:
\[ \Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(\tau) \leq B - V\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\hat{u}_i(b(\tau),\omega(\tau)) \]
Rearranging terms gives:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:BVC}
\Delta(\tau) \leq B + VC
\end{equation}
where $C = \sum_{i=1}^N|\theta_i|u_i^{max}$. The above holds for all rounds $\tau \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$. Fix $t>0$. Summing \eqref{eq:BVC} over $\tau\in \{0, \ldots, t-1\}$ gives:
\[ L(t)-L(0) \leq (B+VC)t \]
Since $L(t) = \frac{1}{2}\norm{Q(t)}^2$ and $L(0)=0$ one has:
\[ \norm{Q(t)}^2 \leq 2(B+VC)t \]
Dividing by $t^2$ and taking square roots gives:
\[ \frac{\norm{Q(t)}}{t} \leq \sqrt{\frac{2(B+VC)}{t}} \]
This proves part (a). Part (b) follows from (a) together with
Lemma \ref{lem:virtual-queues}. Part (c) follows directly from (b).
\end{proof}
The above theorem does not use a value $T$. The value $T$ is also never used in the algorithm implementation. It is only used
in the performance theorem below.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:performance} (Performance) Fix $V\geq 0$ and assume the algorithm in the previous subsection is used
with this $V$ and with $Q_i(0)=0$ for all $i \in \script{N}$. For all positive integers $T$ and $K$ the following holds:
\[ \sum_{i=1}^N \theta_i\overline{u}_i(KT) \geq \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] - \frac{TB}{V} \]
\end{thm}
Theorem \ref{thm:performance} shows that for any frame size $T$ and for any number of frames $K$, the weighted sum of utilities achieved by this algorithm over the first $T$ frames is at most $TB/V$ less than the average of the ideal $T$-slot lookahead values $\psi_T[k]$ over those frames. Notice that this holds for all frame sizes $T$. Since the algorithm does not use a value $T$ as input, the above theorem can be viewed as a class of performance bounds that are parameterized by $T$, all of which are satisfied.
The error term
$TB/V$ can be made as close to $0$ as desired by choosing $V$ appropriately large. This is remarkable, particularly when $T$ is large, because the ideal $\psi_T[k]$ value is defined in terms of perfect knowledge of the future over $T$ rounds, whereas the algorithm does not know the future. The tradeoff is that a large value of $V$ affects the \emph{convergence time} required to meet the desired constraints, as specified by part (b) of Theorem \ref{thm:constraints}.
\begin{proof} (Theorem \ref{thm:performance})
Fix $k$ as a non-negative integer. Summing \eqref{eq:plug} over $\tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}$ gives:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(\tau) \\
&\leq TB - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \\
&+ \sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(\tau)[\hat{u}_i(b(\tau),\omega(\tau)) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))] \\
&\leq TB + 2B\sum_{m=0}^{T-1}m - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \\
&+ \sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(kT)[\hat{u}_i(b(\tau),\omega(\tau)) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))] \\
&= T^2B - VT\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\left[\frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \right] \\
&+ \sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(kT)[\hat{u}_i(b(\tau),\omega(\tau)) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))] \\
\end{align*}
Now define $\gamma^*=(\gamma_1^*, \ldots, \gamma_N^*)$ by:
\[ \gamma_i^* = \frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \]
Then:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(\tau) \\
& \leq T^2B - VT\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\gamma_i^* \\
&+T\sum_{i=1}^NQ_k(kT)\left[\frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1} \hat{u}_i(b(\tau),\omega(\tau)) - \gamma_i^*\right]
\end{align*}
Now fix $\epsilon>0$ and define $\alpha^*(\tau)$ for $\tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}$ as decisions that
satisfy the constraints \eqref{eq:tslot-2}-\eqref{eq:tslot-5} and yield:
\[ \psi_T[k] - \epsilon \leq \sum_{i=1}^N \theta_i \gamma_i^* \leq \psi_T[k] \]
It follows that:
\begin{align}
&\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(\tau) \\
& \leq T^2B - VT\psi_T[k] + \epsilon TV
\end{align}
This holds for all $\epsilon>0$. Taking a limit as $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$ gives:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(\tau) \\
& \leq T^2B - VT\psi_T[k]
\end{align*}
Fix a positive integer $K$.
Summing the above over $k \in \{0, 1, \ldots, K-1\}$ gives:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1}\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1}\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_iu_i(\tau) \\
&\leq T^2BK - VT\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]
\end{align*}
That is:
\begin{align*}
&L(KT) - L(0) - VKT\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\overline{u}_i(KT) \\
&\leq T^2BK - VKT\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]
\end{align*}
Dividing by $VKT$ and using the fact that $L(0)=0$ and $L(KT)\geq 0$ gives:
\[ - \sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\overline{u}_i(KT) \leq \frac{TB}{V} - \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k] \]
Therefore:
\[ \sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\overline{u}_i(KT) \geq \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] - \frac{TB}{V} \]
\end{proof}
\subsection{Discussion}
Theorems \ref{thm:constraints} and \ref{thm:performance} are \emph{deterministic results} that are guaranteed hold on every sample path, regardless of the probability model.
Theorem \ref{thm:performance} holds for arbitrarily large values of $T$ and shows that, for large $K$, averages over $KT$ rounds give time average performance that is arbitrarily close to the value $\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]$, where $\psi_T[k]$ is an ideal value based on knowledge of $T$ rounds into the future. If the $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ processes are ergodic and mild additional assumptions are satisfied, then
the value $\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]$ approaches the ergodic supremum of the problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} as $T\rightarrow\infty$ and $K\rightarrow\infty$. Intuitively, this is why the algorithm comes arbitrarily close to the solution of \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} in the ergodic case.
However, the solution of \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} requires perfect knowledge of \emph{all time into the future}, rather than just a finite horizon of $T$ slots into the future. Thus, in the general
non-ergodic case, the value
$\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]$ does not necessarily come close to the optimal objective function value in the problem
\eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3}, regardless of how large the $T$ value is chosen to be. Nevertheless, the value $\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]$ is an intuitively ambitious target, and it is remarkable that, in all cases, this target can be achieved (arbitrarily closely) by a causal algorithm.
\section{Concave function of utilities} \label{section:convex}
The previous section considered a weighted sum of utilities. This section considers a
general concave function of utilities. Specifically, it uses a function $\phi(u_1, \ldots, u_N)$ that is concave and continuous over $(u_1, \ldots, u_N) \in \prod_{i=1}^N [0, u_i^{max}]$. Thus, it treats the general problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3}. For simplicity of exposition, assume the function $\phi(\cdot)$ is non-negative over $\prod_{i=1}^N [0, u_i^{max}]$ (else, a positive constant can be added to it to make it non-negative).
The idea is to introduce \emph{proxy variables} $\gamma_i(t)$ that relate to running averages of player $i$ utility. The proxy variables are chosen every round $t$ in the interval $[0, u_i^{max}]$ and must satisfy:
\[ \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty} \left[ \overline{\gamma}_i(t) - \overline{u}_i(t) \right] = 0 \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \]
The above constraint is enforced by defining virtual queues $Z_i(t)$ for all $i \in \script{N}$ with update equation:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:z-update}
Z_i(t+1) = Z_i(t) + \gamma_i(t) - u_i(t)
\end{equation}
By summing \eqref{eq:z-update}, is clear that for all $t\in \{1, 2, 3, \ldots\}$ one has:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:proxy-equality}
\overline{u}_i(t) = \overline{\gamma}_i(t) - \frac{Z_i(t)-Z_i(0)}{t}
\end{equation}
Therefore, it is desirable to make each queue $Z_i(t)$ rate stable. The equality \eqref{eq:proxy-equality}
implies:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:proxy-equality2}
\norm{\overline{u}(t) - \overline{\gamma}(t)} = \frac{\norm{Z(t)-Z(0)}}{t}
\end{equation}
where:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{u}(t) &=& (\overline{u}_1(t), \ldots, \overline{u}_N(t)) \\
\overline{\gamma}(t) &=& (\overline{\gamma}_1(t), \ldots, \overline{\gamma}_N(t))
\end{eqnarray*}
Let $Z(t) = (Z_1(t), \ldots, Z_N(t))$ be the vector of $Z_i(t)$ values. As before, define $Q(t)=(Q_1(t), \ldots, Q_N(t))$, with queues $Q_i(t)$ defined in \eqref{eq:q-update}. Define a new Lyapunov function that considers both types of queues:
\[ L(t) = \frac{1}{2}\norm{Q(t)}^2 + \frac{1}{2}\norm{Z(t)}^2\]
Define $\Delta(t) = L(t+1) - L(t)$. The first step is to compute a bound on the new drift-plus-penalty expression:
\[ \Delta(t) - V\phi(\gamma(t)) \]
where $\gamma(t) = (\gamma_1(t), \ldots, \gamma_N(t))$.
\begin{lem} Under any algorithm for choosing $\alpha(t) \in \script{A}_1\times \cdots \script{A}_N$ and
$\gamma(t) \in \prod_{i=1}^N[0, u_i^{max}]$, one has for all $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$:
\begin{align}
&\Delta(t) - V\phi(\gamma(t)) \leq C - V\phi(\gamma(t)) \nonumber \\
& + \sum_{i=1}^N Q_i(t)[\hat{u}_i(b(t), \omega(t)) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t))] \nonumber \\
& + \sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(t)[\gamma_i(t)-\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t),\omega(t))] \label{eq:DPP2}
\end{align}
where $C = \sum_{i=1}^N(u_i^{max})^2$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to that of Lemma \ref{lem:compute} and is omitted for brevity.
\end{proof}
\subsection{General algorithm}
The algorithm makes greedy decisions to minimize the right-hand-side of \eqref{eq:DPP2} on every round $t$.
Specifically, every round $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$, the game manager observes $Q(t)$, $Z(t)$, $\omega(t)$, and $b(t)$ and does the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item (Proxy variables) Choose $\gamma(t)= (\gamma_1(t), \ldots, \gamma_N(t))$ as the solution to:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mbox{Maximize:} & V\phi(\gamma(t)) - \sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(t)\gamma_i(t)\\
\mbox{Subject to:} & 0 \leq \gamma_i(t) \leq u_i^{max} \: \: \forall i \in \script{N}
\end{eqnarray*}
\item (Suggestions) Choose $\alpha(t) = (\alpha_1(t), \ldots, \alpha_N(t))$ as the solution to:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mbox{Maximize:} & \sum_{i=1}^N\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t),\omega(t))[Q_i(t)+Z_i(t)] \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & \alpha_i(t) \in \script{A}_i \: \: \forall i \in \script{N}
\end{eqnarray*}
Next, for each $i \in \script{N}$,
send suggestion $\alpha_i(t)$ to player $i$.
\item (Queue update) For each $i \in \script{N}$, update $Q_i(t)$ and $Z_i(t)$
via \eqref{eq:q-update} and \eqref{eq:z-update}.
\end{itemize}
This is again a simple causal algorithm that is implemented as the game progresses.
\subsection{Constraint analysis}
Define $\phi^{max}$ as the maximum of $\phi(\gamma)$ over $\gamma \in \prod_{i=1}^N[0,u_i^{max}]$. Such a maximum exists since it is defined over a compact subset of $\mathbb{R}^N$ and the function $\phi(\gamma)$ is continuous. It is known that every continuous function over a compact set is \emph{Lipshitz continuous}, so that there is a positive value $M$ such that:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lipschitz}
|\phi(\gamma) - \phi(r)| \leq M\norm{\gamma - r}
\end{equation}
for all $\gamma, r \in \prod_{i=1}^N[0,u_i^{max}]$.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:constraint2} Fix $V\geq 0$ and assume the algorithm in the previous subsection
is used with this $V$ and with $Q_i(0)=Z_i(0)=0$ for all $i \in \script{N}$. For all
$t \in \{1, 2, 3, \ldots\}$ one has:
a) $\frac{\sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^N Q_i(t)^2 + Z_i(t)^2}}{t} \leq \sqrt{\frac{2C + 2V\phi^{max}}{t}}$
b) $\overline{u}_i(t) - \overline{x}_i(t) \geq -\sqrt{\frac{2C + 2V\phi^{max}}{t}}$.
c) The constraints \eqref{eq:p2}-\eqref{eq:p3} are satisfied.
d) The utilities satisfy:
\[ \phi(\overline{u}(t)) \geq \frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau)) - M \sqrt{\frac{2C + 2V\phi^{max}}{t}} \]
where $\overline{u}(t) = (\overline{u}_1(t), \ldots, \overline{u}_N(t))$ and $M$ is the Lipschitz constant in
\eqref{eq:lipschitz}.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} Since the algorithm makes decisions $\gamma(t)$ and $\alpha(t)$ to minimize the right-hand-side of \eqref{eq:DPP2} every round, one has for all rounds $\tau \in \{0, 1, 2,\ldots\}$:
\begin{align*}
&\Delta(\tau) - V\phi(\gamma(\tau)) \leq C - V\phi(\gamma^*) \\
& + \sum_{i=1}^NQ_i(\tau)[\hat{u}_i(b(\tau), \omega(\tau)) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))]\\
&+\sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(\tau)[\gamma_i^* - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))]
\end{align*}
for any alternative vectors $\gamma^* \in \prod_{i=1}^N[0, u_i^{max}]$ and $\alpha^*(\tau) \in \script{A}_1 \times \ldots\times \script{A}_N$. Define $\alpha^*(\tau)=b(\tau)$ and $\gamma^* = (\gamma_1^*, \ldots, \gamma_N^*)$ where $\gamma_i^* =\hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))$. Then the above inequality becomes:
\begin{align*}
&\Delta(\tau) - V\phi(\gamma(\tau)) \leq C - V\phi(\gamma^*)
\end{align*}
Rearranging terms and using the fact that $0 \leq \phi(\gamma) \leq \phi^{max}$ for all $\gamma \in \prod_{i=1}^N[0, u_i^{max}]$ gives the following for all rounds $\tau$:
\[ \Delta(\tau) \leq C + V\phi^{max} \]
The result of part (a) then follows by an argument similar to that of Theorem \ref{thm:constraints}.
Part (b) follows from (a) together with \eqref{eq:proxy-equality}.
Part (c) follows immediately from part (b) by taking a limit. To prove part (d), note by Jensen's inequality for concave functions that for any round $t>0$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1} \phi(\gamma(\tau)) &\leq& \phi(\overline{\gamma}(t)) \\
&\leq& \phi(\overline{u}(t)) + M\norm{\overline{\gamma}(t)-\overline{u}(t)} \\
&\leq& \phi(\overline{u}(t)) + M\sqrt{\frac{2C + 2V\phi^{max}}{t}}
\end{eqnarray*}
where the second inequality above follows by \eqref{eq:lipschitz} and
the final inequality follows by part (a) together with \eqref{eq:proxy-equality2}.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{thm:constraint2} provides a bound on the achieved performance
$\phi(\overline{u}(t))$ in terms of the time average $\frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau))$. The next theorem completes the analysis by bounding the performance of this time average in terms of averages of the
ideal $\psi_T[k]$ values over $T$-slot frames.
\begin{thm} Fix $V \geq 0$ and assume the algorithm in the previous subsection is used with this $V$ and with $Q_i(0)=Z_i(0)=0$ for all $i \in \script{N}$. For all positive integers $T$ and $K$ the following holds:
\[ \frac{1}{KT}\sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1} \phi(\gamma(\tau)) \geq \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k] - \frac{TC}{V} \]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{thm:performance} and is omitted for brevity.
\end{proof}
Combining the results of the above two theorems gives the following performance guarantee for all positive integers $T$ and $K$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\phi(\overline{u}(KT)) &\geq& \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k] \\
&& - \frac{TC}{V} - M \sqrt{\frac{2C + 2V\phi^{max}}{KT}}
\end{eqnarray*}
Rearranging and taking a limit as $K\rightarrow\infty$ gives:
\[ \liminf_{K\rightarrow\infty} \left[\phi(\overline{u}(KT)) - \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k]\right] \geq -\frac{TC}{V}\]
For any $T>0$,
the right-hand-side above can be made arbitrarily small by an appropriately large value of $V$, with a corresponding convergence time tradeoff as specified in part (b) of Theorem \ref{thm:constraint2}.
\section{More conservative constraints}
This section considers a variation that requires the achieved utility of each player \emph{on each round} to be at least as large as the corresponding baseline utility for that round. That is, the time average constraint \eqref{eq:p2} is replaced by the more restrictive constraint:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:new}
u_i(t) \geq x_i(t) \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \: , \: \forall t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}
\end{equation}
where we recall that:
\begin{eqnarray*}
u_i(t) &=& \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \\
x_i(t) &=& \hat{u}_i(b(t), \omega(t))
\end{eqnarray*}
The resulting problem of interest is:
\begin{align}
&\mbox{Maximize:} \nonumber \\
&\liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}_1(t), \ldots, \overline{u}_N(t)) \label{eq:c1} \\
&\mbox{Subject to:} \nonumber \\
&\hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \geq \hat{u}_i(b(t), \omega(t)) \forall i \in \script{N}, \forall t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\} \label{eq:c2} \\
& \alpha_i(t) \in \script{A}_i \: \: \forall i \in \script{N}, \forall t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots \} \label{eq:c3}
\end{align}
where $\phi(u_1, \ldots, u_N)$ is again assumed to be a concave and continuous function over $\prod_{i=1}^N[0, u_i^{max}]$.
The above problem is always feasible because the decisions $\alpha(t)=b(t)$ for all $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$ trivially satisfy the constraints \eqref{eq:c2}-\eqref{eq:c3}. If the constraints of the above problem are satisfied, then the constraints of problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} are also satisfied (but not vice versa). Enforcing more restrictive constraints can reduce the optimal objective function value. However, it provides players an immediate guarantee that the suggested decisions are at least as good as the baseline decisions, whereas problem \eqref{eq:p1}-\eqref{eq:p3} provides a similar guarantee only in the limit of a time average over multiple rounds.
The above problem can be written more simply as follows.
Define:
\begin{eqnarray*}
u(t) &=& (u_1(t), \ldots, u_N(t)) \\
\overline{u}(t) &=& (\overline{u}_1(t), \ldots, \overline{u}_N(t))
\end{eqnarray*}
For each $b \in \script{A}_1\times \cdots \times \script{A}_N$ and each $\omega \in \Omega$, define
$\script{A}(b,\omega)$ as the set of all action vectors $\alpha = (\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_N)$ that satisfy:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\hat{u}_i(\alpha, \omega) \geq \hat{u}_i(b, \omega) & \forall i \in \script{N} \\
\alpha_i \in \script{A}_i & \forall i \in \script{N}
\end{eqnarray*}
The set $\script{A}(b,\omega)$ is non-empty for all $(b,\omega)$ because it contains the element $b$. The problem \eqref{eq:c1}-\eqref{eq:c3} is equivalent to the following:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Maximize:} & \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(t)) \label{eq:s1} \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & \alpha(t) \in \script{A}(b(t),\omega(t)) \: \: \forall t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\} \label{eq:s2}
\end{eqnarray}
If the set $\script{A}(b(t),\omega(t))$ contains only the single element $b(t)$ for all $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$, then there are no decisions and the game manager is forced to choose $\alpha(t)=b(t)$ for all rounds $t$. In this case, the problem is so restricted that the game manager cannot provide any utility gain.
However, for many problems the sets $\script{A}(b(t),\omega(t))$ can have more than one element.
\subsection{Weighted sum of utilities}
First consider the special case:
\[ \phi(u_1, \ldots, u_N) = \sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i u_i \]
where $\theta_i$ are real numbers.
In this special case, the following simple strategy is optimal:
Every round $t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$, the game manager observes $b(t)$ and $\omega(t)$ and then chooses a vector $\alpha(t) \in \script{A}(b(t),\omega(t))$ to maximize the following expression:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:expression}
\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t))
\end{equation}
To see why this is optimal, consider any sequences $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$.
A sequence of actions $\{\alpha(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ is said to be a \emph{feasible sequence of actions} if $\alpha(t) \in \script{A}(b(t),\omega(t))$ for all $t$.
Define $\{\alpha^*(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ as a feasible sequence of actions that maximize \eqref{eq:expression}
on every round $t$. Let $\{\alpha'(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ be any alternative feasible sequence of actions.
Then for all rounds $\tau\in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$ one has:
\[ \sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \geq \sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\hat{u}_i(\alpha'(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \]
Fix $t$ as a positive integer.
Summing the above over $\tau \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots, t-1\}$ and dividing by $t$ proves that:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:every-t}
\sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i \overline{u}^*_i(t) \geq \sum_{i=1}^N\theta_i\overline{u}_i'(t)
\end{equation}
where $\overline{u}_i^*(t)$ is the time average utility of player $i$ over the first $t$ rounds under the actions
$\{\alpha^*(\tau)\}_{\tau=0}^{\infty}$, while $\overline{u}_i'(t)$ is the corresponding time average
utility under the actions $\{\alpha'(\tau)\}_{\tau=0}^{\infty}$. The inequality \eqref{eq:every-t} is true for all rounds $t \in \{1, 2, 3, \ldots\}$ and so it is also true when taking limits as $t\rightarrow \infty$.
\subsection{General concave function of utilities}
A naive attempt to solve \eqref{eq:s1}-\eqref{eq:s2}
might consider the policy of observing $b(t)$ and $\omega(t)$ every round $t$ and then choosing $\alpha(t) \in \script{A}(b(t),\omega(t))$ to maximize $\phi(u_1(t), \ldots, u_N(t))$.
The previous subsection shows this naive policy is optimal in the special case when $\phi(\cdot)$ is linear. However, it is not necessarily optimal when $\phi(\cdot)$ is concave but nonlinear.
The problem \eqref{eq:s1}-\eqref{eq:s2} is similar to an \emph{opportunistic scheduling problem} for wireless networks, as considered in \cite{neely-fairness-ton}\cite{now}\cite{sno-text} via the drift-plus-penalty approach and in \cite{stolyar-greedy}\cite{atilla-fairness-ton}\cite{vijay-allerton02}\cite{prop-fair-down} via different approaches. The works \cite{neely-fairness-ton}\cite{now}\cite{sno-text} transform a problem involving the maximization of a concave function of time averages into a problem of maximizing the time average of a function. The same approach is fruitful in this game theory context. Define proxy variables $\gamma_i(t)$ for all $i \in \script{N}$. Define $\gamma(t) = (\gamma_1(t), \ldots, \gamma_N(t))$. Consider the following problem:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Max:} & \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1} \phi(\gamma(t)) \label{eq:t1} \\
\mbox{Subj to:} & \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty} [\overline{\gamma}_i(t) - \overline{u}_i(t)] = 0 \: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:t2} \\
& 0 \leq \gamma_i(t) \leq u_i^{max} \: \: \forall i \in \script{N}, \forall t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\} \label{eq:t3} \\
& \alpha(t) \in \script{A}(b(t),\omega(t)) \: \: \forall t \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\} \label{eq:t4}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{lem} \label{lem:one-side} If $\{\alpha(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{\gamma(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ are sequences of decisions that satisfy the constraints \eqref{eq:t2}-\eqref{eq:t4}, then $\{\alpha(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ is a feasible sequence of control actions for the original problem \eqref{eq:s1}-\eqref{eq:s2} with the following utility guarantee:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:at-least}
\liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(t)) \geq \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{t}\sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau))
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{\alpha(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{\gamma(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ be sequences
that satisfy \eqref{eq:t2}-\eqref{eq:t4}. Fix $t>0$. By Jensen's inequality and concavity of the $\phi(\gamma)$ function one has:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{t} \sum_{\tau=0}^{t-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau)) &\leq& \phi(\overline{\gamma}(t)) \nonumber \\
&\leq& \phi(\overline{u}(t)) + M\norm{\overline{\gamma}(t) - \overline{u}(t)} \label{eq:lip}
\end{eqnarray}
where $M$ is the Lipschitz constant for the function $\phi(\cdot)$. Taking the $\liminf$ of both sides and using \eqref{eq:t2} proves \eqref{eq:at-least}. Furthermore, since $\alpha(t)$ satisfies \eqref{eq:t4}, it is a feasible sequence of control actions for the original problem.
\end{proof}
Lemma \ref{lem:one-side} suggests that one should make actions in an effort to solve the problem
\eqref{eq:t1}-\eqref{eq:t4}. Any decisions that are feasible for the problem \eqref{eq:t1}-\eqref{eq:t4} and that produce a ``large'' value of the objective function will also be feasible for the original problem with a corresponding objective function value that is at least as large. Let $v_1^{opt}$ and $v_2^{opt}$ be the supremum objective function values for the problems \eqref{eq:s1}-\eqref{eq:s2} and \eqref{eq:t1}-\eqref{eq:t4}, respectively. The above lemma implies that $v_1^{opt} \geq v_2^{opt}$. If $(b(t), \omega(t))$ is ergodic, it turns out that $v_1^{opt} = v_2^{opt}$ with probability 1 (see \cite{sno-text}), although this is not necessarily true for general non-ergodic problems.
The Lyapunov optimization method can be used to treat the problem \eqref{eq:t1}-\eqref{eq:t4}. To enforce the constraints \eqref{eq:t2}, for each $i \in \script{N}$ define a virtual queue:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:z2-update}
Z_i(t+1) = Z_i(t) + \gamma_i(t) - u_i(t)
\end{equation}
Define $Z(t) = (Z_1(t), \ldots, Z_N(t))$. Define $L(t) = \frac{1}{2}\norm{Z(t)}^2$ and $\Delta(t) = L(t+1) - L(t)$.
As before, it can be shown that:
\begin{align}
&\Delta(t) - V\phi(\gamma(t)) \nonumber \\
&\leq D - V\phi(\gamma(t)) \nonumber \\
& + \sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(t)[\gamma_i(t) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t))] \label{eq:conservative-DPP}
\end{align}
where $D$ is a constant. Minimizing the right-hand-side of \eqref{eq:conservative-DPP} every round $t$ results in the following algorithm: Every round $t$, the game manager observes $Z(t)$, $b(t)$, $\omega(t)$. Then:
\begin{itemize}
\item (Proxy variables) Choose $\gamma(t) = (\gamma_1(t), \ldots, \gamma_N(t))$ as the solution to:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mbox{Maximize:} & V\phi(\gamma(t)) - \sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(t)\gamma_i(t) \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & 0 \leq \gamma_i(t) \leq u_i^{max} \: \: \forall i \in \script{N}
\end{eqnarray*}
\item (Suggestions) Choose $\alpha(t) = (\alpha_1(t), \ldots, \alpha_N(t))$ as the solution to:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Maximize:} & \sum_{i=1}^N Z_i(t) \hat{u}_i(\alpha(t), \omega(t)) \label{eq:sugg1} \\
\mbox{Subject to:} & \alpha(t) \in \script{A}(b(t),\omega(t)) \label{eq:sugg2}
\end{eqnarray}
Then send these suggestions to the corresponding players.
\item (Queue update) Update $Z_i(t)$ for $i \in \script{N}$ via \eqref{eq:z2-update}.
\end{itemize}
For simplicity, it is assumed throughout that for all $t\in\{0, 1,2,\ldots\}$ there exists an $\alpha(t)$ that solves \eqref{eq:sugg1}-\eqref{eq:sugg2} (else, the $C$-additive approximation theory of \cite{sno-text} can be used). It follows that the resulting $\alpha(t)$ sequence is a feasible sequence of control actions for the original problem \eqref{eq:s1}-\eqref{eq:s2}. The next subsection analyzes its performance.
\subsection{Analysis for conservative constraints and concave $\phi(\cdot)$}
Fix sequences $\{\omega(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ and $\{b(t)\}_{t=0}^{\infty}$. Fix a positive integer $T$.
For $k \in \{0, 1, 2, \ldots\}$ consider the following $T$-slot lookahead problem,
which uses decision variables $\gamma=(\gamma_1, \ldots, \gamma_N)$ and $\alpha(t)=(\alpha_1(t), \ldots, \alpha_N(t))$:
\begin{align}
&\mbox{Maximize:} \nonumber \\
& \phi(\gamma) \label{eq:conservative1} \\
&\mbox{Subject to:} \nonumber \\
& \gamma_i = \frac{1}{T}\sum_{\tau=kT}^{kT+T-1} \hat{u}_i(\alpha(\tau), \omega(\tau))\: \: \forall i \in \script{N} \label{eq:conservative2} \\
& \alpha(\tau) \in \script{A}(b(\tau), \omega(\tau)) \: \: \forall \tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}\label{eq:conservative3}
\end{align}
Define $\psi_T[k]$ as the supremum objective function value in the above problem. Thus, for any $\epsilon>0$, there is a sequence of decisions $\alpha(\tau)$ for $\tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}$ and a vector $\gamma = (\gamma_1, \ldots, \gamma_N)$ that together satisfy \eqref{eq:conservative2}-\eqref{eq:conservative3} and also satisfy:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:finally-satisfy}
\psi_T[k]-\epsilon \leq \phi(\gamma) \leq \psi_T[k]
\end{equation}
\begin{thm} Fix $V\geq 0$ and assume the algorithm in the previous subsection is used with this $V$ and with $Z_i(0)=0$ for all $i \in \script{N}$. For all positive integers $T$ and $K$ the following holds:
\[ \phi(\overline{u}(KT)) \geq \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] - \frac{DT}{V} - M\sqrt{\frac{2D+2V\phi^{max}}{KT}} \]
where $M$ is the Lipschitz constant for the function $\phi(\cdot)$ and $D$ is the constant in \eqref{eq:conservative-DPP}.
In particular, for all positive integers $T$ one has:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:last}
\liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(t)) \geq \liminf_{K\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] - \frac{DT}{V}
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
The theorem is proven in three parts.
\begin{proof} (Part 1)
This part proves that:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:part1}
\phi(\overline{u}(KT)) \geq \frac{1}{KT}\sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau)) - M\sqrt{\frac{2(D+V\phi^{max})}{KT}}
\end{equation}
To this end, note that \eqref{eq:conservative-DPP} implies that for all rounds $\tau$:
\begin{align}
&\Delta(\tau) - V\phi(\gamma(\tau)) \nonumber \\
&\leq D - V\phi(\gamma^*(\tau)) \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(\tau)[\gamma_i^*(\tau) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau),\omega(\tau))] \label{eq:have}
\end{align}
where $\gamma^*(\tau)$ and $\alpha^*(\tau)$ are any vectors that satisfy $\alpha(\tau) \in \script{A}(b(\tau),\omega(\tau))$ and $\gamma_i^*(\tau) \in [0, u_i^{max}]$ for all $i \in \script{N}$.
Choose $\alpha^*(\tau)=b(\tau)$ and $\gamma^*(\tau) = (\gamma_1^*(\tau), \ldots, \gamma_N^*(\tau))$ where $\gamma_i^*(\tau) = \hat{u}_i(b(\tau),\omega(\tau))$ for all $i \in \script{N}$. Substituting these choices into \eqref{eq:have} gives:
\[ \Delta(\tau) - V\phi(\gamma(\tau)) \leq D - V\phi(\gamma^*(\tau)) \]
and hence:
\[ \Delta(\tau) \leq D + V\phi^{max} \]
Summing over $\tau \in \{0, \ldots, KT-1\}$ gives:
\[ \frac{1}{2}\norm{Z(KT)}^2 - \frac{1}{2}\norm{Z(0)}^2 \leq KT(D+V\phi^{max}) \]
Rearranging terms and using $\norm{Z(0)}=0$ gives:
\[ \frac{\norm{Z(KT)}}{(KT)} \leq \sqrt{\frac{2(D+V\phi^{max})}{KT}} \]
From \eqref{eq:z2-update} it holds that and $\norm{Z(KT)}/t = \norm{\overline{\gamma}(KT)-\overline{u}(KT)}$ and so:
\[ \norm{\overline{\gamma}(KT)-\overline{u}(KT)} \leq \sqrt{\frac{2(D+V\phi^{max})}{KT}} \]
By \eqref{eq:lip} it follows that:
\[ \frac{1}{KT}\sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1} \phi(\gamma(\tau)) \leq \phi(\overline{u}(KT)) + M\sqrt{\frac{2(D+V\phi^{max})}{KT}} \]
which proves \eqref{eq:part1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof} (Part 2) This part shows that:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:part2}
\frac{1}{KT} \sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1} \phi(\gamma(\tau)) \geq \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] - \frac{DT}{V}
\end{equation}
To this end, note that summing \eqref{eq:have} over $\tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}$ gives:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau)) \\
&\leq DT - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\phi(\gamma^*(\tau)) \\
& + \sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(\tau)[\gamma_i^*(\tau) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))] \\
&\leq DT^2 - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\phi(\gamma^*(\tau)) \\
& + \sum_{i=1}^NZ_i(kT)\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}[\gamma_i^*(\tau) - \hat{u}_i(\alpha^*(\tau), \omega(\tau))] \\
\end{align*}
where the final step is similar to a step in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:performance}.
Fix $\epsilon>0$ and
define $\gamma^*=(\gamma_1^*, \ldots, \gamma_N^*)$ and $\alpha^*(\tau)$ for $\tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}$ as the
vectors that satisfy
\eqref{eq:conservative2}, \eqref{eq:conservative3}, \eqref{eq:finally-satisfy}, and
define $\gamma_i^*(\tau) = \gamma_i^*$ for all $\tau \in \{kT, \ldots, (k+1)T-1\}$. Substituting these into the above inequality gives:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\Delta(\tau) - V\sum_{\tau=kT}^{(k+1)T-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau)) \\
&\leq DT^2 - VT\psi_T[k] + VT\epsilon
\end{align*}
Taking $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$ and then
summing over $k \in \{0, \ldots, K-1\}$ gives:
\[ L(KT)-L(0) - V\sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1}\phi(\gamma(\tau)) \leq DT^2K - VT\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\psi_T[k] \]
Dividing by $VKT$ and using the fact that $L(KT)-L(0)\geq 0$ gives:
\[ -\frac{1}{KT}\sum_{\tau=0}^{KT-1} \phi(\gamma(\tau)) \leq \frac{DT}{V} - \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] \]
which proves \eqref{eq:part2}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof} (Part 3) This part proves \eqref{eq:last}. To this end, note that parts 1 and 2 together imply:
\[ \phi(\overline{u}(KT)) \geq \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] - \frac{DT}{V} - M\sqrt{\frac{2D+2V\phi^{max}}{KT}} \]
Taking a $\liminf$ of both sides as $K\rightarrow\infty$ gives:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:batty}
\liminf_{K\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(KT)) \geq \liminf_{K\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \psi_T[k] - \frac{DT}{V}
\end{equation}
It remains to show that the left-hand-side of \eqref{eq:batty} can be replaced by $\liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(t))$. To do this,
fix $t$ as a positive integer. Let $K_t$ be the non-negative integer such that $K_t T \leq t < (K_t+1)T$. Then:
\[ \overline{u}(t) = \overline{u}(K_tT)\frac{K_tT}{t} + \frac{\sum_{\tau=K_tT}^{t-1}u(\tau)}{t}\]
In particular:
\[ \overline{u}(t) = \overline{u}(K_tT) - \overline{u}(K_tT)\frac{(t-K_tT)}{t} + \frac{\sum_{\tau=K_tT}^{t-1}u(\tau)}{t} \]
Thus:
\[ \norm{\overline{u}(t) - \overline{u}(K_tT)} \leq \frac{\sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^N(T-1)u_i^{max}}}{t} \]
Thus:
\[ \phi(\overline{u}(t)) \geq \phi(\overline{u}(K_tT)) - M\frac{\sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^N(T-1)u_i^{max}}}{t} \]
Taking a $\liminf$ of both sides as $t\rightarrow\infty$ gives:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(t)) &\geq& \liminf_{t\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(K_tT)) \\
&\geq& \liminf_{K\rightarrow\infty} \phi(\overline{u}(KT))
\end{eqnarray*}
This together with \eqref{eq:batty} proves the result.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}
This paper considers a stochastic repeated game where players share information and a baseline decision with a game manager at the beginning of each round. The manager provides suggestions that, if taken, maximize a concave function of average utilities across players subject to the constraint that each player receives a time average utility at least as good as it would get if all players used their baseline strategies. A more conservative scenario was also considered where the utility guarantee is enforced every round, rather than in a time average. A Lyapunov optimization algorithm was developed that satisfies the constraints and that ensures the concave function of utilities is close to (or better than) an average of $T$-slot lookahead values that are computed with knowledge of $T$ rounds into the future, regardless of the sample path. This shows that a simple causal algorithm can achieve a target defined in terms of future knowledge.
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section*{Abstract (Not appropriate in this style!)}%
\else \small
\begin{center}{\bf Abstract\vspace{-.5em}\vspace{\z@}}\end{center}%
\quotation
\fi
}%
}{%
}%
\@ifundefined{endabstract}{\def\endabstract
{\if@twocolumn\else\endquotation\fi}}{}%
\@ifundefined{maketitle}{\def\maketitle#1{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{affiliation}{\def\affiliation#1{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{proof}{\def\proof{\noindent{\bfseries Proof. }}}{}%
\@ifundefined{endproof}{\def\endproof{\mbox{\ \rule{.1in}{.1in}}}}{}%
\@ifundefined{newfield}{\def\newfield#1#2{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{chapter}{\def\chapter#1{\par(Chapter head:)#1\par }%
\newcount\c@chapter}{}%
\@ifundefined{part}{\def\part#1{\par(Part head:)#1\par }}{}%
\@ifundefined{section}{\def\section#1{\par(Section head:)#1\par }}{}%
\@ifundefined{subsection}{\def\subsection#1%
{\par(Subsection head:)#1\par }}{}%
\@ifundefined{subsubsection}{\def\subsubsection#1%
{\par(Subsubsection head:)#1\par }}{}%
\@ifundefined{paragraph}{\def\paragraph#1%
{\par(Subsubsubsection head:)#1\par }}{}%
\@ifundefined{subparagraph}{\def\subparagraph#1%
{\par(Subsubsubsubsection head:)#1\par }}{}%
\@ifundefined{therefore}{\def\therefore{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{backepsilon}{\def\backepsilon{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{yen}{\def\yen{\hbox{\rm\rlap=Y}}}{}%
\@ifundefined{registered}{%
\def\registered{\relax\ifmmode{}\r@gistered
\else$\m@th\r@gistered$\fi}%
\def\r@gistered{^{\ooalign
{\hfil\raise.07ex\hbox{$\scriptstyle\rm\RIfM@\expandafter\text@\else\expandafter\mbox\fi{R}$}\hfil\crcr
\mathhexbox20D}}}}{}%
\@ifundefined{Eth}{\def\Eth{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{eth}{\def\eth{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{Thorn}{\def\Thorn{}}{}%
\@ifundefined{thorn}{\def\thorn{}}{}%
\def\TEXTsymbol#1{\mbox{$#1$}}%
\@ifundefined{degree}{\def\degree{{}^{\circ}}}{}%
\newdimen\theight
\def\Column{%
\vadjust{\setbox\z@=\hbox{\scriptsize\quad\quad tcol}%
\theight=\ht\z@\advance\theight by \dp\z@\advance\theight by \lineskip
\kern -\theight \vbox to \theight{%
\rightline{\rlap{\box\z@}}%
\vss
}%
}%
}%
\def\qed{%
\ifhmode\unskip\nobreak\fi\ifmmode\ifinner\else\hskip5\p@\fi\fi
\hbox{\hskip5\p@\vrule width4\p@ height6\p@ depth1.5\p@\hskip\p@}%
}%
\def\cents{\hbox{\rm\rlap/c}}%
\def\miss{\hbox{\vrule height2\p@ width 2\p@ depth\z@}}%
\def\vvert{\Vert
\def\tcol#1{{\baselineskip=6\p@ \vcenter{#1}} \Column} %
\def\dB{\hbox{{}}
\def\mB#1{\hbox{$#1$}
\def\nB#1{\hbox{#1}
\def\note{$^{\dag}}%
\defLaTeX2e{LaTeX2e}
\def\chkcompat{%
\if@compatibility
\else
\usepackage{latexsym}
\fi
}
\ifx\fmtnameLaTeX2e
\DeclareOldFontCommand{\rm}{\normalfont\rmfamily}{\mathrm}
\DeclareOldFontCommand{\sf}{\normalfont\sffamily}{\mathsf}
\DeclareOldFontCommand{\tt}{\normalfont\ttfamily}{\mathtt}
\DeclareOldFontCommand{\bf}{\normalfont\bfseries}{\mathbf}
\DeclareOldFontCommand{\it}{\normalfont\itshape}{\mathit}
\DeclareOldFontCommand{\sl}{\normalfont\slshape}{\@nomath\sl}
\DeclareOldFontCommand{\sc}{\normalfont\scshape}{\@nomath\sc}
\chkcompat
\fi
\def\alpha{\Greekmath 010B }%
\def\beta{\Greekmath 010C }%
\def\gamma{\Greekmath 010D }%
\def\delta{\Greekmath 010E }%
\def\epsilon{\Greekmath 010F }%
\def\zeta{\Greekmath 0110 }%
\def\eta{\Greekmath 0111 }%
\def\theta{\Greekmath 0112 }%
\def\iota{\Greekmath 0113 }%
\def\kappa{\Greekmath 0114 }%
\def\lambda{\Greekmath 0115 }%
\def\mu{\Greekmath 0116 }%
\def\nu{\Greekmath 0117 }%
\def\xi{\Greekmath 0118 }%
\def\pi{\Greekmath 0119 }%
\def\rho{\Greekmath 011A }%
\def\sigma{\Greekmath 011B }%
\def\tau{\Greekmath 011C }%
\def\upsilon{\Greekmath 011D }%
\def\phi{\Greekmath 011E }%
\def\chi{\Greekmath 011F }%
\def\psi{\Greekmath 0120 }%
\def\omega{\Greekmath 0121 }%
\def\varepsilon{\Greekmath 0122 }%
\def\vartheta{\Greekmath 0123 }%
\def\varpi{\Greekmath 0124 }%
\def\varrho{\Greekmath 0125 }%
\def\varsigma{\Greekmath 0126 }%
\def\varphi{\Greekmath 0127 }%
\def\Greekmath 0272 {\Greekmath 0272 }
\def\FindBoldGroup{%
{\setbox0=\hbox{$\mathbf{x\global\edef\theboldgroup{\the\mathgroup}}$}}%
}
\def\Greekmath#1#2#3#4{%
\if@compatibility
\ifnum\mathgroup=\symbold
\mathchoice{\mbox{\boldmath$\displaystyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
{\mbox{\boldmath$\textstyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
{\mbox{\boldmath$\scriptstyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
{\mbox{\boldmath$\scriptscriptstyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
\else
\mathchar"#1#2#3#
\fi
\else
\FindBoldGroup
\ifnum\mathgroup=\theboldgroup
\mathchoice{\mbox{\boldmath$\displaystyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
{\mbox{\boldmath$\textstyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
{\mbox{\boldmath$\scriptstyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
{\mbox{\boldmath$\scriptscriptstyle\mathchar"#1#2#3#4$}}%
\else
\mathchar"#1#2#3#
\fi
\fi}
\newif\ifGreekBold \GreekBoldfalse
\let\SAVEPBF=\pbf
\def\pbf{\GreekBoldtrue\SAVEPBF}%
\@ifundefined{theorem}{\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}}{}
\@ifundefined{lemma}{\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}}{}
\@ifundefined{corollary}{\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}}{}
\@ifundefined{conjecture}{\newtheorem{conjecture}[theorem]{Conjecture}}{}
\@ifundefined{proposition}{\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}}{}
\@ifundefined{axiom}{\newtheorem{axiom}{Axiom}}{}
\@ifundefined{remark}{\newtheorem{remark}{Remark}}{}
\@ifundefined{example}{\newtheorem{example}{Example}}{}
\@ifundefined{exercise}{\newtheorem{exercise}{Exercise}}{}
\@ifundefined{definition}{\newtheorem{definition}{Definition}}{}
\@ifundefined{mathletters}{%
\newcounter{equationnumber}
\def\mathletters{%
\addtocounter{equation}{1}
\edef\@currentlabel{\arabic{equation}}%
\setcounter{equationnumber}{\c@equation}
\setcounter{equation}{0}%
\edef\arabic{equation}{\@currentlabel\noexpand\alph{equation}}%
}
\def\endmathletters{%
\setcounter{equation}{\value{equationnumber}}%
}
}{}
\@ifundefined{BibTeX}{%
\def\BibTeX{{\rm B\kern-.05em{\sc i\kern-.025em b}\kern-.08em
T\kern-.1667em\lower.7ex\hbox{E}\kern-.125emX}}}{}%
\@ifundefined{AmS}%
{\def\AmS{{\protect\usefont{OMS}{cmsy}{m}{n}%
A\kern-.1667em\lower.5ex\hbox{M}\kern-.125emS}}}{}%
\@ifundefined{AmSTeX}{\def\AmSTeX{\protect\AmS-\protect\TeX\@}}{}%
\ifx\ds@amstex\relax
\message{amstex already loaded}\makeatother\endinpu
\else
\@ifpackageloaded{amstex}%
{\message{amstex already loaded}\makeatother\endinput}
{}
\@ifpackageloaded{amsgen}%
{\message{amsgen already loaded}\makeatother\endinput}
{}
\fi
\let\DOTSI\relax
\def\RIfM@{\relax\ifmmode}%
\def\FN@{\futurelet\next}%
\newcount\intno@
\def\iint{\DOTSI\intno@\tw@\FN@\ints@}%
\def\iiint{\DOTSI\intno@\thr@@\FN@\ints@}%
\def\iiiint{\DOTSI\intno@4 \FN@\ints@}%
\def\idotsint{\DOTSI\intno@\z@\FN@\ints@}%
\def\ints@{\findlimits@\ints@@}%
\newif\iflimtoken@
\newif\iflimits@
\def\findlimits@{\limtoken@true\ifx\next\limits\limits@true
\else\ifx\next\nolimits\limits@false\else
\limtoken@false\ifx\ilimits@\nolimits\limits@false\else
\ifinner\limits@false\else\limits@true\fi\fi\fi\fi}%
\def\multint@{\int\ifnum\intno@=\z@\intdots@
\else\intkern@\fi
\ifnum\intno@>\tw@\int\intkern@\fi
\ifnum\intno@>\thr@@\int\intkern@\fi
\int
\def\multintlimits@{\intop\ifnum\intno@=\z@\intdots@\else\intkern@\fi
\ifnum\intno@>\tw@\intop\intkern@\fi
\ifnum\intno@>\thr@@\intop\intkern@\fi\intop}%
\def\intic@{%
\mathchoice{\hskip.5em}{\hskip.4em}{\hskip.4em}{\hskip.4em}}%
\def\negintic@{\mathchoice
{\hskip-.5em}{\hskip-.4em}{\hskip-.4em}{\hskip-.4em}}%
\def\ints@@{\iflimtoken@
\def\ints@@@{\iflimits@\negintic@
\mathop{\intic@\multintlimits@}\limits
\else\multint@\nolimits\fi
\eat@
\else
\def\ints@@@{\iflimits@\negintic@
\mathop{\intic@\multintlimits@}\limits\else
\multint@\nolimits\fi}\fi\ints@@@}%
\def\intkern@{\mathchoice{\!\!\!}{\!\!}{\!\!}{\!\!}}%
\def\plaincdots@{\mathinner{\cdotp\cdotp\cdotp}}%
\def\intdots@{\mathchoice{\plaincdots@}%
{{\cdotp}\mkern1.5mu{\cdotp}\mkern1.5mu{\cdotp}}%
{{\cdotp}\mkern1mu{\cdotp}\mkern1mu{\cdotp}}%
{{\cdotp}\mkern1mu{\cdotp}\mkern1mu{\cdotp}}}%
\def\RIfM@{\relax\protect\ifmmode}
\def\RIfM@\expandafter\text@\else\expandafter\mbox\fi{\RIfM@\expandafter\RIfM@\expandafter\text@\else\expandafter\mbox\fi@\else\expandafter\mbox\fi}
\let\nfss@text\RIfM@\expandafter\text@\else\expandafter\mbox\fi
\def\RIfM@\expandafter\text@\else\expandafter\mbox\fi@#1{\mathchoice
{\textdef@\displaystyle\f@size{#1}}%
{\textdef@\textstyle\tf@size{\firstchoice@false #1}}%
{\textdef@\textstyle\sf@size{\firstchoice@false #1}}%
{\textdef@\textstyle \ssf@size{\firstchoice@false #1}}%
\glb@settings}
\def\textdef@#1#2#3{\hbox{{%
\everymath{#1}%
\let\f@size#2\selectfont
#3}}}
\newif\iffirstchoice@
\firstchoice@true
\def\Let@{\relax\iffalse{\fi\let\\=\cr\iffalse}\fi}%
\def\vspace@{\def\vspace##1{\crcr\noalign{\vskip##1\relax}}}%
\def\multilimits@{\bgroup\vspace@\Let@
\baselineskip\fontdimen10 \scriptfont\tw@
\advance\baselineskip\fontdimen12 \scriptfont\tw@
\lineskip\thr@@\fontdimen8 \scriptfont\thr@@
\lineskiplimit\lineskip
\vbox\bgroup\ialign\bgroup\hfil$\m@th\scriptstyle{##}$\hfil\crcr}%
\def\Sb{_\multilimits@}%
\def\endSb{\crcr\egroup\egroup\egroup}%
\def\Sp{^\multilimits@}%
\let\endSp\endSb
\newdimen\ex@
\ex@.2326ex
\def\rightarrowfill@#1{$#1\m@th\mathord-\mkern-6mu\cleaders
\hbox{$#1\mkern-2mu\mathord-\mkern-2mu$}\hfill
\mkern-6mu\mathord\rightarrow$}%
\def\leftarrowfill@#1{$#1\m@th\mathord\leftarrow\mkern-6mu\cleaders
\hbox{$#1\mkern-2mu\mathord-\mkern-2mu$}\hfill\mkern-6mu\mathord-$}%
\def\leftrightarrowfill@#1{$#1\m@th\mathord\leftarrow
\mkern-6mu\cleaders
\hbox{$#1\mkern-2mu\mathord-\mkern-2mu$}\hfill
\mkern-6mu\mathord\rightarrow$}%
\def\overrightarrow{\mathpalette\overrightarrow@}%
\def\overrightarrow@#1#2{\vbox{\ialign{##\crcr\rightarrowfill@#1\crcr
\noalign{\kern-\ex@\nointerlineskip}$\m@th\hfil#1#2\hfil$\crcr}}}%
\let\overarrow\overrightarrow
\def\overleftarrow{\mathpalette\overleftarrow@}%
\def\overleftarrow@#1#2{\vbox{\ialign{##\crcr\leftarrowfill@#1\crcr
\noalign{\kern-\ex@\nointerlineskip}$\m@th\hfil#1#2\hfil$\crcr}}}%
\def\overleftrightarrow{\mathpalette\overleftrightarrow@}%
\def\overleftrightarrow@#1#2{\vbox{\ialign{##\crcr
\leftrightarrowfill@#1\crcr
\noalign{\kern-\ex@\nointerlineskip}$\m@th\hfil#1#2\hfil$\crcr}}}%
\def\underrightarrow{\mathpalette\underrightarrow@}%
\def\underrightarrow@#1#2{\vtop{\ialign{##\crcr$\m@th\hfil#1#2\hfil
$\crcr\noalign{\nointerlineskip}\rightarrowfill@#1\crcr}}}%
\let\underarrow\underrightarrow
\def\underleftarrow{\mathpalette\underleftarrow@}%
\def\underleftarrow@#1#2{\vtop{\ialign{##\crcr$\m@th\hfil#1#2\hfil
$\crcr\noalign{\nointerlineskip}\leftarrowfill@#1\crcr}}}%
\def\underleftrightarrow{\mathpalette\underleftrightarrow@}%
\def\underleftrightarrow@#1#2{\vtop{\ialign{##\crcr$\m@th
\hfil#1#2\hfil$\crcr
\noalign{\nointerlineskip}\leftrightarrowfill@#1\crcr}}}%
\def\qopnamewl@#1{\mathop{\operator@font#1}\nlimits@}
\let\nlimits@\displaylimits
\def\setboxz@h{\setbox\z@\hbox}
\def\varlim@#1#2{\mathop{\vtop{\ialign{##\crcr
\hfil$#1\m@th\operator@font lim$\hfil\crcr
\noalign{\nointerlineskip}#2#1\crcr
\noalign{\nointerlineskip\kern-\ex@}\crcr}}}}
\def\rightarrowfill@#1{\m@th\setboxz@h{$#1-$}\ht\z@\z@
$#1\copy\z@\mkern-6mu\cleaders
\hbox{$#1\mkern-2mu\box\z@\mkern-2mu$}\hfill
\mkern-6mu\mathord\rightarrow$}
\def\leftarrowfill@#1{\m@th\setboxz@h{$#1-$}\ht\z@\z@
$#1\mathord\leftarrow\mkern-6mu\cleaders
\hbox{$#1\mkern-2mu\copy\z@\mkern-2mu$}\hfill
\mkern-6mu\box\z@$}
\def\qopnamewl@{proj\,lim}{\qopnamewl@{proj\,lim}}
\def\qopnamewl@{inj\,lim}{\qopnamewl@{inj\,lim}}
\def\mathpalette\varlim@\rightarrowfill@{\mathpalette\varlim@\rightarrowfill@}
\def\mathpalette\varlim@\leftarrowfill@{\mathpalette\varlim@\leftarrowfill@}
\def\mathpalette\varliminf@{}{\mathpalette\mathpalette\varliminf@{}@{}}
\def\mathpalette\varliminf@{}@#1{\mathop{\underline{\vrule\@depth.2\ex@\@width\z@
\hbox{$#1\m@th\operator@font lim$}}}}
\def\mathpalette\varlimsup@{}{\mathpalette\mathpalette\varlimsup@{}@{}}
\def\mathpalette\varlimsup@{}@#1{\mathop{\overline
{\hbox{$#1\m@th\operator@font lim$}}}}
\def\tfrac#1#2{{\textstyle {#1 \over #2}}}%
\def\dfrac#1#2{{\displaystyle {#1 \over #2}}}%
\def\binom#1#2{{#1 \choose #2}}%
\def\tbinom#1#2{{\textstyle {#1 \choose #2}}}%
\def\dbinom#1#2{{\displaystyle {#1 \choose #2}}}%
\def\QATOP#1#2{{#1 \atop #2}}%
\def\QTATOP#1#2{{\textstyle {#1 \atop #2}}}%
\def\QDATOP#1#2{{\displaystyle {#1 \atop #2}}}%
\def\QABOVE#1#2#3{{#2 \above#1 #3}}%
\def\QTABOVE#1#2#3{{\textstyle {#2 \above#1 #3}}}%
\def\QDABOVE#1#2#3{{\displaystyle {#2 \above#1 #3}}}%
\def\QOVERD#1#2#3#4{{#3 \overwithdelims#1#2 #4}}%
\def\QTOVERD#1#2#3#4{{\textstyle {#3 \overwithdelims#1#2 #4}}}%
\def\QDOVERD#1#2#3#4{{\displaystyle {#3 \overwithdelims#1#2 #4}}}%
\def\QATOPD#1#2#3#4{{#3 \atopwithdelims#1#2 #4}}%
\def\QTATOPD#1#2#3#4{{\textstyle {#3 \atopwithdelims#1#2 #4}}}%
\def\QDATOPD#1#2#3#4{{\displaystyle {#3 \atopwithdelims#1#2 #4}}}%
\def\QABOVED#1#2#3#4#5{{#4 \abovewithdelims#1#2#3 #5}}%
\def\QTABOVED#1#2#3#4#5{{\textstyle
{#4 \abovewithdelims#1#2#3 #5}}}%
\def\QDABOVED#1#2#3#4#5{{\displaystyle
{#4 \abovewithdelims#1#2#3 #5}}}%
\def\tint{\mathop{\textstyle \int}}%
\def\tiint{\mathop{\textstyle \iint }}%
\def\tiiint{\mathop{\textstyle \iiint }}%
\def\tiiiint{\mathop{\textstyle \iiiint }}%
\def\tidotsint{\mathop{\textstyle \idotsint }}%
\def\toint{\mathop{\textstyle \oint}}%
\def\tsum{\mathop{\textstyle \sum }}%
\def\tprod{\mathop{\textstyle \prod }}%
\def\tbigcap{\mathop{\textstyle \bigcap }}%
\def\tbigwedge{\mathop{\textstyle \bigwedge }}%
\def\tbigoplus{\mathop{\textstyle \bigoplus }}%
\def\tbigodot{\mathop{\textstyle \bigodot }}%
\def\tbigsqcup{\mathop{\textstyle \bigsqcup }}%
\def\tcoprod{\mathop{\textstyle \coprod }}%
\def\tbigcup{\mathop{\textstyle \bigcup }}%
\def\tbigvee{\mathop{\textstyle \bigvee }}%
\def\tbigotimes{\mathop{\textstyle \bigotimes }}%
\def\tbiguplus{\mathop{\textstyle \biguplus }}%
\def\dint{\mathop{\displaystyle \int}}%
\def\diint{\mathop{\displaystyle \iint }}%
\def\diiint{\mathop{\displaystyle \iiint }}%
\def\diiiint{\mathop{\displaystyle \iiiint }}%
\def\didotsint{\mathop{\displaystyle \idotsint }}%
\def\doint{\mathop{\displaystyle \oint}}%
\def\dsum{\mathop{\displaystyle \sum }}%
\def\dprod{\mathop{\displaystyle \prod }}%
\def\dbigcap{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigcap }}%
\def\dbigwedge{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigwedge }}%
\def\dbigoplus{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigoplus }}%
\def\dbigodot{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigodot }}%
\def\dbigsqcup{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigsqcup }}%
\def\dcoprod{\mathop{\displaystyle \coprod }}%
\def\dbigcup{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigcup }}%
\def\dbigvee{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigvee }}%
\def\dbigotimes{\mathop{\displaystyle \bigotimes }}%
\def\dbiguplus{\mathop{\displaystyle \biguplus }}%
\def\stackunder#1#2{\mathrel{\mathop{#2}\limits_{#1}}}%
\begingroup \catcode `|=0 \catcode `[= 1
\catcode`]=2 \catcode `\{=12 \catcode `\}=12
\catcode`\\=12
|gdef|@alignverbatim#1\end{align}[#1|end[align]]
|gdef|@salignverbatim#1\end{align*}[#1|end[align*]]
|gdef|@alignatverbatim#1\end{alignat}[#1|end[alignat]]
|gdef|@salignatverbatim#1\end{alignat*}[#1|end[alignat*]]
|gdef|@xalignatverbatim#1\end{xalignat}[#1|end[xalignat]]
|gdef|@sxalignatverbatim#1\end{xalignat*}[#1|end[xalignat*]]
|gdef|@gatherverbatim#1\end{gather}[#1|end[gather]]
|gdef|@sgatherverbatim#1\end{gather*}[#1|end[gather*]]
|gdef|@gatherverbatim#1\end{gather}[#1|end[gather]]
|gdef|@sgatherverbatim#1\end{gather*}[#1|end[gather*]]
|gdef|@multilineverbatim#1\end{multiline}[#1|end[multiline]]
|gdef|@smultilineverbatim#1\end{multiline*}[#1|end[multiline*]]
|gdef|@arraxverbatim#1\end{arrax}[#1|end[arrax]]
|gdef|@sarraxverbatim#1\end{arrax*}[#1|end[arrax*]]
|gdef|@tabulaxverbatim#1\end{tabulax}[#1|end[tabulax]]
|gdef|@stabulaxverbatim#1\end{tabulax*}[#1|end[tabulax*]]
|endgroup
\def\align{\@verbatim \frenchspacing\@vobeyspaces \@alignverbatim
You are using the "align" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\let\endalign=\endtrivlist
\@namedef{align*}{\@verbatim\@salignverbatim
You are using the "align*" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\expandafter\let\csname endalign*\endcsname =\endtrivlist
\def\alignat{\@verbatim \frenchspacing\@vobeyspaces \@alignatverbatim
You are using the "alignat" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\let\endalignat=\endtrivlist
\@namedef{alignat*}{\@verbatim\@salignatverbatim
You are using the "alignat*" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\expandafter\let\csname endalignat*\endcsname =\endtrivlist
\def\xalignat{\@verbatim \frenchspacing\@vobeyspaces \@xalignatverbatim
You are using the "xalignat" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\let\endxalignat=\endtrivlist
\@namedef{xalignat*}{\@verbatim\@sxalignatverbatim
You are using the "xalignat*" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\expandafter\let\csname endxalignat*\endcsname =\endtrivlist
\def\gather{\@verbatim \frenchspacing\@vobeyspaces \@gatherverbatim
You are using the "gather" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\let\endgather=\endtrivlist
\@namedef{gather*}{\@verbatim\@sgatherverbatim
You are using the "gather*" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\expandafter\let\csname endgather*\endcsname =\endtrivlist
\def\multiline{\@verbatim \frenchspacing\@vobeyspaces \@multilineverbatim
You are using the "multiline" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\let\endmultiline=\endtrivlist
\@namedef{multiline*}{\@verbatim\@smultilineverbatim
You are using the "multiline*" environment in a style in which it is not defined.}
\expandafter\let\csname endmultiline*\endcsname =\endtrivlist
\def\arrax{\@verbatim \frenchspacing\@vobeyspaces \@arraxverbatim
You are using a type of "array" construct that is only allowed in AmS-LaTeX.}
\let\endarrax=\endtrivlist
\def\tabulax{\@verbatim \frenchspacing\@vobeyspaces \@tabulaxverbatim
You are using a type of "tabular" construct that is only allowed in AmS-LaTeX.}
\let\endtabulax=\endtrivlist
\@namedef{arrax*}{\@verbatim\@sarraxverbatim
You are using a type of "array*" construct that is only allowed in AmS-LaTeX.}
\expandafter\let\csname endarrax*\endcsname =\endtrivlist
\@namedef{tabulax*}{\@verbatim\@stabulaxverbatim
You are using a type of "tabular*" construct that is only allowed in AmS-LaTeX.}
\expandafter\let\csname endtabulax*\endcsname =\endtrivlist
\def\@@eqncr{\let\@tempa\relax
\ifcase\@eqcnt \def\@tempa{& & &}\or \def\@tempa{& &}%
\else \def\@tempa{&}\fi
\@tempa
\if@eqnsw
\iftag@
\@taggnum
\else
\@eqnnum\stepcounter{equation}%
\fi
\fi
\global\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}@false
\global\@eqnswtrue
\global\@eqcnt\z@\cr}
\def\endequation{%
\ifmmode\ifinner
\iftag@
\addtocounter{equation}{-1}
$\hfil
\displaywidth\linewidth\@taggnum\egroup \endtrivlist
\global\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}@false
\global\@ignoretrue
\else
$\hfil
\displaywidth\linewidth\@eqnnum\egroup \endtrivlist
\global\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}@false
\global\@ignoretrue
\fi
\else
\iftag@
\addtocounter{equation}{-1}
\eqno \hbox{\@taggnum}
\global\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}@false%
$$\global\@ignoretrue
\else
\eqno \hbox{\@eqnnum
$$\global\@ignoretrue
\fi
\fi\fi
}
\newif\iftag@ \@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}@false
\def\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}{\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}}
\def\@tag#1{%
\global\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}@true
\global\def\@taggnum{(#1)}}
\def\@tagstar*#1{%
\global\@ifnextchar*{\@tagstar}{\@tag}@true
\global\def\@taggnum{#1
}
\makeatother
\endinput
\section{Motivations}
The application of techniques from physics to areas outside of its natural
remit, such as economics and finance, is not new. In the 1960's the famous
Harvard economist Nicolas Georgescu-Roegen \cite{nicolas} considered the
concept of entropy in economics. In the 1990's the econophysics movement
started by luminaries like Eugene Stanley \cite{eugene} and Bouchaud \cit
{bouchaud}, became an important field where techniques from statistical
mechanics were very fruitful in understanding some difficult problems in
finance and macro-economics. {An outstanding paper which argues in a very
informed way about how physics based ideas can be of benefit to
understanding a plethora of concepts in the area of complex systems is by
Kwapien and Dro\.{z}d\.{z} \cite{kd}. In that paper the authors remark that
one could guess, from a theoretical point of view that \textquotedblleft all
the laws of financial economics must be a strict mathematical consequence of
the four fundamental interactions among the elementary
particles\textquotedblright .\ But the authors do immediately caution, that
from a \textbf{practical}} {point of view such an approach is unworkable.
The authors remark that \textquotedblleft to fully explain the financial
market's behavior, one has to neglect the deeper levels of organization
without any meaningful loss of information\textquotedblright .\ Kwapien and
Dro\.{z}d\.{z} \cite{kd} ask the question, within the context of real stock
data, what part of the eigenvalue spectrum of the correlation matrix (which
contains a Wishart matrix) contains information about non-trivial
correlations. The authors find that, again within the context of stock
markets, noise and collectivity (i.e. based on a large number of non-linear
interacting constituents) are in a dynamical balance with each other, and
this typifies complex systems. The rationale for introducing some ideas out
of quantum mechanics is also highlighted in the same paper \cite{kd}, where
the authors do mention what the interpretation might be of a price of an
asset between two consecutive transactions. Indeed the non-observed price
could be associated with a quantum mechanical measurement problem. The
authors cite the work of Schaden \cite{ms} in that regard. Other works
appeared also in that area. In the field of game theory, the solution space
of even very elementary games can be enriched when a quantum mechanical
interpretation is considered. In the paper by Piotrowski and S\l adkowski
\cite{psi} the authors invite the reader to consider what happens when
trading strategies are allowed to be entangled. The paper proposes the idea
of a quantum strategy. An important paper, again by these authors \cite{psg
, investigates} a crucial aspect for improving our understanding of
financial markets: Information. {The concept of information is well
formalized in physics and the paper shows that the formalization of
information via the metric structures can be a very good step in the right
direction for a deeper theoretical understanding of financial markets. In
effect we will below, in the motivation for this paper, address the
information issue a little more.}
{The }area of research which applies techniques from quantum mechanics to a
variety of problems in the social sciences, {can actually be }traced back to
the 1950's, with the discussions physics Nobelist Pauli had with the well
known psychologist Jung, on basic issues such as how complementarity in
quantum physics can have `some' existence in psychology \cite{meier}, \cit
{ns}. The level of effectiveness by which quantum mechanical techniques have
been able to shed further light on thorny problems in a variety of areas in
the social sciences, varies somewhat. In psychology, there is sizable
research-momentum in the particular field which actively uses probability
interference to decision making paradoxes in economics and psychology \cit
{busemeyer}, \cite{ehti}. In the area of information retrieval, research
advances are also made \cite{cohen}. In finance, which is the area of
application of this current paper, progress has been made on importing the
quantum physical machinery in an attempt to augment the modelling of
information. Other work in this area has also looked at how potential
functions (within the quantum mechanical setting) can adopt financial
meaning \cite{zhang}, \cite{belal}.
In a recent paper, \cite{baghav}, the authors have considered the way in
which information reaching different traders of a (simplified) stock market
influences the behavior of the traders, \textbf{before they begin to trade}.
In other words, we have considered what happens before the market opens, and
in which way the strategy of the traders is generated. In this description
we have used tools which are originally encountered in the microscopic
world, and which have been proven to be useful also in the description of
different classical systems, see \cite{bagbook} for a recent review. In
particular, a special role is played by an operator, the Hamiltonian of the
system, which is used to deduce the dynamics of those quantities we are
interested in, the so-called \emph{observables} of the model.
In some older papers of one of us (F.B.), \cite{bag1}-\cite{bag4}, the role
of information was, in a certain sense, simply incorporated by properly
choosing some of the constants defining the Hamiltonian of the system we
were considering. The Hamiltonian is adopted to mimic and describe the
interactions between the traders, \cite{bagbook}. On the other hand, E.H.
and his coworkers, {following the original idea of \cite{khren1},
considered the role of information for stock markets, \cite{hav1}-\cite{hav2
, mainly adopting the Bohm view of quantum mechanics, where the information
is carried by a pilot wave function $\Psi (x,t)$, satisfying a certain Sch
\"{o}dinger equation of motion, and which, with simple computations,
produces what in the literature is called \emph{a mental force}. This force
has to be added to the other \emph{hard} forces acting on the system,
producing a full Newton-like classical differential equation.
In \cite{baghav} we have tried to produce an unifying point of view, using
Bohmian quantum mechanics to construct a Hamiltonian $H$ in which the
information is not merely described by some parameters of $H$, but becomes
one of the dynamical variables of the system. However, in that preliminary
work, we have only considered how the information contributes to generate,
out of two \emph{equivalent} traders $\tau _{1}$ and $\tau _{2}$, two
traders which are no longer equivalent: i.e. they have used the information
to improve, as much as they can, their \emph{financial status} (the
portfolio, see below). For this reason, no interaction between $\tau _{1}$
and $\tau _{2}$ was considered in \cite{baghav}. Here we continue our
analysis adding also a possible interaction to the system. In other words,
we will see what happens in a market made of $\tau _{1}$ and $\tau _{2}$,
when they interact and are also subjected to a flux of information coming
from the market itself and from the outer world. As one can expect, this is
quite a hard problem to be discussed in its full generality, and in fact we
will consider, along the way, some useful assumptions which will allow us to
deduce an approximate analytical solution for the problem.
{To clarify our main ideas, we propose here a list of six succinct points
which are those motivating our present analysis. We keep specifically in
mind the `un-convinced' or `sceptic' reader. }
\begin{itemize}
\item {First, the Hamiltonians which are used in the paper are introducing
dynamics in the model in a \textquotedblleft natural\textquotedblright\ way.
We can explicitly claim that the Hamiltonians considered here are receiving
an economics based interpretation. Important work in the literature has also
referred to the use of a Hamiltonian framework in a social science
framework. In Kwapien and Dro\.{z}d\.{z} \cite{kd} reference is made to a so
called market factor which is a force acting on all stocks. As the authors
explain, this approach refers to a many-body problem which can lead to the
use of a Hamiltonian. In their paper Piotrowski and S\l adkowski \cite{psq}
use a Hamiltonian which contains what they define as a `risk inclination
operator'. Our paper expands the Hamiltonian (relative to our first paper
(Bagarello and Haven \cite{baghav})) to a Hamiltonian which now also models
interaction, even if in a very simplified form. Whilst our first paper had
an absence of interaction between traders, and this current paper explicitly
allows for interaction between traders, it should be stressed that \textbf
even in the absence of interaction} there was quite some richness in the
first paper. The limit on number of traders was of course irrelevant given
the absence of interaction, but even with this absence, we were very
concerned to discuss what happens before trading begins and after the rumors
have reached traders. Our first paper also actively studied the situation of
two traders who are no longer completely equivalent. In this paper, we think
that it is quite important to observe that we can now divide information,
using the expanded Hamiltonian framework, into two sets of information - bad
and good information. Information is seen as a dynamical variable and it
thus has a role in the Hamiltonian itself. This leads us to make a plea
about how useful in fact quantum mechanical concepts in social science can
be. We believe that the modelling of information is a very big advantage
that the quantum formalism has to offer when considering applications
outside of the remit of quantum mechanics. We want to hint to the use of
Fisher information (well known in economics via the so called Cramer-Rao
bound) and the intimate relationship which exists between the minimization
of Fisher information and the Schr\"{o}dinger equation (see Hawkins and
Frieden \cite{HF}). Please see also point five below. We also can mention
the relationship which has been argued for between Fisher information and a
specific type of potential (see Reginatto \cite{REG}, Haven and Khrennikov
\cite{HAV4}).}
\item {Second, the use of non-commuting operators has been investigated in
the finance environment. In Segal and Segal \cite{SEGAL} it is shown that
such operators should be used to describe the time dependence of the price
of shares and its forward time derivative. {The motivation is purely
economical: if one trader knows exactly both these quantities, he could earn
a virtually enormous amount of money. Since this does not happen, it is
reasonable to replace functions of time with time-depending, non commuting,
operators.}}
\item {Third, bosonic operators have a financial meaning in this paper and
the reason why such bosonic operators are coming in a natural way in our
financial set up is linked to the fact that the operator can assume a very
large set of discrete values. {This gives us the possibility to describe, in
a rather natural way, the portfolios (see below) of the traders.}}
\item {Fourth, the reservoir with which the traders interact produces a
system with infinite degrees of freedom. }
\item {Fifth, we can, as we have expressed in several footnotes in the
current paper, look at the measure of loss of information within the context
of a traded financial payoff function and Fisher information (which we
mentioned in our first point above).}
\item {Sixth, we probably should also mention that very strong connections
have been established between the Schr\"{o}dinger and the Black-Scholes
equations, \cite{baa}. This is surely another indication of the relevance of
quantum mechanics in economics.}
\end{itemize}
{In summary, we think both quantum mechanics and financial markets benefit
from our approach. From a quantum mechanical point of view, we show that
uses can be made of elementary concepts outside of the natural remit of
quantum mechanics. We believe that the above 6 points provide for good
arguments why this current study can provide benefits for better
understanding financial markets. Very few models in economics will use
Hamiltonians which have an information and interaction component to describe
dynamics. We can only make `baby-steps' at this point in time, but it should
be seen as a credible argument, that given the extremely powerful machinery
quantum mechanics really is, it may not be impossible to harness that power
also within a social science domain. It is surely not the case, that finance
and economics should not be receptive to new models. Quite the contrary, for
its own survival, it should be open to models coming from other areas of
inquiry. Many models in the finance literature are often extremely simple
too. Often the assumptions underlying those models make the applicability of
the model to be very constrained. We have been very up-front in this paper
with our assumptions. }
The paper is organized as follows: in the next section we propose our model
and we discuss some of its most important aspects. In particular, we deduce
the relevant equations of motion. In Section III we propose a perturbative
approach to deduce the approximate solution of these equations. Section IV
contains our conclusions.
\section{The model}
The model we are interested here extends the one originally proposed in \cit
{baghav}, adding an explicit interaction term between the traders. We begin
by defining the following Hamiltonian, already considered in \cite{baghav}:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\mathfrak{H}=H_{0}+H_{inf}, & \\
H_{0}=\sum_{j=1}^{2}\left[ \omega _{j}^{s}\hat{S}_{j}+\omega _{j}^{c}\hat{K
_{j}+\Omega _{j}\hat{I}_{j}+\int_{\mathbb{R}}\Omega _{j}^{(r)}(k)\hat{R
_{j}(k)\,dk\right] , & \\
H_{inf}=\sum_{j=1}^{2}\left[ \lambda _{inf}\left( i_{j}(s_{j}^{\dagger
}+c_{j}^{\dagger })+i_{j}^{\dagger }(s_{j}+c_{j})\right) +\gamma _{j}\int_
\mathbb{R}}(i_{j}^{\dagger }r_{j}(k)+i_{j}r_{j}^{\dagger }(k))\,dk\right]
\label{21} &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation
where $\hat{R}_{j}(k)=r_{j}^{\dagger }(k)r_{j}(k)$, $\hat{S
_{j}=s_{j}^{\dagger }s_{j}$, $\hat{K}_{j}=c_{j}^{\dagger }c_{j}$ and $\hat{I
_{j}=i_{j}^{\dagger }i_{j}$, and the following canonical commutation
relations (CCR's) are assumed,
\begin{equation}
\lbrack s_{j},s_{l}^{\dagger }]=[c_{j},c_{l}^{\dagger
}]=[i_{j},i_{l}^{\dagger }]=1\!\!1\delta _{j,l},\quad \lbrack
r_{j}(k),r_{l}^{\dagger }(q)]=1\!\!1\delta _{j,l}\delta (k-q), \label{21bis}
\end{equation
all the other commutators being zero. Moreover $\omega _{j}^{s}$, $\omega
_{j}^{c}$, $\Omega _{j}$, $\lambda _{inf}$ and $\gamma _{j}$ are real
constants, while $\Omega _{j}^{(r)}(k)$, $j=1,2$, are two real-valued
functions. Each bosonic operator has a different meaning in the present
context, which is explained in detail in \cite{baghav}: $c_{j}$,
c_{j}^{\dagger }$ and $\hat{K}_{j}$ are \emph{cash operators}. They
respectively lower, increase and count the units of cash in the portfolio of
$\tau _{j}$, see below. Analogously $s_{j}$, $s_{j}^{\dagger }$ and $\hat{S
_{j}$ are \emph{share operators}. They lower, increase and count the number
of shares in the portfolio of $\tau _{j}$. Incidentally, we notice that, to
make the notation simple, we are assuming that our market consists of a
single type of shares. This is not a major constraint, and it could be
avoided. However, we will not do it here. The operator $i_{j}^{\dagger }$
increases the \emph{lack of information} (LoI) of $\tau _{j}$, while $i_{j}$
decreases it. Of course, the higher the value of the eigenvalues of the
number-like operator $\hat{I}_{j}$, the less $\tau _{j}$ knows about what is
going on in the market. In other words, to be more efficient, the trader
should have a low LoI, i.e. he should be somehow associated to a small
eigenvalue of $\hat{I}_{j}$. In our model we also have a reservoir, which
models the set of all the rumors, news, and external facts which, all
together, concretely create the final information and, therefore, fix the
values of the LoI's of the two traders. The reservoir\footnote
In financial economics, a distinction is often made between so called
`private information' and `public information'. The reservoir here contains
public and private information. Distinguishing those types of information
can be fruitful as they do implicitly call up notions such as `financial
efficiency' where the strongest form of efficiency would say that all prices
contain both public and private information. This is thus the point of view
taken in this paper.} is described here by the bosonic operators $r_{j}(k)$,
$r_{j}^{\dagger }(k)$ and $\hat{R}_{j}(k)$, which depend on a real variable,
$k\in \mathbb{R}$.
The Hamiltonian $\mathfrak{H}$ contains a free \emph{canonical} part $H_{0}
. By this we mean that $H_0$ is the typical quadratic Hamiltonian used in
quantum many-body systems, when they are described in second quantization.
The main characteristic of $H_0$ is that, whenever our system is described
only by $H_0$, i.e. when we put $H_{inf}=0$, all the number operators ($\hat
S_j$, $\hat K_j$ and so on) stay constant in time: so, from the point of
view of our \emph{observables}, \cite{bagbook}, the market looks static.
However, this is not really so, since non-observable operators may still
evolve in time.
For what concerns $H_{inf}$, let us now consider separately its two
contributions. They respectively describe the following: when the LoI
increases, the value of the portfolio decreases (because of $i_{j}^{\dagger
}(s_{j}+c_{j})$) and vice-versa (because of $i_{j}(s_{j}^{\dagger
}+c_{j}^{\dagger })$)\footnote
This first contribution to $H_{inf}$ can also be obtained via a slightly
different route (\cite{hav3}) where a quantum mechanical (like) wave
function is seen as carrier of information and upon it travelling towards a
potential function (the payoff function) it may decay or not depending on
the position of the potential versus total energy. Total energy is
considered as capturing public information, whilst the wave function carries
private information. If we assume the portfolio to be a payoff function
which maps a domain of prices of shares onto a level of profit then one can
model incoming information, before a profit position is taken, as decaying
in a way which will depend on the level of the profit. We show that if we
restrict this domain of prices to be very narrow, then the higher the level
of profit of the payoff function the lower the LoI and the lower the level
of profit, the higher the LoI. The change in LoI could be measured via the
comparison of two Fisher information measures.}. Moreover, the LoI increases
when the "value" of the reservoir decreases (this is the meaning of
i_{j}^{\dagger }r_{j}(k)$), and, viceversa, decreases when the "value" of
the reservoir increases\footnote
If we consider again \cite{hav3}, we can obtain a similar result - but again
in a different setting. Consider the reservoir to be total energy and let
there be a payoff function (which is a potential function) with a large
domain of prices of shares. Set first the level of total energy vis a vis
the payoff function such that the incoming quantum (like) mechanical wave
function does not decay and calculate the Fisher information. Now reduce the
level of total energy such that the incoming quantum (like) mechanical wave
function will decay and measure the Fisher information. If the domain of
prices is sufficiently large, once can show indeed that the LoI increases
when the value of the reservoir decreases.}. Considering, for example, the
contribution $i_{j}r_{j}^{\dagger }(k)$ in $H_{inf}$, we see that the LoI
decreases (so that the trader is \emph{better informed}) when a larger
amount of news, rumors, etc. reaches the trader. Notice that, in $\mathfrak{
}$, no interaction between $\tau _{1}$ and $\tau _{2}$ is considered, yet.
As in \cite{baghav}, to produce a reasonably simple model, we will assume
that the price of the share is constant in time, and we fix this constant to
be one. Of course, this is a strong limitation of the model, but it is
useful to allow to get some analytical expression for the time evolution of
the portfolios of the traders. {Other possibilities exist, but, not
surprisingly, produce more complicated models: one could consider the price
of the share as a dynamical variable of the system. This is what we really
would like to do, but it is very hard to implement this possibility in a
realistic way. A simpler possibility is to consider the price as an external
field, deduced out of experimental data. Both these possibilities are
discussed in \cite{bagbook}.} We will come back on this aspect of the model
later on.
In \cite{baghav} $\mathfrak{H}$ was exactly the objective of our interest,
since we were not considering the interaction between the traders. Here, on
the other hand, this is exactly one of the aspects which is interesting for
us. For this reason, our full model is described by the following
Hamiltonian:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
H=\mathfrak{H}+H_{int}, & \\
H_{int}=\lambda\left(s_1c_1^\dagger s_2^\dagger c_2+s_1^\dagger
c_1s_2c_2^\dagger\right). \label{22} &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation}
The meaning of $H_{int}$ is the following: $s_1c_1^\dagger s_2^\dagger c_2$
describes the fact that $\tau_1$ is selling a share to $\tau_2$. For this
reason, the number of the shares in his portfolio decreases of one unit (and
this is the meaning of $s_1$) while his cash increases of one unit (because
of $c_1^\dagger$), since the price of the share is assumed here to be on
\footnote
In some older models, \cite{bagbook}, $c_1^\dagger$ was replaced by $
c_1^\dagger}^{\hat P}$, where $\hat P$ is the price operator.}. After the
interaction, $\tau_2$ has one more share ($s_2^\dagger$), but one less unit
of cash ($c_2$). Of course, $H_{int}$ also contains the adjoint
contribution, which describes the opposite situation: $\tau_2$ sells a share
to $\tau_1$. Therefore, for obvious reasons, $s_jc_j^\dagger$ and
s_j^\dagger c_j$ can be collectively called \emph{the selling and buying
operators}, respectively. $\lambda$ is an interaction parameter: if
\lambda=0$, $\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$ do not interact, and we go back to our
analysis in \cite{baghav}.
It is worth stressing that our choice of Hamiltonian is not compatible with
the fact that the amount of cash and the number of shares are preserved
during the time evolution. This is a simple consequence of the fact that,
calling $\hat{K}=\sum_{j=1}^{2}\hat{K}_{j}$ and $\hat{S}=\sum_{j=1}^{2}\hat{
}_{j}$ the total cash and number of shares operators of the market, they do
not commute with $H$. In fact, in particular, they do not commute with
H_{inf}$: $[H,\hat{K}]\neq 0$, $[H,\hat{S}]\neq 0$. Hence, we are allowing
here for bankruptcy. Moreover, we are not assuming that the cash is only
used to buy shares, so that it needs not to be preserved in time. However,
some other self-adjoint operators are preserved during the time evolution.
These operators are $\hat{M}_{j}=\hat{S}_{j}+\hat{K}_{j}+\hat{I}_{j}+\hat{R
_{j}=\hat{\Pi}_{j}+\hat{I}_{j}+\hat{R}_{j}$, $j=1,2$, where $\hat{R
_{j}=\int_{\mathbb{R}}r_{j}^{\dagger }(k)r_{j}(k)\,dk$ and $\hat{\Pi}_{j}
\hat{S}_{j}+\hat{K}_{j}$ is what we call the \emph{portfolio operator} of
\tau _{j}$, which is simply the sum of the trader $j$'s amount of cash and
number of shares (and, being the price of each share equal to one, also
their value). Then we can check that $[H,\hat{M}_{j}]=0$, $j=1,2$. This
implies that what is constant in time is the sum of the portfolio, the LoI
and the \emph{reservoir input} of each single trader\footnote
The existence of conserved quantities has proven to be useful, among other
reasons, also to check that the numerical schemes adopted to solve the
equations of the system work properly, \cite{ff}.}.
What we are willing to deduce is the time evolution of the portfolio
operators: $\hat\Pi_j(t)=\hat K_j(t)+\hat S_j(t)$, $j=1,2$. As we have
already noticed, because of our working assumption about the price of the
shares, the mean value of $\hat\Pi_j(t)$ represents for us the \emph{richnes
} of $\tau_j $. The mean value, as widely discussed in \cite{bagbook}, has
to be taken with respect to vectors which are eigenstates of (all) the
number operators of the system, with eigenvalues corresponding to the
initial conditions of the system. We will see explicitly how this
computation works later on.
Once we have the Hamiltonian, we can deduce the differential equations we
are interested in by adopting the standard quantum mechanical Heisenberg
approach: $\dot{X}=i[H,X]$. In this way, we get the following set of
equations:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{d}{dt}s_{k}(t)=-i\omega _{k}^{s}s_{k}(t)-i\lambda
_{inf}\,i_{k}(t)-i\lambda c_{k}(t)s_{\overline{k}}(t)c_{\overline{k
}^{\dagger }(t), & \\
\frac{d}{dt}c_{k}(t)=-i\omega _{k}^{c}c_{k}(t)-i\lambda
_{inf}\,i_{k}(t)-i\lambda s_{k}(t)c_{\overline{k}}(t)s_{\overline{k
}^{\dagger }(t), & \\
\frac{d}{dt}i_{k}(t)=-i\Omega _{k}i_{k}(t)-i\lambda
_{inf}(s_{k}(t)+c_{k}(t))-i\gamma _{k}\int_{\mathbb{R}}r_{k}(q,t)\,dq & \\
\frac{d}{dt}r_{k}(q,t)=-i\Omega _{k}^{(r)}(q)\,r_{k}(q,t)-i\gamma
_{k}\,i_{k}(t),\label{23} &
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation
where the \emph{denial of $k$}, $\overline{k}$, is seen as follows: if $k=1
, then $\overline{k}=2$. On the other hand, when $k=2$, then $\overline{k}=1
. With respect to the equations deduced in \cite{baghav}, in this paper we
deduce two highly nonlinear contributions in the first two equations above.
Not surprisingly, we are not able to solve the system exactly. Still, we
will produce a perturbative solution which, we believe, is of some interest.
Our first step consists in rewriting the last equation in its integral form:
\[
r_{k}(q,t)=r_{k}(q)e^{-i\Omega _{k}^{(r)}(q)t}-i\gamma
_{k}\int_{0}^{t}i_{k}(t_{1})e^{-i\Omega _{k}^{(r)}(q)(t-t_{1})}\,dt_{1},
\
and replacing this in the differential equation for $i_{k}(t)$. Assuming
first that $\Omega _{k}^{(r)}(q)$ is linear in $q$, $\Omega
_{k}^{(r)}(q)=\Omega _{k}^{(r)}\,q$, \cite{bagbook}, we deduce that
\begin{equation}
\frac{d}{dt}i_{k}(t)=-\left( i\Omega _{k}+\frac{\pi \gamma _{k}^{2}}{\Omega
_{k}^{(r)}}\right) i_{k}(t)-i\gamma _{k}\int_{\mathbb{R}}r_{k}(k)e^{-i\Omega
_{k}^{(r)}\,q\,t}\,dq-i\lambda _{inf}(s_{k}(t)+c_{k}(t)). \label{24}
\end{equation
So far, our computations are exact. However, to find some analytical
solution, we are forced to consider some approximations and to perform some
perturbative expansion. For this reason, as in \cite{baghav}, we will now
work under the assumption that the last contribution in this equation can be
neglected, when compared to the other ones. In other words, we are taking
\lambda _{inf}$ to be very small. However, our procedure is much better than
simply considering $\lambda _{inf}=0$ in $H$ above, since we will keep
memory of its effects in the first two equations in (\ref{23}). Solving now
\ref{24}) in its simplified expression, we get
\begin{equation}
i_{k}(t)=e^{-\left( i\Omega _{k}+\frac{\pi \gamma _{k}^{2}}{\Omega _{k}^{(r)
}\right) t}\left( i_{k}(0)-i\gamma _{k}\int_{\mathbb{R}}r_{k}(q)\rho
_{k}(q,t)\,dq\right) , \label{2a}
\end{equation
where
\[
\rho _{k}(q,t)=\int_{0}^{t}e^{\left[ i(\Omega _{k}-\Omega _{k}^{(r)}q)+\frac
\pi \gamma _{k}^{2}}{\Omega _{k}^{(r)}}\right] t_{1}}\,dt_{1}=\frac{e^{\left[
i(\Omega _{k}-\Omega _{k}^{(r)}q)+\frac{\pi \gamma _{k}^{2}}{\Omega
_{k}^{(r)}}\right] t}-1}{i(\Omega _{k}-\Omega _{k}^{(r)}q)+\frac{\pi \gamma
_{k}^{2}}{\Omega _{k}^{(r)}}}.
\
The differential equations for $s_{j}(t)$ and $c_{j}(t)$ look now as
follows:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\dot{s}_{1}(t)=-i\omega _{1}^{s}s_{1}(t)-i\lambda
c_{1}(t)s_{2}(t)c_{2}^{\dagger }(t)-i\lambda _{inf}\,i_{1}(t), & \\
\dot{s}_{2}(t)=-i\omega _{2}^{s}s_{2}(t)-i\lambda
c_{2}(t)s_{1}(t)c_{1}^{\dagger }(t)-i\lambda _{inf}\,i_{2}(t), & \\
\dot{c}_{1}(t)=-i\omega _{1}^{c}c_{1}(t)-i\lambda
s_{1}(t)c_{2}(t)s_{2}^{\dagger }(t)-i\lambda _{inf}\,i_{1}(t), & \\
\dot{c}_{2}(t)=-i\omega _{2}^{c}c_{2}(t)-i\lambda
s_{2}(t)c_{1}(t)s_{1}^{\dagger }(t)-i\lambda _{inf}\,i_{2}(t). &
\end{array
\right. \label{25}
\end{equation
\vspace{2mm}
\textbf{Remark: }So far, the order of the various operators appearing in the
right-hand side of these equations is not important since they all commute
between them at equal time: $[c_{1}(t),s_{1}^{\dagger }(t)]=0$, for all
t\in \mathbb{R}$, and so on. This is a consequence of the analogous
commutation rule at $t=0$, and of the fact that the time evolution is
unitarily implemented by $H$: $X(t)=e^{iHt}X(0)e^{-iHt}$, for each dynamical
variable $X$.
\subsection{What if we remove the information?}
We devote this short subsection to briefly discuss how crucial the
information really is in our model. First we check what happens if
H_{inf}=0 $ in the definition of $H$. A simple computation shows that, in
this case, the differential equations deduced by this new hamiltonian
coincide exactly with those in (\ref{25}), with $i_1(t)=i_2(t)=0$. This
shows that the presence of $H_{inf}$ in $H$ is to produce something like an
external force driving the time evolution of the dynamical variables we are
interested in, $s_j(t)$ and $c_j(t)$, and $\hat\Pi_j(t)$ as a consequence.
It should be stressed that, in (\ref{25}), $i_1(t)$ and $i_2(t)$ are now
known operator-valued functions of time given in (\ref{2a}). In other words,
removing $H_{inf}$ is like removing these known forces.
Let us now look for the dynamical behavior of the two portfolio operators in
this case: in principle, we should solve the Heisenberg differential
equations in (\ref{25}) putting $\lambda _{inf}=0$. Needless to say, this
system is not trivial, and a solution could be found when one considers a
perturbation scheme for when $\lambda $ is a small parameter. However, due
to the canonical commutation rules we have assumed here, (\ref{21bis}), it
is easy to check that the dynamics of the two portfolios is trivial. In
fact, since $H=H_{0}+H_{int}$, it is a simple exercise to check that $[H
\hat{\Pi}_{j}]=0$, $j=1,2$. Hence, $\hat{\Pi}_{j}(t)=\Pi _{j}(0)$ for all
t\in \mathbb{R}$: even if the cash and the shares of the two traders may
change in time, their portfolios do not. This result seems reasonable since
our traders, receiving no information from outside the market, have no real
reason to change their original status, even if they could, in principle,
interact. However, this conclusion is strongly related to the fact that, in
our model, the price of the share stays constant in time. In fact, if this
is not so, then the portfolio of, say, $\tau _{1}$, should be defined more
reasonably as $\Pi _{1}(t):=\hat{K}_{1}(t)+\hat{P}(t)\hat{S}_{1}(t)$, $\hat{
}(t)$ being the value of the share at time $t$, and this operator needs not
to commute with $H$, even when $H_{inf}=0$.
\vspace{3mm}
The conclusion of this simple analysis is therefore that, in order not to
trivialize the model, $H_{inf}$ cannot be taken to be zero, so that the
equations to be solved are exactly those in (\ref{25}), but with all their
ingredients inside!
\section{The perturbative solution of the equations}
Our previous results suggest to check, first of all, that when $H_{inf}\neq0
, the portfolio operators do not commute with $H$. In fact, as shown before,
if they commute, there is no reason to try to solve the differential
equations, and the model is (essentially) trivial, and surely not very
interesting for us. However, luckily enough, this is not so:
\[
[H,\hat\Pi_j]=\lambda_{inf}\left(i_j^\dagger(s_j+c_j)-i_j(s_j^\dagger+c_j
\dagger)\right),
\]
$j=1,2$. This, again, is a measure of the relevance of the information in
our model: it is exactly the presence of $H_{inf}$ which makes the model not
trivial, not really the interaction between $\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$.
We are now ready to set up our perturbation scheme. For that, it is
convenient to define new variables $\sigma _{j}(t):=s_{j}(t)e^{i\omega
_{j}^{s}t}$ and $\theta _{j}(t):=c_{j}(t)e^{i\omega _{j}^{c}t}$, $j=1,2$. To
simplify the treatment a little bit, we also assume that $\lambda =\lambda
_{inf}$. From an economical point of view, this simply means that we are
assuming that the interaction and the information terms in $H$ have a
similar strength. Then equations (\ref{25}) become
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\dot{\sigma}_{1}(t)=-i\lambda \left( \sigma _{2}(t)\theta _{1}(t)\theta
_{2}^{\dagger }(t)e^{i\hat{\omega}t}+i_{1}(t)e^{i\omega _{1}^{s}t}\right) ,
& \\
\dot{\sigma}_{2}(t)=-i\lambda \left( \sigma _{1}(t)\theta _{1}^{\dagger
}(t)\theta _{2}(t)e^{-i\hat{\omega}t}+i_{2}(t)e^{i\omega _{2}^{s}t}\right) ,
& \\
\dot{\theta}_{1}(t)=-i\lambda \left( \sigma _{1}(t)\sigma _{2}^{\dagger
}(t)\theta _{2}(t)e^{-i\hat{\omega}t}+i_{1}(t)e^{i\omega _{1}^{c}t}\right) ,
& \\
\dot{\theta}_{2}(t)=-i\lambda \left( \sigma _{1}^{\dagger }(t)\sigma
_{2}(t)\theta _{1}(t)e^{i\hat{\omega}t}+i_{2}(t)e^{i\omega _{2}^{c}t}\right)
, &
\end{array
\right. \label{31}
\end{equation
where $\hat{\omega}=\omega _{1}^{s}-\omega _{2}^{s}-\omega _{1}^{c}+\omega
_{2}^{s}$. The zero-th approximation in $\lambda $ is quite simple: $\dot
\sigma}_{j}^{(0)}(t)=\dot{\theta}_{j}^{(0)}(t)=0$, for $j=1,2$. Therefore,
with obvious notation, $\sigma _{j}^{(0)}(t)=\sigma _{j}^{(0)}(0)=s_{j}$ and
$\theta _{j}^{(0)}(t)=\theta _{j}^{(0)}(0)=c_{j}$, $j=1,2$, which we insert
in the right-hand side of system (\ref{31}) to deduce the first order
approximation for $\sigma _{j}(t)$ and $\theta _{j}(t)$. By introducing the
new (known) operators
\[
I_{j}^{s}(t):=\int_{0}^{t}i_{j}(t_{1})e^{i\omega _{j}^{s}t_{1}}dt_{1},\qquad
I_{j}^{c}(t):=\int_{0}^{t}i_{j}(t_{1})e^{i\omega _{j}^{c}t_{1}}dt_{1},
\
and by assuming that $\sigma _{j}^{(1)}(0)=s_{j}$, $\theta
_{j}^{(1)}(0)=c_{j}$ and that $\hat{\omega}\neq 0$, we get
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\sigma _{1}^{(1)}(t)=s_{1}-\frac{\lambda }{\hat{\omega}}\left( e^{i\hat
\omega}t}-1\right) s_{2}c_{1}c_{2}^{\dagger }-i\lambda I_{1}^{s}(t), & \\
\sigma _{2}^{(1)}(t)=s_{2}+\frac{\lambda }{\hat{\omega}}\left( e^{-i\hat
\omega}t}-1\right) s_{1}c_{1}^{\dagger }c_{2}-i\lambda I_{2}^{s}(t), & \\
\theta _{1}^{(1)}(t)=c_{1}+\frac{\lambda }{\hat{\omega}}\left( e^{-i\hat
\omega}t}-1\right) s_{1}s_{2}^{\dagger }c_{2}-i\lambda I_{1}^{c}(t), & \\
\theta _{2}^{(1)}(t)=c_{2}-\frac{\lambda }{\hat{\omega}}\left( e^{i\hat
\omega}t}-1\right) s_{1}^{\dagger }s_{2}c_{1}-i\lambda I_{2}^{c}(t). &
\end{array
\right. \label{32}
\end{equation
It is not hard to check that this first order in our perturbation expansion
is not enough: in fact, \cite{bagbook}, in order to deduce, the (classical)
function $n_{j}(t)$, we have to compute the following mean value:
\[
n_{j}(t):=\left\langle \varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}},s_{j}^{\dagger
}(t)s_{j}(t)\varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}}\right\rangle =\left\langle \varphi _
\mathcal{G}_{0}},\sigma _{j}^{\dagger }(t)\sigma _{j}(t)\varphi _{\mathcal{G
_{0}}\right\rangle \simeq
\
\[
\simeq \left\langle \varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}},(\sigma
_{j}^{(1)}(t))^{\dagger }\sigma _{j}^{(1)}(t)\varphi _{\mathcal{G
_{0}}\right\rangle .
\
Analogously,
\[
k_{j}(t):=\left\langle \varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}},c_{j}^{\dagger
}(t)c_{j}(t)\varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}}\right\rangle \simeq \left\langle
\varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}},(\theta _{j}^{(1)}(t))^{\dagger }\theta
_{j}^{(1)}(t)\varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}}\right\rangle .
\
Here the vector $\varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}}$ is
\[
\varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt
n_{1}!n_{2}!k_{1}!k_{2}!I_{1}!I_{2}!}}(s_{1}^{\dagger
})^{n_{1}}(s_{2}^{\dagger })^{n_{2}}(c_{1}^{\dagger
})^{k_{1}}(c_{2}^{\dagger })^{k_{2}}(i_{1}^{\dagger
})^{I_{1}}(i_{2}^{\dagger })^{I_{2}}\varphi _{\underline{0}},
\
and $\varphi _{\underline{0}}$ is the vacuum of $s_{j}$, $c_{j}$ and $i_{j}
: $s_{j}\varphi _{\underline{0}}=c_{j}\varphi _{\underline{0}}=i_{j}\varphi
_{\underline{0}}=0$, $j=1,2$, see \cite{bagbook}. The explicit choice of the
numbers $n_{1}$, $n_{2}$, $k_{1}$, $k_{2}$ $I_{1}$ and $I_{2}$ depends on
the original (i.e., at $t=0$) status of the two traders: for example, $n_{1}$
is the number of share that $\tau _{1}$ has at $t=0$, $k_{1}$ are the units
of cash in his portfolio, at this same time, while $I_{1}$ is his LoI. Easy
computations show that, at this order in $\lambda $, $n_{j}(t)=n_{j}(0)=n_{j}
$ and $k_{j}(t)=k_{j}(0)=k_{j}$, so that each portfolio stays constant in
time: $\Pi _{j}(t)=\Pi _{j}(0)$. The conclusion is therefore that, if we
want to get some non trivial dynamics, we need to go, at least, at the
second order in the perturbation expansion.
This second order has to be deduced in the same way: we replace the first
order solution in the right-hand side of system (\ref{31}), and then we
simply integrate on time, requiring that $\sigma _{j}^{(2)}(0)=s_{j}$ and
\theta _{j}^{(2)}(0)=c_{j}$. Incidentally, we should observe that because of
this approximation, we get problems of ordering of the operators. In fact,
while as we have already discussed, $\sigma _{2}(t)\theta _{1}(t)\theta
_{2}^{\dagger }(t)=\theta _{1}(t)\sigma _{2}(t)\theta _{2}^{\dagger
}(t)=\sigma _{2}(t)\theta _{1}(t)\theta _{2}^{\dagger }(t)$, these
equalities are false when we replace the operators with their first, or
second, order approximations. For this reason we adopt here the following
\emph{normal ordering rule}: every time we have products of operators, we
order them considering first $s_{1}$ or $s_{1}^{\dagger }$, then $s_{2}$ or
s_{2}^{\dagger }$, $c_{1}$ or $c_{1}^{\dagger }$ and, finally, $c_{2}$ or
c_{2}^{\dagger }$. In particular the equations in (\ref{31}) are already
written in this normal-ordered form. Needless to say, this is an arbitrary
choice and needs not to be, in principle, the \emph{best one}. Here we just
want to remind that normal ordering procedures are rather common in quantum
mechanics for systems with infinite degrees of freedom, and that they have
proved to be quite often useful and reasonable, producing results which are
in good agreement with experimental data.
After some lengthy but straightforward computations we get the following
results:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\sigma _{1}^{(2)}(t)=s_{1}-i\lambda \left( -i\eta
_{1}(t)X_{1}+I_{1}^{s}(t)\right) -i\lambda ^{2}\left( Q_{1}(t)+\overline
\eta _{2}(t)}\,Y_{1}\right) & \\
\sigma _{2}^{(2)}(t)=s_{2}-i\lambda \left( i\overline{\eta _{1}(t)
\,X_{2}+I_{2}^{s}(t)\right) -i\lambda ^{2}\left( Q_{2}(t)+\eta
_{2}(t)Y_{2}\right) & \\
\theta _{1}^{(2)}(t)=c_{1}-i\lambda \left( i\overline{\eta _{1}(t)
\,X_{3}+I_{1}^{c}(t)\right) -i\lambda ^{2}\left( Q_{3}(t)+\eta
_{2}(t)Y_{3}\right) & \\
\theta _{2}^{(2)}(t)=c_{2}-i\lambda \left( -i\eta
_{1}(t)X_{4}+I_{2}^{c}(t)\right) -i\lambda ^{2}\left( Q_{4}(t)+\overline
\eta _{2}(t)}\,Y_{4}\right) , &
\end{array
\right. \label{33}
\end{equation
where we have proposed the following quantities:
\[
\eta _{1}(t):=\frac{e^{i\hat{\omega}t}-1}{\hat{\omega}},\qquad \eta
_{2}(t)=\int_{0}^{t}\eta _{1}(t_{1})e^{-i\hat{\omega}t_{1}}dt_{1}=\frac{1}
\hat{\omega}}\left( t-i\overline{\eta _{1}(t)}\right) ,
\
\[
X_{1}:=s_{2}c_{1}c_{2}^{\dagger },\quad X_{2}:=s_{1}c_{1}^{\dagger
}c_{2},\quad X_{3}:=s_{1}s_{2}^{\dagger }c_{2},\quad X_{4}:=s_{1}^{\dagger
}s_{2}c_{1},
\
\[
Y_{1}:=s_{1}(c_{1}^{\dagger }c_{1}c_{2}c_{2}^{\dagger }+s_{2}s_{2}^{\dagger
}c_{2}c_{2}^{\dagger }-c_{1}c_{1}^{\dagger }s_{2}s_{2}^{\dagger }),\quad
Y_{2}:=s_{2}(-s_{1}s_{1}^{\dagger }c_{1}^{\dagger }c_{1}+s_{1}s_{1}^{\dagger
}c_{2}^{\dagger }c_{2}-c_{1}c_{1}^{\dagger }c_{2}^{\dagger }c_{2}),
\
\[
Y_{3}:=c_{1}(s_{1}s_{1}^{\dagger }c_{2}^{\dagger }c_{2}-s_{2}s_{2}^{\dagger
}c_{2}^{\dagger }c_{2}-s_{1}s_{1}^{\dagger }s_{2}^{\dagger }s_{2}),\quad
Y_{4}:=c_{2}(s_{1}^{\dagger }s_{1}s_{2}s_{2}^{\dagger }+s_{1}^{\dagger
}s_{1}c_{1}^{\dagger }c_{1}-s_{2}^{\dagger }s_{2}c_{1}^{\dagger }c_{1}),
\
as well as the following time-dependent operators:
\[
G_{1}(t):=-i\left( -s_{2}c_{1}{I_{2}^{c}(t)}^{\dagger }+s_{2}c_{2}^{\dagger
}I_{1}^{c}(t)+c_{1}c_{2}^{\dagger }I_{2}^{s}(t)\right) ,
\
\[
G_{2}(t):=-i\left( s_{1}c_{1}^{\dagger }{I_{2}^{c}(t)}-s_{1}c_{2}
I_{1}^{c}(t)}^{\dagger }+c_{1}^{\dagger }c_{2}I_{1}^{s}(t)\right) ,
\
\[
G_{3}(t):=-i\left( s_{1}s_{2}^{\dagger }{I_{2}^{c}(t)}+s_{2}^{\dagger }c_{2}
I_{1}^{s}(t)}-s_{1}c_{2}{I_{2}^{s}(t)}^{\dagger }\right) ,
\
\[
G_{4}(t):=-i\left( s_{1}^{\dagger }s_{2}{I_{1}^{c}(t)}+s_{1}^{\dagger }c_{1}
I_{2}^{s}(t)}-s_{2}c_{1}{I_{1}^{s}(t)}^{\dagger }\right) ,
\
and
\[
Q_{j}(t):=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\int_{0}^{t}G_{j}(t_{1})e^{i\hat{\omega}t_{1}}dt_{1},\hspace{15mm}j=1,4, &
\\
\int_{0}^{t}G_{j}(t_{1})e^{-i\hat{\omega}t_{1}}dt_{1},\hspace{13mm}j=2,3. &
\end{array
\right.
\
We can now compute the mean values of ${\sigma _{j}^{(2)}}^{\dagger
}(t)\sigma _{j}^{(2)}(t)$ and ${\theta _{j}^{(2)}}^{\dagger }(t)\theta
_{j}^{(2)}(t)$ on the state $\left\langle \varphi _{\mathcal{G
_{0}},\,.\,\varphi _{\mathcal{G}_{0}}\right\rangle $ as seen before. Another
approximation is adopted at this stage: formula (\ref{2a}) shows that the
contribution of the reservoir, $i\gamma _{k}\int_{\mathbb{R}}r_{k}(q)\rho
_{k}(q,t)\,dq$, is $O(\gamma _{k})$ with respect to the other contribution,
i_{k}(0)$. For this reason, assuming $\gamma _{k}$ to be small enough, we
approximate $i_{k}(t)$ with $e^{-\left( i\Omega _{k}+\frac{\pi \gamma
_{k}^{2}}{\Omega _{k}^{(r)}}\right) t}i_{k}(0)$.
Up to the second order in $\lambda $, we get
\[
n_{1}(t)\simeq n_{1}+\frac{2\lambda ^{2}}{\hat{\omega}^{2}}(1-\cos (\hat
\omega
t))[n_{1}(k_{1}n_{2}-k_{1}k_{2}-n_{2}k_{2}-k_{2})+n_{2}k_{1}(1+k_{2})]
\lambda ^{2}I_{1}|\eta _{3}^{s}(t)|^{2},
\
\[
n_{2}(t)\simeq n_{2}+\frac{2\lambda ^{2}}{\hat{\omega}^{2}}(1-\cos (\hat
\omega
t))[n_{2}(n_{1}k_{2}-k_{1}k_{2}-k_{1}n_{1}-k_{1})+n_{1}k_{2}(1+k_{1})]
\lambda ^{2}I_{2}|\eta _{4}^{s}(t)|^{2},
\
\[
k_{1}(t)\simeq k_{1}+\frac{2\lambda ^{2}}{\hat{\omega}^{2}}(1-\cos (\hat
\omega
t))[k_{1}(n_{1}k_{2}-n_{1}n_{2}-n_{2}k_{2}-n_{2})+n_{1}k_{2}(1+n_{2})]
\lambda ^{2}I_{1}|\eta _{3}^{c}(t)|^{2},
\
\[
k_{2}(t)\simeq k_{2}+\frac{2\lambda ^{2}}{\hat{\omega}^{2}}(1-\cos (\hat
\omega
t))[k_{2}(k_{1}n_{2}-n_{1}n_{2}-n_{1}k_{1}-n_{1})+k_{1}n_{2}(1+n_{1})]
\lambda ^{2}I_{2}|\eta _{4}^{c}(t)|^{2}.
\
Incidentally, these results confirm that the first non trivial contribution
in our perturbation scheme is quadratic in $\lambda $. The following
quantity has been proposed:
\[
\eta _{k}^{s}(t)=\int_{0}^{t}e^{\left[ i(\omega _{k-2}^{s}-\Omega _{k-2})
\frac{\pi \gamma _{k-2}^{2}}{\Omega _{k-2}^{(r)}}\right] t_{1}}\,dt_{1}
\frac{e^{\left[ i(\omega _{k-2}^{s}-\Omega _{k-2})-\frac{\pi \gamma
_{k-2}^{2}}{\Omega _{k-2}^{(r)}}\right] t}-1}{i(\omega _{k-2}^{s}-\Omega
_{k-2})-\frac{\pi \gamma _{k-2}^{2}}{\Omega _{k-2}^{(r)}}},
\
for $k=3,4$. The other function $\eta _{k}^{c}(t)$, is defined like $\eta
_{k}^{s}(t)$ with the only difference that $\omega _{k-2}^{s}$ is replaced
by $\omega _{k-2}^{c}$. If we now compute the variation of the portfolios,
\delta \Pi _{j}(t):=\Pi _{j}(t)-\Pi _{j}(0)$, we find that
\begin{equation}
\delta \Pi _{1}(t)=\lambda ^{2}I_{1}\left( |\eta _{3}^{s}(t)|^{2}+|\eta
_{3}^{c}(t)|^{2}\right) ,\quad \delta \Pi _{2}(t)=\lambda ^{2}I_{2}\left(
|\eta _{4}^{s}(t)|^{2}+|\eta _{4}^{c}(t)|^{2}\right) . \label{34}
\end{equation
These formulas show, first of all, that up to the order $\lambda ^{2}$, what
is really important in the computation of the portfolios of the traders, is
not the initial conditions on the cash and shares but, much more than this,
the initial values of the LoI for each trader\footnote
If we consider \cite{hav3}, the level of LoI can depend i) on how large the
domain of prices of the payoff function is; ii) the type of payoff function
and iii) the level of public information.}. This is the only \emph{quantum
number} which appears in (\ref{34}), while all the other numbers, $n_{1}$,
n_{2}$, $k_{1}$ and $k_{2}$, produce contributions which sum up to zero, at
least at this order in $\lambda $.
Another interesting feature of the analytical expressions for $\delta \Pi
_{j}(t)$ can be deduced observing that,
\[
|\eta _{3}^{s}(t)|^{2}=\frac{e^{-\frac{2\pi \gamma _{1}^{2}}{\Omega
_{1}^{(r)}}t}-2e^{-\frac{\pi \gamma _{1}^{2}}{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}}t}\cos
(\omega _{1}^{s}-\Omega _{1})t+1}{(\omega _{1}^{s}-\Omega _{1})^{2}+\frac
\pi ^{2}\gamma _{1}^{4}}{{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}}}^{2}}.
\
This implies that $\delta \Pi _{1}(t)$ and $\delta \Pi _{2}(t)$ both admit a
non trivial asymptotic value: calling $\delta \Pi _{j}(\infty
)=\lim_{t,\infty }\delta \Pi _{j}(t)$, and using the above formula for
|\eta _{3}^{s}(t)|^{2}$ and the analogous formulas for $|\eta
_{3}^{c}(t)|^{2}$, $|\eta _{4}^{s}(t)|^{2}$ and $|\eta _{4}^{c}(t)|^{2}$, we
get
\begin{equation}
\delta \Pi _{1}(\infty )=\lambda ^{2}I_{1}\left( \frac{1}{(\omega
_{1}^{s}-\Omega _{1})^{2}+\frac{\pi ^{2}\gamma _{1}^{4}}{{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}
^{2}}}+\frac{1}{(\omega _{1}^{c}-\Omega _{1})^{2}+\frac{\pi ^{2}\gamma
_{1}^{4}}{{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}}^{2}}}\right) , \label{35}
\end{equation
and
\begin{equation}
\delta \Pi _{2}(\infty )=\lambda ^{2}I_{2}\left( \frac{1}{(\omega
_{2}^{s}-\Omega _{2})^{2}+\frac{\pi ^{2}\gamma _{2}^{4}}{{\Omega _{2}^{(r)}
^{2}}}+\frac{1}{(\omega _{2}^{c}-\Omega _{2})^{2}+\frac{\pi ^{2}\gamma
_{2}^{4}}{{\Omega _{2}^{(r)}}^{2}}}\right) , \label{36}
\end{equation
The first evident conclusion is that $\delta \Pi _{1}(\infty )+\delta \Pi
_{2}(\infty )\neq 0$. This is possible, since the total amount of cash and
the total number of shares are not required to be constant in time, in our
model. Therefore, there is no reason to expect that the gain for $\tau _{1}$
become the loss for $\tau _{2}$, or viceversa.
As we can see, in agreement with our general analysis in \cite{bagbook}, the
parameters of the free Hamiltonian behave as a sort of inertia for the
system. More in details, if $\omega _{1}^{s}$ and $\omega _{1}^{c}$ are very
large, compared with $\Omega _{1}$ and $\Omega _{2}$, we see that $\delta
\Pi _{1}(\infty )$ is very small: $\tau _{1}$ experiences a large inertia,
so that the value of his portfolio stays almost constant. A similar
conclusion is deduced if $\frac{\gamma _{1}^{2}}{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}}$ is
large enough. Let us now suppose that $\omega _{1}^{s}=\omega
_{1}^{c}=\Omega _{1}$. Then $\delta \Pi _{1}(\infty )=2\lambda ^{2}I_{1
\frac{{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}}^{2}}{\pi ^{2}\gamma _{1}^{4}}$. We see from this
formula that the reservoir of the information plays also a role in the
evolution of the portfolios, and we see that, what is relevant for us, is
not really the contribution of the free Hamiltonian, $\Omega _{1}^{(r)}$, or
the contribution of the interaction between the reservoir and the dynamical
variables of the LoI, $\gamma _{1}$, but the ratio above between the two.
This is interesting because it shows that we do have a contribution to
\delta \Pi _{j}(\infty )$ coming from these parts of the full Hamiltonian,
even under all the approximations we have considered along the way.
On the other hand, for $\delta\Pi_1(\infty)$ to be large, it is convenient
to have large $I_1$ and/or small values of $\omega_1^s-\Omega_1$,
\omega_1^c-\Omega_1$ and of $\frac{\gamma_1^2}{\Omega_1^{(r)}}$. Similar
conclusions can be deduced for $\delta\Pi_2(\infty)$.
A natural question is the following: when does it happen that $\delta \Pi
_{1}(\infty )>\delta \Pi _{2}(\infty )$? This is ensured, for sure, if all
the following inequalities are satisfied:
\[
I_{1}>I_{2},\quad \omega _{1}^{s}-\Omega _{1}<\omega _{2}^{s}-\Omega
_{2},\quad \omega _{1}^{c}-\Omega _{1}<\omega _{2}^{c}-\Omega _{2},\quad
\frac{\gamma _{1}^{2}}{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}}<\frac{\gamma _{2}^{2}}{\Omega
_{2}^{(r)}}.
\
Particularly interesting is what happens if $\omega _{1}^{s}-\Omega
_{1}=\omega _{2}^{s}-\Omega _{2}$ and $\omega _{1}^{c}-\Omega _{1}=\omega
_{2}^{c}-\Omega _{2}$. In this case, in order to have $\delta \Pi
_{1}(\infty )>\delta \Pi _{2}(\infty )$, we need to compare two ingredients
of the formulas, i.e. $I_{j}$ and the ratio $\frac{\gamma _{j}^{2}}{\Omega
_{j}^{(r)}}$. As we have seen before, in these conditions $\delta \Pi
_{1}(\infty )>\delta \Pi _{2}(\infty )$ surely if $I_{1}>I_{2}$ and if
\frac{\gamma _{1}^{2}}{\Omega _{1}^{(r)}}<\frac{\gamma _{2}^{2}}{\Omega
_{2}^{(r)}}$. But the first inequality implies that the LoI of $\tau _{1}$
should be larger than that of $\tau _{2}$, while the second inequality can
be rewritten as $\frac{\Omega _{2}^{(r)}}{\gamma _{2}^{2}}<\frac{\Omega
_{1}^{(r)}}{\gamma _{1}^{2}}$. This suggests to divide the information
reaching the traders in two different kinds: a \emph{bad information}, which
is directly related to the variables $i_{j}$, $i_{j}^{\dagger }$ and $\hat{I
_{j}$, and a \emph{good one}\footnote
If we consider \cite{hav3}, the total energy, if it is the harbinger of
public information (relative thus to the payoff function), it will not
necessarily be classified as bad or good information for the portfolio
holder. The diminishing of public information may affect the level of
private information in a different way, if the domain of the payoff function
is small, as opposed to the case when the domain of the payoff function is
large.}, which is related to the reservoir and, therefore, to the variables
r_{j}(q)$, $r_{j}^{\dagger }(q)$ and $\hat{R}_{j}(q)$. This is an
interesting result, since it helps to clarify the roles of the different
ingredients of the Hamiltonian (\ref{21}). The differentiation of
information into `good' and `bad' information can also be found back in
early work in finance. The so called `Kyle measure' \cite{Kyle} was proposed
to give an indication of how the level of private information compares to
the level of so called noise trading (which itself is based on a type of
information which is different from private information).
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we have discussed, within an operatorial setting, a simple
stock market formed by just two traders who, whilst they are interacting
between them, are subjected to a flux of information which aids them to
decide how to behave during the trade operations. A non perturbative result
shows that, in order to not get trivial dynamics, we need to put information
in the model. Otherwise the portfolios of the traders do not change in time.
Using a perturbation expansion we have also deduced the time evolution of
the portfolios of the two traders and we have analyzed their asymptotic
limits at a second order in perturbation theory. This analysis suggests to
contemplate a difference between a bad and a good information. We believe
that this is quite a natural distinction, and it clarifies the meaning of
the various terms in $H$. Interestingly enough, the bad information is
related to a set of two-modes bosonic operators, while the good information
arises from two reservoirs, each having an infinite number of modes.
Needless to say, a step toward real models would imply the following
improvements: more traders, different kind of shares and non constant prices
of the shares. Although the first two extensions do not look particularly
difficult, the last one is very complicated. We hope to be able to produce
such a model in the near future.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
F.B. acknowledges partial financial support from Universit\`{a} di Palermo.
F.B. also wishes to thank the School of Management and Institute of Finance
of the University of Leicester for its warm hospitality.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introd}
Let $G$ be a group and $\varphi:G\to G$ be a group endomorphism.
We define an equivalence relation $\sim$ on $G$, called the Reidemeister action by $\varphi$, by
$$
a\sim b \Leftrightarrow b=ha\varphi(h)^{-1} \text{ for some }h\in G.
$$
The equivalence classes are called \emph{twisted conjugacy classes} or \emph{Reidemeister classes} and $R[\varphi]$ denotes the set of twisted conjugacy classes.
The \emph{Reidemeister number} $R(\varphi)$ of $\varphi$ is defined to be the cardinality of $R[\varphi]$.
We say that $G$ has the \emph{$R_\infty$ property} if $R(\varphi)=\infty$ for every automorphism $\varphi:G\to G$.
In 1994, Fel'shtyn and Hill \cite{FH} conjectured that any injective endomorphism $\varphi$ of a finitely generated group $G$ with exponential growth would have infinite Reidemeister number. Levitt and Lustig (\cite{LL}), and Fel'shtyn (\cite{F}) showed that the conjecture holds for
automorphisms when $G$ is Gromov hyperbolic. However, in 2003, the conjecture was answered negatively by Gon\c{c}alves and Wong \cite{GW1} who gave examples of groups which do not have the $R_\infty$ property.
Since then, groups with the $R_{\infty}$ property have been known including Baumslag-Solitar groups, lamplighter groups, Thompson's group $F$, Grigorchuk group, mapping class groups, relatively hyperbolic groups, and some linear groups (see \cite{BFG, DG, FG, GK, GS1,GS2, GS3, GW2, HL, KW, STW} and references therein).
For a topological consequence of the $R_{\infty}$ property, see \cite{GW2, KW, STW}.
In this article we show the following.
\begin{Thm}\label{thm:main}
The Houghton's groups $\mathcal{H}_n$ have the $R_\infty$ property for all $n\in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{Thm}
It is shown that the conjugacy problem(\cite{ABM}) and the twisted conjugacy problem(\cite{C}) of $\mathcal{H}_n$ are solvable for $n \geq 2$. In 2010, Gon\c{c}alves and Kochloukova \cite{GK} proved that there is a finite index subgroup $H$ of $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ such that $R(\varphi) = \infty$ for $\varphi \in H$ provided $n\geq 2$. Recently the structure of $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ is known from \cite{BCMR} (see Theorem~\ref{auto} below). In \cite{GS3}, Gon\c{c}alves and Sankaran have studied also the $R_\infty$ property of Houghton's groups.
In this paper we use simple but useful observations of the Reidmeister numbers and the structure of $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ to find equivalent conditions for two elements of $\mathcal{H}_n$ to determine the same twisted conjugacy class under mild assumptions.
In Section~\ref{sec:Houghton}, we will review definition and some facts about Houghton's groups $\mathcal{H}_n$
which are necessary mainly to the study of Reidemeister numbers for $\mathcal{H}_n$.
In Section~\ref{sec:R number}, we prove our main result for $n\geq 2$. The case of $n=1$ is discussed in Section~\ref{sec:H_1}.
\section{Houghton's groups $\mathcal{H}_n$}\label{sec:Houghton}
In this paper we use the following notational conventions. All bijections (or permutations) act on the right unless otherwise specified. Consequently $gh$ means $g$ followed by $h$. The conjugation by $g$ is denoted by $\mu(g)$, $h^g = g^{-1}hg = :\mu(g)(h)$, and the commutator is defined by $[g,h] = ghg^{-1}h^{-1}$.
Our basic references are \cite{H,SR} for Houghton's groups and \cite{BCMR} for their automorphism groups.
Fix an integer $n\ge1$. For each $k$ with $1\le k\le n$, let
$$
R_k=\left\{me^{i\theta}\in\mathbb{C}\mid m\in\mathbb{N},\ \theta=\tfrac{\pi}{2}+(k-1)\tfrac{2\pi}{n} \right\}
$$
and let $X_n=\bigcup_{k=1}^n R_k$ be the disjoint union of $n$ copies of $\mathbb{N}$,
each arranged along a ray emanating from the origin in the plane.
We shall use the notation $\{1,\cdots,n\}\times\mathbb{N}$ for $X_n$,
letting $(k,p)$ denote the point of $R_k$ with distance $p$ from the origin.
A bijection $g:X_n\to X_n$ is called an \emph{eventual translation}
if the following holds:
\begin{quote}
There exist an $n$-tuple $(m_1,\cdots,m_n)\in\mathbb{Z}^n$ and a finite set $K_g\subset X_n$ such that
$$
(k,p)\cdot g:=(k,p+m_k)\quad \forall (k,p)\in X_n-K_g.
$$
\end{quote}
An eventual translation acts as a translation on each ray outside a finite set.
For each $n \in \mathbb{N}$ the \emph{Houghton's group} $\mathcal{H}_n$ is defined to be the group of all eventual translations of $X_n$.
\begin{comment}
Here are some known results for the Houghton's groups $\mathcal{H}_n$:
\begin{itemize}
\item K.~S.~Brown showed that $\mathcal{H}_n$ has type FP$_{n-1}$ but not FP$_n$ and
also showed that $\mathcal{H}_n$ is finitely presented provided $n\ge 3$.
\item By \cite[Theorem~2.18]{SR}, $\mathcal{H}_n$ is an amenable group.
\item R\"{o}ver \cite{Rover} showed that for all $n\ge1, r\ge2,m\ge1$,
$\mathcal{H}_n$ embeds in Higman's groups $G_{r,m}$ (defined in \cite{Hig}), and in particular all Houghton's groups are subgroups of Thompson's group $V$.
\item The fact is every normal subgroup of $\mathcal{H}_n$ contains $\mathsf{FAlt}_n$, which is simple.
This says $\mathcal{H}_n$ is not residually finite.
The fact also implies that $\mathcal{H}_n$ is Hopfian.
($\mathcal{H}_n$ is not isomorphic to any of proper quotient. If a proper quotient has an element of finite order it must be 2 while $\mathcal{H}_n$ already has infinite torsion.)
\item $\mathcal{H}_n$ is not co-Hopfian. A map sending $g_i$ to $g_i^2$ is an injective homomorphism but not an isomorphism.
\end{itemize}
\end{comment}
Let $g_i$ be the translation on the ray of $R_1\cup R_{i+1}$ by $1$ for $1\le i\le n-1$.
Namely,
$$
(j,p)\cdot g_i=\begin{cases}
(1,p-1)&\text{if $j=1$ and $p\ge2$,}\\
(i+1,1)&\text{if $(j,p)=(1,1)$,}\\
(i+1,p+1)&\text{if $j=i+1$,}\\
(j,p)&\text{otherwise.}\end{cases}
$$
\begin{figure}[h]\label{fig:example}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{examples_H_n.pdf}
\caption{Some examples of $\mathcal{H}_n$}.
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:example} illustrates some examples of elements of $\mathcal{H}_n$, where points which do not involve arrows are meant to be fixed.
Finite sets $K_{g_i}$
and $K_{g_j}$ are singleton sets. The commutator $[g_i,g_j]$ of two distinct elements $g_i$ and $g_j$ is the transposition exchanging $(1,1)$ and $(1,2)$.
We will denote this transposition by $\alpha$. The last
element $g$ is rather generic and $K_g$ consists of eight points.
Johnson provided a finite presentation for $\mathcal{H}_3$ in \cite{J} and the third author gave a finite presentation for $\mathcal{H}_n$ with $n \geq 3$ in \cite{SR} as follows:
\begin{Thm}[{\cite[Theorem~C]{SR}}]\label{C}
For $n\ge3$, $\mathcal{H}_n$ is generated by $g_1,\cdots,g_{n-1},\alpha$ with relations
$$
\alpha^2=1,\
(\alpha\alpha^{g_1})^3=1,\
[\alpha,\alpha^{g_1^2}]=1,\
\alpha=[g_i,g_j],\
\alpha^{g_i^{-1}}=\alpha^{g_j^{-1}}\
$$
for $1\le i\ne j\le n-1$.
\end{Thm}
From the definition of Houghton's groups, the assignment $g\in\mathcal{H}_n\mapsto (m_1,\cdots,m_n)\in\mathbb{Z}^n$
defines a homomorphism $\pi=(\pi_1,\cdots,\pi_n):\mathcal{H}_n\to\mathbb{Z}^n$. Then we have:
\begin{Lemma}[{\cite[Lemma~2.3]{SR}}]
For $n\ge3$, we have $\ker\p
=[\mathcal{H}_n,\mathcal{H}_n]$.
\end{Lemma}
Note that $\pi(g_i)\in\mathbb{Z}^n$ has only two nonzero values $-1$ and $1$,
$$
\pi(g_i)=(-1,0,\cdots,0,1,0,\cdots,0)
$$
where $1$ occurs in the $(i+1)$st component.
Since the image of $\mathcal{H}_n$ under $\pi$ is generated by those elements,
we have that
$$
\pi(\mathcal{H}_n)=\left\{(m_1,\cdots,m_n)\in\mathbb{Z}^n\mid \sum_{i=1}^n m_i=0\right\},
$$
which is isomorphic to the free Abelian group of rank $n-1$.
Consequently, $\mathcal{H}_n$ ($n\ge3$) fits in the following short exact sequence
$$
1\longrightarrow\mathcal{H}_n'=[\mathcal{H}_n,\mathcal{H}_n]\longrightarrow\mathcal{H}_n\buildrel{\pi}\over\longrightarrow\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}\lra1.
$$
The above abelianization, first observed by C. H. Houghton in \cite{H}, is the characteristic property of $\{\mathcal{H}_n\}$ for which he introduced those groups in the same paper.
We may regard $\pi$ as a homomorphism $\mathcal{H}_n\to\mathbb{Z}^n\to\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}$ given by
$$
\pi:g_i\mapsto(-1,0,\cdots,0,1,0,\cdots,0)\mapsto(0,\cdots,0,1,0,\cdots,0).
$$
In particular, $\pi(g_1),\cdots,\pi(g_{n-1})$ form a set of free generators for $\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}$.
As definition, $\mathcal{H}_1$ is the symmetric group itself on $X_1$ with finite support,
which is not finitely generated.
Furthermore, $\mathcal{H}_2$ is
$$
\mathcal{H}_2=\langle g_1,\alpha \mid \alpha^2=1, (\alpha\alpha^{g_1})^3=1,
[\alpha,\alpha^{g_1^k}]=1 \text{ for all } |k|>1\rangle,
$$
which is finitely generated, but not finitely presented. It is not difficult to see that $\mathcal{H}_2'=\mathsf{FAlt}_2$.
\begin{notation}
\begin{align*}
&\mathsf{Sym}_n= \text{ the full symmetric group of $X_n$,}\\
&\mathsf{FSym}_n= \text{ the symmetric group of $X_n$ with finite support,}\\
&\mathsf{FAlt}_n= \text{ the alternating group of $X_n$ with finite support.}
\end{align*}
\end{notation}
\noindent
For each $n$ the group $\mathsf{FAlt}_n$ can be seen as the kernel of the sign homomorphism $\mathsf{FSym}_n\to\{\pm1\}$. The following fact is necessary for our discussion, see \cite{DM}.
\begin{Rmk}\label{prop:conjugation}
For any $\sigma\in\mathsf{Sym}_n$, the conjugation by $\sigma$ induces automorphisms
$\mu(\sigma):\mathsf{FSym}_n\to\mathsf{FSym}_n$ and $\mu(\sigma):\mathsf{FAlt}_n\to\mathsf{FAlt}_n$.
Then $\mu:\mathsf{Sym}_n\to\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$ and $\mu:\mathsf{Sym}_n\to\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FSym}_n)$ are isomorphisms.
\end{Rmk}
Every automorphism of $\mathcal{H}_n$ restricts to an automorphism of the characteristic subgroup $\mathcal{H}_n''=[\mathsf{FSym}_{n},\mathsf{FSym}_{n}]=\mathsf{FAlt}_n$, which induces a homomorphism $\mathrm{res}: \mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)\to\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$. One can show this map is injective by using the fact that $\mathsf{FAlt}_n$ is generated by $3$-cycles. The embedding $$
\mathrm{Res}:\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)\buildrel\mathrm{res}\over\longrightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)\buildrel\mu^{-1}\over\longrightarrow \mathsf{Sym}_n
$$ implies that each automorphism of $\mathcal{H}_n$ is given by a conjugation of an element in $\mathsf{Sym}_n$. Moreover the composition preserves the normality $\mathcal{H}_n = \mathrm{Inn}(\mathcal{H}_n) \lhd \mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$.
\begin{Prop}[{\cite[Proposition~2.1]{BCMR}}]
For $n\ge1$, the automorphism group $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ is isomorphic to
the normalizer of $\mathcal{H}_n$ in the group $\mathsf{Sym}_n$.
\end{Prop}
\begin{comment}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $\mathcal{H}_n'=\mathsf{FSym}_{n}$
and $\mathcal{H}_n''=[\mathsf{FSym}_{n},\mathsf{FSym}_{n}]=\mathsf{FAlt}_n$.
Every automorphism of $\mathcal{H}_n$ restricts to an automorphism of the characteristic subgroup $\mathcal{H}_n''$.
So we have a homomorphism $\mathrm{res}: \mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)\to\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$.
We will show that this homomorphism is injective.
Let $\varphi\in\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ whose restriction on $\mathcal{H}_n''=\mathsf{FAlt}_n$ is the identity.
Let $k\ge1$ and consider the following six points of $X_n$:
$$
a_1=(i,k+1),\
a_2=(i,k+2),\
a_3=(i,k+3),\
a_4=(i,k+4),\
a_5=(i,k+5),\
a_6=(i,k+6).
$$
We denote by $(xyz)\in\mathsf{FAlt}_n=\mathcal{H}_n''\subset\mathcal{H}_n$ the $3$-cycle of the points $x,y,z\in X_n$.
Then we obtain the identities
\begin{align*}
g_i^{-1}(a_2a_3a_4)g_i=(a_1a_2a_3),\
g_i^{-1}(a_4a_5a_6)g_i=(a_3a_4a_5).
\end{align*}
Taking $\varphi$, since $\varphi(xyz)=(xyz)$, we have
\begin{align*}
\varphi(g_i)^{-1}(a_2a_3a_4)\varphi(g_i)=(a_1a_2a_3),\
\varphi(g_i)^{-1}(a_4a_5a_6)\varphi(g_i)=(a_3a_4a_5).
\end{align*}
These imply that $\varphi(g_i)$ maps $a_3$ to $a_2$.
Applying a similar argument to all points in the branches $R_i$ and $R_{i+1}$,
it follows that $\varphi(g_i)=g_i$.
Because $i$ was arbitrary, this means that $\varphi$ is the identity.
Now, we consider the composition
$$
\mathrm{Res}:\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)\buildrel\mathrm{res}\over\longrightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)\buildrel\mu^{-1}\over\longrightarrow \mathsf{Sym}_n.
$$
In view of Remark~\ref{prop:conjugation},
for each automorphism $\varphi:\mathcal{H}_n\to\mathcal{H}_n$, the restriction
$\varphi'':\mathcal{H}_n''\to\mathcal{H}_n''$ is an automorphism $\mu(g_{\varphi''})$ on $\mathsf{FAlt}_n$
for some $g_{\varphi''}\in\mathsf{Sym}_n$. Thus
$$
\mathrm{Res}:\varphi\in\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)\longmapsto g_{\varphi''}\in\mathsf{Sym}_n
$$
and $\mathrm{Res}(\mathrm{Inn}(\mathcal{H}_n))=\mathcal{H}_n$.
Because $\mathrm{Inn}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ is a normal subgroup of $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$,
it follows that $\mathrm{Res}$ maps $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ isomorphically onto $N_{\mathsf{Sym}_n}(\mathcal{H}_n)$.
\end{proof}
\end{comment}
We need an explicit description for the normalizer $N_{\mathsf{Sym}_n}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ to study $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$.
Consider an element $\sigma_{ij}\in \mathsf{Sym}_n$ for $1\leq i\neq j\leq n$ defined by
$$
(\ell,p)\cdot\sigma_{ij}=
\begin{cases}
(j,p) &\text{if } \ell=i\\
(i,p) &\text{if } \ell=j\\
(\ell,p) &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
$$ for all $p\in \mathbb{N}$. Each element $\sigma_{ij}$ defines a transposition on $n$ rays isometrically. The subgroup of $\mathsf{Sym}_n$ generated by all $\sigma_{ij}$ is isomorphic to the symmetric group $\Sigma_n$ on the $n$ rays. Note that $\Sigma_n$ acts on $\mathcal{H}_n$ by conjugation. One can show that $N_{\mathsf{Sym}_n}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ coincides with $\mathcal{H}_n\rtimes \Sigma_n$ by using the ray structure (end structure) of the underlying set $X_n$. An eventual translation $g$ preserves each ray up to a finite set. Let $ R_i^*$ denote the set of all points of $R_i$ but finitely many. It is not difficult to see that if $\phi\in \mathsf{Sym}_n$ normalizes $\mathcal{H}_n$ then
$$
(R_i^*)\phi= R_j^*\quad
$$
for $1 \leq i,j\leq n$. Thus $\phi$ defines an element $\sigma$ of $\Sigma_n$, and we see that $\phi \sigma^{-1} \in \mathcal{H}_n$ since $(R_i^*)\phi\sigma^{-1}=(R_j^*)\sigma^{-1}=R_i^*$ for each $i$. Consequently, $N_{\mathsf{Sym}_n}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ has the internal semidirect product of $\mathcal{H}_n$ by $\Sigma_n$. Therefore we have:
\begin{Thm}[{\cite[Theorem~2.2]{BCMR}}]\label{auto}
For $n\ge2$, we have
$$
\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)\cong\mathcal{H}_n\rtimes \Sigma_n
$$
where $\Sigma_n$ is the symmetric group that permutes $n$ rays isometrically.
\end{Thm}
\section{The $R_\infty$ property for $\mathcal{H}_n$, $n\ge2$}\label{sec:R number}
We consider the Houghton's groups $\mathcal{H}_n$ with $n\ge2$.
Let $\phi$ be an automorphism on $\mathcal{H}_n$. Remark that, when $n\ge3$,
$\phi$ induces an automorphism $\phi'$ on the commutator subgroup $\mathcal{H}_n'=\mathsf{FSym}_n$
and an automorphism $\bar\phi$ on $\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}$ so that
the following diagram is commutative:
$$
\CD
1@>>>\mathsf{FSym}_n@>{i}>>\mathcal{H}_n@>{\pi}>>\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}@>>>1\\
@.@VV{\phi'}V@VV{\phi}V@VV{\bar\phi}V\\
1@>>>\mathsf{FSym}_n@>{i}>>\mathcal{H}_n@>{\pi}>>\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}@>>>1
\endCD
$$
But when $n=2$, $\mathcal{H}_2'=\mathsf{FAlt}_2$ and $\mathcal{H}_2/\mathcal{H}_2'=\mathbb{Z}\oplus\mathbb{Z}_2$.
Since $\mathsf{FSym}_2$ is a normal subgroup of $\mathcal{H}_2$, we have the following commutative diagram
$$
\CD
@.@.1@.1\\
@.@.@AAA@AAA\\
@.@.\mathbb{Z}@>=>>\mathbb{Z}\\
@.@.@AAA@AAA\\
1@>>>\mathsf{FAlt}_2@>>>\mathcal{H}_2@>>>\mathbb{Z}\oplus\mathbb{Z}_2@>>>1\\
@.@AA{=}A@AAA@AAA\\
1@>>>\mathsf{FAlt}_2@>>>\mathsf{FSym}_2@>>>\mathbb{Z}_2@>>>1\\
@.@.@AAA@AAA\\
@.@.1@.1
\endCD
$$
Let $\phi \in\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_2)$.
Then $\phi$ restricts to an element $\phi'$ of $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_2')=\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}_2)=\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FSym}_2)$,
and hence induces an automorphism $\bar\phi$ on $\mathbb{Z}$ so that the following diagram is commutative
$$
\CD
1@>>>\mathsf{FSym}_2@>>>\mathcal{H}_2@>>>\mathbb{Z}@>>>1\\
@.@VV{\phi'}V@VV{\phi}V@VV{\bar\phi}V\\
1@>>>\mathsf{FSym}_2@>>>\mathcal{H}_2@>>>\mathbb{Z}@>>>1
\endCD
$$
These diagrams induce an exact sequence of Reidemeister sets
$$
\mathcal{R}[\phi']\buildrel{\hat{i}}\over\longrightarrow
\mathcal{R}[\phi]\buildrel{\hat{\pi}}\over\longrightarrow
\mathcal{R}[\bar{\phi}]\lra1.
$$
Because $\hat{\pi}$ is surjective, we have that if $R(\bar\phi)=\infty$, then $R(\phi)=\infty$.
Consequently, we have
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemma:infty}
Let $\phi$ be an automorphism on $\mathcal{H}_n$, $(n\ge2)$.
If $R(\bar\phi)=\infty$, then $R(\phi)=\infty$.
\end{Lemma}
By Theorem~\ref{auto}, $\phi=\mu(\gamma\sigma)$ for some $\gamma\in\mathcal{H}_n$ and $\sigma\in\Sigma_n$.
First, we will show that when $\phi=\mu(\sigma)$ for $\sigma \in \Sigma_n$ the Reidemeister number of $\phi$ is infinity.
When $\sigma=\mathrm{id}$, $\phi$ and hence $\bar\phi$ are identities. It is easy to see from definition that $R(\bar\phi)=R(\mathrm{id})=\infty$, and so $R(\phi)=\infty$.
One useful observation in calculating $R(\mu(\sigma))$ is that a product
$\sigma=\sigma_1\sigma_2$ induces a bijection
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bijection}
R[\mu(\sigma_1)]\longleftrightarrow R[\mu(\sigma)],
\end{equation} which follows from
$$
b = h a h^{\sigma_1} \Leftrightarrow b \sigma_2 = h (a\sigma_2) h^{\sigma_1 \sigma_2}
$$ for all $a, b, h\in \mathcal{H}_n$. Note that any product for $\sigma$ induces a bijection between the twist conjugacy classes of $\sigma$ and of the first term in the product. Recall that a cycle decomposition of a permutation $\sigma$ allows one to write $\sigma$ as a product of disjoint cycles. Since disjoint cycles commute there exists a bijection between $R[\mu(\sigma)]$ and $R[\mu(\sigma_1)]$ for any cycle $\sigma_1$ in a cycle decomposition of $\sigma$. The following observation plays a crucial role in the sequel.
\begin{Rmk}\label{rmk:bijection}
For a cycle $\sigma_1$ in a cycle decomposition of $\sigma\in \Sigma_n$, $R(\mu(\sigma_1))=\infty$ if and only if $R(\mu(\sigma))=\infty$.
\end{Rmk}
Recall that the \emph{cycle type} of a permutation $\tau\in \mathsf{FSym}_n$ encodes the data of how many cycles of each length are present in a cycle decomposition of $\tau$. Note that two permutations $\tau$ and $\tau'$ have the same cycle type if and only if they are conjugate in $\mathsf{FSym}_n$. In particular two cycles determine the same conjugacy class if and only if they have the same length. We extend this to establish a criterion for twisted conjugacy classes of cycles with respect to an automorphism $\phi= \mu(\sigma)$ when $\sigma \in \Sigma_n$ is a cycle.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemma:sigma}
Suppose $\sigma\ne\mathrm{id} \in \Sigma_n$ is a cycle and $n\ge2$. A pair of cycles $\tau$ and $\tau'$ on the same ray determine the same twisted conjugacy class of $\phi=\mu(\sigma)$ if and only if they have the equal length. In particular $R(\phi)= \infty$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\tau$ and $\tau'$ are cycles on the same ray of the equal length.
We first consider the case when $\sigma$ permutes rays
as an $\ell$-cycle $(1 \,2 \cdots \, \ell)$ for some $2\leq \ell\leq n$,
and $\tau$ and $\tau'$ are disjoint cycles on $R_1$.
Two cycles $\tau $ and $\tau'$ can be written as
$$
\tau=(p_1\cdots p_m) \text{ and }\tau'=(q_1 \cdots q_m)
$$
(by suppressing the ray notation) where $m\geq 2$.
We need to find an element $h\in\mathcal{H}_n$ such that $\tau' = h\tau \mu(\sigma) (h)^{-1}$,
or equivalently
\begin{equation}\label{eq:class}
h ^\sigma = \tau'^{-1} h \tau.
\end{equation} Let $h_1$ be the $2m$-cycle on $R_1$ given by
$$
h_1 = (p_1 q_1 \,p_2\, q_2 \cdots p_m\, q_m).
$$ It is direct to check that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:reduction}
\tau'^{-1} h_1 \tau = (q_m\cdots q_1)(p_1 q_1 \,p_2\, q_2 \cdots p_m\, q_m)(p_1 \cdots p_m)= h_1.
\end{equation}
Consider $h\in \mathcal{H}_n'$ defined by
$$
h= h_1^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} \cdots h_1^\sigma h_1.
$$
Note that $h$ is a product of $\ell$ disjoint $2m$-cycles
each of which is an `isometric translation' of $h_1$ to the ray $R_{\ell}, \cdots, R_{2}, R_1$.
More precisely $(k+1,p) h_1^{\sigma^k} = (1,p)h_1 {\sigma^k}$ for all $(1,p) \in \mathrm{supp}(h_1)$
and $k=1, \cdots,\ell-1$. One crucial observation is that
\begin{equation*}
h^\sigma = h.
\end{equation*}
The above follows from that $\sigma$ is a $\ell$-cycle
and that components of $h$ have pairwise disjoint supports.
Moreover, $\tau'$ commutes with $h_1^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} \cdots h_1^\sigma$, so we have
\begin{align*}
h^\sigma &= h =
h_1^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} \cdots h_1^\sigma h_1=h_1^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} \cdots h_1^\sigma (\tau'^{-1} h_1 \tau )\\
&= \tau'^{-1}( h_1^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} \cdots h_1^\sigma h_1)\tau =\tau'^{-1}h \tau.
\end{align*}
Therefore $h$ satisfies the condition (\ref{eq:class}),
and hence $[\tau]=[\tau']$ in $R[\mu(\sigma)]$.
\begin{comment}
For the case when $\sigma$ is not a cycle, we use a cycle decomposition of $\sigma$. Suppose that $\tau$ and $\tau'$ are {\bf disjoint} $m$-cycles on $R_1$ and that $\sigma$ does not fix $R_1$. Then $\sigma$ can be written as $\sigma=\sigma_1\sigma_2\in\Sigma_n$
such that $\sigma_1$ is of the form $(12\cdots\ell)$. With $h_1$ defined as above, let
$$
h= h_1^{\sigma_1^{\ell-1}} \cdots h_1^{\sigma_1} h_1.
$$
Then we have seen that $h^{\sigma_1}=h$ and $h^{\sigma_1}=\tau'^{-1}h\tau$.
Now since $h^{\sigma_2}=h$, we have
$$
h^\sigma=(h^{\sigma_2})^{\sigma_1}=h^{\sigma_1}=\tau'^{-1}h\tau,
$$
showing that $[\tau]=[\tau']$ in $R[\mu(\sigma)]$.
Finally we consider $\sigma$ which fixes the ray $R_1$.
Let $\tau,\tau'$ and $h_1$ be as before.
Then $h_1^\sigma=h_1=\tau'^{-1}h_1\tau$,
showing again that $[\tau]=[\tau']$ in $R[\mu(\sigma)]$.
\end{comment}
Applying appropriate conjugations one can extend the above observations to show that $[\tau]=[\tau']$ in $R[\mu(\sigma)]$ for any cycle $\sigma\in \Sigma_n$ and for any two disjoint cycles $\tau$ and $\tau'$ on the same ray with the equal length. Therefore, by the transitivity of the class, we can see that two cycles (not necessarily disjoint) on a ray belong to the same class for $\phi=\mu(\sigma)$ as long as they have the same length.
Indeed, if two $m$-cycles $\tau$ and $\tau'$ are not disjoint, one takes another $m$-cycle $\tau_0$ which is disjoint with $\tau $ and $\tau'$ to have $ [\tau]=[\tau_0]=[\tau']$. Thus we are done with one direction.
For the converse, suppose there exists $h\in \mathcal{H}_n$ satisfying the condition (\ref{eq:class}) for a cycle $\sigma\in \Sigma_n$ even when cycles $\tau $ and $\tau'$ on the same ray have different lengths $m$ and $m'$ respectively. Assume $m' >m$. Let $\ell$ be the order of $\sigma$.
Applying the identity (\ref{eq:class}) $\ell$ times, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:iterated_conjugation}
h= h^{\sigma^\ell}= (\tau'^{-1})^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} \cdots ({\tau'^{-1}){^\sigma}} \tau'^{-1} h \tau {\tau^\sigma} \cdots \tau^{\sigma^{\ell-1}}.
\end{equation}
Let $c'=(\tau'^{-1})^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} \cdots (\tau'^{-1})^\sigma \tau'^{-1}$ and $c=\tau {\tau^\sigma} \cdots \tau^{\sigma^{\ell-1}} $ be the products of first and last $\ell$ terms on the RHS of (\ref{eq:iterated_conjugation}). Note that each component of $c'$ is an `isometric translation' of $\tau'^{-1}$ to different $\ell$ rays (and similarly for each component of $c$). To draw a contradiction, we use the fact that the size of $\mathrm{supp}(c')$ is strictly greater than that of $\mathrm{supp}(c)$. For details we need to examine how $h=c'hc$ acts on $\mathrm{supp}(c')$. Being a disjoint union, $\mathrm{supp}(c')=\bigcup_{0\leq k\leq \ell-1} (\mathrm{supp}(\tau'))\sigma^k$, $\mathrm{supp}(c')$ has size $\ell\times m'$, while $\mathrm{supp}(c)$ has size $\ell\times m$. For each $P \in \mathrm{supp}(c')$, we have
$$
(P)h= (P)c' h c = (P')hc\;\; \text{ or }\;\; (P)hc^{-1} = (P')h
$$
where $P'$ is a point in the same ray of $P$ but distinct from $P$. We claim that $(P)h$ belongs to $\mathrm{supp}(c)$. Otherwise $c^{-1}$ fixes $(P)h$, forcing $(P)h = (P')h$. Since $P\in \mathrm{supp}(c')$ was arbitrary, a bijection $h$ maps $\mathrm{supp}(c')$ to $\mathrm{supp}(c)$. We conclude that there does not exists $h\in \mathcal{H}_n$ satisfying the condition (\ref{eq:class}) for cycles $\tau$ and $\tau'$ on the same ray with different lengths.
\end{proof}
\begin{Thm}\label{thm:conclusion_n}
The Houghton's groups $\mathcal{H}_n$ have the $R_\infty$ property for all $n\ge2$.
\end{Thm}
\begin{proof}Theorem \ref{auto} says that an automorphism $\phi$ of $\mathcal{H}_n$ is determined by $\phi=\mu(g\sigma)$ for some $g\in\mathcal{H}_n$ and $\sigma \in \Sigma_n$. As we noted earlier, we may assume that $\sigma \neq 1$. Note that
$$
g\sigma=\sigma(\sigma^{-1}g\sigma)=\sigma g'
$$ with $g'\in\mathcal{H}_n$. The product in RHS yields a bijection between $R[\mu(g\sigma)]$ and $R[\mu(\sigma)]$ as in (\ref{eq:bijection}). Consider a cycle $\sigma_1$ in a cycle decomposition of $\sigma$. Remark \ref{rmk:bijection} together with Lemma \ref{lemma:sigma} implies $R[\mu(\sigma)] = R[\mu(\sigma_1)]=\infty$. Therefore we have $R[\phi]=R[\mu(g\sigma)] = R[\mu(\sigma)]=\infty$ for all $\phi \in \mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ when $n\geq2$.
\begin{comment}In general, we consider the case where $\phi=\mu(\gamma\sigma)$ for some $\gamma\in\mathcal{H}_n$.
Noting that $\gamma\sigma=\sigma(\sigma^{-1}\gamma\sigma)=\sigma\gamma'$ with $\gamma'\in\mathcal{H}_n$,
we want to show that $R(\phi)=R(\mu(\sigma\gamma'))=\infty$.
This follows from the fact that
$[x]\inR[\mu(\sigma)]\mapsto [x\gamma']\inR[\mu(\sigma\gamma')]$ is a bijection,
because $y=gx\mu(\sigma)(g)^{-1}$ if and only if
$y\gamma'=g(x\gamma')\mu(\sigma\gamma')(g)^{-1}$, i.e., $[x]=[y]$ in $R[\mu(\sigma)]$ if and only if $[x\gamma']=[y\gamma']$ in $R[\mu(\sigma\gamma')]$.
Therefore, we have $R(\mu(\gamma\sigma))=R(\mu(\sigma))=\infty$.
\end{comment}
\end{proof}
We remark that Lemma~\ref{lemma:infty} can be used extensively to establish Theorem~\ref{thm:conclusion_n}. As observed in commuting diagrams above an automorphism $\phi=\mu(g\sigma)$ of $\mathcal{H}_n$ induces an automorphism $\overline{\phi}$ on the abelianization $\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}$, which is freely generated by $\pi(g_1),\cdots, \pi(g_{n-1})$. Since $\mu(g)$ fixes the generates $g_1, \cdots, g_{n-1}$, se wee that $\overline{\phi}= \mu(\sigma)$. The Reidemeister number of an automorphism on $\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}$ ($n\geq 2$) is well understood. By \cite[Theorem~6.11]{HLP}, $R(\overline{\phi})=\infty$ if and only if $\overline{\phi}$ has eigenvalue $1$. By using induction on $n$ one can show that $\overline{\phi}= \mu(\sigma)$ has eigenvalue $1$ unless $\sigma$ is an $n$-cycle on the rays $R_1, \cdots, R_n$. Now Lemma~\ref{lemma:sigma} implies that $R(\mu(\sigma))=\infty $ if $\sigma$ is a cycle, and so $R(\phi)=R(\overline{\phi})=\infty$.
\section{The group $\mathcal{H}_1$ and its $R_\infty$ property}\label{sec:H_1}
In this section, we will study the $R_\infty$ property for the group $\mathcal{H}_1$.
We remark that $\mathcal{H}_1=\mathsf{FSym}_1$ is generated by the transpositions exchanging two consecutive points of $R_1$.
Let $\phi$ be an automorphism of $\mathcal{H}_1$.
Since $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_1)=\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FSym}_1)\cong\mathsf{Sym}_1$, we have that $\phi=\mu(\gamma)$ for some $\gamma\in\mathsf{Sym}_1$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemma:image}
Let $\varphi:G\to G$ be an endomorphism. Then for any $g\in G$
we have $[g]=[\varphi(g)]$ in $R[\varphi]$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
The lemma follows from
\begin{align*}
&\varphi(g)=(g^{-1})g\varphi(g^{-1})^{-1}.\qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
An infinite cycle $\gamma \in \mathsf{Sym}_1$ is given by a bijection $\gamma: \mathbb{Z} \to R_1$. For convenience we use the $1$-to-$1$ correspondence to denote points of $\mathrm{supp}(\gamma)\subset R_1$ by integers, that is, each point of $\mathrm{supp}(\gamma)$ is denoted by its \emph{preimage}. With this notation, each infinite cycle can be realized as the translation on $\mathbb{Z}$ by $+1$. Remark that if $h\in \mathsf{FSym}_1$ with $\mathrm{supp}(h) \subset \mathrm{supp}(\gamma)$ then the conjugation $\mu(\gamma)$ \emph{shifts} $\mathrm{supp}(h)$ to $\mathrm{supp}(h^\gamma)$ by $+1$;
\begin{equation}\label{eq:shift}
(k)h = k' \; \Leftrightarrow (k+1)h^\gamma = k'+1
\end{equation}
for all $k\in \mathrm{supp}(h)$. We say that an infinite cycle $\gamma$ \emph{conjugates} a permutation $\tau\in\mathsf{FSym}_1$ to $\tau'$ if $\tau'$ can be written as a conjugation of $\tau$ by a power of $\gamma$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemma:infinite cycle}
For an infinite cycle $\gamma\in \mathsf{Sym}_1$, two transpositions $\tau$ and $\tau'$ with $\mathrm{supp}(\tau) \subset \mathrm{supp}(\gamma)$ and $\mathrm{supp}(\tau')\subset \mathrm{supp}(\gamma)$ determine the same conjugacy class for $\phi=\mu(\gamma)$ if and only if $\gamma$ conjugates $\tau$ to $\tau'$. In particular $R(\mu(\gamma))= \infty$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\tau'=\tau^{\gamma^m}$ or $\tau'=\phi^m(\tau)$, for some $m$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:image}, we have $[\tau]=[\phi(\tau)]=\cdots=[\phi^m(\tau)]=[\tau']$.
For the converse, suppose that there exists $h\in \mathsf{FSym}_1$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{eq:class_c}
h^\gamma =\tau'^{-1}h \tau=\tau'h\tau
\end{equation}
for two transpositions $\tau$ and $\tau'$ with the condition on their supports, one of which $\gamma$ does not conjugate to the other. By the shift (\ref{eq:shift}), they can be written as $\tau=(0\,\ell)$ and $\tau'=(m\,m\!+\!\ell')$ for some $m\ge0$ and $\ell\neq\ell'>0$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:image}, which implies $[(0\, \ell')]=[(m\,\, m\!+\!\ell')]$ for all $m\in \mathbb{Z}$, we may further assume that $\tau'=(0\,\ell')$ and $\ell<\ell'$.
We first claim that $(-1)h=-1$. If $-1\in \mathrm{supp}(h)$, the identity (\ref{eq:class_c}) says
$$
(-1)h^\gamma = (-1)\tau' h\tau = (-1)h\tau \neq -1
$$since $\tau$ and $\tau'$ fix all negative integers. So $-1 \in \mathrm{supp}(h^\gamma)$. Now the shift
\begin{equation*}
k\in \mathrm{supp}(h) \;\Leftrightarrow\; k+1 \in \mathrm{supp}(h^\gamma)
\end{equation*}
implies $-2 \in \mathrm{supp}(h)$. Observe that the same argument establishes simultaneous induction on $k$ for
$$
-k \in \mathrm{supp}(h) \text{ and } -k \in \mathrm{supp}(h^\gamma)
$$for all positive $k$ with the above base cases when $k=1$. This means that $\mathrm{supp}(h)$ must contain all negative integers. It contradicts that $h\in \mathsf{FSym}_1$. Therefore $h$ fixes $-1$, or equivalently $h^\gamma$ fixes $0$. One can also show $h$ fixes $\ell'+1$ by verifying
$$
\ell'+k \in \mathrm{supp}(h)\text{ and } \ell+k \in \mathrm{supp}(h^\gamma)
$$for all positive $k$ if we are given the base case $\ell'+1 \in \mathrm{supp}(h)$ (and $\ell'+1 \in \mathrm{supp}(h^\gamma)$, which follows immediately by (\ref{eq:class_c})). So we also have $(\ell'+1)h=(\ell'+1)$, and hence $(\ell'+1)h^\gamma=(\ell'+1)$ by (\ref{eq:class_c}).
From the fixed point $0=(0)h^\gamma$ we have
$$
(0)\tau' h \tau =0 \;\Leftrightarrow\; (\ell')h = \ell.
$$ The shift (\ref{eq:shift}) says $\ell'+1 \in \mathrm{supp}(h^\gamma)$. However this contradicts that $(\ell'+1)h^\gamma=(\ell'+1)$. Therefore $\tau' =(0\, \ell')$ does not belong to the class of $\tau=(0\, \ell)$ unless $\ell=\ell'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemma:finite_permutation}
Suppose two permutations $\tau,\tau' \in \mathsf{FSym}_1$ are disjoint with a permutation $\gamma\in \mathsf{FSym}_1$. Then $\tau$ and $\tau'$ belong to the same class in $R[\mu(\gamma)]$ if and only if they have the same cycle type. In particular $R(\mu(\gamma))= \infty$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}The statement follows from \emph{cycle type criterion} for usual conjugacy classes of the symmetric group on the fixed points of $\gamma\in \mathsf{FSym}_1$.
Any permutations on $R_1'=R_1\setminus\mathrm{supp}(\gamma)$ with finite supports are conjugate if and only if they have the same cycle type. For two permutations $\tau $ and $\tau'$ on $R_1'$ there exists a permutation $h \in \mathsf{FSym}_1$ on $R_1'$ such that
$$
\tau' = h \tau h^{-1}
$$if and only if $\tau$ and $\tau'$ have the same cycle type. Since $h^\gamma=h$ one can replace $h^{-1}$ by $(h^{-1})^\gamma$ in the identity to establish $\tau' = h \tau (h^{-1})^\gamma $.
\end{proof}
\begin{Thm}\label{thm:H1}
The group $\mathcal{H}_1$ has the $R_\infty$ property.
\end{Thm}
\begin{proof}
Recall $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_1)=\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FSym}_1)\cong\mathsf{Sym}_1$. Each automorphism $\phi$ is given by $\phi = \mu(\gamma)$ for some $\gamma \in \mathsf{Sym}_1$. Consider the orbits of $\mathrm{supp}(\gamma)$ to form a partition of $\mathrm{supp}(\gamma)$. Observe that $\gamma$ restricts to a cycle on each orbit. Thus we see that a cycle decomposition of $\gamma$ is well defined and so $\gamma$ can be expressed as a product of commuting cycles. If $\gamma$ has an infinite orbit then it contains an infinite cycle $\gamma_1$ so that $\gamma$ can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:magic_product}
\gamma = \gamma_1 \gamma_2.
\end{equation} We have a bijection $R[\mu(\gamma_1)]\leftrightarrow R[\mu(\gamma)]$ from Remark \ref{rmk:bijection}. By Lemma \ref{lemma:infinite cycle}, we know that $R[\mu(\gamma_1)]=\infty$, and hence $R[\mu(\gamma)]=\infty$. If all orbits of $\gamma$ are finite then we can express $\gamma$ as a product (\ref{eq:magic_product}) with a finite cycle $\gamma_1$. From Lemma \ref{lemma:finite_permutation}, we see that $R[\mu(\gamma_1)]=\infty$, and so $R[\mu(\gamma)]=\infty$ due to the same bijection as above. We have proved that $R[\phi]=\infty$ for all automorphism of $\mathcal{H}_1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\section{Growth rates for automorphisms of $\mathcal{H}_n$}
Let $\pi$ be a finitely generated group with a set $\Gamma=\{s_1,\cdots,s_n\}$ of generators.
Let $\phi:\pi\to\pi$ be an endomorphism.
For any $\gamma\in\pi$,
let $L(\gamma,\Gamma)$ be the length of the shortest word in the letters $S\cup S^{-1}$
which represents $\gamma$.
Then the {\bf growth rate} of $\phi$ is defined to be (\cite{B78})
$$
\mathrm{GR}(\phi):=\sup\left\{\limsup_{k\to\infty}L(\phi^k(\gamma),\Gamma)^{1/k}\mid \gamma\in\pi\right\}.
$$
\sqbox{In the definition, we need $1/k$ in the exponent.}
For each $k>0$, we put
$$
L_k(\phi,\Gamma)=\max \left\{L(\phi^k(s_i),\Gamma)\mid i=1,\cdots,n\right\}.
$$
It is known that
$$
\mathrm{GR}(\phi)=\lim_{k\to\infty}L_k(\phi,\Gamma)^{1/k}
=\inf_{k}\left\{L_k(\phi,\Gamma)^{1/k}\right\}.
$$
The growth rate is well-defined,
i.e., independent of the choice of a set of generators (\cite[p.~\!114]{KH}).
In this section, we will study the growth rates for automorphisms of the Houghton's groups $\mathcal{H}_n$.
We refer to \cite{B78, FJL} for general information on growth rates for endomorphisms
of finitely generated groups. Since $\mathcal{H}_1=\mathsf{FSym}_1$ is not finitely generated, we must assume $n\ge2$.
When $n\ge3$, by Theorem~\ref{C}, $\mathcal{H}_n$ is generated by $g_1,\cdots,g_{n-1}$.
With new notations $g_{1,i+1}=g_i$ and $g_{1,1}=1$, let $\Gamma$
denote the set of generators $\{g_{1,2},\cdots,g_{1,n}\}$ for $\mathcal{H}_n$.
Consider any automorphism $\phi=\mu(\sigma\gamma)$.
Then
\begin{align*}
&g_{1,i}^\sigma=g_{1,\sigma(1)}^{-1}g_{1,\sigma(i)} \text{ for $i=2,\cdots,n$},\\
&g_{1,i}^\gamma=g_{1,i}^*= \text{ an eventual $g_{1,i}$}.
\end{align*}
The second line follows from the fact that $\gamma$ is a word of $g_{1,j}^{\pm1}$'s
and an observation that $g_{1,j}^{-1}g_{1,i}g_{1,j}$ is the translation on $R_1\cup\{(j,1)\}\cup R_i$ by $1$.
Observe also that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(g_{1,i}^*)^{-1}=(g_{1,i}^{-1})^*$,\ $(g_{1,i}^{\pm1}g_{1,j})^*=(g_{1,i}^*)^{\pm1}g_{1,j}^*$,
\item $(g_{1,i}^*)^\sigma=(g_{1,i}^\sigma)^*$,\ $(g_{1,i}^*)^\gamma=(g_{1,i}^\gamma)^*=g_{1,i}^*$.
\end{enumerate}
In particular, we have $\phi(g_{1,i})=\phi(g_{1,i}^*)=\phi(g_{1,i})^*$.
Thus we have
\begin{align*}
\phi^m(g_{1,i}^*)={g_{1,\sigma^m(1)}^*}^{\!\!\!-1}g_{1,\sigma^m(i)}^*.
\end{align*}
This shows that if $\sigma$ is of order $m$, then $\phi^m(g_{1,i})=\phi^m(g_{1,i}^*)=g_{1,i}^*$.
Remark also that if $\gamma=1$, then $\phi^{m}(g_{1,i})=g_{1,i}$ for all $2\le i\le n$, i.e., $\phi^m=\mathrm{id}$.
Hence $\mathrm{GR}(\phi^m)=1$ and so $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)=1$. In fact, we have:
\begin{Thm}
For any automorphism $\phi$ of $\mathcal{H}_n$ $(n\ge3)$, we have $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)=1$.
\end{Thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $L(\gamma,\Gamma)=\ell$. Then we have $L_k(\mu(\gamma),\Gamma)\le 1+2\ell k$.
Indeed, since $\mu(\gamma)^k(g_{1,i})=\gamma^{-k}g_{1,i}\gamma^k$, we have
\begin{align*}
L(\mu(\gamma)^k(g_{1,i}),\Gamma)&\le L(\gamma^{-k},\Gamma)+L(g_{1,i},\Gamma)+L(\gamma^k,\Gamma)\\
&=1+2L(\gamma^k,\Gamma)\le 1+2kL(\gamma,\Gamma)=1+2k\ell.
\end{align*}
Thus we have $L_k(\mu(\gamma),\Gamma)\le 1+2k\ell$.
This implies that
$$
\mathrm{GR}(\mu(\gamma))=\lim_{k\to\infty}L_k(\mu(\gamma),\Gamma)^{1/k}
\le\lim_{k\to\infty}(1+2\ell k)^{1/k}=1.
$$
Let $\phi=\mu(\sigma\gamma)$ with $\sigma$ of order $m$.
Then
$$
\phi^m=\mu(\sigma\gamma)^m=\mu(\sigma^m\gamma^{\sigma^{m-1}}\cdots\gamma^\sigma\gamma)
=\mu(\gamma^{\sigma^{m-1}}\cdots\gamma^\sigma\gamma).
$$
Consequently, we have that
$$
\mathrm{GR}(\phi^m)=\mathrm{GR}(\mu(\gamma^{\sigma^{m-1}}\cdots\gamma^\sigma\gamma))\le1.
$$
Since $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)^m=\mathrm{GR}(\phi^m)$ (this follows from definition), we have $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)\le1$.
If $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)<1$, then by \cite[Lemma~2.3]{FJL}, $\phi$ is an eventually trivial endomorphism.
This is impossible because $\phi$ is an automorphism, and so we must have $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)=1$.
\end{proof}
Next, we consider $\mathcal{H}_2$.
By Theorem~\ref{auto} again, every automorphism $\phi$ of $\mathcal{H}_2$ is induced from the conjugation
by some element of $\sigma\gamma\in\mathcal{H}_2\Sigma_2\subset\mathsf{Sym}_2$.
We remark that the proof of the above theorem relies on only the fact that automorphisms are induced from conjugations. This makes possible to repeat the above proof verbatim for the set $\Gamma=\{g_1,\alpha\}$ of generators for $\mathcal{H}_2$. Therefore we have:
\begin{Thm}
For any automorphism $\phi$ of $\mathcal{H}_2$, we have $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)=1$.
\end{Thm}
\section{Endomorphisms of $\mathcal{H}_n$}
Since $\mathcal{H}_n''=\mathsf{FAlt}_n$ is a fully invariant subgroup of $\mathcal{H}_n$,
every element of $\mathrm{Endo}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ restricts to an element of $\mathrm{Endo}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$.
So, we have a restriction
$\mathrm{res}:\mathrm{Endo}(\mathcal{H}_n)\to\mathrm{Endo}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$. Note that $\mathrm{Endo}(G)$ is not a group!
\colr{My scenario} is:
(1) $\mathrm{res}:\mathrm{Endo}(\mathcal{H}_n)\to\mathrm{Endo}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$ is injective.
Seems that the proof for $\mathrm{res}:\mathrm{Aut}(\mathcal{H}_n)\to\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$ works also for our case.
(2) Let $\varphi\in\mathrm{Endo}(\mathsf{FAlt}_n)$. Remark that $\mathsf{FAlt}_n$ is generated by $3$-cycles on $X_n$.
Every $3$-cycle is of order $3$, its image under $\varphi$ is of order $1$ or $3$.
Let $K_\varphi$ be the kernel of $\varphi$. Then $\varphi$ induces an automorphism $\hat\varphi$ on $\mathsf{FAlt}_n/K_\varphi$, which is isomorphic the subgroup of $\mathsf{FAlt}_n$ generated by
the $3$-cycles whose image under $\varphi$ is of order $3$.
We denote by $V$ the set of vertices of $X_n$ or the subgraph of $X_n$ of all such $3$-cycles.
Then $\mathsf{FAlt}_n/K_\varphi\cong\mathsf{FAlt}(V)$, and $\hat\varphi\in\mathrm{Aut}(\mathsf{FAlt}(V))\cong\mathsf{Sym}(V)$.
Hope that by this way, we can understand $\varphi\in\mathrm{Endo}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ and then $\mathrm{GR}(\phi)$.
\sqbox{Regarding our next project, how about $R_\infty$ property in right-angled Artin groups?
Seems like nobody attacked this project before, and SR knows about these groups.
What is Abelinization of RAAG?}
\end{comment}
\bibliographystyle{siam}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
Recent applications of quantum mechanics are based on processing and
transferring information encoded in quantum states. The full description of
quantum information processing procedures is given in terms of quantum
channels, \textit{i.e.} completely positive, trace preserving maps on the set
of quantum states.
In many areas of quantum information processing one needs to quantify the
difference between ideal quantum procedure and the procedure which is performed
in the laboratory. This is especially true in the situation when one deals with
imperfections during the realization of experiments. These imperfections can be
countered, in a quantum control setup, using various techniques, such us
dynamical decoupling
\cite{viola1999dynamical,viola1999universal,viola2003robust,dahleh1990optimal},
sliding mode control~\cite{dong2009sliding} and risk sensitive quantum
control~\cite{james2004risk,d2006quantum}. A different approach is to model the
particular setup and optimize control pulses for a specific task in a specific
setup~\cite{pawela2013various,pawela2014quantum,gawron2014decoherence,pawela2014quantum2}.
In particular the problem of quantifying the distance between quantum channels
was studied in the context of channel distinguishability.
The main aim of this paper is to provide a succinct expression for the channel
superfidelity. The main aim of this paper is to provide a succinct expression
for the channel output similarity. As a measure of similarity we will consider
the superfidelity function and define channel superfidelity.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:preliminaries}
\subsection{Quantum states and channels}
First, we introduce two basic notions: density operators and superoperatros:
\begin{definition}
We call an operator $\rho \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ a density operator iff $\rho \geq 0$
and $\Tr \rho = 1$. We denote the set of all density operators on $\mathcal{X}$ by
$\mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X})$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
A superoperator is a linear mapping acting on linear operators $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ on a
finite dimensional Hilbert space $\mathcal{X}$ and transforming them into operators on
a another finite dimensional Hilbert space $\mathcal{Y}$. Thus
\begin{equation}
\Phi: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y}).
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Now we define the tensor product of superoperators
\begin{definition}
Given superoperators
\begin{equation}
\Phi_1: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_1) \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y}_1), \Phi_2: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_2) \rightarrow
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y}_2),
\end{equation}
we define the product superoperator
\begin{equation}
\Phi_1 \otimes \Phi_2: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_1 \otimes\mathcal{X}_2)
\rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y}_1\otimes \mathcal{Y}_2),
\end{equation}
to be the unique linear mapping that satisfies the equation
\begin{equation}
(\Phi_1 \otimes \Phi_2)(A_2 \otimes A_2) =
\Phi_1(A_1) \otimes \Phi_2(A_2),
\end{equation}
for all operators $A_1\in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_1), A_2 \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_2)$.
\end{definition}
In the most general case, the evolution of a quantum system can be described
using the notion of a \emph{quantum
channel}~\cite{BZ2006,NC2000,puchala2011experimentally}.
\begin{definition}\label{def:channel}
A quantum channel is a superoperator $\Phi$ that satisfies the following restrictions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\Phi$ is trace-preserving, i.e. $\forall {A \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})} \
\Tr(\Phi(A))=\Tr(A)$,
\item \label{item:CP}$\Phi$ is completely positive, that is for every finite-dimensional
Hilbert space $\mathcal{Z}$ the product of $\Phi$ and identity mapping on $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})$
is a non-negativity preserving operation, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\forall {\mathcal{Z}} \ \forall {A \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X} \otimes \mathcal{Z})}, {A \geq 0} \ \Phi\otimes
\mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})}(A) \geq 0.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Many different representations of quantum channels can be chosen, depending on
the application. In this paper we will use only the Krauss representation.
\begin{definition}
The Kraus representation of a completely positive superoperator
(Def.~\ref{def:channel}\eqref{item:CP}) is given by a set of operators $K_i
\in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}, \mathcal{Y})$. The action of the superoperator $\Phi$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
\Phi(\rho)=\sum_i K_i \rho K_i^\dagger,
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
This form ensures that the sueroperator is completely positive. For it to be
also trace-preserving we need to impose the following constraint on the Kraus
operators
\begin{equation}
\sum_i K_i^\dagger K_i=\mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{X}}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Superfidelity}
In this section we introduce the \emph{superfidelity}, along with its properties
\begin{definition}
Superfidelity of two density operators $\rho, \sigma \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X})$ is given by
\begin{equation}
G(\rho, \sigma) = \Tr\rho\sigma + \sqrt{1 - \Tr\rho^2}\sqrt{1 - \Tr\sigma^2}.
\label{eq:superfidelity}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
The superfidelity is an upper bound for the fidelity
function~\cite{miszczak2009sub,BZ2006}.
Properties of the superfidelity~\cite{miszczak2009sub} $(\rho_1, \rho_2,
\rho_3,
\rho_4 \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X}))$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Bounds: $0 \leq G(\rho_1, \rho_2) \leq 1$.
\item Symmetry: $G(\rho_1, \rho_2) = G(\rho_2, \rho_1)$.
\item Unitary invariance: $G(\rho_1, \rho_2) = G(U \rho_1 U^\dagger, U \rho_2
U^\dagger)$.
\item Joint concavity~\cite{bound-tr-di}:
\begin{equation}
G (p \rho_1 + (1-p)\rho_2, p \rho_3 + (1-p)\rho_4) \leq pG(\rho_1, \rho_3) +
(1-p) G(\rho_2, \rho_4)\label{eq:concavity}
\end{equation}
for $p \in [0, 1]$.
\item Super-multiplicavity:
\begin{equation}
G(\rho_1 \otimes \rho_2, \rho_3 \otimes \rho_4) \geq G(\rho_1, \rho_3)
G(\rho_2, \rho_4).
\end{equation}
\item Bound for trace distance~\cite{puchala2009bound}
\begin{equation}
\frac12 \| \rho_1 - \rho_2 \|_1 \geq 1 - G(\rho_1, \rho_2).
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Supporting definitions}
In this section we define additional operations used in our proof. We begin
with the \emph{partial trace}
\begin{definition}
For all operators $A \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ and all operators $B \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y})$ the
partial
trace is a linear mapping defined as:
\begin{equation}
\Tr_{\mathcal{Y}} A \otimes B = A \Tr B.
\end{equation}
The extension to operators not in the tensor product form follows from
linearity.
\end{definition}
Next, we introduce the \emph{purification} of quantum states:
\begin{definition}
Given Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$, we will call $\ket{\zeta} \in \mathcal{X} \otimes
\mathcal{Y}$ a purification of $\rho \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X})$ if
\begin{equation}
\Tr_{\mathcal{Y}}\proj{\zeta} = \rho.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
We will also need the notion of conjugate superoperator
\begin{definition}
Given a quantum channel $\Phi: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y})$, for every
operator $A \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}), B \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y})$ we define the conjugate superoperator
$\Phi^\dagger: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y}) \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ as the mapping satisfying
\begin{equation}
\forall A \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \; \forall B \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Y}) \mathrm{Tr} (\Phi(A)B) = \mathrm{Tr} (A
\Phi^\dagger(B)). \label{eq:conjugate-channel}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Note, that the conjugate to completely positive superoperator is completely
positive, but is not necessarily trace-preserving
\begin{definition}
We define the linear mapping
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{vec}: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}, \mathcal{Y}) \rightarrow \mathcal{Y} \otimes \mathcal{X},
\end{equation}
for dyadic operators as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{vec}(\ketbra{\psi}{\phi}) = \ket{\psi}\overline{\ket{\phi}},
\end{equation}
for $\ket{\psi} \in \mathcal{Y}$ and $\ket{\phi} \in \mathcal{X}$ and uniquely extended by linearity.
\end{definition}
We introduce the inverse of the $\mathrm{vec}(\cdot)$
\begin{definition}
We define the linear mapping
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{unvec}: \mathcal{Y} \otimes \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}, \mathcal{Y})
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{equation}
\forall X \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}, \mathcal{Y}) \quad \mathrm{unvec}(\mathrm{vec}(X)) = X.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
For every choice of Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{X}_1$, $\mathcal{X}_2$, $\mathcal{Y}_1$ and $\mathcal{Y}_2$ and
every choice of operators $A \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_1, \mathcal{Y}_1)$, $B \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_2, \mathcal{Y}_2)$
and $X \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}_2, \mathcal{X}_1)$ it holds that:
\begin{equation}
(A \otimes B) \mathrm{vec}(X) = \mathrm{vec}(AXB^\mathrm{T})
\end{equation}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Quantum channel fidelity}
First, we introduce the \emph{fidelity} and \emph{channel fidelity}
\begin{definition}
Given operators $A \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ and $B \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ such that $A \geq 0$, $B
\geq 0$ we define the fidelity between $A$ and $B$ as:
\begin{equation}
F(A, B) = \| \sqrt{A} \sqrt{B} \|_1 = \Tr \sqrt{\sqrt{A} B \sqrt{A}}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Quantum channel fidelity of a channel $\Phi: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ for
some $\sigma \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X})$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}
F_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi; \sigma) = \inf F(\xi, (\Phi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})})(\xi)),
\label{eq:channel-fidelity}
\end{equation}
where the infimum is over all Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{Z}$ and all $\xi \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X}
\otimes \mathcal{Z})$ such that $\Tr_{\mathcal{Z}}\xi = \sigma$
\end{definition}
It can be shown that this infimum is independent of $\xi$ and is given by
\begin{equation}
F_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi; \sigma) = \sqrt{\sum_i |\mathrm{Tr}(\sigma A_i)|^2},
\end{equation}
where $\Phi$ has the Kraus form given by $\{A_i: A_i \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})\}_i$.
\section{Our results}
\begin{definition}
Consider two quantum channels $\Phi, \Psi: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ and
a
density operator $\sigma \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X})$. We define the quantum channel
superfidelity to be:
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi, \Psi;\sigma )= \inf G((\Phi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})})(\xi),
(\Psi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})})(\xi)),\label{eq:ch-superfidelity}
\end{equation}
where the infimum is over all Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{Z}$ and over all purifications $\xi = \proj{\zeta} \in
\mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X} \otimes \mathcal{Z})$ of $\sigma$.
\end{definition}
The channel superfidelity $G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi, \Psi; \sigma)$ places a lower
bound on the output superfidelity of two quantum channels in the case of the
same input states. Henceforth, where unambigous, we will write the channel
superfidelity as $G_\mathrm{ch}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:main-theorem}
Given quantum channels $\Phi, \Psi: \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \rightarrow \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$ with Kraus
forms given by the sets $\{ A_i: A_i \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \}_i$ and $\{ B_j: B_j \in
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \}_j$ respectively the quantum channel superfidelity is given by:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
G_\mathrm{ch} = &\sum_{i,j} |\Tr \sigma A_i^{\dagger} B_j|^2 + \sqrt{1 -
\sum_{i,j} |\Tr \sigma A_i^{\dagger} A_j|^2} \\ & \times\sqrt{1 - \sum_{i,j}
|\Tr \sigma B_i^{\dagger} B_j|^2}.\label{eq:our-result}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theproof}
As we limit ourselves only to pure states $\xi$, in order to calculate the
superfidelity, we need to compute the following quantities:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Tr \left(\Phi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right) (\proj{\zeta})
\left(\Psi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right) (\proj{\zeta}), \\
\Tr \left[ \left(\Phi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right) (\proj{\zeta}) \right]^2,\\
\Tr \left[ \left(\Psi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right) (\proj{\zeta}) \right]^2.
\end{split}
\label{eq:quantities}
\end{equation}
As the general idea is shared between all of these quantities, we will show
here the calculation for the first one. We get
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Tr \left(\Phi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right) (\proj{\zeta})
\left(\Psi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right) (\proj{\zeta}) = \\
\Tr \proj{\zeta} \left( \Phi^\dagger \circ \Psi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})}
\right)(\proj{\zeta}) =\\
\bra{\zeta} \left( \Phi^\dagger \circ \Psi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right)
(\proj{\zeta})
\ket{\zeta},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the first equality follows from the definition of the conjugate
superoperator. The Kraus form of the suoperoperator $\Phi^\dagger \circ \Psi$
is given by the set $\{ A_i^\dagger B_j \}_{i, j}$. Now, we may write
$\ket{\zeta}$ as
\begin{equation}
\ket{\zeta} = \mathrm{vec}(\sqrt{\sigma} U),
\end{equation}
for some $U \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z}, \mathcal{X})$ such that $UU^\dagger =
\Pi_{\mathrm{im}(\sigma)}$.
We obtain:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\bra{\zeta} \left( \Phi^\dagger \circ \Psi \otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})} \right)
(\proj{\zeta})
\ket{\zeta} = \sum_{i,j} |\bra{\zeta} (A_i^{\dagger} B_j) \otimes
\mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{Z}} \ket{\zeta}|^2 = \\
\sum_{i,j} |\mathrm{vec}({\sqrt{\sigma}U})^\dagger (A_i^{\dagger} B_j)
\otimes \mathbbm{1}_{\mathcal{Z}} \mathrm{vec}({\sqrt{\sigma}U})|^2 = \\
\sum_{i,j} | U^\dagger \sqrt{\sigma} A_i^{\dagger} B_j \sqrt{\sigma}
U|^2 = \sum_{i,j} |\Tr \sigma A_i^{\dagger} B_j|^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
This quantity is independent of the particular purification of $\sigma$.
Following the same path for the other two quantities shown in
Eq~\eqref{eq:quantities}, we recover the expression for the channel
superfidelity from Eq~\eqref{eq:our-result}.
\end{theproof}
The following simple corollaries are easily derived from
Theorem~\ref{th:main-theorem}.
\begin{corollary}
If $\Phi$ is a unitary channel i. e. $\Phi(\rho) = U\rho U^\dagger$ for any $U
\in \mathcal{U}(\mathcal{X})$ and $\Psi': \rho \mapsto U^\dagger \Psi(\rho) U$ then
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi, \Psi; \sigma) = F_\mathrm{ch}(\Psi'; \sigma).
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{theproof}
If $\Phi$ is a unitary channel, then the second term in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:our-result} vanishes. Let us assume that $\Psi$ has a Kraus form
$\{A_i\}_i, \ \forall i \ A_i \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$. We get $G_\mathrm{ch} = \sum_i
|\mathrm{Tr} \sigma U^\dagger A_i|^2$.
The Kraus form of the channel $\Psi'$ is given by the set $\{ U^\dagger A_i:
A_i \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \}$. Using this in Eq.~\eqref{eq:channel-fidelity} we get
$F_\mathrm{ch}(\Psi'; \sigma) = \sum_i|\Tr \sigma U^\dagger A_i|^2$. This
completes the proof.
\end{theproof}
\begin{corollary}
In general, the quantum channel superfidelity is an upper bound on the quantum
channel fidelity, that is:
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi, \Psi; \sigma) \geq F_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi, \Psi; \sigma).
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{theproof}
Obvious.
\end{theproof}
\begin{corollary}
If $\sigma \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X})$ is a pure state i.e. $\sigma = \proj{\psi}$ then
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi, \Psi; \sigma) = G(\Phi(\sigma), \Psi(\sigma)).
\label{eq:cor-3}
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{theproof}
Let us only focus on the first terms in Eq.~\eqref{eq:superfidelity} and
Eq.~\eqref{eq:our-result}. We will denote these terms $T$ and $T_\mathrm{ch}$
respectively. Let us assume that channels $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ have Kraus forms
$\{A_i \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \}_i$ and $\{B_j \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \}_j$ respectively. We get:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
T & = \Tr \sum_{ij} A_i \proj{\psi} A_i^\dagger B_j \proj{\psi} B_j^\dagger \\
& = \sum_{ij} \bra{\psi} A_i^\dagger B_j \proj{\psi} B_j^\dagger A_i \ket{\psi}
= \sum_{ij} |\bra{\psi} A_i^\dagger B_j \ket{\psi}|^2 = T_\mathrm{ch}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Performing similar calculations for other terms, we recover Eq.~\eqref{eq:cor-3}
\end{theproof}
\section{Simple examples}
In this section we provide a number of examples of the application of
Theorem~\ref{th:main-theorem}.
\subsection{Erasure channel}
\begin{definition}
Given a quantum state $\xi \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X})$ the erasure channel is given by:
\begin{equation}
\Phi(A) = \xi,
\end{equation}
for any $A$ in $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})$. The Kraus form of this channel is given by the set
$\{ A_{ij}: \; A_{ij} \in \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X}) \; \wedge \; A_{ij} = \sqrt{\lambda_i}
\ketbra{\lambda_i}{j} \}_{ij}$, $\lambda_i$ and $\ket{\lambda_i}$ denote the
$i$\textsuperscript{th} eigenvalue and the corresponding eigenvector of $\xi$.
\end{definition}
Let us consider the superfidelity between the erasure channel $\Phi$ and a
unitary channel $\forall \sigma \in \mathcal{D}(\mathcal{X}) \ \Psi: \sigma \mapsto U\sigma
U^\dagger$ for some $U \in \mathcal{U}(\mathcal{X})$. We note that the second term in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:our-result} vanishes. What remains is:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
G_\mathrm{ch} & = \sum_{ij} \lambda_i |\bra{j} \sigma U^\dagger
\ket{\lambda_i}|^2 = \sum_j \bra{j} \sigma U^\dagger \left( \sum_i \lambda_i
\proj{\lambda_i} \right) U \sigma \ket{j} \\
& = \Tr \sigma^2 \Psi^\dagger(\xi) \leq \sum_i \lambda_i^\downarrow
\mu_i^\downarrow,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\mu_i^\downarrow$ and $\lambda_i^\downarrow$ denote the eigenvalues of
$\sigma$ and $\xi$ respectively, sorted in a descending order. The last
inequality follows from von Neumann's trace inequality~\cite{horntopics}.
\subsection{Sensitivity to channel error}\label{sec:channel-error}
Consider a quantum channel $\Phi$ with the Kraus form $\{A_i: A_i \in
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{X})\}$ and a quantum channel $\Psi: \rho \mapsto U_\epsilon \Phi(\rho)
U_\epsilon^\dagger$, where $U_\epsilon = \exp(- i \epsilon H)$. We get:
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi, \Psi; \sigma) = 1 + \sum_{ij} |\Tr \sigma A_i^\dagger
U_\epsilon A_j|^2 - \sum_{ij} |\Tr \sigma A_i^\dagger
A_j|^2.\label{eq:sensitivity-error}
\end{equation}
Now, we concentrate on the change of the quantum channel superfidelity under
the change of $\epsilon$. As we are interested only in small values of
$\epsilon$, we expand Eq.~\eqref{eq:sensitivity-error} up to the linear term in
the Taylor series. For small values of $\epsilon$ we get:
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch} \approx 1 - 2\epsilon \sum_{ij} \Im \mathrm{Tr} \sigma A_i^\dagger H A_j
\overline{\Tr \sigma A_i^\dagger A_j}.
\end{equation}
Note that this depends on the value of the observable $H$ of the operator
$A_j\sigma A_i^\dagger$.
\section{Sensitivity to Hamiltonian parameters}
In this section we will show how the channel superfidelity is affected by
errors in the system Hamiltonian parameters. First, we will show analytical
results for a single qubit system at a finite temperature. Next, we show
numerical results for a simple, three-qubit spin chain.
\subsection{Single qubit at a finite temperature}
A single qubit at a finite temperature is described by the master equation
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\dot{\rho}(t) = -\mathrm{i} \frac{\Omega + \epsilon}{2}[\sigma_z,\rho(t)] &+ \gamma_+
\left( \sigma_- \rho(t) \sigma_+ - \frac12 \{ \sigma_+ \sigma_-, \rho(t) \}
\right) +
\\
&+ \gamma_- \left( \sigma_+ \rho(t) \sigma_- - \frac12 \{ \sigma_- \sigma_+,
\rho(t) \} \right),\label{eq:single-qubit}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_+ = \ketbra{1}{0}$, $\sigma_- = \sigma_+^\dagger$ and $\epsilon$
is the error in $\Omega$. Our goal is to calculate the quantum channel
superfidelity between the case when there is no error in $\Omega$, i.e.
$\epsilon=0$ and the case with error in $\Omega$. Henceforth, we will assume
$\gamma_- = \gamma_+ = 1$ for clarity.
For a given time $T$, Eq.~\eqref{eq:single-qubit} may be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\rho(T) = \Phi_T^\epsilon(\rho(0)),\label{eq:single-qubit-channel}
\end{equation}
where $\Phi_T^\epsilon$ is a quantum channel in the quantum dynamical
semigroup. A natural representation $M_{\Phi_T^\epsilon}$ for the channel
$\Phi_T^\epsilon$ may be found as~\cite{havel2003robust}:
\begin{equation}
M_{\Phi_T^\epsilon} = \mathrm{e}^{-F T},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
F = &- \mathrm{i} \frac{\Omega + \epsilon}{2}(\mathbbm{1} \otimes \sigma_z - \sigma_z \otimes
\mathbbm{1}) - \sigma_- \otimes \sigma_- - \sigma_+ \otimes \sigma_+ +\\
&+ \frac12 ( \sigma_+ \sigma_- \otimes \mathbbm{1} + \sigma_- \sigma_+ \otimes \mathbbm{1} + \mathbbm{1}
\otimes \sigma_+ \sigma_- + \mathbbm{1} \otimes \sigma_- \sigma_+ ).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In this representation we may rewrite Eq.~\eqref{eq:single-qubit-channel} as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{vec}(\rho(T)) = M_{\Phi_T^\epsilon} \mathrm{vec}(\rho(0)).
\end{equation}
The Choi-Jamio{\l}kowski representation of the channel $\Phi_T$ is given by
$D_{\Phi_T^\epsilon} = (M_{\Phi_T}^\epsilon)^\mathrm{R}$. Here, $M^\mathrm{R}$
denotes
the \emph{reshuffle} operation on matrix $M$~\cite{BZ2006}. Now, it is simple
to find the Kraus form of the channel $\Phi_T^\epsilon$. The Kraus operators
are related
to the eigenvalues $\lambda_i$ and eigenvectors $\ket{\lambda_i}$ of
$D_{\Phi_T^\epsilon}$ in the following manner:
\begin{equation}
K_i^{\Phi_T^\epsilon} = \sqrt{\lambda_i}
\mathrm{unvec}(\ket{\lambda_i}).\label{eq:kraus-single-qubit}
\end{equation}
Inserting these Kraus operators into Eq.~\eqref{eq:our-result} we get
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi_T^0, \Phi_T^\epsilon; \rho) = 1 - 2 \mathrm{e}^{-2T}(1 - \cos
\epsilon T)\rho_{00}(0) \rho_{11}(0),
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{ii}(0) = \bra{i}\rho(0)\ket{i}$. Note that, we get $G_\mathrm{ch}
= 1$ in two cases. First, for large $T$ and second when $\epsilon T =
\frac{\pi}{2}$. As we are mainly interested in small values of $\epsilon$, we
expand $\cos\epsilon T$ up to the second term in the Taylor series. We get:
\begin{equation}
G_\mathrm{ch}(\Phi_T^0, \Phi_T^\epsilon; \rho) \approx 1 - \epsilon^2T^2
\mathrm{e}^{-2T} \rho_{00}(0)\rho_{11}(0).
\end{equation}
In this setup the channel superfidelity has a quadratic dependence on the error
parameter $\epsilon$. This should be compared with the results in
Sec.~\ref{sec:channel-error}.
\subsection{Quantum control example}
In this section, we consider a three-qubit spin chain with dephasing
interactions with the environment. We will consider piecewise constant control
pulses. The time evolution of the system is governed
by the equation:
\begin{equation}
\dot{\rho}(t) = -\mathrm{i} [H, \rho(t)] + \gamma(\sigma_z \rho(t) \sigma_z - \rho(t)),
\end{equation}
where $H = H_\mathrm{d} + H_\mathrm{c}$. Here $H_\mathrm{d}$ is the drift term
of the Hamiltonian given by
\begin{equation}
H_\mathrm{d} = J \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\alpha \in \{x, y, z\}}
\sigma_\alpha^i \sigma_\alpha^{i+1},
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_\alpha^i$ denotes $\sigma_\alpha$ acting on site $i$. We set the
control Hamiltonian $H_\mathrm{c}$ to:
\begin{equation}
H_\mathrm{c} = \sum_{i}^N h_x(t_i) \sigma_x^1 + h_y(t_i) \sigma_y^1,
\end{equation}
where $h_x(t_i)$ and $h_y(t_i)$ denote the control pulses in the time interval
$t_i$. We set the target to be
\begin{equation}
U_\mathrm{T} = \mathbbm{1} \otimes 1 \otimes \sigma_x,
\end{equation}
i.e. a NOT gate on the third qubit. We fixed the number of time intervals
$N=64$, the total evolution time $T=6.1$ and the maximum amplitude of a single
control pulse $\forall k \in {x, y} \; \max(|h_k|)=10$.
First, we optimize control pulses for the system, such that we achieve a high
fidelity of the gate $U_T$. Next, to each control pulse we add a noise term
$h_\epsilon$ witch has a normal distribution, $h_\epsilon = N(0, s)$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:result-control} shows the change of $G_\mathrm{ch}$ as a function
of the standard deviation $s$. We have conducted 100 simulations for each
value of $s$. As expected, the quantum channel superfidelity decreases
slowly for low values of $s$. After a certain value the decrease becomes
rapid. As values of $s$ increase, the minimum and maximum achieved
fidelity diverge rapidly. This is represented by the shaded area in
Fig.~\ref{fig:result-control}. We can approximate the average value of the
channel fidelity as $\langle G_\mathrm{ch} \rangle \approx 1 - c s ^2$. Fitting
this function to the curve shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:result-control-zoom} gives a
relative error which is less then $0.5\%$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics{control-superfidelity}}\\
\subfloat[\label{fig:result-control-zoom}]{\includegraphics{control-superfidelity-zoom}}
\caption{Quantum channel superfidelity as a function of noise in the system's
control pulses. The shaded area represents the range of the achieved channel
superfidelity, the black line is the average channel
superfidelity.}\label{fig:result-control}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have studied the superfidelity of a quantum channel. This quantity allows us
to provide an upper bound on the fidelity of the output of two quantum
channels. We shown an example of application of this quantity to a unitary and
an erasure channel. The obtained superfidelity can be easily limited from above
by the product w eigenvalues of the input state $\sigma$ and the result of the
erasure channel $\xi$.
Furthermore, as shown in our examples, the quantum channel superfidelity may
have potential applications in quantum control theory as an easy to compute
figure of merit of quantum operations. In a simple setup, where the desired
quantum channel is changed by a unitary transformation $U_\epsilon = \exp(-\mathrm{i}
\epsilon H)$ we get a linear of the decrease of channel superfidelity on the
noise parameter $\epsilon$. On the other hand, when we introduce the noise as a
control error in a single qubit quantum control setup, we get a quadratic
dependence on the noise parameter.
Finally, we shown numerical results for a more complicated system. We
calculated the quantum channel superfidelity for a three-qubit quantum control
setup. First we found control pulses which achieve a high fidelity of the
desired quantum operation, next we introduced Gaussian noise in the control
pulses. Our results show, that the quantum channel superfidelity stayed high
for a wide range of the noise strength.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank Piotr Gawron for inspiring discussions. {\L}P was
supported by the Polish National Science Centre under decision number
DEC-2012/05/N/ST7/01105. ZP supported by the Polish National Science Centre
under the post-doc programme, decision number DEC-2012/04/S/ST6/00400.
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Statement of Results}
We define two entropy functions:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h\colon \Circle\to [0,\log 2]$, assigning to every external angle $\theta\in\Circle$ the core entropy of the lamination associated to the angle $\theta$.
\item $\tilde h\colon \mathcal M}
\newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}
\newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}
\newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}
\newcommand{\Circle}{\mathbb S}
\newcommand{\sm}{\setminus}
\newcommand{\0}{\texttt{0}}
\newcommand{\1}{\texttt{1}}
\newcommand{\s}{\underline{s}}
\newcommand\eps{\varepsilon}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}
\renewcommand{\theta}{\vartheta}
\newcommand{\ovl}[1]{\overline{#1}}
\newcommand{\lineclear}{\rule{0pt}{2pt}\newline}
\newcommand{\reminder}[1]{\textsl{#1}\marginpar{$\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd$}}
\newcommand{\hide}[1]{}
\title[Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials]{Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials %\\ \rule{0pt}{20pt} --- Draft $\circ$ Comments Invited ---
}
\author{Dzmitry Dudko}
\author{Dierk Schleicher}
\author[]{With an appendix by Wolf Jung}
\address{G.-A.-Universit\"at zu G\"ottingen, Bunsenstrasse 3--5, D-37073 G\"ottingen, Germany}
\address{Jacobs University Bremen, Research I, Postfach 750 561, D-28725 Bremen, Germany}
\address{Gesamtschule Aachen-Brand, Rombachstrasse 99, 52078 Aachen, Germany}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
We give a combinatorial definition of ``core entropy'' for quadratic polynomials as the growth exponent of the number of certain precritical points in the Julia set (those that separate the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative). This notion extends known definitions that work in cases when the polynomial is postcritically finite or when the topology of the Julia set has good properties, and it applies to all quadratic polynomials in the Mandelbrot set.
We prove that core entropy is continuous as a function of the complex parameter. In fact, we model the Julia set as an invariant quadratic lamination in the sense of Thurston: this depends on the external angle of a parameter in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set and suffices to define core entropy directly from the angle in combinatorial terms. As such, core entropy is continuous as a function of the external angle.
Moreover, we prove a conjecture of Guilio Tiozzo about local and global maxima of core entropy as a function of external angles: local maxima are exactly dyadic angles, and the unique global maximum within any wake occurs at the dyadic of lowest denominator.
An appendix by Wolf Jung relates different concepts of core entropy and biaccessibility dimension and thus shows that biaccessibility dimension is continuous as well.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Statement of Results}
We define two entropy functions:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h\colon \Circle\to [0,\log 2]$, assigning to every external angle $\theta\in\Circle$ the core entropy of the lamination associated to the angle $\theta$.
\item $\tilde h\colon \M\to[0,\log2]$, assigning to every $c\in\M$ the core entropy of the quadratic polynomial $z\mapsto z^2+c$.
\end{itemize}
We describe these definitions in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}. Note that we define $\tilde h$ for every $c\in\M$, postcritically finite or not (and could extend it to every parameter $c\in\C$), and similarly for every $\theta\in\Circle$. These definitions are such that if the parameter ray at angle $\theta$ lands (or accumulates) at $c\in\partial \M$, then $h(\theta)=\tilde h(c)$. Our definitions are entirely combinatorial so we do not have to worry about topological subtleties such whether the Julia set is locally connected or whether a (generalized) Hubbard tree exists and, if so, whether it is compact. Of course, in the cases where the usual definitions of topological entropy apply, our definition agrees with them.
Our first result goes back to a bet between Bill Thurston and John Hubbard in the spring of 2012 and helped settle this bet soon after.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Core Entropy]
Both entropy functions, $\tilde h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ and $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$, are continuous.
\end{theorem}
We prove continuity of $h$ in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}; the fact that this implies continuity of $\tilde h$ is easy and is explained in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{EntropyGraphPlain.pdf}
}
\caption{The graph of the core entropy function $h\colon[0,1/2]\to[0,\log 2]$ (by Bill Thurston).}
\end{figure}
Our second result settles a conjecture of Giulio Tiozzo \cite[Conjecture~1.6]{TiozzoThesis}.
\begin{theorem}[Local Maximal of Core Entropy]
\lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We will prove this in Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj}.
In Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}, we define a wake as a closed interval in $\Circle$ bounded by two rational angles so that the corresponding rays land together (or more generally as any closed interval for which the two boundary angles have the same angled internal address, so the corresponding parameter rays land together at the same point in $\M$, or at least in its combinatorial models).
Bill Thurston inspired a number of people to investigate core entropy. In particular, there are a survey on current work and open problems by Tan Lei~\cite{TanLeiEntropy}, a manuscript by Wolf Jung \cite{Jung}, and two manuscripts by Giulio Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoThesis,TiozzoPaper}. An independent proof of continuity of core entropy can be found in the recent manuscript \cite{TiozzoPaper}.
\emph{Acknowledgements}. We would like to thank Henk Bruin, John Hubbard, Tan Lei, Mikhail Lyubich, John Milnor, Bill Thurston, Giulio Tiozzo, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and especially Wolf Jung for interesting and helpful discussions. In the spring of 2014, we had the opportunity to give various presentations about this result in Bremen, Moscow and Stony Brook, and we thank the audiences for their questions and suggestions.
Finally, we would like to thank Cornell University and the ICERM institute in Providence for their hospitality and support in the spring of 2012 where many of our initial discussions were carried out.
\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Definitions}
\label{Sec:Definitions}
In this section we introduce our combinatorial definition of topological entropy that applies to all polynomials with connected Julia set, whether or not they are locally connected and whether or not they have a (generalized) Hubbard tree, and if so whether the latter is compact. One advantage of our approach is that we work in an entirely combinatorial setting, so we never have to worry about topological issues.
\begin{definition}[Invariant Lamination and Entropy Associated to External Angle]
\label{Def:CoreEntropy}
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$, there is a unique invariant quadratic lamination where the minor leaf either ends at $\theta$ or is the degenerate leaf at $\theta$. This lamination will be called $L_\theta$.
A \emph{precritical leaf of generation $n$} in this lamination will be any leaf on the backwards orbit of one of the two major leaves that takes $n$ generations to map to the minor leaf.
The \emph{$\alpha$ gap} is either the leaf connecting the two angles $1/3$ and $2/3$, or it is the unique gap that is fixed by the dynamics (this is a finite polygon).
We call a precritical leaf \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative, and define $N(n)=N_\theta(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical leaves of generation $n$. We define the \emph{core entropy} of this lamination as $h=h(\theta):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_\theta(n)$. If the $\alpha$ gap does not exist, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $N_{\theta}(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the core entropy of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\begin{remark}
A natural question is whether the $\limsup$ in the definition of entropy can be replaced by a simple $\lim$. This is not always so: Wolf Jung kindly pointed out to us the example of $c=c(9/56)$ where the Hubbard tree has the shape of a $\textsf{Y}$ so that the branch point is fixed and one endpoint maps to the second, which maps to the third, which in turn maps to the branch point. Here $N(n)=0$ for infinitely many $n$ while $h=(\log 2)/3>0$. There are thus counterexamples when the dynamics is renormalizable. We prove that renormalizability is the only obstruction (see Corollary~\ref{Cor:ExistenceLimit}). For now, observe that in the postcritically finite non-renormalizable case, the limit exists and equals the $\limsup$ because the associated subshift of finite type is irreducible.
\end{remark}
Thurston showed that the union of all minor leaves of all invariant quadratic laminations forms itself a lamination, called the \emph{quadratic minor lamination} QML \cite{ThurstonLaminations}. It turns out that $h$ is naturally defined on QML: since both ends of any leaf in QML define the same lamination, we can first extend the definition of $h$ to each separate leaf on QML. Complementary components of leaves in QML are called \emph{gaps}, and they come in two kids: either they are finite polygons (corresponding to Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters) or have infinitely many boundary leaves (and describe hyperbolic components). In both cases, it is easy to see that $h$ is constant on all boundary leaves of any gap, so $h$ naturally extends to the disk on which QML is defined.
The equivalence relation defining QML is closed, so the quotient of the supporting closed unit disk by collapsing all leaves to points yields a topological Hausdorff space called the ``abstract Mandelbrot set'' $\M_{abs}$ (this construction is known as Douady's ``pinched disk model'' of $\M$). Since $h$ is constant on fibers of the quotient map $q\colon QML\to \M_{abs}$, $h$ is naturally a function on $\M_{abs}$.
Finally, there is the natural projection $\pi\colon\M\to\M_{abs}$ from the Mandelbrot set $\M$ to the abstract Mandelbrot set $\M_{abs}$. It is defined by mapping every landing point $c(\theta)$ of any rational parameter ray $\theta$ to the equivalence class of the angle $\theta$; then $\pi$ is the unique continuous map with this property.
\looseness-1
We thus obtain a unique map $\tilde h=h\circ\pi\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$, and continuity of $\tilde h$ follows from continuity of $h$, with continuity of $\pi$ being well known.
More specifically, the map $\tilde h$ can also be constructed explicitly as follows.
\begin{definition}[Entropy Associated to Quadratic Polynomial in $\M$]
\label{Def:CoreEntropyTilde}
Let $p_c(z):=z^2+c$ be any quadratic polynomial with $c\in\C$ for which the critical value is in the Julia set, and let $\theta$ be the external angle of any dynamic ray that lands or accumulates at $c$. The \emph{critical ray pair} will be the ray pair $RP(\theta/2,(1+\theta)/2)$, and a precritical ray pair of generation $n$ will be any ray pair on the backwards orbit of the critical ray pair and that takes $n$ iterations to map to the ray $R(\theta)$.
If $p_c$ is such that the critical value is in the Fatou set, then it has an attracting or parabolic orbit and there is a unique periodic characteristic ray pair; precritical ray pairs are then defined as ray pairs on its backward orbit.
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the \emph{core entropy} of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
Note that we use the term ``separation'' in a combinatorial sense: the two rays in a separating ray pairs either land together or accumulate at the same fiber.
The usual definition of core entropy is modeled after the postcritically finite case: here, the Hubbard tree is a finite tree with a finite and forward invariant set of marked points (the critical point and its forward orbit, as well as all branch points). The finite set of edges on the tree form a Markov chain with associated transition matrix, where the matrix element $M_{i,j}$ is $0$, $1$, or $2$ if the edge $e_i$ covers the edge $e_j$ respectively $0$, $1$, or $2$ times. Having only positive real entries, this matrix has a leading eigenvalue which is real, and its logarithm is defined as the core entropy of the given postcritically finite parameter.
This definition coincides with the classical definition of topological entropy of general dynamical systems, and it also applies in the postcritically infinite case as long as the Hubbard tree is defined (i.e.\ the Julia set is path connected) and still finite. However, the number of edges of the Hubbard trees is not locally bounded even among postcritically finite maps, which makes entropy estimates based on these transition matrices difficult.
It is well known, at least in the postcritically finite case, that if $x$ is any point on the Hubbard tree and $N_x(n)$ is the number of preimages of $x$ of generation $n$, then $h=\limsup_n \log N_x(n)$ is the core entropy. Since each of the finitely many edges, except those within ``renormalizable little Julia sets'', will cover the entire tree after finitely many iterations, one can as well count only those preimages of $x$ that are on an arbitrary subset of the edges of the Hubbard tree, as long as at least one of these edges is not in a renormalizable little Julia set. For instance, instead of counting precritical leaves on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (as in our definition above) we may count preimages on $[\alpha,\beta]$ (as we will do in Section~\ref{Sec:Continuity}) or on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
\begin{lemma}[Definitions of Core Entropy Coincide]
\label{Lem:defEntropy} \lineclear
For postcritically finite polynomials, the core entropy as in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} coincides with the usual definition (in terms of transition matrices on finite Hubbard trees).
If $p_c$ has the property that the critical value is in the impression of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$, then the core entropy of $p_c$ equals the core entropy of the lamination $L_\theta$.
\end{lemma}
It is well known that if several parameter rays accumulate at the same parameter in $\M$, then the laminations associated to their corresponding angles coincide, so these angles have the same entropy.
If $\theta\in\Circle$ is a rational angle, we define $c(\theta)$ as the landing point in $\M$ of the parameter ray at angle $\theta$, and within any connected Julia set we define $z(\theta)$ as the landing point of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$.
If $c,\tilde c$ are two parameters in $\M$, we say $c\prec \tilde c$ if there is a parameter ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ at periodic angles that separates $\tilde c$ simultaneously from $c$ and from the origin.
\begin{lemma}[Monotonicity of Lamination and of Entropy]
\label{Lem:Monotonicity}
If $c\prec \tilde c$, then $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ for all $n$ and thus $h(\tilde c)\ge h(c)$. Moreover, any characteristic leaf in $L_c$ also occurs in $L_{\tilde c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is routine to check that any precritical leaf of $c$ also ``occurs'' in the dynamics (or the lamination) of $\tilde c$: the major leaf (or leaves) in $L_{\tilde c}$ separate the two major leaves in $L_c$. Precritical leaves in $L_{c}$ are preimages of the pair of major leaves (the preimages of this pair are always ``parallel'', i.e.\ not separated by the critical value, because otherwise the forward orbit of the critical value would have to intersect the domain bounded by the two major leaves). Each pair of preimages surrounds one preimage of the major leaf of $\tilde c$ (or a pair of preimages of the major leaves), and when such a preimage separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative in $L_c$, then it also does so for $L_{\tilde c}$. Therefore, $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ and $\tilde h(\tilde c)\ge \tilde h(c)$.
The statement about characteristic leaves (or characteristic ray pairs) is well known and follows, for instance, from Milnor's Orbit Portraits \cite{MiOrbits}.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Topological Surgery on dyadic Hubbard trees}
Recall the vein structure of $\M$: every dyadic parameter $c$ has a unique \emph{long vein} $V(c)$, that is an injective arc connecting $c$ to $0$, subject to the condition that it traverses hyperbolic components along internal rays. (The existence of such arcs is a non-trivial theorem, established by Jeremy Kahn using Yoccoz' puzzle results, and by Johannes Riedl using quasiconformal surgery. However, it is sufficient to use a weaker combinatorial version of this result, defining the combinatorial arc as the set of postsingularly finite parameters that separate $c$ from the origin, together with the induced order.) The \emph{vein} of $c$ is the shortest closed sub-arc of the long vein connecting $c$ to the union of the long veins of all dyadic parameters of lower generation than $c$.
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then it is well known that their long veins intersect in an arc $[0,x]$, where $x$ is postcritically finite; this result is known as the ``branch theorem'' of $\M$ \cite{Orsay,MandelBranch}.
\begin{definition}[Directly Subordinate Parameter $c\lhd c'$]
\label{Def:DirectlySubordinate} \lineclear
We say that $ c$ is \emph{directly subordinate} to $c'$ and write $c\lhd c'$ if the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$; in addition, any dyadic parameter whose vein terminates at $0$ is declared to be subordinate to $c=-2$ with dyadic angle $1/2$.
\end{definition}
If $c\lhd c'$, then necessarily the external angle of $c'$ has lower denominator than that of $c$.
Note that this is not a transitive relation and thus not a partial order. A few directly subordinate dyadic parameters are illustrated in Figure~\ref{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\framebox{\includegraphics{DirectlySubordinate_Fig2.pdf}}
\caption{Illustration of directly subordinate parameters: we have $c(3/16)\lhd c(1/4)$, $c(1/4)\lhd c(1/2)$, and $c(3/8)\lhd c(1/2)$. Arrows indicate where the vein to some dyadic parameter terminates at the vein of the dyadic parameter to which it is directly subordinate.}
\label{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}[Entropy Between Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} \lineclear
a) If $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $N(n)\le N'(n)$ for all $n$, and $N(n)<N'(n)$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
\noindent b) If $c\lhd c'$ are both dyadic, then $\tilde h(c)<\tilde h(c')$.
\end{theorem}
Here $N(n)$ and $N'(n)$ denote the numbers of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ for $p_c$ and for $p_{c'}$. This immediately implies a weak version of the Tiozzo conjecture:
\begin{corollary}[Dyadic Version of Tiozzo Conjecture]
\label{Cor:DyadicTiozzoConjecture}\lineclear
Every dyadic angle $\theta$ has a neighborhood on which $h$, restricted to dyadic angles, assumes its unique maximum at $\theta$ (a dyadic version of the Tiozzo conjecture).
\end{corollary}
%\newpage
Let us now state the Correspondence Theorem relating the combinatorics of dynamical and parameter ray pairs. Following Milnor~\cite{MiOrbits}, a periodic or preperiodic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ (with $\phi^-,\phi^+\in\Circle$) in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ is called \emph{characteristic} if the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together in such a way that they separate the critical value $c$ from the critical point $0$ as well as from all other rays landing at $\cup_{k\ge 0}p_{c}^{\circ k}(x)$.
\begin{theorem}[Correspondence Theorem]
\label{thm:Corresp} \lineclear
A dynamic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ with $\phi^\pm$ rational is characteristic if and only if the parameter rays with angles $\phi^-$ and $\phi^+$ land together and separate the parameters $c$ and $0$ from each other.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}[Monotonicity of Rational Lamination on Hubbard Tree]
\label{Cor:CountPartsHubTree}
Let $c,c'\in\M$ be two postcritically finite parameters such that $c\prec c'$. Suppose that in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ two periodic or preperiodic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together at some point in the Hubbard tree of $p_c$, but not on the backwards orbit of the critical value. Then in the dynamical plane of $c'$ the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ also land together and the landing point is in the Hubbard tree of $c'$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
In the dynamic plane of $p_c$, let $x$ be the landing point of the dynamic ray pair $RP(\theta^-,\theta^+)$; it is by hypothesis in the Hubbard tree of $c$. Let $x':=p_c^{\circ t}(x)$ be the characteristic point on the orbit of $x$: this is the unique point that separates the critical value from all other points on the forward orbit of $x$. Let $(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ be the characteristic angles at $x'$ (the ray pair at $x'$ that separates the critical value from all other rays on its orbit).
By Theorem~\ref{thm:Corresp}, the rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ form a ray pair for all parameters in the wake of $c$, and in particular for $c'$. The same is true for all pull-back ray pairs, as long as they are not in the component of $\C\sm RP(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ containing the critical value; and this is the case for the rays landing at $x$. The landing point is clearly in the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}[Dynamical Counterpart to Parameter]
\label{Def:DynamCounterpart} \lineclear
Let $c$ be a postcritically finite parameter and suppose $c'\succ c$. Then a (pre)periodic point $x$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ is called the \emph{dynamical counterpart to $c$} if
\begin{itemize}
\item
if $c$ is preperiodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the preperiodic dynamic rays at the same angles as $c$;
\item
if $c$ is periodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the periodic dynamic rays bounding (in the parameter plane) the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the periodic case, $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_c$, and the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$ is bounded by a periodic parameter ray pair landing at $\partial H_c$. The angles of this ray pair are the angles of two rays landing at $x$. For example, the $\alpha$ fixed point is the dynamical counterpart of $c=0$. In the preperiodic case, it is known that all dynamic rays with the same angles of the rays landing at $c$ also land together in the dynamical plane of $c'$.
An equivalent definition is that $x$ is the unique repelling periodic or preperiodic point in the dynamical plane of $c'$ such that the itinerary of $x$ (with respect to the critical point) equals the (upper) kneading sequence of $c$.
\begin{lemma}[Directly Subordinate Dyadics]
\label{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics} \lineclear
\looseness-1
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $c\lhd c'$ if and only if there is a postcritically finite parameter $c_*\in\M$ so that $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation within any sublimb of $c_*$, and $c$ is in a different sublimb of $c_*$ than $c'$.
In this case, denoting the external angles of $c$ and $c'$ by $\theta$ and $\theta'$, respectively, then in the dynamics of $c$ (or any other parameter in the same sublimb of $c_*$) there is a repelling (pre)periodic point $x_*$ that is the landing point of at least three dynamic rays that separate the dynamic rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$. The point $x_*$ is the dynamical counterpart to $c_*$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any two dyadic parameters are endpoints of $\M$, so by the Branch Theorem of the Mandelbrot set there is a unique postcritically finite parameter $c_*$ that contains $c$ and $c'$ in two different of its sublimbs. Let $c_0$ be the unique dyadic of least generation in any of the sublimbs of $c_*$; then $c_*$ is on the long vein of all three of $c_0$, $c$, and $c'$, and it is on the vein of $c_0$.
The assumption that $c\lhd c'$ means that the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$, and hence it must terminate at the parameter $c_*$, so $c_*$ is an interior point of the vein of $c'$. Since $c_*$ is also an interior point of the vein of $c_0$, it follows that $c'=c_0$ (two veins can never have more than one point in common).
Conversely, if $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation in the sublimb of $c_*$, then $c_*$ is in the interior of the vein of $c'$ and the vein of $c$ terminates at $c_*$. This proves the first claim.
For the second claim, we first consider the case that $c_*$ is a Mi\-siu\-re\-wicz-Thurston parameter; it is then the landing point of $s\ge 3$ rational parameter rays, say at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$, so that the parameter rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$ are in different sectors with respect to these parameter rays. Every parameter in any sublimb of $c_*$ has the property that the dynamic rays at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$ land together at a repelling preperiodic point, and the claim follows.
If $c_*$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, then the parameter $c$ is in a sublimb at internal angle $p/q\neq 1/2$, and in the dynamical plane of $c$ (or any parameter within the same sublimb) there is a repelling periodic point that is the landing point of $q\ge 3$ dynamic rays that separates the angles $0$, $\theta$ and $\theta'$ so that $\theta$ is in the largest sector not containing the angle $0$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
The main step in proving Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} is a topological surgery on Hubbard trees, as follows:
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Relation Between Subordinate Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} %\lineclear
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters with external angles $\theta$ and $\theta'$, let $H_c$ be the Hubbard tree of $c$, and let $H \supset H_c$ be the connected hull of the critical orbit and of the orbit of $z(\theta')$. Let $x$ be the branch point of the arcs from $0$ to $c$ and to $z(\theta')$. If $p_c$ is the natural map on $H$, define a map $f\colon H\to H$ as follows: choose a homeomorphism $\rho\colon[x,c]\to[x,z(\theta')]$ fixing $x$ and let
\[
f(z):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \rho\circ p_c(z) & \text{if $p_c(z)\in[x,c]$} \\
p_c(z) & \text{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.
\]
Let $H'$ be the connected hull within $H$ of the orbit of $0$ under $f$. Then $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have a connected tree $H$ containing the critical point $0$, and with respect to $f$ the orbit of $0$ is still finite (it still terminates at the $\beta$ fixed point). Therefore, $(H',f)$ is a finite tree with a continuous self-map, and the dynamics is locally injective except at the critical point $0$. Since there are at most $2$ branches at $0$, the map is globally at most $2:1$. Every endpoint is by definition on the critical orbit, so $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of a postcritically finite polynomial in which the critical orbit lands at the $\beta$ fixed point at the desired number of iterations. Let $c''$ be the corresponding parameter and $\theta''$ be the external angle; we have $\theta''=a''/2^{k'}$.
It remains to prove that $\theta''=\theta'$ and thus $c''=c'$.
Since $c\lhd c'$, there is a postcritically finite branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, that separates $c$ from $c'$, and the external angles of $c_*$ are the external angles of $x$ in the dynamical plane of $c$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). In the dynamical plane of $c''$, the point $x$ has the same external angles because it has the same period and preperiod and the dynamics of the subtree connecting the orbit of $x$ is unaffected by the surgery (except the bit around the critical point that maps past $x$). Hence $\theta''$ is the unique dyadic of least generation that is separated from the angle $0$ by the angles of $x$, and the same is true for $\theta'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The fact that $c''=c'$ can also be shown using spiders \cite{Spiders} and Thurston's theorem. Let us topologically extend the map $f:H' \to H'$ to a continuous map on $\C$ as follows. First, we set $f$ to be $p_c$ on the dynamic rays $R({2^{t}\theta'})$ of $p_c$, where $t\in\{0,1,\dots, k'\}$. There are $k'+1$ topological discs in the complement of $H'\cup_{t\ge 0} R({2^{t}\theta'})$ and the map $f$ easily extends to each of them as a homeomorphism. The new map $f$ is a topological polynomial for which $\bigcup_t R({2^{t}\theta'})$ forms an invariant spider. Since this spider is equivalent to a standard invariant spider of $c'$, we get $c'=c''$ by Thurston rigidity \cite{DHThurston,Spiders}.
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Injective Dynamics of Last Edge]
\label{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}
In any dyadic Julia set, consider any dyadic angle $\theta=a/2^k$ with $k\ge 1$ and let $x$ be the point where the arc from $z(\theta)$ to $\alpha$ is attached to the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generations $a'/2^{k'}$ with $k'<k$. Then $[z(\theta),x]$ maps injectively for $k$ iterations to an interval $[\beta,y]\subset[\beta,\alpha]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For every integer $m\ge 0$, let $T_m$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $m$. Let $f$ be the map on the Julia set.
The edge $[z(\theta),x]\subset \ovl{T_k\sm T_{k-1}}$ certainly maps forward homeomorphically one generation to an arc $[z(2\theta),x']$, where $x'=f(x)\in f(T_{k-1})$.
We claim that $[z(2\theta),x']\subset \ovl{T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2}}$ so that the inductive step applies and completes the proof.
We first show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, $T_{k-2}$ is the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k-2$. Consider an endpoint $y$ of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$. If $f(y)\in T_{k-2}$ was not an endpoint, so it was connected to at least two edges in $T_{k-2}$, then $y$ would have to be connected to at least two edges in $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$, a contradiction. Thus every endpoint of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$ is a dyadic endpoint of generation at least $k-1$ and hence $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
Finally, if $[z(2\theta),x']$ intersects $T_{k-2}$, then $[z(\theta),x]$ intersects $T_{k-1}$, and by hypothesis this intersection is the single point $x$. Hence $[z(2\theta),x']\subset (T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2})\cup\{x'\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In this lemma, the hypothesis that the polynomial be dyadic was stated only for convenience. All we are using is that the Julia set is path connected (if there are bounded Fatou components, the notation needs minor adjustments).
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Homeomorphic Preimage of Arc]
\label{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}
Suppose that $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters and let $\theta,\theta'$ be their external angles. In the Julia set of $c$, let $x$ be the branch point between $0$, $z(\theta)=c$ and $z(\theta')=:z'$. If $\theta=a/2^k$, then there is a point $y'\in(z',x)$ so that $p_c^{\circ k}\colon [z',y']\to p_c^{\circ k}([z',y'])= p_c^{\circ k}([ c,x])$ is a homeomorphism.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that $[c,x]$ maps homeomorphically for $k$ iterations to a subinterval of $[\beta,\alpha]$; define $y:=p_c^{\circ k}(x)\in(\beta,\alpha]$.
Similarly, there is a point $x'\in[z',0]$ so that $[z',x']$ maps forward homeomorphically for $k'$ iterations (if $\theta'=a'/2^{k'}$). We have
$x'\in[x,0]$ (or equivalently $x\in[z',x']$) because $c\lhd c'$, i.e.\ $c$ is \emph{directly} subordinate to $c'$.
More precisely, the external angles of the dynamic rays landing at $x$ are exactly the external angles of the parameter rays landing at a branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, where the vein of $c$ terminates (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). Analogously, the same is true for the point $x'$ and the vein of $c'$; let $c'_*$ be this branch point. But since $c\lhd c'$, it follows that $c'_*$ separates $c_*$ from the origin, and hence, by the Correspondence Theorem, $x'$ separates $x$ from the origin.
%\newpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{HubbardTreeBranchPic4.pdf}
}
\caption{Illustration of the relative position of various points in the Hubbard tree of $c$ in the proof of Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}. Note that we do not know or need the relative position between $0$, $y$, and $y''$; in particular, we do not claim $y''\in[\beta,y]$.
}
\label{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}
\end{figure}
Let $y'':=p_c^{\circ k'}(x)$; then $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon[z',x]\to[\beta,y'']$ is a homeomorphism. Iterating this $k-k'$ further times, the image arc terminates at $\beta$ and at $y$, but it can no longer be injective (the map $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[c,x]\to [\beta,y]$ is a homeomorphism, and $p_c^{\circ k}$ is a local homeomorphism near $x$ because $x$ cannot be on the critical orbit).
There is a branch $p_c^{-1}\colon[\beta,\alpha]\to[\beta,-\alpha]$; let $[\beta,y''']$ be the image of $[\beta,y]$ under the $k-k'$-th iterate of this branch.
Observe that $[y''',\beta]\subsetneq[y'',\beta]$ because otherwise $p_c^{\circ (k-k')}$ restricted to $[\beta,y'']$ would have degree $1$. Pulling back $k'$ times we obtain an interval $[z',y']\subset[z',x]$ so that $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon [z',y']\to[\beta,y''']$ and $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[z',y']\to[\beta,y]$ are homeomorphisms, as claimed.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Injection Between Precritical Points]
\label{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters. There exists a generation-preserving injection $B$ from the set of precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ to the set of precritical points in $[c',-\alpha]$ of $p_{c'}$. Moreover, $B$ could be taken to satisfy the following properties (A)--(C). Suppose $\zeta\in [c,-\alpha]$ is a precritical point.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] For $k\ge 0$ we have $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))\in [c',-\alpha]$. Moreover, if $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$, then
\[
B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta)).
\]
\item[(B)] Assume $c_*$ is a postcritically finite parameter such that $c_* \prec c$ and $c_* \prec c'$. Let $x_*$ and $x'_*$ be the dynamic counterparts of $c_*$ in the dynamical planes of $c$ and $c'$. Then $\zeta\in [x_*,-\alpha]$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in [x'_*,-\alpha]$.
\item[(C)] There is a sub-interval $J\subset [c', \alpha]$ such that $p^{\circ k }_{c'}(J)=[-\alpha, \alpha ]$ for some $k>0$ and such that the image of $B$ is in $[c',-\alpha]\setminus J$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition~\ref{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} and its notation, we may identify $p_{c'}:H_{c'}\to H_{c'}$ with $f:H'\to H'$. Under this identification $x'_*$ is $x_*$ which is a periodic or preperiodic point that never visits $[x,c]$ under iterates of $p_c$. We will now construct a bijection $B$ between precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and those precritical points in $[z',-\alpha]\setminus [y',x]$ of $f$ for which the orbit never visits $[y',x]$, where $y'$ is specified in Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage} (see Figure~\ref{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}).
In fact, our bijection will preserve the itinerary with respect to $H\sm\{0\}$, except for $k$ iterations along the orbit from $[c,x]$ to $[\beta,y]=p_c^{\circ k}([c,x])$ (resp.\ from $[z',y']$ to $[\beta,y]$).
Our proof proceeds by induction on the number of times, say $m$, that an orbit of a precritical point $\zeta$ runs through $[c,x]$ (not counting $\zeta$ itself). We start by those precritical points on $[c,x]$ (for the map $p_c$) that never run through $(c,x)$ again, that is with the case $m=0$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}, an appropriate branch of $f^{\circ(-k)}\circ p_c^{\circ k}$ sends $[c,x]$ homeomorphically to $[z',y']$; call this branch $\eta\colon[c,x]\to [z',y']$. Then for any $a\in[c,x]$, we have $p_c^{\circ k}(a)=f^{\circ k}(\eta(a))$ and the future orbits of these points under $p_c$ respectively under $f$ coincide as long as the orbits avoid $[c,x]$. Note that all precritical points on $[c,x]$ must have generation at least $k$. We thus obtain an injection, say $B_0$, of precritical points with $m=0$.
Every precritical point $\zeta\in[c,x]$ of generation $n$ and with $m=0$ is the common endpoint of two adjacent sub-intervals of $[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after $n$ iterations: we have $p_c^{\circ n}(\zeta)=c$ and $p_c^{\circ (n-1)}(\zeta)=0$, so we can pull the entire interval $[c,x]$ back in two ways (with a choice in the first step) until we end at $\zeta$. The pull-back of the entire interval $[c,x]$ is possible because no critical value can interfere (the critical orbit visits only endpoints of the tree), and the resulting interval is in $[c,x]$ because the Hubbard tree is unbranched on $[c,x)$ and the orbit of $x$ never enters $[c,x)$.
There is an analogous result about precritical points $\zeta'\in[z',y']$ of $f$ with $m=0$ and sub-intervals of $[z',y']$ that map to $[z',y']$: by construction of $y'$, the point $\zeta'$ has generation $n\ge k$, and there is a precritical point $\zeta=\eta^{-1}(\zeta')\in[c,x]$. The point $\zeta$ has neighborhood, say $I_\zeta\subset [c,x]$ that maps $2:1$ onto $[c,x]$ (the union of the two intervals constructed above), and then $\zeta'$ has a neighborhood $I_{\zeta'}\subset[z',y']$ with $p_c^{\circ k}(I_{\zeta'})=p_c^{\circ k}(I_\zeta)\subset[\beta,y]$.
The bijection $B_0$ of precritical points with $m=0$ thus extends to a bijection between intervals $I\subset[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after some number of iterations without visiting $(c,x)$ before, and intervals $I'\subset [z',y']$ that map homeomorphically onto $[z',y']$ after the same number of iterations and without ever visiting $(z',y')$; this bijection respects the number of iterations as well as the order along the intervals within $[c,x]$ and $[z',y']$ (the intervals are obviously disjoint). Denote this bijection of intervals by $B^*_0$.
Now suppose the statement is shown for all precritical points on $[c,x]$ that visit $(c,x)$ at most $m$ times, for some $m\ge 0$; in particular, we have an injection, say $B_m$, from precritical points on $(c,x)$ that map into $(c,x)$ exactly $m$ times, to precritical points on $(z',y')$ that map into $(z',y')$ exactly $m$ times. Consider any precritical point $\zeta\in(c,x)$ that visits $(c,x)$ exactly $m+1$ times, and let $s$ be minimal such that $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$. Then there is an interval $I\ni \zeta$ so that $p_c^{\circ s}\colon I\to[c,x]$ is a homeomorphism (same reasoning as above).
Let $I':=B^*_0(I)$. Then $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$ is a precritical point that visits $(c,x)$ only $m$ times, and $B_{m+1}(\zeta)=\zeta':= f^{\circ(-s)}\circ B_m \circ p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)$, choosing the branch $f^{\circ(-s)}\colon [y',z']\to I'$.
Since the map $B^*_0$ is injective, different intervals $I$ land in disjoint intervals $I'$, and since $B_m$ is injective by induction, the restriction of $B_{m+1}$ that run through any particular $I$ is injective too, so in total $B_{m+1}$ is injective as claimed.
This takes care of all precritical points on $[c,x]$, and we still have to deal with those on $[x,-\alpha]$. But those with orbits that never run through $[c,x]$ are unaffected by the changed dynamics, and the injection easily extends to those that map into $[c,x]$ under $p_c$.
It remains to show that the map $B$ satisfies Properties (A) -- (C). Let us extend $B_0^*$ to all intervals in $[x,-\alpha]$ that are injective preimages of $[c,x]$ and never run through $[c,x]$ before mapping into $[c,x]$. It is easy to see that $B_0^*(I)\subset I$ for every such interval $I$, because $[z',y']\subset [z',x]$ and $g_c^{\circ -1}[c,x]=f^{-1}[z',x]$, and induction is applied. Since $x_*$ never visits $[x,c]$, we see that $x_*\not \in I$ for every maximal pre-image $I$ of $[c,x]$. Also, by construction, $\zeta \in I$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in I$ for every precritical $\zeta$ and an interval $I$ as above. Therefore, $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ are on the same side of $x_*$. It is clear that $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ have the same return times to $[c,-\alpha]$ and $[z',-\alpha]$ because $p_c^{\circ k}[c,x]=f^{\circ k}[z',y']$. And the dynamical relation $B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))$ holds by construction. Thus Properties (A) and (B) hold. To prove (C) set $J$ to be any pre-image of $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ so that $J\subset [x,y']$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees}]
From Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} we have an injection of precritical points of $p_{c}$ of any given generation on $[-\alpha,c]$ to precritical points of $p_{c'}$ of the same generation on $[-\alpha',c']$, and by claim (B) this injection restricts to the arcs $[-\alpha,\alpha]$ and $[-\alpha',\alpha']$. This immediately proves the first half of part a), and the second half follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}.
Part b) of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}: a precritical orbit of $p_{c'}$ has strictly more choices than a precritical orbit of $p_c$ thanks to the interval $J$. More precisely, consider the Hubbard tree $H_{c'}$ of $p_{c'}$; and let us add the forward orbit of the ends of $J$ into the vertex set of $H_{c'}$. Denote by$A'$ the associated automaton of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$, see Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} for a formal definition of an associated automaton. And let $A'_*\subset A'$ be the sub-automaton obtained from $A'$ by removing all states within the interval $J$ as well as all arrows starting or ending at the removed states. Then the entropy of $c$ is bounded by the entropy of $A'_*$ by claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}, while the entropy of $c'$ is equal to the entropy of $A'$. Since $A'$ is irreducible, the entropy of $A'$ is strictly bigger than the entropy of $A'_*$.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Irrational Angles and the Tiozzo Conjecture}
In this brief section, we will complete the proof of the Tiozzo Conjecture.
\begin{lemma}[Bound for Irrational Angles]
\label{Lem:IrrationalAngle} \lineclear
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$ (dyadic or not) and every $n\in\N$ there is an $\eps>0$ so that $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ for all dyadic angles $\theta'$ with $|\theta'-\theta|<\eps$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
All the relevant precritical points correspond to non-degenerate leaves in the lamination, and there are finitely many of level $n$. As the characteristic angle $\theta$ changes, say by some $\eps>0$, then a precritical leaf of generation $k$ changes continuously by $\eps/2^k$, except when an endpoint of that precritical leaf moves through $\theta$, that is, when $\theta$ itself is periodic of period dividing $k$.
In the exceptional case that $\theta$ is periodic, there are preimage leaves that terminate at $\theta$ itself, but these do not separate and are thus not counted.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[The Tiozzo Conjectures]
\label{Cor:TiozzoConj} \lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\item[d)]
Within every wake, for each $n$ the function $N_\theta(n)$ assumes its maximum at the dyadic of least generation (of course, this maximum is not unique).
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Fix a dyadic angle $\theta_0$ and let $I=I(\theta_0)\subset\Circle$ be the open interval of angles $\theta$ for which the combinatorial arcs to $c(\theta)$ intersect the interior of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$ (not the long vein). In other words, if $c_*$ is the endpoint of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$, then $I$ consists of the angles within the same subwake of $c_*$ that $c(\theta)$ is in. Clearly $\theta_0\in I$. Every dyadic angle in $I$ is either directly or indirectly subordinate to $\theta_0$ (where the latter means that there is a finite sequence of dyadic angles ending at $\theta_0$ so that each is directly subordinate to the next).
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} part b), we know that $h$ restricted to dyadic angles in $I$ has its unique maximum at $\theta_0$.
We claim that for every $\theta\in I$ and every $n\in\N$ we have $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ and hence $h(\theta)\le h(\theta_0)$. Indeed, for every $n$ there is a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ sufficiently close to $\theta$ with $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:IrrationalAngle}), and $N_{\theta'(n)}\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ by definition of $I$. Therefore $\theta_0$ is a (weak) local maximum of $N_\theta(n)$ and of $h$.
However, if $\theta$ is dyadic, then we even have $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$. If $c(\theta)\prec c(\theta_0)$, then $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$ by monotonicity along dyadic veins. Otherwise, choose a new dyadic $\theta'$ so that $\theta\in I(\theta')$ but $\theta_0\not\in I(\theta')$. We then have $h(\theta)\le h(\theta')<h(\theta_0)$. Therefore, $\theta_0$ is the unique global maximum within $I(\theta_0)\ni\theta_0$. This proves claim a) in the stronger form that $h$ has a unique global maximum on $I(\theta_0)$, and this occurs at $\theta_0$.
For part c), consider any hyperbolic component $W$ and let $I$ be the open interval of angles within its wake. Let $\theta_W$ be the unique dyadic of lowest generation within $I$. Then $I(\theta_W)\supset I$, and on this interval $h$ has its unique global maximum at $\theta_W$. Now suppose $W$ is a wake that is not the wake of a hyperbolic component: then either it is one of the subwakes of a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters, or an irrational wake (bounded by two irrational angles with equal angled internal address). But such wakes are exhausted by wakes of hyperbolic components, so the claim holds for them as well. Part d) also follows.
For claim b), suppose $\theta$ is a local maximum of $h$, and let $I\subset\Circle$ be an interval on which $\theta$ is the global maximum. By monotonicity, $\theta$ lands (combinatorially) at an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. If $\theta$ is not dyadic, then choose a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ with $\theta\in I(\theta')\subset I$.
Then the unique global maximum of $h$ within $I(\theta')$ is at $\theta'$, so $\theta=\theta'$ is dyadic.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Continuity of Entropy}
\label{Sec:Continuity}
We start with a combinatorial estimate. A ``combinatorial pattern of length $n$ with gap size $s$'' is a finite sequence of integers $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ with $1\le j_1< j_2 < \dots < j_m< n$ and $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s$ and $n-j_m\ge s$.
\begin{lemma}[Number of Combinatorial Patterns]
\label{Lem:CombinatorialPatterns}
The number of combinatorial patterns of length $n$ with gap size $s$ is at most $e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The number of combinatorial patterns equals the number of binary sequences of length $n$ where two consecutive digits $1$ have distance at least $s$, and so that the final digit is a $1$. Write $n=ks+r$ with $r<s$. Then each block of $s$ consecutive entries has $s+1$ possibilities because it has at most a single $1$, and the last block has $r-1$ digits $0$ followed by a $1$, so it has $1$ possibility. The number of combinatorial patterns is thus at most $(s+1)^k\le e^{k\log(s+1)}\le e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
In the following proof, it will be convenient to define relevant precritical points as precritical points on $[\alpha,\beta]$, i.e.\ precritical leaves separating the two fixed points $\alpha$ and $\beta$ or their corresponding leaves in the lamination (rather than separating $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$ as before).
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Different Counts Yield Identical Entropy]
\label{lem:DifferCounts}
\lineclear
In any invariant quadratic lamination, let $N_1(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves that separate $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$, and let $N_2(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves of generation $n$ separating the leaves corresponding to the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points. Then
\[
\limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_1(n) = \limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_2(n)
\;;
\]
in other words, both counting functions define the same entropy.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $-\alpha\in[\alpha,\beta]$, we clearly have $N_1(n)\le N_2(n)$. To show the converse, we claim that $N_2(n) \le (N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+ N_1(n-2)+\dots) $.
To see this, denote $\alpha_0:=\alpha$ and, recursively, $\alpha_{n+1}$ to be the unique preimage of $\alpha_n$ on $[\alpha,\beta]$, so $\alpha_1=-\alpha$. Then $[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_n]$ maps homeomorphically onto $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n-1}]$ and $[\alpha,\beta]=\bigcup_{n\ge 0}[\alpha_{n},\alpha_{n+1}]$. If $N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n)$ denotes the number of precritical points of generation $n$ on $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]$, then we have $N_{[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_{n+2}]}(n)=N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n-1)$ and $N_{[\alpha_{0},\alpha_{1}]}(n)=N_1(n)$ and indeed $N_2(n) = N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+N_1(n-2)+\dots$. If $N_1\le C e^{(h+\eps)n}$ for all $n$, then $N_2(n)\le 2Cn e^{(h+\eps)n}$. Therefore, $N_1$ and $N_2$ define the same entropy.
\end{proof}
In view of this lemma, we will take the liberty in the following result to count relevant precritical points (leaves) as those separating the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points.
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Bound on Entropy Increase]
\label{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} \lineclear
Suppose $c_1\prec c_2$ and $[c_1,c_2]$ is a (combinatorial) arc in $\M$ such that $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$. Then there is an $s>0$ with the following property: if $[c,c']$ is a dyadic vein of generation at least $s$ that terminates at $c\in [c_1,c_2]$, then $\tilde h(c')-\tilde h(c_2)\le \eps$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $h:=\tilde h(c_2)$. There is a $C>0$ so that all $c\in [c_1,c_2]$ satisfy $N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)\le Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$ for all $n$. We may suppose that $s$ is large enough so that $2C\le e^{(h+\eps/2)s}$. Let $s'\ge s$ be the generation of $c'$.
Let $f' \colon H'\to H'$ denote the Hubbard tree of the dyadic parameter $c'$ and $f\colon H\to H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$ (as endpoint of a dyadic vein in $\M$, $c$ is postcritically finite, so both Hubbard trees exist and are finite). Let $x\in H'$ be the dynamical counterpart of $c$.
Recall that $x$ is a characteristic periodic or preperiodic point in the sense that the entire orbit of $x$ is contained in the closure of the component of $H'\sm\{x\}$ that contains $0$.
In particular, the orbit of $x$ is disjoint from $(x,c']$. It follows that any connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ is either contained in $[x,c']$ or intersects it at most in $\{x\}$. (Otherwise, $x$ would be in the interior of $I$ and after $n$ iterates $x$ would be mapped into $(x,c']$.)
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that
\begin{equation}
(f')^{\circ (s')}([x,c']) \subset[\alpha,\beta]
\;.
\label{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}
\end{equation}
and, moreover, the orbit of $(f')^{\circ m}([x,c'])$ for $m\in \{0,1,\dots , s'-1\}$ does not contain $0$.
By a maximal preimage of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n>0$ we
mean a connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ so that $I\not\subset (f')^{-m}[x,c']$
for every $m\in\{1,2,\dots,n\}$; equivalently, $(f')^{\circ m}(I)\not \subset [x,c']$ for all $m<n$.
We denote by $M$ the set of all maximal preimages of $[x,c']$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$.
An \emph{itinerary} of $I$ will be a sequence $s_{0}s_1\dots s_{n-2}\in\{\0,\1\}^\N$ where each $s_{i}$ describes the connected component of $H'\setminus \{0\}$ containing $(f')^i(I)$ (labeled for instance so that the critical value is in the component with label $\1$).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:PreCritInterv}
There is an itinerary preserving inclusion from
\begin{itemize}
\item the set $M$ of maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n$; to
\item the set of precritical points of $f:H\to H$ of generation $n$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, a maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ belongs to the interval $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H'$ if and only if the corresponding precritical point belongs to $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $[c', c]$ is a dyadic vein, we may associate to $f:H\to H$ and $f'\colon H' \to H'$ the automata $A$ and $A'$ as in Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} such that there is an inclusion $J:A\hookrightarrow A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'} we denote by $e_0$ the unique state of $A'$ containing the critical point.
Then maximal preimages $I$ of $[x,c']$ of generation $n$ are in bijection with paths $s$ in $J( A)$ of length $n-1$ terminating at $e_0$ and starting at states in $[x,\beta]$. Indeed, every such $s$ is uniquely described by a sequence of states $s_0,s_1,\dots , s_{n-2}$ in $A'$ such that $(f')^{\circ i}(I) \subset s_i$. Since $I$ is a maximal preimage, all $s_i$ are in $J(A)$.
Further, $J^{-1}(s)$ defines a unique critical point in $[c,\beta]$ of $f$ because $J^{-1}(s)$ starts at a state in $[c,\beta]$ and terminates at $J^{-1}(e_0)$ containing the critical point. This constructs the required injection.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
By Lemma~\ref{lem:PreCritInterv} the number of intervals in $M$ of generation $n$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$ is bounded above by $Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$.
In order to bound the number of precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of any generation $n$ in the dynamics of $f'\colon H'\to H'$, consider any relevant (i.e.\ between the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ points) precritical point $\ell$ of generation $n$. Let $j_1<j_2<\dots <j_m=n$ be the set of all iterates so that $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$.
Then $\ell$, $(f')^{\circ (j_1+s')}(\ell)$, $(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell)$,\dots , $(f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$ are within $[\alpha,\beta]$; compare \eqref{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}. This also implies that $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s'$.
Let $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}\in M$ be the unique intervals in $M$ containing, respectively,
$\ell, (f')^{\circ(j_1+s')}(\ell),(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell),\dots , (f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$; their respective generations are $j_1, j_2-j_1-s',\dots , j_{m}-j_{m-1}-s'$.
Then $\ell$ has itinerary $\s=s_0s_2\dots s_{n-2}$ of $\ell$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $s_0s_1\dots s_{j_1-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_0$;
\item $s_{j_i}s_{j_i+1}\dots s_{j_i+s'-1}$ is the kneading sequence of $c'$;
\item $s_{j_{i}+s'}s_{j_{i}+s'+1}\dots s_{j_{i+1}-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_i$; and
\item all $s_{j_{i}-1}$ are arbitrary in $\{\0,\1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We justify this as follows:
$(f')^{\circ(j_1-1)} $ maps $I_0$ homeomorphically, while $(f')^{\circ j_1}\colon I_0\to [x,\tilde c]$ is a $2:1$-map, so the first $j_1-2$ iterates do not contain $0$ and all points in $I_0$ have the same entries in their itineraries up to entry number $j_1-2$.
Since $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$, the next iterates are the same as for $[x,c']$ and, in particular, for $c'$, hence equal to the kneading sequence of $c'$, at least before $c'$ lands at the $\beta$ fixed point, that is for $s'-1$ iterations. The iterate $(f')^{\circ (j_i+s')}(\ell)$ is by definition in $I_i$, and this interval travels forward homeomorphically until it covers $0$, which is the iteration before it reaches $[x,c']$ the next time; since the latter is at iterate $j_{i+1}$, the itinerary of $\ell$ coincides with that of $I_i$ until position $j_{i+1}-2$. In the subsequent iterate, the image interval $(f')^{\circ j_{i+1}-j_i-1}(I_i)$ contains $0$, so both entries in the itinerary might be possible.
Now consider the set of all precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of generation $n$ corresponding to a particular combinatorial pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$.
We just showed that in order to determine the itinerary of $\ell$ we only need to specify $s_{j_1-1},s_{j_2-1},\dots , s_{j_m-1}\in \{\0,\1\}$ as well as the intervals $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}$ as above; their numbers we estimated above. Therefore, the total number of precritical points with pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ is at most
\[
2 C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_1-1)} \left(\prod_{i=1}^{m-1} 2C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_{i+1}-j_i-s'-1)}\right)\le2C e^{(h+\eps/2)n}
\]
because $2Ce^{-s'}\le 1$ by hypothesis.
Since the number of combinatorial patterns is at most $e^{\log(s'+1)n/s'}$, it follows that $N_{\tilde c}(n) \le 2 C e^{n(h+\eps/2+\log(s'+1)/s')}$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\tilde h(\tilde c)
&\le \limsup_n \frac{1}{n}\left(\log 2 +\log C + n (h+\eps/2)+\frac{n}{s'}\log(s'+1) \rule{0pt}{11pt} \right)
\\
&\le h+\eps/2+ \frac{\log (s'+1)}{s'} \le h+\eps
\;
\end{align*}
if $s'\ge s$ is sufficiently large.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy Near Veins]
\label{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins} \lineclear
Suppose $\theta\in\Circle$ is such that topological entropy is continuous along the (combinatorial) vein connecting the parameters $0$ to $c(\theta)$ in $\M$. Then $h$ is continuous for all parameters on $[0,c(\theta)]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
It may be helpful to explain the statement. Let $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to \C$ be a parametrization of the (combinatorial) arc $[0,c(\theta)]$. Then the hypothesis says that $h(\gamma(t))$ is continuous for $t\in[0,1]$ (only considering parameters along the arc). The conclusion is that then $h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\gamma(t)$ for all $t$. (Note that this hypothesis is known to be true for all angles $\theta\in\Circle$, except when $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$ at an irrational angle \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}; we will treat the missing case in Section~\ref{Sec:IrratEndpoints}).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, suppose $c_a\prec c_b$ are two parameters in $\M$ with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$; we allow $c_b$ to be a (combinatorial) endpoint of $\M$. Denote by $\text{wake}(c_a)$ the open wake of $c_a$: this is the set of all parameters in $\M$ that are separated from $0$ by two parameter rays landing at (or accumulating at) $c_a$. If $c_a$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then we set $\text{wake}(c_a)$ to be the subwake of $c_a$ containing $c_b$. Similarly $\text{wake}(c_b)$ is defined; if $c_b$ is a combinatorial endpoint of the Mandelbrot set, then $\text{wake}(c_b)=\emptyset$. Set $W:=\ovl{\text{wake}(c_a)}\sm\text{wake}(c_b)$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} there are at most finitely many dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ with $c_i\in [c_a,c_b]$ such that the entropy variation along $[c_i,c'_i]$ exceeds $\eps$, and so that $c_b\not\in(c_i,c'_i]$. We will construct a ``reduced wake'' $W'\subset W$ in which the entropy variation is at most $2\eps$.
By the Branch Theorem \cite{Orsay}, \cite[Theorem~3.1]{MandelBranch}, the points $c_i$ are either Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters or centers of hyperbolic components. In both cases, we will exclude a subwake at $c_i$ from $W$ where the entropy variation is large.
If $c_i$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, let $W_i$ be the subwake of $c_i$ containing $c'_i$ and thus $[c_i,c'_i]$ (this subwake does not contain $c_b$). If $c_i$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_i$, then let $W_i$ be the subwake of $H_i$ that contains $c'_i$ (the root of this wake is a bifurcation parameter on $\partial H_i$).
Set $W':=W\sm \bigcup_i \ovl{W_i}$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj} (the Tiozzo Conjecture), the maximal entropy for angles within $W'$ (or more precisely, the entropy of angles corresponding to rays in $W'$) occurs either at $c_b$ or at a dyadic parameter $c'\in W'$, and in both cases it is at most $\tilde h(c_a)+2\eps$.
To prove continuity of $h$ at $\theta$, we first discuss the case that $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$. By hypothesis, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial vein $[0,c(\theta)]$, so there is a $c_a\in\M$ with $0\prec c_a\prec c(\theta)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c(\theta)) -\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$. Now we use the argument from above and construct a wake $W'$ as described.
Then all angles $\theta'\in W'$ satisfy $|h(\theta')-h(\theta)|\le 2\eps$, and these angles form a neighborhood of $\theta$, which completes the proof in this case.
The second case is that $c(\theta)$ is not an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set and $c(\theta)$ is neither on the boundary of a hyperbolic component nor a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter. We may choose an arc $(c_a,c_b)\ni c(\theta)$ (i.e., $c_a\prec c(\theta)\prec c_b$) with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a)\le 2\eps$ and proceed as above.
If $c(\theta)$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then there are finitely many branches, and the previous argument works separately for all the individual branches.
If $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of a single hyperbolic component $H$, let $c_a\in \partial H$ be the root of $H$ (the boundary point with multiplier $1$) and let $c_b$ be the period-doubling bifurcation point (the boundary point with multiplier $-1$). Then all dyadic parameters $c'\in W=\text{wake}(c_a)\sm\ovl{\text{wake}(c_b)}$ have the endpoints of their veins in $W\setminus \{c(\theta)\}$. The entropy variation of $[c_a,c_b] $ is $0$, in particular less than $\eps$.
Hence $W'$ as above provides a neighborhood of $\theta$ with small entropy variation.
Finally, if $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of two hyperbolic components, then the previous argument works separately
for both hyperbolic components.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy]
\label{Thm:Continuity} \lineclear
If $\theta\in\Circle$, then $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\theta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins}, entropy is continuous at all angles $\theta\in\Circle$ for which entropy restricted to the combinatorial arc $[0,c(\theta)]$ is continuous. This is true for all parameters $c(\theta)$ with $\theta\in\Q/\Z$ by work of Tiozzo~\cite{TiozzoThesis} and Jung \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, and consequently for all parameters that are not (combinatorial) endpoints of $\M$ at irrational angles. For combinatorial endpoints $c(\theta)$ with irrational $\theta$, we will prove this in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{corollary}[Existence of Limit]
\label{Cor:ExistenceLimit} \lineclear
In the dynamics of $p_c$, the limit $\lim_{n\to\infty} (1/n)\log N(n)$ exists whenever $p_c$ is non-renormalizable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, if $c$ is non-renormalizable and postcritically finite, then $\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)=\lim_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)$ by irreducibility of the associated subshift of finite type. If $c$ is not postcritically finite and not an endpoint of $\M$ (that is, $c$ is associated to two external angles in $\M$), then there are two non-renormalizable parameters $c_1$ and $c_2$ with $N_{c_1}(n)\le N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le\eps$ for arbitrary $\eps>0$ and the result holds as well (here we use continuity of entropy).
Finally, if $c$ is a non-renormalizable endpoint, then by continuity of $\tilde h$ for any $\eps>0$ there exists a postcritically finite non-renormalizable parameter $c_1\prec c$ so that $\tilde h(c)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$.
By monotonicity, we have $\liminf(1/n)N_c(n)\ge \liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)$, and
$\limsup(1/n)N_c(n)=\tilde h(c)\le \tilde h(c_1)+\eps=\liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)+\eps\le \liminf(1/n)N_{c}(n)+\eps$. Since $\eps>0$ was arbitrary, the claim follows in this case too.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Irrational endpoints}
\label{Sec:IrratEndpoints}
In this section, we prove that for every combinatorial endpoint $c$ of $\M$, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial arc $[0,c]$. This is known when $c$ is postcritically finite \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, but we need it in all cases. This proof provides the missing step in the continuity proof in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}.
We will approximate the irrational endpoints by dyadic ones, and of course we need uniform estimates for the latter (see Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}).
\subsection{Hubbard trees}
\label{ss:HaubTrees}
We need to start by discussing some more properties of Hubbard trees of postcritically finite polynomials.
The \emph{marked points} or \emph{vertices} of the Hubbard tree are the endpoints, branch points, and the postcritical points. (In fact, all endpoints are postcritical points; critical points are not included in their own right, but they might be postcritical, for instance when they are periodic, and when the degree is greater than $2$ then they might also be branch points.) Since the set of vertices is forward invariant, every edge (a closed arc connecting two vertices) maps over one or several entire edges, so that the image contains every edge the interior of which intersects the image; in other words, the edges form a Markov partition on the Hubbard tree. --- Here, we will only discuss quadratic polynomials and Hubbard trees.
If $H_r\subset H$ is a proper subtree of $H$ with the property that $p_c^{\circ n}(H_r)\subset H_r$ for some period $n\ge 2$, then $p_c$ is \emph{renormalizable}; it is well known that this means the $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded copy of the Mandelbrot set within itself.
The main part of the argument below will be in the case that there exists an edge $e\subset H$ so that $p_c^{\circ n}(e)=H$ for every sufficiently big $n$. If $p_c$ is non-renormalizable, then every edge will do; otherwise there may still be some edge (outside of ``little Julia sets'') with this property. If there is no such edge, then we are in the ``immediate satellite renormalizable case'', that means $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded Mandelbrot set that touches the main cardioid of $\M$.
\emph{Standing Assumption:} In this subsection and the next one (Section~\ref{ss:Automata}), we assume that $H$ has an edge for which a finite iterate covers the entire Hubbard tree $H$, so that $c$ is not immediate satellite renormalizable. (In fact, this assumption will continue to hold, in different notation, until we give the proof of the general case in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}).
Consider a dyadic endpoint $c'$ with Hubbard tree $H'$ and external angle ${q}/{2^m}$. Then the critical value and every postcritical point are endpoints of $H'$, so vertices of $H'$ are either endpoints or branch points. Easy calculations show that $H'$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item $m+1$ endpoints;
\item at most $m-2$ branch points;
\item at most $2m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Let $c$ be the postcritically finite parameter where the vein of $c'$ terminates. We denote by $H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$; note that $\beta \not\in H$.
Denote by $x\in H'$ the dynamic counterpart of $c$ as in Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\begin{lemma}
The set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}\setminus \{\text{vertices of }H'\}$ contains at most $m$ points; equivalently, $p_{c'}^{\circ m}(x)$ is a branch point of $H'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde c$ be the dyadic parameter with $c'\lhd \tilde c$, so $c'$ is directly subordinate to $\tilde c$. Then $c\prec c'$ and $c\prec \tilde c$.
Denote by $\tilde q/ 2^n$ the external angle of $\tilde c$; note that $n<m$.
We will work in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, the rays landing at $x$ (this point is denoted by $x_*$ in Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}) separate $R(0), R(\tilde q/2^n)$, and $R(q/2^m)$.
Let $x(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ be the landing point of $R(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ and consider the arc $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$ in the filled-in Julia set of $p_{c'}$ (which is a dendrite). Then $x$ has at least three branches in $ H'\cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$: two of them are the branches to the critical point and to the critical value at angle $q/2^m$, and the third is $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$.
We claim that $p_{c'}^{\circ n}[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\subset H'$. Indeed, let $T_k$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. Then $p_{c'}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$ by \eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}. Therefore, $p_{c'}(T_{k-1})\subset T_{k-2}\cup H'$ and, by induction, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(T_{n})\subset H'$.
Therefore, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(x)$ has at least $3$ branches in $H'$ because $p_{c'}^{\circ n}:H' \cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\to H'$ is locally a homeomorphism at $x$, and $n<m$.
\end{proof}
Let us now refine $H'$ by adding the finite set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}$ to its vertex set. The new tree, still called $H'$, has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $3m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $3m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Here and elsewhere, we find it convenient to express some combinatorial properties in terms of \emph{automata}. We would like to reassure the reader that we only use a basic notion without results from automata theory and hope it will not be distracting. More precisely, given a postcritically finite polynomial $p_{c'}$ with Hubbard tree $H'$, we associate to it an automaton $A'$ in a natural way, as follows. The states of $A'$ correspond to the edges of $H'$. An arrow connects two edges $e_1$ and $e_2$ so that the image of $e_1$ contains $e_2$; the number of arrows from $e_1$ to $e_2$ equals the number of times the edge $e_1$ covers $e_2$ under $p_{c'}$ (this is well defined because we have a Markov partition). This number of arrows equals $0$ or $1$, except for the unique edge (if any) that contains the critical point in its interior.
Similarly, denote by $A$ the natural automaton associated with $p_c\colon H\to H$.
\emph{Overview on the argument.}
The key idea of our proof consists of identifying the dynamics of $p$ on $H$ as an embedded subset of the dynamics of $p'$ on $H'$. Since entropy measures the growth rate of choice of orbits of length $n$, the entropy of $p'$ on $H'$ is no less than the entropy of $p$ on $H$, and we need to give an upper bound on the difference. An orbit in $H'$ that realizes the additional choice is one that leaves the embedded image of $H$ in $H'$, and we show that it starts on a single edge $[x,c']$ at the critical value. We show that this edge maps forward homeomorphically a large number of iterations: so if some orbit uses the additional choice, then it will not have any choice for a long time, and this will give an upper bound on the entropy increase. We will do much of the argument in terms of the automaton $A$ that we consider as a sub-automaton of $A'$.
We start the construction by describing the relation between $H,A$ and $H',A'$ in the following lemma. We define an end-edge of $H'$ to be any edge so that among the two vertices it connects there is one endpoint of $H'$.
\begin{lemma}[Identifying $A$ as Sub-Automaton of $A'$]
\label{lem:AandA'} \lineclear
Denote by $H'_*$ the sub-tree of $H'$ obtained from $H'$ by removing all its end-vertices and (open) end-edges. Then there is a homeomorphism $J:H \to H'_*$
such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$J$ is a tree-isomorphism, i.e.\ $J$ sends vertices and edges of $H$ to vertices and edges of $ H'_*$ respectively;
\item
if $y$ is a vertex of $H$, then $J(y)$ has the same itinerary as $y$; and
\item
$J$ respects the dynamics in the sense that
an edge $e_1$ of $H$ covers once, resp twice, an edge $e_2$ under $p_c$ if and only if $J(e_1)$ covers once, resp twice, $J(e_2)$ under $p_{c'}$.
\end{enumerate}
There is a unique edge $e_0$ of $H'$ containing the critical point of $p_{c'}$. If $c$ is strictly pre-periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is in the interior of $J^{-1}(e_0)$. If $c$ is periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is on the boundary of $J^{-1}(e_0)$.
The map $J$ induces an inclusion $A \hookrightarrow A'$ by mapping a state $e$ of $A$ into the state $J(e)$ of $A'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us first define the map
\[
J: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Recall that every vertex of $H$ is a postcritical point or a branch point.
If $y\in \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}$ (in the dynamics of $p_c$) is a branch point of $H$, then $y$ is not a pre-critical point because the latter points have valence $1$ or $2$ in $H$.
In particular, there are at least $3$ external rays landing at $y$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:CountPartsHubTree} these rays at the same angle also land together in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ and the landing point, say $y'$, is in $H'_*$. We define $J(y):=y'$.
Further, let $x=J(c)$ be the dynamical counterpart (again in the dynamics of $c'$) of the parameter $c$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}. Then we set $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c)):= p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)\in H'_*$ for all $k\ge 0$. We claim that this definition is consistent and, moreover, that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
$J$ is injective on the set of vertices and
\item[(b)] $J$ preserves orientation in the following sense: if a ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ lands at a non-precritical point of $H$ so that $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates two vertices $v_1,v_2\in H$, then $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates $J(v_1)$ and $J(v_2)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
\end{itemize}
If $c$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameter, then $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of at least two external rays (because $c\prec c'$ is not an endpoint). Moreover, $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of a ray $R(\phi)$ if and only if $R(\phi)$ lands at $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c))$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$. Thus $J$ is well defined and satisfies (a) and (b).
The other case is that $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component $W$. In this case, no ray lands at $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ for $k\ge 0$ because these points are in the Fatou set. By definition, $J(c)=x$ is the landing point of periodic rays, say $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$, so that $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$ bounds the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$. Denote by $c_*\in \partial W$ the landing point of $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. For a parameter $w\in \ovl W$, let $\gamma_w$ be a non-repelling periodic point; there is a unique continuous choice so that $\gamma_c=c$. Moreover, $\gamma_{c_*}$ is the landing point of the ray pair $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. Observe also that the cycle $\{p_w^{\circ k}(\gamma_w)\}_{k\ge 0}$ for $w\in W\cup\{c_*\}$ does not cross any ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ as in claim (b). This proves claim (b) because the rays landing at non-precritical points of $H$ plus rays $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$ are stable in the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
%\newpage
We now extend $J$ to a continuous map $J:H\to H'_*$ that is injective on every edge of $H$. Since $J$ preserves orientation of vertices of $H$, the extension is an embedding.
Since $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(c')$ is not in the image of $J$ for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$ but $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ is in the image of $J$ for all $k\ge 0$, the image of $H$ under $J$ is the connected hull of $\cup _{k\ge 0} p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ (the tree $H$ is the connected hull of the orbit of $c$ under $p_c$, and the map $J$ preserves external angles of rays landing at vertices). By Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} the images $p^{\circ k}_{c'}([c',x])$ are arcs with disjoint interiors for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$. Thus there is no branch point in $H'\setminus J(H)$. Therefore, $J$ maps $H$ bijectively onto $ H'_*$.
In the standard definition of Hubbard trees, every vertex of $H'$ is a branch point or an endpoint, and the postcritical points are exactly the endpoints. Remember, however, that we added the orbit of $x$ to the set of vertices of $H'$. The vertices of $H'_*$ are thus the branch points in $H'$ and the orbit of $x$, and all are $J$-images of vertices in $H$. Therefore $J$ is a bijection from vertices of $H$ to vertices of $H'_*$, and claim (1) follows.
Observe that $J$ is a conjugacy between
\[
p_c: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}
\]
and
\[
p_{c'}: \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Therefore, if $e_1$ is an edge of $H$ so that the critical point $0$ is not in the interior of $e_1$, then $p_{c}(e_1)\supset e_2$ if and only if $p_{c'}(J(e_1))\supset J(e_2)$. Moreover, $p_c$ and $p_{c'}$ restricted to $e_1$ and $J(e_1)$ respectively have degree $1$. If the interior of $e_1=[a,b]$ contains the critical point of $p_c$, then $p_c([a,0])=[p_{c}(a),c]$ and $p_c([0,b])=[c,p_{c}(b)]$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $J(e_1)$ because all other edges of $H'$ are mapped injectively under $p_{c'}$. We have $p_{c'}([J(a),0])=[J(p_c(a)),c')]\supset [J(p_c(a),J(c)]$ and $p_{c'}([0,J(b)])=[c',J(p_c(b))]\supset [J(c), J(p_c(b)]$. This finishes the proof of (1)--(3).
The critical point $0$ is not a vertex of $H'$ because $0$ is a strictly preperiodic point of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$. Hence $0$ is in the interior of an edge $e_0\subset H'$. Since $x\in p_{c'}(e_0)$ we have $c\in p_{c}(J^{-1}(e_0))$. Therefore, $J^{-1}(e_0)$ contains the critical point $0$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $e_0$ if and only if $0$ is strictly preperiodic under $p_c$.
Clearly, $J$ injects the set of states of $A$, which are edges of $H$, into the set of states of $A'$, which are edges of $H'$. It follows from (3) that the number of arrows from $a_1$ to $a_2$ (i.e., the degree of the corresponding map on the edge) is equal to the number of arrows from $J(a_1)$ to $J(a_2)$.
\end{proof}
\goodbreak
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:EdgesOfH}
The tree $H$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $2m-2$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-3$ edges.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Automata}
\label{ss:Automata}
Let us look in detail at the automata $A'$ and $A$ introduced above. For simplicity, we write $A\subset A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}.
Whether or not the dynamics on a Hubbard tree is renormalizable is encoded in the associated automaton. We write
$A=A_n\cup A_r$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_n$ (the non-renormalizable edges) contains all states that, for a fixed finite iterate, reach all states of $A$ simultaneously; and
\item $A_r$ (the renormalizable edges) contains all states from which {not all} of $A$ can be reached simultaneously: these correspond to edges within the Hubbard trees of ``smalls Julia sets'' corresponding to renormalization domains).
\end{itemize}
The dynamics on the Hubbard tree is renormalizable if and only if $A_r\neq \emptyset$.
An automaton is called \emph{irreducible} if every state of $A$ can be reached from each other. This is certainly the case when $A$ is non-renormalizable, but may also happen in the renormalizable case: for instance, the Hubbard tree of the rabbit polynomial with a superattracting $3$-cycle has its Hubbard tree in the form of a topological \textsf{Y} where the three edges are permuted cyclically: the automaton has the form $e_0\to e_1\to e_2\to e_0$ and is irreducible, but the dynamics is renormalizable. The difference is that no edge covers all of $A$ after the same number of iterations.
If $A_r\neq\emptyset$, so that the dynamics is renormalizable, then we may have $A_n=\emptyset$ or $A_n\neq \emptyset$. The former case, $A_n=\emptyset$, was defined earlier as the case of immediate satellite renormalization.
Recall our earlier assumption that $A_n\neq\emptyset$: so we are not in the immediate satellite renormalizable case.
We also remark that there are no arrows from $A_r$ to $A_n$, so within $A$ there is no escape from the set of renormalization states $A_r$. However, in $A'\supset A$, if $A_r\neq\emptyset$, then there are two arrows from $A_r$ to $[c',x]$, which is a state in $A'\setminus A$.
There are the following special states of $A$ and $A'\supset A$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the $0$-state in $A'$ contains the critical point; this state is the edge $e_0$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}; we set the $0$-state of $A$ to be $J^{-1}(e_0)$; this convention is compatible with the inclusion $J\colon A\hookrightarrow A'$;
\item
the $[c',x]$-state of $A'\setminus A$;
\item
states of $A$ and of $A'$ that belong to the interval $[\alpha, -\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
A \emph{path} in $A$ or $A'$ is a sequence of arrows so that each arrow starts where the previous arrow ends. The \emph{length} of a path is the number of arrows it contains. We can also think of a path as a sequence of states so that there is an arrow from every state to the subsequent one (that is, a sequence of edges in the Hubbard tree so that each edge covers the next one under the map). When a path connects two states that are connected by multiple arrows, then there are accordingly multiple paths along this sequence of states (as an example, in $A'$ there are two paths of length $1$ from the $0$-state to the $[c',x]$-state).
We define a \emph{relevant precritical path} in $A'$ or in $A$ as a path that starts at a state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and terminates at the $0$-state. By basic properties of symbolic dynamics, relevant precritical paths in $A'$ are in bijection with precritical points of $p_{c'}$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ because the critical point of $p_{c'}$ is not a vertex of $H'$. Different relevant precritical paths in $A$ encode different precritical points of $p_c$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
Every relevant precritical path $s$ in $A'$ has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DecompOfs}
s=b_0c_0a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\end{equation}
such that (roughly: $a_i, b_i, c_i$ are the sub-paths in $ A'\setminus A$, in $A_n$, and in $A_r$ respectively)
\begin{itemize}
\item
$a_i$ is an (almost) ``choiceless'' path that starts at the $0$-state, then goes to $[x,c']$, then travels outside of states in $[\alpha, -\alpha]$, and terminates at the first state reached in $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset A$;
\item
if $a_i$ terminates at a state in $A_r$, then $b_i=\emptyset$; otherwise, $b_i$ is a path that starts at the state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ where $a_i$ terminates and continues while states in $A_n$ are visited; (if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$)
\item
if $A_r=\emptyset$, then $c_i=\emptyset$; otherwise: if $b_i\not=\emptyset$, then $c_i$ is a path that starts in $A_n$ where $b_i$ terminates, and immediately moves into $A_r$, and otherwise it starts at a state in $A_r$ where $a_i$ terminates; the end of $c_i$ is the $0$-state, and until then the path remains in $A_r$ (again, if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$).
\end{itemize}
Observe that paths in $A'$ that are not in $A$ start on the edge $[x,c']$, so they are described by the $a_i$ that are long and have almost no choice, hence contribute little additional entropy.
Every $a_i$ has length at least $m+1$ because $[x,c']$ needs $m$ iteration to reach $[\beta,\alpha]$, and might need further iterations to land in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}). Once it lands there, we are either in $A_n$ and we continue with a path $b_i$ as long as we stay in $A_n$, or we are already in $A_r$ and $b_i=\emptyset$, and $c_i$ continues until the next visit of the $0$ state.
We will refer to $a_i$ as \emph{detours} (the long almost choice-less parts).
Defining $\ell_i,t_i, k_i$ as the lengths of $a_i, b_i, c_i$ respectively, we say that $s$ has \emph{combinatorial pattern} $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$.
\begin{lemma}[Almost Choiceless Paths]
\label{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}
There are at most two possible paths in $A'$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at the $0$-state;
\item then immediately go to the $[c',x]$-state;
\item then travel outside $[\alpha,-\alpha]$; and
\item terminate at a given state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Such paths have length $\ell\ge m+1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, the edge of $H'$ associated with the $0$-state covers $[c,x]$ with degree $2$ under $p_{c'}$. Then $[x,c]$ maps injectively for at least $m+1$ iterations until $[x,c]$ starts to partially cover $[\alpha,-\alpha]$. But this is, by definition, when the path under discussion terminates.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Number of Paths $c_i$]
\label{lem:c_iPaths}
Suppose $c$ is renormalizable. Let $g$ be the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$. Then there are at most $2^{{k}/{g}}$ paths in $A$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at a given state in $A_n$ or in $A_r$;
\item all subsequent states are within $A_r$;
\item terminate at the $0$-state; and
\item have length $k$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $H_0,H_1,\dots H_{g-1}$ be the cycle of small Hubbard trees associated with the the largest renormalizable Hubbard trees (corresponding to the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$). Then the degree $p_c^{\circ gt}:H_{0}\to H_{0}$ is at most $2^t$ for all $t$. Therefore, there are at most $2^{t}$ paths in $A_r$ with length $k\in \{ gt,gt+1,\dots, g(t+1)-1\}$ that terminate at the $0$-state; so for given length $k$, the number of such paths is at most $2^t=2^{\lfloor k/g \rfloor}$ (and we have not even counted the first step from a given state of $A$ to $A_r$).
\end{proof}
Fix a combinatorial pattern $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$ and let $n=|P|=t_0+k_0+\sum_{i\ge 1}^p(\ell_i+t_i+k_i)$.
When comparing entropy in $A'$ and in $A$, we will consider the additional relevant precritical paths in $A'$ and show that they correspond to relevant precritical paths in $A$ of bounded length, so that there are not too many additional paths in $A'$. More precisely, if a detour has length $\ell_i\ge 3m$ then the new path within $A$ will be shorter (or have equal length) than before.
We thus introduce a quantity $\kappa$, called \emph{uncertainty of $P$}, that measures the possible increase of length as follows:
\[
\kappa(P):= \frac 1 n \sum_{|\ell_i|<3m}(3m- \ell_{i})
= \frac 1 n \sum_i \max(0,3m-\ell_i)
\]
(the first sum is taken over all $\ell_i$ that are less than $3m$). Higher values of $\kappa$ create problems. Since all $\ell_i>m$ and $\sum\ell_i\le n$, we have $3m-\ell_i\le 2m < 2\ell_i$ and $\kappa(P)\in[0, 2]$.
Denote by $N'(P)$ the number of all precritical paths in $A'$ with pattern $P$.
For $\kappa\in [0,2]$ define
\[
N'(\kappa,n):= \sum_{\kappa(P)\le \kappa,\ \ |P|=n} N'(P)
\;,
\]
the numbers of precritical itineraries with small uncertainty.
We define $S'(\kappa,n)$ to be the corresponding set of relevant precritical paths with small uncertainty, so that $N'(\kappa,n)=|S'(\kappa,n)|$.
\begin{lemma}[Replacing a Path in $A'$ by a Path in $A$]
\label{lem:substitution} \lineclear
If $s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p$ is a precritical path in $A'$ with uncertainty $\kappa$, then there are paths $a^*_i$ in $A_n$ with lengths in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$ such that
$s^*:=b_0 a^*_1 b_1a^*_1b_2a^*_2\dots a^*_p b_pc_p$ is a path in $A$. If $n$ is the length of
$s$, then $s^*$ has length at most $n + \kappa n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that some $b_i$ might be empty paths. Choose a state $a\in A_n$. For convenience, we say that $a$ is the beginning and the end of every empty $b_i$.
Since $A_n$ is irreducible and has less than $2m$ vertices (Corollary~\ref{cor:EdgesOfH}) we may replace every $c_ia_{i+1}$ by a path $a^*_{i+1}$ in $A_n$ of length at most $2m$ so that $a^*_{i+1}$ connects the end of $b_{i}$ with the beginning of $b_{i+1}$ (which are by definition both in $A_n$); by adding $m$ arbitrary steps at the beginning, we may arrange things so that $a^*_i$ has length in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$.
Since the length of each $a_i$ is at least $m$, this procedure increases the length of $s$ by at most $\kappa n$ (and even shortens whenever $c_ia_{i+1}$ has length greater than $3m$).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Counting Patterns]
\label{lem:PatternsGrowth}
The quantity
\[
\limsup_{n}\frac{1}{n}\log\left(\# \{\text{patterns of length }n\}\rule{0pt}{11pt}\right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $m$ tends to infinity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every pattern $P$ is uniquely characterized by a non-decreasing sequence of positive integers
\[t_0,t_0+k_0,t_0+k_0+\ell_1, t_0+k_0+\ell_1+t_1, \dots. \]
Since $\ell_i\ge m+1$, for every $q\in\{0,\dots,\lfloor n/m\rfloor\}$ the interval $[qm,(q+1)m)$ contains at most $3$ elements of the above sequence; and the same is true for the final interval $[\lfloor n/m\rfloor m+1, n]$. Therefore, the number of all patterns is bounded by $Z(n,m):=((m+1)^3)^{(n/m)+1}=e^{{3(n+m)\log(m+1)}/{m}}$. For fixed $m$, we have $\limsup_n (1/n)\log Z(n,m)=3\log(m+1)/m$, and indeed this tends to $0$ as $m\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Uniformity]
\label{prop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon >0$ there are $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0$ depending only on $\varepsilon$ but not on $c$ and $c'$ such that the following holds. If
\begin{itemize}
\item $m\ge \overline m$,
\item either $c$ is non renormalizable, or the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$ is at least $\overline g$,
\item $\kappa\le \ovl \kappa$, and
\item $h$ is the entropy of the parameter $c$,
\end{itemize}
then
%\newpage
\[
N'(\kappa,n)\le C e^{(h+\eps)n} % \sum_{\nu\le n}N(\nu)
\]
for some constant $C>0$ depending on $c$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $h$ is the entropy of $c$, there is a constant $C_1>0$ such that
\[
N(n)\le C_1e^{(h+\eps/3)n},
\]
where $N(n)$ counts the number of relevant precritical paths in $A$ of generation $n$.
Our first claim is that there are at most $ 2^{{n}/{g}+{n}/{m}}$ precritical paths
\[
s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\]
with fixed $(b_i)_{i\le p}$ of a given pattern $P$ of length $n$. Indeed, the beginning of the $c_i$ is fixed by $b_i$, or by $a_i$ if $b_i$ is empty, and the end is at the $0$ state, so by Lemma~\ref{lem:c_iPaths} there are at most $2^{k_i/g}$ choices for each $c_i$ and in total at most $2^{n/g}$ choices for all $c_i$ combined (in the non-renormalizable case, the $c_i$ are empty and there is no choice at all). Each $a_i$ has at most two choices by Lemma~\ref{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}, and since their length is at least $m$, there are no more than $n/m$ such choices.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:substitution} we may substitute $c_ia_i$ by $a^*_i$ with $m\le |a^*_i|\le 3m$ and get a precritical path
\[s^*=b_0a^*_1b_1a^*_2b_2\dots a^*_pb_p c_p\]
in $A$ with length at most $ n+\kappa(P) n $. Denoting the length of $a_i^*$ by $\ell_i^*$, we call the numbers $Q=(t_0,0, \ell^*_1, t_1,0,\ell^*_2,\dots,\ell^*_p,t_p,k_p)$ the pattern of $s^*$.
Our next claim is that for fixed patterns $P$ and $Q$, the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is at most
\[
2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}=C_1e^{((h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m)n}
\;.
\]
Indeed, the number of paths $s$ for a given pattern $P$ with fixed $b_i$ is at most $2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}$. Different $b_i$ clearly lead to different $s^*$ because we know from $P$ were in $s^*$ the $b_i$ are located. The length of $s^*$ is bounded by $(1+\kappa(P))n$; hence the number of different $s^*$ is bounded by $\max_{1\le \mu \le (1+\kappa(P))n} N(\mu)\le C_1e^{(h +\eps/3)(1+\kappa (P))n}\le C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}$ because each $s^*$ is a precritical path in $A$.
If $g$ and $m$ are sufficiently large and $\ovl \kappa$ is sufficiently small, then $(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m\le h+2\eps/3$, and the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is bounded by
\[
C_1e^{(h+2\eps/3)n}
\]
Since every $s\in S'(\kappa,n)$ is a part of at least one triple $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ for some patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $\kappa(P)\le \kappa$ we get the estimate
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le \left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| C_1 \ e^{(h+2\eps/3) n}
\;,
\]
where $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right|$ denotes the number of pairs of patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $|P|=n$ and $|Q|\le n+\kappa(P)n$. Lemma~\ref{lem:PatternsGrowth}, the number $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| $ is bounded by $C_2e^{(\eps/3) n}$ for some constant $C_2>0$. We get
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le C_1C_2 \ e^{(h+\eps) n}
\;;
\]
this finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{Continuity at Irrational Endpoints}
Let $c_{\infty}$ be a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set.
There a sequence of dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ approximating $c_{\infty}$ in the following way
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1\prec c_2\prec\dots \prec c_{\infty}$;
\item $c_{i+1}\in [c_i,c'_i]$; and
\item $ \dots c_i \lhd \dots \lhd c'_2\lhd c'_1$.
\end{itemize}
Figure~\ref{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint} illustrates the arrangement of these points.
Note that once $c_1$ is chosen, the remaining parameters are uniquely determined: $c'_i$ is the dyadic of least generation with $c'_i\succ c_i$, and $c_{i+1}$ is the branch point in the vein of $c'_i$ where the vein to $c_\infty$ branches off.
We assume that $c_{\infty}$ is not in any immediate satellite small copy of the Mandelbrot set. More precisely, since we work with automata only in the postcritically finite case, the assumption that we make is this:\begin{itemize}
\item all $c_i$ are outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set
\end{itemize}
(note that if any $c_i$ is outside of immediate satellite copies, then all subsequent ones are as well: so, possibly up to truncating an initial part of the sequence $(c_i)$, the assumption on $c_\infty$ is that there exists a postcritically finite $c_1\prec c_\infty$ outside of immediate satellite copies).
The case that $c_\infty$ is immediate satellite renormalizable will be treated in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{\includegraphics{FigAllBranchPoints.pdf}}
\caption{The relative (combinatorial) positions of the parameters $c_i$, $c_\infty$ and $c'_i$ used in the proof.}
\label{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint}
\end{figure}
Similar to the previous discussion we specify the following objects
\begin{itemize}
\item $H'_i$ is the Hubbard tree of $c'_i$ with dynamics $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$ \,;
\item
$S'_{i}(n)\subset [\alpha,-\alpha]\subset H'_i$ is the set of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ for the parameter $c'_i$\,;
\item
$N'_{i}(n):= |S'_i(n)|$ is its cardinality;
\item
$h_i=\tilde h(c_i)$ and $h'_i=\tilde h(c'_i)$ are the entropies;
\item
$m_i$ is the generation of the dyadic parameter $c'_i$\,;
and
\item for $j\le i$ we denote by $x_j^{(i)}\in H_i$ the dynamical counterpart of $c_j$ in $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We will now introduce the sets $S'_i(j,\kappa, n)$ for all $j\le i$; these sets are defined in a similar way as $S'(\kappa,n)$ in Section~\ref{ss:Automata}. Consider a precritical point $y\in S'_i(n)\subset H'_i$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Iter:K:ell}0=\tilde \ell_0 <\tilde t_0<\tilde \ell_1<\tilde t_1< \dots < \tilde t_p=n
\end{equation} be the iteration times of $y$ (depending on $j$) uniquely specified as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\tilde t_k>\tilde \ell_k$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde t_k}_{c'_i}(y) \in [ c'_i, x_{j}^{(i)}]$;
\item
$\tilde \ell_k>\tilde t_{k-1}$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde \ell_k}_{c'_i}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We also set $\ell_k:=\tilde \ell_k- \tilde t_{k-1}$ and $t_k:= \tilde t_k-\tilde \ell_k$. Clearly, \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is uniquely specified by $(t_0,\ell_1, \dots, t_p)$.
We define \emph{the uncertainty of $y$ with respect to $x_j^{(i)}$} as
\[
\kappa_j(y):= \frac 1 n \sum_{\ell_k<3m_j}(3m_j- (\ell_k+1))
= \frac 1 n \sum_k \max(0,3m_j-(\ell_k+1)).
\]We denote by $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ the set of all $y\in S'_i(n)$ such that $\kappa_j(y)<\kappa$.
Let us also define \[I_j(y):= \bigcup_{\ell_k<3m_j} \{\tilde t_{k-1}, \tilde t_{k-1}+1,\dots, \tilde \ell_{k} \}.\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:I_j}
For all $j$ and $y$ the set $I_j(y)$ is a union of blocks of consecutive numbers so that each block has length $\ell_k+1\in[m_j,\dots, 3m_j]$, and
\begin{itemize}
\item
its first number is the unique number $t$ in the block that satisfies $p_{c'_i}^{\circ t}(y)\in [c'_i, \alpha]$; %x_j^{(i)}]$.
\item
its last number is the unique number $\ell$ in the block that satisfies
$p_{c'_i}^{\circ \ell}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Furthermore,
\( \displaystyle \kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|.\)
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have $\ell_k<3m_j$ by definition of $I_j(y)$ and we need to prove the lower bound $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
For every integer $k\ge 0$, let $T_k\subset H'_i$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. In particular, $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset T_0$. By~\eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1} we have $p_{c'_i}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
By construction, $c'_i$ and $c'_{j-1}$ are in different sublimbs of $c_{j}$. Thus, by Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})$ is disjoint from $T_{m_j-1 }$; and we get $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})\cap p_{c'}^{\circ -k} [\alpha,-\alpha]=\emptyset$ for all $k< m_j$. This shows that $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
We certainly have $p_{c'_i}^{\circ \tilde t_{k-1}}(y)\in[c'_i,x^{(i)}_j]\subset [c'_i,\alpha]$, and since $p_{c'}^{-1}([c'_i,\alpha])=[\alpha,-\alpha]$, the block would end before the orbit could enter $[c'_i,\alpha]$
again. The claim about the last number is obvious.
Finally, $3m_j-(\ell_k+1) \le 2m_j \le 2(\ell_k+1)$, and taking the sum we conclude $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:MonotIncl}
For $j<i$ the injection $B:S'_{i}(n)\to S'_{i-1}(n)$ of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} injects $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ into $S'_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $x_j^{(i)}$ and $x_j^{(i-1)}$ are the dynamical counterparts of $c_j$ in the dynamical planes of $p_{c_i}$ and $p_{c_{i-1}}$ respectively. Consider $y\in S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$. It follows from Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} parts (A) and (B) that
\begin{itemize}
\item $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ for all $\ell\ge 0$; and
\item $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [c'_{i},x_j^{(i)}]$ if and only if $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [c'_{i-1},x_j^{(i-1)}]$ for all $t \ge 0$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the first claim follows from Part (B) applied to $c_*=0$ (recall that the dynamical counterpart of $c_*=0$ is the $\alpha$-fixed point). The second claim follows from Part (A) combined with Part (B) applied to $c_*=c_j$.
Therefore, our surgery respects the sequence \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell}: for fixed $j$ and every $y\in S_i(n)$ the point $B(y)$ has the same sequence as $y$.
Hence $\kappa(y)=\kappa(B(y))$ and $B(y)\subset S_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:SmallKappa}
For every $\delta>0$ and for every $i'\ge 0$ there is an $i''>i'$ such that for every $n\ge 0$ we have
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\delta,n).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a subsequence of indices $i'=i_1< i_2< \dots < i_h$ so that $3m_{i_r}< m_{i_{r+1}}$ and $h> 2/\delta$. We show that $i'':= i_h$ satisfies the claim of the lemma. It is sufficient to show that for every $y\in S'_{i_h}(n)$ there is an $s<h$ such that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j} that $I_{i_1}(y), I_{i_2}(y), \dots , I_{i_h}(y)$ consist of pairwise disjoint blocks. Thus all $I_{i_s}$ are pairwise disjoint subsets of $\{1,2,\dots ,n\}$. Hence
\[\frac 1 n (|I_{i_1}(y)|+ |I_{i_2}(y)|) + \dots + |I_{i_h}(y)|) \le 1.\]
Since $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)| $, again Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j}, we have
\[\kappa_{i_1}(y)+\kappa_{i_2}(y)+\dots +\kappa_{i_h}(y)\le 2;\]
this implies that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$ for some $s<h.$
\end{proof}
The next lemma is a corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon>0$ there is an $i'\ge 0$ and $\overline \kappa>0$ such that if $ j \ge i'$ and $\kappa\le \overline \kappa$, then
\[|S'_j(j,\kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}\] for all $n>0$ and some constant $C_j>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For a given $\varepsilon $ fix $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0 $ as in Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}. We may choose a big enough $i'$ such that for all $j\ge i'$
\begin{itemize}
\item $m_j\ge \overline m$; and
\item $c_j$ is either non-renormalizable or the renormalization period of $c_j$ is at least $\overline g$.
\end{itemize}
We will now apply Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity} to the pair $c:=c_j$ and $c':= c'_j$; then $h_j=h$ is the entropy of $c=c_j$.
Observe first that $|S'_j(j, \kappa,n)| = |S'( \kappa, n)|= N'(\kappa,n)$ after the substitution. Indeed, every relevant pre-critical point of $p_{c'_j}$ is uniquely characterized by a precritical path in $A'$ (again by a fundamental property of the symbolic dynamics because the critical point is in the interior of the $0$-state of $A'$.) This bijection preserves the uncertainties: if $y\in S'_j(j,\kappa,n)$ with Sequence~\eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is identified with a relevant precritical path $s$ with Decomposition~\eqref{eq:DecompOfs}, then $\ell_k +1 =\tilde \ell_k - \tilde t_k +1= |a_k|$. Hence $y$ and $s$ have the same uncertainties, and $S'_j(j, \kappa,n)$ and $S'( \kappa, n)$ are in bijection.
Now the lemma immediately follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\end{proof}
Remember that we continue to have the assumption that $c_\infty$ is a non-dyadic endpoint that is not immediate satellite renormalizable. In this case, we can now complete the proof.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity on Vein to $c_{\infty}$, Non-Renormalizable Case]
\label{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}
%\lineclear
For every $\eps>0$ there is an $\bar i\ge 1$ such that $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge \bar i$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Choose $\overline\kappa$ and $i'$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:SmallKappa} there is an $i''\ge i'$ such that
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n).
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:MonotIncl} there is an injection from $S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ into $S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ for all $j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}$. Therefore,
\[
N'_{i''}(n)=|S'_{i''}(n)|\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''} |S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity} we have $|S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}$. Thus
\[
N'_{i''}(n)\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n} \le \left( \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j\right) e^{(\eps +h_{i''})n}
\]because $h_{i''}\ge h_{j}$ by monotonicity.
This proves that $h'_{i''}-h_{i''}\le \eps$, and since the sequence $h'_i-h_i$ is decreasing we have $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge i''$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{The Immediate Satellite Renormalizable Case}
In order to formulate our statements, we need to briefly review well known facts on renormalization; compare \cite{Polylike, McMullenRenormalization,MiSelfSim,MiRenorm}.
If $p_c$ is simple $m$-renormalizable, then there exists a ``little Mandelbrot set'' $\M'\subset\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters with $c\in\M'$ and a straightening homeomorphism $\chi\colon\M'\to\M$ so that $p_{\chi(c)}$ in the neighborhood of its filled-in Julia set is hybrid equivalent to $p_c^{\circ m}$ on a neighborhood of the little filled-in Julia set (except possibly at the root point $\chi^{-1}(1/4)$). The little Mandelbrot set has a main center $c_0:=\chi^{-1}(0)$ with a superattracting orbit of period $m$. In this case, we say that ``the parameter $c$ is $c_0$ tuned with $\chi(c)$''. We say $\M'$ is an \emph{immediate satellite copy of $\M$} if $\M'$ is attached to the main hyperbolic component of the Mandelbrot set. Dynamically, this means that the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c^{\circ m}$ is equivalent to $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$; in the postcritically finite case, this is equivalent to $A_n=\emptyset$.
\begin{lemma}[Immediate Satellite Renormalization and Entropy]
\label{Lem:Renormalization} \lineclear
If $\M'$ is an immediate satellite copy of $\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters, then the straightening map $\chi:\M'\to \M$ satisfies
\[
\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))
\;.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $N_{c}(n)$ and $N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ be the numbers of precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and $p_{\chi(c)}$ respectively and let $\tilde N_{\chi (c)}(n)$ be the number of precritical points of $p_{\chi(c)}$ on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
The straightening map $\chi$ identifies the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_{c}^{\circ m}$ with the arc $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$. Therefore, $N_c(mn)= \tilde N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ while $N_c(mn+k)=0$ for all $k\in \{1,2,\dots, m-1\}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:DifferCounts}, the precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and those on $[\alpha,\beta]$ give the same entropies; and on $[\beta,-\beta]$ there can be at most twice as many precritical points of any generation $n$ as on $[\alpha,\beta]$.
Therefore, $\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If $\chi\colon \M'\to\M$ is the straightening map of an arbitrary small copy of $\M$, we have
\[
\tilde h(c)=\max\left(\tilde h(c_0),\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))\right)
\;.
\]
This is obvious in the postcritically finite case and follows in general once we know that $\tilde h$ is continuous, which we are about to establish.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}[Continuity Along Vein to $c_{\infty}$, General Case.]
\label{cor:RadialContin}
\lineclear
Suppose that $c_{\infty}$ is a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. Then the entropy is continuous along the vein $[c_{\infty}, 0]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen} proves the case when $c_{\infty}$ is outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set.
The second case is that there is a finite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots, \chi_n:\M_n\to \M $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty\in \M_*:=(\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1)^{-1}(\M)$ and $c'_{\infty}:=\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1(c_\infty)$ is not immediate satellite-renormalizable. Entropy is continuous along the vein $[0,c_*]$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}, and continuous along the image $\chi_*^{-1}([0,c_*])=[c_0,c_{\infty}]$ by Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} (where $c_0$ is the main center of $\M_*$), and continuous along $[0,c_0]$ by \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung} (or Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}). Therefore, entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
The final case is that there is an infinite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty$ is in the domain of $\chi_n \circ \chi_{n-1}\circ \dots \circ \chi_1$ for all $n\ge 0$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} that the entropy of $c_\infty$ is $0$. Thus entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
\end{proof}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
\renewcommand{\top}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{top}}}
\newcommand{\comb}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{comb}}}
\appendix
\section{Core entropy and biaccessibility dimension}
\centerline{by Wolf Jung}
\bigskip
Here various definitions of core entropy shall be discussed and related to
the biaccessibility dimension. On a compact metric space, the topological
entropy of a continuous map is defined by a growth rate, which is referring
to preimages of covers, or to $\epsilon$-shadowing sets. See
\cite{deMelovanStrien} for details. When the underlying space is a compact
interval, a finite tree, or graph, several equivalent characterizations are due
to Misiurewicz and others. These include the growth rate of horse shoes,
laps (monotonic branches), periodic points, and preimages of a general point.
For real and complex quadratic polynomials, core entropy was defined by
Tao Li and Bill Thurston as the topological entropy of $p_c(z)$ on the
Hubbard tree; this definition applies to the postcritically finite case in
particular, and more generally to finite compact trees, but it does not work
when $c$ is an endpoint with a dense postcritcal orbit.
In general, the filled Julia set $\mathcal{K}_c$ consists of the Hubbard tree
$T_c$\,, the countable family of its preimages, and an uncountable family of
endpoints. The dynamics on $T_c$ is interesting because this tree is folded
over itself, while the iteration does not return to arcs of its preimages.
On the other hand, the endpoints form a set of full harmonic measure, while
the external angles of $T_c$ and its preimages form a set of Hausdorff
dimension $<1$ (unless $c=-2$). Since all biaccessible points are contained
in arcs iterated to $T_c$\,, these angles are called biaccessible
(or biaccessing). More precisely, the biaccessibilty dimension is defined as
follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item For the lamination generated by an angle $\theta\in S^1$
\cite{ThurstonLaminations}, consider all
angles of non-trivial leaves. Their Hausdorff dimension is the
\emph{combinatorial biaccessibility dimension} $B_\comb(\theta)$. The same
dimension is obtained from pairs of angles with the same itinerary, or from
pairs not separated by the precritical leaves: the diameter joining $\theta/2$
and $(\theta+1)/2$, and its preimages.
\item For a parameter $c\in\mathcal{M}$, the
\emph{topological biaccessibility dimension} $B_\top(c)$ is the Hausdorff
dimension of those angles, such that the dynamic ray is landing together with
another ray.
\end{itemize}
These definitions are related analogously to Lemma~\ref{Lem:defEntropy}:
\begin{lemma}[Combinatorial and topological biaccessibility]
Suppose that $\theta\in S^1$ and $c\in\partial\M$ belongs to the impression
of the parameter ray with angle $\theta$, or $c\in\M$ is hyperbolic and the
ray lands at the corresponding root. Then $B_\comb(\theta)=B_\top(c)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of the proof \cite{BruinSchleicher, Jung}] In the locally connected case, and
neglecting the countable family of angles at precritical or precharacteristic
points, two dynamic rays are landing together if and only if they are not
separated by a precritical ray-pair. When $\mathcal{K}_c$ is not
locally connected, exceptional sets of angles are shown to be negligible in
terms of Hausdorff dimension. These include the angles of non-landing rays,
and the possible angles of Cremer cycles.
\end{proof}
The following relation to entropy is due to Thurston \cite{TanLeiEntropy},
relying on earlier work by Furstenberg \cite{Furstenberg}
and Douady \cite{Douady}.
\begin{proposition}[Dimension and entropy of the tree]\label{Prop:Biaccessibility}
Suppose $\mathcal{K}_c$ is locally connected with empty interior, or $f_c$ is
parabolic or hyperbolic with a real multiplier.
Using regulated arcs, define the tree $T_c$ as the path-connected hull of
the critical orbit. If $T_c$ is compact, consider the topological entropy of
$p_c(z)$ on $T_c$\,. Then it is related to
the biaccessibility dimension by $h_\top(T_c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is found in version 1 of \cite{BruinSchleicher} and in
\cite{TiozzoThesis, Jung}:
since $\theta\mapsto z(\theta)$ is a semi-conjugation with finite fibers, we may
consider the topological entropy of the angle-doubling map on the compact set
of angles of $T_c$ \cite[Thm.~II.7.1]{deMelovanStrien}. And this equals the
Hausdorff dimension \cite[Proposition~III.1]{Furstenberg}, except for the
base 2 instead of e in the logarithm of the growth factor $\lambda$.
\end{proof}
While the definition of $h_\top(T_c)$ requires a compact tree $T_c$\,,
a general notion was given in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} in terms
of precritical ray pairs:
\begin{theorem}[Dimension and entropy in general]\label{Thm:Biaccessibility}
Entropy and biaccessibility dimension are related as follows for
all parameters $c\in\mathcal{M}$ and all angles $\theta\in S^1$\,:
\begin{equation}
\tilde h(c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2
\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
h(\theta)=B_\comb(\theta)\cdot\log2 \ .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First, suppose that $c=c(\theta)$ is postcritically finite or belongs
to a dyadic vein. In particular, $\mathcal{K}_c$ is
locally connected and $T_c$ is compact with finitely many endpoints. Then
the growth rate of lap numbers is equal to the growth rate of precritical
points on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, so $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$, and
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} applies.
Second, suppose that $c$ is a non-renormalizable irrational endpoint, and
approximate it with biaccessible parameters $c_n$ before $c$. Then monotonicity
\cite[Proposition~4.6]{Jung} and continuity give
\begin{equation}
B_\top(c)\cdot\log2\ge\lim B_\top(c_n)\cdot\log2
=\lim\tilde h(c_n)=\tilde h(c) \ .
\end{equation}
For the opposite estimate, note that the plane is cut into pieces successively
by precritcal ray pairs, and the angles of a piece of level $n$ form up to $n$
intervals of total length $2^{-n}$ according to
\cite[Lemma~4.1]{BruinSchleicher}. Recall that $N(n)$ is the number of
precritcal points of \textsc{Step} $n$ on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, and denote
the number of pieces intersecting this arc by $V(n)$. Then
$V(n)=1+N(1)+\dots+N(n)$ is growing by the same factor $\lambda=e^h$ as $N(n)$,
and the same holds for $n \cdot V(n)$. The $b$-dimensional Hausdorff measure
of the angles of $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$ is estimated as
\begin{equation}
\mu_b\le\lim n \cdot V(n) \cdot 2^{-bn} \ ,
\end{equation}
which is 0 when $b>\log\lambda/\log2=\tilde h(c)/\log2$. So the Hausdorff
dimension is estimated as $B_\top(c)\le\tilde h(c)/\log2$ as well,
implying equality.
Finally, both $\tilde h(c)$ and $B_\top(c)$ are constant on the main molecule
and on primitive small Mandelbrot sets, and both are scaled by the period of
immediate satellite renormalization. Now all cases are covererd by the
Yoccoz Theorem.
\end{proof}
Continuity of entropy according to Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity} gives:
\begin{corollary}[Continuity of biaccessibility dimension]
The biaccessibility dimension $B_\comb(\theta)$ is continuous on $S^1$ and
$B_\top(c)$ is continuous on the Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$.
\end{corollary}
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} and Theorem~\ref{Thm:Biaccessibility}
show that the definition
of entropy in terms of precritical points is a generalization
of the original definition in terms of a compact core:
\begin{corollary}[Extending the definition of core entropy]
We have $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$ whenever $T_c$ is defined and compact.
\end{corollary}
\begin{thebibliography}{ABC}
\bibitem[BS]{BruinSchleicher} H.~Bruin, D.~Schleicher,
Hausdorff dimension of biaccessible
angles for quadratic polynomials, Preprint. ArXiv:1205.2544, 28 pp.
\bibitem[D]{Douady} A.~Douady, Topological entropy of unimodal maps:
monotonicity for quadratic polynomials, in:
\emph{Real and complex dynamical systems}
(Hiller{\o}d 1993), NATO Adv.~Sci.~Inst.~Ser.~C
Math.~Phys.~Sci.~\textbf{464}, Kluwer 1995, 65--87.
\bibitem[DH1]{Orsay} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{Etude dynamique des polyn\^omes complexes} (The Orsay Notes). Publications Math\'ematiques d'Orsay 1984-02 (1984) (premi\`ere partie) and 1985-04 (1985) (deuxi\`eme partie).
\bibitem[DH2] {Polylike} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{On the dynamics of polynomial-like mappings}. Annales Scientifiques de l'\'Ecole Normale Sup\'erieure. Quatri\`eme S\'erie. V 15 (1985), 287--343.
\bibitem[DH3]{DHThurston} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{A proof of {T}hurston's topological characterization of rational functions}. Acta Mathematica. V 171 (1993), 263--297.
\bibitem[F]{Furstenberg} H.~Furstenberg, Disjointness in ergodic theory,
minimal sets, and a problem in Diophantine approximation,
Math.~Systems Theory~\textbf{1}, 1--49 (1967).
\bibitem[HS]{Spiders} John Hubbard and Dierk Schleicher. \emph{The spider algorithm}. Complex dynamical systems ({C}incinnati, {OH}). Proc. Sympos. Appl. Math. V 49 (1994), 155--180.
\bibitem[Ju]{Jung} Wolf Jung, \emph{Core entropy and biaccessibility of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1401.4792 (2014), 46 pp.
\bibitem[TL]{TanLeiEntropy} Tan Lei, \emph{On W. Thurston's core-entropy theory}. Presentation, given in Toulouse (January 2014) and elsewhere.
\bibitem[Mc]{McMullenRenormalization} Curt McMullen, \emph{Complex dynamics and renormalization}. Annals of Mathematics Studies \textbf{135},
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1994).
\bibitem[dMS]{deMelovanStrien} W.~de Melo, S.~van Strien,
\emph{One-dimensional dynamics}, Springer 1993.
\bibitem[M1]{MiSelfSim} John Milnor, \emph{Self-similarity and hairiness in the {M}andelbrot set}. Computers in geometry and topology. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. V 114, 211--257, (1989).
\bibitem[M2]{MiRenorm} John Milnor, \emph{Local connectivity of {J}ulia sets: expository lectures}. In: The {M}andelbrot set, theme and variations. London Math. Soc. V 274, 67--116 (2000).
\bibitem[M3]{MiOrbits} John Milnor, \emph{Periodic orbits, externals rays and the Mandelbrot set: an expository account}. In: G\'eom\'etrie complexe et syst\`emes dynamiques (Marguerite Flexor, Pierrette Sentenac, and Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, eds). Ast\'erisque \textbf{ 261}, 277--333 (2000).
\bibitem[Sch]{MandelBranch} Dierk Schleicher,
\emph{On fibers and local connectivity of Mandelbrot and Multibrot sets}. In: M. Lapidus, M. van Frankenhuysen (eds): Fractal Geometry and Applications: A Jubilee of Benoit Mandelbrot. Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics \textbf{72}, American Mathematical Society (2004), 477--507.
\bibitem[T]{ThurstonLaminations} William P. Thurston, \emph{On the geometry and dynamics of iterated rational maps}. In: Complex dynamics, families and friends (Dierk Schleicher, ed.), AK Peters, Wellesley, MA (ISBN 978-1-56881-450-6), pp. 3--109 (2009).
\bibitem[Ti1]{TiozzoThesis} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Topological entropy of quadratic polynomials and dimension of sections of the Mandelbrot set}. Preprint, arXiv:1305.3542 (2013), 56 pp.
\bibitem[Ti2]{TiozzoPaper} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Continuity of core entropy of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1409.3511 (2014), 25 pp.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document\to[0,\log2]$, assigning to every $c\in\mathcal M}
\newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}
\newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}
\newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}
\newcommand{\Circle}{\mathbb S}
\newcommand{\sm}{\setminus}
\newcommand{\0}{\texttt{0}}
\newcommand{\1}{\texttt{1}}
\newcommand{\s}{\underline{s}}
\newcommand\eps{\varepsilon}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}
\renewcommand{\theta}{\vartheta}
\newcommand{\ovl}[1]{\overline{#1}}
\newcommand{\lineclear}{\rule{0pt}{2pt}\newline}
\newcommand{\reminder}[1]{\textsl{#1}\marginpar{$\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd$}}
\newcommand{\hide}[1]{}
\title[Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials]{Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials %\\ \rule{0pt}{20pt} --- Draft $\circ$ Comments Invited ---
}
\author{Dzmitry Dudko}
\author{Dierk Schleicher}
\author[]{With an appendix by Wolf Jung}
\address{G.-A.-Universit\"at zu G\"ottingen, Bunsenstrasse 3--5, D-37073 G\"ottingen, Germany}
\address{Jacobs University Bremen, Research I, Postfach 750 561, D-28725 Bremen, Germany}
\address{Gesamtschule Aachen-Brand, Rombachstrasse 99, 52078 Aachen, Germany}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
We give a combinatorial definition of ``core entropy'' for quadratic polynomials as the growth exponent of the number of certain precritical points in the Julia set (those that separate the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative). This notion extends known definitions that work in cases when the polynomial is postcritically finite or when the topology of the Julia set has good properties, and it applies to all quadratic polynomials in the Mandelbrot set.
We prove that core entropy is continuous as a function of the complex parameter. In fact, we model the Julia set as an invariant quadratic lamination in the sense of Thurston: this depends on the external angle of a parameter in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set and suffices to define core entropy directly from the angle in combinatorial terms. As such, core entropy is continuous as a function of the external angle.
Moreover, we prove a conjecture of Guilio Tiozzo about local and global maxima of core entropy as a function of external angles: local maxima are exactly dyadic angles, and the unique global maximum within any wake occurs at the dyadic of lowest denominator.
An appendix by Wolf Jung relates different concepts of core entropy and biaccessibility dimension and thus shows that biaccessibility dimension is continuous as well.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Statement of Results}
We define two entropy functions:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h\colon \Circle\to [0,\log 2]$, assigning to every external angle $\theta\in\Circle$ the core entropy of the lamination associated to the angle $\theta$.
\item $\tilde h\colon \M\to[0,\log2]$, assigning to every $c\in\M$ the core entropy of the quadratic polynomial $z\mapsto z^2+c$.
\end{itemize}
We describe these definitions in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}. Note that we define $\tilde h$ for every $c\in\M$, postcritically finite or not (and could extend it to every parameter $c\in\C$), and similarly for every $\theta\in\Circle$. These definitions are such that if the parameter ray at angle $\theta$ lands (or accumulates) at $c\in\partial \M$, then $h(\theta)=\tilde h(c)$. Our definitions are entirely combinatorial so we do not have to worry about topological subtleties such whether the Julia set is locally connected or whether a (generalized) Hubbard tree exists and, if so, whether it is compact. Of course, in the cases where the usual definitions of topological entropy apply, our definition agrees with them.
Our first result goes back to a bet between Bill Thurston and John Hubbard in the spring of 2012 and helped settle this bet soon after.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Core Entropy]
Both entropy functions, $\tilde h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ and $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$, are continuous.
\end{theorem}
We prove continuity of $h$ in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}; the fact that this implies continuity of $\tilde h$ is easy and is explained in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{EntropyGraphPlain.pdf}
}
\caption{The graph of the core entropy function $h\colon[0,1/2]\to[0,\log 2]$ (by Bill Thurston).}
\end{figure}
Our second result settles a conjecture of Giulio Tiozzo \cite[Conjecture~1.6]{TiozzoThesis}.
\begin{theorem}[Local Maximal of Core Entropy]
\lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We will prove this in Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj}.
In Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}, we define a wake as a closed interval in $\Circle$ bounded by two rational angles so that the corresponding rays land together (or more generally as any closed interval for which the two boundary angles have the same angled internal address, so the corresponding parameter rays land together at the same point in $\M$, or at least in its combinatorial models).
Bill Thurston inspired a number of people to investigate core entropy. In particular, there are a survey on current work and open problems by Tan Lei~\cite{TanLeiEntropy}, a manuscript by Wolf Jung \cite{Jung}, and two manuscripts by Giulio Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoThesis,TiozzoPaper}. An independent proof of continuity of core entropy can be found in the recent manuscript \cite{TiozzoPaper}.
\emph{Acknowledgements}. We would like to thank Henk Bruin, John Hubbard, Tan Lei, Mikhail Lyubich, John Milnor, Bill Thurston, Giulio Tiozzo, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and especially Wolf Jung for interesting and helpful discussions. In the spring of 2014, we had the opportunity to give various presentations about this result in Bremen, Moscow and Stony Brook, and we thank the audiences for their questions and suggestions.
Finally, we would like to thank Cornell University and the ICERM institute in Providence for their hospitality and support in the spring of 2012 where many of our initial discussions were carried out.
\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Definitions}
\label{Sec:Definitions}
In this section we introduce our combinatorial definition of topological entropy that applies to all polynomials with connected Julia set, whether or not they are locally connected and whether or not they have a (generalized) Hubbard tree, and if so whether the latter is compact. One advantage of our approach is that we work in an entirely combinatorial setting, so we never have to worry about topological issues.
\begin{definition}[Invariant Lamination and Entropy Associated to External Angle]
\label{Def:CoreEntropy}
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$, there is a unique invariant quadratic lamination where the minor leaf either ends at $\theta$ or is the degenerate leaf at $\theta$. This lamination will be called $L_\theta$.
A \emph{precritical leaf of generation $n$} in this lamination will be any leaf on the backwards orbit of one of the two major leaves that takes $n$ generations to map to the minor leaf.
The \emph{$\alpha$ gap} is either the leaf connecting the two angles $1/3$ and $2/3$, or it is the unique gap that is fixed by the dynamics (this is a finite polygon).
We call a precritical leaf \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative, and define $N(n)=N_\theta(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical leaves of generation $n$. We define the \emph{core entropy} of this lamination as $h=h(\theta):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_\theta(n)$. If the $\alpha$ gap does not exist, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $N_{\theta}(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the core entropy of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\begin{remark}
A natural question is whether the $\limsup$ in the definition of entropy can be replaced by a simple $\lim$. This is not always so: Wolf Jung kindly pointed out to us the example of $c=c(9/56)$ where the Hubbard tree has the shape of a $\textsf{Y}$ so that the branch point is fixed and one endpoint maps to the second, which maps to the third, which in turn maps to the branch point. Here $N(n)=0$ for infinitely many $n$ while $h=(\log 2)/3>0$. There are thus counterexamples when the dynamics is renormalizable. We prove that renormalizability is the only obstruction (see Corollary~\ref{Cor:ExistenceLimit}). For now, observe that in the postcritically finite non-renormalizable case, the limit exists and equals the $\limsup$ because the associated subshift of finite type is irreducible.
\end{remark}
Thurston showed that the union of all minor leaves of all invariant quadratic laminations forms itself a lamination, called the \emph{quadratic minor lamination} QML \cite{ThurstonLaminations}. It turns out that $h$ is naturally defined on QML: since both ends of any leaf in QML define the same lamination, we can first extend the definition of $h$ to each separate leaf on QML. Complementary components of leaves in QML are called \emph{gaps}, and they come in two kids: either they are finite polygons (corresponding to Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters) or have infinitely many boundary leaves (and describe hyperbolic components). In both cases, it is easy to see that $h$ is constant on all boundary leaves of any gap, so $h$ naturally extends to the disk on which QML is defined.
The equivalence relation defining QML is closed, so the quotient of the supporting closed unit disk by collapsing all leaves to points yields a topological Hausdorff space called the ``abstract Mandelbrot set'' $\M_{abs}$ (this construction is known as Douady's ``pinched disk model'' of $\M$). Since $h$ is constant on fibers of the quotient map $q\colon QML\to \M_{abs}$, $h$ is naturally a function on $\M_{abs}$.
Finally, there is the natural projection $\pi\colon\M\to\M_{abs}$ from the Mandelbrot set $\M$ to the abstract Mandelbrot set $\M_{abs}$. It is defined by mapping every landing point $c(\theta)$ of any rational parameter ray $\theta$ to the equivalence class of the angle $\theta$; then $\pi$ is the unique continuous map with this property.
\looseness-1
We thus obtain a unique map $\tilde h=h\circ\pi\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$, and continuity of $\tilde h$ follows from continuity of $h$, with continuity of $\pi$ being well known.
More specifically, the map $\tilde h$ can also be constructed explicitly as follows.
\begin{definition}[Entropy Associated to Quadratic Polynomial in $\M$]
\label{Def:CoreEntropyTilde}
Let $p_c(z):=z^2+c$ be any quadratic polynomial with $c\in\C$ for which the critical value is in the Julia set, and let $\theta$ be the external angle of any dynamic ray that lands or accumulates at $c$. The \emph{critical ray pair} will be the ray pair $RP(\theta/2,(1+\theta)/2)$, and a precritical ray pair of generation $n$ will be any ray pair on the backwards orbit of the critical ray pair and that takes $n$ iterations to map to the ray $R(\theta)$.
If $p_c$ is such that the critical value is in the Fatou set, then it has an attracting or parabolic orbit and there is a unique periodic characteristic ray pair; precritical ray pairs are then defined as ray pairs on its backward orbit.
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the \emph{core entropy} of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
Note that we use the term ``separation'' in a combinatorial sense: the two rays in a separating ray pairs either land together or accumulate at the same fiber.
The usual definition of core entropy is modeled after the postcritically finite case: here, the Hubbard tree is a finite tree with a finite and forward invariant set of marked points (the critical point and its forward orbit, as well as all branch points). The finite set of edges on the tree form a Markov chain with associated transition matrix, where the matrix element $M_{i,j}$ is $0$, $1$, or $2$ if the edge $e_i$ covers the edge $e_j$ respectively $0$, $1$, or $2$ times. Having only positive real entries, this matrix has a leading eigenvalue which is real, and its logarithm is defined as the core entropy of the given postcritically finite parameter.
This definition coincides with the classical definition of topological entropy of general dynamical systems, and it also applies in the postcritically infinite case as long as the Hubbard tree is defined (i.e.\ the Julia set is path connected) and still finite. However, the number of edges of the Hubbard trees is not locally bounded even among postcritically finite maps, which makes entropy estimates based on these transition matrices difficult.
It is well known, at least in the postcritically finite case, that if $x$ is any point on the Hubbard tree and $N_x(n)$ is the number of preimages of $x$ of generation $n$, then $h=\limsup_n \log N_x(n)$ is the core entropy. Since each of the finitely many edges, except those within ``renormalizable little Julia sets'', will cover the entire tree after finitely many iterations, one can as well count only those preimages of $x$ that are on an arbitrary subset of the edges of the Hubbard tree, as long as at least one of these edges is not in a renormalizable little Julia set. For instance, instead of counting precritical leaves on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (as in our definition above) we may count preimages on $[\alpha,\beta]$ (as we will do in Section~\ref{Sec:Continuity}) or on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
\begin{lemma}[Definitions of Core Entropy Coincide]
\label{Lem:defEntropy} \lineclear
For postcritically finite polynomials, the core entropy as in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} coincides with the usual definition (in terms of transition matrices on finite Hubbard trees).
If $p_c$ has the property that the critical value is in the impression of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$, then the core entropy of $p_c$ equals the core entropy of the lamination $L_\theta$.
\end{lemma}
It is well known that if several parameter rays accumulate at the same parameter in $\M$, then the laminations associated to their corresponding angles coincide, so these angles have the same entropy.
If $\theta\in\Circle$ is a rational angle, we define $c(\theta)$ as the landing point in $\M$ of the parameter ray at angle $\theta$, and within any connected Julia set we define $z(\theta)$ as the landing point of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$.
If $c,\tilde c$ are two parameters in $\M$, we say $c\prec \tilde c$ if there is a parameter ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ at periodic angles that separates $\tilde c$ simultaneously from $c$ and from the origin.
\begin{lemma}[Monotonicity of Lamination and of Entropy]
\label{Lem:Monotonicity}
If $c\prec \tilde c$, then $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ for all $n$ and thus $h(\tilde c)\ge h(c)$. Moreover, any characteristic leaf in $L_c$ also occurs in $L_{\tilde c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is routine to check that any precritical leaf of $c$ also ``occurs'' in the dynamics (or the lamination) of $\tilde c$: the major leaf (or leaves) in $L_{\tilde c}$ separate the two major leaves in $L_c$. Precritical leaves in $L_{c}$ are preimages of the pair of major leaves (the preimages of this pair are always ``parallel'', i.e.\ not separated by the critical value, because otherwise the forward orbit of the critical value would have to intersect the domain bounded by the two major leaves). Each pair of preimages surrounds one preimage of the major leaf of $\tilde c$ (or a pair of preimages of the major leaves), and when such a preimage separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative in $L_c$, then it also does so for $L_{\tilde c}$. Therefore, $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ and $\tilde h(\tilde c)\ge \tilde h(c)$.
The statement about characteristic leaves (or characteristic ray pairs) is well known and follows, for instance, from Milnor's Orbit Portraits \cite{MiOrbits}.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Topological Surgery on dyadic Hubbard trees}
Recall the vein structure of $\M$: every dyadic parameter $c$ has a unique \emph{long vein} $V(c)$, that is an injective arc connecting $c$ to $0$, subject to the condition that it traverses hyperbolic components along internal rays. (The existence of such arcs is a non-trivial theorem, established by Jeremy Kahn using Yoccoz' puzzle results, and by Johannes Riedl using quasiconformal surgery. However, it is sufficient to use a weaker combinatorial version of this result, defining the combinatorial arc as the set of postsingularly finite parameters that separate $c$ from the origin, together with the induced order.) The \emph{vein} of $c$ is the shortest closed sub-arc of the long vein connecting $c$ to the union of the long veins of all dyadic parameters of lower generation than $c$.
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then it is well known that their long veins intersect in an arc $[0,x]$, where $x$ is postcritically finite; this result is known as the ``branch theorem'' of $\M$ \cite{Orsay,MandelBranch}.
\begin{definition}[Directly Subordinate Parameter $c\lhd c'$]
\label{Def:DirectlySubordinate} \lineclear
We say that $ c$ is \emph{directly subordinate} to $c'$ and write $c\lhd c'$ if the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$; in addition, any dyadic parameter whose vein terminates at $0$ is declared to be subordinate to $c=-2$ with dyadic angle $1/2$.
\end{definition}
If $c\lhd c'$, then necessarily the external angle of $c'$ has lower denominator than that of $c$.
Note that this is not a transitive relation and thus not a partial order. A few directly subordinate dyadic parameters are illustrated in Figure~\ref{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\framebox{\includegraphics{DirectlySubordinate_Fig2.pdf}}
\caption{Illustration of directly subordinate parameters: we have $c(3/16)\lhd c(1/4)$, $c(1/4)\lhd c(1/2)$, and $c(3/8)\lhd c(1/2)$. Arrows indicate where the vein to some dyadic parameter terminates at the vein of the dyadic parameter to which it is directly subordinate.}
\label{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}[Entropy Between Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} \lineclear
a) If $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $N(n)\le N'(n)$ for all $n$, and $N(n)<N'(n)$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
\noindent b) If $c\lhd c'$ are both dyadic, then $\tilde h(c)<\tilde h(c')$.
\end{theorem}
Here $N(n)$ and $N'(n)$ denote the numbers of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ for $p_c$ and for $p_{c'}$. This immediately implies a weak version of the Tiozzo conjecture:
\begin{corollary}[Dyadic Version of Tiozzo Conjecture]
\label{Cor:DyadicTiozzoConjecture}\lineclear
Every dyadic angle $\theta$ has a neighborhood on which $h$, restricted to dyadic angles, assumes its unique maximum at $\theta$ (a dyadic version of the Tiozzo conjecture).
\end{corollary}
%\newpage
Let us now state the Correspondence Theorem relating the combinatorics of dynamical and parameter ray pairs. Following Milnor~\cite{MiOrbits}, a periodic or preperiodic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ (with $\phi^-,\phi^+\in\Circle$) in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ is called \emph{characteristic} if the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together in such a way that they separate the critical value $c$ from the critical point $0$ as well as from all other rays landing at $\cup_{k\ge 0}p_{c}^{\circ k}(x)$.
\begin{theorem}[Correspondence Theorem]
\label{thm:Corresp} \lineclear
A dynamic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ with $\phi^\pm$ rational is characteristic if and only if the parameter rays with angles $\phi^-$ and $\phi^+$ land together and separate the parameters $c$ and $0$ from each other.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}[Monotonicity of Rational Lamination on Hubbard Tree]
\label{Cor:CountPartsHubTree}
Let $c,c'\in\M$ be two postcritically finite parameters such that $c\prec c'$. Suppose that in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ two periodic or preperiodic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together at some point in the Hubbard tree of $p_c$, but not on the backwards orbit of the critical value. Then in the dynamical plane of $c'$ the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ also land together and the landing point is in the Hubbard tree of $c'$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
In the dynamic plane of $p_c$, let $x$ be the landing point of the dynamic ray pair $RP(\theta^-,\theta^+)$; it is by hypothesis in the Hubbard tree of $c$. Let $x':=p_c^{\circ t}(x)$ be the characteristic point on the orbit of $x$: this is the unique point that separates the critical value from all other points on the forward orbit of $x$. Let $(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ be the characteristic angles at $x'$ (the ray pair at $x'$ that separates the critical value from all other rays on its orbit).
By Theorem~\ref{thm:Corresp}, the rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ form a ray pair for all parameters in the wake of $c$, and in particular for $c'$. The same is true for all pull-back ray pairs, as long as they are not in the component of $\C\sm RP(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ containing the critical value; and this is the case for the rays landing at $x$. The landing point is clearly in the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}[Dynamical Counterpart to Parameter]
\label{Def:DynamCounterpart} \lineclear
Let $c$ be a postcritically finite parameter and suppose $c'\succ c$. Then a (pre)periodic point $x$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ is called the \emph{dynamical counterpart to $c$} if
\begin{itemize}
\item
if $c$ is preperiodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the preperiodic dynamic rays at the same angles as $c$;
\item
if $c$ is periodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the periodic dynamic rays bounding (in the parameter plane) the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the periodic case, $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_c$, and the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$ is bounded by a periodic parameter ray pair landing at $\partial H_c$. The angles of this ray pair are the angles of two rays landing at $x$. For example, the $\alpha$ fixed point is the dynamical counterpart of $c=0$. In the preperiodic case, it is known that all dynamic rays with the same angles of the rays landing at $c$ also land together in the dynamical plane of $c'$.
An equivalent definition is that $x$ is the unique repelling periodic or preperiodic point in the dynamical plane of $c'$ such that the itinerary of $x$ (with respect to the critical point) equals the (upper) kneading sequence of $c$.
\begin{lemma}[Directly Subordinate Dyadics]
\label{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics} \lineclear
\looseness-1
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $c\lhd c'$ if and only if there is a postcritically finite parameter $c_*\in\M$ so that $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation within any sublimb of $c_*$, and $c$ is in a different sublimb of $c_*$ than $c'$.
In this case, denoting the external angles of $c$ and $c'$ by $\theta$ and $\theta'$, respectively, then in the dynamics of $c$ (or any other parameter in the same sublimb of $c_*$) there is a repelling (pre)periodic point $x_*$ that is the landing point of at least three dynamic rays that separate the dynamic rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$. The point $x_*$ is the dynamical counterpart to $c_*$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any two dyadic parameters are endpoints of $\M$, so by the Branch Theorem of the Mandelbrot set there is a unique postcritically finite parameter $c_*$ that contains $c$ and $c'$ in two different of its sublimbs. Let $c_0$ be the unique dyadic of least generation in any of the sublimbs of $c_*$; then $c_*$ is on the long vein of all three of $c_0$, $c$, and $c'$, and it is on the vein of $c_0$.
The assumption that $c\lhd c'$ means that the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$, and hence it must terminate at the parameter $c_*$, so $c_*$ is an interior point of the vein of $c'$. Since $c_*$ is also an interior point of the vein of $c_0$, it follows that $c'=c_0$ (two veins can never have more than one point in common).
Conversely, if $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation in the sublimb of $c_*$, then $c_*$ is in the interior of the vein of $c'$ and the vein of $c$ terminates at $c_*$. This proves the first claim.
For the second claim, we first consider the case that $c_*$ is a Mi\-siu\-re\-wicz-Thurston parameter; it is then the landing point of $s\ge 3$ rational parameter rays, say at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$, so that the parameter rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$ are in different sectors with respect to these parameter rays. Every parameter in any sublimb of $c_*$ has the property that the dynamic rays at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$ land together at a repelling preperiodic point, and the claim follows.
If $c_*$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, then the parameter $c$ is in a sublimb at internal angle $p/q\neq 1/2$, and in the dynamical plane of $c$ (or any parameter within the same sublimb) there is a repelling periodic point that is the landing point of $q\ge 3$ dynamic rays that separates the angles $0$, $\theta$ and $\theta'$ so that $\theta$ is in the largest sector not containing the angle $0$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
The main step in proving Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} is a topological surgery on Hubbard trees, as follows:
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Relation Between Subordinate Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} %\lineclear
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters with external angles $\theta$ and $\theta'$, let $H_c$ be the Hubbard tree of $c$, and let $H \supset H_c$ be the connected hull of the critical orbit and of the orbit of $z(\theta')$. Let $x$ be the branch point of the arcs from $0$ to $c$ and to $z(\theta')$. If $p_c$ is the natural map on $H$, define a map $f\colon H\to H$ as follows: choose a homeomorphism $\rho\colon[x,c]\to[x,z(\theta')]$ fixing $x$ and let
\[
f(z):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \rho\circ p_c(z) & \text{if $p_c(z)\in[x,c]$} \\
p_c(z) & \text{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.
\]
Let $H'$ be the connected hull within $H$ of the orbit of $0$ under $f$. Then $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have a connected tree $H$ containing the critical point $0$, and with respect to $f$ the orbit of $0$ is still finite (it still terminates at the $\beta$ fixed point). Therefore, $(H',f)$ is a finite tree with a continuous self-map, and the dynamics is locally injective except at the critical point $0$. Since there are at most $2$ branches at $0$, the map is globally at most $2:1$. Every endpoint is by definition on the critical orbit, so $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of a postcritically finite polynomial in which the critical orbit lands at the $\beta$ fixed point at the desired number of iterations. Let $c''$ be the corresponding parameter and $\theta''$ be the external angle; we have $\theta''=a''/2^{k'}$.
It remains to prove that $\theta''=\theta'$ and thus $c''=c'$.
Since $c\lhd c'$, there is a postcritically finite branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, that separates $c$ from $c'$, and the external angles of $c_*$ are the external angles of $x$ in the dynamical plane of $c$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). In the dynamical plane of $c''$, the point $x$ has the same external angles because it has the same period and preperiod and the dynamics of the subtree connecting the orbit of $x$ is unaffected by the surgery (except the bit around the critical point that maps past $x$). Hence $\theta''$ is the unique dyadic of least generation that is separated from the angle $0$ by the angles of $x$, and the same is true for $\theta'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The fact that $c''=c'$ can also be shown using spiders \cite{Spiders} and Thurston's theorem. Let us topologically extend the map $f:H' \to H'$ to a continuous map on $\C$ as follows. First, we set $f$ to be $p_c$ on the dynamic rays $R({2^{t}\theta'})$ of $p_c$, where $t\in\{0,1,\dots, k'\}$. There are $k'+1$ topological discs in the complement of $H'\cup_{t\ge 0} R({2^{t}\theta'})$ and the map $f$ easily extends to each of them as a homeomorphism. The new map $f$ is a topological polynomial for which $\bigcup_t R({2^{t}\theta'})$ forms an invariant spider. Since this spider is equivalent to a standard invariant spider of $c'$, we get $c'=c''$ by Thurston rigidity \cite{DHThurston,Spiders}.
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Injective Dynamics of Last Edge]
\label{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}
In any dyadic Julia set, consider any dyadic angle $\theta=a/2^k$ with $k\ge 1$ and let $x$ be the point where the arc from $z(\theta)$ to $\alpha$ is attached to the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generations $a'/2^{k'}$ with $k'<k$. Then $[z(\theta),x]$ maps injectively for $k$ iterations to an interval $[\beta,y]\subset[\beta,\alpha]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For every integer $m\ge 0$, let $T_m$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $m$. Let $f$ be the map on the Julia set.
The edge $[z(\theta),x]\subset \ovl{T_k\sm T_{k-1}}$ certainly maps forward homeomorphically one generation to an arc $[z(2\theta),x']$, where $x'=f(x)\in f(T_{k-1})$.
We claim that $[z(2\theta),x']\subset \ovl{T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2}}$ so that the inductive step applies and completes the proof.
We first show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, $T_{k-2}$ is the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k-2$. Consider an endpoint $y$ of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$. If $f(y)\in T_{k-2}$ was not an endpoint, so it was connected to at least two edges in $T_{k-2}$, then $y$ would have to be connected to at least two edges in $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$, a contradiction. Thus every endpoint of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$ is a dyadic endpoint of generation at least $k-1$ and hence $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
Finally, if $[z(2\theta),x']$ intersects $T_{k-2}$, then $[z(\theta),x]$ intersects $T_{k-1}$, and by hypothesis this intersection is the single point $x$. Hence $[z(2\theta),x']\subset (T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2})\cup\{x'\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In this lemma, the hypothesis that the polynomial be dyadic was stated only for convenience. All we are using is that the Julia set is path connected (if there are bounded Fatou components, the notation needs minor adjustments).
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Homeomorphic Preimage of Arc]
\label{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}
Suppose that $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters and let $\theta,\theta'$ be their external angles. In the Julia set of $c$, let $x$ be the branch point between $0$, $z(\theta)=c$ and $z(\theta')=:z'$. If $\theta=a/2^k$, then there is a point $y'\in(z',x)$ so that $p_c^{\circ k}\colon [z',y']\to p_c^{\circ k}([z',y'])= p_c^{\circ k}([ c,x])$ is a homeomorphism.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that $[c,x]$ maps homeomorphically for $k$ iterations to a subinterval of $[\beta,\alpha]$; define $y:=p_c^{\circ k}(x)\in(\beta,\alpha]$.
Similarly, there is a point $x'\in[z',0]$ so that $[z',x']$ maps forward homeomorphically for $k'$ iterations (if $\theta'=a'/2^{k'}$). We have
$x'\in[x,0]$ (or equivalently $x\in[z',x']$) because $c\lhd c'$, i.e.\ $c$ is \emph{directly} subordinate to $c'$.
More precisely, the external angles of the dynamic rays landing at $x$ are exactly the external angles of the parameter rays landing at a branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, where the vein of $c$ terminates (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). Analogously, the same is true for the point $x'$ and the vein of $c'$; let $c'_*$ be this branch point. But since $c\lhd c'$, it follows that $c'_*$ separates $c_*$ from the origin, and hence, by the Correspondence Theorem, $x'$ separates $x$ from the origin.
%\newpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{HubbardTreeBranchPic4.pdf}
}
\caption{Illustration of the relative position of various points in the Hubbard tree of $c$ in the proof of Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}. Note that we do not know or need the relative position between $0$, $y$, and $y''$; in particular, we do not claim $y''\in[\beta,y]$.
}
\label{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}
\end{figure}
Let $y'':=p_c^{\circ k'}(x)$; then $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon[z',x]\to[\beta,y'']$ is a homeomorphism. Iterating this $k-k'$ further times, the image arc terminates at $\beta$ and at $y$, but it can no longer be injective (the map $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[c,x]\to [\beta,y]$ is a homeomorphism, and $p_c^{\circ k}$ is a local homeomorphism near $x$ because $x$ cannot be on the critical orbit).
There is a branch $p_c^{-1}\colon[\beta,\alpha]\to[\beta,-\alpha]$; let $[\beta,y''']$ be the image of $[\beta,y]$ under the $k-k'$-th iterate of this branch.
Observe that $[y''',\beta]\subsetneq[y'',\beta]$ because otherwise $p_c^{\circ (k-k')}$ restricted to $[\beta,y'']$ would have degree $1$. Pulling back $k'$ times we obtain an interval $[z',y']\subset[z',x]$ so that $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon [z',y']\to[\beta,y''']$ and $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[z',y']\to[\beta,y]$ are homeomorphisms, as claimed.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Injection Between Precritical Points]
\label{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters. There exists a generation-preserving injection $B$ from the set of precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ to the set of precritical points in $[c',-\alpha]$ of $p_{c'}$. Moreover, $B$ could be taken to satisfy the following properties (A)--(C). Suppose $\zeta\in [c,-\alpha]$ is a precritical point.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] For $k\ge 0$ we have $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))\in [c',-\alpha]$. Moreover, if $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$, then
\[
B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta)).
\]
\item[(B)] Assume $c_*$ is a postcritically finite parameter such that $c_* \prec c$ and $c_* \prec c'$. Let $x_*$ and $x'_*$ be the dynamic counterparts of $c_*$ in the dynamical planes of $c$ and $c'$. Then $\zeta\in [x_*,-\alpha]$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in [x'_*,-\alpha]$.
\item[(C)] There is a sub-interval $J\subset [c', \alpha]$ such that $p^{\circ k }_{c'}(J)=[-\alpha, \alpha ]$ for some $k>0$ and such that the image of $B$ is in $[c',-\alpha]\setminus J$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition~\ref{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} and its notation, we may identify $p_{c'}:H_{c'}\to H_{c'}$ with $f:H'\to H'$. Under this identification $x'_*$ is $x_*$ which is a periodic or preperiodic point that never visits $[x,c]$ under iterates of $p_c$. We will now construct a bijection $B$ between precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and those precritical points in $[z',-\alpha]\setminus [y',x]$ of $f$ for which the orbit never visits $[y',x]$, where $y'$ is specified in Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage} (see Figure~\ref{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}).
In fact, our bijection will preserve the itinerary with respect to $H\sm\{0\}$, except for $k$ iterations along the orbit from $[c,x]$ to $[\beta,y]=p_c^{\circ k}([c,x])$ (resp.\ from $[z',y']$ to $[\beta,y]$).
Our proof proceeds by induction on the number of times, say $m$, that an orbit of a precritical point $\zeta$ runs through $[c,x]$ (not counting $\zeta$ itself). We start by those precritical points on $[c,x]$ (for the map $p_c$) that never run through $(c,x)$ again, that is with the case $m=0$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}, an appropriate branch of $f^{\circ(-k)}\circ p_c^{\circ k}$ sends $[c,x]$ homeomorphically to $[z',y']$; call this branch $\eta\colon[c,x]\to [z',y']$. Then for any $a\in[c,x]$, we have $p_c^{\circ k}(a)=f^{\circ k}(\eta(a))$ and the future orbits of these points under $p_c$ respectively under $f$ coincide as long as the orbits avoid $[c,x]$. Note that all precritical points on $[c,x]$ must have generation at least $k$. We thus obtain an injection, say $B_0$, of precritical points with $m=0$.
Every precritical point $\zeta\in[c,x]$ of generation $n$ and with $m=0$ is the common endpoint of two adjacent sub-intervals of $[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after $n$ iterations: we have $p_c^{\circ n}(\zeta)=c$ and $p_c^{\circ (n-1)}(\zeta)=0$, so we can pull the entire interval $[c,x]$ back in two ways (with a choice in the first step) until we end at $\zeta$. The pull-back of the entire interval $[c,x]$ is possible because no critical value can interfere (the critical orbit visits only endpoints of the tree), and the resulting interval is in $[c,x]$ because the Hubbard tree is unbranched on $[c,x)$ and the orbit of $x$ never enters $[c,x)$.
There is an analogous result about precritical points $\zeta'\in[z',y']$ of $f$ with $m=0$ and sub-intervals of $[z',y']$ that map to $[z',y']$: by construction of $y'$, the point $\zeta'$ has generation $n\ge k$, and there is a precritical point $\zeta=\eta^{-1}(\zeta')\in[c,x]$. The point $\zeta$ has neighborhood, say $I_\zeta\subset [c,x]$ that maps $2:1$ onto $[c,x]$ (the union of the two intervals constructed above), and then $\zeta'$ has a neighborhood $I_{\zeta'}\subset[z',y']$ with $p_c^{\circ k}(I_{\zeta'})=p_c^{\circ k}(I_\zeta)\subset[\beta,y]$.
The bijection $B_0$ of precritical points with $m=0$ thus extends to a bijection between intervals $I\subset[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after some number of iterations without visiting $(c,x)$ before, and intervals $I'\subset [z',y']$ that map homeomorphically onto $[z',y']$ after the same number of iterations and without ever visiting $(z',y')$; this bijection respects the number of iterations as well as the order along the intervals within $[c,x]$ and $[z',y']$ (the intervals are obviously disjoint). Denote this bijection of intervals by $B^*_0$.
Now suppose the statement is shown for all precritical points on $[c,x]$ that visit $(c,x)$ at most $m$ times, for some $m\ge 0$; in particular, we have an injection, say $B_m$, from precritical points on $(c,x)$ that map into $(c,x)$ exactly $m$ times, to precritical points on $(z',y')$ that map into $(z',y')$ exactly $m$ times. Consider any precritical point $\zeta\in(c,x)$ that visits $(c,x)$ exactly $m+1$ times, and let $s$ be minimal such that $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$. Then there is an interval $I\ni \zeta$ so that $p_c^{\circ s}\colon I\to[c,x]$ is a homeomorphism (same reasoning as above).
Let $I':=B^*_0(I)$. Then $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$ is a precritical point that visits $(c,x)$ only $m$ times, and $B_{m+1}(\zeta)=\zeta':= f^{\circ(-s)}\circ B_m \circ p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)$, choosing the branch $f^{\circ(-s)}\colon [y',z']\to I'$.
Since the map $B^*_0$ is injective, different intervals $I$ land in disjoint intervals $I'$, and since $B_m$ is injective by induction, the restriction of $B_{m+1}$ that run through any particular $I$ is injective too, so in total $B_{m+1}$ is injective as claimed.
This takes care of all precritical points on $[c,x]$, and we still have to deal with those on $[x,-\alpha]$. But those with orbits that never run through $[c,x]$ are unaffected by the changed dynamics, and the injection easily extends to those that map into $[c,x]$ under $p_c$.
It remains to show that the map $B$ satisfies Properties (A) -- (C). Let us extend $B_0^*$ to all intervals in $[x,-\alpha]$ that are injective preimages of $[c,x]$ and never run through $[c,x]$ before mapping into $[c,x]$. It is easy to see that $B_0^*(I)\subset I$ for every such interval $I$, because $[z',y']\subset [z',x]$ and $g_c^{\circ -1}[c,x]=f^{-1}[z',x]$, and induction is applied. Since $x_*$ never visits $[x,c]$, we see that $x_*\not \in I$ for every maximal pre-image $I$ of $[c,x]$. Also, by construction, $\zeta \in I$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in I$ for every precritical $\zeta$ and an interval $I$ as above. Therefore, $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ are on the same side of $x_*$. It is clear that $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ have the same return times to $[c,-\alpha]$ and $[z',-\alpha]$ because $p_c^{\circ k}[c,x]=f^{\circ k}[z',y']$. And the dynamical relation $B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))$ holds by construction. Thus Properties (A) and (B) hold. To prove (C) set $J$ to be any pre-image of $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ so that $J\subset [x,y']$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees}]
From Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} we have an injection of precritical points of $p_{c}$ of any given generation on $[-\alpha,c]$ to precritical points of $p_{c'}$ of the same generation on $[-\alpha',c']$, and by claim (B) this injection restricts to the arcs $[-\alpha,\alpha]$ and $[-\alpha',\alpha']$. This immediately proves the first half of part a), and the second half follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}.
Part b) of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}: a precritical orbit of $p_{c'}$ has strictly more choices than a precritical orbit of $p_c$ thanks to the interval $J$. More precisely, consider the Hubbard tree $H_{c'}$ of $p_{c'}$; and let us add the forward orbit of the ends of $J$ into the vertex set of $H_{c'}$. Denote by$A'$ the associated automaton of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$, see Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} for a formal definition of an associated automaton. And let $A'_*\subset A'$ be the sub-automaton obtained from $A'$ by removing all states within the interval $J$ as well as all arrows starting or ending at the removed states. Then the entropy of $c$ is bounded by the entropy of $A'_*$ by claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}, while the entropy of $c'$ is equal to the entropy of $A'$. Since $A'$ is irreducible, the entropy of $A'$ is strictly bigger than the entropy of $A'_*$.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Irrational Angles and the Tiozzo Conjecture}
In this brief section, we will complete the proof of the Tiozzo Conjecture.
\begin{lemma}[Bound for Irrational Angles]
\label{Lem:IrrationalAngle} \lineclear
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$ (dyadic or not) and every $n\in\N$ there is an $\eps>0$ so that $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ for all dyadic angles $\theta'$ with $|\theta'-\theta|<\eps$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
All the relevant precritical points correspond to non-degenerate leaves in the lamination, and there are finitely many of level $n$. As the characteristic angle $\theta$ changes, say by some $\eps>0$, then a precritical leaf of generation $k$ changes continuously by $\eps/2^k$, except when an endpoint of that precritical leaf moves through $\theta$, that is, when $\theta$ itself is periodic of period dividing $k$.
In the exceptional case that $\theta$ is periodic, there are preimage leaves that terminate at $\theta$ itself, but these do not separate and are thus not counted.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[The Tiozzo Conjectures]
\label{Cor:TiozzoConj} \lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\item[d)]
Within every wake, for each $n$ the function $N_\theta(n)$ assumes its maximum at the dyadic of least generation (of course, this maximum is not unique).
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Fix a dyadic angle $\theta_0$ and let $I=I(\theta_0)\subset\Circle$ be the open interval of angles $\theta$ for which the combinatorial arcs to $c(\theta)$ intersect the interior of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$ (not the long vein). In other words, if $c_*$ is the endpoint of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$, then $I$ consists of the angles within the same subwake of $c_*$ that $c(\theta)$ is in. Clearly $\theta_0\in I$. Every dyadic angle in $I$ is either directly or indirectly subordinate to $\theta_0$ (where the latter means that there is a finite sequence of dyadic angles ending at $\theta_0$ so that each is directly subordinate to the next).
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} part b), we know that $h$ restricted to dyadic angles in $I$ has its unique maximum at $\theta_0$.
We claim that for every $\theta\in I$ and every $n\in\N$ we have $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ and hence $h(\theta)\le h(\theta_0)$. Indeed, for every $n$ there is a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ sufficiently close to $\theta$ with $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:IrrationalAngle}), and $N_{\theta'(n)}\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ by definition of $I$. Therefore $\theta_0$ is a (weak) local maximum of $N_\theta(n)$ and of $h$.
However, if $\theta$ is dyadic, then we even have $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$. If $c(\theta)\prec c(\theta_0)$, then $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$ by monotonicity along dyadic veins. Otherwise, choose a new dyadic $\theta'$ so that $\theta\in I(\theta')$ but $\theta_0\not\in I(\theta')$. We then have $h(\theta)\le h(\theta')<h(\theta_0)$. Therefore, $\theta_0$ is the unique global maximum within $I(\theta_0)\ni\theta_0$. This proves claim a) in the stronger form that $h$ has a unique global maximum on $I(\theta_0)$, and this occurs at $\theta_0$.
For part c), consider any hyperbolic component $W$ and let $I$ be the open interval of angles within its wake. Let $\theta_W$ be the unique dyadic of lowest generation within $I$. Then $I(\theta_W)\supset I$, and on this interval $h$ has its unique global maximum at $\theta_W$. Now suppose $W$ is a wake that is not the wake of a hyperbolic component: then either it is one of the subwakes of a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters, or an irrational wake (bounded by two irrational angles with equal angled internal address). But such wakes are exhausted by wakes of hyperbolic components, so the claim holds for them as well. Part d) also follows.
For claim b), suppose $\theta$ is a local maximum of $h$, and let $I\subset\Circle$ be an interval on which $\theta$ is the global maximum. By monotonicity, $\theta$ lands (combinatorially) at an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. If $\theta$ is not dyadic, then choose a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ with $\theta\in I(\theta')\subset I$.
Then the unique global maximum of $h$ within $I(\theta')$ is at $\theta'$, so $\theta=\theta'$ is dyadic.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Continuity of Entropy}
\label{Sec:Continuity}
We start with a combinatorial estimate. A ``combinatorial pattern of length $n$ with gap size $s$'' is a finite sequence of integers $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ with $1\le j_1< j_2 < \dots < j_m< n$ and $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s$ and $n-j_m\ge s$.
\begin{lemma}[Number of Combinatorial Patterns]
\label{Lem:CombinatorialPatterns}
The number of combinatorial patterns of length $n$ with gap size $s$ is at most $e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The number of combinatorial patterns equals the number of binary sequences of length $n$ where two consecutive digits $1$ have distance at least $s$, and so that the final digit is a $1$. Write $n=ks+r$ with $r<s$. Then each block of $s$ consecutive entries has $s+1$ possibilities because it has at most a single $1$, and the last block has $r-1$ digits $0$ followed by a $1$, so it has $1$ possibility. The number of combinatorial patterns is thus at most $(s+1)^k\le e^{k\log(s+1)}\le e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
In the following proof, it will be convenient to define relevant precritical points as precritical points on $[\alpha,\beta]$, i.e.\ precritical leaves separating the two fixed points $\alpha$ and $\beta$ or their corresponding leaves in the lamination (rather than separating $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$ as before).
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Different Counts Yield Identical Entropy]
\label{lem:DifferCounts}
\lineclear
In any invariant quadratic lamination, let $N_1(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves that separate $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$, and let $N_2(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves of generation $n$ separating the leaves corresponding to the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points. Then
\[
\limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_1(n) = \limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_2(n)
\;;
\]
in other words, both counting functions define the same entropy.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $-\alpha\in[\alpha,\beta]$, we clearly have $N_1(n)\le N_2(n)$. To show the converse, we claim that $N_2(n) \le (N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+ N_1(n-2)+\dots) $.
To see this, denote $\alpha_0:=\alpha$ and, recursively, $\alpha_{n+1}$ to be the unique preimage of $\alpha_n$ on $[\alpha,\beta]$, so $\alpha_1=-\alpha$. Then $[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_n]$ maps homeomorphically onto $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n-1}]$ and $[\alpha,\beta]=\bigcup_{n\ge 0}[\alpha_{n},\alpha_{n+1}]$. If $N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n)$ denotes the number of precritical points of generation $n$ on $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]$, then we have $N_{[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_{n+2}]}(n)=N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n-1)$ and $N_{[\alpha_{0},\alpha_{1}]}(n)=N_1(n)$ and indeed $N_2(n) = N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+N_1(n-2)+\dots$. If $N_1\le C e^{(h+\eps)n}$ for all $n$, then $N_2(n)\le 2Cn e^{(h+\eps)n}$. Therefore, $N_1$ and $N_2$ define the same entropy.
\end{proof}
In view of this lemma, we will take the liberty in the following result to count relevant precritical points (leaves) as those separating the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points.
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Bound on Entropy Increase]
\label{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} \lineclear
Suppose $c_1\prec c_2$ and $[c_1,c_2]$ is a (combinatorial) arc in $\M$ such that $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$. Then there is an $s>0$ with the following property: if $[c,c']$ is a dyadic vein of generation at least $s$ that terminates at $c\in [c_1,c_2]$, then $\tilde h(c')-\tilde h(c_2)\le \eps$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $h:=\tilde h(c_2)$. There is a $C>0$ so that all $c\in [c_1,c_2]$ satisfy $N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)\le Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$ for all $n$. We may suppose that $s$ is large enough so that $2C\le e^{(h+\eps/2)s}$. Let $s'\ge s$ be the generation of $c'$.
Let $f' \colon H'\to H'$ denote the Hubbard tree of the dyadic parameter $c'$ and $f\colon H\to H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$ (as endpoint of a dyadic vein in $\M$, $c$ is postcritically finite, so both Hubbard trees exist and are finite). Let $x\in H'$ be the dynamical counterpart of $c$.
Recall that $x$ is a characteristic periodic or preperiodic point in the sense that the entire orbit of $x$ is contained in the closure of the component of $H'\sm\{x\}$ that contains $0$.
In particular, the orbit of $x$ is disjoint from $(x,c']$. It follows that any connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ is either contained in $[x,c']$ or intersects it at most in $\{x\}$. (Otherwise, $x$ would be in the interior of $I$ and after $n$ iterates $x$ would be mapped into $(x,c']$.)
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that
\begin{equation}
(f')^{\circ (s')}([x,c']) \subset[\alpha,\beta]
\;.
\label{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}
\end{equation}
and, moreover, the orbit of $(f')^{\circ m}([x,c'])$ for $m\in \{0,1,\dots , s'-1\}$ does not contain $0$.
By a maximal preimage of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n>0$ we
mean a connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ so that $I\not\subset (f')^{-m}[x,c']$
for every $m\in\{1,2,\dots,n\}$; equivalently, $(f')^{\circ m}(I)\not \subset [x,c']$ for all $m<n$.
We denote by $M$ the set of all maximal preimages of $[x,c']$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$.
An \emph{itinerary} of $I$ will be a sequence $s_{0}s_1\dots s_{n-2}\in\{\0,\1\}^\N$ where each $s_{i}$ describes the connected component of $H'\setminus \{0\}$ containing $(f')^i(I)$ (labeled for instance so that the critical value is in the component with label $\1$).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:PreCritInterv}
There is an itinerary preserving inclusion from
\begin{itemize}
\item the set $M$ of maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n$; to
\item the set of precritical points of $f:H\to H$ of generation $n$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, a maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ belongs to the interval $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H'$ if and only if the corresponding precritical point belongs to $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $[c', c]$ is a dyadic vein, we may associate to $f:H\to H$ and $f'\colon H' \to H'$ the automata $A$ and $A'$ as in Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} such that there is an inclusion $J:A\hookrightarrow A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'} we denote by $e_0$ the unique state of $A'$ containing the critical point.
Then maximal preimages $I$ of $[x,c']$ of generation $n$ are in bijection with paths $s$ in $J( A)$ of length $n-1$ terminating at $e_0$ and starting at states in $[x,\beta]$. Indeed, every such $s$ is uniquely described by a sequence of states $s_0,s_1,\dots , s_{n-2}$ in $A'$ such that $(f')^{\circ i}(I) \subset s_i$. Since $I$ is a maximal preimage, all $s_i$ are in $J(A)$.
Further, $J^{-1}(s)$ defines a unique critical point in $[c,\beta]$ of $f$ because $J^{-1}(s)$ starts at a state in $[c,\beta]$ and terminates at $J^{-1}(e_0)$ containing the critical point. This constructs the required injection.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
By Lemma~\ref{lem:PreCritInterv} the number of intervals in $M$ of generation $n$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$ is bounded above by $Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$.
In order to bound the number of precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of any generation $n$ in the dynamics of $f'\colon H'\to H'$, consider any relevant (i.e.\ between the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ points) precritical point $\ell$ of generation $n$. Let $j_1<j_2<\dots <j_m=n$ be the set of all iterates so that $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$.
Then $\ell$, $(f')^{\circ (j_1+s')}(\ell)$, $(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell)$,\dots , $(f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$ are within $[\alpha,\beta]$; compare \eqref{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}. This also implies that $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s'$.
Let $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}\in M$ be the unique intervals in $M$ containing, respectively,
$\ell, (f')^{\circ(j_1+s')}(\ell),(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell),\dots , (f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$; their respective generations are $j_1, j_2-j_1-s',\dots , j_{m}-j_{m-1}-s'$.
Then $\ell$ has itinerary $\s=s_0s_2\dots s_{n-2}$ of $\ell$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $s_0s_1\dots s_{j_1-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_0$;
\item $s_{j_i}s_{j_i+1}\dots s_{j_i+s'-1}$ is the kneading sequence of $c'$;
\item $s_{j_{i}+s'}s_{j_{i}+s'+1}\dots s_{j_{i+1}-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_i$; and
\item all $s_{j_{i}-1}$ are arbitrary in $\{\0,\1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We justify this as follows:
$(f')^{\circ(j_1-1)} $ maps $I_0$ homeomorphically, while $(f')^{\circ j_1}\colon I_0\to [x,\tilde c]$ is a $2:1$-map, so the first $j_1-2$ iterates do not contain $0$ and all points in $I_0$ have the same entries in their itineraries up to entry number $j_1-2$.
Since $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$, the next iterates are the same as for $[x,c']$ and, in particular, for $c'$, hence equal to the kneading sequence of $c'$, at least before $c'$ lands at the $\beta$ fixed point, that is for $s'-1$ iterations. The iterate $(f')^{\circ (j_i+s')}(\ell)$ is by definition in $I_i$, and this interval travels forward homeomorphically until it covers $0$, which is the iteration before it reaches $[x,c']$ the next time; since the latter is at iterate $j_{i+1}$, the itinerary of $\ell$ coincides with that of $I_i$ until position $j_{i+1}-2$. In the subsequent iterate, the image interval $(f')^{\circ j_{i+1}-j_i-1}(I_i)$ contains $0$, so both entries in the itinerary might be possible.
Now consider the set of all precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of generation $n$ corresponding to a particular combinatorial pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$.
We just showed that in order to determine the itinerary of $\ell$ we only need to specify $s_{j_1-1},s_{j_2-1},\dots , s_{j_m-1}\in \{\0,\1\}$ as well as the intervals $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}$ as above; their numbers we estimated above. Therefore, the total number of precritical points with pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ is at most
\[
2 C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_1-1)} \left(\prod_{i=1}^{m-1} 2C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_{i+1}-j_i-s'-1)}\right)\le2C e^{(h+\eps/2)n}
\]
because $2Ce^{-s'}\le 1$ by hypothesis.
Since the number of combinatorial patterns is at most $e^{\log(s'+1)n/s'}$, it follows that $N_{\tilde c}(n) \le 2 C e^{n(h+\eps/2+\log(s'+1)/s')}$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\tilde h(\tilde c)
&\le \limsup_n \frac{1}{n}\left(\log 2 +\log C + n (h+\eps/2)+\frac{n}{s'}\log(s'+1) \rule{0pt}{11pt} \right)
\\
&\le h+\eps/2+ \frac{\log (s'+1)}{s'} \le h+\eps
\;
\end{align*}
if $s'\ge s$ is sufficiently large.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy Near Veins]
\label{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins} \lineclear
Suppose $\theta\in\Circle$ is such that topological entropy is continuous along the (combinatorial) vein connecting the parameters $0$ to $c(\theta)$ in $\M$. Then $h$ is continuous for all parameters on $[0,c(\theta)]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
It may be helpful to explain the statement. Let $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to \C$ be a parametrization of the (combinatorial) arc $[0,c(\theta)]$. Then the hypothesis says that $h(\gamma(t))$ is continuous for $t\in[0,1]$ (only considering parameters along the arc). The conclusion is that then $h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\gamma(t)$ for all $t$. (Note that this hypothesis is known to be true for all angles $\theta\in\Circle$, except when $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$ at an irrational angle \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}; we will treat the missing case in Section~\ref{Sec:IrratEndpoints}).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, suppose $c_a\prec c_b$ are two parameters in $\M$ with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$; we allow $c_b$ to be a (combinatorial) endpoint of $\M$. Denote by $\text{wake}(c_a)$ the open wake of $c_a$: this is the set of all parameters in $\M$ that are separated from $0$ by two parameter rays landing at (or accumulating at) $c_a$. If $c_a$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then we set $\text{wake}(c_a)$ to be the subwake of $c_a$ containing $c_b$. Similarly $\text{wake}(c_b)$ is defined; if $c_b$ is a combinatorial endpoint of the Mandelbrot set, then $\text{wake}(c_b)=\emptyset$. Set $W:=\ovl{\text{wake}(c_a)}\sm\text{wake}(c_b)$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} there are at most finitely many dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ with $c_i\in [c_a,c_b]$ such that the entropy variation along $[c_i,c'_i]$ exceeds $\eps$, and so that $c_b\not\in(c_i,c'_i]$. We will construct a ``reduced wake'' $W'\subset W$ in which the entropy variation is at most $2\eps$.
By the Branch Theorem \cite{Orsay}, \cite[Theorem~3.1]{MandelBranch}, the points $c_i$ are either Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters or centers of hyperbolic components. In both cases, we will exclude a subwake at $c_i$ from $W$ where the entropy variation is large.
If $c_i$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, let $W_i$ be the subwake of $c_i$ containing $c'_i$ and thus $[c_i,c'_i]$ (this subwake does not contain $c_b$). If $c_i$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_i$, then let $W_i$ be the subwake of $H_i$ that contains $c'_i$ (the root of this wake is a bifurcation parameter on $\partial H_i$).
Set $W':=W\sm \bigcup_i \ovl{W_i}$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj} (the Tiozzo Conjecture), the maximal entropy for angles within $W'$ (or more precisely, the entropy of angles corresponding to rays in $W'$) occurs either at $c_b$ or at a dyadic parameter $c'\in W'$, and in both cases it is at most $\tilde h(c_a)+2\eps$.
To prove continuity of $h$ at $\theta$, we first discuss the case that $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$. By hypothesis, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial vein $[0,c(\theta)]$, so there is a $c_a\in\M$ with $0\prec c_a\prec c(\theta)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c(\theta)) -\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$. Now we use the argument from above and construct a wake $W'$ as described.
Then all angles $\theta'\in W'$ satisfy $|h(\theta')-h(\theta)|\le 2\eps$, and these angles form a neighborhood of $\theta$, which completes the proof in this case.
The second case is that $c(\theta)$ is not an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set and $c(\theta)$ is neither on the boundary of a hyperbolic component nor a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter. We may choose an arc $(c_a,c_b)\ni c(\theta)$ (i.e., $c_a\prec c(\theta)\prec c_b$) with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a)\le 2\eps$ and proceed as above.
If $c(\theta)$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then there are finitely many branches, and the previous argument works separately for all the individual branches.
If $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of a single hyperbolic component $H$, let $c_a\in \partial H$ be the root of $H$ (the boundary point with multiplier $1$) and let $c_b$ be the period-doubling bifurcation point (the boundary point with multiplier $-1$). Then all dyadic parameters $c'\in W=\text{wake}(c_a)\sm\ovl{\text{wake}(c_b)}$ have the endpoints of their veins in $W\setminus \{c(\theta)\}$. The entropy variation of $[c_a,c_b] $ is $0$, in particular less than $\eps$.
Hence $W'$ as above provides a neighborhood of $\theta$ with small entropy variation.
Finally, if $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of two hyperbolic components, then the previous argument works separately
for both hyperbolic components.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy]
\label{Thm:Continuity} \lineclear
If $\theta\in\Circle$, then $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\theta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins}, entropy is continuous at all angles $\theta\in\Circle$ for which entropy restricted to the combinatorial arc $[0,c(\theta)]$ is continuous. This is true for all parameters $c(\theta)$ with $\theta\in\Q/\Z$ by work of Tiozzo~\cite{TiozzoThesis} and Jung \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, and consequently for all parameters that are not (combinatorial) endpoints of $\M$ at irrational angles. For combinatorial endpoints $c(\theta)$ with irrational $\theta$, we will prove this in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{corollary}[Existence of Limit]
\label{Cor:ExistenceLimit} \lineclear
In the dynamics of $p_c$, the limit $\lim_{n\to\infty} (1/n)\log N(n)$ exists whenever $p_c$ is non-renormalizable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, if $c$ is non-renormalizable and postcritically finite, then $\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)=\lim_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)$ by irreducibility of the associated subshift of finite type. If $c$ is not postcritically finite and not an endpoint of $\M$ (that is, $c$ is associated to two external angles in $\M$), then there are two non-renormalizable parameters $c_1$ and $c_2$ with $N_{c_1}(n)\le N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le\eps$ for arbitrary $\eps>0$ and the result holds as well (here we use continuity of entropy).
Finally, if $c$ is a non-renormalizable endpoint, then by continuity of $\tilde h$ for any $\eps>0$ there exists a postcritically finite non-renormalizable parameter $c_1\prec c$ so that $\tilde h(c)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$.
By monotonicity, we have $\liminf(1/n)N_c(n)\ge \liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)$, and
$\limsup(1/n)N_c(n)=\tilde h(c)\le \tilde h(c_1)+\eps=\liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)+\eps\le \liminf(1/n)N_{c}(n)+\eps$. Since $\eps>0$ was arbitrary, the claim follows in this case too.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Irrational endpoints}
\label{Sec:IrratEndpoints}
In this section, we prove that for every combinatorial endpoint $c$ of $\M$, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial arc $[0,c]$. This is known when $c$ is postcritically finite \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, but we need it in all cases. This proof provides the missing step in the continuity proof in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}.
We will approximate the irrational endpoints by dyadic ones, and of course we need uniform estimates for the latter (see Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}).
\subsection{Hubbard trees}
\label{ss:HaubTrees}
We need to start by discussing some more properties of Hubbard trees of postcritically finite polynomials.
The \emph{marked points} or \emph{vertices} of the Hubbard tree are the endpoints, branch points, and the postcritical points. (In fact, all endpoints are postcritical points; critical points are not included in their own right, but they might be postcritical, for instance when they are periodic, and when the degree is greater than $2$ then they might also be branch points.) Since the set of vertices is forward invariant, every edge (a closed arc connecting two vertices) maps over one or several entire edges, so that the image contains every edge the interior of which intersects the image; in other words, the edges form a Markov partition on the Hubbard tree. --- Here, we will only discuss quadratic polynomials and Hubbard trees.
If $H_r\subset H$ is a proper subtree of $H$ with the property that $p_c^{\circ n}(H_r)\subset H_r$ for some period $n\ge 2$, then $p_c$ is \emph{renormalizable}; it is well known that this means the $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded copy of the Mandelbrot set within itself.
The main part of the argument below will be in the case that there exists an edge $e\subset H$ so that $p_c^{\circ n}(e)=H$ for every sufficiently big $n$. If $p_c$ is non-renormalizable, then every edge will do; otherwise there may still be some edge (outside of ``little Julia sets'') with this property. If there is no such edge, then we are in the ``immediate satellite renormalizable case'', that means $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded Mandelbrot set that touches the main cardioid of $\M$.
\emph{Standing Assumption:} In this subsection and the next one (Section~\ref{ss:Automata}), we assume that $H$ has an edge for which a finite iterate covers the entire Hubbard tree $H$, so that $c$ is not immediate satellite renormalizable. (In fact, this assumption will continue to hold, in different notation, until we give the proof of the general case in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}).
Consider a dyadic endpoint $c'$ with Hubbard tree $H'$ and external angle ${q}/{2^m}$. Then the critical value and every postcritical point are endpoints of $H'$, so vertices of $H'$ are either endpoints or branch points. Easy calculations show that $H'$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item $m+1$ endpoints;
\item at most $m-2$ branch points;
\item at most $2m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Let $c$ be the postcritically finite parameter where the vein of $c'$ terminates. We denote by $H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$; note that $\beta \not\in H$.
Denote by $x\in H'$ the dynamic counterpart of $c$ as in Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\begin{lemma}
The set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}\setminus \{\text{vertices of }H'\}$ contains at most $m$ points; equivalently, $p_{c'}^{\circ m}(x)$ is a branch point of $H'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde c$ be the dyadic parameter with $c'\lhd \tilde c$, so $c'$ is directly subordinate to $\tilde c$. Then $c\prec c'$ and $c\prec \tilde c$.
Denote by $\tilde q/ 2^n$ the external angle of $\tilde c$; note that $n<m$.
We will work in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, the rays landing at $x$ (this point is denoted by $x_*$ in Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}) separate $R(0), R(\tilde q/2^n)$, and $R(q/2^m)$.
Let $x(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ be the landing point of $R(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ and consider the arc $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$ in the filled-in Julia set of $p_{c'}$ (which is a dendrite). Then $x$ has at least three branches in $ H'\cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$: two of them are the branches to the critical point and to the critical value at angle $q/2^m$, and the third is $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$.
We claim that $p_{c'}^{\circ n}[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\subset H'$. Indeed, let $T_k$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. Then $p_{c'}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$ by \eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}. Therefore, $p_{c'}(T_{k-1})\subset T_{k-2}\cup H'$ and, by induction, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(T_{n})\subset H'$.
Therefore, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(x)$ has at least $3$ branches in $H'$ because $p_{c'}^{\circ n}:H' \cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\to H'$ is locally a homeomorphism at $x$, and $n<m$.
\end{proof}
Let us now refine $H'$ by adding the finite set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}$ to its vertex set. The new tree, still called $H'$, has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $3m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $3m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Here and elsewhere, we find it convenient to express some combinatorial properties in terms of \emph{automata}. We would like to reassure the reader that we only use a basic notion without results from automata theory and hope it will not be distracting. More precisely, given a postcritically finite polynomial $p_{c'}$ with Hubbard tree $H'$, we associate to it an automaton $A'$ in a natural way, as follows. The states of $A'$ correspond to the edges of $H'$. An arrow connects two edges $e_1$ and $e_2$ so that the image of $e_1$ contains $e_2$; the number of arrows from $e_1$ to $e_2$ equals the number of times the edge $e_1$ covers $e_2$ under $p_{c'}$ (this is well defined because we have a Markov partition). This number of arrows equals $0$ or $1$, except for the unique edge (if any) that contains the critical point in its interior.
Similarly, denote by $A$ the natural automaton associated with $p_c\colon H\to H$.
\emph{Overview on the argument.}
The key idea of our proof consists of identifying the dynamics of $p$ on $H$ as an embedded subset of the dynamics of $p'$ on $H'$. Since entropy measures the growth rate of choice of orbits of length $n$, the entropy of $p'$ on $H'$ is no less than the entropy of $p$ on $H$, and we need to give an upper bound on the difference. An orbit in $H'$ that realizes the additional choice is one that leaves the embedded image of $H$ in $H'$, and we show that it starts on a single edge $[x,c']$ at the critical value. We show that this edge maps forward homeomorphically a large number of iterations: so if some orbit uses the additional choice, then it will not have any choice for a long time, and this will give an upper bound on the entropy increase. We will do much of the argument in terms of the automaton $A$ that we consider as a sub-automaton of $A'$.
We start the construction by describing the relation between $H,A$ and $H',A'$ in the following lemma. We define an end-edge of $H'$ to be any edge so that among the two vertices it connects there is one endpoint of $H'$.
\begin{lemma}[Identifying $A$ as Sub-Automaton of $A'$]
\label{lem:AandA'} \lineclear
Denote by $H'_*$ the sub-tree of $H'$ obtained from $H'$ by removing all its end-vertices and (open) end-edges. Then there is a homeomorphism $J:H \to H'_*$
such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$J$ is a tree-isomorphism, i.e.\ $J$ sends vertices and edges of $H$ to vertices and edges of $ H'_*$ respectively;
\item
if $y$ is a vertex of $H$, then $J(y)$ has the same itinerary as $y$; and
\item
$J$ respects the dynamics in the sense that
an edge $e_1$ of $H$ covers once, resp twice, an edge $e_2$ under $p_c$ if and only if $J(e_1)$ covers once, resp twice, $J(e_2)$ under $p_{c'}$.
\end{enumerate}
There is a unique edge $e_0$ of $H'$ containing the critical point of $p_{c'}$. If $c$ is strictly pre-periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is in the interior of $J^{-1}(e_0)$. If $c$ is periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is on the boundary of $J^{-1}(e_0)$.
The map $J$ induces an inclusion $A \hookrightarrow A'$ by mapping a state $e$ of $A$ into the state $J(e)$ of $A'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us first define the map
\[
J: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Recall that every vertex of $H$ is a postcritical point or a branch point.
If $y\in \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}$ (in the dynamics of $p_c$) is a branch point of $H$, then $y$ is not a pre-critical point because the latter points have valence $1$ or $2$ in $H$.
In particular, there are at least $3$ external rays landing at $y$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:CountPartsHubTree} these rays at the same angle also land together in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ and the landing point, say $y'$, is in $H'_*$. We define $J(y):=y'$.
Further, let $x=J(c)$ be the dynamical counterpart (again in the dynamics of $c'$) of the parameter $c$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}. Then we set $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c)):= p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)\in H'_*$ for all $k\ge 0$. We claim that this definition is consistent and, moreover, that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
$J$ is injective on the set of vertices and
\item[(b)] $J$ preserves orientation in the following sense: if a ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ lands at a non-precritical point of $H$ so that $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates two vertices $v_1,v_2\in H$, then $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates $J(v_1)$ and $J(v_2)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
\end{itemize}
If $c$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameter, then $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of at least two external rays (because $c\prec c'$ is not an endpoint). Moreover, $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of a ray $R(\phi)$ if and only if $R(\phi)$ lands at $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c))$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$. Thus $J$ is well defined and satisfies (a) and (b).
The other case is that $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component $W$. In this case, no ray lands at $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ for $k\ge 0$ because these points are in the Fatou set. By definition, $J(c)=x$ is the landing point of periodic rays, say $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$, so that $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$ bounds the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$. Denote by $c_*\in \partial W$ the landing point of $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. For a parameter $w\in \ovl W$, let $\gamma_w$ be a non-repelling periodic point; there is a unique continuous choice so that $\gamma_c=c$. Moreover, $\gamma_{c_*}$ is the landing point of the ray pair $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. Observe also that the cycle $\{p_w^{\circ k}(\gamma_w)\}_{k\ge 0}$ for $w\in W\cup\{c_*\}$ does not cross any ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ as in claim (b). This proves claim (b) because the rays landing at non-precritical points of $H$ plus rays $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$ are stable in the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
%\newpage
We now extend $J$ to a continuous map $J:H\to H'_*$ that is injective on every edge of $H$. Since $J$ preserves orientation of vertices of $H$, the extension is an embedding.
Since $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(c')$ is not in the image of $J$ for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$ but $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ is in the image of $J$ for all $k\ge 0$, the image of $H$ under $J$ is the connected hull of $\cup _{k\ge 0} p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ (the tree $H$ is the connected hull of the orbit of $c$ under $p_c$, and the map $J$ preserves external angles of rays landing at vertices). By Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} the images $p^{\circ k}_{c'}([c',x])$ are arcs with disjoint interiors for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$. Thus there is no branch point in $H'\setminus J(H)$. Therefore, $J$ maps $H$ bijectively onto $ H'_*$.
In the standard definition of Hubbard trees, every vertex of $H'$ is a branch point or an endpoint, and the postcritical points are exactly the endpoints. Remember, however, that we added the orbit of $x$ to the set of vertices of $H'$. The vertices of $H'_*$ are thus the branch points in $H'$ and the orbit of $x$, and all are $J$-images of vertices in $H$. Therefore $J$ is a bijection from vertices of $H$ to vertices of $H'_*$, and claim (1) follows.
Observe that $J$ is a conjugacy between
\[
p_c: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}
\]
and
\[
p_{c'}: \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Therefore, if $e_1$ is an edge of $H$ so that the critical point $0$ is not in the interior of $e_1$, then $p_{c}(e_1)\supset e_2$ if and only if $p_{c'}(J(e_1))\supset J(e_2)$. Moreover, $p_c$ and $p_{c'}$ restricted to $e_1$ and $J(e_1)$ respectively have degree $1$. If the interior of $e_1=[a,b]$ contains the critical point of $p_c$, then $p_c([a,0])=[p_{c}(a),c]$ and $p_c([0,b])=[c,p_{c}(b)]$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $J(e_1)$ because all other edges of $H'$ are mapped injectively under $p_{c'}$. We have $p_{c'}([J(a),0])=[J(p_c(a)),c')]\supset [J(p_c(a),J(c)]$ and $p_{c'}([0,J(b)])=[c',J(p_c(b))]\supset [J(c), J(p_c(b)]$. This finishes the proof of (1)--(3).
The critical point $0$ is not a vertex of $H'$ because $0$ is a strictly preperiodic point of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$. Hence $0$ is in the interior of an edge $e_0\subset H'$. Since $x\in p_{c'}(e_0)$ we have $c\in p_{c}(J^{-1}(e_0))$. Therefore, $J^{-1}(e_0)$ contains the critical point $0$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $e_0$ if and only if $0$ is strictly preperiodic under $p_c$.
Clearly, $J$ injects the set of states of $A$, which are edges of $H$, into the set of states of $A'$, which are edges of $H'$. It follows from (3) that the number of arrows from $a_1$ to $a_2$ (i.e., the degree of the corresponding map on the edge) is equal to the number of arrows from $J(a_1)$ to $J(a_2)$.
\end{proof}
\goodbreak
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:EdgesOfH}
The tree $H$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $2m-2$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-3$ edges.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Automata}
\label{ss:Automata}
Let us look in detail at the automata $A'$ and $A$ introduced above. For simplicity, we write $A\subset A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}.
Whether or not the dynamics on a Hubbard tree is renormalizable is encoded in the associated automaton. We write
$A=A_n\cup A_r$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_n$ (the non-renormalizable edges) contains all states that, for a fixed finite iterate, reach all states of $A$ simultaneously; and
\item $A_r$ (the renormalizable edges) contains all states from which {not all} of $A$ can be reached simultaneously: these correspond to edges within the Hubbard trees of ``smalls Julia sets'' corresponding to renormalization domains).
\end{itemize}
The dynamics on the Hubbard tree is renormalizable if and only if $A_r\neq \emptyset$.
An automaton is called \emph{irreducible} if every state of $A$ can be reached from each other. This is certainly the case when $A$ is non-renormalizable, but may also happen in the renormalizable case: for instance, the Hubbard tree of the rabbit polynomial with a superattracting $3$-cycle has its Hubbard tree in the form of a topological \textsf{Y} where the three edges are permuted cyclically: the automaton has the form $e_0\to e_1\to e_2\to e_0$ and is irreducible, but the dynamics is renormalizable. The difference is that no edge covers all of $A$ after the same number of iterations.
If $A_r\neq\emptyset$, so that the dynamics is renormalizable, then we may have $A_n=\emptyset$ or $A_n\neq \emptyset$. The former case, $A_n=\emptyset$, was defined earlier as the case of immediate satellite renormalization.
Recall our earlier assumption that $A_n\neq\emptyset$: so we are not in the immediate satellite renormalizable case.
We also remark that there are no arrows from $A_r$ to $A_n$, so within $A$ there is no escape from the set of renormalization states $A_r$. However, in $A'\supset A$, if $A_r\neq\emptyset$, then there are two arrows from $A_r$ to $[c',x]$, which is a state in $A'\setminus A$.
There are the following special states of $A$ and $A'\supset A$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the $0$-state in $A'$ contains the critical point; this state is the edge $e_0$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}; we set the $0$-state of $A$ to be $J^{-1}(e_0)$; this convention is compatible with the inclusion $J\colon A\hookrightarrow A'$;
\item
the $[c',x]$-state of $A'\setminus A$;
\item
states of $A$ and of $A'$ that belong to the interval $[\alpha, -\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
A \emph{path} in $A$ or $A'$ is a sequence of arrows so that each arrow starts where the previous arrow ends. The \emph{length} of a path is the number of arrows it contains. We can also think of a path as a sequence of states so that there is an arrow from every state to the subsequent one (that is, a sequence of edges in the Hubbard tree so that each edge covers the next one under the map). When a path connects two states that are connected by multiple arrows, then there are accordingly multiple paths along this sequence of states (as an example, in $A'$ there are two paths of length $1$ from the $0$-state to the $[c',x]$-state).
We define a \emph{relevant precritical path} in $A'$ or in $A$ as a path that starts at a state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and terminates at the $0$-state. By basic properties of symbolic dynamics, relevant precritical paths in $A'$ are in bijection with precritical points of $p_{c'}$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ because the critical point of $p_{c'}$ is not a vertex of $H'$. Different relevant precritical paths in $A$ encode different precritical points of $p_c$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
Every relevant precritical path $s$ in $A'$ has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DecompOfs}
s=b_0c_0a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\end{equation}
such that (roughly: $a_i, b_i, c_i$ are the sub-paths in $ A'\setminus A$, in $A_n$, and in $A_r$ respectively)
\begin{itemize}
\item
$a_i$ is an (almost) ``choiceless'' path that starts at the $0$-state, then goes to $[x,c']$, then travels outside of states in $[\alpha, -\alpha]$, and terminates at the first state reached in $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset A$;
\item
if $a_i$ terminates at a state in $A_r$, then $b_i=\emptyset$; otherwise, $b_i$ is a path that starts at the state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ where $a_i$ terminates and continues while states in $A_n$ are visited; (if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$)
\item
if $A_r=\emptyset$, then $c_i=\emptyset$; otherwise: if $b_i\not=\emptyset$, then $c_i$ is a path that starts in $A_n$ where $b_i$ terminates, and immediately moves into $A_r$, and otherwise it starts at a state in $A_r$ where $a_i$ terminates; the end of $c_i$ is the $0$-state, and until then the path remains in $A_r$ (again, if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$).
\end{itemize}
Observe that paths in $A'$ that are not in $A$ start on the edge $[x,c']$, so they are described by the $a_i$ that are long and have almost no choice, hence contribute little additional entropy.
Every $a_i$ has length at least $m+1$ because $[x,c']$ needs $m$ iteration to reach $[\beta,\alpha]$, and might need further iterations to land in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}). Once it lands there, we are either in $A_n$ and we continue with a path $b_i$ as long as we stay in $A_n$, or we are already in $A_r$ and $b_i=\emptyset$, and $c_i$ continues until the next visit of the $0$ state.
We will refer to $a_i$ as \emph{detours} (the long almost choice-less parts).
Defining $\ell_i,t_i, k_i$ as the lengths of $a_i, b_i, c_i$ respectively, we say that $s$ has \emph{combinatorial pattern} $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$.
\begin{lemma}[Almost Choiceless Paths]
\label{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}
There are at most two possible paths in $A'$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at the $0$-state;
\item then immediately go to the $[c',x]$-state;
\item then travel outside $[\alpha,-\alpha]$; and
\item terminate at a given state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Such paths have length $\ell\ge m+1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, the edge of $H'$ associated with the $0$-state covers $[c,x]$ with degree $2$ under $p_{c'}$. Then $[x,c]$ maps injectively for at least $m+1$ iterations until $[x,c]$ starts to partially cover $[\alpha,-\alpha]$. But this is, by definition, when the path under discussion terminates.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Number of Paths $c_i$]
\label{lem:c_iPaths}
Suppose $c$ is renormalizable. Let $g$ be the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$. Then there are at most $2^{{k}/{g}}$ paths in $A$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at a given state in $A_n$ or in $A_r$;
\item all subsequent states are within $A_r$;
\item terminate at the $0$-state; and
\item have length $k$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $H_0,H_1,\dots H_{g-1}$ be the cycle of small Hubbard trees associated with the the largest renormalizable Hubbard trees (corresponding to the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$). Then the degree $p_c^{\circ gt}:H_{0}\to H_{0}$ is at most $2^t$ for all $t$. Therefore, there are at most $2^{t}$ paths in $A_r$ with length $k\in \{ gt,gt+1,\dots, g(t+1)-1\}$ that terminate at the $0$-state; so for given length $k$, the number of such paths is at most $2^t=2^{\lfloor k/g \rfloor}$ (and we have not even counted the first step from a given state of $A$ to $A_r$).
\end{proof}
Fix a combinatorial pattern $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$ and let $n=|P|=t_0+k_0+\sum_{i\ge 1}^p(\ell_i+t_i+k_i)$.
When comparing entropy in $A'$ and in $A$, we will consider the additional relevant precritical paths in $A'$ and show that they correspond to relevant precritical paths in $A$ of bounded length, so that there are not too many additional paths in $A'$. More precisely, if a detour has length $\ell_i\ge 3m$ then the new path within $A$ will be shorter (or have equal length) than before.
We thus introduce a quantity $\kappa$, called \emph{uncertainty of $P$}, that measures the possible increase of length as follows:
\[
\kappa(P):= \frac 1 n \sum_{|\ell_i|<3m}(3m- \ell_{i})
= \frac 1 n \sum_i \max(0,3m-\ell_i)
\]
(the first sum is taken over all $\ell_i$ that are less than $3m$). Higher values of $\kappa$ create problems. Since all $\ell_i>m$ and $\sum\ell_i\le n$, we have $3m-\ell_i\le 2m < 2\ell_i$ and $\kappa(P)\in[0, 2]$.
Denote by $N'(P)$ the number of all precritical paths in $A'$ with pattern $P$.
For $\kappa\in [0,2]$ define
\[
N'(\kappa,n):= \sum_{\kappa(P)\le \kappa,\ \ |P|=n} N'(P)
\;,
\]
the numbers of precritical itineraries with small uncertainty.
We define $S'(\kappa,n)$ to be the corresponding set of relevant precritical paths with small uncertainty, so that $N'(\kappa,n)=|S'(\kappa,n)|$.
\begin{lemma}[Replacing a Path in $A'$ by a Path in $A$]
\label{lem:substitution} \lineclear
If $s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p$ is a precritical path in $A'$ with uncertainty $\kappa$, then there are paths $a^*_i$ in $A_n$ with lengths in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$ such that
$s^*:=b_0 a^*_1 b_1a^*_1b_2a^*_2\dots a^*_p b_pc_p$ is a path in $A$. If $n$ is the length of
$s$, then $s^*$ has length at most $n + \kappa n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that some $b_i$ might be empty paths. Choose a state $a\in A_n$. For convenience, we say that $a$ is the beginning and the end of every empty $b_i$.
Since $A_n$ is irreducible and has less than $2m$ vertices (Corollary~\ref{cor:EdgesOfH}) we may replace every $c_ia_{i+1}$ by a path $a^*_{i+1}$ in $A_n$ of length at most $2m$ so that $a^*_{i+1}$ connects the end of $b_{i}$ with the beginning of $b_{i+1}$ (which are by definition both in $A_n$); by adding $m$ arbitrary steps at the beginning, we may arrange things so that $a^*_i$ has length in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$.
Since the length of each $a_i$ is at least $m$, this procedure increases the length of $s$ by at most $\kappa n$ (and even shortens whenever $c_ia_{i+1}$ has length greater than $3m$).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Counting Patterns]
\label{lem:PatternsGrowth}
The quantity
\[
\limsup_{n}\frac{1}{n}\log\left(\# \{\text{patterns of length }n\}\rule{0pt}{11pt}\right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $m$ tends to infinity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every pattern $P$ is uniquely characterized by a non-decreasing sequence of positive integers
\[t_0,t_0+k_0,t_0+k_0+\ell_1, t_0+k_0+\ell_1+t_1, \dots. \]
Since $\ell_i\ge m+1$, for every $q\in\{0,\dots,\lfloor n/m\rfloor\}$ the interval $[qm,(q+1)m)$ contains at most $3$ elements of the above sequence; and the same is true for the final interval $[\lfloor n/m\rfloor m+1, n]$. Therefore, the number of all patterns is bounded by $Z(n,m):=((m+1)^3)^{(n/m)+1}=e^{{3(n+m)\log(m+1)}/{m}}$. For fixed $m$, we have $\limsup_n (1/n)\log Z(n,m)=3\log(m+1)/m$, and indeed this tends to $0$ as $m\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Uniformity]
\label{prop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon >0$ there are $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0$ depending only on $\varepsilon$ but not on $c$ and $c'$ such that the following holds. If
\begin{itemize}
\item $m\ge \overline m$,
\item either $c$ is non renormalizable, or the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$ is at least $\overline g$,
\item $\kappa\le \ovl \kappa$, and
\item $h$ is the entropy of the parameter $c$,
\end{itemize}
then
%\newpage
\[
N'(\kappa,n)\le C e^{(h+\eps)n} % \sum_{\nu\le n}N(\nu)
\]
for some constant $C>0$ depending on $c$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $h$ is the entropy of $c$, there is a constant $C_1>0$ such that
\[
N(n)\le C_1e^{(h+\eps/3)n},
\]
where $N(n)$ counts the number of relevant precritical paths in $A$ of generation $n$.
Our first claim is that there are at most $ 2^{{n}/{g}+{n}/{m}}$ precritical paths
\[
s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\]
with fixed $(b_i)_{i\le p}$ of a given pattern $P$ of length $n$. Indeed, the beginning of the $c_i$ is fixed by $b_i$, or by $a_i$ if $b_i$ is empty, and the end is at the $0$ state, so by Lemma~\ref{lem:c_iPaths} there are at most $2^{k_i/g}$ choices for each $c_i$ and in total at most $2^{n/g}$ choices for all $c_i$ combined (in the non-renormalizable case, the $c_i$ are empty and there is no choice at all). Each $a_i$ has at most two choices by Lemma~\ref{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}, and since their length is at least $m$, there are no more than $n/m$ such choices.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:substitution} we may substitute $c_ia_i$ by $a^*_i$ with $m\le |a^*_i|\le 3m$ and get a precritical path
\[s^*=b_0a^*_1b_1a^*_2b_2\dots a^*_pb_p c_p\]
in $A$ with length at most $ n+\kappa(P) n $. Denoting the length of $a_i^*$ by $\ell_i^*$, we call the numbers $Q=(t_0,0, \ell^*_1, t_1,0,\ell^*_2,\dots,\ell^*_p,t_p,k_p)$ the pattern of $s^*$.
Our next claim is that for fixed patterns $P$ and $Q$, the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is at most
\[
2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}=C_1e^{((h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m)n}
\;.
\]
Indeed, the number of paths $s$ for a given pattern $P$ with fixed $b_i$ is at most $2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}$. Different $b_i$ clearly lead to different $s^*$ because we know from $P$ were in $s^*$ the $b_i$ are located. The length of $s^*$ is bounded by $(1+\kappa(P))n$; hence the number of different $s^*$ is bounded by $\max_{1\le \mu \le (1+\kappa(P))n} N(\mu)\le C_1e^{(h +\eps/3)(1+\kappa (P))n}\le C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}$ because each $s^*$ is a precritical path in $A$.
If $g$ and $m$ are sufficiently large and $\ovl \kappa$ is sufficiently small, then $(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m\le h+2\eps/3$, and the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is bounded by
\[
C_1e^{(h+2\eps/3)n}
\]
Since every $s\in S'(\kappa,n)$ is a part of at least one triple $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ for some patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $\kappa(P)\le \kappa$ we get the estimate
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le \left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| C_1 \ e^{(h+2\eps/3) n}
\;,
\]
where $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right|$ denotes the number of pairs of patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $|P|=n$ and $|Q|\le n+\kappa(P)n$. Lemma~\ref{lem:PatternsGrowth}, the number $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| $ is bounded by $C_2e^{(\eps/3) n}$ for some constant $C_2>0$. We get
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le C_1C_2 \ e^{(h+\eps) n}
\;;
\]
this finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{Continuity at Irrational Endpoints}
Let $c_{\infty}$ be a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set.
There a sequence of dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ approximating $c_{\infty}$ in the following way
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1\prec c_2\prec\dots \prec c_{\infty}$;
\item $c_{i+1}\in [c_i,c'_i]$; and
\item $ \dots c_i \lhd \dots \lhd c'_2\lhd c'_1$.
\end{itemize}
Figure~\ref{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint} illustrates the arrangement of these points.
Note that once $c_1$ is chosen, the remaining parameters are uniquely determined: $c'_i$ is the dyadic of least generation with $c'_i\succ c_i$, and $c_{i+1}$ is the branch point in the vein of $c'_i$ where the vein to $c_\infty$ branches off.
We assume that $c_{\infty}$ is not in any immediate satellite small copy of the Mandelbrot set. More precisely, since we work with automata only in the postcritically finite case, the assumption that we make is this:\begin{itemize}
\item all $c_i$ are outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set
\end{itemize}
(note that if any $c_i$ is outside of immediate satellite copies, then all subsequent ones are as well: so, possibly up to truncating an initial part of the sequence $(c_i)$, the assumption on $c_\infty$ is that there exists a postcritically finite $c_1\prec c_\infty$ outside of immediate satellite copies).
The case that $c_\infty$ is immediate satellite renormalizable will be treated in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{\includegraphics{FigAllBranchPoints.pdf}}
\caption{The relative (combinatorial) positions of the parameters $c_i$, $c_\infty$ and $c'_i$ used in the proof.}
\label{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint}
\end{figure}
Similar to the previous discussion we specify the following objects
\begin{itemize}
\item $H'_i$ is the Hubbard tree of $c'_i$ with dynamics $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$ \,;
\item
$S'_{i}(n)\subset [\alpha,-\alpha]\subset H'_i$ is the set of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ for the parameter $c'_i$\,;
\item
$N'_{i}(n):= |S'_i(n)|$ is its cardinality;
\item
$h_i=\tilde h(c_i)$ and $h'_i=\tilde h(c'_i)$ are the entropies;
\item
$m_i$ is the generation of the dyadic parameter $c'_i$\,;
and
\item for $j\le i$ we denote by $x_j^{(i)}\in H_i$ the dynamical counterpart of $c_j$ in $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We will now introduce the sets $S'_i(j,\kappa, n)$ for all $j\le i$; these sets are defined in a similar way as $S'(\kappa,n)$ in Section~\ref{ss:Automata}. Consider a precritical point $y\in S'_i(n)\subset H'_i$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Iter:K:ell}0=\tilde \ell_0 <\tilde t_0<\tilde \ell_1<\tilde t_1< \dots < \tilde t_p=n
\end{equation} be the iteration times of $y$ (depending on $j$) uniquely specified as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\tilde t_k>\tilde \ell_k$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde t_k}_{c'_i}(y) \in [ c'_i, x_{j}^{(i)}]$;
\item
$\tilde \ell_k>\tilde t_{k-1}$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde \ell_k}_{c'_i}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We also set $\ell_k:=\tilde \ell_k- \tilde t_{k-1}$ and $t_k:= \tilde t_k-\tilde \ell_k$. Clearly, \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is uniquely specified by $(t_0,\ell_1, \dots, t_p)$.
We define \emph{the uncertainty of $y$ with respect to $x_j^{(i)}$} as
\[
\kappa_j(y):= \frac 1 n \sum_{\ell_k<3m_j}(3m_j- (\ell_k+1))
= \frac 1 n \sum_k \max(0,3m_j-(\ell_k+1)).
\]We denote by $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ the set of all $y\in S'_i(n)$ such that $\kappa_j(y)<\kappa$.
Let us also define \[I_j(y):= \bigcup_{\ell_k<3m_j} \{\tilde t_{k-1}, \tilde t_{k-1}+1,\dots, \tilde \ell_{k} \}.\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:I_j}
For all $j$ and $y$ the set $I_j(y)$ is a union of blocks of consecutive numbers so that each block has length $\ell_k+1\in[m_j,\dots, 3m_j]$, and
\begin{itemize}
\item
its first number is the unique number $t$ in the block that satisfies $p_{c'_i}^{\circ t}(y)\in [c'_i, \alpha]$; %x_j^{(i)}]$.
\item
its last number is the unique number $\ell$ in the block that satisfies
$p_{c'_i}^{\circ \ell}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Furthermore,
\( \displaystyle \kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|.\)
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have $\ell_k<3m_j$ by definition of $I_j(y)$ and we need to prove the lower bound $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
For every integer $k\ge 0$, let $T_k\subset H'_i$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. In particular, $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset T_0$. By~\eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1} we have $p_{c'_i}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
By construction, $c'_i$ and $c'_{j-1}$ are in different sublimbs of $c_{j}$. Thus, by Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})$ is disjoint from $T_{m_j-1 }$; and we get $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})\cap p_{c'}^{\circ -k} [\alpha,-\alpha]=\emptyset$ for all $k< m_j$. This shows that $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
We certainly have $p_{c'_i}^{\circ \tilde t_{k-1}}(y)\in[c'_i,x^{(i)}_j]\subset [c'_i,\alpha]$, and since $p_{c'}^{-1}([c'_i,\alpha])=[\alpha,-\alpha]$, the block would end before the orbit could enter $[c'_i,\alpha]$
again. The claim about the last number is obvious.
Finally, $3m_j-(\ell_k+1) \le 2m_j \le 2(\ell_k+1)$, and taking the sum we conclude $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:MonotIncl}
For $j<i$ the injection $B:S'_{i}(n)\to S'_{i-1}(n)$ of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} injects $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ into $S'_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $x_j^{(i)}$ and $x_j^{(i-1)}$ are the dynamical counterparts of $c_j$ in the dynamical planes of $p_{c_i}$ and $p_{c_{i-1}}$ respectively. Consider $y\in S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$. It follows from Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} parts (A) and (B) that
\begin{itemize}
\item $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ for all $\ell\ge 0$; and
\item $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [c'_{i},x_j^{(i)}]$ if and only if $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [c'_{i-1},x_j^{(i-1)}]$ for all $t \ge 0$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the first claim follows from Part (B) applied to $c_*=0$ (recall that the dynamical counterpart of $c_*=0$ is the $\alpha$-fixed point). The second claim follows from Part (A) combined with Part (B) applied to $c_*=c_j$.
Therefore, our surgery respects the sequence \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell}: for fixed $j$ and every $y\in S_i(n)$ the point $B(y)$ has the same sequence as $y$.
Hence $\kappa(y)=\kappa(B(y))$ and $B(y)\subset S_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:SmallKappa}
For every $\delta>0$ and for every $i'\ge 0$ there is an $i''>i'$ such that for every $n\ge 0$ we have
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\delta,n).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a subsequence of indices $i'=i_1< i_2< \dots < i_h$ so that $3m_{i_r}< m_{i_{r+1}}$ and $h> 2/\delta$. We show that $i'':= i_h$ satisfies the claim of the lemma. It is sufficient to show that for every $y\in S'_{i_h}(n)$ there is an $s<h$ such that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j} that $I_{i_1}(y), I_{i_2}(y), \dots , I_{i_h}(y)$ consist of pairwise disjoint blocks. Thus all $I_{i_s}$ are pairwise disjoint subsets of $\{1,2,\dots ,n\}$. Hence
\[\frac 1 n (|I_{i_1}(y)|+ |I_{i_2}(y)|) + \dots + |I_{i_h}(y)|) \le 1.\]
Since $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)| $, again Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j}, we have
\[\kappa_{i_1}(y)+\kappa_{i_2}(y)+\dots +\kappa_{i_h}(y)\le 2;\]
this implies that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$ for some $s<h.$
\end{proof}
The next lemma is a corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon>0$ there is an $i'\ge 0$ and $\overline \kappa>0$ such that if $ j \ge i'$ and $\kappa\le \overline \kappa$, then
\[|S'_j(j,\kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}\] for all $n>0$ and some constant $C_j>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For a given $\varepsilon $ fix $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0 $ as in Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}. We may choose a big enough $i'$ such that for all $j\ge i'$
\begin{itemize}
\item $m_j\ge \overline m$; and
\item $c_j$ is either non-renormalizable or the renormalization period of $c_j$ is at least $\overline g$.
\end{itemize}
We will now apply Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity} to the pair $c:=c_j$ and $c':= c'_j$; then $h_j=h$ is the entropy of $c=c_j$.
Observe first that $|S'_j(j, \kappa,n)| = |S'( \kappa, n)|= N'(\kappa,n)$ after the substitution. Indeed, every relevant pre-critical point of $p_{c'_j}$ is uniquely characterized by a precritical path in $A'$ (again by a fundamental property of the symbolic dynamics because the critical point is in the interior of the $0$-state of $A'$.) This bijection preserves the uncertainties: if $y\in S'_j(j,\kappa,n)$ with Sequence~\eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is identified with a relevant precritical path $s$ with Decomposition~\eqref{eq:DecompOfs}, then $\ell_k +1 =\tilde \ell_k - \tilde t_k +1= |a_k|$. Hence $y$ and $s$ have the same uncertainties, and $S'_j(j, \kappa,n)$ and $S'( \kappa, n)$ are in bijection.
Now the lemma immediately follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\end{proof}
Remember that we continue to have the assumption that $c_\infty$ is a non-dyadic endpoint that is not immediate satellite renormalizable. In this case, we can now complete the proof.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity on Vein to $c_{\infty}$, Non-Renormalizable Case]
\label{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}
%\lineclear
For every $\eps>0$ there is an $\bar i\ge 1$ such that $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge \bar i$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Choose $\overline\kappa$ and $i'$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:SmallKappa} there is an $i''\ge i'$ such that
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n).
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:MonotIncl} there is an injection from $S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ into $S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ for all $j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}$. Therefore,
\[
N'_{i''}(n)=|S'_{i''}(n)|\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''} |S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity} we have $|S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}$. Thus
\[
N'_{i''}(n)\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n} \le \left( \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j\right) e^{(\eps +h_{i''})n}
\]because $h_{i''}\ge h_{j}$ by monotonicity.
This proves that $h'_{i''}-h_{i''}\le \eps$, and since the sequence $h'_i-h_i$ is decreasing we have $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge i''$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{The Immediate Satellite Renormalizable Case}
In order to formulate our statements, we need to briefly review well known facts on renormalization; compare \cite{Polylike, McMullenRenormalization,MiSelfSim,MiRenorm}.
If $p_c$ is simple $m$-renormalizable, then there exists a ``little Mandelbrot set'' $\M'\subset\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters with $c\in\M'$ and a straightening homeomorphism $\chi\colon\M'\to\M$ so that $p_{\chi(c)}$ in the neighborhood of its filled-in Julia set is hybrid equivalent to $p_c^{\circ m}$ on a neighborhood of the little filled-in Julia set (except possibly at the root point $\chi^{-1}(1/4)$). The little Mandelbrot set has a main center $c_0:=\chi^{-1}(0)$ with a superattracting orbit of period $m$. In this case, we say that ``the parameter $c$ is $c_0$ tuned with $\chi(c)$''. We say $\M'$ is an \emph{immediate satellite copy of $\M$} if $\M'$ is attached to the main hyperbolic component of the Mandelbrot set. Dynamically, this means that the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c^{\circ m}$ is equivalent to $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$; in the postcritically finite case, this is equivalent to $A_n=\emptyset$.
\begin{lemma}[Immediate Satellite Renormalization and Entropy]
\label{Lem:Renormalization} \lineclear
If $\M'$ is an immediate satellite copy of $\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters, then the straightening map $\chi:\M'\to \M$ satisfies
\[
\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))
\;.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $N_{c}(n)$ and $N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ be the numbers of precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and $p_{\chi(c)}$ respectively and let $\tilde N_{\chi (c)}(n)$ be the number of precritical points of $p_{\chi(c)}$ on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
The straightening map $\chi$ identifies the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_{c}^{\circ m}$ with the arc $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$. Therefore, $N_c(mn)= \tilde N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ while $N_c(mn+k)=0$ for all $k\in \{1,2,\dots, m-1\}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:DifferCounts}, the precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and those on $[\alpha,\beta]$ give the same entropies; and on $[\beta,-\beta]$ there can be at most twice as many precritical points of any generation $n$ as on $[\alpha,\beta]$.
Therefore, $\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If $\chi\colon \M'\to\M$ is the straightening map of an arbitrary small copy of $\M$, we have
\[
\tilde h(c)=\max\left(\tilde h(c_0),\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))\right)
\;.
\]
This is obvious in the postcritically finite case and follows in general once we know that $\tilde h$ is continuous, which we are about to establish.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}[Continuity Along Vein to $c_{\infty}$, General Case.]
\label{cor:RadialContin}
\lineclear
Suppose that $c_{\infty}$ is a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. Then the entropy is continuous along the vein $[c_{\infty}, 0]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen} proves the case when $c_{\infty}$ is outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set.
The second case is that there is a finite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots, \chi_n:\M_n\to \M $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty\in \M_*:=(\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1)^{-1}(\M)$ and $c'_{\infty}:=\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1(c_\infty)$ is not immediate satellite-renormalizable. Entropy is continuous along the vein $[0,c_*]$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}, and continuous along the image $\chi_*^{-1}([0,c_*])=[c_0,c_{\infty}]$ by Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} (where $c_0$ is the main center of $\M_*$), and continuous along $[0,c_0]$ by \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung} (or Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}). Therefore, entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
The final case is that there is an infinite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty$ is in the domain of $\chi_n \circ \chi_{n-1}\circ \dots \circ \chi_1$ for all $n\ge 0$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} that the entropy of $c_\infty$ is $0$. Thus entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
\end{proof}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
\renewcommand{\top}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{top}}}
\newcommand{\comb}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{comb}}}
\appendix
\section{Core entropy and biaccessibility dimension}
\centerline{by Wolf Jung}
\bigskip
Here various definitions of core entropy shall be discussed and related to
the biaccessibility dimension. On a compact metric space, the topological
entropy of a continuous map is defined by a growth rate, which is referring
to preimages of covers, or to $\epsilon$-shadowing sets. See
\cite{deMelovanStrien} for details. When the underlying space is a compact
interval, a finite tree, or graph, several equivalent characterizations are due
to Misiurewicz and others. These include the growth rate of horse shoes,
laps (monotonic branches), periodic points, and preimages of a general point.
For real and complex quadratic polynomials, core entropy was defined by
Tao Li and Bill Thurston as the topological entropy of $p_c(z)$ on the
Hubbard tree; this definition applies to the postcritically finite case in
particular, and more generally to finite compact trees, but it does not work
when $c$ is an endpoint with a dense postcritcal orbit.
In general, the filled Julia set $\mathcal{K}_c$ consists of the Hubbard tree
$T_c$\,, the countable family of its preimages, and an uncountable family of
endpoints. The dynamics on $T_c$ is interesting because this tree is folded
over itself, while the iteration does not return to arcs of its preimages.
On the other hand, the endpoints form a set of full harmonic measure, while
the external angles of $T_c$ and its preimages form a set of Hausdorff
dimension $<1$ (unless $c=-2$). Since all biaccessible points are contained
in arcs iterated to $T_c$\,, these angles are called biaccessible
(or biaccessing). More precisely, the biaccessibilty dimension is defined as
follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item For the lamination generated by an angle $\theta\in S^1$
\cite{ThurstonLaminations}, consider all
angles of non-trivial leaves. Their Hausdorff dimension is the
\emph{combinatorial biaccessibility dimension} $B_\comb(\theta)$. The same
dimension is obtained from pairs of angles with the same itinerary, or from
pairs not separated by the precritical leaves: the diameter joining $\theta/2$
and $(\theta+1)/2$, and its preimages.
\item For a parameter $c\in\mathcal{M}$, the
\emph{topological biaccessibility dimension} $B_\top(c)$ is the Hausdorff
dimension of those angles, such that the dynamic ray is landing together with
another ray.
\end{itemize}
These definitions are related analogously to Lemma~\ref{Lem:defEntropy}:
\begin{lemma}[Combinatorial and topological biaccessibility]
Suppose that $\theta\in S^1$ and $c\in\partial\M$ belongs to the impression
of the parameter ray with angle $\theta$, or $c\in\M$ is hyperbolic and the
ray lands at the corresponding root. Then $B_\comb(\theta)=B_\top(c)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of the proof \cite{BruinSchleicher, Jung}] In the locally connected case, and
neglecting the countable family of angles at precritical or precharacteristic
points, two dynamic rays are landing together if and only if they are not
separated by a precritical ray-pair. When $\mathcal{K}_c$ is not
locally connected, exceptional sets of angles are shown to be negligible in
terms of Hausdorff dimension. These include the angles of non-landing rays,
and the possible angles of Cremer cycles.
\end{proof}
The following relation to entropy is due to Thurston \cite{TanLeiEntropy},
relying on earlier work by Furstenberg \cite{Furstenberg}
and Douady \cite{Douady}.
\begin{proposition}[Dimension and entropy of the tree]\label{Prop:Biaccessibility}
Suppose $\mathcal{K}_c$ is locally connected with empty interior, or $f_c$ is
parabolic or hyperbolic with a real multiplier.
Using regulated arcs, define the tree $T_c$ as the path-connected hull of
the critical orbit. If $T_c$ is compact, consider the topological entropy of
$p_c(z)$ on $T_c$\,. Then it is related to
the biaccessibility dimension by $h_\top(T_c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is found in version 1 of \cite{BruinSchleicher} and in
\cite{TiozzoThesis, Jung}:
since $\theta\mapsto z(\theta)$ is a semi-conjugation with finite fibers, we may
consider the topological entropy of the angle-doubling map on the compact set
of angles of $T_c$ \cite[Thm.~II.7.1]{deMelovanStrien}. And this equals the
Hausdorff dimension \cite[Proposition~III.1]{Furstenberg}, except for the
base 2 instead of e in the logarithm of the growth factor $\lambda$.
\end{proof}
While the definition of $h_\top(T_c)$ requires a compact tree $T_c$\,,
a general notion was given in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} in terms
of precritical ray pairs:
\begin{theorem}[Dimension and entropy in general]\label{Thm:Biaccessibility}
Entropy and biaccessibility dimension are related as follows for
all parameters $c\in\mathcal{M}$ and all angles $\theta\in S^1$\,:
\begin{equation}
\tilde h(c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2
\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
h(\theta)=B_\comb(\theta)\cdot\log2 \ .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First, suppose that $c=c(\theta)$ is postcritically finite or belongs
to a dyadic vein. In particular, $\mathcal{K}_c$ is
locally connected and $T_c$ is compact with finitely many endpoints. Then
the growth rate of lap numbers is equal to the growth rate of precritical
points on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, so $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$, and
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} applies.
Second, suppose that $c$ is a non-renormalizable irrational endpoint, and
approximate it with biaccessible parameters $c_n$ before $c$. Then monotonicity
\cite[Proposition~4.6]{Jung} and continuity give
\begin{equation}
B_\top(c)\cdot\log2\ge\lim B_\top(c_n)\cdot\log2
=\lim\tilde h(c_n)=\tilde h(c) \ .
\end{equation}
For the opposite estimate, note that the plane is cut into pieces successively
by precritcal ray pairs, and the angles of a piece of level $n$ form up to $n$
intervals of total length $2^{-n}$ according to
\cite[Lemma~4.1]{BruinSchleicher}. Recall that $N(n)$ is the number of
precritcal points of \textsc{Step} $n$ on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, and denote
the number of pieces intersecting this arc by $V(n)$. Then
$V(n)=1+N(1)+\dots+N(n)$ is growing by the same factor $\lambda=e^h$ as $N(n)$,
and the same holds for $n \cdot V(n)$. The $b$-dimensional Hausdorff measure
of the angles of $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$ is estimated as
\begin{equation}
\mu_b\le\lim n \cdot V(n) \cdot 2^{-bn} \ ,
\end{equation}
which is 0 when $b>\log\lambda/\log2=\tilde h(c)/\log2$. So the Hausdorff
dimension is estimated as $B_\top(c)\le\tilde h(c)/\log2$ as well,
implying equality.
Finally, both $\tilde h(c)$ and $B_\top(c)$ are constant on the main molecule
and on primitive small Mandelbrot sets, and both are scaled by the period of
immediate satellite renormalization. Now all cases are covererd by the
Yoccoz Theorem.
\end{proof}
Continuity of entropy according to Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity} gives:
\begin{corollary}[Continuity of biaccessibility dimension]
The biaccessibility dimension $B_\comb(\theta)$ is continuous on $S^1$ and
$B_\top(c)$ is continuous on the Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$.
\end{corollary}
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} and Theorem~\ref{Thm:Biaccessibility}
show that the definition
of entropy in terms of precritical points is a generalization
of the original definition in terms of a compact core:
\begin{corollary}[Extending the definition of core entropy]
We have $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$ whenever $T_c$ is defined and compact.
\end{corollary}
\begin{thebibliography}{ABC}
\bibitem[BS]{BruinSchleicher} H.~Bruin, D.~Schleicher,
Hausdorff dimension of biaccessible
angles for quadratic polynomials, Preprint. ArXiv:1205.2544, 28 pp.
\bibitem[D]{Douady} A.~Douady, Topological entropy of unimodal maps:
monotonicity for quadratic polynomials, in:
\emph{Real and complex dynamical systems}
(Hiller{\o}d 1993), NATO Adv.~Sci.~Inst.~Ser.~C
Math.~Phys.~Sci.~\textbf{464}, Kluwer 1995, 65--87.
\bibitem[DH1]{Orsay} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{Etude dynamique des polyn\^omes complexes} (The Orsay Notes). Publications Math\'ematiques d'Orsay 1984-02 (1984) (premi\`ere partie) and 1985-04 (1985) (deuxi\`eme partie).
\bibitem[DH2] {Polylike} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{On the dynamics of polynomial-like mappings}. Annales Scientifiques de l'\'Ecole Normale Sup\'erieure. Quatri\`eme S\'erie. V 15 (1985), 287--343.
\bibitem[DH3]{DHThurston} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{A proof of {T}hurston's topological characterization of rational functions}. Acta Mathematica. V 171 (1993), 263--297.
\bibitem[F]{Furstenberg} H.~Furstenberg, Disjointness in ergodic theory,
minimal sets, and a problem in Diophantine approximation,
Math.~Systems Theory~\textbf{1}, 1--49 (1967).
\bibitem[HS]{Spiders} John Hubbard and Dierk Schleicher. \emph{The spider algorithm}. Complex dynamical systems ({C}incinnati, {OH}). Proc. Sympos. Appl. Math. V 49 (1994), 155--180.
\bibitem[Ju]{Jung} Wolf Jung, \emph{Core entropy and biaccessibility of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1401.4792 (2014), 46 pp.
\bibitem[TL]{TanLeiEntropy} Tan Lei, \emph{On W. Thurston's core-entropy theory}. Presentation, given in Toulouse (January 2014) and elsewhere.
\bibitem[Mc]{McMullenRenormalization} Curt McMullen, \emph{Complex dynamics and renormalization}. Annals of Mathematics Studies \textbf{135},
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1994).
\bibitem[dMS]{deMelovanStrien} W.~de Melo, S.~van Strien,
\emph{One-dimensional dynamics}, Springer 1993.
\bibitem[M1]{MiSelfSim} John Milnor, \emph{Self-similarity and hairiness in the {M}andelbrot set}. Computers in geometry and topology. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. V 114, 211--257, (1989).
\bibitem[M2]{MiRenorm} John Milnor, \emph{Local connectivity of {J}ulia sets: expository lectures}. In: The {M}andelbrot set, theme and variations. London Math. Soc. V 274, 67--116 (2000).
\bibitem[M3]{MiOrbits} John Milnor, \emph{Periodic orbits, externals rays and the Mandelbrot set: an expository account}. In: G\'eom\'etrie complexe et syst\`emes dynamiques (Marguerite Flexor, Pierrette Sentenac, and Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, eds). Ast\'erisque \textbf{ 261}, 277--333 (2000).
\bibitem[Sch]{MandelBranch} Dierk Schleicher,
\emph{On fibers and local connectivity of Mandelbrot and Multibrot sets}. In: M. Lapidus, M. van Frankenhuysen (eds): Fractal Geometry and Applications: A Jubilee of Benoit Mandelbrot. Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics \textbf{72}, American Mathematical Society (2004), 477--507.
\bibitem[T]{ThurstonLaminations} William P. Thurston, \emph{On the geometry and dynamics of iterated rational maps}. In: Complex dynamics, families and friends (Dierk Schleicher, ed.), AK Peters, Wellesley, MA (ISBN 978-1-56881-450-6), pp. 3--109 (2009).
\bibitem[Ti1]{TiozzoThesis} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Topological entropy of quadratic polynomials and dimension of sections of the Mandelbrot set}. Preprint, arXiv:1305.3542 (2013), 56 pp.
\bibitem[Ti2]{TiozzoPaper} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Continuity of core entropy of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1409.3511 (2014), 25 pp.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document$ the core entropy of the quadratic polynomial $z\mapsto z^2+c$.
\end{itemize}
We describe these definitions in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}. Note that we define $\tilde h$ for every $c\in\mathcal M}
\newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}
\newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}
\newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}
\newcommand{\Circle}{\mathbb S}
\newcommand{\sm}{\setminus}
\newcommand{\0}{\texttt{0}}
\newcommand{\1}{\texttt{1}}
\newcommand{\s}{\underline{s}}
\newcommand\eps{\varepsilon}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}
\renewcommand{\theta}{\vartheta}
\newcommand{\ovl}[1]{\overline{#1}}
\newcommand{\lineclear}{\rule{0pt}{2pt}\newline}
\newcommand{\reminder}[1]{\textsl{#1}\marginpar{$\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd$}}
\newcommand{\hide}[1]{}
\title[Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials]{Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials %\\ \rule{0pt}{20pt} --- Draft $\circ$ Comments Invited ---
}
\author{Dzmitry Dudko}
\author{Dierk Schleicher}
\author[]{With an appendix by Wolf Jung}
\address{G.-A.-Universit\"at zu G\"ottingen, Bunsenstrasse 3--5, D-37073 G\"ottingen, Germany}
\address{Jacobs University Bremen, Research I, Postfach 750 561, D-28725 Bremen, Germany}
\address{Gesamtschule Aachen-Brand, Rombachstrasse 99, 52078 Aachen, Germany}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
We give a combinatorial definition of ``core entropy'' for quadratic polynomials as the growth exponent of the number of certain precritical points in the Julia set (those that separate the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative). This notion extends known definitions that work in cases when the polynomial is postcritically finite or when the topology of the Julia set has good properties, and it applies to all quadratic polynomials in the Mandelbrot set.
We prove that core entropy is continuous as a function of the complex parameter. In fact, we model the Julia set as an invariant quadratic lamination in the sense of Thurston: this depends on the external angle of a parameter in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set and suffices to define core entropy directly from the angle in combinatorial terms. As such, core entropy is continuous as a function of the external angle.
Moreover, we prove a conjecture of Guilio Tiozzo about local and global maxima of core entropy as a function of external angles: local maxima are exactly dyadic angles, and the unique global maximum within any wake occurs at the dyadic of lowest denominator.
An appendix by Wolf Jung relates different concepts of core entropy and biaccessibility dimension and thus shows that biaccessibility dimension is continuous as well.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Statement of Results}
We define two entropy functions:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h\colon \Circle\to [0,\log 2]$, assigning to every external angle $\theta\in\Circle$ the core entropy of the lamination associated to the angle $\theta$.
\item $\tilde h\colon \M\to[0,\log2]$, assigning to every $c\in\M$ the core entropy of the quadratic polynomial $z\mapsto z^2+c$.
\end{itemize}
We describe these definitions in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}. Note that we define $\tilde h$ for every $c\in\M$, postcritically finite or not (and could extend it to every parameter $c\in\C$), and similarly for every $\theta\in\Circle$. These definitions are such that if the parameter ray at angle $\theta$ lands (or accumulates) at $c\in\partial \M$, then $h(\theta)=\tilde h(c)$. Our definitions are entirely combinatorial so we do not have to worry about topological subtleties such whether the Julia set is locally connected or whether a (generalized) Hubbard tree exists and, if so, whether it is compact. Of course, in the cases where the usual definitions of topological entropy apply, our definition agrees with them.
Our first result goes back to a bet between Bill Thurston and John Hubbard in the spring of 2012 and helped settle this bet soon after.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Core Entropy]
Both entropy functions, $\tilde h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ and $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$, are continuous.
\end{theorem}
We prove continuity of $h$ in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}; the fact that this implies continuity of $\tilde h$ is easy and is explained in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{EntropyGraphPlain.pdf}
}
\caption{The graph of the core entropy function $h\colon[0,1/2]\to[0,\log 2]$ (by Bill Thurston).}
\end{figure}
Our second result settles a conjecture of Giulio Tiozzo \cite[Conjecture~1.6]{TiozzoThesis}.
\begin{theorem}[Local Maximal of Core Entropy]
\lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We will prove this in Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj}.
In Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}, we define a wake as a closed interval in $\Circle$ bounded by two rational angles so that the corresponding rays land together (or more generally as any closed interval for which the two boundary angles have the same angled internal address, so the corresponding parameter rays land together at the same point in $\M$, or at least in its combinatorial models).
Bill Thurston inspired a number of people to investigate core entropy. In particular, there are a survey on current work and open problems by Tan Lei~\cite{TanLeiEntropy}, a manuscript by Wolf Jung \cite{Jung}, and two manuscripts by Giulio Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoThesis,TiozzoPaper}. An independent proof of continuity of core entropy can be found in the recent manuscript \cite{TiozzoPaper}.
\emph{Acknowledgements}. We would like to thank Henk Bruin, John Hubbard, Tan Lei, Mikhail Lyubich, John Milnor, Bill Thurston, Giulio Tiozzo, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and especially Wolf Jung for interesting and helpful discussions. In the spring of 2014, we had the opportunity to give various presentations about this result in Bremen, Moscow and Stony Brook, and we thank the audiences for their questions and suggestions.
Finally, we would like to thank Cornell University and the ICERM institute in Providence for their hospitality and support in the spring of 2012 where many of our initial discussions were carried out.
\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Definitions}
\label{Sec:Definitions}
In this section we introduce our combinatorial definition of topological entropy that applies to all polynomials with connected Julia set, whether or not they are locally connected and whether or not they have a (generalized) Hubbard tree, and if so whether the latter is compact. One advantage of our approach is that we work in an entirely combinatorial setting, so we never have to worry about topological issues.
\begin{definition}[Invariant Lamination and Entropy Associated to External Angle]
\label{Def:CoreEntropy}
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$, there is a unique invariant quadratic lamination where the minor leaf either ends at $\theta$ or is the degenerate leaf at $\theta$. This lamination will be called $L_\theta$.
A \emph{precritical leaf of generation $n$} in this lamination will be any leaf on the backwards orbit of one of the two major leaves that takes $n$ generations to map to the minor leaf.
The \emph{$\alpha$ gap} is either the leaf connecting the two angles $1/3$ and $2/3$, or it is the unique gap that is fixed by the dynamics (this is a finite polygon).
We call a precritical leaf \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative, and define $N(n)=N_\theta(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical leaves of generation $n$. We define the \emph{core entropy} of this lamination as $h=h(\theta):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_\theta(n)$. If the $\alpha$ gap does not exist, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $N_{\theta}(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the core entropy of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\begin{remark}
A natural question is whether the $\limsup$ in the definition of entropy can be replaced by a simple $\lim$. This is not always so: Wolf Jung kindly pointed out to us the example of $c=c(9/56)$ where the Hubbard tree has the shape of a $\textsf{Y}$ so that the branch point is fixed and one endpoint maps to the second, which maps to the third, which in turn maps to the branch point. Here $N(n)=0$ for infinitely many $n$ while $h=(\log 2)/3>0$. There are thus counterexamples when the dynamics is renormalizable. We prove that renormalizability is the only obstruction (see Corollary~\ref{Cor:ExistenceLimit}). For now, observe that in the postcritically finite non-renormalizable case, the limit exists and equals the $\limsup$ because the associated subshift of finite type is irreducible.
\end{remark}
Thurston showed that the union of all minor leaves of all invariant quadratic laminations forms itself a lamination, called the \emph{quadratic minor lamination} QML \cite{ThurstonLaminations}. It turns out that $h$ is naturally defined on QML: since both ends of any leaf in QML define the same lamination, we can first extend the definition of $h$ to each separate leaf on QML. Complementary components of leaves in QML are called \emph{gaps}, and they come in two kids: either they are finite polygons (corresponding to Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters) or have infinitely many boundary leaves (and describe hyperbolic components). In both cases, it is easy to see that $h$ is constant on all boundary leaves of any gap, so $h$ naturally extends to the disk on which QML is defined.
The equivalence relation defining QML is closed, so the quotient of the supporting closed unit disk by collapsing all leaves to points yields a topological Hausdorff space called the ``abstract Mandelbrot set'' $\M_{abs}$ (this construction is known as Douady's ``pinched disk model'' of $\M$). Since $h$ is constant on fibers of the quotient map $q\colon QML\to \M_{abs}$, $h$ is naturally a function on $\M_{abs}$.
Finally, there is the natural projection $\pi\colon\M\to\M_{abs}$ from the Mandelbrot set $\M$ to the abstract Mandelbrot set $\M_{abs}$. It is defined by mapping every landing point $c(\theta)$ of any rational parameter ray $\theta$ to the equivalence class of the angle $\theta$; then $\pi$ is the unique continuous map with this property.
\looseness-1
We thus obtain a unique map $\tilde h=h\circ\pi\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$, and continuity of $\tilde h$ follows from continuity of $h$, with continuity of $\pi$ being well known.
More specifically, the map $\tilde h$ can also be constructed explicitly as follows.
\begin{definition}[Entropy Associated to Quadratic Polynomial in $\M$]
\label{Def:CoreEntropyTilde}
Let $p_c(z):=z^2+c$ be any quadratic polynomial with $c\in\C$ for which the critical value is in the Julia set, and let $\theta$ be the external angle of any dynamic ray that lands or accumulates at $c$. The \emph{critical ray pair} will be the ray pair $RP(\theta/2,(1+\theta)/2)$, and a precritical ray pair of generation $n$ will be any ray pair on the backwards orbit of the critical ray pair and that takes $n$ iterations to map to the ray $R(\theta)$.
If $p_c$ is such that the critical value is in the Fatou set, then it has an attracting or parabolic orbit and there is a unique periodic characteristic ray pair; precritical ray pairs are then defined as ray pairs on its backward orbit.
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the \emph{core entropy} of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
Note that we use the term ``separation'' in a combinatorial sense: the two rays in a separating ray pairs either land together or accumulate at the same fiber.
The usual definition of core entropy is modeled after the postcritically finite case: here, the Hubbard tree is a finite tree with a finite and forward invariant set of marked points (the critical point and its forward orbit, as well as all branch points). The finite set of edges on the tree form a Markov chain with associated transition matrix, where the matrix element $M_{i,j}$ is $0$, $1$, or $2$ if the edge $e_i$ covers the edge $e_j$ respectively $0$, $1$, or $2$ times. Having only positive real entries, this matrix has a leading eigenvalue which is real, and its logarithm is defined as the core entropy of the given postcritically finite parameter.
This definition coincides with the classical definition of topological entropy of general dynamical systems, and it also applies in the postcritically infinite case as long as the Hubbard tree is defined (i.e.\ the Julia set is path connected) and still finite. However, the number of edges of the Hubbard trees is not locally bounded even among postcritically finite maps, which makes entropy estimates based on these transition matrices difficult.
It is well known, at least in the postcritically finite case, that if $x$ is any point on the Hubbard tree and $N_x(n)$ is the number of preimages of $x$ of generation $n$, then $h=\limsup_n \log N_x(n)$ is the core entropy. Since each of the finitely many edges, except those within ``renormalizable little Julia sets'', will cover the entire tree after finitely many iterations, one can as well count only those preimages of $x$ that are on an arbitrary subset of the edges of the Hubbard tree, as long as at least one of these edges is not in a renormalizable little Julia set. For instance, instead of counting precritical leaves on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (as in our definition above) we may count preimages on $[\alpha,\beta]$ (as we will do in Section~\ref{Sec:Continuity}) or on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
\begin{lemma}[Definitions of Core Entropy Coincide]
\label{Lem:defEntropy} \lineclear
For postcritically finite polynomials, the core entropy as in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} coincides with the usual definition (in terms of transition matrices on finite Hubbard trees).
If $p_c$ has the property that the critical value is in the impression of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$, then the core entropy of $p_c$ equals the core entropy of the lamination $L_\theta$.
\end{lemma}
It is well known that if several parameter rays accumulate at the same parameter in $\M$, then the laminations associated to their corresponding angles coincide, so these angles have the same entropy.
If $\theta\in\Circle$ is a rational angle, we define $c(\theta)$ as the landing point in $\M$ of the parameter ray at angle $\theta$, and within any connected Julia set we define $z(\theta)$ as the landing point of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$.
If $c,\tilde c$ are two parameters in $\M$, we say $c\prec \tilde c$ if there is a parameter ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ at periodic angles that separates $\tilde c$ simultaneously from $c$ and from the origin.
\begin{lemma}[Monotonicity of Lamination and of Entropy]
\label{Lem:Monotonicity}
If $c\prec \tilde c$, then $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ for all $n$ and thus $h(\tilde c)\ge h(c)$. Moreover, any characteristic leaf in $L_c$ also occurs in $L_{\tilde c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is routine to check that any precritical leaf of $c$ also ``occurs'' in the dynamics (or the lamination) of $\tilde c$: the major leaf (or leaves) in $L_{\tilde c}$ separate the two major leaves in $L_c$. Precritical leaves in $L_{c}$ are preimages of the pair of major leaves (the preimages of this pair are always ``parallel'', i.e.\ not separated by the critical value, because otherwise the forward orbit of the critical value would have to intersect the domain bounded by the two major leaves). Each pair of preimages surrounds one preimage of the major leaf of $\tilde c$ (or a pair of preimages of the major leaves), and when such a preimage separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative in $L_c$, then it also does so for $L_{\tilde c}$. Therefore, $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ and $\tilde h(\tilde c)\ge \tilde h(c)$.
The statement about characteristic leaves (or characteristic ray pairs) is well known and follows, for instance, from Milnor's Orbit Portraits \cite{MiOrbits}.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Topological Surgery on dyadic Hubbard trees}
Recall the vein structure of $\M$: every dyadic parameter $c$ has a unique \emph{long vein} $V(c)$, that is an injective arc connecting $c$ to $0$, subject to the condition that it traverses hyperbolic components along internal rays. (The existence of such arcs is a non-trivial theorem, established by Jeremy Kahn using Yoccoz' puzzle results, and by Johannes Riedl using quasiconformal surgery. However, it is sufficient to use a weaker combinatorial version of this result, defining the combinatorial arc as the set of postsingularly finite parameters that separate $c$ from the origin, together with the induced order.) The \emph{vein} of $c$ is the shortest closed sub-arc of the long vein connecting $c$ to the union of the long veins of all dyadic parameters of lower generation than $c$.
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then it is well known that their long veins intersect in an arc $[0,x]$, where $x$ is postcritically finite; this result is known as the ``branch theorem'' of $\M$ \cite{Orsay,MandelBranch}.
\begin{definition}[Directly Subordinate Parameter $c\lhd c'$]
\label{Def:DirectlySubordinate} \lineclear
We say that $ c$ is \emph{directly subordinate} to $c'$ and write $c\lhd c'$ if the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$; in addition, any dyadic parameter whose vein terminates at $0$ is declared to be subordinate to $c=-2$ with dyadic angle $1/2$.
\end{definition}
If $c\lhd c'$, then necessarily the external angle of $c'$ has lower denominator than that of $c$.
Note that this is not a transitive relation and thus not a partial order. A few directly subordinate dyadic parameters are illustrated in Figure~\ref{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\framebox{\includegraphics{DirectlySubordinate_Fig2.pdf}}
\caption{Illustration of directly subordinate parameters: we have $c(3/16)\lhd c(1/4)$, $c(1/4)\lhd c(1/2)$, and $c(3/8)\lhd c(1/2)$. Arrows indicate where the vein to some dyadic parameter terminates at the vein of the dyadic parameter to which it is directly subordinate.}
\label{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}[Entropy Between Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} \lineclear
a) If $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $N(n)\le N'(n)$ for all $n$, and $N(n)<N'(n)$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
\noindent b) If $c\lhd c'$ are both dyadic, then $\tilde h(c)<\tilde h(c')$.
\end{theorem}
Here $N(n)$ and $N'(n)$ denote the numbers of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ for $p_c$ and for $p_{c'}$. This immediately implies a weak version of the Tiozzo conjecture:
\begin{corollary}[Dyadic Version of Tiozzo Conjecture]
\label{Cor:DyadicTiozzoConjecture}\lineclear
Every dyadic angle $\theta$ has a neighborhood on which $h$, restricted to dyadic angles, assumes its unique maximum at $\theta$ (a dyadic version of the Tiozzo conjecture).
\end{corollary}
%\newpage
Let us now state the Correspondence Theorem relating the combinatorics of dynamical and parameter ray pairs. Following Milnor~\cite{MiOrbits}, a periodic or preperiodic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ (with $\phi^-,\phi^+\in\Circle$) in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ is called \emph{characteristic} if the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together in such a way that they separate the critical value $c$ from the critical point $0$ as well as from all other rays landing at $\cup_{k\ge 0}p_{c}^{\circ k}(x)$.
\begin{theorem}[Correspondence Theorem]
\label{thm:Corresp} \lineclear
A dynamic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ with $\phi^\pm$ rational is characteristic if and only if the parameter rays with angles $\phi^-$ and $\phi^+$ land together and separate the parameters $c$ and $0$ from each other.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}[Monotonicity of Rational Lamination on Hubbard Tree]
\label{Cor:CountPartsHubTree}
Let $c,c'\in\M$ be two postcritically finite parameters such that $c\prec c'$. Suppose that in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ two periodic or preperiodic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together at some point in the Hubbard tree of $p_c$, but not on the backwards orbit of the critical value. Then in the dynamical plane of $c'$ the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ also land together and the landing point is in the Hubbard tree of $c'$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
In the dynamic plane of $p_c$, let $x$ be the landing point of the dynamic ray pair $RP(\theta^-,\theta^+)$; it is by hypothesis in the Hubbard tree of $c$. Let $x':=p_c^{\circ t}(x)$ be the characteristic point on the orbit of $x$: this is the unique point that separates the critical value from all other points on the forward orbit of $x$. Let $(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ be the characteristic angles at $x'$ (the ray pair at $x'$ that separates the critical value from all other rays on its orbit).
By Theorem~\ref{thm:Corresp}, the rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ form a ray pair for all parameters in the wake of $c$, and in particular for $c'$. The same is true for all pull-back ray pairs, as long as they are not in the component of $\C\sm RP(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ containing the critical value; and this is the case for the rays landing at $x$. The landing point is clearly in the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}[Dynamical Counterpart to Parameter]
\label{Def:DynamCounterpart} \lineclear
Let $c$ be a postcritically finite parameter and suppose $c'\succ c$. Then a (pre)periodic point $x$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ is called the \emph{dynamical counterpart to $c$} if
\begin{itemize}
\item
if $c$ is preperiodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the preperiodic dynamic rays at the same angles as $c$;
\item
if $c$ is periodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the periodic dynamic rays bounding (in the parameter plane) the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the periodic case, $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_c$, and the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$ is bounded by a periodic parameter ray pair landing at $\partial H_c$. The angles of this ray pair are the angles of two rays landing at $x$. For example, the $\alpha$ fixed point is the dynamical counterpart of $c=0$. In the preperiodic case, it is known that all dynamic rays with the same angles of the rays landing at $c$ also land together in the dynamical plane of $c'$.
An equivalent definition is that $x$ is the unique repelling periodic or preperiodic point in the dynamical plane of $c'$ such that the itinerary of $x$ (with respect to the critical point) equals the (upper) kneading sequence of $c$.
\begin{lemma}[Directly Subordinate Dyadics]
\label{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics} \lineclear
\looseness-1
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $c\lhd c'$ if and only if there is a postcritically finite parameter $c_*\in\M$ so that $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation within any sublimb of $c_*$, and $c$ is in a different sublimb of $c_*$ than $c'$.
In this case, denoting the external angles of $c$ and $c'$ by $\theta$ and $\theta'$, respectively, then in the dynamics of $c$ (or any other parameter in the same sublimb of $c_*$) there is a repelling (pre)periodic point $x_*$ that is the landing point of at least three dynamic rays that separate the dynamic rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$. The point $x_*$ is the dynamical counterpart to $c_*$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any two dyadic parameters are endpoints of $\M$, so by the Branch Theorem of the Mandelbrot set there is a unique postcritically finite parameter $c_*$ that contains $c$ and $c'$ in two different of its sublimbs. Let $c_0$ be the unique dyadic of least generation in any of the sublimbs of $c_*$; then $c_*$ is on the long vein of all three of $c_0$, $c$, and $c'$, and it is on the vein of $c_0$.
The assumption that $c\lhd c'$ means that the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$, and hence it must terminate at the parameter $c_*$, so $c_*$ is an interior point of the vein of $c'$. Since $c_*$ is also an interior point of the vein of $c_0$, it follows that $c'=c_0$ (two veins can never have more than one point in common).
Conversely, if $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation in the sublimb of $c_*$, then $c_*$ is in the interior of the vein of $c'$ and the vein of $c$ terminates at $c_*$. This proves the first claim.
For the second claim, we first consider the case that $c_*$ is a Mi\-siu\-re\-wicz-Thurston parameter; it is then the landing point of $s\ge 3$ rational parameter rays, say at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$, so that the parameter rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$ are in different sectors with respect to these parameter rays. Every parameter in any sublimb of $c_*$ has the property that the dynamic rays at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$ land together at a repelling preperiodic point, and the claim follows.
If $c_*$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, then the parameter $c$ is in a sublimb at internal angle $p/q\neq 1/2$, and in the dynamical plane of $c$ (or any parameter within the same sublimb) there is a repelling periodic point that is the landing point of $q\ge 3$ dynamic rays that separates the angles $0$, $\theta$ and $\theta'$ so that $\theta$ is in the largest sector not containing the angle $0$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
The main step in proving Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} is a topological surgery on Hubbard trees, as follows:
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Relation Between Subordinate Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} %\lineclear
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters with external angles $\theta$ and $\theta'$, let $H_c$ be the Hubbard tree of $c$, and let $H \supset H_c$ be the connected hull of the critical orbit and of the orbit of $z(\theta')$. Let $x$ be the branch point of the arcs from $0$ to $c$ and to $z(\theta')$. If $p_c$ is the natural map on $H$, define a map $f\colon H\to H$ as follows: choose a homeomorphism $\rho\colon[x,c]\to[x,z(\theta')]$ fixing $x$ and let
\[
f(z):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \rho\circ p_c(z) & \text{if $p_c(z)\in[x,c]$} \\
p_c(z) & \text{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.
\]
Let $H'$ be the connected hull within $H$ of the orbit of $0$ under $f$. Then $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have a connected tree $H$ containing the critical point $0$, and with respect to $f$ the orbit of $0$ is still finite (it still terminates at the $\beta$ fixed point). Therefore, $(H',f)$ is a finite tree with a continuous self-map, and the dynamics is locally injective except at the critical point $0$. Since there are at most $2$ branches at $0$, the map is globally at most $2:1$. Every endpoint is by definition on the critical orbit, so $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of a postcritically finite polynomial in which the critical orbit lands at the $\beta$ fixed point at the desired number of iterations. Let $c''$ be the corresponding parameter and $\theta''$ be the external angle; we have $\theta''=a''/2^{k'}$.
It remains to prove that $\theta''=\theta'$ and thus $c''=c'$.
Since $c\lhd c'$, there is a postcritically finite branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, that separates $c$ from $c'$, and the external angles of $c_*$ are the external angles of $x$ in the dynamical plane of $c$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). In the dynamical plane of $c''$, the point $x$ has the same external angles because it has the same period and preperiod and the dynamics of the subtree connecting the orbit of $x$ is unaffected by the surgery (except the bit around the critical point that maps past $x$). Hence $\theta''$ is the unique dyadic of least generation that is separated from the angle $0$ by the angles of $x$, and the same is true for $\theta'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The fact that $c''=c'$ can also be shown using spiders \cite{Spiders} and Thurston's theorem. Let us topologically extend the map $f:H' \to H'$ to a continuous map on $\C$ as follows. First, we set $f$ to be $p_c$ on the dynamic rays $R({2^{t}\theta'})$ of $p_c$, where $t\in\{0,1,\dots, k'\}$. There are $k'+1$ topological discs in the complement of $H'\cup_{t\ge 0} R({2^{t}\theta'})$ and the map $f$ easily extends to each of them as a homeomorphism. The new map $f$ is a topological polynomial for which $\bigcup_t R({2^{t}\theta'})$ forms an invariant spider. Since this spider is equivalent to a standard invariant spider of $c'$, we get $c'=c''$ by Thurston rigidity \cite{DHThurston,Spiders}.
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Injective Dynamics of Last Edge]
\label{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}
In any dyadic Julia set, consider any dyadic angle $\theta=a/2^k$ with $k\ge 1$ and let $x$ be the point where the arc from $z(\theta)$ to $\alpha$ is attached to the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generations $a'/2^{k'}$ with $k'<k$. Then $[z(\theta),x]$ maps injectively for $k$ iterations to an interval $[\beta,y]\subset[\beta,\alpha]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For every integer $m\ge 0$, let $T_m$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $m$. Let $f$ be the map on the Julia set.
The edge $[z(\theta),x]\subset \ovl{T_k\sm T_{k-1}}$ certainly maps forward homeomorphically one generation to an arc $[z(2\theta),x']$, where $x'=f(x)\in f(T_{k-1})$.
We claim that $[z(2\theta),x']\subset \ovl{T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2}}$ so that the inductive step applies and completes the proof.
We first show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, $T_{k-2}$ is the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k-2$. Consider an endpoint $y$ of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$. If $f(y)\in T_{k-2}$ was not an endpoint, so it was connected to at least two edges in $T_{k-2}$, then $y$ would have to be connected to at least two edges in $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$, a contradiction. Thus every endpoint of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$ is a dyadic endpoint of generation at least $k-1$ and hence $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
Finally, if $[z(2\theta),x']$ intersects $T_{k-2}$, then $[z(\theta),x]$ intersects $T_{k-1}$, and by hypothesis this intersection is the single point $x$. Hence $[z(2\theta),x']\subset (T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2})\cup\{x'\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In this lemma, the hypothesis that the polynomial be dyadic was stated only for convenience. All we are using is that the Julia set is path connected (if there are bounded Fatou components, the notation needs minor adjustments).
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Homeomorphic Preimage of Arc]
\label{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}
Suppose that $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters and let $\theta,\theta'$ be their external angles. In the Julia set of $c$, let $x$ be the branch point between $0$, $z(\theta)=c$ and $z(\theta')=:z'$. If $\theta=a/2^k$, then there is a point $y'\in(z',x)$ so that $p_c^{\circ k}\colon [z',y']\to p_c^{\circ k}([z',y'])= p_c^{\circ k}([ c,x])$ is a homeomorphism.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that $[c,x]$ maps homeomorphically for $k$ iterations to a subinterval of $[\beta,\alpha]$; define $y:=p_c^{\circ k}(x)\in(\beta,\alpha]$.
Similarly, there is a point $x'\in[z',0]$ so that $[z',x']$ maps forward homeomorphically for $k'$ iterations (if $\theta'=a'/2^{k'}$). We have
$x'\in[x,0]$ (or equivalently $x\in[z',x']$) because $c\lhd c'$, i.e.\ $c$ is \emph{directly} subordinate to $c'$.
More precisely, the external angles of the dynamic rays landing at $x$ are exactly the external angles of the parameter rays landing at a branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, where the vein of $c$ terminates (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). Analogously, the same is true for the point $x'$ and the vein of $c'$; let $c'_*$ be this branch point. But since $c\lhd c'$, it follows that $c'_*$ separates $c_*$ from the origin, and hence, by the Correspondence Theorem, $x'$ separates $x$ from the origin.
%\newpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{HubbardTreeBranchPic4.pdf}
}
\caption{Illustration of the relative position of various points in the Hubbard tree of $c$ in the proof of Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}. Note that we do not know or need the relative position between $0$, $y$, and $y''$; in particular, we do not claim $y''\in[\beta,y]$.
}
\label{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}
\end{figure}
Let $y'':=p_c^{\circ k'}(x)$; then $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon[z',x]\to[\beta,y'']$ is a homeomorphism. Iterating this $k-k'$ further times, the image arc terminates at $\beta$ and at $y$, but it can no longer be injective (the map $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[c,x]\to [\beta,y]$ is a homeomorphism, and $p_c^{\circ k}$ is a local homeomorphism near $x$ because $x$ cannot be on the critical orbit).
There is a branch $p_c^{-1}\colon[\beta,\alpha]\to[\beta,-\alpha]$; let $[\beta,y''']$ be the image of $[\beta,y]$ under the $k-k'$-th iterate of this branch.
Observe that $[y''',\beta]\subsetneq[y'',\beta]$ because otherwise $p_c^{\circ (k-k')}$ restricted to $[\beta,y'']$ would have degree $1$. Pulling back $k'$ times we obtain an interval $[z',y']\subset[z',x]$ so that $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon [z',y']\to[\beta,y''']$ and $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[z',y']\to[\beta,y]$ are homeomorphisms, as claimed.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Injection Between Precritical Points]
\label{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters. There exists a generation-preserving injection $B$ from the set of precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ to the set of precritical points in $[c',-\alpha]$ of $p_{c'}$. Moreover, $B$ could be taken to satisfy the following properties (A)--(C). Suppose $\zeta\in [c,-\alpha]$ is a precritical point.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] For $k\ge 0$ we have $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))\in [c',-\alpha]$. Moreover, if $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$, then
\[
B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta)).
\]
\item[(B)] Assume $c_*$ is a postcritically finite parameter such that $c_* \prec c$ and $c_* \prec c'$. Let $x_*$ and $x'_*$ be the dynamic counterparts of $c_*$ in the dynamical planes of $c$ and $c'$. Then $\zeta\in [x_*,-\alpha]$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in [x'_*,-\alpha]$.
\item[(C)] There is a sub-interval $J\subset [c', \alpha]$ such that $p^{\circ k }_{c'}(J)=[-\alpha, \alpha ]$ for some $k>0$ and such that the image of $B$ is in $[c',-\alpha]\setminus J$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition~\ref{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} and its notation, we may identify $p_{c'}:H_{c'}\to H_{c'}$ with $f:H'\to H'$. Under this identification $x'_*$ is $x_*$ which is a periodic or preperiodic point that never visits $[x,c]$ under iterates of $p_c$. We will now construct a bijection $B$ between precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and those precritical points in $[z',-\alpha]\setminus [y',x]$ of $f$ for which the orbit never visits $[y',x]$, where $y'$ is specified in Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage} (see Figure~\ref{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}).
In fact, our bijection will preserve the itinerary with respect to $H\sm\{0\}$, except for $k$ iterations along the orbit from $[c,x]$ to $[\beta,y]=p_c^{\circ k}([c,x])$ (resp.\ from $[z',y']$ to $[\beta,y]$).
Our proof proceeds by induction on the number of times, say $m$, that an orbit of a precritical point $\zeta$ runs through $[c,x]$ (not counting $\zeta$ itself). We start by those precritical points on $[c,x]$ (for the map $p_c$) that never run through $(c,x)$ again, that is with the case $m=0$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}, an appropriate branch of $f^{\circ(-k)}\circ p_c^{\circ k}$ sends $[c,x]$ homeomorphically to $[z',y']$; call this branch $\eta\colon[c,x]\to [z',y']$. Then for any $a\in[c,x]$, we have $p_c^{\circ k}(a)=f^{\circ k}(\eta(a))$ and the future orbits of these points under $p_c$ respectively under $f$ coincide as long as the orbits avoid $[c,x]$. Note that all precritical points on $[c,x]$ must have generation at least $k$. We thus obtain an injection, say $B_0$, of precritical points with $m=0$.
Every precritical point $\zeta\in[c,x]$ of generation $n$ and with $m=0$ is the common endpoint of two adjacent sub-intervals of $[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after $n$ iterations: we have $p_c^{\circ n}(\zeta)=c$ and $p_c^{\circ (n-1)}(\zeta)=0$, so we can pull the entire interval $[c,x]$ back in two ways (with a choice in the first step) until we end at $\zeta$. The pull-back of the entire interval $[c,x]$ is possible because no critical value can interfere (the critical orbit visits only endpoints of the tree), and the resulting interval is in $[c,x]$ because the Hubbard tree is unbranched on $[c,x)$ and the orbit of $x$ never enters $[c,x)$.
There is an analogous result about precritical points $\zeta'\in[z',y']$ of $f$ with $m=0$ and sub-intervals of $[z',y']$ that map to $[z',y']$: by construction of $y'$, the point $\zeta'$ has generation $n\ge k$, and there is a precritical point $\zeta=\eta^{-1}(\zeta')\in[c,x]$. The point $\zeta$ has neighborhood, say $I_\zeta\subset [c,x]$ that maps $2:1$ onto $[c,x]$ (the union of the two intervals constructed above), and then $\zeta'$ has a neighborhood $I_{\zeta'}\subset[z',y']$ with $p_c^{\circ k}(I_{\zeta'})=p_c^{\circ k}(I_\zeta)\subset[\beta,y]$.
The bijection $B_0$ of precritical points with $m=0$ thus extends to a bijection between intervals $I\subset[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after some number of iterations without visiting $(c,x)$ before, and intervals $I'\subset [z',y']$ that map homeomorphically onto $[z',y']$ after the same number of iterations and without ever visiting $(z',y')$; this bijection respects the number of iterations as well as the order along the intervals within $[c,x]$ and $[z',y']$ (the intervals are obviously disjoint). Denote this bijection of intervals by $B^*_0$.
Now suppose the statement is shown for all precritical points on $[c,x]$ that visit $(c,x)$ at most $m$ times, for some $m\ge 0$; in particular, we have an injection, say $B_m$, from precritical points on $(c,x)$ that map into $(c,x)$ exactly $m$ times, to precritical points on $(z',y')$ that map into $(z',y')$ exactly $m$ times. Consider any precritical point $\zeta\in(c,x)$ that visits $(c,x)$ exactly $m+1$ times, and let $s$ be minimal such that $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$. Then there is an interval $I\ni \zeta$ so that $p_c^{\circ s}\colon I\to[c,x]$ is a homeomorphism (same reasoning as above).
Let $I':=B^*_0(I)$. Then $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$ is a precritical point that visits $(c,x)$ only $m$ times, and $B_{m+1}(\zeta)=\zeta':= f^{\circ(-s)}\circ B_m \circ p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)$, choosing the branch $f^{\circ(-s)}\colon [y',z']\to I'$.
Since the map $B^*_0$ is injective, different intervals $I$ land in disjoint intervals $I'$, and since $B_m$ is injective by induction, the restriction of $B_{m+1}$ that run through any particular $I$ is injective too, so in total $B_{m+1}$ is injective as claimed.
This takes care of all precritical points on $[c,x]$, and we still have to deal with those on $[x,-\alpha]$. But those with orbits that never run through $[c,x]$ are unaffected by the changed dynamics, and the injection easily extends to those that map into $[c,x]$ under $p_c$.
It remains to show that the map $B$ satisfies Properties (A) -- (C). Let us extend $B_0^*$ to all intervals in $[x,-\alpha]$ that are injective preimages of $[c,x]$ and never run through $[c,x]$ before mapping into $[c,x]$. It is easy to see that $B_0^*(I)\subset I$ for every such interval $I$, because $[z',y']\subset [z',x]$ and $g_c^{\circ -1}[c,x]=f^{-1}[z',x]$, and induction is applied. Since $x_*$ never visits $[x,c]$, we see that $x_*\not \in I$ for every maximal pre-image $I$ of $[c,x]$. Also, by construction, $\zeta \in I$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in I$ for every precritical $\zeta$ and an interval $I$ as above. Therefore, $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ are on the same side of $x_*$. It is clear that $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ have the same return times to $[c,-\alpha]$ and $[z',-\alpha]$ because $p_c^{\circ k}[c,x]=f^{\circ k}[z',y']$. And the dynamical relation $B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))$ holds by construction. Thus Properties (A) and (B) hold. To prove (C) set $J$ to be any pre-image of $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ so that $J\subset [x,y']$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees}]
From Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} we have an injection of precritical points of $p_{c}$ of any given generation on $[-\alpha,c]$ to precritical points of $p_{c'}$ of the same generation on $[-\alpha',c']$, and by claim (B) this injection restricts to the arcs $[-\alpha,\alpha]$ and $[-\alpha',\alpha']$. This immediately proves the first half of part a), and the second half follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}.
Part b) of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}: a precritical orbit of $p_{c'}$ has strictly more choices than a precritical orbit of $p_c$ thanks to the interval $J$. More precisely, consider the Hubbard tree $H_{c'}$ of $p_{c'}$; and let us add the forward orbit of the ends of $J$ into the vertex set of $H_{c'}$. Denote by$A'$ the associated automaton of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$, see Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} for a formal definition of an associated automaton. And let $A'_*\subset A'$ be the sub-automaton obtained from $A'$ by removing all states within the interval $J$ as well as all arrows starting or ending at the removed states. Then the entropy of $c$ is bounded by the entropy of $A'_*$ by claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}, while the entropy of $c'$ is equal to the entropy of $A'$. Since $A'$ is irreducible, the entropy of $A'$ is strictly bigger than the entropy of $A'_*$.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Irrational Angles and the Tiozzo Conjecture}
In this brief section, we will complete the proof of the Tiozzo Conjecture.
\begin{lemma}[Bound for Irrational Angles]
\label{Lem:IrrationalAngle} \lineclear
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$ (dyadic or not) and every $n\in\N$ there is an $\eps>0$ so that $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ for all dyadic angles $\theta'$ with $|\theta'-\theta|<\eps$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
All the relevant precritical points correspond to non-degenerate leaves in the lamination, and there are finitely many of level $n$. As the characteristic angle $\theta$ changes, say by some $\eps>0$, then a precritical leaf of generation $k$ changes continuously by $\eps/2^k$, except when an endpoint of that precritical leaf moves through $\theta$, that is, when $\theta$ itself is periodic of period dividing $k$.
In the exceptional case that $\theta$ is periodic, there are preimage leaves that terminate at $\theta$ itself, but these do not separate and are thus not counted.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[The Tiozzo Conjectures]
\label{Cor:TiozzoConj} \lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\item[d)]
Within every wake, for each $n$ the function $N_\theta(n)$ assumes its maximum at the dyadic of least generation (of course, this maximum is not unique).
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Fix a dyadic angle $\theta_0$ and let $I=I(\theta_0)\subset\Circle$ be the open interval of angles $\theta$ for which the combinatorial arcs to $c(\theta)$ intersect the interior of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$ (not the long vein). In other words, if $c_*$ is the endpoint of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$, then $I$ consists of the angles within the same subwake of $c_*$ that $c(\theta)$ is in. Clearly $\theta_0\in I$. Every dyadic angle in $I$ is either directly or indirectly subordinate to $\theta_0$ (where the latter means that there is a finite sequence of dyadic angles ending at $\theta_0$ so that each is directly subordinate to the next).
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} part b), we know that $h$ restricted to dyadic angles in $I$ has its unique maximum at $\theta_0$.
We claim that for every $\theta\in I$ and every $n\in\N$ we have $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ and hence $h(\theta)\le h(\theta_0)$. Indeed, for every $n$ there is a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ sufficiently close to $\theta$ with $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:IrrationalAngle}), and $N_{\theta'(n)}\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ by definition of $I$. Therefore $\theta_0$ is a (weak) local maximum of $N_\theta(n)$ and of $h$.
However, if $\theta$ is dyadic, then we even have $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$. If $c(\theta)\prec c(\theta_0)$, then $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$ by monotonicity along dyadic veins. Otherwise, choose a new dyadic $\theta'$ so that $\theta\in I(\theta')$ but $\theta_0\not\in I(\theta')$. We then have $h(\theta)\le h(\theta')<h(\theta_0)$. Therefore, $\theta_0$ is the unique global maximum within $I(\theta_0)\ni\theta_0$. This proves claim a) in the stronger form that $h$ has a unique global maximum on $I(\theta_0)$, and this occurs at $\theta_0$.
For part c), consider any hyperbolic component $W$ and let $I$ be the open interval of angles within its wake. Let $\theta_W$ be the unique dyadic of lowest generation within $I$. Then $I(\theta_W)\supset I$, and on this interval $h$ has its unique global maximum at $\theta_W$. Now suppose $W$ is a wake that is not the wake of a hyperbolic component: then either it is one of the subwakes of a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters, or an irrational wake (bounded by two irrational angles with equal angled internal address). But such wakes are exhausted by wakes of hyperbolic components, so the claim holds for them as well. Part d) also follows.
For claim b), suppose $\theta$ is a local maximum of $h$, and let $I\subset\Circle$ be an interval on which $\theta$ is the global maximum. By monotonicity, $\theta$ lands (combinatorially) at an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. If $\theta$ is not dyadic, then choose a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ with $\theta\in I(\theta')\subset I$.
Then the unique global maximum of $h$ within $I(\theta')$ is at $\theta'$, so $\theta=\theta'$ is dyadic.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Continuity of Entropy}
\label{Sec:Continuity}
We start with a combinatorial estimate. A ``combinatorial pattern of length $n$ with gap size $s$'' is a finite sequence of integers $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ with $1\le j_1< j_2 < \dots < j_m< n$ and $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s$ and $n-j_m\ge s$.
\begin{lemma}[Number of Combinatorial Patterns]
\label{Lem:CombinatorialPatterns}
The number of combinatorial patterns of length $n$ with gap size $s$ is at most $e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The number of combinatorial patterns equals the number of binary sequences of length $n$ where two consecutive digits $1$ have distance at least $s$, and so that the final digit is a $1$. Write $n=ks+r$ with $r<s$. Then each block of $s$ consecutive entries has $s+1$ possibilities because it has at most a single $1$, and the last block has $r-1$ digits $0$ followed by a $1$, so it has $1$ possibility. The number of combinatorial patterns is thus at most $(s+1)^k\le e^{k\log(s+1)}\le e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
In the following proof, it will be convenient to define relevant precritical points as precritical points on $[\alpha,\beta]$, i.e.\ precritical leaves separating the two fixed points $\alpha$ and $\beta$ or their corresponding leaves in the lamination (rather than separating $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$ as before).
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Different Counts Yield Identical Entropy]
\label{lem:DifferCounts}
\lineclear
In any invariant quadratic lamination, let $N_1(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves that separate $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$, and let $N_2(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves of generation $n$ separating the leaves corresponding to the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points. Then
\[
\limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_1(n) = \limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_2(n)
\;;
\]
in other words, both counting functions define the same entropy.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $-\alpha\in[\alpha,\beta]$, we clearly have $N_1(n)\le N_2(n)$. To show the converse, we claim that $N_2(n) \le (N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+ N_1(n-2)+\dots) $.
To see this, denote $\alpha_0:=\alpha$ and, recursively, $\alpha_{n+1}$ to be the unique preimage of $\alpha_n$ on $[\alpha,\beta]$, so $\alpha_1=-\alpha$. Then $[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_n]$ maps homeomorphically onto $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n-1}]$ and $[\alpha,\beta]=\bigcup_{n\ge 0}[\alpha_{n},\alpha_{n+1}]$. If $N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n)$ denotes the number of precritical points of generation $n$ on $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]$, then we have $N_{[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_{n+2}]}(n)=N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n-1)$ and $N_{[\alpha_{0},\alpha_{1}]}(n)=N_1(n)$ and indeed $N_2(n) = N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+N_1(n-2)+\dots$. If $N_1\le C e^{(h+\eps)n}$ for all $n$, then $N_2(n)\le 2Cn e^{(h+\eps)n}$. Therefore, $N_1$ and $N_2$ define the same entropy.
\end{proof}
In view of this lemma, we will take the liberty in the following result to count relevant precritical points (leaves) as those separating the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points.
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Bound on Entropy Increase]
\label{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} \lineclear
Suppose $c_1\prec c_2$ and $[c_1,c_2]$ is a (combinatorial) arc in $\M$ such that $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$. Then there is an $s>0$ with the following property: if $[c,c']$ is a dyadic vein of generation at least $s$ that terminates at $c\in [c_1,c_2]$, then $\tilde h(c')-\tilde h(c_2)\le \eps$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $h:=\tilde h(c_2)$. There is a $C>0$ so that all $c\in [c_1,c_2]$ satisfy $N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)\le Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$ for all $n$. We may suppose that $s$ is large enough so that $2C\le e^{(h+\eps/2)s}$. Let $s'\ge s$ be the generation of $c'$.
Let $f' \colon H'\to H'$ denote the Hubbard tree of the dyadic parameter $c'$ and $f\colon H\to H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$ (as endpoint of a dyadic vein in $\M$, $c$ is postcritically finite, so both Hubbard trees exist and are finite). Let $x\in H'$ be the dynamical counterpart of $c$.
Recall that $x$ is a characteristic periodic or preperiodic point in the sense that the entire orbit of $x$ is contained in the closure of the component of $H'\sm\{x\}$ that contains $0$.
In particular, the orbit of $x$ is disjoint from $(x,c']$. It follows that any connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ is either contained in $[x,c']$ or intersects it at most in $\{x\}$. (Otherwise, $x$ would be in the interior of $I$ and after $n$ iterates $x$ would be mapped into $(x,c']$.)
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that
\begin{equation}
(f')^{\circ (s')}([x,c']) \subset[\alpha,\beta]
\;.
\label{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}
\end{equation}
and, moreover, the orbit of $(f')^{\circ m}([x,c'])$ for $m\in \{0,1,\dots , s'-1\}$ does not contain $0$.
By a maximal preimage of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n>0$ we
mean a connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ so that $I\not\subset (f')^{-m}[x,c']$
for every $m\in\{1,2,\dots,n\}$; equivalently, $(f')^{\circ m}(I)\not \subset [x,c']$ for all $m<n$.
We denote by $M$ the set of all maximal preimages of $[x,c']$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$.
An \emph{itinerary} of $I$ will be a sequence $s_{0}s_1\dots s_{n-2}\in\{\0,\1\}^\N$ where each $s_{i}$ describes the connected component of $H'\setminus \{0\}$ containing $(f')^i(I)$ (labeled for instance so that the critical value is in the component with label $\1$).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:PreCritInterv}
There is an itinerary preserving inclusion from
\begin{itemize}
\item the set $M$ of maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n$; to
\item the set of precritical points of $f:H\to H$ of generation $n$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, a maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ belongs to the interval $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H'$ if and only if the corresponding precritical point belongs to $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $[c', c]$ is a dyadic vein, we may associate to $f:H\to H$ and $f'\colon H' \to H'$ the automata $A$ and $A'$ as in Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} such that there is an inclusion $J:A\hookrightarrow A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'} we denote by $e_0$ the unique state of $A'$ containing the critical point.
Then maximal preimages $I$ of $[x,c']$ of generation $n$ are in bijection with paths $s$ in $J( A)$ of length $n-1$ terminating at $e_0$ and starting at states in $[x,\beta]$. Indeed, every such $s$ is uniquely described by a sequence of states $s_0,s_1,\dots , s_{n-2}$ in $A'$ such that $(f')^{\circ i}(I) \subset s_i$. Since $I$ is a maximal preimage, all $s_i$ are in $J(A)$.
Further, $J^{-1}(s)$ defines a unique critical point in $[c,\beta]$ of $f$ because $J^{-1}(s)$ starts at a state in $[c,\beta]$ and terminates at $J^{-1}(e_0)$ containing the critical point. This constructs the required injection.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
By Lemma~\ref{lem:PreCritInterv} the number of intervals in $M$ of generation $n$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$ is bounded above by $Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$.
In order to bound the number of precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of any generation $n$ in the dynamics of $f'\colon H'\to H'$, consider any relevant (i.e.\ between the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ points) precritical point $\ell$ of generation $n$. Let $j_1<j_2<\dots <j_m=n$ be the set of all iterates so that $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$.
Then $\ell$, $(f')^{\circ (j_1+s')}(\ell)$, $(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell)$,\dots , $(f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$ are within $[\alpha,\beta]$; compare \eqref{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}. This also implies that $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s'$.
Let $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}\in M$ be the unique intervals in $M$ containing, respectively,
$\ell, (f')^{\circ(j_1+s')}(\ell),(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell),\dots , (f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$; their respective generations are $j_1, j_2-j_1-s',\dots , j_{m}-j_{m-1}-s'$.
Then $\ell$ has itinerary $\s=s_0s_2\dots s_{n-2}$ of $\ell$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $s_0s_1\dots s_{j_1-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_0$;
\item $s_{j_i}s_{j_i+1}\dots s_{j_i+s'-1}$ is the kneading sequence of $c'$;
\item $s_{j_{i}+s'}s_{j_{i}+s'+1}\dots s_{j_{i+1}-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_i$; and
\item all $s_{j_{i}-1}$ are arbitrary in $\{\0,\1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We justify this as follows:
$(f')^{\circ(j_1-1)} $ maps $I_0$ homeomorphically, while $(f')^{\circ j_1}\colon I_0\to [x,\tilde c]$ is a $2:1$-map, so the first $j_1-2$ iterates do not contain $0$ and all points in $I_0$ have the same entries in their itineraries up to entry number $j_1-2$.
Since $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$, the next iterates are the same as for $[x,c']$ and, in particular, for $c'$, hence equal to the kneading sequence of $c'$, at least before $c'$ lands at the $\beta$ fixed point, that is for $s'-1$ iterations. The iterate $(f')^{\circ (j_i+s')}(\ell)$ is by definition in $I_i$, and this interval travels forward homeomorphically until it covers $0$, which is the iteration before it reaches $[x,c']$ the next time; since the latter is at iterate $j_{i+1}$, the itinerary of $\ell$ coincides with that of $I_i$ until position $j_{i+1}-2$. In the subsequent iterate, the image interval $(f')^{\circ j_{i+1}-j_i-1}(I_i)$ contains $0$, so both entries in the itinerary might be possible.
Now consider the set of all precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of generation $n$ corresponding to a particular combinatorial pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$.
We just showed that in order to determine the itinerary of $\ell$ we only need to specify $s_{j_1-1},s_{j_2-1},\dots , s_{j_m-1}\in \{\0,\1\}$ as well as the intervals $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}$ as above; their numbers we estimated above. Therefore, the total number of precritical points with pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ is at most
\[
2 C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_1-1)} \left(\prod_{i=1}^{m-1} 2C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_{i+1}-j_i-s'-1)}\right)\le2C e^{(h+\eps/2)n}
\]
because $2Ce^{-s'}\le 1$ by hypothesis.
Since the number of combinatorial patterns is at most $e^{\log(s'+1)n/s'}$, it follows that $N_{\tilde c}(n) \le 2 C e^{n(h+\eps/2+\log(s'+1)/s')}$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\tilde h(\tilde c)
&\le \limsup_n \frac{1}{n}\left(\log 2 +\log C + n (h+\eps/2)+\frac{n}{s'}\log(s'+1) \rule{0pt}{11pt} \right)
\\
&\le h+\eps/2+ \frac{\log (s'+1)}{s'} \le h+\eps
\;
\end{align*}
if $s'\ge s$ is sufficiently large.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy Near Veins]
\label{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins} \lineclear
Suppose $\theta\in\Circle$ is such that topological entropy is continuous along the (combinatorial) vein connecting the parameters $0$ to $c(\theta)$ in $\M$. Then $h$ is continuous for all parameters on $[0,c(\theta)]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
It may be helpful to explain the statement. Let $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to \C$ be a parametrization of the (combinatorial) arc $[0,c(\theta)]$. Then the hypothesis says that $h(\gamma(t))$ is continuous for $t\in[0,1]$ (only considering parameters along the arc). The conclusion is that then $h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\gamma(t)$ for all $t$. (Note that this hypothesis is known to be true for all angles $\theta\in\Circle$, except when $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$ at an irrational angle \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}; we will treat the missing case in Section~\ref{Sec:IrratEndpoints}).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, suppose $c_a\prec c_b$ are two parameters in $\M$ with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$; we allow $c_b$ to be a (combinatorial) endpoint of $\M$. Denote by $\text{wake}(c_a)$ the open wake of $c_a$: this is the set of all parameters in $\M$ that are separated from $0$ by two parameter rays landing at (or accumulating at) $c_a$. If $c_a$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then we set $\text{wake}(c_a)$ to be the subwake of $c_a$ containing $c_b$. Similarly $\text{wake}(c_b)$ is defined; if $c_b$ is a combinatorial endpoint of the Mandelbrot set, then $\text{wake}(c_b)=\emptyset$. Set $W:=\ovl{\text{wake}(c_a)}\sm\text{wake}(c_b)$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} there are at most finitely many dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ with $c_i\in [c_a,c_b]$ such that the entropy variation along $[c_i,c'_i]$ exceeds $\eps$, and so that $c_b\not\in(c_i,c'_i]$. We will construct a ``reduced wake'' $W'\subset W$ in which the entropy variation is at most $2\eps$.
By the Branch Theorem \cite{Orsay}, \cite[Theorem~3.1]{MandelBranch}, the points $c_i$ are either Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters or centers of hyperbolic components. In both cases, we will exclude a subwake at $c_i$ from $W$ where the entropy variation is large.
If $c_i$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, let $W_i$ be the subwake of $c_i$ containing $c'_i$ and thus $[c_i,c'_i]$ (this subwake does not contain $c_b$). If $c_i$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_i$, then let $W_i$ be the subwake of $H_i$ that contains $c'_i$ (the root of this wake is a bifurcation parameter on $\partial H_i$).
Set $W':=W\sm \bigcup_i \ovl{W_i}$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj} (the Tiozzo Conjecture), the maximal entropy for angles within $W'$ (or more precisely, the entropy of angles corresponding to rays in $W'$) occurs either at $c_b$ or at a dyadic parameter $c'\in W'$, and in both cases it is at most $\tilde h(c_a)+2\eps$.
To prove continuity of $h$ at $\theta$, we first discuss the case that $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$. By hypothesis, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial vein $[0,c(\theta)]$, so there is a $c_a\in\M$ with $0\prec c_a\prec c(\theta)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c(\theta)) -\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$. Now we use the argument from above and construct a wake $W'$ as described.
Then all angles $\theta'\in W'$ satisfy $|h(\theta')-h(\theta)|\le 2\eps$, and these angles form a neighborhood of $\theta$, which completes the proof in this case.
The second case is that $c(\theta)$ is not an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set and $c(\theta)$ is neither on the boundary of a hyperbolic component nor a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter. We may choose an arc $(c_a,c_b)\ni c(\theta)$ (i.e., $c_a\prec c(\theta)\prec c_b$) with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a)\le 2\eps$ and proceed as above.
If $c(\theta)$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then there are finitely many branches, and the previous argument works separately for all the individual branches.
If $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of a single hyperbolic component $H$, let $c_a\in \partial H$ be the root of $H$ (the boundary point with multiplier $1$) and let $c_b$ be the period-doubling bifurcation point (the boundary point with multiplier $-1$). Then all dyadic parameters $c'\in W=\text{wake}(c_a)\sm\ovl{\text{wake}(c_b)}$ have the endpoints of their veins in $W\setminus \{c(\theta)\}$. The entropy variation of $[c_a,c_b] $ is $0$, in particular less than $\eps$.
Hence $W'$ as above provides a neighborhood of $\theta$ with small entropy variation.
Finally, if $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of two hyperbolic components, then the previous argument works separately
for both hyperbolic components.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy]
\label{Thm:Continuity} \lineclear
If $\theta\in\Circle$, then $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\theta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins}, entropy is continuous at all angles $\theta\in\Circle$ for which entropy restricted to the combinatorial arc $[0,c(\theta)]$ is continuous. This is true for all parameters $c(\theta)$ with $\theta\in\Q/\Z$ by work of Tiozzo~\cite{TiozzoThesis} and Jung \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, and consequently for all parameters that are not (combinatorial) endpoints of $\M$ at irrational angles. For combinatorial endpoints $c(\theta)$ with irrational $\theta$, we will prove this in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{corollary}[Existence of Limit]
\label{Cor:ExistenceLimit} \lineclear
In the dynamics of $p_c$, the limit $\lim_{n\to\infty} (1/n)\log N(n)$ exists whenever $p_c$ is non-renormalizable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, if $c$ is non-renormalizable and postcritically finite, then $\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)=\lim_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)$ by irreducibility of the associated subshift of finite type. If $c$ is not postcritically finite and not an endpoint of $\M$ (that is, $c$ is associated to two external angles in $\M$), then there are two non-renormalizable parameters $c_1$ and $c_2$ with $N_{c_1}(n)\le N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le\eps$ for arbitrary $\eps>0$ and the result holds as well (here we use continuity of entropy).
Finally, if $c$ is a non-renormalizable endpoint, then by continuity of $\tilde h$ for any $\eps>0$ there exists a postcritically finite non-renormalizable parameter $c_1\prec c$ so that $\tilde h(c)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$.
By monotonicity, we have $\liminf(1/n)N_c(n)\ge \liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)$, and
$\limsup(1/n)N_c(n)=\tilde h(c)\le \tilde h(c_1)+\eps=\liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)+\eps\le \liminf(1/n)N_{c}(n)+\eps$. Since $\eps>0$ was arbitrary, the claim follows in this case too.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Irrational endpoints}
\label{Sec:IrratEndpoints}
In this section, we prove that for every combinatorial endpoint $c$ of $\M$, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial arc $[0,c]$. This is known when $c$ is postcritically finite \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, but we need it in all cases. This proof provides the missing step in the continuity proof in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}.
We will approximate the irrational endpoints by dyadic ones, and of course we need uniform estimates for the latter (see Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}).
\subsection{Hubbard trees}
\label{ss:HaubTrees}
We need to start by discussing some more properties of Hubbard trees of postcritically finite polynomials.
The \emph{marked points} or \emph{vertices} of the Hubbard tree are the endpoints, branch points, and the postcritical points. (In fact, all endpoints are postcritical points; critical points are not included in their own right, but they might be postcritical, for instance when they are periodic, and when the degree is greater than $2$ then they might also be branch points.) Since the set of vertices is forward invariant, every edge (a closed arc connecting two vertices) maps over one or several entire edges, so that the image contains every edge the interior of which intersects the image; in other words, the edges form a Markov partition on the Hubbard tree. --- Here, we will only discuss quadratic polynomials and Hubbard trees.
If $H_r\subset H$ is a proper subtree of $H$ with the property that $p_c^{\circ n}(H_r)\subset H_r$ for some period $n\ge 2$, then $p_c$ is \emph{renormalizable}; it is well known that this means the $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded copy of the Mandelbrot set within itself.
The main part of the argument below will be in the case that there exists an edge $e\subset H$ so that $p_c^{\circ n}(e)=H$ for every sufficiently big $n$. If $p_c$ is non-renormalizable, then every edge will do; otherwise there may still be some edge (outside of ``little Julia sets'') with this property. If there is no such edge, then we are in the ``immediate satellite renormalizable case'', that means $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded Mandelbrot set that touches the main cardioid of $\M$.
\emph{Standing Assumption:} In this subsection and the next one (Section~\ref{ss:Automata}), we assume that $H$ has an edge for which a finite iterate covers the entire Hubbard tree $H$, so that $c$ is not immediate satellite renormalizable. (In fact, this assumption will continue to hold, in different notation, until we give the proof of the general case in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}).
Consider a dyadic endpoint $c'$ with Hubbard tree $H'$ and external angle ${q}/{2^m}$. Then the critical value and every postcritical point are endpoints of $H'$, so vertices of $H'$ are either endpoints or branch points. Easy calculations show that $H'$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item $m+1$ endpoints;
\item at most $m-2$ branch points;
\item at most $2m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Let $c$ be the postcritically finite parameter where the vein of $c'$ terminates. We denote by $H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$; note that $\beta \not\in H$.
Denote by $x\in H'$ the dynamic counterpart of $c$ as in Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\begin{lemma}
The set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}\setminus \{\text{vertices of }H'\}$ contains at most $m$ points; equivalently, $p_{c'}^{\circ m}(x)$ is a branch point of $H'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde c$ be the dyadic parameter with $c'\lhd \tilde c$, so $c'$ is directly subordinate to $\tilde c$. Then $c\prec c'$ and $c\prec \tilde c$.
Denote by $\tilde q/ 2^n$ the external angle of $\tilde c$; note that $n<m$.
We will work in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, the rays landing at $x$ (this point is denoted by $x_*$ in Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}) separate $R(0), R(\tilde q/2^n)$, and $R(q/2^m)$.
Let $x(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ be the landing point of $R(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ and consider the arc $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$ in the filled-in Julia set of $p_{c'}$ (which is a dendrite). Then $x$ has at least three branches in $ H'\cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$: two of them are the branches to the critical point and to the critical value at angle $q/2^m$, and the third is $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$.
We claim that $p_{c'}^{\circ n}[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\subset H'$. Indeed, let $T_k$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. Then $p_{c'}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$ by \eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}. Therefore, $p_{c'}(T_{k-1})\subset T_{k-2}\cup H'$ and, by induction, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(T_{n})\subset H'$.
Therefore, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(x)$ has at least $3$ branches in $H'$ because $p_{c'}^{\circ n}:H' \cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\to H'$ is locally a homeomorphism at $x$, and $n<m$.
\end{proof}
Let us now refine $H'$ by adding the finite set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}$ to its vertex set. The new tree, still called $H'$, has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $3m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $3m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Here and elsewhere, we find it convenient to express some combinatorial properties in terms of \emph{automata}. We would like to reassure the reader that we only use a basic notion without results from automata theory and hope it will not be distracting. More precisely, given a postcritically finite polynomial $p_{c'}$ with Hubbard tree $H'$, we associate to it an automaton $A'$ in a natural way, as follows. The states of $A'$ correspond to the edges of $H'$. An arrow connects two edges $e_1$ and $e_2$ so that the image of $e_1$ contains $e_2$; the number of arrows from $e_1$ to $e_2$ equals the number of times the edge $e_1$ covers $e_2$ under $p_{c'}$ (this is well defined because we have a Markov partition). This number of arrows equals $0$ or $1$, except for the unique edge (if any) that contains the critical point in its interior.
Similarly, denote by $A$ the natural automaton associated with $p_c\colon H\to H$.
\emph{Overview on the argument.}
The key idea of our proof consists of identifying the dynamics of $p$ on $H$ as an embedded subset of the dynamics of $p'$ on $H'$. Since entropy measures the growth rate of choice of orbits of length $n$, the entropy of $p'$ on $H'$ is no less than the entropy of $p$ on $H$, and we need to give an upper bound on the difference. An orbit in $H'$ that realizes the additional choice is one that leaves the embedded image of $H$ in $H'$, and we show that it starts on a single edge $[x,c']$ at the critical value. We show that this edge maps forward homeomorphically a large number of iterations: so if some orbit uses the additional choice, then it will not have any choice for a long time, and this will give an upper bound on the entropy increase. We will do much of the argument in terms of the automaton $A$ that we consider as a sub-automaton of $A'$.
We start the construction by describing the relation between $H,A$ and $H',A'$ in the following lemma. We define an end-edge of $H'$ to be any edge so that among the two vertices it connects there is one endpoint of $H'$.
\begin{lemma}[Identifying $A$ as Sub-Automaton of $A'$]
\label{lem:AandA'} \lineclear
Denote by $H'_*$ the sub-tree of $H'$ obtained from $H'$ by removing all its end-vertices and (open) end-edges. Then there is a homeomorphism $J:H \to H'_*$
such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$J$ is a tree-isomorphism, i.e.\ $J$ sends vertices and edges of $H$ to vertices and edges of $ H'_*$ respectively;
\item
if $y$ is a vertex of $H$, then $J(y)$ has the same itinerary as $y$; and
\item
$J$ respects the dynamics in the sense that
an edge $e_1$ of $H$ covers once, resp twice, an edge $e_2$ under $p_c$ if and only if $J(e_1)$ covers once, resp twice, $J(e_2)$ under $p_{c'}$.
\end{enumerate}
There is a unique edge $e_0$ of $H'$ containing the critical point of $p_{c'}$. If $c$ is strictly pre-periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is in the interior of $J^{-1}(e_0)$. If $c$ is periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is on the boundary of $J^{-1}(e_0)$.
The map $J$ induces an inclusion $A \hookrightarrow A'$ by mapping a state $e$ of $A$ into the state $J(e)$ of $A'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us first define the map
\[
J: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Recall that every vertex of $H$ is a postcritical point or a branch point.
If $y\in \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}$ (in the dynamics of $p_c$) is a branch point of $H$, then $y$ is not a pre-critical point because the latter points have valence $1$ or $2$ in $H$.
In particular, there are at least $3$ external rays landing at $y$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:CountPartsHubTree} these rays at the same angle also land together in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ and the landing point, say $y'$, is in $H'_*$. We define $J(y):=y'$.
Further, let $x=J(c)$ be the dynamical counterpart (again in the dynamics of $c'$) of the parameter $c$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}. Then we set $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c)):= p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)\in H'_*$ for all $k\ge 0$. We claim that this definition is consistent and, moreover, that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
$J$ is injective on the set of vertices and
\item[(b)] $J$ preserves orientation in the following sense: if a ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ lands at a non-precritical point of $H$ so that $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates two vertices $v_1,v_2\in H$, then $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates $J(v_1)$ and $J(v_2)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
\end{itemize}
If $c$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameter, then $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of at least two external rays (because $c\prec c'$ is not an endpoint). Moreover, $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of a ray $R(\phi)$ if and only if $R(\phi)$ lands at $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c))$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$. Thus $J$ is well defined and satisfies (a) and (b).
The other case is that $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component $W$. In this case, no ray lands at $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ for $k\ge 0$ because these points are in the Fatou set. By definition, $J(c)=x$ is the landing point of periodic rays, say $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$, so that $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$ bounds the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$. Denote by $c_*\in \partial W$ the landing point of $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. For a parameter $w\in \ovl W$, let $\gamma_w$ be a non-repelling periodic point; there is a unique continuous choice so that $\gamma_c=c$. Moreover, $\gamma_{c_*}$ is the landing point of the ray pair $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. Observe also that the cycle $\{p_w^{\circ k}(\gamma_w)\}_{k\ge 0}$ for $w\in W\cup\{c_*\}$ does not cross any ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ as in claim (b). This proves claim (b) because the rays landing at non-precritical points of $H$ plus rays $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$ are stable in the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
%\newpage
We now extend $J$ to a continuous map $J:H\to H'_*$ that is injective on every edge of $H$. Since $J$ preserves orientation of vertices of $H$, the extension is an embedding.
Since $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(c')$ is not in the image of $J$ for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$ but $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ is in the image of $J$ for all $k\ge 0$, the image of $H$ under $J$ is the connected hull of $\cup _{k\ge 0} p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ (the tree $H$ is the connected hull of the orbit of $c$ under $p_c$, and the map $J$ preserves external angles of rays landing at vertices). By Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} the images $p^{\circ k}_{c'}([c',x])$ are arcs with disjoint interiors for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$. Thus there is no branch point in $H'\setminus J(H)$. Therefore, $J$ maps $H$ bijectively onto $ H'_*$.
In the standard definition of Hubbard trees, every vertex of $H'$ is a branch point or an endpoint, and the postcritical points are exactly the endpoints. Remember, however, that we added the orbit of $x$ to the set of vertices of $H'$. The vertices of $H'_*$ are thus the branch points in $H'$ and the orbit of $x$, and all are $J$-images of vertices in $H$. Therefore $J$ is a bijection from vertices of $H$ to vertices of $H'_*$, and claim (1) follows.
Observe that $J$ is a conjugacy between
\[
p_c: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}
\]
and
\[
p_{c'}: \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Therefore, if $e_1$ is an edge of $H$ so that the critical point $0$ is not in the interior of $e_1$, then $p_{c}(e_1)\supset e_2$ if and only if $p_{c'}(J(e_1))\supset J(e_2)$. Moreover, $p_c$ and $p_{c'}$ restricted to $e_1$ and $J(e_1)$ respectively have degree $1$. If the interior of $e_1=[a,b]$ contains the critical point of $p_c$, then $p_c([a,0])=[p_{c}(a),c]$ and $p_c([0,b])=[c,p_{c}(b)]$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $J(e_1)$ because all other edges of $H'$ are mapped injectively under $p_{c'}$. We have $p_{c'}([J(a),0])=[J(p_c(a)),c')]\supset [J(p_c(a),J(c)]$ and $p_{c'}([0,J(b)])=[c',J(p_c(b))]\supset [J(c), J(p_c(b)]$. This finishes the proof of (1)--(3).
The critical point $0$ is not a vertex of $H'$ because $0$ is a strictly preperiodic point of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$. Hence $0$ is in the interior of an edge $e_0\subset H'$. Since $x\in p_{c'}(e_0)$ we have $c\in p_{c}(J^{-1}(e_0))$. Therefore, $J^{-1}(e_0)$ contains the critical point $0$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $e_0$ if and only if $0$ is strictly preperiodic under $p_c$.
Clearly, $J$ injects the set of states of $A$, which are edges of $H$, into the set of states of $A'$, which are edges of $H'$. It follows from (3) that the number of arrows from $a_1$ to $a_2$ (i.e., the degree of the corresponding map on the edge) is equal to the number of arrows from $J(a_1)$ to $J(a_2)$.
\end{proof}
\goodbreak
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:EdgesOfH}
The tree $H$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $2m-2$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-3$ edges.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Automata}
\label{ss:Automata}
Let us look in detail at the automata $A'$ and $A$ introduced above. For simplicity, we write $A\subset A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}.
Whether or not the dynamics on a Hubbard tree is renormalizable is encoded in the associated automaton. We write
$A=A_n\cup A_r$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_n$ (the non-renormalizable edges) contains all states that, for a fixed finite iterate, reach all states of $A$ simultaneously; and
\item $A_r$ (the renormalizable edges) contains all states from which {not all} of $A$ can be reached simultaneously: these correspond to edges within the Hubbard trees of ``smalls Julia sets'' corresponding to renormalization domains).
\end{itemize}
The dynamics on the Hubbard tree is renormalizable if and only if $A_r\neq \emptyset$.
An automaton is called \emph{irreducible} if every state of $A$ can be reached from each other. This is certainly the case when $A$ is non-renormalizable, but may also happen in the renormalizable case: for instance, the Hubbard tree of the rabbit polynomial with a superattracting $3$-cycle has its Hubbard tree in the form of a topological \textsf{Y} where the three edges are permuted cyclically: the automaton has the form $e_0\to e_1\to e_2\to e_0$ and is irreducible, but the dynamics is renormalizable. The difference is that no edge covers all of $A$ after the same number of iterations.
If $A_r\neq\emptyset$, so that the dynamics is renormalizable, then we may have $A_n=\emptyset$ or $A_n\neq \emptyset$. The former case, $A_n=\emptyset$, was defined earlier as the case of immediate satellite renormalization.
Recall our earlier assumption that $A_n\neq\emptyset$: so we are not in the immediate satellite renormalizable case.
We also remark that there are no arrows from $A_r$ to $A_n$, so within $A$ there is no escape from the set of renormalization states $A_r$. However, in $A'\supset A$, if $A_r\neq\emptyset$, then there are two arrows from $A_r$ to $[c',x]$, which is a state in $A'\setminus A$.
There are the following special states of $A$ and $A'\supset A$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the $0$-state in $A'$ contains the critical point; this state is the edge $e_0$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}; we set the $0$-state of $A$ to be $J^{-1}(e_0)$; this convention is compatible with the inclusion $J\colon A\hookrightarrow A'$;
\item
the $[c',x]$-state of $A'\setminus A$;
\item
states of $A$ and of $A'$ that belong to the interval $[\alpha, -\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
A \emph{path} in $A$ or $A'$ is a sequence of arrows so that each arrow starts where the previous arrow ends. The \emph{length} of a path is the number of arrows it contains. We can also think of a path as a sequence of states so that there is an arrow from every state to the subsequent one (that is, a sequence of edges in the Hubbard tree so that each edge covers the next one under the map). When a path connects two states that are connected by multiple arrows, then there are accordingly multiple paths along this sequence of states (as an example, in $A'$ there are two paths of length $1$ from the $0$-state to the $[c',x]$-state).
We define a \emph{relevant precritical path} in $A'$ or in $A$ as a path that starts at a state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and terminates at the $0$-state. By basic properties of symbolic dynamics, relevant precritical paths in $A'$ are in bijection with precritical points of $p_{c'}$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ because the critical point of $p_{c'}$ is not a vertex of $H'$. Different relevant precritical paths in $A$ encode different precritical points of $p_c$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
Every relevant precritical path $s$ in $A'$ has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DecompOfs}
s=b_0c_0a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\end{equation}
such that (roughly: $a_i, b_i, c_i$ are the sub-paths in $ A'\setminus A$, in $A_n$, and in $A_r$ respectively)
\begin{itemize}
\item
$a_i$ is an (almost) ``choiceless'' path that starts at the $0$-state, then goes to $[x,c']$, then travels outside of states in $[\alpha, -\alpha]$, and terminates at the first state reached in $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset A$;
\item
if $a_i$ terminates at a state in $A_r$, then $b_i=\emptyset$; otherwise, $b_i$ is a path that starts at the state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ where $a_i$ terminates and continues while states in $A_n$ are visited; (if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$)
\item
if $A_r=\emptyset$, then $c_i=\emptyset$; otherwise: if $b_i\not=\emptyset$, then $c_i$ is a path that starts in $A_n$ where $b_i$ terminates, and immediately moves into $A_r$, and otherwise it starts at a state in $A_r$ where $a_i$ terminates; the end of $c_i$ is the $0$-state, and until then the path remains in $A_r$ (again, if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$).
\end{itemize}
Observe that paths in $A'$ that are not in $A$ start on the edge $[x,c']$, so they are described by the $a_i$ that are long and have almost no choice, hence contribute little additional entropy.
Every $a_i$ has length at least $m+1$ because $[x,c']$ needs $m$ iteration to reach $[\beta,\alpha]$, and might need further iterations to land in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}). Once it lands there, we are either in $A_n$ and we continue with a path $b_i$ as long as we stay in $A_n$, or we are already in $A_r$ and $b_i=\emptyset$, and $c_i$ continues until the next visit of the $0$ state.
We will refer to $a_i$ as \emph{detours} (the long almost choice-less parts).
Defining $\ell_i,t_i, k_i$ as the lengths of $a_i, b_i, c_i$ respectively, we say that $s$ has \emph{combinatorial pattern} $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$.
\begin{lemma}[Almost Choiceless Paths]
\label{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}
There are at most two possible paths in $A'$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at the $0$-state;
\item then immediately go to the $[c',x]$-state;
\item then travel outside $[\alpha,-\alpha]$; and
\item terminate at a given state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Such paths have length $\ell\ge m+1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, the edge of $H'$ associated with the $0$-state covers $[c,x]$ with degree $2$ under $p_{c'}$. Then $[x,c]$ maps injectively for at least $m+1$ iterations until $[x,c]$ starts to partially cover $[\alpha,-\alpha]$. But this is, by definition, when the path under discussion terminates.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Number of Paths $c_i$]
\label{lem:c_iPaths}
Suppose $c$ is renormalizable. Let $g$ be the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$. Then there are at most $2^{{k}/{g}}$ paths in $A$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at a given state in $A_n$ or in $A_r$;
\item all subsequent states are within $A_r$;
\item terminate at the $0$-state; and
\item have length $k$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $H_0,H_1,\dots H_{g-1}$ be the cycle of small Hubbard trees associated with the the largest renormalizable Hubbard trees (corresponding to the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$). Then the degree $p_c^{\circ gt}:H_{0}\to H_{0}$ is at most $2^t$ for all $t$. Therefore, there are at most $2^{t}$ paths in $A_r$ with length $k\in \{ gt,gt+1,\dots, g(t+1)-1\}$ that terminate at the $0$-state; so for given length $k$, the number of such paths is at most $2^t=2^{\lfloor k/g \rfloor}$ (and we have not even counted the first step from a given state of $A$ to $A_r$).
\end{proof}
Fix a combinatorial pattern $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$ and let $n=|P|=t_0+k_0+\sum_{i\ge 1}^p(\ell_i+t_i+k_i)$.
When comparing entropy in $A'$ and in $A$, we will consider the additional relevant precritical paths in $A'$ and show that they correspond to relevant precritical paths in $A$ of bounded length, so that there are not too many additional paths in $A'$. More precisely, if a detour has length $\ell_i\ge 3m$ then the new path within $A$ will be shorter (or have equal length) than before.
We thus introduce a quantity $\kappa$, called \emph{uncertainty of $P$}, that measures the possible increase of length as follows:
\[
\kappa(P):= \frac 1 n \sum_{|\ell_i|<3m}(3m- \ell_{i})
= \frac 1 n \sum_i \max(0,3m-\ell_i)
\]
(the first sum is taken over all $\ell_i$ that are less than $3m$). Higher values of $\kappa$ create problems. Since all $\ell_i>m$ and $\sum\ell_i\le n$, we have $3m-\ell_i\le 2m < 2\ell_i$ and $\kappa(P)\in[0, 2]$.
Denote by $N'(P)$ the number of all precritical paths in $A'$ with pattern $P$.
For $\kappa\in [0,2]$ define
\[
N'(\kappa,n):= \sum_{\kappa(P)\le \kappa,\ \ |P|=n} N'(P)
\;,
\]
the numbers of precritical itineraries with small uncertainty.
We define $S'(\kappa,n)$ to be the corresponding set of relevant precritical paths with small uncertainty, so that $N'(\kappa,n)=|S'(\kappa,n)|$.
\begin{lemma}[Replacing a Path in $A'$ by a Path in $A$]
\label{lem:substitution} \lineclear
If $s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p$ is a precritical path in $A'$ with uncertainty $\kappa$, then there are paths $a^*_i$ in $A_n$ with lengths in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$ such that
$s^*:=b_0 a^*_1 b_1a^*_1b_2a^*_2\dots a^*_p b_pc_p$ is a path in $A$. If $n$ is the length of
$s$, then $s^*$ has length at most $n + \kappa n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that some $b_i$ might be empty paths. Choose a state $a\in A_n$. For convenience, we say that $a$ is the beginning and the end of every empty $b_i$.
Since $A_n$ is irreducible and has less than $2m$ vertices (Corollary~\ref{cor:EdgesOfH}) we may replace every $c_ia_{i+1}$ by a path $a^*_{i+1}$ in $A_n$ of length at most $2m$ so that $a^*_{i+1}$ connects the end of $b_{i}$ with the beginning of $b_{i+1}$ (which are by definition both in $A_n$); by adding $m$ arbitrary steps at the beginning, we may arrange things so that $a^*_i$ has length in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$.
Since the length of each $a_i$ is at least $m$, this procedure increases the length of $s$ by at most $\kappa n$ (and even shortens whenever $c_ia_{i+1}$ has length greater than $3m$).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Counting Patterns]
\label{lem:PatternsGrowth}
The quantity
\[
\limsup_{n}\frac{1}{n}\log\left(\# \{\text{patterns of length }n\}\rule{0pt}{11pt}\right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $m$ tends to infinity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every pattern $P$ is uniquely characterized by a non-decreasing sequence of positive integers
\[t_0,t_0+k_0,t_0+k_0+\ell_1, t_0+k_0+\ell_1+t_1, \dots. \]
Since $\ell_i\ge m+1$, for every $q\in\{0,\dots,\lfloor n/m\rfloor\}$ the interval $[qm,(q+1)m)$ contains at most $3$ elements of the above sequence; and the same is true for the final interval $[\lfloor n/m\rfloor m+1, n]$. Therefore, the number of all patterns is bounded by $Z(n,m):=((m+1)^3)^{(n/m)+1}=e^{{3(n+m)\log(m+1)}/{m}}$. For fixed $m$, we have $\limsup_n (1/n)\log Z(n,m)=3\log(m+1)/m$, and indeed this tends to $0$ as $m\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Uniformity]
\label{prop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon >0$ there are $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0$ depending only on $\varepsilon$ but not on $c$ and $c'$ such that the following holds. If
\begin{itemize}
\item $m\ge \overline m$,
\item either $c$ is non renormalizable, or the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$ is at least $\overline g$,
\item $\kappa\le \ovl \kappa$, and
\item $h$ is the entropy of the parameter $c$,
\end{itemize}
then
%\newpage
\[
N'(\kappa,n)\le C e^{(h+\eps)n} % \sum_{\nu\le n}N(\nu)
\]
for some constant $C>0$ depending on $c$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $h$ is the entropy of $c$, there is a constant $C_1>0$ such that
\[
N(n)\le C_1e^{(h+\eps/3)n},
\]
where $N(n)$ counts the number of relevant precritical paths in $A$ of generation $n$.
Our first claim is that there are at most $ 2^{{n}/{g}+{n}/{m}}$ precritical paths
\[
s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\]
with fixed $(b_i)_{i\le p}$ of a given pattern $P$ of length $n$. Indeed, the beginning of the $c_i$ is fixed by $b_i$, or by $a_i$ if $b_i$ is empty, and the end is at the $0$ state, so by Lemma~\ref{lem:c_iPaths} there are at most $2^{k_i/g}$ choices for each $c_i$ and in total at most $2^{n/g}$ choices for all $c_i$ combined (in the non-renormalizable case, the $c_i$ are empty and there is no choice at all). Each $a_i$ has at most two choices by Lemma~\ref{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}, and since their length is at least $m$, there are no more than $n/m$ such choices.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:substitution} we may substitute $c_ia_i$ by $a^*_i$ with $m\le |a^*_i|\le 3m$ and get a precritical path
\[s^*=b_0a^*_1b_1a^*_2b_2\dots a^*_pb_p c_p\]
in $A$ with length at most $ n+\kappa(P) n $. Denoting the length of $a_i^*$ by $\ell_i^*$, we call the numbers $Q=(t_0,0, \ell^*_1, t_1,0,\ell^*_2,\dots,\ell^*_p,t_p,k_p)$ the pattern of $s^*$.
Our next claim is that for fixed patterns $P$ and $Q$, the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is at most
\[
2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}=C_1e^{((h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m)n}
\;.
\]
Indeed, the number of paths $s$ for a given pattern $P$ with fixed $b_i$ is at most $2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}$. Different $b_i$ clearly lead to different $s^*$ because we know from $P$ were in $s^*$ the $b_i$ are located. The length of $s^*$ is bounded by $(1+\kappa(P))n$; hence the number of different $s^*$ is bounded by $\max_{1\le \mu \le (1+\kappa(P))n} N(\mu)\le C_1e^{(h +\eps/3)(1+\kappa (P))n}\le C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}$ because each $s^*$ is a precritical path in $A$.
If $g$ and $m$ are sufficiently large and $\ovl \kappa$ is sufficiently small, then $(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m\le h+2\eps/3$, and the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is bounded by
\[
C_1e^{(h+2\eps/3)n}
\]
Since every $s\in S'(\kappa,n)$ is a part of at least one triple $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ for some patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $\kappa(P)\le \kappa$ we get the estimate
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le \left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| C_1 \ e^{(h+2\eps/3) n}
\;,
\]
where $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right|$ denotes the number of pairs of patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $|P|=n$ and $|Q|\le n+\kappa(P)n$. Lemma~\ref{lem:PatternsGrowth}, the number $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| $ is bounded by $C_2e^{(\eps/3) n}$ for some constant $C_2>0$. We get
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le C_1C_2 \ e^{(h+\eps) n}
\;;
\]
this finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{Continuity at Irrational Endpoints}
Let $c_{\infty}$ be a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set.
There a sequence of dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ approximating $c_{\infty}$ in the following way
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1\prec c_2\prec\dots \prec c_{\infty}$;
\item $c_{i+1}\in [c_i,c'_i]$; and
\item $ \dots c_i \lhd \dots \lhd c'_2\lhd c'_1$.
\end{itemize}
Figure~\ref{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint} illustrates the arrangement of these points.
Note that once $c_1$ is chosen, the remaining parameters are uniquely determined: $c'_i$ is the dyadic of least generation with $c'_i\succ c_i$, and $c_{i+1}$ is the branch point in the vein of $c'_i$ where the vein to $c_\infty$ branches off.
We assume that $c_{\infty}$ is not in any immediate satellite small copy of the Mandelbrot set. More precisely, since we work with automata only in the postcritically finite case, the assumption that we make is this:\begin{itemize}
\item all $c_i$ are outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set
\end{itemize}
(note that if any $c_i$ is outside of immediate satellite copies, then all subsequent ones are as well: so, possibly up to truncating an initial part of the sequence $(c_i)$, the assumption on $c_\infty$ is that there exists a postcritically finite $c_1\prec c_\infty$ outside of immediate satellite copies).
The case that $c_\infty$ is immediate satellite renormalizable will be treated in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{\includegraphics{FigAllBranchPoints.pdf}}
\caption{The relative (combinatorial) positions of the parameters $c_i$, $c_\infty$ and $c'_i$ used in the proof.}
\label{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint}
\end{figure}
Similar to the previous discussion we specify the following objects
\begin{itemize}
\item $H'_i$ is the Hubbard tree of $c'_i$ with dynamics $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$ \,;
\item
$S'_{i}(n)\subset [\alpha,-\alpha]\subset H'_i$ is the set of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ for the parameter $c'_i$\,;
\item
$N'_{i}(n):= |S'_i(n)|$ is its cardinality;
\item
$h_i=\tilde h(c_i)$ and $h'_i=\tilde h(c'_i)$ are the entropies;
\item
$m_i$ is the generation of the dyadic parameter $c'_i$\,;
and
\item for $j\le i$ we denote by $x_j^{(i)}\in H_i$ the dynamical counterpart of $c_j$ in $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We will now introduce the sets $S'_i(j,\kappa, n)$ for all $j\le i$; these sets are defined in a similar way as $S'(\kappa,n)$ in Section~\ref{ss:Automata}. Consider a precritical point $y\in S'_i(n)\subset H'_i$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Iter:K:ell}0=\tilde \ell_0 <\tilde t_0<\tilde \ell_1<\tilde t_1< \dots < \tilde t_p=n
\end{equation} be the iteration times of $y$ (depending on $j$) uniquely specified as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\tilde t_k>\tilde \ell_k$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde t_k}_{c'_i}(y) \in [ c'_i, x_{j}^{(i)}]$;
\item
$\tilde \ell_k>\tilde t_{k-1}$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde \ell_k}_{c'_i}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We also set $\ell_k:=\tilde \ell_k- \tilde t_{k-1}$ and $t_k:= \tilde t_k-\tilde \ell_k$. Clearly, \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is uniquely specified by $(t_0,\ell_1, \dots, t_p)$.
We define \emph{the uncertainty of $y$ with respect to $x_j^{(i)}$} as
\[
\kappa_j(y):= \frac 1 n \sum_{\ell_k<3m_j}(3m_j- (\ell_k+1))
= \frac 1 n \sum_k \max(0,3m_j-(\ell_k+1)).
\]We denote by $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ the set of all $y\in S'_i(n)$ such that $\kappa_j(y)<\kappa$.
Let us also define \[I_j(y):= \bigcup_{\ell_k<3m_j} \{\tilde t_{k-1}, \tilde t_{k-1}+1,\dots, \tilde \ell_{k} \}.\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:I_j}
For all $j$ and $y$ the set $I_j(y)$ is a union of blocks of consecutive numbers so that each block has length $\ell_k+1\in[m_j,\dots, 3m_j]$, and
\begin{itemize}
\item
its first number is the unique number $t$ in the block that satisfies $p_{c'_i}^{\circ t}(y)\in [c'_i, \alpha]$; %x_j^{(i)}]$.
\item
its last number is the unique number $\ell$ in the block that satisfies
$p_{c'_i}^{\circ \ell}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Furthermore,
\( \displaystyle \kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|.\)
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have $\ell_k<3m_j$ by definition of $I_j(y)$ and we need to prove the lower bound $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
For every integer $k\ge 0$, let $T_k\subset H'_i$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. In particular, $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset T_0$. By~\eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1} we have $p_{c'_i}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
By construction, $c'_i$ and $c'_{j-1}$ are in different sublimbs of $c_{j}$. Thus, by Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})$ is disjoint from $T_{m_j-1 }$; and we get $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})\cap p_{c'}^{\circ -k} [\alpha,-\alpha]=\emptyset$ for all $k< m_j$. This shows that $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
We certainly have $p_{c'_i}^{\circ \tilde t_{k-1}}(y)\in[c'_i,x^{(i)}_j]\subset [c'_i,\alpha]$, and since $p_{c'}^{-1}([c'_i,\alpha])=[\alpha,-\alpha]$, the block would end before the orbit could enter $[c'_i,\alpha]$
again. The claim about the last number is obvious.
Finally, $3m_j-(\ell_k+1) \le 2m_j \le 2(\ell_k+1)$, and taking the sum we conclude $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:MonotIncl}
For $j<i$ the injection $B:S'_{i}(n)\to S'_{i-1}(n)$ of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} injects $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ into $S'_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $x_j^{(i)}$ and $x_j^{(i-1)}$ are the dynamical counterparts of $c_j$ in the dynamical planes of $p_{c_i}$ and $p_{c_{i-1}}$ respectively. Consider $y\in S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$. It follows from Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} parts (A) and (B) that
\begin{itemize}
\item $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ for all $\ell\ge 0$; and
\item $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [c'_{i},x_j^{(i)}]$ if and only if $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [c'_{i-1},x_j^{(i-1)}]$ for all $t \ge 0$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the first claim follows from Part (B) applied to $c_*=0$ (recall that the dynamical counterpart of $c_*=0$ is the $\alpha$-fixed point). The second claim follows from Part (A) combined with Part (B) applied to $c_*=c_j$.
Therefore, our surgery respects the sequence \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell}: for fixed $j$ and every $y\in S_i(n)$ the point $B(y)$ has the same sequence as $y$.
Hence $\kappa(y)=\kappa(B(y))$ and $B(y)\subset S_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:SmallKappa}
For every $\delta>0$ and for every $i'\ge 0$ there is an $i''>i'$ such that for every $n\ge 0$ we have
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\delta,n).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a subsequence of indices $i'=i_1< i_2< \dots < i_h$ so that $3m_{i_r}< m_{i_{r+1}}$ and $h> 2/\delta$. We show that $i'':= i_h$ satisfies the claim of the lemma. It is sufficient to show that for every $y\in S'_{i_h}(n)$ there is an $s<h$ such that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j} that $I_{i_1}(y), I_{i_2}(y), \dots , I_{i_h}(y)$ consist of pairwise disjoint blocks. Thus all $I_{i_s}$ are pairwise disjoint subsets of $\{1,2,\dots ,n\}$. Hence
\[\frac 1 n (|I_{i_1}(y)|+ |I_{i_2}(y)|) + \dots + |I_{i_h}(y)|) \le 1.\]
Since $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)| $, again Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j}, we have
\[\kappa_{i_1}(y)+\kappa_{i_2}(y)+\dots +\kappa_{i_h}(y)\le 2;\]
this implies that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$ for some $s<h.$
\end{proof}
The next lemma is a corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon>0$ there is an $i'\ge 0$ and $\overline \kappa>0$ such that if $ j \ge i'$ and $\kappa\le \overline \kappa$, then
\[|S'_j(j,\kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}\] for all $n>0$ and some constant $C_j>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For a given $\varepsilon $ fix $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0 $ as in Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}. We may choose a big enough $i'$ such that for all $j\ge i'$
\begin{itemize}
\item $m_j\ge \overline m$; and
\item $c_j$ is either non-renormalizable or the renormalization period of $c_j$ is at least $\overline g$.
\end{itemize}
We will now apply Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity} to the pair $c:=c_j$ and $c':= c'_j$; then $h_j=h$ is the entropy of $c=c_j$.
Observe first that $|S'_j(j, \kappa,n)| = |S'( \kappa, n)|= N'(\kappa,n)$ after the substitution. Indeed, every relevant pre-critical point of $p_{c'_j}$ is uniquely characterized by a precritical path in $A'$ (again by a fundamental property of the symbolic dynamics because the critical point is in the interior of the $0$-state of $A'$.) This bijection preserves the uncertainties: if $y\in S'_j(j,\kappa,n)$ with Sequence~\eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is identified with a relevant precritical path $s$ with Decomposition~\eqref{eq:DecompOfs}, then $\ell_k +1 =\tilde \ell_k - \tilde t_k +1= |a_k|$. Hence $y$ and $s$ have the same uncertainties, and $S'_j(j, \kappa,n)$ and $S'( \kappa, n)$ are in bijection.
Now the lemma immediately follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\end{proof}
Remember that we continue to have the assumption that $c_\infty$ is a non-dyadic endpoint that is not immediate satellite renormalizable. In this case, we can now complete the proof.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity on Vein to $c_{\infty}$, Non-Renormalizable Case]
\label{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}
%\lineclear
For every $\eps>0$ there is an $\bar i\ge 1$ such that $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge \bar i$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Choose $\overline\kappa$ and $i'$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:SmallKappa} there is an $i''\ge i'$ such that
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n).
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:MonotIncl} there is an injection from $S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ into $S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ for all $j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}$. Therefore,
\[
N'_{i''}(n)=|S'_{i''}(n)|\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''} |S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity} we have $|S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}$. Thus
\[
N'_{i''}(n)\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n} \le \left( \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j\right) e^{(\eps +h_{i''})n}
\]because $h_{i''}\ge h_{j}$ by monotonicity.
This proves that $h'_{i''}-h_{i''}\le \eps$, and since the sequence $h'_i-h_i$ is decreasing we have $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge i''$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{The Immediate Satellite Renormalizable Case}
In order to formulate our statements, we need to briefly review well known facts on renormalization; compare \cite{Polylike, McMullenRenormalization,MiSelfSim,MiRenorm}.
If $p_c$ is simple $m$-renormalizable, then there exists a ``little Mandelbrot set'' $\M'\subset\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters with $c\in\M'$ and a straightening homeomorphism $\chi\colon\M'\to\M$ so that $p_{\chi(c)}$ in the neighborhood of its filled-in Julia set is hybrid equivalent to $p_c^{\circ m}$ on a neighborhood of the little filled-in Julia set (except possibly at the root point $\chi^{-1}(1/4)$). The little Mandelbrot set has a main center $c_0:=\chi^{-1}(0)$ with a superattracting orbit of period $m$. In this case, we say that ``the parameter $c$ is $c_0$ tuned with $\chi(c)$''. We say $\M'$ is an \emph{immediate satellite copy of $\M$} if $\M'$ is attached to the main hyperbolic component of the Mandelbrot set. Dynamically, this means that the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c^{\circ m}$ is equivalent to $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$; in the postcritically finite case, this is equivalent to $A_n=\emptyset$.
\begin{lemma}[Immediate Satellite Renormalization and Entropy]
\label{Lem:Renormalization} \lineclear
If $\M'$ is an immediate satellite copy of $\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters, then the straightening map $\chi:\M'\to \M$ satisfies
\[
\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))
\;.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $N_{c}(n)$ and $N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ be the numbers of precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and $p_{\chi(c)}$ respectively and let $\tilde N_{\chi (c)}(n)$ be the number of precritical points of $p_{\chi(c)}$ on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
The straightening map $\chi$ identifies the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_{c}^{\circ m}$ with the arc $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$. Therefore, $N_c(mn)= \tilde N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ while $N_c(mn+k)=0$ for all $k\in \{1,2,\dots, m-1\}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:DifferCounts}, the precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and those on $[\alpha,\beta]$ give the same entropies; and on $[\beta,-\beta]$ there can be at most twice as many precritical points of any generation $n$ as on $[\alpha,\beta]$.
Therefore, $\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If $\chi\colon \M'\to\M$ is the straightening map of an arbitrary small copy of $\M$, we have
\[
\tilde h(c)=\max\left(\tilde h(c_0),\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))\right)
\;.
\]
This is obvious in the postcritically finite case and follows in general once we know that $\tilde h$ is continuous, which we are about to establish.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}[Continuity Along Vein to $c_{\infty}$, General Case.]
\label{cor:RadialContin}
\lineclear
Suppose that $c_{\infty}$ is a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. Then the entropy is continuous along the vein $[c_{\infty}, 0]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen} proves the case when $c_{\infty}$ is outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set.
The second case is that there is a finite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots, \chi_n:\M_n\to \M $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty\in \M_*:=(\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1)^{-1}(\M)$ and $c'_{\infty}:=\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1(c_\infty)$ is not immediate satellite-renormalizable. Entropy is continuous along the vein $[0,c_*]$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}, and continuous along the image $\chi_*^{-1}([0,c_*])=[c_0,c_{\infty}]$ by Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} (where $c_0$ is the main center of $\M_*$), and continuous along $[0,c_0]$ by \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung} (or Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}). Therefore, entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
The final case is that there is an infinite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty$ is in the domain of $\chi_n \circ \chi_{n-1}\circ \dots \circ \chi_1$ for all $n\ge 0$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} that the entropy of $c_\infty$ is $0$. Thus entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
\end{proof}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
\renewcommand{\top}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{top}}}
\newcommand{\comb}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{comb}}}
\appendix
\section{Core entropy and biaccessibility dimension}
\centerline{by Wolf Jung}
\bigskip
Here various definitions of core entropy shall be discussed and related to
the biaccessibility dimension. On a compact metric space, the topological
entropy of a continuous map is defined by a growth rate, which is referring
to preimages of covers, or to $\epsilon$-shadowing sets. See
\cite{deMelovanStrien} for details. When the underlying space is a compact
interval, a finite tree, or graph, several equivalent characterizations are due
to Misiurewicz and others. These include the growth rate of horse shoes,
laps (monotonic branches), periodic points, and preimages of a general point.
For real and complex quadratic polynomials, core entropy was defined by
Tao Li and Bill Thurston as the topological entropy of $p_c(z)$ on the
Hubbard tree; this definition applies to the postcritically finite case in
particular, and more generally to finite compact trees, but it does not work
when $c$ is an endpoint with a dense postcritcal orbit.
In general, the filled Julia set $\mathcal{K}_c$ consists of the Hubbard tree
$T_c$\,, the countable family of its preimages, and an uncountable family of
endpoints. The dynamics on $T_c$ is interesting because this tree is folded
over itself, while the iteration does not return to arcs of its preimages.
On the other hand, the endpoints form a set of full harmonic measure, while
the external angles of $T_c$ and its preimages form a set of Hausdorff
dimension $<1$ (unless $c=-2$). Since all biaccessible points are contained
in arcs iterated to $T_c$\,, these angles are called biaccessible
(or biaccessing). More precisely, the biaccessibilty dimension is defined as
follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item For the lamination generated by an angle $\theta\in S^1$
\cite{ThurstonLaminations}, consider all
angles of non-trivial leaves. Their Hausdorff dimension is the
\emph{combinatorial biaccessibility dimension} $B_\comb(\theta)$. The same
dimension is obtained from pairs of angles with the same itinerary, or from
pairs not separated by the precritical leaves: the diameter joining $\theta/2$
and $(\theta+1)/2$, and its preimages.
\item For a parameter $c\in\mathcal{M}$, the
\emph{topological biaccessibility dimension} $B_\top(c)$ is the Hausdorff
dimension of those angles, such that the dynamic ray is landing together with
another ray.
\end{itemize}
These definitions are related analogously to Lemma~\ref{Lem:defEntropy}:
\begin{lemma}[Combinatorial and topological biaccessibility]
Suppose that $\theta\in S^1$ and $c\in\partial\M$ belongs to the impression
of the parameter ray with angle $\theta$, or $c\in\M$ is hyperbolic and the
ray lands at the corresponding root. Then $B_\comb(\theta)=B_\top(c)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of the proof \cite{BruinSchleicher, Jung}] In the locally connected case, and
neglecting the countable family of angles at precritical or precharacteristic
points, two dynamic rays are landing together if and only if they are not
separated by a precritical ray-pair. When $\mathcal{K}_c$ is not
locally connected, exceptional sets of angles are shown to be negligible in
terms of Hausdorff dimension. These include the angles of non-landing rays,
and the possible angles of Cremer cycles.
\end{proof}
The following relation to entropy is due to Thurston \cite{TanLeiEntropy},
relying on earlier work by Furstenberg \cite{Furstenberg}
and Douady \cite{Douady}.
\begin{proposition}[Dimension and entropy of the tree]\label{Prop:Biaccessibility}
Suppose $\mathcal{K}_c$ is locally connected with empty interior, or $f_c$ is
parabolic or hyperbolic with a real multiplier.
Using regulated arcs, define the tree $T_c$ as the path-connected hull of
the critical orbit. If $T_c$ is compact, consider the topological entropy of
$p_c(z)$ on $T_c$\,. Then it is related to
the biaccessibility dimension by $h_\top(T_c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is found in version 1 of \cite{BruinSchleicher} and in
\cite{TiozzoThesis, Jung}:
since $\theta\mapsto z(\theta)$ is a semi-conjugation with finite fibers, we may
consider the topological entropy of the angle-doubling map on the compact set
of angles of $T_c$ \cite[Thm.~II.7.1]{deMelovanStrien}. And this equals the
Hausdorff dimension \cite[Proposition~III.1]{Furstenberg}, except for the
base 2 instead of e in the logarithm of the growth factor $\lambda$.
\end{proof}
While the definition of $h_\top(T_c)$ requires a compact tree $T_c$\,,
a general notion was given in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} in terms
of precritical ray pairs:
\begin{theorem}[Dimension and entropy in general]\label{Thm:Biaccessibility}
Entropy and biaccessibility dimension are related as follows for
all parameters $c\in\mathcal{M}$ and all angles $\theta\in S^1$\,:
\begin{equation}
\tilde h(c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2
\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
h(\theta)=B_\comb(\theta)\cdot\log2 \ .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First, suppose that $c=c(\theta)$ is postcritically finite or belongs
to a dyadic vein. In particular, $\mathcal{K}_c$ is
locally connected and $T_c$ is compact with finitely many endpoints. Then
the growth rate of lap numbers is equal to the growth rate of precritical
points on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, so $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$, and
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} applies.
Second, suppose that $c$ is a non-renormalizable irrational endpoint, and
approximate it with biaccessible parameters $c_n$ before $c$. Then monotonicity
\cite[Proposition~4.6]{Jung} and continuity give
\begin{equation}
B_\top(c)\cdot\log2\ge\lim B_\top(c_n)\cdot\log2
=\lim\tilde h(c_n)=\tilde h(c) \ .
\end{equation}
For the opposite estimate, note that the plane is cut into pieces successively
by precritcal ray pairs, and the angles of a piece of level $n$ form up to $n$
intervals of total length $2^{-n}$ according to
\cite[Lemma~4.1]{BruinSchleicher}. Recall that $N(n)$ is the number of
precritcal points of \textsc{Step} $n$ on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, and denote
the number of pieces intersecting this arc by $V(n)$. Then
$V(n)=1+N(1)+\dots+N(n)$ is growing by the same factor $\lambda=e^h$ as $N(n)$,
and the same holds for $n \cdot V(n)$. The $b$-dimensional Hausdorff measure
of the angles of $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$ is estimated as
\begin{equation}
\mu_b\le\lim n \cdot V(n) \cdot 2^{-bn} \ ,
\end{equation}
which is 0 when $b>\log\lambda/\log2=\tilde h(c)/\log2$. So the Hausdorff
dimension is estimated as $B_\top(c)\le\tilde h(c)/\log2$ as well,
implying equality.
Finally, both $\tilde h(c)$ and $B_\top(c)$ are constant on the main molecule
and on primitive small Mandelbrot sets, and both are scaled by the period of
immediate satellite renormalization. Now all cases are covererd by the
Yoccoz Theorem.
\end{proof}
Continuity of entropy according to Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity} gives:
\begin{corollary}[Continuity of biaccessibility dimension]
The biaccessibility dimension $B_\comb(\theta)$ is continuous on $S^1$ and
$B_\top(c)$ is continuous on the Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$.
\end{corollary}
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} and Theorem~\ref{Thm:Biaccessibility}
show that the definition
of entropy in terms of precritical points is a generalization
of the original definition in terms of a compact core:
\begin{corollary}[Extending the definition of core entropy]
We have $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$ whenever $T_c$ is defined and compact.
\end{corollary}
\begin{thebibliography}{ABC}
\bibitem[BS]{BruinSchleicher} H.~Bruin, D.~Schleicher,
Hausdorff dimension of biaccessible
angles for quadratic polynomials, Preprint. ArXiv:1205.2544, 28 pp.
\bibitem[D]{Douady} A.~Douady, Topological entropy of unimodal maps:
monotonicity for quadratic polynomials, in:
\emph{Real and complex dynamical systems}
(Hiller{\o}d 1993), NATO Adv.~Sci.~Inst.~Ser.~C
Math.~Phys.~Sci.~\textbf{464}, Kluwer 1995, 65--87.
\bibitem[DH1]{Orsay} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{Etude dynamique des polyn\^omes complexes} (The Orsay Notes). Publications Math\'ematiques d'Orsay 1984-02 (1984) (premi\`ere partie) and 1985-04 (1985) (deuxi\`eme partie).
\bibitem[DH2] {Polylike} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{On the dynamics of polynomial-like mappings}. Annales Scientifiques de l'\'Ecole Normale Sup\'erieure. Quatri\`eme S\'erie. V 15 (1985), 287--343.
\bibitem[DH3]{DHThurston} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{A proof of {T}hurston's topological characterization of rational functions}. Acta Mathematica. V 171 (1993), 263--297.
\bibitem[F]{Furstenberg} H.~Furstenberg, Disjointness in ergodic theory,
minimal sets, and a problem in Diophantine approximation,
Math.~Systems Theory~\textbf{1}, 1--49 (1967).
\bibitem[HS]{Spiders} John Hubbard and Dierk Schleicher. \emph{The spider algorithm}. Complex dynamical systems ({C}incinnati, {OH}). Proc. Sympos. Appl. Math. V 49 (1994), 155--180.
\bibitem[Ju]{Jung} Wolf Jung, \emph{Core entropy and biaccessibility of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1401.4792 (2014), 46 pp.
\bibitem[TL]{TanLeiEntropy} Tan Lei, \emph{On W. Thurston's core-entropy theory}. Presentation, given in Toulouse (January 2014) and elsewhere.
\bibitem[Mc]{McMullenRenormalization} Curt McMullen, \emph{Complex dynamics and renormalization}. Annals of Mathematics Studies \textbf{135},
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1994).
\bibitem[dMS]{deMelovanStrien} W.~de Melo, S.~van Strien,
\emph{One-dimensional dynamics}, Springer 1993.
\bibitem[M1]{MiSelfSim} John Milnor, \emph{Self-similarity and hairiness in the {M}andelbrot set}. Computers in geometry and topology. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. V 114, 211--257, (1989).
\bibitem[M2]{MiRenorm} John Milnor, \emph{Local connectivity of {J}ulia sets: expository lectures}. In: The {M}andelbrot set, theme and variations. London Math. Soc. V 274, 67--116 (2000).
\bibitem[M3]{MiOrbits} John Milnor, \emph{Periodic orbits, externals rays and the Mandelbrot set: an expository account}. In: G\'eom\'etrie complexe et syst\`emes dynamiques (Marguerite Flexor, Pierrette Sentenac, and Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, eds). Ast\'erisque \textbf{ 261}, 277--333 (2000).
\bibitem[Sch]{MandelBranch} Dierk Schleicher,
\emph{On fibers and local connectivity of Mandelbrot and Multibrot sets}. In: M. Lapidus, M. van Frankenhuysen (eds): Fractal Geometry and Applications: A Jubilee of Benoit Mandelbrot. Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics \textbf{72}, American Mathematical Society (2004), 477--507.
\bibitem[T]{ThurstonLaminations} William P. Thurston, \emph{On the geometry and dynamics of iterated rational maps}. In: Complex dynamics, families and friends (Dierk Schleicher, ed.), AK Peters, Wellesley, MA (ISBN 978-1-56881-450-6), pp. 3--109 (2009).
\bibitem[Ti1]{TiozzoThesis} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Topological entropy of quadratic polynomials and dimension of sections of the Mandelbrot set}. Preprint, arXiv:1305.3542 (2013), 56 pp.
\bibitem[Ti2]{TiozzoPaper} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Continuity of core entropy of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1409.3511 (2014), 25 pp.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document$, postcritically finite or not (and could extend it to every parameter $c\in\C$), and similarly for every $\theta\in\Circle$. These definitions are such that if the parameter ray at angle $\theta$ lands (or accumulates) at $c\in\partial \mathcal M}
\newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}
\newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}
\newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}
\newcommand{\Circle}{\mathbb S}
\newcommand{\sm}{\setminus}
\newcommand{\0}{\texttt{0}}
\newcommand{\1}{\texttt{1}}
\newcommand{\s}{\underline{s}}
\newcommand\eps{\varepsilon}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}
\renewcommand{\theta}{\vartheta}
\newcommand{\ovl}[1]{\overline{#1}}
\newcommand{\lineclear}{\rule{0pt}{2pt}\newline}
\newcommand{\reminder}[1]{\textsl{#1}\marginpar{$\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd$}}
\newcommand{\hide}[1]{}
\title[Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials]{Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials %\\ \rule{0pt}{20pt} --- Draft $\circ$ Comments Invited ---
}
\author{Dzmitry Dudko}
\author{Dierk Schleicher}
\author[]{With an appendix by Wolf Jung}
\address{G.-A.-Universit\"at zu G\"ottingen, Bunsenstrasse 3--5, D-37073 G\"ottingen, Germany}
\address{Jacobs University Bremen, Research I, Postfach 750 561, D-28725 Bremen, Germany}
\address{Gesamtschule Aachen-Brand, Rombachstrasse 99, 52078 Aachen, Germany}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
We give a combinatorial definition of ``core entropy'' for quadratic polynomials as the growth exponent of the number of certain precritical points in the Julia set (those that separate the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative). This notion extends known definitions that work in cases when the polynomial is postcritically finite or when the topology of the Julia set has good properties, and it applies to all quadratic polynomials in the Mandelbrot set.
We prove that core entropy is continuous as a function of the complex parameter. In fact, we model the Julia set as an invariant quadratic lamination in the sense of Thurston: this depends on the external angle of a parameter in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set and suffices to define core entropy directly from the angle in combinatorial terms. As such, core entropy is continuous as a function of the external angle.
Moreover, we prove a conjecture of Guilio Tiozzo about local and global maxima of core entropy as a function of external angles: local maxima are exactly dyadic angles, and the unique global maximum within any wake occurs at the dyadic of lowest denominator.
An appendix by Wolf Jung relates different concepts of core entropy and biaccessibility dimension and thus shows that biaccessibility dimension is continuous as well.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Statement of Results}
We define two entropy functions:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h\colon \Circle\to [0,\log 2]$, assigning to every external angle $\theta\in\Circle$ the core entropy of the lamination associated to the angle $\theta$.
\item $\tilde h\colon \M\to[0,\log2]$, assigning to every $c\in\M$ the core entropy of the quadratic polynomial $z\mapsto z^2+c$.
\end{itemize}
We describe these definitions in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}. Note that we define $\tilde h$ for every $c\in\M$, postcritically finite or not (and could extend it to every parameter $c\in\C$), and similarly for every $\theta\in\Circle$. These definitions are such that if the parameter ray at angle $\theta$ lands (or accumulates) at $c\in\partial \M$, then $h(\theta)=\tilde h(c)$. Our definitions are entirely combinatorial so we do not have to worry about topological subtleties such whether the Julia set is locally connected or whether a (generalized) Hubbard tree exists and, if so, whether it is compact. Of course, in the cases where the usual definitions of topological entropy apply, our definition agrees with them.
Our first result goes back to a bet between Bill Thurston and John Hubbard in the spring of 2012 and helped settle this bet soon after.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Core Entropy]
Both entropy functions, $\tilde h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ and $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$, are continuous.
\end{theorem}
We prove continuity of $h$ in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}; the fact that this implies continuity of $\tilde h$ is easy and is explained in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{EntropyGraphPlain.pdf}
}
\caption{The graph of the core entropy function $h\colon[0,1/2]\to[0,\log 2]$ (by Bill Thurston).}
\end{figure}
Our second result settles a conjecture of Giulio Tiozzo \cite[Conjecture~1.6]{TiozzoThesis}.
\begin{theorem}[Local Maximal of Core Entropy]
\lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We will prove this in Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj}.
In Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}, we define a wake as a closed interval in $\Circle$ bounded by two rational angles so that the corresponding rays land together (or more generally as any closed interval for which the two boundary angles have the same angled internal address, so the corresponding parameter rays land together at the same point in $\M$, or at least in its combinatorial models).
Bill Thurston inspired a number of people to investigate core entropy. In particular, there are a survey on current work and open problems by Tan Lei~\cite{TanLeiEntropy}, a manuscript by Wolf Jung \cite{Jung}, and two manuscripts by Giulio Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoThesis,TiozzoPaper}. An independent proof of continuity of core entropy can be found in the recent manuscript \cite{TiozzoPaper}.
\emph{Acknowledgements}. We would like to thank Henk Bruin, John Hubbard, Tan Lei, Mikhail Lyubich, John Milnor, Bill Thurston, Giulio Tiozzo, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and especially Wolf Jung for interesting and helpful discussions. In the spring of 2014, we had the opportunity to give various presentations about this result in Bremen, Moscow and Stony Brook, and we thank the audiences for their questions and suggestions.
Finally, we would like to thank Cornell University and the ICERM institute in Providence for their hospitality and support in the spring of 2012 where many of our initial discussions were carried out.
\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Definitions}
\label{Sec:Definitions}
In this section we introduce our combinatorial definition of topological entropy that applies to all polynomials with connected Julia set, whether or not they are locally connected and whether or not they have a (generalized) Hubbard tree, and if so whether the latter is compact. One advantage of our approach is that we work in an entirely combinatorial setting, so we never have to worry about topological issues.
\begin{definition}[Invariant Lamination and Entropy Associated to External Angle]
\label{Def:CoreEntropy}
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$, there is a unique invariant quadratic lamination where the minor leaf either ends at $\theta$ or is the degenerate leaf at $\theta$. This lamination will be called $L_\theta$.
A \emph{precritical leaf of generation $n$} in this lamination will be any leaf on the backwards orbit of one of the two major leaves that takes $n$ generations to map to the minor leaf.
The \emph{$\alpha$ gap} is either the leaf connecting the two angles $1/3$ and $2/3$, or it is the unique gap that is fixed by the dynamics (this is a finite polygon).
We call a precritical leaf \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative, and define $N(n)=N_\theta(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical leaves of generation $n$. We define the \emph{core entropy} of this lamination as $h=h(\theta):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_\theta(n)$. If the $\alpha$ gap does not exist, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $N_{\theta}(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the core entropy of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\begin{remark}
A natural question is whether the $\limsup$ in the definition of entropy can be replaced by a simple $\lim$. This is not always so: Wolf Jung kindly pointed out to us the example of $c=c(9/56)$ where the Hubbard tree has the shape of a $\textsf{Y}$ so that the branch point is fixed and one endpoint maps to the second, which maps to the third, which in turn maps to the branch point. Here $N(n)=0$ for infinitely many $n$ while $h=(\log 2)/3>0$. There are thus counterexamples when the dynamics is renormalizable. We prove that renormalizability is the only obstruction (see Corollary~\ref{Cor:ExistenceLimit}). For now, observe that in the postcritically finite non-renormalizable case, the limit exists and equals the $\limsup$ because the associated subshift of finite type is irreducible.
\end{remark}
Thurston showed that the union of all minor leaves of all invariant quadratic laminations forms itself a lamination, called the \emph{quadratic minor lamination} QML \cite{ThurstonLaminations}. It turns out that $h$ is naturally defined on QML: since both ends of any leaf in QML define the same lamination, we can first extend the definition of $h$ to each separate leaf on QML. Complementary components of leaves in QML are called \emph{gaps}, and they come in two kids: either they are finite polygons (corresponding to Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters) or have infinitely many boundary leaves (and describe hyperbolic components). In both cases, it is easy to see that $h$ is constant on all boundary leaves of any gap, so $h$ naturally extends to the disk on which QML is defined.
The equivalence relation defining QML is closed, so the quotient of the supporting closed unit disk by collapsing all leaves to points yields a topological Hausdorff space called the ``abstract Mandelbrot set'' $\M_{abs}$ (this construction is known as Douady's ``pinched disk model'' of $\M$). Since $h$ is constant on fibers of the quotient map $q\colon QML\to \M_{abs}$, $h$ is naturally a function on $\M_{abs}$.
Finally, there is the natural projection $\pi\colon\M\to\M_{abs}$ from the Mandelbrot set $\M$ to the abstract Mandelbrot set $\M_{abs}$. It is defined by mapping every landing point $c(\theta)$ of any rational parameter ray $\theta$ to the equivalence class of the angle $\theta$; then $\pi$ is the unique continuous map with this property.
\looseness-1
We thus obtain a unique map $\tilde h=h\circ\pi\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$, and continuity of $\tilde h$ follows from continuity of $h$, with continuity of $\pi$ being well known.
More specifically, the map $\tilde h$ can also be constructed explicitly as follows.
\begin{definition}[Entropy Associated to Quadratic Polynomial in $\M$]
\label{Def:CoreEntropyTilde}
Let $p_c(z):=z^2+c$ be any quadratic polynomial with $c\in\C$ for which the critical value is in the Julia set, and let $\theta$ be the external angle of any dynamic ray that lands or accumulates at $c$. The \emph{critical ray pair} will be the ray pair $RP(\theta/2,(1+\theta)/2)$, and a precritical ray pair of generation $n$ will be any ray pair on the backwards orbit of the critical ray pair and that takes $n$ iterations to map to the ray $R(\theta)$.
If $p_c$ is such that the critical value is in the Fatou set, then it has an attracting or parabolic orbit and there is a unique periodic characteristic ray pair; precritical ray pairs are then defined as ray pairs on its backward orbit.
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the \emph{core entropy} of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
Note that we use the term ``separation'' in a combinatorial sense: the two rays in a separating ray pairs either land together or accumulate at the same fiber.
The usual definition of core entropy is modeled after the postcritically finite case: here, the Hubbard tree is a finite tree with a finite and forward invariant set of marked points (the critical point and its forward orbit, as well as all branch points). The finite set of edges on the tree form a Markov chain with associated transition matrix, where the matrix element $M_{i,j}$ is $0$, $1$, or $2$ if the edge $e_i$ covers the edge $e_j$ respectively $0$, $1$, or $2$ times. Having only positive real entries, this matrix has a leading eigenvalue which is real, and its logarithm is defined as the core entropy of the given postcritically finite parameter.
This definition coincides with the classical definition of topological entropy of general dynamical systems, and it also applies in the postcritically infinite case as long as the Hubbard tree is defined (i.e.\ the Julia set is path connected) and still finite. However, the number of edges of the Hubbard trees is not locally bounded even among postcritically finite maps, which makes entropy estimates based on these transition matrices difficult.
It is well known, at least in the postcritically finite case, that if $x$ is any point on the Hubbard tree and $N_x(n)$ is the number of preimages of $x$ of generation $n$, then $h=\limsup_n \log N_x(n)$ is the core entropy. Since each of the finitely many edges, except those within ``renormalizable little Julia sets'', will cover the entire tree after finitely many iterations, one can as well count only those preimages of $x$ that are on an arbitrary subset of the edges of the Hubbard tree, as long as at least one of these edges is not in a renormalizable little Julia set. For instance, instead of counting precritical leaves on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (as in our definition above) we may count preimages on $[\alpha,\beta]$ (as we will do in Section~\ref{Sec:Continuity}) or on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
\begin{lemma}[Definitions of Core Entropy Coincide]
\label{Lem:defEntropy} \lineclear
For postcritically finite polynomials, the core entropy as in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} coincides with the usual definition (in terms of transition matrices on finite Hubbard trees).
If $p_c$ has the property that the critical value is in the impression of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$, then the core entropy of $p_c$ equals the core entropy of the lamination $L_\theta$.
\end{lemma}
It is well known that if several parameter rays accumulate at the same parameter in $\M$, then the laminations associated to their corresponding angles coincide, so these angles have the same entropy.
If $\theta\in\Circle$ is a rational angle, we define $c(\theta)$ as the landing point in $\M$ of the parameter ray at angle $\theta$, and within any connected Julia set we define $z(\theta)$ as the landing point of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$.
If $c,\tilde c$ are two parameters in $\M$, we say $c\prec \tilde c$ if there is a parameter ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ at periodic angles that separates $\tilde c$ simultaneously from $c$ and from the origin.
\begin{lemma}[Monotonicity of Lamination and of Entropy]
\label{Lem:Monotonicity}
If $c\prec \tilde c$, then $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ for all $n$ and thus $h(\tilde c)\ge h(c)$. Moreover, any characteristic leaf in $L_c$ also occurs in $L_{\tilde c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is routine to check that any precritical leaf of $c$ also ``occurs'' in the dynamics (or the lamination) of $\tilde c$: the major leaf (or leaves) in $L_{\tilde c}$ separate the two major leaves in $L_c$. Precritical leaves in $L_{c}$ are preimages of the pair of major leaves (the preimages of this pair are always ``parallel'', i.e.\ not separated by the critical value, because otherwise the forward orbit of the critical value would have to intersect the domain bounded by the two major leaves). Each pair of preimages surrounds one preimage of the major leaf of $\tilde c$ (or a pair of preimages of the major leaves), and when such a preimage separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative in $L_c$, then it also does so for $L_{\tilde c}$. Therefore, $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ and $\tilde h(\tilde c)\ge \tilde h(c)$.
The statement about characteristic leaves (or characteristic ray pairs) is well known and follows, for instance, from Milnor's Orbit Portraits \cite{MiOrbits}.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Topological Surgery on dyadic Hubbard trees}
Recall the vein structure of $\M$: every dyadic parameter $c$ has a unique \emph{long vein} $V(c)$, that is an injective arc connecting $c$ to $0$, subject to the condition that it traverses hyperbolic components along internal rays. (The existence of such arcs is a non-trivial theorem, established by Jeremy Kahn using Yoccoz' puzzle results, and by Johannes Riedl using quasiconformal surgery. However, it is sufficient to use a weaker combinatorial version of this result, defining the combinatorial arc as the set of postsingularly finite parameters that separate $c$ from the origin, together with the induced order.) The \emph{vein} of $c$ is the shortest closed sub-arc of the long vein connecting $c$ to the union of the long veins of all dyadic parameters of lower generation than $c$.
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then it is well known that their long veins intersect in an arc $[0,x]$, where $x$ is postcritically finite; this result is known as the ``branch theorem'' of $\M$ \cite{Orsay,MandelBranch}.
\begin{definition}[Directly Subordinate Parameter $c\lhd c'$]
\label{Def:DirectlySubordinate} \lineclear
We say that $ c$ is \emph{directly subordinate} to $c'$ and write $c\lhd c'$ if the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$; in addition, any dyadic parameter whose vein terminates at $0$ is declared to be subordinate to $c=-2$ with dyadic angle $1/2$.
\end{definition}
If $c\lhd c'$, then necessarily the external angle of $c'$ has lower denominator than that of $c$.
Note that this is not a transitive relation and thus not a partial order. A few directly subordinate dyadic parameters are illustrated in Figure~\ref{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\framebox{\includegraphics{DirectlySubordinate_Fig2.pdf}}
\caption{Illustration of directly subordinate parameters: we have $c(3/16)\lhd c(1/4)$, $c(1/4)\lhd c(1/2)$, and $c(3/8)\lhd c(1/2)$. Arrows indicate where the vein to some dyadic parameter terminates at the vein of the dyadic parameter to which it is directly subordinate.}
\label{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}[Entropy Between Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} \lineclear
a) If $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $N(n)\le N'(n)$ for all $n$, and $N(n)<N'(n)$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
\noindent b) If $c\lhd c'$ are both dyadic, then $\tilde h(c)<\tilde h(c')$.
\end{theorem}
Here $N(n)$ and $N'(n)$ denote the numbers of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ for $p_c$ and for $p_{c'}$. This immediately implies a weak version of the Tiozzo conjecture:
\begin{corollary}[Dyadic Version of Tiozzo Conjecture]
\label{Cor:DyadicTiozzoConjecture}\lineclear
Every dyadic angle $\theta$ has a neighborhood on which $h$, restricted to dyadic angles, assumes its unique maximum at $\theta$ (a dyadic version of the Tiozzo conjecture).
\end{corollary}
%\newpage
Let us now state the Correspondence Theorem relating the combinatorics of dynamical and parameter ray pairs. Following Milnor~\cite{MiOrbits}, a periodic or preperiodic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ (with $\phi^-,\phi^+\in\Circle$) in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ is called \emph{characteristic} if the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together in such a way that they separate the critical value $c$ from the critical point $0$ as well as from all other rays landing at $\cup_{k\ge 0}p_{c}^{\circ k}(x)$.
\begin{theorem}[Correspondence Theorem]
\label{thm:Corresp} \lineclear
A dynamic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ with $\phi^\pm$ rational is characteristic if and only if the parameter rays with angles $\phi^-$ and $\phi^+$ land together and separate the parameters $c$ and $0$ from each other.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}[Monotonicity of Rational Lamination on Hubbard Tree]
\label{Cor:CountPartsHubTree}
Let $c,c'\in\M$ be two postcritically finite parameters such that $c\prec c'$. Suppose that in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ two periodic or preperiodic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together at some point in the Hubbard tree of $p_c$, but not on the backwards orbit of the critical value. Then in the dynamical plane of $c'$ the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ also land together and the landing point is in the Hubbard tree of $c'$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
In the dynamic plane of $p_c$, let $x$ be the landing point of the dynamic ray pair $RP(\theta^-,\theta^+)$; it is by hypothesis in the Hubbard tree of $c$. Let $x':=p_c^{\circ t}(x)$ be the characteristic point on the orbit of $x$: this is the unique point that separates the critical value from all other points on the forward orbit of $x$. Let $(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ be the characteristic angles at $x'$ (the ray pair at $x'$ that separates the critical value from all other rays on its orbit).
By Theorem~\ref{thm:Corresp}, the rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ form a ray pair for all parameters in the wake of $c$, and in particular for $c'$. The same is true for all pull-back ray pairs, as long as they are not in the component of $\C\sm RP(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ containing the critical value; and this is the case for the rays landing at $x$. The landing point is clearly in the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}[Dynamical Counterpart to Parameter]
\label{Def:DynamCounterpart} \lineclear
Let $c$ be a postcritically finite parameter and suppose $c'\succ c$. Then a (pre)periodic point $x$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ is called the \emph{dynamical counterpart to $c$} if
\begin{itemize}
\item
if $c$ is preperiodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the preperiodic dynamic rays at the same angles as $c$;
\item
if $c$ is periodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the periodic dynamic rays bounding (in the parameter plane) the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the periodic case, $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_c$, and the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$ is bounded by a periodic parameter ray pair landing at $\partial H_c$. The angles of this ray pair are the angles of two rays landing at $x$. For example, the $\alpha$ fixed point is the dynamical counterpart of $c=0$. In the preperiodic case, it is known that all dynamic rays with the same angles of the rays landing at $c$ also land together in the dynamical plane of $c'$.
An equivalent definition is that $x$ is the unique repelling periodic or preperiodic point in the dynamical plane of $c'$ such that the itinerary of $x$ (with respect to the critical point) equals the (upper) kneading sequence of $c$.
\begin{lemma}[Directly Subordinate Dyadics]
\label{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics} \lineclear
\looseness-1
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $c\lhd c'$ if and only if there is a postcritically finite parameter $c_*\in\M$ so that $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation within any sublimb of $c_*$, and $c$ is in a different sublimb of $c_*$ than $c'$.
In this case, denoting the external angles of $c$ and $c'$ by $\theta$ and $\theta'$, respectively, then in the dynamics of $c$ (or any other parameter in the same sublimb of $c_*$) there is a repelling (pre)periodic point $x_*$ that is the landing point of at least three dynamic rays that separate the dynamic rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$. The point $x_*$ is the dynamical counterpart to $c_*$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any two dyadic parameters are endpoints of $\M$, so by the Branch Theorem of the Mandelbrot set there is a unique postcritically finite parameter $c_*$ that contains $c$ and $c'$ in two different of its sublimbs. Let $c_0$ be the unique dyadic of least generation in any of the sublimbs of $c_*$; then $c_*$ is on the long vein of all three of $c_0$, $c$, and $c'$, and it is on the vein of $c_0$.
The assumption that $c\lhd c'$ means that the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$, and hence it must terminate at the parameter $c_*$, so $c_*$ is an interior point of the vein of $c'$. Since $c_*$ is also an interior point of the vein of $c_0$, it follows that $c'=c_0$ (two veins can never have more than one point in common).
Conversely, if $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation in the sublimb of $c_*$, then $c_*$ is in the interior of the vein of $c'$ and the vein of $c$ terminates at $c_*$. This proves the first claim.
For the second claim, we first consider the case that $c_*$ is a Mi\-siu\-re\-wicz-Thurston parameter; it is then the landing point of $s\ge 3$ rational parameter rays, say at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$, so that the parameter rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$ are in different sectors with respect to these parameter rays. Every parameter in any sublimb of $c_*$ has the property that the dynamic rays at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$ land together at a repelling preperiodic point, and the claim follows.
If $c_*$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, then the parameter $c$ is in a sublimb at internal angle $p/q\neq 1/2$, and in the dynamical plane of $c$ (or any parameter within the same sublimb) there is a repelling periodic point that is the landing point of $q\ge 3$ dynamic rays that separates the angles $0$, $\theta$ and $\theta'$ so that $\theta$ is in the largest sector not containing the angle $0$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
The main step in proving Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} is a topological surgery on Hubbard trees, as follows:
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Relation Between Subordinate Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} %\lineclear
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters with external angles $\theta$ and $\theta'$, let $H_c$ be the Hubbard tree of $c$, and let $H \supset H_c$ be the connected hull of the critical orbit and of the orbit of $z(\theta')$. Let $x$ be the branch point of the arcs from $0$ to $c$ and to $z(\theta')$. If $p_c$ is the natural map on $H$, define a map $f\colon H\to H$ as follows: choose a homeomorphism $\rho\colon[x,c]\to[x,z(\theta')]$ fixing $x$ and let
\[
f(z):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \rho\circ p_c(z) & \text{if $p_c(z)\in[x,c]$} \\
p_c(z) & \text{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.
\]
Let $H'$ be the connected hull within $H$ of the orbit of $0$ under $f$. Then $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have a connected tree $H$ containing the critical point $0$, and with respect to $f$ the orbit of $0$ is still finite (it still terminates at the $\beta$ fixed point). Therefore, $(H',f)$ is a finite tree with a continuous self-map, and the dynamics is locally injective except at the critical point $0$. Since there are at most $2$ branches at $0$, the map is globally at most $2:1$. Every endpoint is by definition on the critical orbit, so $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of a postcritically finite polynomial in which the critical orbit lands at the $\beta$ fixed point at the desired number of iterations. Let $c''$ be the corresponding parameter and $\theta''$ be the external angle; we have $\theta''=a''/2^{k'}$.
It remains to prove that $\theta''=\theta'$ and thus $c''=c'$.
Since $c\lhd c'$, there is a postcritically finite branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, that separates $c$ from $c'$, and the external angles of $c_*$ are the external angles of $x$ in the dynamical plane of $c$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). In the dynamical plane of $c''$, the point $x$ has the same external angles because it has the same period and preperiod and the dynamics of the subtree connecting the orbit of $x$ is unaffected by the surgery (except the bit around the critical point that maps past $x$). Hence $\theta''$ is the unique dyadic of least generation that is separated from the angle $0$ by the angles of $x$, and the same is true for $\theta'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The fact that $c''=c'$ can also be shown using spiders \cite{Spiders} and Thurston's theorem. Let us topologically extend the map $f:H' \to H'$ to a continuous map on $\C$ as follows. First, we set $f$ to be $p_c$ on the dynamic rays $R({2^{t}\theta'})$ of $p_c$, where $t\in\{0,1,\dots, k'\}$. There are $k'+1$ topological discs in the complement of $H'\cup_{t\ge 0} R({2^{t}\theta'})$ and the map $f$ easily extends to each of them as a homeomorphism. The new map $f$ is a topological polynomial for which $\bigcup_t R({2^{t}\theta'})$ forms an invariant spider. Since this spider is equivalent to a standard invariant spider of $c'$, we get $c'=c''$ by Thurston rigidity \cite{DHThurston,Spiders}.
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Injective Dynamics of Last Edge]
\label{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}
In any dyadic Julia set, consider any dyadic angle $\theta=a/2^k$ with $k\ge 1$ and let $x$ be the point where the arc from $z(\theta)$ to $\alpha$ is attached to the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generations $a'/2^{k'}$ with $k'<k$. Then $[z(\theta),x]$ maps injectively for $k$ iterations to an interval $[\beta,y]\subset[\beta,\alpha]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For every integer $m\ge 0$, let $T_m$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $m$. Let $f$ be the map on the Julia set.
The edge $[z(\theta),x]\subset \ovl{T_k\sm T_{k-1}}$ certainly maps forward homeomorphically one generation to an arc $[z(2\theta),x']$, where $x'=f(x)\in f(T_{k-1})$.
We claim that $[z(2\theta),x']\subset \ovl{T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2}}$ so that the inductive step applies and completes the proof.
We first show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, $T_{k-2}$ is the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k-2$. Consider an endpoint $y$ of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$. If $f(y)\in T_{k-2}$ was not an endpoint, so it was connected to at least two edges in $T_{k-2}$, then $y$ would have to be connected to at least two edges in $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$, a contradiction. Thus every endpoint of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$ is a dyadic endpoint of generation at least $k-1$ and hence $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
Finally, if $[z(2\theta),x']$ intersects $T_{k-2}$, then $[z(\theta),x]$ intersects $T_{k-1}$, and by hypothesis this intersection is the single point $x$. Hence $[z(2\theta),x']\subset (T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2})\cup\{x'\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In this lemma, the hypothesis that the polynomial be dyadic was stated only for convenience. All we are using is that the Julia set is path connected (if there are bounded Fatou components, the notation needs minor adjustments).
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Homeomorphic Preimage of Arc]
\label{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}
Suppose that $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters and let $\theta,\theta'$ be their external angles. In the Julia set of $c$, let $x$ be the branch point between $0$, $z(\theta)=c$ and $z(\theta')=:z'$. If $\theta=a/2^k$, then there is a point $y'\in(z',x)$ so that $p_c^{\circ k}\colon [z',y']\to p_c^{\circ k}([z',y'])= p_c^{\circ k}([ c,x])$ is a homeomorphism.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that $[c,x]$ maps homeomorphically for $k$ iterations to a subinterval of $[\beta,\alpha]$; define $y:=p_c^{\circ k}(x)\in(\beta,\alpha]$.
Similarly, there is a point $x'\in[z',0]$ so that $[z',x']$ maps forward homeomorphically for $k'$ iterations (if $\theta'=a'/2^{k'}$). We have
$x'\in[x,0]$ (or equivalently $x\in[z',x']$) because $c\lhd c'$, i.e.\ $c$ is \emph{directly} subordinate to $c'$.
More precisely, the external angles of the dynamic rays landing at $x$ are exactly the external angles of the parameter rays landing at a branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, where the vein of $c$ terminates (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). Analogously, the same is true for the point $x'$ and the vein of $c'$; let $c'_*$ be this branch point. But since $c\lhd c'$, it follows that $c'_*$ separates $c_*$ from the origin, and hence, by the Correspondence Theorem, $x'$ separates $x$ from the origin.
%\newpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{HubbardTreeBranchPic4.pdf}
}
\caption{Illustration of the relative position of various points in the Hubbard tree of $c$ in the proof of Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}. Note that we do not know or need the relative position between $0$, $y$, and $y''$; in particular, we do not claim $y''\in[\beta,y]$.
}
\label{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}
\end{figure}
Let $y'':=p_c^{\circ k'}(x)$; then $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon[z',x]\to[\beta,y'']$ is a homeomorphism. Iterating this $k-k'$ further times, the image arc terminates at $\beta$ and at $y$, but it can no longer be injective (the map $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[c,x]\to [\beta,y]$ is a homeomorphism, and $p_c^{\circ k}$ is a local homeomorphism near $x$ because $x$ cannot be on the critical orbit).
There is a branch $p_c^{-1}\colon[\beta,\alpha]\to[\beta,-\alpha]$; let $[\beta,y''']$ be the image of $[\beta,y]$ under the $k-k'$-th iterate of this branch.
Observe that $[y''',\beta]\subsetneq[y'',\beta]$ because otherwise $p_c^{\circ (k-k')}$ restricted to $[\beta,y'']$ would have degree $1$. Pulling back $k'$ times we obtain an interval $[z',y']\subset[z',x]$ so that $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon [z',y']\to[\beta,y''']$ and $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[z',y']\to[\beta,y]$ are homeomorphisms, as claimed.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Injection Between Precritical Points]
\label{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters. There exists a generation-preserving injection $B$ from the set of precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ to the set of precritical points in $[c',-\alpha]$ of $p_{c'}$. Moreover, $B$ could be taken to satisfy the following properties (A)--(C). Suppose $\zeta\in [c,-\alpha]$ is a precritical point.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] For $k\ge 0$ we have $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))\in [c',-\alpha]$. Moreover, if $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$, then
\[
B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta)).
\]
\item[(B)] Assume $c_*$ is a postcritically finite parameter such that $c_* \prec c$ and $c_* \prec c'$. Let $x_*$ and $x'_*$ be the dynamic counterparts of $c_*$ in the dynamical planes of $c$ and $c'$. Then $\zeta\in [x_*,-\alpha]$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in [x'_*,-\alpha]$.
\item[(C)] There is a sub-interval $J\subset [c', \alpha]$ such that $p^{\circ k }_{c'}(J)=[-\alpha, \alpha ]$ for some $k>0$ and such that the image of $B$ is in $[c',-\alpha]\setminus J$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition~\ref{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} and its notation, we may identify $p_{c'}:H_{c'}\to H_{c'}$ with $f:H'\to H'$. Under this identification $x'_*$ is $x_*$ which is a periodic or preperiodic point that never visits $[x,c]$ under iterates of $p_c$. We will now construct a bijection $B$ between precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and those precritical points in $[z',-\alpha]\setminus [y',x]$ of $f$ for which the orbit never visits $[y',x]$, where $y'$ is specified in Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage} (see Figure~\ref{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}).
In fact, our bijection will preserve the itinerary with respect to $H\sm\{0\}$, except for $k$ iterations along the orbit from $[c,x]$ to $[\beta,y]=p_c^{\circ k}([c,x])$ (resp.\ from $[z',y']$ to $[\beta,y]$).
Our proof proceeds by induction on the number of times, say $m$, that an orbit of a precritical point $\zeta$ runs through $[c,x]$ (not counting $\zeta$ itself). We start by those precritical points on $[c,x]$ (for the map $p_c$) that never run through $(c,x)$ again, that is with the case $m=0$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}, an appropriate branch of $f^{\circ(-k)}\circ p_c^{\circ k}$ sends $[c,x]$ homeomorphically to $[z',y']$; call this branch $\eta\colon[c,x]\to [z',y']$. Then for any $a\in[c,x]$, we have $p_c^{\circ k}(a)=f^{\circ k}(\eta(a))$ and the future orbits of these points under $p_c$ respectively under $f$ coincide as long as the orbits avoid $[c,x]$. Note that all precritical points on $[c,x]$ must have generation at least $k$. We thus obtain an injection, say $B_0$, of precritical points with $m=0$.
Every precritical point $\zeta\in[c,x]$ of generation $n$ and with $m=0$ is the common endpoint of two adjacent sub-intervals of $[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after $n$ iterations: we have $p_c^{\circ n}(\zeta)=c$ and $p_c^{\circ (n-1)}(\zeta)=0$, so we can pull the entire interval $[c,x]$ back in two ways (with a choice in the first step) until we end at $\zeta$. The pull-back of the entire interval $[c,x]$ is possible because no critical value can interfere (the critical orbit visits only endpoints of the tree), and the resulting interval is in $[c,x]$ because the Hubbard tree is unbranched on $[c,x)$ and the orbit of $x$ never enters $[c,x)$.
There is an analogous result about precritical points $\zeta'\in[z',y']$ of $f$ with $m=0$ and sub-intervals of $[z',y']$ that map to $[z',y']$: by construction of $y'$, the point $\zeta'$ has generation $n\ge k$, and there is a precritical point $\zeta=\eta^{-1}(\zeta')\in[c,x]$. The point $\zeta$ has neighborhood, say $I_\zeta\subset [c,x]$ that maps $2:1$ onto $[c,x]$ (the union of the two intervals constructed above), and then $\zeta'$ has a neighborhood $I_{\zeta'}\subset[z',y']$ with $p_c^{\circ k}(I_{\zeta'})=p_c^{\circ k}(I_\zeta)\subset[\beta,y]$.
The bijection $B_0$ of precritical points with $m=0$ thus extends to a bijection between intervals $I\subset[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after some number of iterations without visiting $(c,x)$ before, and intervals $I'\subset [z',y']$ that map homeomorphically onto $[z',y']$ after the same number of iterations and without ever visiting $(z',y')$; this bijection respects the number of iterations as well as the order along the intervals within $[c,x]$ and $[z',y']$ (the intervals are obviously disjoint). Denote this bijection of intervals by $B^*_0$.
Now suppose the statement is shown for all precritical points on $[c,x]$ that visit $(c,x)$ at most $m$ times, for some $m\ge 0$; in particular, we have an injection, say $B_m$, from precritical points on $(c,x)$ that map into $(c,x)$ exactly $m$ times, to precritical points on $(z',y')$ that map into $(z',y')$ exactly $m$ times. Consider any precritical point $\zeta\in(c,x)$ that visits $(c,x)$ exactly $m+1$ times, and let $s$ be minimal such that $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$. Then there is an interval $I\ni \zeta$ so that $p_c^{\circ s}\colon I\to[c,x]$ is a homeomorphism (same reasoning as above).
Let $I':=B^*_0(I)$. Then $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$ is a precritical point that visits $(c,x)$ only $m$ times, and $B_{m+1}(\zeta)=\zeta':= f^{\circ(-s)}\circ B_m \circ p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)$, choosing the branch $f^{\circ(-s)}\colon [y',z']\to I'$.
Since the map $B^*_0$ is injective, different intervals $I$ land in disjoint intervals $I'$, and since $B_m$ is injective by induction, the restriction of $B_{m+1}$ that run through any particular $I$ is injective too, so in total $B_{m+1}$ is injective as claimed.
This takes care of all precritical points on $[c,x]$, and we still have to deal with those on $[x,-\alpha]$. But those with orbits that never run through $[c,x]$ are unaffected by the changed dynamics, and the injection easily extends to those that map into $[c,x]$ under $p_c$.
It remains to show that the map $B$ satisfies Properties (A) -- (C). Let us extend $B_0^*$ to all intervals in $[x,-\alpha]$ that are injective preimages of $[c,x]$ and never run through $[c,x]$ before mapping into $[c,x]$. It is easy to see that $B_0^*(I)\subset I$ for every such interval $I$, because $[z',y']\subset [z',x]$ and $g_c^{\circ -1}[c,x]=f^{-1}[z',x]$, and induction is applied. Since $x_*$ never visits $[x,c]$, we see that $x_*\not \in I$ for every maximal pre-image $I$ of $[c,x]$. Also, by construction, $\zeta \in I$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in I$ for every precritical $\zeta$ and an interval $I$ as above. Therefore, $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ are on the same side of $x_*$. It is clear that $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ have the same return times to $[c,-\alpha]$ and $[z',-\alpha]$ because $p_c^{\circ k}[c,x]=f^{\circ k}[z',y']$. And the dynamical relation $B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))$ holds by construction. Thus Properties (A) and (B) hold. To prove (C) set $J$ to be any pre-image of $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ so that $J\subset [x,y']$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees}]
From Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} we have an injection of precritical points of $p_{c}$ of any given generation on $[-\alpha,c]$ to precritical points of $p_{c'}$ of the same generation on $[-\alpha',c']$, and by claim (B) this injection restricts to the arcs $[-\alpha,\alpha]$ and $[-\alpha',\alpha']$. This immediately proves the first half of part a), and the second half follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}.
Part b) of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}: a precritical orbit of $p_{c'}$ has strictly more choices than a precritical orbit of $p_c$ thanks to the interval $J$. More precisely, consider the Hubbard tree $H_{c'}$ of $p_{c'}$; and let us add the forward orbit of the ends of $J$ into the vertex set of $H_{c'}$. Denote by$A'$ the associated automaton of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$, see Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} for a formal definition of an associated automaton. And let $A'_*\subset A'$ be the sub-automaton obtained from $A'$ by removing all states within the interval $J$ as well as all arrows starting or ending at the removed states. Then the entropy of $c$ is bounded by the entropy of $A'_*$ by claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}, while the entropy of $c'$ is equal to the entropy of $A'$. Since $A'$ is irreducible, the entropy of $A'$ is strictly bigger than the entropy of $A'_*$.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Irrational Angles and the Tiozzo Conjecture}
In this brief section, we will complete the proof of the Tiozzo Conjecture.
\begin{lemma}[Bound for Irrational Angles]
\label{Lem:IrrationalAngle} \lineclear
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$ (dyadic or not) and every $n\in\N$ there is an $\eps>0$ so that $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ for all dyadic angles $\theta'$ with $|\theta'-\theta|<\eps$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
All the relevant precritical points correspond to non-degenerate leaves in the lamination, and there are finitely many of level $n$. As the characteristic angle $\theta$ changes, say by some $\eps>0$, then a precritical leaf of generation $k$ changes continuously by $\eps/2^k$, except when an endpoint of that precritical leaf moves through $\theta$, that is, when $\theta$ itself is periodic of period dividing $k$.
In the exceptional case that $\theta$ is periodic, there are preimage leaves that terminate at $\theta$ itself, but these do not separate and are thus not counted.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[The Tiozzo Conjectures]
\label{Cor:TiozzoConj} \lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\item[d)]
Within every wake, for each $n$ the function $N_\theta(n)$ assumes its maximum at the dyadic of least generation (of course, this maximum is not unique).
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Fix a dyadic angle $\theta_0$ and let $I=I(\theta_0)\subset\Circle$ be the open interval of angles $\theta$ for which the combinatorial arcs to $c(\theta)$ intersect the interior of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$ (not the long vein). In other words, if $c_*$ is the endpoint of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$, then $I$ consists of the angles within the same subwake of $c_*$ that $c(\theta)$ is in. Clearly $\theta_0\in I$. Every dyadic angle in $I$ is either directly or indirectly subordinate to $\theta_0$ (where the latter means that there is a finite sequence of dyadic angles ending at $\theta_0$ so that each is directly subordinate to the next).
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} part b), we know that $h$ restricted to dyadic angles in $I$ has its unique maximum at $\theta_0$.
We claim that for every $\theta\in I$ and every $n\in\N$ we have $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ and hence $h(\theta)\le h(\theta_0)$. Indeed, for every $n$ there is a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ sufficiently close to $\theta$ with $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:IrrationalAngle}), and $N_{\theta'(n)}\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ by definition of $I$. Therefore $\theta_0$ is a (weak) local maximum of $N_\theta(n)$ and of $h$.
However, if $\theta$ is dyadic, then we even have $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$. If $c(\theta)\prec c(\theta_0)$, then $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$ by monotonicity along dyadic veins. Otherwise, choose a new dyadic $\theta'$ so that $\theta\in I(\theta')$ but $\theta_0\not\in I(\theta')$. We then have $h(\theta)\le h(\theta')<h(\theta_0)$. Therefore, $\theta_0$ is the unique global maximum within $I(\theta_0)\ni\theta_0$. This proves claim a) in the stronger form that $h$ has a unique global maximum on $I(\theta_0)$, and this occurs at $\theta_0$.
For part c), consider any hyperbolic component $W$ and let $I$ be the open interval of angles within its wake. Let $\theta_W$ be the unique dyadic of lowest generation within $I$. Then $I(\theta_W)\supset I$, and on this interval $h$ has its unique global maximum at $\theta_W$. Now suppose $W$ is a wake that is not the wake of a hyperbolic component: then either it is one of the subwakes of a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters, or an irrational wake (bounded by two irrational angles with equal angled internal address). But such wakes are exhausted by wakes of hyperbolic components, so the claim holds for them as well. Part d) also follows.
For claim b), suppose $\theta$ is a local maximum of $h$, and let $I\subset\Circle$ be an interval on which $\theta$ is the global maximum. By monotonicity, $\theta$ lands (combinatorially) at an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. If $\theta$ is not dyadic, then choose a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ with $\theta\in I(\theta')\subset I$.
Then the unique global maximum of $h$ within $I(\theta')$ is at $\theta'$, so $\theta=\theta'$ is dyadic.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Continuity of Entropy}
\label{Sec:Continuity}
We start with a combinatorial estimate. A ``combinatorial pattern of length $n$ with gap size $s$'' is a finite sequence of integers $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ with $1\le j_1< j_2 < \dots < j_m< n$ and $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s$ and $n-j_m\ge s$.
\begin{lemma}[Number of Combinatorial Patterns]
\label{Lem:CombinatorialPatterns}
The number of combinatorial patterns of length $n$ with gap size $s$ is at most $e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The number of combinatorial patterns equals the number of binary sequences of length $n$ where two consecutive digits $1$ have distance at least $s$, and so that the final digit is a $1$. Write $n=ks+r$ with $r<s$. Then each block of $s$ consecutive entries has $s+1$ possibilities because it has at most a single $1$, and the last block has $r-1$ digits $0$ followed by a $1$, so it has $1$ possibility. The number of combinatorial patterns is thus at most $(s+1)^k\le e^{k\log(s+1)}\le e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
In the following proof, it will be convenient to define relevant precritical points as precritical points on $[\alpha,\beta]$, i.e.\ precritical leaves separating the two fixed points $\alpha$ and $\beta$ or their corresponding leaves in the lamination (rather than separating $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$ as before).
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Different Counts Yield Identical Entropy]
\label{lem:DifferCounts}
\lineclear
In any invariant quadratic lamination, let $N_1(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves that separate $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$, and let $N_2(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves of generation $n$ separating the leaves corresponding to the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points. Then
\[
\limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_1(n) = \limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_2(n)
\;;
\]
in other words, both counting functions define the same entropy.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $-\alpha\in[\alpha,\beta]$, we clearly have $N_1(n)\le N_2(n)$. To show the converse, we claim that $N_2(n) \le (N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+ N_1(n-2)+\dots) $.
To see this, denote $\alpha_0:=\alpha$ and, recursively, $\alpha_{n+1}$ to be the unique preimage of $\alpha_n$ on $[\alpha,\beta]$, so $\alpha_1=-\alpha$. Then $[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_n]$ maps homeomorphically onto $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n-1}]$ and $[\alpha,\beta]=\bigcup_{n\ge 0}[\alpha_{n},\alpha_{n+1}]$. If $N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n)$ denotes the number of precritical points of generation $n$ on $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]$, then we have $N_{[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_{n+2}]}(n)=N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n-1)$ and $N_{[\alpha_{0},\alpha_{1}]}(n)=N_1(n)$ and indeed $N_2(n) = N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+N_1(n-2)+\dots$. If $N_1\le C e^{(h+\eps)n}$ for all $n$, then $N_2(n)\le 2Cn e^{(h+\eps)n}$. Therefore, $N_1$ and $N_2$ define the same entropy.
\end{proof}
In view of this lemma, we will take the liberty in the following result to count relevant precritical points (leaves) as those separating the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points.
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Bound on Entropy Increase]
\label{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} \lineclear
Suppose $c_1\prec c_2$ and $[c_1,c_2]$ is a (combinatorial) arc in $\M$ such that $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$. Then there is an $s>0$ with the following property: if $[c,c']$ is a dyadic vein of generation at least $s$ that terminates at $c\in [c_1,c_2]$, then $\tilde h(c')-\tilde h(c_2)\le \eps$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $h:=\tilde h(c_2)$. There is a $C>0$ so that all $c\in [c_1,c_2]$ satisfy $N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)\le Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$ for all $n$. We may suppose that $s$ is large enough so that $2C\le e^{(h+\eps/2)s}$. Let $s'\ge s$ be the generation of $c'$.
Let $f' \colon H'\to H'$ denote the Hubbard tree of the dyadic parameter $c'$ and $f\colon H\to H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$ (as endpoint of a dyadic vein in $\M$, $c$ is postcritically finite, so both Hubbard trees exist and are finite). Let $x\in H'$ be the dynamical counterpart of $c$.
Recall that $x$ is a characteristic periodic or preperiodic point in the sense that the entire orbit of $x$ is contained in the closure of the component of $H'\sm\{x\}$ that contains $0$.
In particular, the orbit of $x$ is disjoint from $(x,c']$. It follows that any connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ is either contained in $[x,c']$ or intersects it at most in $\{x\}$. (Otherwise, $x$ would be in the interior of $I$ and after $n$ iterates $x$ would be mapped into $(x,c']$.)
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that
\begin{equation}
(f')^{\circ (s')}([x,c']) \subset[\alpha,\beta]
\;.
\label{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}
\end{equation}
and, moreover, the orbit of $(f')^{\circ m}([x,c'])$ for $m\in \{0,1,\dots , s'-1\}$ does not contain $0$.
By a maximal preimage of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n>0$ we
mean a connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ so that $I\not\subset (f')^{-m}[x,c']$
for every $m\in\{1,2,\dots,n\}$; equivalently, $(f')^{\circ m}(I)\not \subset [x,c']$ for all $m<n$.
We denote by $M$ the set of all maximal preimages of $[x,c']$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$.
An \emph{itinerary} of $I$ will be a sequence $s_{0}s_1\dots s_{n-2}\in\{\0,\1\}^\N$ where each $s_{i}$ describes the connected component of $H'\setminus \{0\}$ containing $(f')^i(I)$ (labeled for instance so that the critical value is in the component with label $\1$).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:PreCritInterv}
There is an itinerary preserving inclusion from
\begin{itemize}
\item the set $M$ of maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n$; to
\item the set of precritical points of $f:H\to H$ of generation $n$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, a maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ belongs to the interval $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H'$ if and only if the corresponding precritical point belongs to $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $[c', c]$ is a dyadic vein, we may associate to $f:H\to H$ and $f'\colon H' \to H'$ the automata $A$ and $A'$ as in Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} such that there is an inclusion $J:A\hookrightarrow A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'} we denote by $e_0$ the unique state of $A'$ containing the critical point.
Then maximal preimages $I$ of $[x,c']$ of generation $n$ are in bijection with paths $s$ in $J( A)$ of length $n-1$ terminating at $e_0$ and starting at states in $[x,\beta]$. Indeed, every such $s$ is uniquely described by a sequence of states $s_0,s_1,\dots , s_{n-2}$ in $A'$ such that $(f')^{\circ i}(I) \subset s_i$. Since $I$ is a maximal preimage, all $s_i$ are in $J(A)$.
Further, $J^{-1}(s)$ defines a unique critical point in $[c,\beta]$ of $f$ because $J^{-1}(s)$ starts at a state in $[c,\beta]$ and terminates at $J^{-1}(e_0)$ containing the critical point. This constructs the required injection.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
By Lemma~\ref{lem:PreCritInterv} the number of intervals in $M$ of generation $n$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$ is bounded above by $Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$.
In order to bound the number of precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of any generation $n$ in the dynamics of $f'\colon H'\to H'$, consider any relevant (i.e.\ between the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ points) precritical point $\ell$ of generation $n$. Let $j_1<j_2<\dots <j_m=n$ be the set of all iterates so that $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$.
Then $\ell$, $(f')^{\circ (j_1+s')}(\ell)$, $(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell)$,\dots , $(f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$ are within $[\alpha,\beta]$; compare \eqref{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}. This also implies that $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s'$.
Let $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}\in M$ be the unique intervals in $M$ containing, respectively,
$\ell, (f')^{\circ(j_1+s')}(\ell),(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell),\dots , (f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$; their respective generations are $j_1, j_2-j_1-s',\dots , j_{m}-j_{m-1}-s'$.
Then $\ell$ has itinerary $\s=s_0s_2\dots s_{n-2}$ of $\ell$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $s_0s_1\dots s_{j_1-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_0$;
\item $s_{j_i}s_{j_i+1}\dots s_{j_i+s'-1}$ is the kneading sequence of $c'$;
\item $s_{j_{i}+s'}s_{j_{i}+s'+1}\dots s_{j_{i+1}-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_i$; and
\item all $s_{j_{i}-1}$ are arbitrary in $\{\0,\1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We justify this as follows:
$(f')^{\circ(j_1-1)} $ maps $I_0$ homeomorphically, while $(f')^{\circ j_1}\colon I_0\to [x,\tilde c]$ is a $2:1$-map, so the first $j_1-2$ iterates do not contain $0$ and all points in $I_0$ have the same entries in their itineraries up to entry number $j_1-2$.
Since $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$, the next iterates are the same as for $[x,c']$ and, in particular, for $c'$, hence equal to the kneading sequence of $c'$, at least before $c'$ lands at the $\beta$ fixed point, that is for $s'-1$ iterations. The iterate $(f')^{\circ (j_i+s')}(\ell)$ is by definition in $I_i$, and this interval travels forward homeomorphically until it covers $0$, which is the iteration before it reaches $[x,c']$ the next time; since the latter is at iterate $j_{i+1}$, the itinerary of $\ell$ coincides with that of $I_i$ until position $j_{i+1}-2$. In the subsequent iterate, the image interval $(f')^{\circ j_{i+1}-j_i-1}(I_i)$ contains $0$, so both entries in the itinerary might be possible.
Now consider the set of all precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of generation $n$ corresponding to a particular combinatorial pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$.
We just showed that in order to determine the itinerary of $\ell$ we only need to specify $s_{j_1-1},s_{j_2-1},\dots , s_{j_m-1}\in \{\0,\1\}$ as well as the intervals $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}$ as above; their numbers we estimated above. Therefore, the total number of precritical points with pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ is at most
\[
2 C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_1-1)} \left(\prod_{i=1}^{m-1} 2C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_{i+1}-j_i-s'-1)}\right)\le2C e^{(h+\eps/2)n}
\]
because $2Ce^{-s'}\le 1$ by hypothesis.
Since the number of combinatorial patterns is at most $e^{\log(s'+1)n/s'}$, it follows that $N_{\tilde c}(n) \le 2 C e^{n(h+\eps/2+\log(s'+1)/s')}$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\tilde h(\tilde c)
&\le \limsup_n \frac{1}{n}\left(\log 2 +\log C + n (h+\eps/2)+\frac{n}{s'}\log(s'+1) \rule{0pt}{11pt} \right)
\\
&\le h+\eps/2+ \frac{\log (s'+1)}{s'} \le h+\eps
\;
\end{align*}
if $s'\ge s$ is sufficiently large.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy Near Veins]
\label{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins} \lineclear
Suppose $\theta\in\Circle$ is such that topological entropy is continuous along the (combinatorial) vein connecting the parameters $0$ to $c(\theta)$ in $\M$. Then $h$ is continuous for all parameters on $[0,c(\theta)]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
It may be helpful to explain the statement. Let $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to \C$ be a parametrization of the (combinatorial) arc $[0,c(\theta)]$. Then the hypothesis says that $h(\gamma(t))$ is continuous for $t\in[0,1]$ (only considering parameters along the arc). The conclusion is that then $h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\gamma(t)$ for all $t$. (Note that this hypothesis is known to be true for all angles $\theta\in\Circle$, except when $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$ at an irrational angle \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}; we will treat the missing case in Section~\ref{Sec:IrratEndpoints}).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, suppose $c_a\prec c_b$ are two parameters in $\M$ with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$; we allow $c_b$ to be a (combinatorial) endpoint of $\M$. Denote by $\text{wake}(c_a)$ the open wake of $c_a$: this is the set of all parameters in $\M$ that are separated from $0$ by two parameter rays landing at (or accumulating at) $c_a$. If $c_a$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then we set $\text{wake}(c_a)$ to be the subwake of $c_a$ containing $c_b$. Similarly $\text{wake}(c_b)$ is defined; if $c_b$ is a combinatorial endpoint of the Mandelbrot set, then $\text{wake}(c_b)=\emptyset$. Set $W:=\ovl{\text{wake}(c_a)}\sm\text{wake}(c_b)$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} there are at most finitely many dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ with $c_i\in [c_a,c_b]$ such that the entropy variation along $[c_i,c'_i]$ exceeds $\eps$, and so that $c_b\not\in(c_i,c'_i]$. We will construct a ``reduced wake'' $W'\subset W$ in which the entropy variation is at most $2\eps$.
By the Branch Theorem \cite{Orsay}, \cite[Theorem~3.1]{MandelBranch}, the points $c_i$ are either Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters or centers of hyperbolic components. In both cases, we will exclude a subwake at $c_i$ from $W$ where the entropy variation is large.
If $c_i$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, let $W_i$ be the subwake of $c_i$ containing $c'_i$ and thus $[c_i,c'_i]$ (this subwake does not contain $c_b$). If $c_i$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_i$, then let $W_i$ be the subwake of $H_i$ that contains $c'_i$ (the root of this wake is a bifurcation parameter on $\partial H_i$).
Set $W':=W\sm \bigcup_i \ovl{W_i}$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj} (the Tiozzo Conjecture), the maximal entropy for angles within $W'$ (or more precisely, the entropy of angles corresponding to rays in $W'$) occurs either at $c_b$ or at a dyadic parameter $c'\in W'$, and in both cases it is at most $\tilde h(c_a)+2\eps$.
To prove continuity of $h$ at $\theta$, we first discuss the case that $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$. By hypothesis, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial vein $[0,c(\theta)]$, so there is a $c_a\in\M$ with $0\prec c_a\prec c(\theta)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c(\theta)) -\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$. Now we use the argument from above and construct a wake $W'$ as described.
Then all angles $\theta'\in W'$ satisfy $|h(\theta')-h(\theta)|\le 2\eps$, and these angles form a neighborhood of $\theta$, which completes the proof in this case.
The second case is that $c(\theta)$ is not an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set and $c(\theta)$ is neither on the boundary of a hyperbolic component nor a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter. We may choose an arc $(c_a,c_b)\ni c(\theta)$ (i.e., $c_a\prec c(\theta)\prec c_b$) with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a)\le 2\eps$ and proceed as above.
If $c(\theta)$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then there are finitely many branches, and the previous argument works separately for all the individual branches.
If $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of a single hyperbolic component $H$, let $c_a\in \partial H$ be the root of $H$ (the boundary point with multiplier $1$) and let $c_b$ be the period-doubling bifurcation point (the boundary point with multiplier $-1$). Then all dyadic parameters $c'\in W=\text{wake}(c_a)\sm\ovl{\text{wake}(c_b)}$ have the endpoints of their veins in $W\setminus \{c(\theta)\}$. The entropy variation of $[c_a,c_b] $ is $0$, in particular less than $\eps$.
Hence $W'$ as above provides a neighborhood of $\theta$ with small entropy variation.
Finally, if $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of two hyperbolic components, then the previous argument works separately
for both hyperbolic components.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy]
\label{Thm:Continuity} \lineclear
If $\theta\in\Circle$, then $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\theta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins}, entropy is continuous at all angles $\theta\in\Circle$ for which entropy restricted to the combinatorial arc $[0,c(\theta)]$ is continuous. This is true for all parameters $c(\theta)$ with $\theta\in\Q/\Z$ by work of Tiozzo~\cite{TiozzoThesis} and Jung \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, and consequently for all parameters that are not (combinatorial) endpoints of $\M$ at irrational angles. For combinatorial endpoints $c(\theta)$ with irrational $\theta$, we will prove this in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{corollary}[Existence of Limit]
\label{Cor:ExistenceLimit} \lineclear
In the dynamics of $p_c$, the limit $\lim_{n\to\infty} (1/n)\log N(n)$ exists whenever $p_c$ is non-renormalizable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, if $c$ is non-renormalizable and postcritically finite, then $\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)=\lim_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)$ by irreducibility of the associated subshift of finite type. If $c$ is not postcritically finite and not an endpoint of $\M$ (that is, $c$ is associated to two external angles in $\M$), then there are two non-renormalizable parameters $c_1$ and $c_2$ with $N_{c_1}(n)\le N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le\eps$ for arbitrary $\eps>0$ and the result holds as well (here we use continuity of entropy).
Finally, if $c$ is a non-renormalizable endpoint, then by continuity of $\tilde h$ for any $\eps>0$ there exists a postcritically finite non-renormalizable parameter $c_1\prec c$ so that $\tilde h(c)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$.
By monotonicity, we have $\liminf(1/n)N_c(n)\ge \liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)$, and
$\limsup(1/n)N_c(n)=\tilde h(c)\le \tilde h(c_1)+\eps=\liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)+\eps\le \liminf(1/n)N_{c}(n)+\eps$. Since $\eps>0$ was arbitrary, the claim follows in this case too.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Irrational endpoints}
\label{Sec:IrratEndpoints}
In this section, we prove that for every combinatorial endpoint $c$ of $\M$, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial arc $[0,c]$. This is known when $c$ is postcritically finite \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, but we need it in all cases. This proof provides the missing step in the continuity proof in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}.
We will approximate the irrational endpoints by dyadic ones, and of course we need uniform estimates for the latter (see Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}).
\subsection{Hubbard trees}
\label{ss:HaubTrees}
We need to start by discussing some more properties of Hubbard trees of postcritically finite polynomials.
The \emph{marked points} or \emph{vertices} of the Hubbard tree are the endpoints, branch points, and the postcritical points. (In fact, all endpoints are postcritical points; critical points are not included in their own right, but they might be postcritical, for instance when they are periodic, and when the degree is greater than $2$ then they might also be branch points.) Since the set of vertices is forward invariant, every edge (a closed arc connecting two vertices) maps over one or several entire edges, so that the image contains every edge the interior of which intersects the image; in other words, the edges form a Markov partition on the Hubbard tree. --- Here, we will only discuss quadratic polynomials and Hubbard trees.
If $H_r\subset H$ is a proper subtree of $H$ with the property that $p_c^{\circ n}(H_r)\subset H_r$ for some period $n\ge 2$, then $p_c$ is \emph{renormalizable}; it is well known that this means the $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded copy of the Mandelbrot set within itself.
The main part of the argument below will be in the case that there exists an edge $e\subset H$ so that $p_c^{\circ n}(e)=H$ for every sufficiently big $n$. If $p_c$ is non-renormalizable, then every edge will do; otherwise there may still be some edge (outside of ``little Julia sets'') with this property. If there is no such edge, then we are in the ``immediate satellite renormalizable case'', that means $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded Mandelbrot set that touches the main cardioid of $\M$.
\emph{Standing Assumption:} In this subsection and the next one (Section~\ref{ss:Automata}), we assume that $H$ has an edge for which a finite iterate covers the entire Hubbard tree $H$, so that $c$ is not immediate satellite renormalizable. (In fact, this assumption will continue to hold, in different notation, until we give the proof of the general case in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}).
Consider a dyadic endpoint $c'$ with Hubbard tree $H'$ and external angle ${q}/{2^m}$. Then the critical value and every postcritical point are endpoints of $H'$, so vertices of $H'$ are either endpoints or branch points. Easy calculations show that $H'$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item $m+1$ endpoints;
\item at most $m-2$ branch points;
\item at most $2m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Let $c$ be the postcritically finite parameter where the vein of $c'$ terminates. We denote by $H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$; note that $\beta \not\in H$.
Denote by $x\in H'$ the dynamic counterpart of $c$ as in Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\begin{lemma}
The set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}\setminus \{\text{vertices of }H'\}$ contains at most $m$ points; equivalently, $p_{c'}^{\circ m}(x)$ is a branch point of $H'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde c$ be the dyadic parameter with $c'\lhd \tilde c$, so $c'$ is directly subordinate to $\tilde c$. Then $c\prec c'$ and $c\prec \tilde c$.
Denote by $\tilde q/ 2^n$ the external angle of $\tilde c$; note that $n<m$.
We will work in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, the rays landing at $x$ (this point is denoted by $x_*$ in Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}) separate $R(0), R(\tilde q/2^n)$, and $R(q/2^m)$.
Let $x(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ be the landing point of $R(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ and consider the arc $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$ in the filled-in Julia set of $p_{c'}$ (which is a dendrite). Then $x$ has at least three branches in $ H'\cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$: two of them are the branches to the critical point and to the critical value at angle $q/2^m$, and the third is $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$.
We claim that $p_{c'}^{\circ n}[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\subset H'$. Indeed, let $T_k$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. Then $p_{c'}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$ by \eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}. Therefore, $p_{c'}(T_{k-1})\subset T_{k-2}\cup H'$ and, by induction, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(T_{n})\subset H'$.
Therefore, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(x)$ has at least $3$ branches in $H'$ because $p_{c'}^{\circ n}:H' \cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\to H'$ is locally a homeomorphism at $x$, and $n<m$.
\end{proof}
Let us now refine $H'$ by adding the finite set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}$ to its vertex set. The new tree, still called $H'$, has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $3m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $3m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Here and elsewhere, we find it convenient to express some combinatorial properties in terms of \emph{automata}. We would like to reassure the reader that we only use a basic notion without results from automata theory and hope it will not be distracting. More precisely, given a postcritically finite polynomial $p_{c'}$ with Hubbard tree $H'$, we associate to it an automaton $A'$ in a natural way, as follows. The states of $A'$ correspond to the edges of $H'$. An arrow connects two edges $e_1$ and $e_2$ so that the image of $e_1$ contains $e_2$; the number of arrows from $e_1$ to $e_2$ equals the number of times the edge $e_1$ covers $e_2$ under $p_{c'}$ (this is well defined because we have a Markov partition). This number of arrows equals $0$ or $1$, except for the unique edge (if any) that contains the critical point in its interior.
Similarly, denote by $A$ the natural automaton associated with $p_c\colon H\to H$.
\emph{Overview on the argument.}
The key idea of our proof consists of identifying the dynamics of $p$ on $H$ as an embedded subset of the dynamics of $p'$ on $H'$. Since entropy measures the growth rate of choice of orbits of length $n$, the entropy of $p'$ on $H'$ is no less than the entropy of $p$ on $H$, and we need to give an upper bound on the difference. An orbit in $H'$ that realizes the additional choice is one that leaves the embedded image of $H$ in $H'$, and we show that it starts on a single edge $[x,c']$ at the critical value. We show that this edge maps forward homeomorphically a large number of iterations: so if some orbit uses the additional choice, then it will not have any choice for a long time, and this will give an upper bound on the entropy increase. We will do much of the argument in terms of the automaton $A$ that we consider as a sub-automaton of $A'$.
We start the construction by describing the relation between $H,A$ and $H',A'$ in the following lemma. We define an end-edge of $H'$ to be any edge so that among the two vertices it connects there is one endpoint of $H'$.
\begin{lemma}[Identifying $A$ as Sub-Automaton of $A'$]
\label{lem:AandA'} \lineclear
Denote by $H'_*$ the sub-tree of $H'$ obtained from $H'$ by removing all its end-vertices and (open) end-edges. Then there is a homeomorphism $J:H \to H'_*$
such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$J$ is a tree-isomorphism, i.e.\ $J$ sends vertices and edges of $H$ to vertices and edges of $ H'_*$ respectively;
\item
if $y$ is a vertex of $H$, then $J(y)$ has the same itinerary as $y$; and
\item
$J$ respects the dynamics in the sense that
an edge $e_1$ of $H$ covers once, resp twice, an edge $e_2$ under $p_c$ if and only if $J(e_1)$ covers once, resp twice, $J(e_2)$ under $p_{c'}$.
\end{enumerate}
There is a unique edge $e_0$ of $H'$ containing the critical point of $p_{c'}$. If $c$ is strictly pre-periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is in the interior of $J^{-1}(e_0)$. If $c$ is periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is on the boundary of $J^{-1}(e_0)$.
The map $J$ induces an inclusion $A \hookrightarrow A'$ by mapping a state $e$ of $A$ into the state $J(e)$ of $A'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us first define the map
\[
J: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Recall that every vertex of $H$ is a postcritical point or a branch point.
If $y\in \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}$ (in the dynamics of $p_c$) is a branch point of $H$, then $y$ is not a pre-critical point because the latter points have valence $1$ or $2$ in $H$.
In particular, there are at least $3$ external rays landing at $y$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:CountPartsHubTree} these rays at the same angle also land together in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ and the landing point, say $y'$, is in $H'_*$. We define $J(y):=y'$.
Further, let $x=J(c)$ be the dynamical counterpart (again in the dynamics of $c'$) of the parameter $c$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}. Then we set $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c)):= p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)\in H'_*$ for all $k\ge 0$. We claim that this definition is consistent and, moreover, that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
$J$ is injective on the set of vertices and
\item[(b)] $J$ preserves orientation in the following sense: if a ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ lands at a non-precritical point of $H$ so that $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates two vertices $v_1,v_2\in H$, then $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates $J(v_1)$ and $J(v_2)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
\end{itemize}
If $c$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameter, then $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of at least two external rays (because $c\prec c'$ is not an endpoint). Moreover, $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of a ray $R(\phi)$ if and only if $R(\phi)$ lands at $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c))$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$. Thus $J$ is well defined and satisfies (a) and (b).
The other case is that $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component $W$. In this case, no ray lands at $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ for $k\ge 0$ because these points are in the Fatou set. By definition, $J(c)=x$ is the landing point of periodic rays, say $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$, so that $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$ bounds the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$. Denote by $c_*\in \partial W$ the landing point of $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. For a parameter $w\in \ovl W$, let $\gamma_w$ be a non-repelling periodic point; there is a unique continuous choice so that $\gamma_c=c$. Moreover, $\gamma_{c_*}$ is the landing point of the ray pair $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. Observe also that the cycle $\{p_w^{\circ k}(\gamma_w)\}_{k\ge 0}$ for $w\in W\cup\{c_*\}$ does not cross any ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ as in claim (b). This proves claim (b) because the rays landing at non-precritical points of $H$ plus rays $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$ are stable in the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
%\newpage
We now extend $J$ to a continuous map $J:H\to H'_*$ that is injective on every edge of $H$. Since $J$ preserves orientation of vertices of $H$, the extension is an embedding.
Since $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(c')$ is not in the image of $J$ for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$ but $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ is in the image of $J$ for all $k\ge 0$, the image of $H$ under $J$ is the connected hull of $\cup _{k\ge 0} p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ (the tree $H$ is the connected hull of the orbit of $c$ under $p_c$, and the map $J$ preserves external angles of rays landing at vertices). By Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} the images $p^{\circ k}_{c'}([c',x])$ are arcs with disjoint interiors for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$. Thus there is no branch point in $H'\setminus J(H)$. Therefore, $J$ maps $H$ bijectively onto $ H'_*$.
In the standard definition of Hubbard trees, every vertex of $H'$ is a branch point or an endpoint, and the postcritical points are exactly the endpoints. Remember, however, that we added the orbit of $x$ to the set of vertices of $H'$. The vertices of $H'_*$ are thus the branch points in $H'$ and the orbit of $x$, and all are $J$-images of vertices in $H$. Therefore $J$ is a bijection from vertices of $H$ to vertices of $H'_*$, and claim (1) follows.
Observe that $J$ is a conjugacy between
\[
p_c: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}
\]
and
\[
p_{c'}: \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Therefore, if $e_1$ is an edge of $H$ so that the critical point $0$ is not in the interior of $e_1$, then $p_{c}(e_1)\supset e_2$ if and only if $p_{c'}(J(e_1))\supset J(e_2)$. Moreover, $p_c$ and $p_{c'}$ restricted to $e_1$ and $J(e_1)$ respectively have degree $1$. If the interior of $e_1=[a,b]$ contains the critical point of $p_c$, then $p_c([a,0])=[p_{c}(a),c]$ and $p_c([0,b])=[c,p_{c}(b)]$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $J(e_1)$ because all other edges of $H'$ are mapped injectively under $p_{c'}$. We have $p_{c'}([J(a),0])=[J(p_c(a)),c')]\supset [J(p_c(a),J(c)]$ and $p_{c'}([0,J(b)])=[c',J(p_c(b))]\supset [J(c), J(p_c(b)]$. This finishes the proof of (1)--(3).
The critical point $0$ is not a vertex of $H'$ because $0$ is a strictly preperiodic point of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$. Hence $0$ is in the interior of an edge $e_0\subset H'$. Since $x\in p_{c'}(e_0)$ we have $c\in p_{c}(J^{-1}(e_0))$. Therefore, $J^{-1}(e_0)$ contains the critical point $0$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $e_0$ if and only if $0$ is strictly preperiodic under $p_c$.
Clearly, $J$ injects the set of states of $A$, which are edges of $H$, into the set of states of $A'$, which are edges of $H'$. It follows from (3) that the number of arrows from $a_1$ to $a_2$ (i.e., the degree of the corresponding map on the edge) is equal to the number of arrows from $J(a_1)$ to $J(a_2)$.
\end{proof}
\goodbreak
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:EdgesOfH}
The tree $H$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $2m-2$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-3$ edges.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Automata}
\label{ss:Automata}
Let us look in detail at the automata $A'$ and $A$ introduced above. For simplicity, we write $A\subset A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}.
Whether or not the dynamics on a Hubbard tree is renormalizable is encoded in the associated automaton. We write
$A=A_n\cup A_r$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_n$ (the non-renormalizable edges) contains all states that, for a fixed finite iterate, reach all states of $A$ simultaneously; and
\item $A_r$ (the renormalizable edges) contains all states from which {not all} of $A$ can be reached simultaneously: these correspond to edges within the Hubbard trees of ``smalls Julia sets'' corresponding to renormalization domains).
\end{itemize}
The dynamics on the Hubbard tree is renormalizable if and only if $A_r\neq \emptyset$.
An automaton is called \emph{irreducible} if every state of $A$ can be reached from each other. This is certainly the case when $A$ is non-renormalizable, but may also happen in the renormalizable case: for instance, the Hubbard tree of the rabbit polynomial with a superattracting $3$-cycle has its Hubbard tree in the form of a topological \textsf{Y} where the three edges are permuted cyclically: the automaton has the form $e_0\to e_1\to e_2\to e_0$ and is irreducible, but the dynamics is renormalizable. The difference is that no edge covers all of $A$ after the same number of iterations.
If $A_r\neq\emptyset$, so that the dynamics is renormalizable, then we may have $A_n=\emptyset$ or $A_n\neq \emptyset$. The former case, $A_n=\emptyset$, was defined earlier as the case of immediate satellite renormalization.
Recall our earlier assumption that $A_n\neq\emptyset$: so we are not in the immediate satellite renormalizable case.
We also remark that there are no arrows from $A_r$ to $A_n$, so within $A$ there is no escape from the set of renormalization states $A_r$. However, in $A'\supset A$, if $A_r\neq\emptyset$, then there are two arrows from $A_r$ to $[c',x]$, which is a state in $A'\setminus A$.
There are the following special states of $A$ and $A'\supset A$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the $0$-state in $A'$ contains the critical point; this state is the edge $e_0$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}; we set the $0$-state of $A$ to be $J^{-1}(e_0)$; this convention is compatible with the inclusion $J\colon A\hookrightarrow A'$;
\item
the $[c',x]$-state of $A'\setminus A$;
\item
states of $A$ and of $A'$ that belong to the interval $[\alpha, -\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
A \emph{path} in $A$ or $A'$ is a sequence of arrows so that each arrow starts where the previous arrow ends. The \emph{length} of a path is the number of arrows it contains. We can also think of a path as a sequence of states so that there is an arrow from every state to the subsequent one (that is, a sequence of edges in the Hubbard tree so that each edge covers the next one under the map). When a path connects two states that are connected by multiple arrows, then there are accordingly multiple paths along this sequence of states (as an example, in $A'$ there are two paths of length $1$ from the $0$-state to the $[c',x]$-state).
We define a \emph{relevant precritical path} in $A'$ or in $A$ as a path that starts at a state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and terminates at the $0$-state. By basic properties of symbolic dynamics, relevant precritical paths in $A'$ are in bijection with precritical points of $p_{c'}$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ because the critical point of $p_{c'}$ is not a vertex of $H'$. Different relevant precritical paths in $A$ encode different precritical points of $p_c$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
Every relevant precritical path $s$ in $A'$ has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DecompOfs}
s=b_0c_0a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\end{equation}
such that (roughly: $a_i, b_i, c_i$ are the sub-paths in $ A'\setminus A$, in $A_n$, and in $A_r$ respectively)
\begin{itemize}
\item
$a_i$ is an (almost) ``choiceless'' path that starts at the $0$-state, then goes to $[x,c']$, then travels outside of states in $[\alpha, -\alpha]$, and terminates at the first state reached in $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset A$;
\item
if $a_i$ terminates at a state in $A_r$, then $b_i=\emptyset$; otherwise, $b_i$ is a path that starts at the state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ where $a_i$ terminates and continues while states in $A_n$ are visited; (if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$)
\item
if $A_r=\emptyset$, then $c_i=\emptyset$; otherwise: if $b_i\not=\emptyset$, then $c_i$ is a path that starts in $A_n$ where $b_i$ terminates, and immediately moves into $A_r$, and otherwise it starts at a state in $A_r$ where $a_i$ terminates; the end of $c_i$ is the $0$-state, and until then the path remains in $A_r$ (again, if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$).
\end{itemize}
Observe that paths in $A'$ that are not in $A$ start on the edge $[x,c']$, so they are described by the $a_i$ that are long and have almost no choice, hence contribute little additional entropy.
Every $a_i$ has length at least $m+1$ because $[x,c']$ needs $m$ iteration to reach $[\beta,\alpha]$, and might need further iterations to land in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}). Once it lands there, we are either in $A_n$ and we continue with a path $b_i$ as long as we stay in $A_n$, or we are already in $A_r$ and $b_i=\emptyset$, and $c_i$ continues until the next visit of the $0$ state.
We will refer to $a_i$ as \emph{detours} (the long almost choice-less parts).
Defining $\ell_i,t_i, k_i$ as the lengths of $a_i, b_i, c_i$ respectively, we say that $s$ has \emph{combinatorial pattern} $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$.
\begin{lemma}[Almost Choiceless Paths]
\label{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}
There are at most two possible paths in $A'$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at the $0$-state;
\item then immediately go to the $[c',x]$-state;
\item then travel outside $[\alpha,-\alpha]$; and
\item terminate at a given state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Such paths have length $\ell\ge m+1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, the edge of $H'$ associated with the $0$-state covers $[c,x]$ with degree $2$ under $p_{c'}$. Then $[x,c]$ maps injectively for at least $m+1$ iterations until $[x,c]$ starts to partially cover $[\alpha,-\alpha]$. But this is, by definition, when the path under discussion terminates.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Number of Paths $c_i$]
\label{lem:c_iPaths}
Suppose $c$ is renormalizable. Let $g$ be the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$. Then there are at most $2^{{k}/{g}}$ paths in $A$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at a given state in $A_n$ or in $A_r$;
\item all subsequent states are within $A_r$;
\item terminate at the $0$-state; and
\item have length $k$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $H_0,H_1,\dots H_{g-1}$ be the cycle of small Hubbard trees associated with the the largest renormalizable Hubbard trees (corresponding to the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$). Then the degree $p_c^{\circ gt}:H_{0}\to H_{0}$ is at most $2^t$ for all $t$. Therefore, there are at most $2^{t}$ paths in $A_r$ with length $k\in \{ gt,gt+1,\dots, g(t+1)-1\}$ that terminate at the $0$-state; so for given length $k$, the number of such paths is at most $2^t=2^{\lfloor k/g \rfloor}$ (and we have not even counted the first step from a given state of $A$ to $A_r$).
\end{proof}
Fix a combinatorial pattern $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$ and let $n=|P|=t_0+k_0+\sum_{i\ge 1}^p(\ell_i+t_i+k_i)$.
When comparing entropy in $A'$ and in $A$, we will consider the additional relevant precritical paths in $A'$ and show that they correspond to relevant precritical paths in $A$ of bounded length, so that there are not too many additional paths in $A'$. More precisely, if a detour has length $\ell_i\ge 3m$ then the new path within $A$ will be shorter (or have equal length) than before.
We thus introduce a quantity $\kappa$, called \emph{uncertainty of $P$}, that measures the possible increase of length as follows:
\[
\kappa(P):= \frac 1 n \sum_{|\ell_i|<3m}(3m- \ell_{i})
= \frac 1 n \sum_i \max(0,3m-\ell_i)
\]
(the first sum is taken over all $\ell_i$ that are less than $3m$). Higher values of $\kappa$ create problems. Since all $\ell_i>m$ and $\sum\ell_i\le n$, we have $3m-\ell_i\le 2m < 2\ell_i$ and $\kappa(P)\in[0, 2]$.
Denote by $N'(P)$ the number of all precritical paths in $A'$ with pattern $P$.
For $\kappa\in [0,2]$ define
\[
N'(\kappa,n):= \sum_{\kappa(P)\le \kappa,\ \ |P|=n} N'(P)
\;,
\]
the numbers of precritical itineraries with small uncertainty.
We define $S'(\kappa,n)$ to be the corresponding set of relevant precritical paths with small uncertainty, so that $N'(\kappa,n)=|S'(\kappa,n)|$.
\begin{lemma}[Replacing a Path in $A'$ by a Path in $A$]
\label{lem:substitution} \lineclear
If $s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p$ is a precritical path in $A'$ with uncertainty $\kappa$, then there are paths $a^*_i$ in $A_n$ with lengths in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$ such that
$s^*:=b_0 a^*_1 b_1a^*_1b_2a^*_2\dots a^*_p b_pc_p$ is a path in $A$. If $n$ is the length of
$s$, then $s^*$ has length at most $n + \kappa n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that some $b_i$ might be empty paths. Choose a state $a\in A_n$. For convenience, we say that $a$ is the beginning and the end of every empty $b_i$.
Since $A_n$ is irreducible and has less than $2m$ vertices (Corollary~\ref{cor:EdgesOfH}) we may replace every $c_ia_{i+1}$ by a path $a^*_{i+1}$ in $A_n$ of length at most $2m$ so that $a^*_{i+1}$ connects the end of $b_{i}$ with the beginning of $b_{i+1}$ (which are by definition both in $A_n$); by adding $m$ arbitrary steps at the beginning, we may arrange things so that $a^*_i$ has length in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$.
Since the length of each $a_i$ is at least $m$, this procedure increases the length of $s$ by at most $\kappa n$ (and even shortens whenever $c_ia_{i+1}$ has length greater than $3m$).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Counting Patterns]
\label{lem:PatternsGrowth}
The quantity
\[
\limsup_{n}\frac{1}{n}\log\left(\# \{\text{patterns of length }n\}\rule{0pt}{11pt}\right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $m$ tends to infinity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every pattern $P$ is uniquely characterized by a non-decreasing sequence of positive integers
\[t_0,t_0+k_0,t_0+k_0+\ell_1, t_0+k_0+\ell_1+t_1, \dots. \]
Since $\ell_i\ge m+1$, for every $q\in\{0,\dots,\lfloor n/m\rfloor\}$ the interval $[qm,(q+1)m)$ contains at most $3$ elements of the above sequence; and the same is true for the final interval $[\lfloor n/m\rfloor m+1, n]$. Therefore, the number of all patterns is bounded by $Z(n,m):=((m+1)^3)^{(n/m)+1}=e^{{3(n+m)\log(m+1)}/{m}}$. For fixed $m$, we have $\limsup_n (1/n)\log Z(n,m)=3\log(m+1)/m$, and indeed this tends to $0$ as $m\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Uniformity]
\label{prop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon >0$ there are $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0$ depending only on $\varepsilon$ but not on $c$ and $c'$ such that the following holds. If
\begin{itemize}
\item $m\ge \overline m$,
\item either $c$ is non renormalizable, or the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$ is at least $\overline g$,
\item $\kappa\le \ovl \kappa$, and
\item $h$ is the entropy of the parameter $c$,
\end{itemize}
then
%\newpage
\[
N'(\kappa,n)\le C e^{(h+\eps)n} % \sum_{\nu\le n}N(\nu)
\]
for some constant $C>0$ depending on $c$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $h$ is the entropy of $c$, there is a constant $C_1>0$ such that
\[
N(n)\le C_1e^{(h+\eps/3)n},
\]
where $N(n)$ counts the number of relevant precritical paths in $A$ of generation $n$.
Our first claim is that there are at most $ 2^{{n}/{g}+{n}/{m}}$ precritical paths
\[
s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\]
with fixed $(b_i)_{i\le p}$ of a given pattern $P$ of length $n$. Indeed, the beginning of the $c_i$ is fixed by $b_i$, or by $a_i$ if $b_i$ is empty, and the end is at the $0$ state, so by Lemma~\ref{lem:c_iPaths} there are at most $2^{k_i/g}$ choices for each $c_i$ and in total at most $2^{n/g}$ choices for all $c_i$ combined (in the non-renormalizable case, the $c_i$ are empty and there is no choice at all). Each $a_i$ has at most two choices by Lemma~\ref{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}, and since their length is at least $m$, there are no more than $n/m$ such choices.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:substitution} we may substitute $c_ia_i$ by $a^*_i$ with $m\le |a^*_i|\le 3m$ and get a precritical path
\[s^*=b_0a^*_1b_1a^*_2b_2\dots a^*_pb_p c_p\]
in $A$ with length at most $ n+\kappa(P) n $. Denoting the length of $a_i^*$ by $\ell_i^*$, we call the numbers $Q=(t_0,0, \ell^*_1, t_1,0,\ell^*_2,\dots,\ell^*_p,t_p,k_p)$ the pattern of $s^*$.
Our next claim is that for fixed patterns $P$ and $Q$, the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is at most
\[
2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}=C_1e^{((h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m)n}
\;.
\]
Indeed, the number of paths $s$ for a given pattern $P$ with fixed $b_i$ is at most $2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}$. Different $b_i$ clearly lead to different $s^*$ because we know from $P$ were in $s^*$ the $b_i$ are located. The length of $s^*$ is bounded by $(1+\kappa(P))n$; hence the number of different $s^*$ is bounded by $\max_{1\le \mu \le (1+\kappa(P))n} N(\mu)\le C_1e^{(h +\eps/3)(1+\kappa (P))n}\le C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}$ because each $s^*$ is a precritical path in $A$.
If $g$ and $m$ are sufficiently large and $\ovl \kappa$ is sufficiently small, then $(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m\le h+2\eps/3$, and the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is bounded by
\[
C_1e^{(h+2\eps/3)n}
\]
Since every $s\in S'(\kappa,n)$ is a part of at least one triple $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ for some patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $\kappa(P)\le \kappa$ we get the estimate
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le \left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| C_1 \ e^{(h+2\eps/3) n}
\;,
\]
where $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right|$ denotes the number of pairs of patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $|P|=n$ and $|Q|\le n+\kappa(P)n$. Lemma~\ref{lem:PatternsGrowth}, the number $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| $ is bounded by $C_2e^{(\eps/3) n}$ for some constant $C_2>0$. We get
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le C_1C_2 \ e^{(h+\eps) n}
\;;
\]
this finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{Continuity at Irrational Endpoints}
Let $c_{\infty}$ be a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set.
There a sequence of dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ approximating $c_{\infty}$ in the following way
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1\prec c_2\prec\dots \prec c_{\infty}$;
\item $c_{i+1}\in [c_i,c'_i]$; and
\item $ \dots c_i \lhd \dots \lhd c'_2\lhd c'_1$.
\end{itemize}
Figure~\ref{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint} illustrates the arrangement of these points.
Note that once $c_1$ is chosen, the remaining parameters are uniquely determined: $c'_i$ is the dyadic of least generation with $c'_i\succ c_i$, and $c_{i+1}$ is the branch point in the vein of $c'_i$ where the vein to $c_\infty$ branches off.
We assume that $c_{\infty}$ is not in any immediate satellite small copy of the Mandelbrot set. More precisely, since we work with automata only in the postcritically finite case, the assumption that we make is this:\begin{itemize}
\item all $c_i$ are outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set
\end{itemize}
(note that if any $c_i$ is outside of immediate satellite copies, then all subsequent ones are as well: so, possibly up to truncating an initial part of the sequence $(c_i)$, the assumption on $c_\infty$ is that there exists a postcritically finite $c_1\prec c_\infty$ outside of immediate satellite copies).
The case that $c_\infty$ is immediate satellite renormalizable will be treated in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{\includegraphics{FigAllBranchPoints.pdf}}
\caption{The relative (combinatorial) positions of the parameters $c_i$, $c_\infty$ and $c'_i$ used in the proof.}
\label{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint}
\end{figure}
Similar to the previous discussion we specify the following objects
\begin{itemize}
\item $H'_i$ is the Hubbard tree of $c'_i$ with dynamics $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$ \,;
\item
$S'_{i}(n)\subset [\alpha,-\alpha]\subset H'_i$ is the set of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ for the parameter $c'_i$\,;
\item
$N'_{i}(n):= |S'_i(n)|$ is its cardinality;
\item
$h_i=\tilde h(c_i)$ and $h'_i=\tilde h(c'_i)$ are the entropies;
\item
$m_i$ is the generation of the dyadic parameter $c'_i$\,;
and
\item for $j\le i$ we denote by $x_j^{(i)}\in H_i$ the dynamical counterpart of $c_j$ in $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We will now introduce the sets $S'_i(j,\kappa, n)$ for all $j\le i$; these sets are defined in a similar way as $S'(\kappa,n)$ in Section~\ref{ss:Automata}. Consider a precritical point $y\in S'_i(n)\subset H'_i$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Iter:K:ell}0=\tilde \ell_0 <\tilde t_0<\tilde \ell_1<\tilde t_1< \dots < \tilde t_p=n
\end{equation} be the iteration times of $y$ (depending on $j$) uniquely specified as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\tilde t_k>\tilde \ell_k$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde t_k}_{c'_i}(y) \in [ c'_i, x_{j}^{(i)}]$;
\item
$\tilde \ell_k>\tilde t_{k-1}$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde \ell_k}_{c'_i}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We also set $\ell_k:=\tilde \ell_k- \tilde t_{k-1}$ and $t_k:= \tilde t_k-\tilde \ell_k$. Clearly, \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is uniquely specified by $(t_0,\ell_1, \dots, t_p)$.
We define \emph{the uncertainty of $y$ with respect to $x_j^{(i)}$} as
\[
\kappa_j(y):= \frac 1 n \sum_{\ell_k<3m_j}(3m_j- (\ell_k+1))
= \frac 1 n \sum_k \max(0,3m_j-(\ell_k+1)).
\]We denote by $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ the set of all $y\in S'_i(n)$ such that $\kappa_j(y)<\kappa$.
Let us also define \[I_j(y):= \bigcup_{\ell_k<3m_j} \{\tilde t_{k-1}, \tilde t_{k-1}+1,\dots, \tilde \ell_{k} \}.\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:I_j}
For all $j$ and $y$ the set $I_j(y)$ is a union of blocks of consecutive numbers so that each block has length $\ell_k+1\in[m_j,\dots, 3m_j]$, and
\begin{itemize}
\item
its first number is the unique number $t$ in the block that satisfies $p_{c'_i}^{\circ t}(y)\in [c'_i, \alpha]$; %x_j^{(i)}]$.
\item
its last number is the unique number $\ell$ in the block that satisfies
$p_{c'_i}^{\circ \ell}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Furthermore,
\( \displaystyle \kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|.\)
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have $\ell_k<3m_j$ by definition of $I_j(y)$ and we need to prove the lower bound $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
For every integer $k\ge 0$, let $T_k\subset H'_i$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. In particular, $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset T_0$. By~\eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1} we have $p_{c'_i}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
By construction, $c'_i$ and $c'_{j-1}$ are in different sublimbs of $c_{j}$. Thus, by Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})$ is disjoint from $T_{m_j-1 }$; and we get $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})\cap p_{c'}^{\circ -k} [\alpha,-\alpha]=\emptyset$ for all $k< m_j$. This shows that $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
We certainly have $p_{c'_i}^{\circ \tilde t_{k-1}}(y)\in[c'_i,x^{(i)}_j]\subset [c'_i,\alpha]$, and since $p_{c'}^{-1}([c'_i,\alpha])=[\alpha,-\alpha]$, the block would end before the orbit could enter $[c'_i,\alpha]$
again. The claim about the last number is obvious.
Finally, $3m_j-(\ell_k+1) \le 2m_j \le 2(\ell_k+1)$, and taking the sum we conclude $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:MonotIncl}
For $j<i$ the injection $B:S'_{i}(n)\to S'_{i-1}(n)$ of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} injects $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ into $S'_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $x_j^{(i)}$ and $x_j^{(i-1)}$ are the dynamical counterparts of $c_j$ in the dynamical planes of $p_{c_i}$ and $p_{c_{i-1}}$ respectively. Consider $y\in S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$. It follows from Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} parts (A) and (B) that
\begin{itemize}
\item $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ for all $\ell\ge 0$; and
\item $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [c'_{i},x_j^{(i)}]$ if and only if $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [c'_{i-1},x_j^{(i-1)}]$ for all $t \ge 0$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the first claim follows from Part (B) applied to $c_*=0$ (recall that the dynamical counterpart of $c_*=0$ is the $\alpha$-fixed point). The second claim follows from Part (A) combined with Part (B) applied to $c_*=c_j$.
Therefore, our surgery respects the sequence \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell}: for fixed $j$ and every $y\in S_i(n)$ the point $B(y)$ has the same sequence as $y$.
Hence $\kappa(y)=\kappa(B(y))$ and $B(y)\subset S_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:SmallKappa}
For every $\delta>0$ and for every $i'\ge 0$ there is an $i''>i'$ such that for every $n\ge 0$ we have
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\delta,n).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a subsequence of indices $i'=i_1< i_2< \dots < i_h$ so that $3m_{i_r}< m_{i_{r+1}}$ and $h> 2/\delta$. We show that $i'':= i_h$ satisfies the claim of the lemma. It is sufficient to show that for every $y\in S'_{i_h}(n)$ there is an $s<h$ such that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j} that $I_{i_1}(y), I_{i_2}(y), \dots , I_{i_h}(y)$ consist of pairwise disjoint blocks. Thus all $I_{i_s}$ are pairwise disjoint subsets of $\{1,2,\dots ,n\}$. Hence
\[\frac 1 n (|I_{i_1}(y)|+ |I_{i_2}(y)|) + \dots + |I_{i_h}(y)|) \le 1.\]
Since $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)| $, again Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j}, we have
\[\kappa_{i_1}(y)+\kappa_{i_2}(y)+\dots +\kappa_{i_h}(y)\le 2;\]
this implies that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$ for some $s<h.$
\end{proof}
The next lemma is a corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon>0$ there is an $i'\ge 0$ and $\overline \kappa>0$ such that if $ j \ge i'$ and $\kappa\le \overline \kappa$, then
\[|S'_j(j,\kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}\] for all $n>0$ and some constant $C_j>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For a given $\varepsilon $ fix $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0 $ as in Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}. We may choose a big enough $i'$ such that for all $j\ge i'$
\begin{itemize}
\item $m_j\ge \overline m$; and
\item $c_j$ is either non-renormalizable or the renormalization period of $c_j$ is at least $\overline g$.
\end{itemize}
We will now apply Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity} to the pair $c:=c_j$ and $c':= c'_j$; then $h_j=h$ is the entropy of $c=c_j$.
Observe first that $|S'_j(j, \kappa,n)| = |S'( \kappa, n)|= N'(\kappa,n)$ after the substitution. Indeed, every relevant pre-critical point of $p_{c'_j}$ is uniquely characterized by a precritical path in $A'$ (again by a fundamental property of the symbolic dynamics because the critical point is in the interior of the $0$-state of $A'$.) This bijection preserves the uncertainties: if $y\in S'_j(j,\kappa,n)$ with Sequence~\eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is identified with a relevant precritical path $s$ with Decomposition~\eqref{eq:DecompOfs}, then $\ell_k +1 =\tilde \ell_k - \tilde t_k +1= |a_k|$. Hence $y$ and $s$ have the same uncertainties, and $S'_j(j, \kappa,n)$ and $S'( \kappa, n)$ are in bijection.
Now the lemma immediately follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\end{proof}
Remember that we continue to have the assumption that $c_\infty$ is a non-dyadic endpoint that is not immediate satellite renormalizable. In this case, we can now complete the proof.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity on Vein to $c_{\infty}$, Non-Renormalizable Case]
\label{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}
%\lineclear
For every $\eps>0$ there is an $\bar i\ge 1$ such that $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge \bar i$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Choose $\overline\kappa$ and $i'$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:SmallKappa} there is an $i''\ge i'$ such that
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n).
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:MonotIncl} there is an injection from $S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ into $S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ for all $j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}$. Therefore,
\[
N'_{i''}(n)=|S'_{i''}(n)|\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''} |S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity} we have $|S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}$. Thus
\[
N'_{i''}(n)\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n} \le \left( \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j\right) e^{(\eps +h_{i''})n}
\]because $h_{i''}\ge h_{j}$ by monotonicity.
This proves that $h'_{i''}-h_{i''}\le \eps$, and since the sequence $h'_i-h_i$ is decreasing we have $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge i''$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{The Immediate Satellite Renormalizable Case}
In order to formulate our statements, we need to briefly review well known facts on renormalization; compare \cite{Polylike, McMullenRenormalization,MiSelfSim,MiRenorm}.
If $p_c$ is simple $m$-renormalizable, then there exists a ``little Mandelbrot set'' $\M'\subset\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters with $c\in\M'$ and a straightening homeomorphism $\chi\colon\M'\to\M$ so that $p_{\chi(c)}$ in the neighborhood of its filled-in Julia set is hybrid equivalent to $p_c^{\circ m}$ on a neighborhood of the little filled-in Julia set (except possibly at the root point $\chi^{-1}(1/4)$). The little Mandelbrot set has a main center $c_0:=\chi^{-1}(0)$ with a superattracting orbit of period $m$. In this case, we say that ``the parameter $c$ is $c_0$ tuned with $\chi(c)$''. We say $\M'$ is an \emph{immediate satellite copy of $\M$} if $\M'$ is attached to the main hyperbolic component of the Mandelbrot set. Dynamically, this means that the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c^{\circ m}$ is equivalent to $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$; in the postcritically finite case, this is equivalent to $A_n=\emptyset$.
\begin{lemma}[Immediate Satellite Renormalization and Entropy]
\label{Lem:Renormalization} \lineclear
If $\M'$ is an immediate satellite copy of $\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters, then the straightening map $\chi:\M'\to \M$ satisfies
\[
\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))
\;.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $N_{c}(n)$ and $N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ be the numbers of precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and $p_{\chi(c)}$ respectively and let $\tilde N_{\chi (c)}(n)$ be the number of precritical points of $p_{\chi(c)}$ on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
The straightening map $\chi$ identifies the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_{c}^{\circ m}$ with the arc $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$. Therefore, $N_c(mn)= \tilde N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ while $N_c(mn+k)=0$ for all $k\in \{1,2,\dots, m-1\}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:DifferCounts}, the precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and those on $[\alpha,\beta]$ give the same entropies; and on $[\beta,-\beta]$ there can be at most twice as many precritical points of any generation $n$ as on $[\alpha,\beta]$.
Therefore, $\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If $\chi\colon \M'\to\M$ is the straightening map of an arbitrary small copy of $\M$, we have
\[
\tilde h(c)=\max\left(\tilde h(c_0),\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))\right)
\;.
\]
This is obvious in the postcritically finite case and follows in general once we know that $\tilde h$ is continuous, which we are about to establish.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}[Continuity Along Vein to $c_{\infty}$, General Case.]
\label{cor:RadialContin}
\lineclear
Suppose that $c_{\infty}$ is a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. Then the entropy is continuous along the vein $[c_{\infty}, 0]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen} proves the case when $c_{\infty}$ is outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set.
The second case is that there is a finite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots, \chi_n:\M_n\to \M $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty\in \M_*:=(\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1)^{-1}(\M)$ and $c'_{\infty}:=\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1(c_\infty)$ is not immediate satellite-renormalizable. Entropy is continuous along the vein $[0,c_*]$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}, and continuous along the image $\chi_*^{-1}([0,c_*])=[c_0,c_{\infty}]$ by Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} (where $c_0$ is the main center of $\M_*$), and continuous along $[0,c_0]$ by \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung} (or Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}). Therefore, entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
The final case is that there is an infinite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty$ is in the domain of $\chi_n \circ \chi_{n-1}\circ \dots \circ \chi_1$ for all $n\ge 0$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} that the entropy of $c_\infty$ is $0$. Thus entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
\end{proof}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
\renewcommand{\top}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{top}}}
\newcommand{\comb}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{comb}}}
\appendix
\section{Core entropy and biaccessibility dimension}
\centerline{by Wolf Jung}
\bigskip
Here various definitions of core entropy shall be discussed and related to
the biaccessibility dimension. On a compact metric space, the topological
entropy of a continuous map is defined by a growth rate, which is referring
to preimages of covers, or to $\epsilon$-shadowing sets. See
\cite{deMelovanStrien} for details. When the underlying space is a compact
interval, a finite tree, or graph, several equivalent characterizations are due
to Misiurewicz and others. These include the growth rate of horse shoes,
laps (monotonic branches), periodic points, and preimages of a general point.
For real and complex quadratic polynomials, core entropy was defined by
Tao Li and Bill Thurston as the topological entropy of $p_c(z)$ on the
Hubbard tree; this definition applies to the postcritically finite case in
particular, and more generally to finite compact trees, but it does not work
when $c$ is an endpoint with a dense postcritcal orbit.
In general, the filled Julia set $\mathcal{K}_c$ consists of the Hubbard tree
$T_c$\,, the countable family of its preimages, and an uncountable family of
endpoints. The dynamics on $T_c$ is interesting because this tree is folded
over itself, while the iteration does not return to arcs of its preimages.
On the other hand, the endpoints form a set of full harmonic measure, while
the external angles of $T_c$ and its preimages form a set of Hausdorff
dimension $<1$ (unless $c=-2$). Since all biaccessible points are contained
in arcs iterated to $T_c$\,, these angles are called biaccessible
(or biaccessing). More precisely, the biaccessibilty dimension is defined as
follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item For the lamination generated by an angle $\theta\in S^1$
\cite{ThurstonLaminations}, consider all
angles of non-trivial leaves. Their Hausdorff dimension is the
\emph{combinatorial biaccessibility dimension} $B_\comb(\theta)$. The same
dimension is obtained from pairs of angles with the same itinerary, or from
pairs not separated by the precritical leaves: the diameter joining $\theta/2$
and $(\theta+1)/2$, and its preimages.
\item For a parameter $c\in\mathcal{M}$, the
\emph{topological biaccessibility dimension} $B_\top(c)$ is the Hausdorff
dimension of those angles, such that the dynamic ray is landing together with
another ray.
\end{itemize}
These definitions are related analogously to Lemma~\ref{Lem:defEntropy}:
\begin{lemma}[Combinatorial and topological biaccessibility]
Suppose that $\theta\in S^1$ and $c\in\partial\M$ belongs to the impression
of the parameter ray with angle $\theta$, or $c\in\M$ is hyperbolic and the
ray lands at the corresponding root. Then $B_\comb(\theta)=B_\top(c)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of the proof \cite{BruinSchleicher, Jung}] In the locally connected case, and
neglecting the countable family of angles at precritical or precharacteristic
points, two dynamic rays are landing together if and only if they are not
separated by a precritical ray-pair. When $\mathcal{K}_c$ is not
locally connected, exceptional sets of angles are shown to be negligible in
terms of Hausdorff dimension. These include the angles of non-landing rays,
and the possible angles of Cremer cycles.
\end{proof}
The following relation to entropy is due to Thurston \cite{TanLeiEntropy},
relying on earlier work by Furstenberg \cite{Furstenberg}
and Douady \cite{Douady}.
\begin{proposition}[Dimension and entropy of the tree]\label{Prop:Biaccessibility}
Suppose $\mathcal{K}_c$ is locally connected with empty interior, or $f_c$ is
parabolic or hyperbolic with a real multiplier.
Using regulated arcs, define the tree $T_c$ as the path-connected hull of
the critical orbit. If $T_c$ is compact, consider the topological entropy of
$p_c(z)$ on $T_c$\,. Then it is related to
the biaccessibility dimension by $h_\top(T_c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is found in version 1 of \cite{BruinSchleicher} and in
\cite{TiozzoThesis, Jung}:
since $\theta\mapsto z(\theta)$ is a semi-conjugation with finite fibers, we may
consider the topological entropy of the angle-doubling map on the compact set
of angles of $T_c$ \cite[Thm.~II.7.1]{deMelovanStrien}. And this equals the
Hausdorff dimension \cite[Proposition~III.1]{Furstenberg}, except for the
base 2 instead of e in the logarithm of the growth factor $\lambda$.
\end{proof}
While the definition of $h_\top(T_c)$ requires a compact tree $T_c$\,,
a general notion was given in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} in terms
of precritical ray pairs:
\begin{theorem}[Dimension and entropy in general]\label{Thm:Biaccessibility}
Entropy and biaccessibility dimension are related as follows for
all parameters $c\in\mathcal{M}$ and all angles $\theta\in S^1$\,:
\begin{equation}
\tilde h(c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2
\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
h(\theta)=B_\comb(\theta)\cdot\log2 \ .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First, suppose that $c=c(\theta)$ is postcritically finite or belongs
to a dyadic vein. In particular, $\mathcal{K}_c$ is
locally connected and $T_c$ is compact with finitely many endpoints. Then
the growth rate of lap numbers is equal to the growth rate of precritical
points on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, so $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$, and
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} applies.
Second, suppose that $c$ is a non-renormalizable irrational endpoint, and
approximate it with biaccessible parameters $c_n$ before $c$. Then monotonicity
\cite[Proposition~4.6]{Jung} and continuity give
\begin{equation}
B_\top(c)\cdot\log2\ge\lim B_\top(c_n)\cdot\log2
=\lim\tilde h(c_n)=\tilde h(c) \ .
\end{equation}
For the opposite estimate, note that the plane is cut into pieces successively
by precritcal ray pairs, and the angles of a piece of level $n$ form up to $n$
intervals of total length $2^{-n}$ according to
\cite[Lemma~4.1]{BruinSchleicher}. Recall that $N(n)$ is the number of
precritcal points of \textsc{Step} $n$ on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, and denote
the number of pieces intersecting this arc by $V(n)$. Then
$V(n)=1+N(1)+\dots+N(n)$ is growing by the same factor $\lambda=e^h$ as $N(n)$,
and the same holds for $n \cdot V(n)$. The $b$-dimensional Hausdorff measure
of the angles of $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$ is estimated as
\begin{equation}
\mu_b\le\lim n \cdot V(n) \cdot 2^{-bn} \ ,
\end{equation}
which is 0 when $b>\log\lambda/\log2=\tilde h(c)/\log2$. So the Hausdorff
dimension is estimated as $B_\top(c)\le\tilde h(c)/\log2$ as well,
implying equality.
Finally, both $\tilde h(c)$ and $B_\top(c)$ are constant on the main molecule
and on primitive small Mandelbrot sets, and both are scaled by the period of
immediate satellite renormalization. Now all cases are covererd by the
Yoccoz Theorem.
\end{proof}
Continuity of entropy according to Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity} gives:
\begin{corollary}[Continuity of biaccessibility dimension]
The biaccessibility dimension $B_\comb(\theta)$ is continuous on $S^1$ and
$B_\top(c)$ is continuous on the Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$.
\end{corollary}
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} and Theorem~\ref{Thm:Biaccessibility}
show that the definition
of entropy in terms of precritical points is a generalization
of the original definition in terms of a compact core:
\begin{corollary}[Extending the definition of core entropy]
We have $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$ whenever $T_c$ is defined and compact.
\end{corollary}
\begin{thebibliography}{ABC}
\bibitem[BS]{BruinSchleicher} H.~Bruin, D.~Schleicher,
Hausdorff dimension of biaccessible
angles for quadratic polynomials, Preprint. ArXiv:1205.2544, 28 pp.
\bibitem[D]{Douady} A.~Douady, Topological entropy of unimodal maps:
monotonicity for quadratic polynomials, in:
\emph{Real and complex dynamical systems}
(Hiller{\o}d 1993), NATO Adv.~Sci.~Inst.~Ser.~C
Math.~Phys.~Sci.~\textbf{464}, Kluwer 1995, 65--87.
\bibitem[DH1]{Orsay} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{Etude dynamique des polyn\^omes complexes} (The Orsay Notes). Publications Math\'ematiques d'Orsay 1984-02 (1984) (premi\`ere partie) and 1985-04 (1985) (deuxi\`eme partie).
\bibitem[DH2] {Polylike} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{On the dynamics of polynomial-like mappings}. Annales Scientifiques de l'\'Ecole Normale Sup\'erieure. Quatri\`eme S\'erie. V 15 (1985), 287--343.
\bibitem[DH3]{DHThurston} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{A proof of {T}hurston's topological characterization of rational functions}. Acta Mathematica. V 171 (1993), 263--297.
\bibitem[F]{Furstenberg} H.~Furstenberg, Disjointness in ergodic theory,
minimal sets, and a problem in Diophantine approximation,
Math.~Systems Theory~\textbf{1}, 1--49 (1967).
\bibitem[HS]{Spiders} John Hubbard and Dierk Schleicher. \emph{The spider algorithm}. Complex dynamical systems ({C}incinnati, {OH}). Proc. Sympos. Appl. Math. V 49 (1994), 155--180.
\bibitem[Ju]{Jung} Wolf Jung, \emph{Core entropy and biaccessibility of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1401.4792 (2014), 46 pp.
\bibitem[TL]{TanLeiEntropy} Tan Lei, \emph{On W. Thurston's core-entropy theory}. Presentation, given in Toulouse (January 2014) and elsewhere.
\bibitem[Mc]{McMullenRenormalization} Curt McMullen, \emph{Complex dynamics and renormalization}. Annals of Mathematics Studies \textbf{135},
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1994).
\bibitem[dMS]{deMelovanStrien} W.~de Melo, S.~van Strien,
\emph{One-dimensional dynamics}, Springer 1993.
\bibitem[M1]{MiSelfSim} John Milnor, \emph{Self-similarity and hairiness in the {M}andelbrot set}. Computers in geometry and topology. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. V 114, 211--257, (1989).
\bibitem[M2]{MiRenorm} John Milnor, \emph{Local connectivity of {J}ulia sets: expository lectures}. In: The {M}andelbrot set, theme and variations. London Math. Soc. V 274, 67--116 (2000).
\bibitem[M3]{MiOrbits} John Milnor, \emph{Periodic orbits, externals rays and the Mandelbrot set: an expository account}. In: G\'eom\'etrie complexe et syst\`emes dynamiques (Marguerite Flexor, Pierrette Sentenac, and Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, eds). Ast\'erisque \textbf{ 261}, 277--333 (2000).
\bibitem[Sch]{MandelBranch} Dierk Schleicher,
\emph{On fibers and local connectivity of Mandelbrot and Multibrot sets}. In: M. Lapidus, M. van Frankenhuysen (eds): Fractal Geometry and Applications: A Jubilee of Benoit Mandelbrot. Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics \textbf{72}, American Mathematical Society (2004), 477--507.
\bibitem[T]{ThurstonLaminations} William P. Thurston, \emph{On the geometry and dynamics of iterated rational maps}. In: Complex dynamics, families and friends (Dierk Schleicher, ed.), AK Peters, Wellesley, MA (ISBN 978-1-56881-450-6), pp. 3--109 (2009).
\bibitem[Ti1]{TiozzoThesis} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Topological entropy of quadratic polynomials and dimension of sections of the Mandelbrot set}. Preprint, arXiv:1305.3542 (2013), 56 pp.
\bibitem[Ti2]{TiozzoPaper} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Continuity of core entropy of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1409.3511 (2014), 25 pp.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document$, then $h(\theta)=\tilde h(c)$. Our definitions are entirely combinatorial so we do not have to worry about topological subtleties such whether the Julia set is locally connected or whether a (generalized) Hubbard tree exists and, if so, whether it is compact. Of course, in the cases where the usual definitions of topological entropy apply, our definition agrees with them.
Our first result goes back to a bet between Bill Thurston and John Hubbard in the spring of 2012 and helped settle this bet soon after.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Core Entropy]
Both entropy functions, $\tilde h\colon\mathcal M}
\newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}
\newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}
\newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}
\newcommand{\Circle}{\mathbb S}
\newcommand{\sm}{\setminus}
\newcommand{\0}{\texttt{0}}
\newcommand{\1}{\texttt{1}}
\newcommand{\s}{\underline{s}}
\newcommand\eps{\varepsilon}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}
\renewcommand{\theta}{\vartheta}
\newcommand{\ovl}[1]{\overline{#1}}
\newcommand{\lineclear}{\rule{0pt}{2pt}\newline}
\newcommand{\reminder}[1]{\textsl{#1}\marginpar{$\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd$}}
\newcommand{\hide}[1]{}
\title[Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials]{Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials %\\ \rule{0pt}{20pt} --- Draft $\circ$ Comments Invited ---
}
\author{Dzmitry Dudko}
\author{Dierk Schleicher}
\author[]{With an appendix by Wolf Jung}
\address{G.-A.-Universit\"at zu G\"ottingen, Bunsenstrasse 3--5, D-37073 G\"ottingen, Germany}
\address{Jacobs University Bremen, Research I, Postfach 750 561, D-28725 Bremen, Germany}
\address{Gesamtschule Aachen-Brand, Rombachstrasse 99, 52078 Aachen, Germany}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
We give a combinatorial definition of ``core entropy'' for quadratic polynomials as the growth exponent of the number of certain precritical points in the Julia set (those that separate the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative). This notion extends known definitions that work in cases when the polynomial is postcritically finite or when the topology of the Julia set has good properties, and it applies to all quadratic polynomials in the Mandelbrot set.
We prove that core entropy is continuous as a function of the complex parameter. In fact, we model the Julia set as an invariant quadratic lamination in the sense of Thurston: this depends on the external angle of a parameter in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set and suffices to define core entropy directly from the angle in combinatorial terms. As such, core entropy is continuous as a function of the external angle.
Moreover, we prove a conjecture of Guilio Tiozzo about local and global maxima of core entropy as a function of external angles: local maxima are exactly dyadic angles, and the unique global maximum within any wake occurs at the dyadic of lowest denominator.
An appendix by Wolf Jung relates different concepts of core entropy and biaccessibility dimension and thus shows that biaccessibility dimension is continuous as well.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Statement of Results}
We define two entropy functions:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h\colon \Circle\to [0,\log 2]$, assigning to every external angle $\theta\in\Circle$ the core entropy of the lamination associated to the angle $\theta$.
\item $\tilde h\colon \M\to[0,\log2]$, assigning to every $c\in\M$ the core entropy of the quadratic polynomial $z\mapsto z^2+c$.
\end{itemize}
We describe these definitions in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}. Note that we define $\tilde h$ for every $c\in\M$, postcritically finite or not (and could extend it to every parameter $c\in\C$), and similarly for every $\theta\in\Circle$. These definitions are such that if the parameter ray at angle $\theta$ lands (or accumulates) at $c\in\partial \M$, then $h(\theta)=\tilde h(c)$. Our definitions are entirely combinatorial so we do not have to worry about topological subtleties such whether the Julia set is locally connected or whether a (generalized) Hubbard tree exists and, if so, whether it is compact. Of course, in the cases where the usual definitions of topological entropy apply, our definition agrees with them.
Our first result goes back to a bet between Bill Thurston and John Hubbard in the spring of 2012 and helped settle this bet soon after.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Core Entropy]
Both entropy functions, $\tilde h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ and $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$, are continuous.
\end{theorem}
We prove continuity of $h$ in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}; the fact that this implies continuity of $\tilde h$ is easy and is explained in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{EntropyGraphPlain.pdf}
}
\caption{The graph of the core entropy function $h\colon[0,1/2]\to[0,\log 2]$ (by Bill Thurston).}
\end{figure}
Our second result settles a conjecture of Giulio Tiozzo \cite[Conjecture~1.6]{TiozzoThesis}.
\begin{theorem}[Local Maximal of Core Entropy]
\lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We will prove this in Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj}.
In Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}, we define a wake as a closed interval in $\Circle$ bounded by two rational angles so that the corresponding rays land together (or more generally as any closed interval for which the two boundary angles have the same angled internal address, so the corresponding parameter rays land together at the same point in $\M$, or at least in its combinatorial models).
Bill Thurston inspired a number of people to investigate core entropy. In particular, there are a survey on current work and open problems by Tan Lei~\cite{TanLeiEntropy}, a manuscript by Wolf Jung \cite{Jung}, and two manuscripts by Giulio Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoThesis,TiozzoPaper}. An independent proof of continuity of core entropy can be found in the recent manuscript \cite{TiozzoPaper}.
\emph{Acknowledgements}. We would like to thank Henk Bruin, John Hubbard, Tan Lei, Mikhail Lyubich, John Milnor, Bill Thurston, Giulio Tiozzo, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and especially Wolf Jung for interesting and helpful discussions. In the spring of 2014, we had the opportunity to give various presentations about this result in Bremen, Moscow and Stony Brook, and we thank the audiences for their questions and suggestions.
Finally, we would like to thank Cornell University and the ICERM institute in Providence for their hospitality and support in the spring of 2012 where many of our initial discussions were carried out.
\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Definitions}
\label{Sec:Definitions}
In this section we introduce our combinatorial definition of topological entropy that applies to all polynomials with connected Julia set, whether or not they are locally connected and whether or not they have a (generalized) Hubbard tree, and if so whether the latter is compact. One advantage of our approach is that we work in an entirely combinatorial setting, so we never have to worry about topological issues.
\begin{definition}[Invariant Lamination and Entropy Associated to External Angle]
\label{Def:CoreEntropy}
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$, there is a unique invariant quadratic lamination where the minor leaf either ends at $\theta$ or is the degenerate leaf at $\theta$. This lamination will be called $L_\theta$.
A \emph{precritical leaf of generation $n$} in this lamination will be any leaf on the backwards orbit of one of the two major leaves that takes $n$ generations to map to the minor leaf.
The \emph{$\alpha$ gap} is either the leaf connecting the two angles $1/3$ and $2/3$, or it is the unique gap that is fixed by the dynamics (this is a finite polygon).
We call a precritical leaf \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative, and define $N(n)=N_\theta(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical leaves of generation $n$. We define the \emph{core entropy} of this lamination as $h=h(\theta):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_\theta(n)$. If the $\alpha$ gap does not exist, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $N_{\theta}(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the core entropy of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\begin{remark}
A natural question is whether the $\limsup$ in the definition of entropy can be replaced by a simple $\lim$. This is not always so: Wolf Jung kindly pointed out to us the example of $c=c(9/56)$ where the Hubbard tree has the shape of a $\textsf{Y}$ so that the branch point is fixed and one endpoint maps to the second, which maps to the third, which in turn maps to the branch point. Here $N(n)=0$ for infinitely many $n$ while $h=(\log 2)/3>0$. There are thus counterexamples when the dynamics is renormalizable. We prove that renormalizability is the only obstruction (see Corollary~\ref{Cor:ExistenceLimit}). For now, observe that in the postcritically finite non-renormalizable case, the limit exists and equals the $\limsup$ because the associated subshift of finite type is irreducible.
\end{remark}
Thurston showed that the union of all minor leaves of all invariant quadratic laminations forms itself a lamination, called the \emph{quadratic minor lamination} QML \cite{ThurstonLaminations}. It turns out that $h$ is naturally defined on QML: since both ends of any leaf in QML define the same lamination, we can first extend the definition of $h$ to each separate leaf on QML. Complementary components of leaves in QML are called \emph{gaps}, and they come in two kids: either they are finite polygons (corresponding to Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters) or have infinitely many boundary leaves (and describe hyperbolic components). In both cases, it is easy to see that $h$ is constant on all boundary leaves of any gap, so $h$ naturally extends to the disk on which QML is defined.
The equivalence relation defining QML is closed, so the quotient of the supporting closed unit disk by collapsing all leaves to points yields a topological Hausdorff space called the ``abstract Mandelbrot set'' $\M_{abs}$ (this construction is known as Douady's ``pinched disk model'' of $\M$). Since $h$ is constant on fibers of the quotient map $q\colon QML\to \M_{abs}$, $h$ is naturally a function on $\M_{abs}$.
Finally, there is the natural projection $\pi\colon\M\to\M_{abs}$ from the Mandelbrot set $\M$ to the abstract Mandelbrot set $\M_{abs}$. It is defined by mapping every landing point $c(\theta)$ of any rational parameter ray $\theta$ to the equivalence class of the angle $\theta$; then $\pi$ is the unique continuous map with this property.
\looseness-1
We thus obtain a unique map $\tilde h=h\circ\pi\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$, and continuity of $\tilde h$ follows from continuity of $h$, with continuity of $\pi$ being well known.
More specifically, the map $\tilde h$ can also be constructed explicitly as follows.
\begin{definition}[Entropy Associated to Quadratic Polynomial in $\M$]
\label{Def:CoreEntropyTilde}
Let $p_c(z):=z^2+c$ be any quadratic polynomial with $c\in\C$ for which the critical value is in the Julia set, and let $\theta$ be the external angle of any dynamic ray that lands or accumulates at $c$. The \emph{critical ray pair} will be the ray pair $RP(\theta/2,(1+\theta)/2)$, and a precritical ray pair of generation $n$ will be any ray pair on the backwards orbit of the critical ray pair and that takes $n$ iterations to map to the ray $R(\theta)$.
If $p_c$ is such that the critical value is in the Fatou set, then it has an attracting or parabolic orbit and there is a unique periodic characteristic ray pair; precritical ray pairs are then defined as ray pairs on its backward orbit.
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the \emph{core entropy} of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
Note that we use the term ``separation'' in a combinatorial sense: the two rays in a separating ray pairs either land together or accumulate at the same fiber.
The usual definition of core entropy is modeled after the postcritically finite case: here, the Hubbard tree is a finite tree with a finite and forward invariant set of marked points (the critical point and its forward orbit, as well as all branch points). The finite set of edges on the tree form a Markov chain with associated transition matrix, where the matrix element $M_{i,j}$ is $0$, $1$, or $2$ if the edge $e_i$ covers the edge $e_j$ respectively $0$, $1$, or $2$ times. Having only positive real entries, this matrix has a leading eigenvalue which is real, and its logarithm is defined as the core entropy of the given postcritically finite parameter.
This definition coincides with the classical definition of topological entropy of general dynamical systems, and it also applies in the postcritically infinite case as long as the Hubbard tree is defined (i.e.\ the Julia set is path connected) and still finite. However, the number of edges of the Hubbard trees is not locally bounded even among postcritically finite maps, which makes entropy estimates based on these transition matrices difficult.
It is well known, at least in the postcritically finite case, that if $x$ is any point on the Hubbard tree and $N_x(n)$ is the number of preimages of $x$ of generation $n$, then $h=\limsup_n \log N_x(n)$ is the core entropy. Since each of the finitely many edges, except those within ``renormalizable little Julia sets'', will cover the entire tree after finitely many iterations, one can as well count only those preimages of $x$ that are on an arbitrary subset of the edges of the Hubbard tree, as long as at least one of these edges is not in a renormalizable little Julia set. For instance, instead of counting precritical leaves on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (as in our definition above) we may count preimages on $[\alpha,\beta]$ (as we will do in Section~\ref{Sec:Continuity}) or on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
\begin{lemma}[Definitions of Core Entropy Coincide]
\label{Lem:defEntropy} \lineclear
For postcritically finite polynomials, the core entropy as in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} coincides with the usual definition (in terms of transition matrices on finite Hubbard trees).
If $p_c$ has the property that the critical value is in the impression of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$, then the core entropy of $p_c$ equals the core entropy of the lamination $L_\theta$.
\end{lemma}
It is well known that if several parameter rays accumulate at the same parameter in $\M$, then the laminations associated to their corresponding angles coincide, so these angles have the same entropy.
If $\theta\in\Circle$ is a rational angle, we define $c(\theta)$ as the landing point in $\M$ of the parameter ray at angle $\theta$, and within any connected Julia set we define $z(\theta)$ as the landing point of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$.
If $c,\tilde c$ are two parameters in $\M$, we say $c\prec \tilde c$ if there is a parameter ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ at periodic angles that separates $\tilde c$ simultaneously from $c$ and from the origin.
\begin{lemma}[Monotonicity of Lamination and of Entropy]
\label{Lem:Monotonicity}
If $c\prec \tilde c$, then $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ for all $n$ and thus $h(\tilde c)\ge h(c)$. Moreover, any characteristic leaf in $L_c$ also occurs in $L_{\tilde c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is routine to check that any precritical leaf of $c$ also ``occurs'' in the dynamics (or the lamination) of $\tilde c$: the major leaf (or leaves) in $L_{\tilde c}$ separate the two major leaves in $L_c$. Precritical leaves in $L_{c}$ are preimages of the pair of major leaves (the preimages of this pair are always ``parallel'', i.e.\ not separated by the critical value, because otherwise the forward orbit of the critical value would have to intersect the domain bounded by the two major leaves). Each pair of preimages surrounds one preimage of the major leaf of $\tilde c$ (or a pair of preimages of the major leaves), and when such a preimage separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative in $L_c$, then it also does so for $L_{\tilde c}$. Therefore, $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ and $\tilde h(\tilde c)\ge \tilde h(c)$.
The statement about characteristic leaves (or characteristic ray pairs) is well known and follows, for instance, from Milnor's Orbit Portraits \cite{MiOrbits}.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Topological Surgery on dyadic Hubbard trees}
Recall the vein structure of $\M$: every dyadic parameter $c$ has a unique \emph{long vein} $V(c)$, that is an injective arc connecting $c$ to $0$, subject to the condition that it traverses hyperbolic components along internal rays. (The existence of such arcs is a non-trivial theorem, established by Jeremy Kahn using Yoccoz' puzzle results, and by Johannes Riedl using quasiconformal surgery. However, it is sufficient to use a weaker combinatorial version of this result, defining the combinatorial arc as the set of postsingularly finite parameters that separate $c$ from the origin, together with the induced order.) The \emph{vein} of $c$ is the shortest closed sub-arc of the long vein connecting $c$ to the union of the long veins of all dyadic parameters of lower generation than $c$.
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then it is well known that their long veins intersect in an arc $[0,x]$, where $x$ is postcritically finite; this result is known as the ``branch theorem'' of $\M$ \cite{Orsay,MandelBranch}.
\begin{definition}[Directly Subordinate Parameter $c\lhd c'$]
\label{Def:DirectlySubordinate} \lineclear
We say that $ c$ is \emph{directly subordinate} to $c'$ and write $c\lhd c'$ if the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$; in addition, any dyadic parameter whose vein terminates at $0$ is declared to be subordinate to $c=-2$ with dyadic angle $1/2$.
\end{definition}
If $c\lhd c'$, then necessarily the external angle of $c'$ has lower denominator than that of $c$.
Note that this is not a transitive relation and thus not a partial order. A few directly subordinate dyadic parameters are illustrated in Figure~\ref{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\framebox{\includegraphics{DirectlySubordinate_Fig2.pdf}}
\caption{Illustration of directly subordinate parameters: we have $c(3/16)\lhd c(1/4)$, $c(1/4)\lhd c(1/2)$, and $c(3/8)\lhd c(1/2)$. Arrows indicate where the vein to some dyadic parameter terminates at the vein of the dyadic parameter to which it is directly subordinate.}
\label{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}[Entropy Between Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} \lineclear
a) If $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $N(n)\le N'(n)$ for all $n$, and $N(n)<N'(n)$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
\noindent b) If $c\lhd c'$ are both dyadic, then $\tilde h(c)<\tilde h(c')$.
\end{theorem}
Here $N(n)$ and $N'(n)$ denote the numbers of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ for $p_c$ and for $p_{c'}$. This immediately implies a weak version of the Tiozzo conjecture:
\begin{corollary}[Dyadic Version of Tiozzo Conjecture]
\label{Cor:DyadicTiozzoConjecture}\lineclear
Every dyadic angle $\theta$ has a neighborhood on which $h$, restricted to dyadic angles, assumes its unique maximum at $\theta$ (a dyadic version of the Tiozzo conjecture).
\end{corollary}
%\newpage
Let us now state the Correspondence Theorem relating the combinatorics of dynamical and parameter ray pairs. Following Milnor~\cite{MiOrbits}, a periodic or preperiodic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ (with $\phi^-,\phi^+\in\Circle$) in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ is called \emph{characteristic} if the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together in such a way that they separate the critical value $c$ from the critical point $0$ as well as from all other rays landing at $\cup_{k\ge 0}p_{c}^{\circ k}(x)$.
\begin{theorem}[Correspondence Theorem]
\label{thm:Corresp} \lineclear
A dynamic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ with $\phi^\pm$ rational is characteristic if and only if the parameter rays with angles $\phi^-$ and $\phi^+$ land together and separate the parameters $c$ and $0$ from each other.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}[Monotonicity of Rational Lamination on Hubbard Tree]
\label{Cor:CountPartsHubTree}
Let $c,c'\in\M$ be two postcritically finite parameters such that $c\prec c'$. Suppose that in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ two periodic or preperiodic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together at some point in the Hubbard tree of $p_c$, but not on the backwards orbit of the critical value. Then in the dynamical plane of $c'$ the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ also land together and the landing point is in the Hubbard tree of $c'$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
In the dynamic plane of $p_c$, let $x$ be the landing point of the dynamic ray pair $RP(\theta^-,\theta^+)$; it is by hypothesis in the Hubbard tree of $c$. Let $x':=p_c^{\circ t}(x)$ be the characteristic point on the orbit of $x$: this is the unique point that separates the critical value from all other points on the forward orbit of $x$. Let $(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ be the characteristic angles at $x'$ (the ray pair at $x'$ that separates the critical value from all other rays on its orbit).
By Theorem~\ref{thm:Corresp}, the rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ form a ray pair for all parameters in the wake of $c$, and in particular for $c'$. The same is true for all pull-back ray pairs, as long as they are not in the component of $\C\sm RP(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ containing the critical value; and this is the case for the rays landing at $x$. The landing point is clearly in the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}[Dynamical Counterpart to Parameter]
\label{Def:DynamCounterpart} \lineclear
Let $c$ be a postcritically finite parameter and suppose $c'\succ c$. Then a (pre)periodic point $x$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ is called the \emph{dynamical counterpart to $c$} if
\begin{itemize}
\item
if $c$ is preperiodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the preperiodic dynamic rays at the same angles as $c$;
\item
if $c$ is periodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the periodic dynamic rays bounding (in the parameter plane) the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the periodic case, $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_c$, and the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$ is bounded by a periodic parameter ray pair landing at $\partial H_c$. The angles of this ray pair are the angles of two rays landing at $x$. For example, the $\alpha$ fixed point is the dynamical counterpart of $c=0$. In the preperiodic case, it is known that all dynamic rays with the same angles of the rays landing at $c$ also land together in the dynamical plane of $c'$.
An equivalent definition is that $x$ is the unique repelling periodic or preperiodic point in the dynamical plane of $c'$ such that the itinerary of $x$ (with respect to the critical point) equals the (upper) kneading sequence of $c$.
\begin{lemma}[Directly Subordinate Dyadics]
\label{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics} \lineclear
\looseness-1
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $c\lhd c'$ if and only if there is a postcritically finite parameter $c_*\in\M$ so that $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation within any sublimb of $c_*$, and $c$ is in a different sublimb of $c_*$ than $c'$.
In this case, denoting the external angles of $c$ and $c'$ by $\theta$ and $\theta'$, respectively, then in the dynamics of $c$ (or any other parameter in the same sublimb of $c_*$) there is a repelling (pre)periodic point $x_*$ that is the landing point of at least three dynamic rays that separate the dynamic rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$. The point $x_*$ is the dynamical counterpart to $c_*$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any two dyadic parameters are endpoints of $\M$, so by the Branch Theorem of the Mandelbrot set there is a unique postcritically finite parameter $c_*$ that contains $c$ and $c'$ in two different of its sublimbs. Let $c_0$ be the unique dyadic of least generation in any of the sublimbs of $c_*$; then $c_*$ is on the long vein of all three of $c_0$, $c$, and $c'$, and it is on the vein of $c_0$.
The assumption that $c\lhd c'$ means that the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$, and hence it must terminate at the parameter $c_*$, so $c_*$ is an interior point of the vein of $c'$. Since $c_*$ is also an interior point of the vein of $c_0$, it follows that $c'=c_0$ (two veins can never have more than one point in common).
Conversely, if $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation in the sublimb of $c_*$, then $c_*$ is in the interior of the vein of $c'$ and the vein of $c$ terminates at $c_*$. This proves the first claim.
For the second claim, we first consider the case that $c_*$ is a Mi\-siu\-re\-wicz-Thurston parameter; it is then the landing point of $s\ge 3$ rational parameter rays, say at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$, so that the parameter rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$ are in different sectors with respect to these parameter rays. Every parameter in any sublimb of $c_*$ has the property that the dynamic rays at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$ land together at a repelling preperiodic point, and the claim follows.
If $c_*$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, then the parameter $c$ is in a sublimb at internal angle $p/q\neq 1/2$, and in the dynamical plane of $c$ (or any parameter within the same sublimb) there is a repelling periodic point that is the landing point of $q\ge 3$ dynamic rays that separates the angles $0$, $\theta$ and $\theta'$ so that $\theta$ is in the largest sector not containing the angle $0$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
The main step in proving Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} is a topological surgery on Hubbard trees, as follows:
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Relation Between Subordinate Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} %\lineclear
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters with external angles $\theta$ and $\theta'$, let $H_c$ be the Hubbard tree of $c$, and let $H \supset H_c$ be the connected hull of the critical orbit and of the orbit of $z(\theta')$. Let $x$ be the branch point of the arcs from $0$ to $c$ and to $z(\theta')$. If $p_c$ is the natural map on $H$, define a map $f\colon H\to H$ as follows: choose a homeomorphism $\rho\colon[x,c]\to[x,z(\theta')]$ fixing $x$ and let
\[
f(z):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \rho\circ p_c(z) & \text{if $p_c(z)\in[x,c]$} \\
p_c(z) & \text{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.
\]
Let $H'$ be the connected hull within $H$ of the orbit of $0$ under $f$. Then $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have a connected tree $H$ containing the critical point $0$, and with respect to $f$ the orbit of $0$ is still finite (it still terminates at the $\beta$ fixed point). Therefore, $(H',f)$ is a finite tree with a continuous self-map, and the dynamics is locally injective except at the critical point $0$. Since there are at most $2$ branches at $0$, the map is globally at most $2:1$. Every endpoint is by definition on the critical orbit, so $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of a postcritically finite polynomial in which the critical orbit lands at the $\beta$ fixed point at the desired number of iterations. Let $c''$ be the corresponding parameter and $\theta''$ be the external angle; we have $\theta''=a''/2^{k'}$.
It remains to prove that $\theta''=\theta'$ and thus $c''=c'$.
Since $c\lhd c'$, there is a postcritically finite branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, that separates $c$ from $c'$, and the external angles of $c_*$ are the external angles of $x$ in the dynamical plane of $c$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). In the dynamical plane of $c''$, the point $x$ has the same external angles because it has the same period and preperiod and the dynamics of the subtree connecting the orbit of $x$ is unaffected by the surgery (except the bit around the critical point that maps past $x$). Hence $\theta''$ is the unique dyadic of least generation that is separated from the angle $0$ by the angles of $x$, and the same is true for $\theta'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The fact that $c''=c'$ can also be shown using spiders \cite{Spiders} and Thurston's theorem. Let us topologically extend the map $f:H' \to H'$ to a continuous map on $\C$ as follows. First, we set $f$ to be $p_c$ on the dynamic rays $R({2^{t}\theta'})$ of $p_c$, where $t\in\{0,1,\dots, k'\}$. There are $k'+1$ topological discs in the complement of $H'\cup_{t\ge 0} R({2^{t}\theta'})$ and the map $f$ easily extends to each of them as a homeomorphism. The new map $f$ is a topological polynomial for which $\bigcup_t R({2^{t}\theta'})$ forms an invariant spider. Since this spider is equivalent to a standard invariant spider of $c'$, we get $c'=c''$ by Thurston rigidity \cite{DHThurston,Spiders}.
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Injective Dynamics of Last Edge]
\label{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}
In any dyadic Julia set, consider any dyadic angle $\theta=a/2^k$ with $k\ge 1$ and let $x$ be the point where the arc from $z(\theta)$ to $\alpha$ is attached to the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generations $a'/2^{k'}$ with $k'<k$. Then $[z(\theta),x]$ maps injectively for $k$ iterations to an interval $[\beta,y]\subset[\beta,\alpha]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For every integer $m\ge 0$, let $T_m$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $m$. Let $f$ be the map on the Julia set.
The edge $[z(\theta),x]\subset \ovl{T_k\sm T_{k-1}}$ certainly maps forward homeomorphically one generation to an arc $[z(2\theta),x']$, where $x'=f(x)\in f(T_{k-1})$.
We claim that $[z(2\theta),x']\subset \ovl{T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2}}$ so that the inductive step applies and completes the proof.
We first show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, $T_{k-2}$ is the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k-2$. Consider an endpoint $y$ of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$. If $f(y)\in T_{k-2}$ was not an endpoint, so it was connected to at least two edges in $T_{k-2}$, then $y$ would have to be connected to at least two edges in $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$, a contradiction. Thus every endpoint of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$ is a dyadic endpoint of generation at least $k-1$ and hence $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
Finally, if $[z(2\theta),x']$ intersects $T_{k-2}$, then $[z(\theta),x]$ intersects $T_{k-1}$, and by hypothesis this intersection is the single point $x$. Hence $[z(2\theta),x']\subset (T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2})\cup\{x'\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In this lemma, the hypothesis that the polynomial be dyadic was stated only for convenience. All we are using is that the Julia set is path connected (if there are bounded Fatou components, the notation needs minor adjustments).
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Homeomorphic Preimage of Arc]
\label{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}
Suppose that $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters and let $\theta,\theta'$ be their external angles. In the Julia set of $c$, let $x$ be the branch point between $0$, $z(\theta)=c$ and $z(\theta')=:z'$. If $\theta=a/2^k$, then there is a point $y'\in(z',x)$ so that $p_c^{\circ k}\colon [z',y']\to p_c^{\circ k}([z',y'])= p_c^{\circ k}([ c,x])$ is a homeomorphism.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that $[c,x]$ maps homeomorphically for $k$ iterations to a subinterval of $[\beta,\alpha]$; define $y:=p_c^{\circ k}(x)\in(\beta,\alpha]$.
Similarly, there is a point $x'\in[z',0]$ so that $[z',x']$ maps forward homeomorphically for $k'$ iterations (if $\theta'=a'/2^{k'}$). We have
$x'\in[x,0]$ (or equivalently $x\in[z',x']$) because $c\lhd c'$, i.e.\ $c$ is \emph{directly} subordinate to $c'$.
More precisely, the external angles of the dynamic rays landing at $x$ are exactly the external angles of the parameter rays landing at a branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, where the vein of $c$ terminates (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). Analogously, the same is true for the point $x'$ and the vein of $c'$; let $c'_*$ be this branch point. But since $c\lhd c'$, it follows that $c'_*$ separates $c_*$ from the origin, and hence, by the Correspondence Theorem, $x'$ separates $x$ from the origin.
%\newpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{HubbardTreeBranchPic4.pdf}
}
\caption{Illustration of the relative position of various points in the Hubbard tree of $c$ in the proof of Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}. Note that we do not know or need the relative position between $0$, $y$, and $y''$; in particular, we do not claim $y''\in[\beta,y]$.
}
\label{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}
\end{figure}
Let $y'':=p_c^{\circ k'}(x)$; then $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon[z',x]\to[\beta,y'']$ is a homeomorphism. Iterating this $k-k'$ further times, the image arc terminates at $\beta$ and at $y$, but it can no longer be injective (the map $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[c,x]\to [\beta,y]$ is a homeomorphism, and $p_c^{\circ k}$ is a local homeomorphism near $x$ because $x$ cannot be on the critical orbit).
There is a branch $p_c^{-1}\colon[\beta,\alpha]\to[\beta,-\alpha]$; let $[\beta,y''']$ be the image of $[\beta,y]$ under the $k-k'$-th iterate of this branch.
Observe that $[y''',\beta]\subsetneq[y'',\beta]$ because otherwise $p_c^{\circ (k-k')}$ restricted to $[\beta,y'']$ would have degree $1$. Pulling back $k'$ times we obtain an interval $[z',y']\subset[z',x]$ so that $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon [z',y']\to[\beta,y''']$ and $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[z',y']\to[\beta,y]$ are homeomorphisms, as claimed.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Injection Between Precritical Points]
\label{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters. There exists a generation-preserving injection $B$ from the set of precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ to the set of precritical points in $[c',-\alpha]$ of $p_{c'}$. Moreover, $B$ could be taken to satisfy the following properties (A)--(C). Suppose $\zeta\in [c,-\alpha]$ is a precritical point.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] For $k\ge 0$ we have $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))\in [c',-\alpha]$. Moreover, if $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$, then
\[
B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta)).
\]
\item[(B)] Assume $c_*$ is a postcritically finite parameter such that $c_* \prec c$ and $c_* \prec c'$. Let $x_*$ and $x'_*$ be the dynamic counterparts of $c_*$ in the dynamical planes of $c$ and $c'$. Then $\zeta\in [x_*,-\alpha]$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in [x'_*,-\alpha]$.
\item[(C)] There is a sub-interval $J\subset [c', \alpha]$ such that $p^{\circ k }_{c'}(J)=[-\alpha, \alpha ]$ for some $k>0$ and such that the image of $B$ is in $[c',-\alpha]\setminus J$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition~\ref{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} and its notation, we may identify $p_{c'}:H_{c'}\to H_{c'}$ with $f:H'\to H'$. Under this identification $x'_*$ is $x_*$ which is a periodic or preperiodic point that never visits $[x,c]$ under iterates of $p_c$. We will now construct a bijection $B$ between precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and those precritical points in $[z',-\alpha]\setminus [y',x]$ of $f$ for which the orbit never visits $[y',x]$, where $y'$ is specified in Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage} (see Figure~\ref{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}).
In fact, our bijection will preserve the itinerary with respect to $H\sm\{0\}$, except for $k$ iterations along the orbit from $[c,x]$ to $[\beta,y]=p_c^{\circ k}([c,x])$ (resp.\ from $[z',y']$ to $[\beta,y]$).
Our proof proceeds by induction on the number of times, say $m$, that an orbit of a precritical point $\zeta$ runs through $[c,x]$ (not counting $\zeta$ itself). We start by those precritical points on $[c,x]$ (for the map $p_c$) that never run through $(c,x)$ again, that is with the case $m=0$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}, an appropriate branch of $f^{\circ(-k)}\circ p_c^{\circ k}$ sends $[c,x]$ homeomorphically to $[z',y']$; call this branch $\eta\colon[c,x]\to [z',y']$. Then for any $a\in[c,x]$, we have $p_c^{\circ k}(a)=f^{\circ k}(\eta(a))$ and the future orbits of these points under $p_c$ respectively under $f$ coincide as long as the orbits avoid $[c,x]$. Note that all precritical points on $[c,x]$ must have generation at least $k$. We thus obtain an injection, say $B_0$, of precritical points with $m=0$.
Every precritical point $\zeta\in[c,x]$ of generation $n$ and with $m=0$ is the common endpoint of two adjacent sub-intervals of $[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after $n$ iterations: we have $p_c^{\circ n}(\zeta)=c$ and $p_c^{\circ (n-1)}(\zeta)=0$, so we can pull the entire interval $[c,x]$ back in two ways (with a choice in the first step) until we end at $\zeta$. The pull-back of the entire interval $[c,x]$ is possible because no critical value can interfere (the critical orbit visits only endpoints of the tree), and the resulting interval is in $[c,x]$ because the Hubbard tree is unbranched on $[c,x)$ and the orbit of $x$ never enters $[c,x)$.
There is an analogous result about precritical points $\zeta'\in[z',y']$ of $f$ with $m=0$ and sub-intervals of $[z',y']$ that map to $[z',y']$: by construction of $y'$, the point $\zeta'$ has generation $n\ge k$, and there is a precritical point $\zeta=\eta^{-1}(\zeta')\in[c,x]$. The point $\zeta$ has neighborhood, say $I_\zeta\subset [c,x]$ that maps $2:1$ onto $[c,x]$ (the union of the two intervals constructed above), and then $\zeta'$ has a neighborhood $I_{\zeta'}\subset[z',y']$ with $p_c^{\circ k}(I_{\zeta'})=p_c^{\circ k}(I_\zeta)\subset[\beta,y]$.
The bijection $B_0$ of precritical points with $m=0$ thus extends to a bijection between intervals $I\subset[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after some number of iterations without visiting $(c,x)$ before, and intervals $I'\subset [z',y']$ that map homeomorphically onto $[z',y']$ after the same number of iterations and without ever visiting $(z',y')$; this bijection respects the number of iterations as well as the order along the intervals within $[c,x]$ and $[z',y']$ (the intervals are obviously disjoint). Denote this bijection of intervals by $B^*_0$.
Now suppose the statement is shown for all precritical points on $[c,x]$ that visit $(c,x)$ at most $m$ times, for some $m\ge 0$; in particular, we have an injection, say $B_m$, from precritical points on $(c,x)$ that map into $(c,x)$ exactly $m$ times, to precritical points on $(z',y')$ that map into $(z',y')$ exactly $m$ times. Consider any precritical point $\zeta\in(c,x)$ that visits $(c,x)$ exactly $m+1$ times, and let $s$ be minimal such that $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$. Then there is an interval $I\ni \zeta$ so that $p_c^{\circ s}\colon I\to[c,x]$ is a homeomorphism (same reasoning as above).
Let $I':=B^*_0(I)$. Then $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$ is a precritical point that visits $(c,x)$ only $m$ times, and $B_{m+1}(\zeta)=\zeta':= f^{\circ(-s)}\circ B_m \circ p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)$, choosing the branch $f^{\circ(-s)}\colon [y',z']\to I'$.
Since the map $B^*_0$ is injective, different intervals $I$ land in disjoint intervals $I'$, and since $B_m$ is injective by induction, the restriction of $B_{m+1}$ that run through any particular $I$ is injective too, so in total $B_{m+1}$ is injective as claimed.
This takes care of all precritical points on $[c,x]$, and we still have to deal with those on $[x,-\alpha]$. But those with orbits that never run through $[c,x]$ are unaffected by the changed dynamics, and the injection easily extends to those that map into $[c,x]$ under $p_c$.
It remains to show that the map $B$ satisfies Properties (A) -- (C). Let us extend $B_0^*$ to all intervals in $[x,-\alpha]$ that are injective preimages of $[c,x]$ and never run through $[c,x]$ before mapping into $[c,x]$. It is easy to see that $B_0^*(I)\subset I$ for every such interval $I$, because $[z',y']\subset [z',x]$ and $g_c^{\circ -1}[c,x]=f^{-1}[z',x]$, and induction is applied. Since $x_*$ never visits $[x,c]$, we see that $x_*\not \in I$ for every maximal pre-image $I$ of $[c,x]$. Also, by construction, $\zeta \in I$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in I$ for every precritical $\zeta$ and an interval $I$ as above. Therefore, $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ are on the same side of $x_*$. It is clear that $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ have the same return times to $[c,-\alpha]$ and $[z',-\alpha]$ because $p_c^{\circ k}[c,x]=f^{\circ k}[z',y']$. And the dynamical relation $B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))$ holds by construction. Thus Properties (A) and (B) hold. To prove (C) set $J$ to be any pre-image of $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ so that $J\subset [x,y']$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees}]
From Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} we have an injection of precritical points of $p_{c}$ of any given generation on $[-\alpha,c]$ to precritical points of $p_{c'}$ of the same generation on $[-\alpha',c']$, and by claim (B) this injection restricts to the arcs $[-\alpha,\alpha]$ and $[-\alpha',\alpha']$. This immediately proves the first half of part a), and the second half follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}.
Part b) of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}: a precritical orbit of $p_{c'}$ has strictly more choices than a precritical orbit of $p_c$ thanks to the interval $J$. More precisely, consider the Hubbard tree $H_{c'}$ of $p_{c'}$; and let us add the forward orbit of the ends of $J$ into the vertex set of $H_{c'}$. Denote by$A'$ the associated automaton of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$, see Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} for a formal definition of an associated automaton. And let $A'_*\subset A'$ be the sub-automaton obtained from $A'$ by removing all states within the interval $J$ as well as all arrows starting or ending at the removed states. Then the entropy of $c$ is bounded by the entropy of $A'_*$ by claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}, while the entropy of $c'$ is equal to the entropy of $A'$. Since $A'$ is irreducible, the entropy of $A'$ is strictly bigger than the entropy of $A'_*$.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Irrational Angles and the Tiozzo Conjecture}
In this brief section, we will complete the proof of the Tiozzo Conjecture.
\begin{lemma}[Bound for Irrational Angles]
\label{Lem:IrrationalAngle} \lineclear
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$ (dyadic or not) and every $n\in\N$ there is an $\eps>0$ so that $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ for all dyadic angles $\theta'$ with $|\theta'-\theta|<\eps$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
All the relevant precritical points correspond to non-degenerate leaves in the lamination, and there are finitely many of level $n$. As the characteristic angle $\theta$ changes, say by some $\eps>0$, then a precritical leaf of generation $k$ changes continuously by $\eps/2^k$, except when an endpoint of that precritical leaf moves through $\theta$, that is, when $\theta$ itself is periodic of period dividing $k$.
In the exceptional case that $\theta$ is periodic, there are preimage leaves that terminate at $\theta$ itself, but these do not separate and are thus not counted.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[The Tiozzo Conjectures]
\label{Cor:TiozzoConj} \lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\item[d)]
Within every wake, for each $n$ the function $N_\theta(n)$ assumes its maximum at the dyadic of least generation (of course, this maximum is not unique).
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Fix a dyadic angle $\theta_0$ and let $I=I(\theta_0)\subset\Circle$ be the open interval of angles $\theta$ for which the combinatorial arcs to $c(\theta)$ intersect the interior of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$ (not the long vein). In other words, if $c_*$ is the endpoint of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$, then $I$ consists of the angles within the same subwake of $c_*$ that $c(\theta)$ is in. Clearly $\theta_0\in I$. Every dyadic angle in $I$ is either directly or indirectly subordinate to $\theta_0$ (where the latter means that there is a finite sequence of dyadic angles ending at $\theta_0$ so that each is directly subordinate to the next).
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} part b), we know that $h$ restricted to dyadic angles in $I$ has its unique maximum at $\theta_0$.
We claim that for every $\theta\in I$ and every $n\in\N$ we have $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ and hence $h(\theta)\le h(\theta_0)$. Indeed, for every $n$ there is a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ sufficiently close to $\theta$ with $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:IrrationalAngle}), and $N_{\theta'(n)}\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ by definition of $I$. Therefore $\theta_0$ is a (weak) local maximum of $N_\theta(n)$ and of $h$.
However, if $\theta$ is dyadic, then we even have $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$. If $c(\theta)\prec c(\theta_0)$, then $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$ by monotonicity along dyadic veins. Otherwise, choose a new dyadic $\theta'$ so that $\theta\in I(\theta')$ but $\theta_0\not\in I(\theta')$. We then have $h(\theta)\le h(\theta')<h(\theta_0)$. Therefore, $\theta_0$ is the unique global maximum within $I(\theta_0)\ni\theta_0$. This proves claim a) in the stronger form that $h$ has a unique global maximum on $I(\theta_0)$, and this occurs at $\theta_0$.
For part c), consider any hyperbolic component $W$ and let $I$ be the open interval of angles within its wake. Let $\theta_W$ be the unique dyadic of lowest generation within $I$. Then $I(\theta_W)\supset I$, and on this interval $h$ has its unique global maximum at $\theta_W$. Now suppose $W$ is a wake that is not the wake of a hyperbolic component: then either it is one of the subwakes of a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters, or an irrational wake (bounded by two irrational angles with equal angled internal address). But such wakes are exhausted by wakes of hyperbolic components, so the claim holds for them as well. Part d) also follows.
For claim b), suppose $\theta$ is a local maximum of $h$, and let $I\subset\Circle$ be an interval on which $\theta$ is the global maximum. By monotonicity, $\theta$ lands (combinatorially) at an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. If $\theta$ is not dyadic, then choose a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ with $\theta\in I(\theta')\subset I$.
Then the unique global maximum of $h$ within $I(\theta')$ is at $\theta'$, so $\theta=\theta'$ is dyadic.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Continuity of Entropy}
\label{Sec:Continuity}
We start with a combinatorial estimate. A ``combinatorial pattern of length $n$ with gap size $s$'' is a finite sequence of integers $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ with $1\le j_1< j_2 < \dots < j_m< n$ and $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s$ and $n-j_m\ge s$.
\begin{lemma}[Number of Combinatorial Patterns]
\label{Lem:CombinatorialPatterns}
The number of combinatorial patterns of length $n$ with gap size $s$ is at most $e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The number of combinatorial patterns equals the number of binary sequences of length $n$ where two consecutive digits $1$ have distance at least $s$, and so that the final digit is a $1$. Write $n=ks+r$ with $r<s$. Then each block of $s$ consecutive entries has $s+1$ possibilities because it has at most a single $1$, and the last block has $r-1$ digits $0$ followed by a $1$, so it has $1$ possibility. The number of combinatorial patterns is thus at most $(s+1)^k\le e^{k\log(s+1)}\le e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
In the following proof, it will be convenient to define relevant precritical points as precritical points on $[\alpha,\beta]$, i.e.\ precritical leaves separating the two fixed points $\alpha$ and $\beta$ or their corresponding leaves in the lamination (rather than separating $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$ as before).
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Different Counts Yield Identical Entropy]
\label{lem:DifferCounts}
\lineclear
In any invariant quadratic lamination, let $N_1(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves that separate $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$, and let $N_2(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves of generation $n$ separating the leaves corresponding to the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points. Then
\[
\limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_1(n) = \limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_2(n)
\;;
\]
in other words, both counting functions define the same entropy.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $-\alpha\in[\alpha,\beta]$, we clearly have $N_1(n)\le N_2(n)$. To show the converse, we claim that $N_2(n) \le (N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+ N_1(n-2)+\dots) $.
To see this, denote $\alpha_0:=\alpha$ and, recursively, $\alpha_{n+1}$ to be the unique preimage of $\alpha_n$ on $[\alpha,\beta]$, so $\alpha_1=-\alpha$. Then $[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_n]$ maps homeomorphically onto $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n-1}]$ and $[\alpha,\beta]=\bigcup_{n\ge 0}[\alpha_{n},\alpha_{n+1}]$. If $N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n)$ denotes the number of precritical points of generation $n$ on $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]$, then we have $N_{[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_{n+2}]}(n)=N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n-1)$ and $N_{[\alpha_{0},\alpha_{1}]}(n)=N_1(n)$ and indeed $N_2(n) = N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+N_1(n-2)+\dots$. If $N_1\le C e^{(h+\eps)n}$ for all $n$, then $N_2(n)\le 2Cn e^{(h+\eps)n}$. Therefore, $N_1$ and $N_2$ define the same entropy.
\end{proof}
In view of this lemma, we will take the liberty in the following result to count relevant precritical points (leaves) as those separating the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points.
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Bound on Entropy Increase]
\label{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} \lineclear
Suppose $c_1\prec c_2$ and $[c_1,c_2]$ is a (combinatorial) arc in $\M$ such that $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$. Then there is an $s>0$ with the following property: if $[c,c']$ is a dyadic vein of generation at least $s$ that terminates at $c\in [c_1,c_2]$, then $\tilde h(c')-\tilde h(c_2)\le \eps$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $h:=\tilde h(c_2)$. There is a $C>0$ so that all $c\in [c_1,c_2]$ satisfy $N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)\le Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$ for all $n$. We may suppose that $s$ is large enough so that $2C\le e^{(h+\eps/2)s}$. Let $s'\ge s$ be the generation of $c'$.
Let $f' \colon H'\to H'$ denote the Hubbard tree of the dyadic parameter $c'$ and $f\colon H\to H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$ (as endpoint of a dyadic vein in $\M$, $c$ is postcritically finite, so both Hubbard trees exist and are finite). Let $x\in H'$ be the dynamical counterpart of $c$.
Recall that $x$ is a characteristic periodic or preperiodic point in the sense that the entire orbit of $x$ is contained in the closure of the component of $H'\sm\{x\}$ that contains $0$.
In particular, the orbit of $x$ is disjoint from $(x,c']$. It follows that any connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ is either contained in $[x,c']$ or intersects it at most in $\{x\}$. (Otherwise, $x$ would be in the interior of $I$ and after $n$ iterates $x$ would be mapped into $(x,c']$.)
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that
\begin{equation}
(f')^{\circ (s')}([x,c']) \subset[\alpha,\beta]
\;.
\label{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}
\end{equation}
and, moreover, the orbit of $(f')^{\circ m}([x,c'])$ for $m\in \{0,1,\dots , s'-1\}$ does not contain $0$.
By a maximal preimage of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n>0$ we
mean a connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ so that $I\not\subset (f')^{-m}[x,c']$
for every $m\in\{1,2,\dots,n\}$; equivalently, $(f')^{\circ m}(I)\not \subset [x,c']$ for all $m<n$.
We denote by $M$ the set of all maximal preimages of $[x,c']$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$.
An \emph{itinerary} of $I$ will be a sequence $s_{0}s_1\dots s_{n-2}\in\{\0,\1\}^\N$ where each $s_{i}$ describes the connected component of $H'\setminus \{0\}$ containing $(f')^i(I)$ (labeled for instance so that the critical value is in the component with label $\1$).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:PreCritInterv}
There is an itinerary preserving inclusion from
\begin{itemize}
\item the set $M$ of maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n$; to
\item the set of precritical points of $f:H\to H$ of generation $n$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, a maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ belongs to the interval $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H'$ if and only if the corresponding precritical point belongs to $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $[c', c]$ is a dyadic vein, we may associate to $f:H\to H$ and $f'\colon H' \to H'$ the automata $A$ and $A'$ as in Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} such that there is an inclusion $J:A\hookrightarrow A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'} we denote by $e_0$ the unique state of $A'$ containing the critical point.
Then maximal preimages $I$ of $[x,c']$ of generation $n$ are in bijection with paths $s$ in $J( A)$ of length $n-1$ terminating at $e_0$ and starting at states in $[x,\beta]$. Indeed, every such $s$ is uniquely described by a sequence of states $s_0,s_1,\dots , s_{n-2}$ in $A'$ such that $(f')^{\circ i}(I) \subset s_i$. Since $I$ is a maximal preimage, all $s_i$ are in $J(A)$.
Further, $J^{-1}(s)$ defines a unique critical point in $[c,\beta]$ of $f$ because $J^{-1}(s)$ starts at a state in $[c,\beta]$ and terminates at $J^{-1}(e_0)$ containing the critical point. This constructs the required injection.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
By Lemma~\ref{lem:PreCritInterv} the number of intervals in $M$ of generation $n$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$ is bounded above by $Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$.
In order to bound the number of precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of any generation $n$ in the dynamics of $f'\colon H'\to H'$, consider any relevant (i.e.\ between the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ points) precritical point $\ell$ of generation $n$. Let $j_1<j_2<\dots <j_m=n$ be the set of all iterates so that $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$.
Then $\ell$, $(f')^{\circ (j_1+s')}(\ell)$, $(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell)$,\dots , $(f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$ are within $[\alpha,\beta]$; compare \eqref{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}. This also implies that $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s'$.
Let $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}\in M$ be the unique intervals in $M$ containing, respectively,
$\ell, (f')^{\circ(j_1+s')}(\ell),(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell),\dots , (f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$; their respective generations are $j_1, j_2-j_1-s',\dots , j_{m}-j_{m-1}-s'$.
Then $\ell$ has itinerary $\s=s_0s_2\dots s_{n-2}$ of $\ell$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $s_0s_1\dots s_{j_1-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_0$;
\item $s_{j_i}s_{j_i+1}\dots s_{j_i+s'-1}$ is the kneading sequence of $c'$;
\item $s_{j_{i}+s'}s_{j_{i}+s'+1}\dots s_{j_{i+1}-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_i$; and
\item all $s_{j_{i}-1}$ are arbitrary in $\{\0,\1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We justify this as follows:
$(f')^{\circ(j_1-1)} $ maps $I_0$ homeomorphically, while $(f')^{\circ j_1}\colon I_0\to [x,\tilde c]$ is a $2:1$-map, so the first $j_1-2$ iterates do not contain $0$ and all points in $I_0$ have the same entries in their itineraries up to entry number $j_1-2$.
Since $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$, the next iterates are the same as for $[x,c']$ and, in particular, for $c'$, hence equal to the kneading sequence of $c'$, at least before $c'$ lands at the $\beta$ fixed point, that is for $s'-1$ iterations. The iterate $(f')^{\circ (j_i+s')}(\ell)$ is by definition in $I_i$, and this interval travels forward homeomorphically until it covers $0$, which is the iteration before it reaches $[x,c']$ the next time; since the latter is at iterate $j_{i+1}$, the itinerary of $\ell$ coincides with that of $I_i$ until position $j_{i+1}-2$. In the subsequent iterate, the image interval $(f')^{\circ j_{i+1}-j_i-1}(I_i)$ contains $0$, so both entries in the itinerary might be possible.
Now consider the set of all precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of generation $n$ corresponding to a particular combinatorial pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$.
We just showed that in order to determine the itinerary of $\ell$ we only need to specify $s_{j_1-1},s_{j_2-1},\dots , s_{j_m-1}\in \{\0,\1\}$ as well as the intervals $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}$ as above; their numbers we estimated above. Therefore, the total number of precritical points with pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ is at most
\[
2 C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_1-1)} \left(\prod_{i=1}^{m-1} 2C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_{i+1}-j_i-s'-1)}\right)\le2C e^{(h+\eps/2)n}
\]
because $2Ce^{-s'}\le 1$ by hypothesis.
Since the number of combinatorial patterns is at most $e^{\log(s'+1)n/s'}$, it follows that $N_{\tilde c}(n) \le 2 C e^{n(h+\eps/2+\log(s'+1)/s')}$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\tilde h(\tilde c)
&\le \limsup_n \frac{1}{n}\left(\log 2 +\log C + n (h+\eps/2)+\frac{n}{s'}\log(s'+1) \rule{0pt}{11pt} \right)
\\
&\le h+\eps/2+ \frac{\log (s'+1)}{s'} \le h+\eps
\;
\end{align*}
if $s'\ge s$ is sufficiently large.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy Near Veins]
\label{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins} \lineclear
Suppose $\theta\in\Circle$ is such that topological entropy is continuous along the (combinatorial) vein connecting the parameters $0$ to $c(\theta)$ in $\M$. Then $h$ is continuous for all parameters on $[0,c(\theta)]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
It may be helpful to explain the statement. Let $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to \C$ be a parametrization of the (combinatorial) arc $[0,c(\theta)]$. Then the hypothesis says that $h(\gamma(t))$ is continuous for $t\in[0,1]$ (only considering parameters along the arc). The conclusion is that then $h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\gamma(t)$ for all $t$. (Note that this hypothesis is known to be true for all angles $\theta\in\Circle$, except when $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$ at an irrational angle \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}; we will treat the missing case in Section~\ref{Sec:IrratEndpoints}).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, suppose $c_a\prec c_b$ are two parameters in $\M$ with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$; we allow $c_b$ to be a (combinatorial) endpoint of $\M$. Denote by $\text{wake}(c_a)$ the open wake of $c_a$: this is the set of all parameters in $\M$ that are separated from $0$ by two parameter rays landing at (or accumulating at) $c_a$. If $c_a$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then we set $\text{wake}(c_a)$ to be the subwake of $c_a$ containing $c_b$. Similarly $\text{wake}(c_b)$ is defined; if $c_b$ is a combinatorial endpoint of the Mandelbrot set, then $\text{wake}(c_b)=\emptyset$. Set $W:=\ovl{\text{wake}(c_a)}\sm\text{wake}(c_b)$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} there are at most finitely many dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ with $c_i\in [c_a,c_b]$ such that the entropy variation along $[c_i,c'_i]$ exceeds $\eps$, and so that $c_b\not\in(c_i,c'_i]$. We will construct a ``reduced wake'' $W'\subset W$ in which the entropy variation is at most $2\eps$.
By the Branch Theorem \cite{Orsay}, \cite[Theorem~3.1]{MandelBranch}, the points $c_i$ are either Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters or centers of hyperbolic components. In both cases, we will exclude a subwake at $c_i$ from $W$ where the entropy variation is large.
If $c_i$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, let $W_i$ be the subwake of $c_i$ containing $c'_i$ and thus $[c_i,c'_i]$ (this subwake does not contain $c_b$). If $c_i$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_i$, then let $W_i$ be the subwake of $H_i$ that contains $c'_i$ (the root of this wake is a bifurcation parameter on $\partial H_i$).
Set $W':=W\sm \bigcup_i \ovl{W_i}$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj} (the Tiozzo Conjecture), the maximal entropy for angles within $W'$ (or more precisely, the entropy of angles corresponding to rays in $W'$) occurs either at $c_b$ or at a dyadic parameter $c'\in W'$, and in both cases it is at most $\tilde h(c_a)+2\eps$.
To prove continuity of $h$ at $\theta$, we first discuss the case that $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$. By hypothesis, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial vein $[0,c(\theta)]$, so there is a $c_a\in\M$ with $0\prec c_a\prec c(\theta)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c(\theta)) -\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$. Now we use the argument from above and construct a wake $W'$ as described.
Then all angles $\theta'\in W'$ satisfy $|h(\theta')-h(\theta)|\le 2\eps$, and these angles form a neighborhood of $\theta$, which completes the proof in this case.
The second case is that $c(\theta)$ is not an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set and $c(\theta)$ is neither on the boundary of a hyperbolic component nor a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter. We may choose an arc $(c_a,c_b)\ni c(\theta)$ (i.e., $c_a\prec c(\theta)\prec c_b$) with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a)\le 2\eps$ and proceed as above.
If $c(\theta)$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then there are finitely many branches, and the previous argument works separately for all the individual branches.
If $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of a single hyperbolic component $H$, let $c_a\in \partial H$ be the root of $H$ (the boundary point with multiplier $1$) and let $c_b$ be the period-doubling bifurcation point (the boundary point with multiplier $-1$). Then all dyadic parameters $c'\in W=\text{wake}(c_a)\sm\ovl{\text{wake}(c_b)}$ have the endpoints of their veins in $W\setminus \{c(\theta)\}$. The entropy variation of $[c_a,c_b] $ is $0$, in particular less than $\eps$.
Hence $W'$ as above provides a neighborhood of $\theta$ with small entropy variation.
Finally, if $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of two hyperbolic components, then the previous argument works separately
for both hyperbolic components.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy]
\label{Thm:Continuity} \lineclear
If $\theta\in\Circle$, then $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\theta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins}, entropy is continuous at all angles $\theta\in\Circle$ for which entropy restricted to the combinatorial arc $[0,c(\theta)]$ is continuous. This is true for all parameters $c(\theta)$ with $\theta\in\Q/\Z$ by work of Tiozzo~\cite{TiozzoThesis} and Jung \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, and consequently for all parameters that are not (combinatorial) endpoints of $\M$ at irrational angles. For combinatorial endpoints $c(\theta)$ with irrational $\theta$, we will prove this in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{corollary}[Existence of Limit]
\label{Cor:ExistenceLimit} \lineclear
In the dynamics of $p_c$, the limit $\lim_{n\to\infty} (1/n)\log N(n)$ exists whenever $p_c$ is non-renormalizable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, if $c$ is non-renormalizable and postcritically finite, then $\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)=\lim_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)$ by irreducibility of the associated subshift of finite type. If $c$ is not postcritically finite and not an endpoint of $\M$ (that is, $c$ is associated to two external angles in $\M$), then there are two non-renormalizable parameters $c_1$ and $c_2$ with $N_{c_1}(n)\le N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le\eps$ for arbitrary $\eps>0$ and the result holds as well (here we use continuity of entropy).
Finally, if $c$ is a non-renormalizable endpoint, then by continuity of $\tilde h$ for any $\eps>0$ there exists a postcritically finite non-renormalizable parameter $c_1\prec c$ so that $\tilde h(c)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$.
By monotonicity, we have $\liminf(1/n)N_c(n)\ge \liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)$, and
$\limsup(1/n)N_c(n)=\tilde h(c)\le \tilde h(c_1)+\eps=\liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)+\eps\le \liminf(1/n)N_{c}(n)+\eps$. Since $\eps>0$ was arbitrary, the claim follows in this case too.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Irrational endpoints}
\label{Sec:IrratEndpoints}
In this section, we prove that for every combinatorial endpoint $c$ of $\M$, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial arc $[0,c]$. This is known when $c$ is postcritically finite \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, but we need it in all cases. This proof provides the missing step in the continuity proof in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}.
We will approximate the irrational endpoints by dyadic ones, and of course we need uniform estimates for the latter (see Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}).
\subsection{Hubbard trees}
\label{ss:HaubTrees}
We need to start by discussing some more properties of Hubbard trees of postcritically finite polynomials.
The \emph{marked points} or \emph{vertices} of the Hubbard tree are the endpoints, branch points, and the postcritical points. (In fact, all endpoints are postcritical points; critical points are not included in their own right, but they might be postcritical, for instance when they are periodic, and when the degree is greater than $2$ then they might also be branch points.) Since the set of vertices is forward invariant, every edge (a closed arc connecting two vertices) maps over one or several entire edges, so that the image contains every edge the interior of which intersects the image; in other words, the edges form a Markov partition on the Hubbard tree. --- Here, we will only discuss quadratic polynomials and Hubbard trees.
If $H_r\subset H$ is a proper subtree of $H$ with the property that $p_c^{\circ n}(H_r)\subset H_r$ for some period $n\ge 2$, then $p_c$ is \emph{renormalizable}; it is well known that this means the $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded copy of the Mandelbrot set within itself.
The main part of the argument below will be in the case that there exists an edge $e\subset H$ so that $p_c^{\circ n}(e)=H$ for every sufficiently big $n$. If $p_c$ is non-renormalizable, then every edge will do; otherwise there may still be some edge (outside of ``little Julia sets'') with this property. If there is no such edge, then we are in the ``immediate satellite renormalizable case'', that means $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded Mandelbrot set that touches the main cardioid of $\M$.
\emph{Standing Assumption:} In this subsection and the next one (Section~\ref{ss:Automata}), we assume that $H$ has an edge for which a finite iterate covers the entire Hubbard tree $H$, so that $c$ is not immediate satellite renormalizable. (In fact, this assumption will continue to hold, in different notation, until we give the proof of the general case in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}).
Consider a dyadic endpoint $c'$ with Hubbard tree $H'$ and external angle ${q}/{2^m}$. Then the critical value and every postcritical point are endpoints of $H'$, so vertices of $H'$ are either endpoints or branch points. Easy calculations show that $H'$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item $m+1$ endpoints;
\item at most $m-2$ branch points;
\item at most $2m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Let $c$ be the postcritically finite parameter where the vein of $c'$ terminates. We denote by $H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$; note that $\beta \not\in H$.
Denote by $x\in H'$ the dynamic counterpart of $c$ as in Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\begin{lemma}
The set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}\setminus \{\text{vertices of }H'\}$ contains at most $m$ points; equivalently, $p_{c'}^{\circ m}(x)$ is a branch point of $H'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde c$ be the dyadic parameter with $c'\lhd \tilde c$, so $c'$ is directly subordinate to $\tilde c$. Then $c\prec c'$ and $c\prec \tilde c$.
Denote by $\tilde q/ 2^n$ the external angle of $\tilde c$; note that $n<m$.
We will work in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, the rays landing at $x$ (this point is denoted by $x_*$ in Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}) separate $R(0), R(\tilde q/2^n)$, and $R(q/2^m)$.
Let $x(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ be the landing point of $R(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ and consider the arc $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$ in the filled-in Julia set of $p_{c'}$ (which is a dendrite). Then $x$ has at least three branches in $ H'\cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$: two of them are the branches to the critical point and to the critical value at angle $q/2^m$, and the third is $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$.
We claim that $p_{c'}^{\circ n}[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\subset H'$. Indeed, let $T_k$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. Then $p_{c'}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$ by \eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}. Therefore, $p_{c'}(T_{k-1})\subset T_{k-2}\cup H'$ and, by induction, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(T_{n})\subset H'$.
Therefore, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(x)$ has at least $3$ branches in $H'$ because $p_{c'}^{\circ n}:H' \cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\to H'$ is locally a homeomorphism at $x$, and $n<m$.
\end{proof}
Let us now refine $H'$ by adding the finite set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}$ to its vertex set. The new tree, still called $H'$, has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $3m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $3m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Here and elsewhere, we find it convenient to express some combinatorial properties in terms of \emph{automata}. We would like to reassure the reader that we only use a basic notion without results from automata theory and hope it will not be distracting. More precisely, given a postcritically finite polynomial $p_{c'}$ with Hubbard tree $H'$, we associate to it an automaton $A'$ in a natural way, as follows. The states of $A'$ correspond to the edges of $H'$. An arrow connects two edges $e_1$ and $e_2$ so that the image of $e_1$ contains $e_2$; the number of arrows from $e_1$ to $e_2$ equals the number of times the edge $e_1$ covers $e_2$ under $p_{c'}$ (this is well defined because we have a Markov partition). This number of arrows equals $0$ or $1$, except for the unique edge (if any) that contains the critical point in its interior.
Similarly, denote by $A$ the natural automaton associated with $p_c\colon H\to H$.
\emph{Overview on the argument.}
The key idea of our proof consists of identifying the dynamics of $p$ on $H$ as an embedded subset of the dynamics of $p'$ on $H'$. Since entropy measures the growth rate of choice of orbits of length $n$, the entropy of $p'$ on $H'$ is no less than the entropy of $p$ on $H$, and we need to give an upper bound on the difference. An orbit in $H'$ that realizes the additional choice is one that leaves the embedded image of $H$ in $H'$, and we show that it starts on a single edge $[x,c']$ at the critical value. We show that this edge maps forward homeomorphically a large number of iterations: so if some orbit uses the additional choice, then it will not have any choice for a long time, and this will give an upper bound on the entropy increase. We will do much of the argument in terms of the automaton $A$ that we consider as a sub-automaton of $A'$.
We start the construction by describing the relation between $H,A$ and $H',A'$ in the following lemma. We define an end-edge of $H'$ to be any edge so that among the two vertices it connects there is one endpoint of $H'$.
\begin{lemma}[Identifying $A$ as Sub-Automaton of $A'$]
\label{lem:AandA'} \lineclear
Denote by $H'_*$ the sub-tree of $H'$ obtained from $H'$ by removing all its end-vertices and (open) end-edges. Then there is a homeomorphism $J:H \to H'_*$
such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$J$ is a tree-isomorphism, i.e.\ $J$ sends vertices and edges of $H$ to vertices and edges of $ H'_*$ respectively;
\item
if $y$ is a vertex of $H$, then $J(y)$ has the same itinerary as $y$; and
\item
$J$ respects the dynamics in the sense that
an edge $e_1$ of $H$ covers once, resp twice, an edge $e_2$ under $p_c$ if and only if $J(e_1)$ covers once, resp twice, $J(e_2)$ under $p_{c'}$.
\end{enumerate}
There is a unique edge $e_0$ of $H'$ containing the critical point of $p_{c'}$. If $c$ is strictly pre-periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is in the interior of $J^{-1}(e_0)$. If $c$ is periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is on the boundary of $J^{-1}(e_0)$.
The map $J$ induces an inclusion $A \hookrightarrow A'$ by mapping a state $e$ of $A$ into the state $J(e)$ of $A'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us first define the map
\[
J: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Recall that every vertex of $H$ is a postcritical point or a branch point.
If $y\in \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}$ (in the dynamics of $p_c$) is a branch point of $H$, then $y$ is not a pre-critical point because the latter points have valence $1$ or $2$ in $H$.
In particular, there are at least $3$ external rays landing at $y$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:CountPartsHubTree} these rays at the same angle also land together in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ and the landing point, say $y'$, is in $H'_*$. We define $J(y):=y'$.
Further, let $x=J(c)$ be the dynamical counterpart (again in the dynamics of $c'$) of the parameter $c$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}. Then we set $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c)):= p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)\in H'_*$ for all $k\ge 0$. We claim that this definition is consistent and, moreover, that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
$J$ is injective on the set of vertices and
\item[(b)] $J$ preserves orientation in the following sense: if a ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ lands at a non-precritical point of $H$ so that $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates two vertices $v_1,v_2\in H$, then $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates $J(v_1)$ and $J(v_2)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
\end{itemize}
If $c$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameter, then $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of at least two external rays (because $c\prec c'$ is not an endpoint). Moreover, $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of a ray $R(\phi)$ if and only if $R(\phi)$ lands at $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c))$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$. Thus $J$ is well defined and satisfies (a) and (b).
The other case is that $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component $W$. In this case, no ray lands at $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ for $k\ge 0$ because these points are in the Fatou set. By definition, $J(c)=x$ is the landing point of periodic rays, say $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$, so that $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$ bounds the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$. Denote by $c_*\in \partial W$ the landing point of $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. For a parameter $w\in \ovl W$, let $\gamma_w$ be a non-repelling periodic point; there is a unique continuous choice so that $\gamma_c=c$. Moreover, $\gamma_{c_*}$ is the landing point of the ray pair $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. Observe also that the cycle $\{p_w^{\circ k}(\gamma_w)\}_{k\ge 0}$ for $w\in W\cup\{c_*\}$ does not cross any ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ as in claim (b). This proves claim (b) because the rays landing at non-precritical points of $H$ plus rays $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$ are stable in the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
%\newpage
We now extend $J$ to a continuous map $J:H\to H'_*$ that is injective on every edge of $H$. Since $J$ preserves orientation of vertices of $H$, the extension is an embedding.
Since $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(c')$ is not in the image of $J$ for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$ but $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ is in the image of $J$ for all $k\ge 0$, the image of $H$ under $J$ is the connected hull of $\cup _{k\ge 0} p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ (the tree $H$ is the connected hull of the orbit of $c$ under $p_c$, and the map $J$ preserves external angles of rays landing at vertices). By Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} the images $p^{\circ k}_{c'}([c',x])$ are arcs with disjoint interiors for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$. Thus there is no branch point in $H'\setminus J(H)$. Therefore, $J$ maps $H$ bijectively onto $ H'_*$.
In the standard definition of Hubbard trees, every vertex of $H'$ is a branch point or an endpoint, and the postcritical points are exactly the endpoints. Remember, however, that we added the orbit of $x$ to the set of vertices of $H'$. The vertices of $H'_*$ are thus the branch points in $H'$ and the orbit of $x$, and all are $J$-images of vertices in $H$. Therefore $J$ is a bijection from vertices of $H$ to vertices of $H'_*$, and claim (1) follows.
Observe that $J$ is a conjugacy between
\[
p_c: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}
\]
and
\[
p_{c'}: \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Therefore, if $e_1$ is an edge of $H$ so that the critical point $0$ is not in the interior of $e_1$, then $p_{c}(e_1)\supset e_2$ if and only if $p_{c'}(J(e_1))\supset J(e_2)$. Moreover, $p_c$ and $p_{c'}$ restricted to $e_1$ and $J(e_1)$ respectively have degree $1$. If the interior of $e_1=[a,b]$ contains the critical point of $p_c$, then $p_c([a,0])=[p_{c}(a),c]$ and $p_c([0,b])=[c,p_{c}(b)]$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $J(e_1)$ because all other edges of $H'$ are mapped injectively under $p_{c'}$. We have $p_{c'}([J(a),0])=[J(p_c(a)),c')]\supset [J(p_c(a),J(c)]$ and $p_{c'}([0,J(b)])=[c',J(p_c(b))]\supset [J(c), J(p_c(b)]$. This finishes the proof of (1)--(3).
The critical point $0$ is not a vertex of $H'$ because $0$ is a strictly preperiodic point of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$. Hence $0$ is in the interior of an edge $e_0\subset H'$. Since $x\in p_{c'}(e_0)$ we have $c\in p_{c}(J^{-1}(e_0))$. Therefore, $J^{-1}(e_0)$ contains the critical point $0$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $e_0$ if and only if $0$ is strictly preperiodic under $p_c$.
Clearly, $J$ injects the set of states of $A$, which are edges of $H$, into the set of states of $A'$, which are edges of $H'$. It follows from (3) that the number of arrows from $a_1$ to $a_2$ (i.e., the degree of the corresponding map on the edge) is equal to the number of arrows from $J(a_1)$ to $J(a_2)$.
\end{proof}
\goodbreak
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:EdgesOfH}
The tree $H$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $2m-2$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-3$ edges.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Automata}
\label{ss:Automata}
Let us look in detail at the automata $A'$ and $A$ introduced above. For simplicity, we write $A\subset A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}.
Whether or not the dynamics on a Hubbard tree is renormalizable is encoded in the associated automaton. We write
$A=A_n\cup A_r$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_n$ (the non-renormalizable edges) contains all states that, for a fixed finite iterate, reach all states of $A$ simultaneously; and
\item $A_r$ (the renormalizable edges) contains all states from which {not all} of $A$ can be reached simultaneously: these correspond to edges within the Hubbard trees of ``smalls Julia sets'' corresponding to renormalization domains).
\end{itemize}
The dynamics on the Hubbard tree is renormalizable if and only if $A_r\neq \emptyset$.
An automaton is called \emph{irreducible} if every state of $A$ can be reached from each other. This is certainly the case when $A$ is non-renormalizable, but may also happen in the renormalizable case: for instance, the Hubbard tree of the rabbit polynomial with a superattracting $3$-cycle has its Hubbard tree in the form of a topological \textsf{Y} where the three edges are permuted cyclically: the automaton has the form $e_0\to e_1\to e_2\to e_0$ and is irreducible, but the dynamics is renormalizable. The difference is that no edge covers all of $A$ after the same number of iterations.
If $A_r\neq\emptyset$, so that the dynamics is renormalizable, then we may have $A_n=\emptyset$ or $A_n\neq \emptyset$. The former case, $A_n=\emptyset$, was defined earlier as the case of immediate satellite renormalization.
Recall our earlier assumption that $A_n\neq\emptyset$: so we are not in the immediate satellite renormalizable case.
We also remark that there are no arrows from $A_r$ to $A_n$, so within $A$ there is no escape from the set of renormalization states $A_r$. However, in $A'\supset A$, if $A_r\neq\emptyset$, then there are two arrows from $A_r$ to $[c',x]$, which is a state in $A'\setminus A$.
There are the following special states of $A$ and $A'\supset A$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the $0$-state in $A'$ contains the critical point; this state is the edge $e_0$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}; we set the $0$-state of $A$ to be $J^{-1}(e_0)$; this convention is compatible with the inclusion $J\colon A\hookrightarrow A'$;
\item
the $[c',x]$-state of $A'\setminus A$;
\item
states of $A$ and of $A'$ that belong to the interval $[\alpha, -\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
A \emph{path} in $A$ or $A'$ is a sequence of arrows so that each arrow starts where the previous arrow ends. The \emph{length} of a path is the number of arrows it contains. We can also think of a path as a sequence of states so that there is an arrow from every state to the subsequent one (that is, a sequence of edges in the Hubbard tree so that each edge covers the next one under the map). When a path connects two states that are connected by multiple arrows, then there are accordingly multiple paths along this sequence of states (as an example, in $A'$ there are two paths of length $1$ from the $0$-state to the $[c',x]$-state).
We define a \emph{relevant precritical path} in $A'$ or in $A$ as a path that starts at a state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and terminates at the $0$-state. By basic properties of symbolic dynamics, relevant precritical paths in $A'$ are in bijection with precritical points of $p_{c'}$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ because the critical point of $p_{c'}$ is not a vertex of $H'$. Different relevant precritical paths in $A$ encode different precritical points of $p_c$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
Every relevant precritical path $s$ in $A'$ has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DecompOfs}
s=b_0c_0a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\end{equation}
such that (roughly: $a_i, b_i, c_i$ are the sub-paths in $ A'\setminus A$, in $A_n$, and in $A_r$ respectively)
\begin{itemize}
\item
$a_i$ is an (almost) ``choiceless'' path that starts at the $0$-state, then goes to $[x,c']$, then travels outside of states in $[\alpha, -\alpha]$, and terminates at the first state reached in $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset A$;
\item
if $a_i$ terminates at a state in $A_r$, then $b_i=\emptyset$; otherwise, $b_i$ is a path that starts at the state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ where $a_i$ terminates and continues while states in $A_n$ are visited; (if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$)
\item
if $A_r=\emptyset$, then $c_i=\emptyset$; otherwise: if $b_i\not=\emptyset$, then $c_i$ is a path that starts in $A_n$ where $b_i$ terminates, and immediately moves into $A_r$, and otherwise it starts at a state in $A_r$ where $a_i$ terminates; the end of $c_i$ is the $0$-state, and until then the path remains in $A_r$ (again, if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$).
\end{itemize}
Observe that paths in $A'$ that are not in $A$ start on the edge $[x,c']$, so they are described by the $a_i$ that are long and have almost no choice, hence contribute little additional entropy.
Every $a_i$ has length at least $m+1$ because $[x,c']$ needs $m$ iteration to reach $[\beta,\alpha]$, and might need further iterations to land in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}). Once it lands there, we are either in $A_n$ and we continue with a path $b_i$ as long as we stay in $A_n$, or we are already in $A_r$ and $b_i=\emptyset$, and $c_i$ continues until the next visit of the $0$ state.
We will refer to $a_i$ as \emph{detours} (the long almost choice-less parts).
Defining $\ell_i,t_i, k_i$ as the lengths of $a_i, b_i, c_i$ respectively, we say that $s$ has \emph{combinatorial pattern} $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$.
\begin{lemma}[Almost Choiceless Paths]
\label{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}
There are at most two possible paths in $A'$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at the $0$-state;
\item then immediately go to the $[c',x]$-state;
\item then travel outside $[\alpha,-\alpha]$; and
\item terminate at a given state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Such paths have length $\ell\ge m+1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, the edge of $H'$ associated with the $0$-state covers $[c,x]$ with degree $2$ under $p_{c'}$. Then $[x,c]$ maps injectively for at least $m+1$ iterations until $[x,c]$ starts to partially cover $[\alpha,-\alpha]$. But this is, by definition, when the path under discussion terminates.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Number of Paths $c_i$]
\label{lem:c_iPaths}
Suppose $c$ is renormalizable. Let $g$ be the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$. Then there are at most $2^{{k}/{g}}$ paths in $A$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at a given state in $A_n$ or in $A_r$;
\item all subsequent states are within $A_r$;
\item terminate at the $0$-state; and
\item have length $k$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $H_0,H_1,\dots H_{g-1}$ be the cycle of small Hubbard trees associated with the the largest renormalizable Hubbard trees (corresponding to the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$). Then the degree $p_c^{\circ gt}:H_{0}\to H_{0}$ is at most $2^t$ for all $t$. Therefore, there are at most $2^{t}$ paths in $A_r$ with length $k\in \{ gt,gt+1,\dots, g(t+1)-1\}$ that terminate at the $0$-state; so for given length $k$, the number of such paths is at most $2^t=2^{\lfloor k/g \rfloor}$ (and we have not even counted the first step from a given state of $A$ to $A_r$).
\end{proof}
Fix a combinatorial pattern $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$ and let $n=|P|=t_0+k_0+\sum_{i\ge 1}^p(\ell_i+t_i+k_i)$.
When comparing entropy in $A'$ and in $A$, we will consider the additional relevant precritical paths in $A'$ and show that they correspond to relevant precritical paths in $A$ of bounded length, so that there are not too many additional paths in $A'$. More precisely, if a detour has length $\ell_i\ge 3m$ then the new path within $A$ will be shorter (or have equal length) than before.
We thus introduce a quantity $\kappa$, called \emph{uncertainty of $P$}, that measures the possible increase of length as follows:
\[
\kappa(P):= \frac 1 n \sum_{|\ell_i|<3m}(3m- \ell_{i})
= \frac 1 n \sum_i \max(0,3m-\ell_i)
\]
(the first sum is taken over all $\ell_i$ that are less than $3m$). Higher values of $\kappa$ create problems. Since all $\ell_i>m$ and $\sum\ell_i\le n$, we have $3m-\ell_i\le 2m < 2\ell_i$ and $\kappa(P)\in[0, 2]$.
Denote by $N'(P)$ the number of all precritical paths in $A'$ with pattern $P$.
For $\kappa\in [0,2]$ define
\[
N'(\kappa,n):= \sum_{\kappa(P)\le \kappa,\ \ |P|=n} N'(P)
\;,
\]
the numbers of precritical itineraries with small uncertainty.
We define $S'(\kappa,n)$ to be the corresponding set of relevant precritical paths with small uncertainty, so that $N'(\kappa,n)=|S'(\kappa,n)|$.
\begin{lemma}[Replacing a Path in $A'$ by a Path in $A$]
\label{lem:substitution} \lineclear
If $s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p$ is a precritical path in $A'$ with uncertainty $\kappa$, then there are paths $a^*_i$ in $A_n$ with lengths in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$ such that
$s^*:=b_0 a^*_1 b_1a^*_1b_2a^*_2\dots a^*_p b_pc_p$ is a path in $A$. If $n$ is the length of
$s$, then $s^*$ has length at most $n + \kappa n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that some $b_i$ might be empty paths. Choose a state $a\in A_n$. For convenience, we say that $a$ is the beginning and the end of every empty $b_i$.
Since $A_n$ is irreducible and has less than $2m$ vertices (Corollary~\ref{cor:EdgesOfH}) we may replace every $c_ia_{i+1}$ by a path $a^*_{i+1}$ in $A_n$ of length at most $2m$ so that $a^*_{i+1}$ connects the end of $b_{i}$ with the beginning of $b_{i+1}$ (which are by definition both in $A_n$); by adding $m$ arbitrary steps at the beginning, we may arrange things so that $a^*_i$ has length in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$.
Since the length of each $a_i$ is at least $m$, this procedure increases the length of $s$ by at most $\kappa n$ (and even shortens whenever $c_ia_{i+1}$ has length greater than $3m$).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Counting Patterns]
\label{lem:PatternsGrowth}
The quantity
\[
\limsup_{n}\frac{1}{n}\log\left(\# \{\text{patterns of length }n\}\rule{0pt}{11pt}\right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $m$ tends to infinity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every pattern $P$ is uniquely characterized by a non-decreasing sequence of positive integers
\[t_0,t_0+k_0,t_0+k_0+\ell_1, t_0+k_0+\ell_1+t_1, \dots. \]
Since $\ell_i\ge m+1$, for every $q\in\{0,\dots,\lfloor n/m\rfloor\}$ the interval $[qm,(q+1)m)$ contains at most $3$ elements of the above sequence; and the same is true for the final interval $[\lfloor n/m\rfloor m+1, n]$. Therefore, the number of all patterns is bounded by $Z(n,m):=((m+1)^3)^{(n/m)+1}=e^{{3(n+m)\log(m+1)}/{m}}$. For fixed $m$, we have $\limsup_n (1/n)\log Z(n,m)=3\log(m+1)/m$, and indeed this tends to $0$ as $m\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Uniformity]
\label{prop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon >0$ there are $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0$ depending only on $\varepsilon$ but not on $c$ and $c'$ such that the following holds. If
\begin{itemize}
\item $m\ge \overline m$,
\item either $c$ is non renormalizable, or the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$ is at least $\overline g$,
\item $\kappa\le \ovl \kappa$, and
\item $h$ is the entropy of the parameter $c$,
\end{itemize}
then
%\newpage
\[
N'(\kappa,n)\le C e^{(h+\eps)n} % \sum_{\nu\le n}N(\nu)
\]
for some constant $C>0$ depending on $c$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $h$ is the entropy of $c$, there is a constant $C_1>0$ such that
\[
N(n)\le C_1e^{(h+\eps/3)n},
\]
where $N(n)$ counts the number of relevant precritical paths in $A$ of generation $n$.
Our first claim is that there are at most $ 2^{{n}/{g}+{n}/{m}}$ precritical paths
\[
s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\]
with fixed $(b_i)_{i\le p}$ of a given pattern $P$ of length $n$. Indeed, the beginning of the $c_i$ is fixed by $b_i$, or by $a_i$ if $b_i$ is empty, and the end is at the $0$ state, so by Lemma~\ref{lem:c_iPaths} there are at most $2^{k_i/g}$ choices for each $c_i$ and in total at most $2^{n/g}$ choices for all $c_i$ combined (in the non-renormalizable case, the $c_i$ are empty and there is no choice at all). Each $a_i$ has at most two choices by Lemma~\ref{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}, and since their length is at least $m$, there are no more than $n/m$ such choices.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:substitution} we may substitute $c_ia_i$ by $a^*_i$ with $m\le |a^*_i|\le 3m$ and get a precritical path
\[s^*=b_0a^*_1b_1a^*_2b_2\dots a^*_pb_p c_p\]
in $A$ with length at most $ n+\kappa(P) n $. Denoting the length of $a_i^*$ by $\ell_i^*$, we call the numbers $Q=(t_0,0, \ell^*_1, t_1,0,\ell^*_2,\dots,\ell^*_p,t_p,k_p)$ the pattern of $s^*$.
Our next claim is that for fixed patterns $P$ and $Q$, the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is at most
\[
2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}=C_1e^{((h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m)n}
\;.
\]
Indeed, the number of paths $s$ for a given pattern $P$ with fixed $b_i$ is at most $2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}$. Different $b_i$ clearly lead to different $s^*$ because we know from $P$ were in $s^*$ the $b_i$ are located. The length of $s^*$ is bounded by $(1+\kappa(P))n$; hence the number of different $s^*$ is bounded by $\max_{1\le \mu \le (1+\kappa(P))n} N(\mu)\le C_1e^{(h +\eps/3)(1+\kappa (P))n}\le C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}$ because each $s^*$ is a precritical path in $A$.
If $g$ and $m$ are sufficiently large and $\ovl \kappa$ is sufficiently small, then $(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m\le h+2\eps/3$, and the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is bounded by
\[
C_1e^{(h+2\eps/3)n}
\]
Since every $s\in S'(\kappa,n)$ is a part of at least one triple $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ for some patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $\kappa(P)\le \kappa$ we get the estimate
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le \left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| C_1 \ e^{(h+2\eps/3) n}
\;,
\]
where $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right|$ denotes the number of pairs of patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $|P|=n$ and $|Q|\le n+\kappa(P)n$. Lemma~\ref{lem:PatternsGrowth}, the number $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| $ is bounded by $C_2e^{(\eps/3) n}$ for some constant $C_2>0$. We get
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le C_1C_2 \ e^{(h+\eps) n}
\;;
\]
this finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{Continuity at Irrational Endpoints}
Let $c_{\infty}$ be a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set.
There a sequence of dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ approximating $c_{\infty}$ in the following way
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1\prec c_2\prec\dots \prec c_{\infty}$;
\item $c_{i+1}\in [c_i,c'_i]$; and
\item $ \dots c_i \lhd \dots \lhd c'_2\lhd c'_1$.
\end{itemize}
Figure~\ref{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint} illustrates the arrangement of these points.
Note that once $c_1$ is chosen, the remaining parameters are uniquely determined: $c'_i$ is the dyadic of least generation with $c'_i\succ c_i$, and $c_{i+1}$ is the branch point in the vein of $c'_i$ where the vein to $c_\infty$ branches off.
We assume that $c_{\infty}$ is not in any immediate satellite small copy of the Mandelbrot set. More precisely, since we work with automata only in the postcritically finite case, the assumption that we make is this:\begin{itemize}
\item all $c_i$ are outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set
\end{itemize}
(note that if any $c_i$ is outside of immediate satellite copies, then all subsequent ones are as well: so, possibly up to truncating an initial part of the sequence $(c_i)$, the assumption on $c_\infty$ is that there exists a postcritically finite $c_1\prec c_\infty$ outside of immediate satellite copies).
The case that $c_\infty$ is immediate satellite renormalizable will be treated in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{\includegraphics{FigAllBranchPoints.pdf}}
\caption{The relative (combinatorial) positions of the parameters $c_i$, $c_\infty$ and $c'_i$ used in the proof.}
\label{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint}
\end{figure}
Similar to the previous discussion we specify the following objects
\begin{itemize}
\item $H'_i$ is the Hubbard tree of $c'_i$ with dynamics $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$ \,;
\item
$S'_{i}(n)\subset [\alpha,-\alpha]\subset H'_i$ is the set of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ for the parameter $c'_i$\,;
\item
$N'_{i}(n):= |S'_i(n)|$ is its cardinality;
\item
$h_i=\tilde h(c_i)$ and $h'_i=\tilde h(c'_i)$ are the entropies;
\item
$m_i$ is the generation of the dyadic parameter $c'_i$\,;
and
\item for $j\le i$ we denote by $x_j^{(i)}\in H_i$ the dynamical counterpart of $c_j$ in $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We will now introduce the sets $S'_i(j,\kappa, n)$ for all $j\le i$; these sets are defined in a similar way as $S'(\kappa,n)$ in Section~\ref{ss:Automata}. Consider a precritical point $y\in S'_i(n)\subset H'_i$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Iter:K:ell}0=\tilde \ell_0 <\tilde t_0<\tilde \ell_1<\tilde t_1< \dots < \tilde t_p=n
\end{equation} be the iteration times of $y$ (depending on $j$) uniquely specified as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\tilde t_k>\tilde \ell_k$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde t_k}_{c'_i}(y) \in [ c'_i, x_{j}^{(i)}]$;
\item
$\tilde \ell_k>\tilde t_{k-1}$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde \ell_k}_{c'_i}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We also set $\ell_k:=\tilde \ell_k- \tilde t_{k-1}$ and $t_k:= \tilde t_k-\tilde \ell_k$. Clearly, \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is uniquely specified by $(t_0,\ell_1, \dots, t_p)$.
We define \emph{the uncertainty of $y$ with respect to $x_j^{(i)}$} as
\[
\kappa_j(y):= \frac 1 n \sum_{\ell_k<3m_j}(3m_j- (\ell_k+1))
= \frac 1 n \sum_k \max(0,3m_j-(\ell_k+1)).
\]We denote by $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ the set of all $y\in S'_i(n)$ such that $\kappa_j(y)<\kappa$.
Let us also define \[I_j(y):= \bigcup_{\ell_k<3m_j} \{\tilde t_{k-1}, \tilde t_{k-1}+1,\dots, \tilde \ell_{k} \}.\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:I_j}
For all $j$ and $y$ the set $I_j(y)$ is a union of blocks of consecutive numbers so that each block has length $\ell_k+1\in[m_j,\dots, 3m_j]$, and
\begin{itemize}
\item
its first number is the unique number $t$ in the block that satisfies $p_{c'_i}^{\circ t}(y)\in [c'_i, \alpha]$; %x_j^{(i)}]$.
\item
its last number is the unique number $\ell$ in the block that satisfies
$p_{c'_i}^{\circ \ell}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Furthermore,
\( \displaystyle \kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|.\)
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have $\ell_k<3m_j$ by definition of $I_j(y)$ and we need to prove the lower bound $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
For every integer $k\ge 0$, let $T_k\subset H'_i$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. In particular, $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset T_0$. By~\eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1} we have $p_{c'_i}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
By construction, $c'_i$ and $c'_{j-1}$ are in different sublimbs of $c_{j}$. Thus, by Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})$ is disjoint from $T_{m_j-1 }$; and we get $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})\cap p_{c'}^{\circ -k} [\alpha,-\alpha]=\emptyset$ for all $k< m_j$. This shows that $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
We certainly have $p_{c'_i}^{\circ \tilde t_{k-1}}(y)\in[c'_i,x^{(i)}_j]\subset [c'_i,\alpha]$, and since $p_{c'}^{-1}([c'_i,\alpha])=[\alpha,-\alpha]$, the block would end before the orbit could enter $[c'_i,\alpha]$
again. The claim about the last number is obvious.
Finally, $3m_j-(\ell_k+1) \le 2m_j \le 2(\ell_k+1)$, and taking the sum we conclude $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:MonotIncl}
For $j<i$ the injection $B:S'_{i}(n)\to S'_{i-1}(n)$ of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} injects $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ into $S'_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $x_j^{(i)}$ and $x_j^{(i-1)}$ are the dynamical counterparts of $c_j$ in the dynamical planes of $p_{c_i}$ and $p_{c_{i-1}}$ respectively. Consider $y\in S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$. It follows from Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} parts (A) and (B) that
\begin{itemize}
\item $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ for all $\ell\ge 0$; and
\item $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [c'_{i},x_j^{(i)}]$ if and only if $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [c'_{i-1},x_j^{(i-1)}]$ for all $t \ge 0$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the first claim follows from Part (B) applied to $c_*=0$ (recall that the dynamical counterpart of $c_*=0$ is the $\alpha$-fixed point). The second claim follows from Part (A) combined with Part (B) applied to $c_*=c_j$.
Therefore, our surgery respects the sequence \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell}: for fixed $j$ and every $y\in S_i(n)$ the point $B(y)$ has the same sequence as $y$.
Hence $\kappa(y)=\kappa(B(y))$ and $B(y)\subset S_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:SmallKappa}
For every $\delta>0$ and for every $i'\ge 0$ there is an $i''>i'$ such that for every $n\ge 0$ we have
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\delta,n).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a subsequence of indices $i'=i_1< i_2< \dots < i_h$ so that $3m_{i_r}< m_{i_{r+1}}$ and $h> 2/\delta$. We show that $i'':= i_h$ satisfies the claim of the lemma. It is sufficient to show that for every $y\in S'_{i_h}(n)$ there is an $s<h$ such that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j} that $I_{i_1}(y), I_{i_2}(y), \dots , I_{i_h}(y)$ consist of pairwise disjoint blocks. Thus all $I_{i_s}$ are pairwise disjoint subsets of $\{1,2,\dots ,n\}$. Hence
\[\frac 1 n (|I_{i_1}(y)|+ |I_{i_2}(y)|) + \dots + |I_{i_h}(y)|) \le 1.\]
Since $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)| $, again Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j}, we have
\[\kappa_{i_1}(y)+\kappa_{i_2}(y)+\dots +\kappa_{i_h}(y)\le 2;\]
this implies that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$ for some $s<h.$
\end{proof}
The next lemma is a corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon>0$ there is an $i'\ge 0$ and $\overline \kappa>0$ such that if $ j \ge i'$ and $\kappa\le \overline \kappa$, then
\[|S'_j(j,\kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}\] for all $n>0$ and some constant $C_j>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For a given $\varepsilon $ fix $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0 $ as in Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}. We may choose a big enough $i'$ such that for all $j\ge i'$
\begin{itemize}
\item $m_j\ge \overline m$; and
\item $c_j$ is either non-renormalizable or the renormalization period of $c_j$ is at least $\overline g$.
\end{itemize}
We will now apply Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity} to the pair $c:=c_j$ and $c':= c'_j$; then $h_j=h$ is the entropy of $c=c_j$.
Observe first that $|S'_j(j, \kappa,n)| = |S'( \kappa, n)|= N'(\kappa,n)$ after the substitution. Indeed, every relevant pre-critical point of $p_{c'_j}$ is uniquely characterized by a precritical path in $A'$ (again by a fundamental property of the symbolic dynamics because the critical point is in the interior of the $0$-state of $A'$.) This bijection preserves the uncertainties: if $y\in S'_j(j,\kappa,n)$ with Sequence~\eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is identified with a relevant precritical path $s$ with Decomposition~\eqref{eq:DecompOfs}, then $\ell_k +1 =\tilde \ell_k - \tilde t_k +1= |a_k|$. Hence $y$ and $s$ have the same uncertainties, and $S'_j(j, \kappa,n)$ and $S'( \kappa, n)$ are in bijection.
Now the lemma immediately follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\end{proof}
Remember that we continue to have the assumption that $c_\infty$ is a non-dyadic endpoint that is not immediate satellite renormalizable. In this case, we can now complete the proof.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity on Vein to $c_{\infty}$, Non-Renormalizable Case]
\label{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}
%\lineclear
For every $\eps>0$ there is an $\bar i\ge 1$ such that $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge \bar i$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Choose $\overline\kappa$ and $i'$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:SmallKappa} there is an $i''\ge i'$ such that
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n).
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:MonotIncl} there is an injection from $S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ into $S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ for all $j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}$. Therefore,
\[
N'_{i''}(n)=|S'_{i''}(n)|\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''} |S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity} we have $|S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}$. Thus
\[
N'_{i''}(n)\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n} \le \left( \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j\right) e^{(\eps +h_{i''})n}
\]because $h_{i''}\ge h_{j}$ by monotonicity.
This proves that $h'_{i''}-h_{i''}\le \eps$, and since the sequence $h'_i-h_i$ is decreasing we have $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge i''$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{The Immediate Satellite Renormalizable Case}
In order to formulate our statements, we need to briefly review well known facts on renormalization; compare \cite{Polylike, McMullenRenormalization,MiSelfSim,MiRenorm}.
If $p_c$ is simple $m$-renormalizable, then there exists a ``little Mandelbrot set'' $\M'\subset\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters with $c\in\M'$ and a straightening homeomorphism $\chi\colon\M'\to\M$ so that $p_{\chi(c)}$ in the neighborhood of its filled-in Julia set is hybrid equivalent to $p_c^{\circ m}$ on a neighborhood of the little filled-in Julia set (except possibly at the root point $\chi^{-1}(1/4)$). The little Mandelbrot set has a main center $c_0:=\chi^{-1}(0)$ with a superattracting orbit of period $m$. In this case, we say that ``the parameter $c$ is $c_0$ tuned with $\chi(c)$''. We say $\M'$ is an \emph{immediate satellite copy of $\M$} if $\M'$ is attached to the main hyperbolic component of the Mandelbrot set. Dynamically, this means that the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c^{\circ m}$ is equivalent to $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$; in the postcritically finite case, this is equivalent to $A_n=\emptyset$.
\begin{lemma}[Immediate Satellite Renormalization and Entropy]
\label{Lem:Renormalization} \lineclear
If $\M'$ is an immediate satellite copy of $\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters, then the straightening map $\chi:\M'\to \M$ satisfies
\[
\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))
\;.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $N_{c}(n)$ and $N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ be the numbers of precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and $p_{\chi(c)}$ respectively and let $\tilde N_{\chi (c)}(n)$ be the number of precritical points of $p_{\chi(c)}$ on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
The straightening map $\chi$ identifies the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_{c}^{\circ m}$ with the arc $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$. Therefore, $N_c(mn)= \tilde N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ while $N_c(mn+k)=0$ for all $k\in \{1,2,\dots, m-1\}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:DifferCounts}, the precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and those on $[\alpha,\beta]$ give the same entropies; and on $[\beta,-\beta]$ there can be at most twice as many precritical points of any generation $n$ as on $[\alpha,\beta]$.
Therefore, $\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If $\chi\colon \M'\to\M$ is the straightening map of an arbitrary small copy of $\M$, we have
\[
\tilde h(c)=\max\left(\tilde h(c_0),\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))\right)
\;.
\]
This is obvious in the postcritically finite case and follows in general once we know that $\tilde h$ is continuous, which we are about to establish.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}[Continuity Along Vein to $c_{\infty}$, General Case.]
\label{cor:RadialContin}
\lineclear
Suppose that $c_{\infty}$ is a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. Then the entropy is continuous along the vein $[c_{\infty}, 0]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen} proves the case when $c_{\infty}$ is outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set.
The second case is that there is a finite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots, \chi_n:\M_n\to \M $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty\in \M_*:=(\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1)^{-1}(\M)$ and $c'_{\infty}:=\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1(c_\infty)$ is not immediate satellite-renormalizable. Entropy is continuous along the vein $[0,c_*]$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}, and continuous along the image $\chi_*^{-1}([0,c_*])=[c_0,c_{\infty}]$ by Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} (where $c_0$ is the main center of $\M_*$), and continuous along $[0,c_0]$ by \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung} (or Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}). Therefore, entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
The final case is that there is an infinite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty$ is in the domain of $\chi_n \circ \chi_{n-1}\circ \dots \circ \chi_1$ for all $n\ge 0$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} that the entropy of $c_\infty$ is $0$. Thus entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
\end{proof}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
\renewcommand{\top}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{top}}}
\newcommand{\comb}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{comb}}}
\appendix
\section{Core entropy and biaccessibility dimension}
\centerline{by Wolf Jung}
\bigskip
Here various definitions of core entropy shall be discussed and related to
the biaccessibility dimension. On a compact metric space, the topological
entropy of a continuous map is defined by a growth rate, which is referring
to preimages of covers, or to $\epsilon$-shadowing sets. See
\cite{deMelovanStrien} for details. When the underlying space is a compact
interval, a finite tree, or graph, several equivalent characterizations are due
to Misiurewicz and others. These include the growth rate of horse shoes,
laps (monotonic branches), periodic points, and preimages of a general point.
For real and complex quadratic polynomials, core entropy was defined by
Tao Li and Bill Thurston as the topological entropy of $p_c(z)$ on the
Hubbard tree; this definition applies to the postcritically finite case in
particular, and more generally to finite compact trees, but it does not work
when $c$ is an endpoint with a dense postcritcal orbit.
In general, the filled Julia set $\mathcal{K}_c$ consists of the Hubbard tree
$T_c$\,, the countable family of its preimages, and an uncountable family of
endpoints. The dynamics on $T_c$ is interesting because this tree is folded
over itself, while the iteration does not return to arcs of its preimages.
On the other hand, the endpoints form a set of full harmonic measure, while
the external angles of $T_c$ and its preimages form a set of Hausdorff
dimension $<1$ (unless $c=-2$). Since all biaccessible points are contained
in arcs iterated to $T_c$\,, these angles are called biaccessible
(or biaccessing). More precisely, the biaccessibilty dimension is defined as
follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item For the lamination generated by an angle $\theta\in S^1$
\cite{ThurstonLaminations}, consider all
angles of non-trivial leaves. Their Hausdorff dimension is the
\emph{combinatorial biaccessibility dimension} $B_\comb(\theta)$. The same
dimension is obtained from pairs of angles with the same itinerary, or from
pairs not separated by the precritical leaves: the diameter joining $\theta/2$
and $(\theta+1)/2$, and its preimages.
\item For a parameter $c\in\mathcal{M}$, the
\emph{topological biaccessibility dimension} $B_\top(c)$ is the Hausdorff
dimension of those angles, such that the dynamic ray is landing together with
another ray.
\end{itemize}
These definitions are related analogously to Lemma~\ref{Lem:defEntropy}:
\begin{lemma}[Combinatorial and topological biaccessibility]
Suppose that $\theta\in S^1$ and $c\in\partial\M$ belongs to the impression
of the parameter ray with angle $\theta$, or $c\in\M$ is hyperbolic and the
ray lands at the corresponding root. Then $B_\comb(\theta)=B_\top(c)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of the proof \cite{BruinSchleicher, Jung}] In the locally connected case, and
neglecting the countable family of angles at precritical or precharacteristic
points, two dynamic rays are landing together if and only if they are not
separated by a precritical ray-pair. When $\mathcal{K}_c$ is not
locally connected, exceptional sets of angles are shown to be negligible in
terms of Hausdorff dimension. These include the angles of non-landing rays,
and the possible angles of Cremer cycles.
\end{proof}
The following relation to entropy is due to Thurston \cite{TanLeiEntropy},
relying on earlier work by Furstenberg \cite{Furstenberg}
and Douady \cite{Douady}.
\begin{proposition}[Dimension and entropy of the tree]\label{Prop:Biaccessibility}
Suppose $\mathcal{K}_c$ is locally connected with empty interior, or $f_c$ is
parabolic or hyperbolic with a real multiplier.
Using regulated arcs, define the tree $T_c$ as the path-connected hull of
the critical orbit. If $T_c$ is compact, consider the topological entropy of
$p_c(z)$ on $T_c$\,. Then it is related to
the biaccessibility dimension by $h_\top(T_c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is found in version 1 of \cite{BruinSchleicher} and in
\cite{TiozzoThesis, Jung}:
since $\theta\mapsto z(\theta)$ is a semi-conjugation with finite fibers, we may
consider the topological entropy of the angle-doubling map on the compact set
of angles of $T_c$ \cite[Thm.~II.7.1]{deMelovanStrien}. And this equals the
Hausdorff dimension \cite[Proposition~III.1]{Furstenberg}, except for the
base 2 instead of e in the logarithm of the growth factor $\lambda$.
\end{proof}
While the definition of $h_\top(T_c)$ requires a compact tree $T_c$\,,
a general notion was given in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} in terms
of precritical ray pairs:
\begin{theorem}[Dimension and entropy in general]\label{Thm:Biaccessibility}
Entropy and biaccessibility dimension are related as follows for
all parameters $c\in\mathcal{M}$ and all angles $\theta\in S^1$\,:
\begin{equation}
\tilde h(c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2
\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
h(\theta)=B_\comb(\theta)\cdot\log2 \ .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First, suppose that $c=c(\theta)$ is postcritically finite or belongs
to a dyadic vein. In particular, $\mathcal{K}_c$ is
locally connected and $T_c$ is compact with finitely many endpoints. Then
the growth rate of lap numbers is equal to the growth rate of precritical
points on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, so $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$, and
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} applies.
Second, suppose that $c$ is a non-renormalizable irrational endpoint, and
approximate it with biaccessible parameters $c_n$ before $c$. Then monotonicity
\cite[Proposition~4.6]{Jung} and continuity give
\begin{equation}
B_\top(c)\cdot\log2\ge\lim B_\top(c_n)\cdot\log2
=\lim\tilde h(c_n)=\tilde h(c) \ .
\end{equation}
For the opposite estimate, note that the plane is cut into pieces successively
by precritcal ray pairs, and the angles of a piece of level $n$ form up to $n$
intervals of total length $2^{-n}$ according to
\cite[Lemma~4.1]{BruinSchleicher}. Recall that $N(n)$ is the number of
precritcal points of \textsc{Step} $n$ on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, and denote
the number of pieces intersecting this arc by $V(n)$. Then
$V(n)=1+N(1)+\dots+N(n)$ is growing by the same factor $\lambda=e^h$ as $N(n)$,
and the same holds for $n \cdot V(n)$. The $b$-dimensional Hausdorff measure
of the angles of $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$ is estimated as
\begin{equation}
\mu_b\le\lim n \cdot V(n) \cdot 2^{-bn} \ ,
\end{equation}
which is 0 when $b>\log\lambda/\log2=\tilde h(c)/\log2$. So the Hausdorff
dimension is estimated as $B_\top(c)\le\tilde h(c)/\log2$ as well,
implying equality.
Finally, both $\tilde h(c)$ and $B_\top(c)$ are constant on the main molecule
and on primitive small Mandelbrot sets, and both are scaled by the period of
immediate satellite renormalization. Now all cases are covererd by the
Yoccoz Theorem.
\end{proof}
Continuity of entropy according to Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity} gives:
\begin{corollary}[Continuity of biaccessibility dimension]
The biaccessibility dimension $B_\comb(\theta)$ is continuous on $S^1$ and
$B_\top(c)$ is continuous on the Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$.
\end{corollary}
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} and Theorem~\ref{Thm:Biaccessibility}
show that the definition
of entropy in terms of precritical points is a generalization
of the original definition in terms of a compact core:
\begin{corollary}[Extending the definition of core entropy]
We have $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$ whenever $T_c$ is defined and compact.
\end{corollary}
\begin{thebibliography}{ABC}
\bibitem[BS]{BruinSchleicher} H.~Bruin, D.~Schleicher,
Hausdorff dimension of biaccessible
angles for quadratic polynomials, Preprint. ArXiv:1205.2544, 28 pp.
\bibitem[D]{Douady} A.~Douady, Topological entropy of unimodal maps:
monotonicity for quadratic polynomials, in:
\emph{Real and complex dynamical systems}
(Hiller{\o}d 1993), NATO Adv.~Sci.~Inst.~Ser.~C
Math.~Phys.~Sci.~\textbf{464}, Kluwer 1995, 65--87.
\bibitem[DH1]{Orsay} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{Etude dynamique des polyn\^omes complexes} (The Orsay Notes). Publications Math\'ematiques d'Orsay 1984-02 (1984) (premi\`ere partie) and 1985-04 (1985) (deuxi\`eme partie).
\bibitem[DH2] {Polylike} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{On the dynamics of polynomial-like mappings}. Annales Scientifiques de l'\'Ecole Normale Sup\'erieure. Quatri\`eme S\'erie. V 15 (1985), 287--343.
\bibitem[DH3]{DHThurston} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{A proof of {T}hurston's topological characterization of rational functions}. Acta Mathematica. V 171 (1993), 263--297.
\bibitem[F]{Furstenberg} H.~Furstenberg, Disjointness in ergodic theory,
minimal sets, and a problem in Diophantine approximation,
Math.~Systems Theory~\textbf{1}, 1--49 (1967).
\bibitem[HS]{Spiders} John Hubbard and Dierk Schleicher. \emph{The spider algorithm}. Complex dynamical systems ({C}incinnati, {OH}). Proc. Sympos. Appl. Math. V 49 (1994), 155--180.
\bibitem[Ju]{Jung} Wolf Jung, \emph{Core entropy and biaccessibility of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1401.4792 (2014), 46 pp.
\bibitem[TL]{TanLeiEntropy} Tan Lei, \emph{On W. Thurston's core-entropy theory}. Presentation, given in Toulouse (January 2014) and elsewhere.
\bibitem[Mc]{McMullenRenormalization} Curt McMullen, \emph{Complex dynamics and renormalization}. Annals of Mathematics Studies \textbf{135},
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1994).
\bibitem[dMS]{deMelovanStrien} W.~de Melo, S.~van Strien,
\emph{One-dimensional dynamics}, Springer 1993.
\bibitem[M1]{MiSelfSim} John Milnor, \emph{Self-similarity and hairiness in the {M}andelbrot set}. Computers in geometry and topology. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. V 114, 211--257, (1989).
\bibitem[M2]{MiRenorm} John Milnor, \emph{Local connectivity of {J}ulia sets: expository lectures}. In: The {M}andelbrot set, theme and variations. London Math. Soc. V 274, 67--116 (2000).
\bibitem[M3]{MiOrbits} John Milnor, \emph{Periodic orbits, externals rays and the Mandelbrot set: an expository account}. In: G\'eom\'etrie complexe et syst\`emes dynamiques (Marguerite Flexor, Pierrette Sentenac, and Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, eds). Ast\'erisque \textbf{ 261}, 277--333 (2000).
\bibitem[Sch]{MandelBranch} Dierk Schleicher,
\emph{On fibers and local connectivity of Mandelbrot and Multibrot sets}. In: M. Lapidus, M. van Frankenhuysen (eds): Fractal Geometry and Applications: A Jubilee of Benoit Mandelbrot. Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics \textbf{72}, American Mathematical Society (2004), 477--507.
\bibitem[T]{ThurstonLaminations} William P. Thurston, \emph{On the geometry and dynamics of iterated rational maps}. In: Complex dynamics, families and friends (Dierk Schleicher, ed.), AK Peters, Wellesley, MA (ISBN 978-1-56881-450-6), pp. 3--109 (2009).
\bibitem[Ti1]{TiozzoThesis} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Topological entropy of quadratic polynomials and dimension of sections of the Mandelbrot set}. Preprint, arXiv:1305.3542 (2013), 56 pp.
\bibitem[Ti2]{TiozzoPaper} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Continuity of core entropy of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1409.3511 (2014), 25 pp.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document\to[0,\log 2]$ and $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$, are continuous.
\end{theorem}
We prove continuity of $h$ in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}; the fact that this implies continuity of $\tilde h$ is easy and is explained in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{EntropyGraphPlain.pdf}
}
\caption{The graph of the core entropy function $h\colon[0,1/2]\to[0,\log 2]$ (by Bill Thurston).}
\end{figure}
Our second result settles a conjecture of Giulio Tiozzo \cite[Conjecture~1.6]{TiozzoThesis}.
\begin{theorem}[Local Maximal of Core Entropy]
\lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We will prove this in Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj}.
In Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}, we define a wake as a closed interval in $\Circle$ bounded by two rational angles so that the corresponding rays land together (or more generally as any closed interval for which the two boundary angles have the same angled internal address, so the corresponding parameter rays land together at the same point in $\mathcal M}
\newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}
\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}
\newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}
\newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}
\newcommand{\Circle}{\mathbb S}
\newcommand{\sm}{\setminus}
\newcommand{\0}{\texttt{0}}
\newcommand{\1}{\texttt{1}}
\newcommand{\s}{\underline{s}}
\newcommand\eps{\varepsilon}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}
\renewcommand{\theta}{\vartheta}
\newcommand{\ovl}[1]{\overline{#1}}
\newcommand{\lineclear}{\rule{0pt}{2pt}\newline}
\newcommand{\reminder}[1]{\textsl{#1}\marginpar{$\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd\lhd\rhd$}}
\newcommand{\hide}[1]{}
\title[Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials]{Core Entropy of Quadratic Polynomials %\\ \rule{0pt}{20pt} --- Draft $\circ$ Comments Invited ---
}
\author{Dzmitry Dudko}
\author{Dierk Schleicher}
\author[]{With an appendix by Wolf Jung}
\address{G.-A.-Universit\"at zu G\"ottingen, Bunsenstrasse 3--5, D-37073 G\"ottingen, Germany}
\address{Jacobs University Bremen, Research I, Postfach 750 561, D-28725 Bremen, Germany}
\address{Gesamtschule Aachen-Brand, Rombachstrasse 99, 52078 Aachen, Germany}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
We give a combinatorial definition of ``core entropy'' for quadratic polynomials as the growth exponent of the number of certain precritical points in the Julia set (those that separate the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative). This notion extends known definitions that work in cases when the polynomial is postcritically finite or when the topology of the Julia set has good properties, and it applies to all quadratic polynomials in the Mandelbrot set.
We prove that core entropy is continuous as a function of the complex parameter. In fact, we model the Julia set as an invariant quadratic lamination in the sense of Thurston: this depends on the external angle of a parameter in the boundary of the Mandelbrot set and suffices to define core entropy directly from the angle in combinatorial terms. As such, core entropy is continuous as a function of the external angle.
Moreover, we prove a conjecture of Guilio Tiozzo about local and global maxima of core entropy as a function of external angles: local maxima are exactly dyadic angles, and the unique global maximum within any wake occurs at the dyadic of lowest denominator.
An appendix by Wolf Jung relates different concepts of core entropy and biaccessibility dimension and thus shows that biaccessibility dimension is continuous as well.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Statement of Results}
We define two entropy functions:
\begin{itemize}
\item $h\colon \Circle\to [0,\log 2]$, assigning to every external angle $\theta\in\Circle$ the core entropy of the lamination associated to the angle $\theta$.
\item $\tilde h\colon \M\to[0,\log2]$, assigning to every $c\in\M$ the core entropy of the quadratic polynomial $z\mapsto z^2+c$.
\end{itemize}
We describe these definitions in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}. Note that we define $\tilde h$ for every $c\in\M$, postcritically finite or not (and could extend it to every parameter $c\in\C$), and similarly for every $\theta\in\Circle$. These definitions are such that if the parameter ray at angle $\theta$ lands (or accumulates) at $c\in\partial \M$, then $h(\theta)=\tilde h(c)$. Our definitions are entirely combinatorial so we do not have to worry about topological subtleties such whether the Julia set is locally connected or whether a (generalized) Hubbard tree exists and, if so, whether it is compact. Of course, in the cases where the usual definitions of topological entropy apply, our definition agrees with them.
Our first result goes back to a bet between Bill Thurston and John Hubbard in the spring of 2012 and helped settle this bet soon after.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Core Entropy]
Both entropy functions, $\tilde h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ and $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$, are continuous.
\end{theorem}
We prove continuity of $h$ in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}; the fact that this implies continuity of $\tilde h$ is easy and is explained in Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{EntropyGraphPlain.pdf}
}
\caption{The graph of the core entropy function $h\colon[0,1/2]\to[0,\log 2]$ (by Bill Thurston).}
\end{figure}
Our second result settles a conjecture of Giulio Tiozzo \cite[Conjecture~1.6]{TiozzoThesis}.
\begin{theorem}[Local Maximal of Core Entropy]
\lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We will prove this in Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj}.
In Section~\ref{Sec:Definitions}, we define a wake as a closed interval in $\Circle$ bounded by two rational angles so that the corresponding rays land together (or more generally as any closed interval for which the two boundary angles have the same angled internal address, so the corresponding parameter rays land together at the same point in $\M$, or at least in its combinatorial models).
Bill Thurston inspired a number of people to investigate core entropy. In particular, there are a survey on current work and open problems by Tan Lei~\cite{TanLeiEntropy}, a manuscript by Wolf Jung \cite{Jung}, and two manuscripts by Giulio Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoThesis,TiozzoPaper}. An independent proof of continuity of core entropy can be found in the recent manuscript \cite{TiozzoPaper}.
\emph{Acknowledgements}. We would like to thank Henk Bruin, John Hubbard, Tan Lei, Mikhail Lyubich, John Milnor, Bill Thurston, Giulio Tiozzo, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and especially Wolf Jung for interesting and helpful discussions. In the spring of 2014, we had the opportunity to give various presentations about this result in Bremen, Moscow and Stony Brook, and we thank the audiences for their questions and suggestions.
Finally, we would like to thank Cornell University and the ICERM institute in Providence for their hospitality and support in the spring of 2012 where many of our initial discussions were carried out.
\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Definitions}
\label{Sec:Definitions}
In this section we introduce our combinatorial definition of topological entropy that applies to all polynomials with connected Julia set, whether or not they are locally connected and whether or not they have a (generalized) Hubbard tree, and if so whether the latter is compact. One advantage of our approach is that we work in an entirely combinatorial setting, so we never have to worry about topological issues.
\begin{definition}[Invariant Lamination and Entropy Associated to External Angle]
\label{Def:CoreEntropy}
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$, there is a unique invariant quadratic lamination where the minor leaf either ends at $\theta$ or is the degenerate leaf at $\theta$. This lamination will be called $L_\theta$.
A \emph{precritical leaf of generation $n$} in this lamination will be any leaf on the backwards orbit of one of the two major leaves that takes $n$ generations to map to the minor leaf.
The \emph{$\alpha$ gap} is either the leaf connecting the two angles $1/3$ and $2/3$, or it is the unique gap that is fixed by the dynamics (this is a finite polygon).
We call a precritical leaf \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative, and define $N(n)=N_\theta(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical leaves of generation $n$. We define the \emph{core entropy} of this lamination as $h=h(\theta):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_\theta(n)$. If the $\alpha$ gap does not exist, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $N_{\theta}(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the core entropy of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\begin{remark}
A natural question is whether the $\limsup$ in the definition of entropy can be replaced by a simple $\lim$. This is not always so: Wolf Jung kindly pointed out to us the example of $c=c(9/56)$ where the Hubbard tree has the shape of a $\textsf{Y}$ so that the branch point is fixed and one endpoint maps to the second, which maps to the third, which in turn maps to the branch point. Here $N(n)=0$ for infinitely many $n$ while $h=(\log 2)/3>0$. There are thus counterexamples when the dynamics is renormalizable. We prove that renormalizability is the only obstruction (see Corollary~\ref{Cor:ExistenceLimit}). For now, observe that in the postcritically finite non-renormalizable case, the limit exists and equals the $\limsup$ because the associated subshift of finite type is irreducible.
\end{remark}
Thurston showed that the union of all minor leaves of all invariant quadratic laminations forms itself a lamination, called the \emph{quadratic minor lamination} QML \cite{ThurstonLaminations}. It turns out that $h$ is naturally defined on QML: since both ends of any leaf in QML define the same lamination, we can first extend the definition of $h$ to each separate leaf on QML. Complementary components of leaves in QML are called \emph{gaps}, and they come in two kids: either they are finite polygons (corresponding to Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters) or have infinitely many boundary leaves (and describe hyperbolic components). In both cases, it is easy to see that $h$ is constant on all boundary leaves of any gap, so $h$ naturally extends to the disk on which QML is defined.
The equivalence relation defining QML is closed, so the quotient of the supporting closed unit disk by collapsing all leaves to points yields a topological Hausdorff space called the ``abstract Mandelbrot set'' $\M_{abs}$ (this construction is known as Douady's ``pinched disk model'' of $\M$). Since $h$ is constant on fibers of the quotient map $q\colon QML\to \M_{abs}$, $h$ is naturally a function on $\M_{abs}$.
Finally, there is the natural projection $\pi\colon\M\to\M_{abs}$ from the Mandelbrot set $\M$ to the abstract Mandelbrot set $\M_{abs}$. It is defined by mapping every landing point $c(\theta)$ of any rational parameter ray $\theta$ to the equivalence class of the angle $\theta$; then $\pi$ is the unique continuous map with this property.
\looseness-1
We thus obtain a unique map $\tilde h=h\circ\pi\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$, and continuity of $\tilde h$ follows from continuity of $h$, with continuity of $\pi$ being well known.
More specifically, the map $\tilde h$ can also be constructed explicitly as follows.
\begin{definition}[Entropy Associated to Quadratic Polynomial in $\M$]
\label{Def:CoreEntropyTilde}
Let $p_c(z):=z^2+c$ be any quadratic polynomial with $c\in\C$ for which the critical value is in the Julia set, and let $\theta$ be the external angle of any dynamic ray that lands or accumulates at $c$. The \emph{critical ray pair} will be the ray pair $RP(\theta/2,(1+\theta)/2)$, and a precritical ray pair of generation $n$ will be any ray pair on the backwards orbit of the critical ray pair and that takes $n$ iterations to map to the ray $R(\theta)$.
If $p_c$ is such that the critical value is in the Fatou set, then it has an attracting or parabolic orbit and there is a unique periodic characteristic ray pair; precritical ray pairs are then defined as ray pairs on its backward orbit.
We call a precritical ray pair \emph{relevant} if it separates the $\alpha$ fixed point from its negative, and define $\tilde N(n)$ as the number of relevant precritical ray pairs. We define the \emph{core entropy} of $p_c$ as $\tilde h=\tilde h(c):=\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log \tilde N(n)$. If the $\alpha$ fixed point is neither repelling nor parabolic, i.e.\ ``the main hyperbolic component case'', then we set $\tilde N(n):=0$.
\end{definition}
Note that we use the term ``separation'' in a combinatorial sense: the two rays in a separating ray pairs either land together or accumulate at the same fiber.
The usual definition of core entropy is modeled after the postcritically finite case: here, the Hubbard tree is a finite tree with a finite and forward invariant set of marked points (the critical point and its forward orbit, as well as all branch points). The finite set of edges on the tree form a Markov chain with associated transition matrix, where the matrix element $M_{i,j}$ is $0$, $1$, or $2$ if the edge $e_i$ covers the edge $e_j$ respectively $0$, $1$, or $2$ times. Having only positive real entries, this matrix has a leading eigenvalue which is real, and its logarithm is defined as the core entropy of the given postcritically finite parameter.
This definition coincides with the classical definition of topological entropy of general dynamical systems, and it also applies in the postcritically infinite case as long as the Hubbard tree is defined (i.e.\ the Julia set is path connected) and still finite. However, the number of edges of the Hubbard trees is not locally bounded even among postcritically finite maps, which makes entropy estimates based on these transition matrices difficult.
It is well known, at least in the postcritically finite case, that if $x$ is any point on the Hubbard tree and $N_x(n)$ is the number of preimages of $x$ of generation $n$, then $h=\limsup_n \log N_x(n)$ is the core entropy. Since each of the finitely many edges, except those within ``renormalizable little Julia sets'', will cover the entire tree after finitely many iterations, one can as well count only those preimages of $x$ that are on an arbitrary subset of the edges of the Hubbard tree, as long as at least one of these edges is not in a renormalizable little Julia set. For instance, instead of counting precritical leaves on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (as in our definition above) we may count preimages on $[\alpha,\beta]$ (as we will do in Section~\ref{Sec:Continuity}) or on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
\begin{lemma}[Definitions of Core Entropy Coincide]
\label{Lem:defEntropy} \lineclear
For postcritically finite polynomials, the core entropy as in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} coincides with the usual definition (in terms of transition matrices on finite Hubbard trees).
If $p_c$ has the property that the critical value is in the impression of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$, then the core entropy of $p_c$ equals the core entropy of the lamination $L_\theta$.
\end{lemma}
It is well known that if several parameter rays accumulate at the same parameter in $\M$, then the laminations associated to their corresponding angles coincide, so these angles have the same entropy.
If $\theta\in\Circle$ is a rational angle, we define $c(\theta)$ as the landing point in $\M$ of the parameter ray at angle $\theta$, and within any connected Julia set we define $z(\theta)$ as the landing point of the dynamic ray at angle $\theta$.
If $c,\tilde c$ are two parameters in $\M$, we say $c\prec \tilde c$ if there is a parameter ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ at periodic angles that separates $\tilde c$ simultaneously from $c$ and from the origin.
\begin{lemma}[Monotonicity of Lamination and of Entropy]
\label{Lem:Monotonicity}
If $c\prec \tilde c$, then $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ for all $n$ and thus $h(\tilde c)\ge h(c)$. Moreover, any characteristic leaf in $L_c$ also occurs in $L_{\tilde c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is routine to check that any precritical leaf of $c$ also ``occurs'' in the dynamics (or the lamination) of $\tilde c$: the major leaf (or leaves) in $L_{\tilde c}$ separate the two major leaves in $L_c$. Precritical leaves in $L_{c}$ are preimages of the pair of major leaves (the preimages of this pair are always ``parallel'', i.e.\ not separated by the critical value, because otherwise the forward orbit of the critical value would have to intersect the domain bounded by the two major leaves). Each pair of preimages surrounds one preimage of the major leaf of $\tilde c$ (or a pair of preimages of the major leaves), and when such a preimage separates the $\alpha$ gap from its negative in $L_c$, then it also does so for $L_{\tilde c}$. Therefore, $N_{\tilde c}(n)\ge N_c(n)$ and $\tilde h(\tilde c)\ge \tilde h(c)$.
The statement about characteristic leaves (or characteristic ray pairs) is well known and follows, for instance, from Milnor's Orbit Portraits \cite{MiOrbits}.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Topological Surgery on dyadic Hubbard trees}
Recall the vein structure of $\M$: every dyadic parameter $c$ has a unique \emph{long vein} $V(c)$, that is an injective arc connecting $c$ to $0$, subject to the condition that it traverses hyperbolic components along internal rays. (The existence of such arcs is a non-trivial theorem, established by Jeremy Kahn using Yoccoz' puzzle results, and by Johannes Riedl using quasiconformal surgery. However, it is sufficient to use a weaker combinatorial version of this result, defining the combinatorial arc as the set of postsingularly finite parameters that separate $c$ from the origin, together with the induced order.) The \emph{vein} of $c$ is the shortest closed sub-arc of the long vein connecting $c$ to the union of the long veins of all dyadic parameters of lower generation than $c$.
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then it is well known that their long veins intersect in an arc $[0,x]$, where $x$ is postcritically finite; this result is known as the ``branch theorem'' of $\M$ \cite{Orsay,MandelBranch}.
\begin{definition}[Directly Subordinate Parameter $c\lhd c'$]
\label{Def:DirectlySubordinate} \lineclear
We say that $ c$ is \emph{directly subordinate} to $c'$ and write $c\lhd c'$ if the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$; in addition, any dyadic parameter whose vein terminates at $0$ is declared to be subordinate to $c=-2$ with dyadic angle $1/2$.
\end{definition}
If $c\lhd c'$, then necessarily the external angle of $c'$ has lower denominator than that of $c$.
Note that this is not a transitive relation and thus not a partial order. A few directly subordinate dyadic parameters are illustrated in Figure~\ref{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\framebox{\includegraphics{DirectlySubordinate_Fig2.pdf}}
\caption{Illustration of directly subordinate parameters: we have $c(3/16)\lhd c(1/4)$, $c(1/4)\lhd c(1/2)$, and $c(3/8)\lhd c(1/2)$. Arrows indicate where the vein to some dyadic parameter terminates at the vein of the dyadic parameter to which it is directly subordinate.}
\label{Fig:DirectlySubordinate}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}[Entropy Between Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} \lineclear
a) If $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $N(n)\le N'(n)$ for all $n$, and $N(n)<N'(n)$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
\noindent b) If $c\lhd c'$ are both dyadic, then $\tilde h(c)<\tilde h(c')$.
\end{theorem}
Here $N(n)$ and $N'(n)$ denote the numbers of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ for $p_c$ and for $p_{c'}$. This immediately implies a weak version of the Tiozzo conjecture:
\begin{corollary}[Dyadic Version of Tiozzo Conjecture]
\label{Cor:DyadicTiozzoConjecture}\lineclear
Every dyadic angle $\theta$ has a neighborhood on which $h$, restricted to dyadic angles, assumes its unique maximum at $\theta$ (a dyadic version of the Tiozzo conjecture).
\end{corollary}
%\newpage
Let us now state the Correspondence Theorem relating the combinatorics of dynamical and parameter ray pairs. Following Milnor~\cite{MiOrbits}, a periodic or preperiodic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ (with $\phi^-,\phi^+\in\Circle$) in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ is called \emph{characteristic} if the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together in such a way that they separate the critical value $c$ from the critical point $0$ as well as from all other rays landing at $\cup_{k\ge 0}p_{c}^{\circ k}(x)$.
\begin{theorem}[Correspondence Theorem]
\label{thm:Corresp} \lineclear
A dynamic ray pair $RP(\phi^-,\phi^+)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ with $\phi^\pm$ rational is characteristic if and only if the parameter rays with angles $\phi^-$ and $\phi^+$ land together and separate the parameters $c$ and $0$ from each other.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}[Monotonicity of Rational Lamination on Hubbard Tree]
\label{Cor:CountPartsHubTree}
Let $c,c'\in\M$ be two postcritically finite parameters such that $c\prec c'$. Suppose that in the dynamical plane of $p_c$ two periodic or preperiodic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ land together at some point in the Hubbard tree of $p_c$, but not on the backwards orbit of the critical value. Then in the dynamical plane of $c'$ the dynamic rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ also land together and the landing point is in the Hubbard tree of $c'$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
In the dynamic plane of $p_c$, let $x$ be the landing point of the dynamic ray pair $RP(\theta^-,\theta^+)$; it is by hypothesis in the Hubbard tree of $c$. Let $x':=p_c^{\circ t}(x)$ be the characteristic point on the orbit of $x$: this is the unique point that separates the critical value from all other points on the forward orbit of $x$. Let $(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ be the characteristic angles at $x'$ (the ray pair at $x'$ that separates the critical value from all other rays on its orbit).
By Theorem~\ref{thm:Corresp}, the rays $R(\phi^-)$ and $R(\phi^+)$ form a ray pair for all parameters in the wake of $c$, and in particular for $c'$. The same is true for all pull-back ray pairs, as long as they are not in the component of $\C\sm RP(\tilde\phi^-,\tilde\phi^+)$ containing the critical value; and this is the case for the rays landing at $x$. The landing point is clearly in the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}[Dynamical Counterpart to Parameter]
\label{Def:DynamCounterpart} \lineclear
Let $c$ be a postcritically finite parameter and suppose $c'\succ c$. Then a (pre)periodic point $x$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ is called the \emph{dynamical counterpart to $c$} if
\begin{itemize}
\item
if $c$ is preperiodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the preperiodic dynamic rays at the same angles as $c$;
\item
if $c$ is periodic, then $x$ is the landing point of the periodic dynamic rays bounding (in the parameter plane) the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the periodic case, $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_c$, and the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$ is bounded by a periodic parameter ray pair landing at $\partial H_c$. The angles of this ray pair are the angles of two rays landing at $x$. For example, the $\alpha$ fixed point is the dynamical counterpart of $c=0$. In the preperiodic case, it is known that all dynamic rays with the same angles of the rays landing at $c$ also land together in the dynamical plane of $c'$.
An equivalent definition is that $x$ is the unique repelling periodic or preperiodic point in the dynamical plane of $c'$ such that the itinerary of $x$ (with respect to the critical point) equals the (upper) kneading sequence of $c$.
\begin{lemma}[Directly Subordinate Dyadics]
\label{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics} \lineclear
\looseness-1
If $c$ and $c'$ are two dyadic parameters, then $c\lhd c'$ if and only if there is a postcritically finite parameter $c_*\in\M$ so that $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation within any sublimb of $c_*$, and $c$ is in a different sublimb of $c_*$ than $c'$.
In this case, denoting the external angles of $c$ and $c'$ by $\theta$ and $\theta'$, respectively, then in the dynamics of $c$ (or any other parameter in the same sublimb of $c_*$) there is a repelling (pre)periodic point $x_*$ that is the landing point of at least three dynamic rays that separate the dynamic rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$. The point $x_*$ is the dynamical counterpart to $c_*$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any two dyadic parameters are endpoints of $\M$, so by the Branch Theorem of the Mandelbrot set there is a unique postcritically finite parameter $c_*$ that contains $c$ and $c'$ in two different of its sublimbs. Let $c_0$ be the unique dyadic of least generation in any of the sublimbs of $c_*$; then $c_*$ is on the long vein of all three of $c_0$, $c$, and $c'$, and it is on the vein of $c_0$.
The assumption that $c\lhd c'$ means that the vein of $c$ terminates at an interior point of the vein of $c'$, and hence it must terminate at the parameter $c_*$, so $c_*$ is an interior point of the vein of $c'$. Since $c_*$ is also an interior point of the vein of $c_0$, it follows that $c'=c_0$ (two veins can never have more than one point in common).
Conversely, if $c'$ is the dyadic of least generation in the sublimb of $c_*$, then $c_*$ is in the interior of the vein of $c'$ and the vein of $c$ terminates at $c_*$. This proves the first claim.
For the second claim, we first consider the case that $c_*$ is a Mi\-siu\-re\-wicz-Thurston parameter; it is then the landing point of $s\ge 3$ rational parameter rays, say at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$, so that the parameter rays at angles $0$, $\theta$, and $\theta'$ are in different sectors with respect to these parameter rays. Every parameter in any sublimb of $c_*$ has the property that the dynamic rays at angles $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_s$ land together at a repelling preperiodic point, and the claim follows.
If $c_*$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, then the parameter $c$ is in a sublimb at internal angle $p/q\neq 1/2$, and in the dynamical plane of $c$ (or any parameter within the same sublimb) there is a repelling periodic point that is the landing point of $q\ge 3$ dynamic rays that separates the angles $0$, $\theta$ and $\theta'$ so that $\theta$ is in the largest sector not containing the angle $0$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
The main step in proving Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} is a topological surgery on Hubbard trees, as follows:
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Relation Between Subordinate Dyadic Hubbard Trees]
\label{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} %\lineclear
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters with external angles $\theta$ and $\theta'$, let $H_c$ be the Hubbard tree of $c$, and let $H \supset H_c$ be the connected hull of the critical orbit and of the orbit of $z(\theta')$. Let $x$ be the branch point of the arcs from $0$ to $c$ and to $z(\theta')$. If $p_c$ is the natural map on $H$, define a map $f\colon H\to H$ as follows: choose a homeomorphism $\rho\colon[x,c]\to[x,z(\theta')]$ fixing $x$ and let
\[
f(z):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \rho\circ p_c(z) & \text{if $p_c(z)\in[x,c]$} \\
p_c(z) & \text{otherwise.} \end{array} \right.
\]
Let $H'$ be the connected hull within $H$ of the orbit of $0$ under $f$. Then $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of $p_{c'}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have a connected tree $H$ containing the critical point $0$, and with respect to $f$ the orbit of $0$ is still finite (it still terminates at the $\beta$ fixed point). Therefore, $(H',f)$ is a finite tree with a continuous self-map, and the dynamics is locally injective except at the critical point $0$. Since there are at most $2$ branches at $0$, the map is globally at most $2:1$. Every endpoint is by definition on the critical orbit, so $(H',f)$ is the Hubbard tree of a postcritically finite polynomial in which the critical orbit lands at the $\beta$ fixed point at the desired number of iterations. Let $c''$ be the corresponding parameter and $\theta''$ be the external angle; we have $\theta''=a''/2^{k'}$.
It remains to prove that $\theta''=\theta'$ and thus $c''=c'$.
Since $c\lhd c'$, there is a postcritically finite branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, that separates $c$ from $c'$, and the external angles of $c_*$ are the external angles of $x$ in the dynamical plane of $c$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). In the dynamical plane of $c''$, the point $x$ has the same external angles because it has the same period and preperiod and the dynamics of the subtree connecting the orbit of $x$ is unaffected by the surgery (except the bit around the critical point that maps past $x$). Hence $\theta''$ is the unique dyadic of least generation that is separated from the angle $0$ by the angles of $x$, and the same is true for $\theta'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The fact that $c''=c'$ can also be shown using spiders \cite{Spiders} and Thurston's theorem. Let us topologically extend the map $f:H' \to H'$ to a continuous map on $\C$ as follows. First, we set $f$ to be $p_c$ on the dynamic rays $R({2^{t}\theta'})$ of $p_c$, where $t\in\{0,1,\dots, k'\}$. There are $k'+1$ topological discs in the complement of $H'\cup_{t\ge 0} R({2^{t}\theta'})$ and the map $f$ easily extends to each of them as a homeomorphism. The new map $f$ is a topological polynomial for which $\bigcup_t R({2^{t}\theta'})$ forms an invariant spider. Since this spider is equivalent to a standard invariant spider of $c'$, we get $c'=c''$ by Thurston rigidity \cite{DHThurston,Spiders}.
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Injective Dynamics of Last Edge]
\label{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}
In any dyadic Julia set, consider any dyadic angle $\theta=a/2^k$ with $k\ge 1$ and let $x$ be the point where the arc from $z(\theta)$ to $\alpha$ is attached to the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generations $a'/2^{k'}$ with $k'<k$. Then $[z(\theta),x]$ maps injectively for $k$ iterations to an interval $[\beta,y]\subset[\beta,\alpha]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For every integer $m\ge 0$, let $T_m$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $m$. Let $f$ be the map on the Julia set.
The edge $[z(\theta),x]\subset \ovl{T_k\sm T_{k-1}}$ certainly maps forward homeomorphically one generation to an arc $[z(2\theta),x']$, where $x'=f(x)\in f(T_{k-1})$.
We claim that $[z(2\theta),x']\subset \ovl{T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2}}$ so that the inductive step applies and completes the proof.
We first show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, $T_{k-2}$ is the minimal tree connecting all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k-2$. Consider an endpoint $y$ of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$. If $f(y)\in T_{k-2}$ was not an endpoint, so it was connected to at least two edges in $T_{k-2}$, then $y$ would have to be connected to at least two edges in $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$, a contradiction. Thus every endpoint of the forest $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})$ is a dyadic endpoint of generation at least $k-1$ and hence $f^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
Finally, if $[z(2\theta),x']$ intersects $T_{k-2}$, then $[z(\theta),x]$ intersects $T_{k-1}$, and by hypothesis this intersection is the single point $x$. Hence $[z(2\theta),x']\subset (T_{k-1}\sm T_{k-2})\cup\{x'\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In this lemma, the hypothesis that the polynomial be dyadic was stated only for convenience. All we are using is that the Julia set is path connected (if there are bounded Fatou components, the notation needs minor adjustments).
\end{remark}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Homeomorphic Preimage of Arc]
\label{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}
Suppose that $c\lhd c'$ are two dyadic parameters and let $\theta,\theta'$ be their external angles. In the Julia set of $c$, let $x$ be the branch point between $0$, $z(\theta)=c$ and $z(\theta')=:z'$. If $\theta=a/2^k$, then there is a point $y'\in(z',x)$ so that $p_c^{\circ k}\colon [z',y']\to p_c^{\circ k}([z',y'])= p_c^{\circ k}([ c,x])$ is a homeomorphism.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that $[c,x]$ maps homeomorphically for $k$ iterations to a subinterval of $[\beta,\alpha]$; define $y:=p_c^{\circ k}(x)\in(\beta,\alpha]$.
Similarly, there is a point $x'\in[z',0]$ so that $[z',x']$ maps forward homeomorphically for $k'$ iterations (if $\theta'=a'/2^{k'}$). We have
$x'\in[x,0]$ (or equivalently $x\in[z',x']$) because $c\lhd c'$, i.e.\ $c$ is \emph{directly} subordinate to $c'$.
More precisely, the external angles of the dynamic rays landing at $x$ are exactly the external angles of the parameter rays landing at a branch point in $\M$, say $c_*$, where the vein of $c$ terminates (Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}). Analogously, the same is true for the point $x'$ and the vein of $c'$; let $c'_*$ be this branch point. But since $c\lhd c'$, it follows that $c'_*$ separates $c_*$ from the origin, and hence, by the Correspondence Theorem, $x'$ separates $x$ from the origin.
%\newpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{HubbardTreeBranchPic4.pdf}
}
\caption{Illustration of the relative position of various points in the Hubbard tree of $c$ in the proof of Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}. Note that we do not know or need the relative position between $0$, $y$, and $y''$; in particular, we do not claim $y''\in[\beta,y]$.
}
\label{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}
\end{figure}
Let $y'':=p_c^{\circ k'}(x)$; then $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon[z',x]\to[\beta,y'']$ is a homeomorphism. Iterating this $k-k'$ further times, the image arc terminates at $\beta$ and at $y$, but it can no longer be injective (the map $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[c,x]\to [\beta,y]$ is a homeomorphism, and $p_c^{\circ k}$ is a local homeomorphism near $x$ because $x$ cannot be on the critical orbit).
There is a branch $p_c^{-1}\colon[\beta,\alpha]\to[\beta,-\alpha]$; let $[\beta,y''']$ be the image of $[\beta,y]$ under the $k-k'$-th iterate of this branch.
Observe that $[y''',\beta]\subsetneq[y'',\beta]$ because otherwise $p_c^{\circ (k-k')}$ restricted to $[\beta,y'']$ would have degree $1$. Pulling back $k'$ times we obtain an interval $[z',y']\subset[z',x]$ so that $p_c^{\circ k'}\colon [z',y']\to[\beta,y''']$ and $p_c^{\circ k}\colon[z',y']\to[\beta,y]$ are homeomorphisms, as claimed.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Injection Between Precritical Points]
\label{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}
Let $c\lhd c'$ be two dyadic parameters. There exists a generation-preserving injection $B$ from the set of precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ to the set of precritical points in $[c',-\alpha]$ of $p_{c'}$. Moreover, $B$ could be taken to satisfy the following properties (A)--(C). Suppose $\zeta\in [c,-\alpha]$ is a precritical point.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] For $k\ge 0$ we have $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))\in [c',-\alpha]$. Moreover, if $p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta)\in [c,-\alpha]$, then
\[
B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta)).
\]
\item[(B)] Assume $c_*$ is a postcritically finite parameter such that $c_* \prec c$ and $c_* \prec c'$. Let $x_*$ and $x'_*$ be the dynamic counterparts of $c_*$ in the dynamical planes of $c$ and $c'$. Then $\zeta\in [x_*,-\alpha]$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in [x'_*,-\alpha]$.
\item[(C)] There is a sub-interval $J\subset [c', \alpha]$ such that $p^{\circ k }_{c'}(J)=[-\alpha, \alpha ]$ for some $k>0$ and such that the image of $B$ is in $[c',-\alpha]\setminus J$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition~\ref{Prop:RelationDyadicTrees} and its notation, we may identify $p_{c'}:H_{c'}\to H_{c'}$ with $f:H'\to H'$. Under this identification $x'_*$ is $x_*$ which is a periodic or preperiodic point that never visits $[x,c]$ under iterates of $p_c$. We will now construct a bijection $B$ between precritical points in $[c,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and those precritical points in $[z',-\alpha]\setminus [y',x]$ of $f$ for which the orbit never visits $[y',x]$, where $y'$ is specified in Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage} (see Figure~\ref{Fig:HubbardTreeVariousPoints}).
In fact, our bijection will preserve the itinerary with respect to $H\sm\{0\}$, except for $k$ iterations along the orbit from $[c,x]$ to $[\beta,y]=p_c^{\circ k}([c,x])$ (resp.\ from $[z',y']$ to $[\beta,y]$).
Our proof proceeds by induction on the number of times, say $m$, that an orbit of a precritical point $\zeta$ runs through $[c,x]$ (not counting $\zeta$ itself). We start by those precritical points on $[c,x]$ (for the map $p_c$) that never run through $(c,x)$ again, that is with the case $m=0$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:HomeomorphicPreimage}, an appropriate branch of $f^{\circ(-k)}\circ p_c^{\circ k}$ sends $[c,x]$ homeomorphically to $[z',y']$; call this branch $\eta\colon[c,x]\to [z',y']$. Then for any $a\in[c,x]$, we have $p_c^{\circ k}(a)=f^{\circ k}(\eta(a))$ and the future orbits of these points under $p_c$ respectively under $f$ coincide as long as the orbits avoid $[c,x]$. Note that all precritical points on $[c,x]$ must have generation at least $k$. We thus obtain an injection, say $B_0$, of precritical points with $m=0$.
Every precritical point $\zeta\in[c,x]$ of generation $n$ and with $m=0$ is the common endpoint of two adjacent sub-intervals of $[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after $n$ iterations: we have $p_c^{\circ n}(\zeta)=c$ and $p_c^{\circ (n-1)}(\zeta)=0$, so we can pull the entire interval $[c,x]$ back in two ways (with a choice in the first step) until we end at $\zeta$. The pull-back of the entire interval $[c,x]$ is possible because no critical value can interfere (the critical orbit visits only endpoints of the tree), and the resulting interval is in $[c,x]$ because the Hubbard tree is unbranched on $[c,x)$ and the orbit of $x$ never enters $[c,x)$.
There is an analogous result about precritical points $\zeta'\in[z',y']$ of $f$ with $m=0$ and sub-intervals of $[z',y']$ that map to $[z',y']$: by construction of $y'$, the point $\zeta'$ has generation $n\ge k$, and there is a precritical point $\zeta=\eta^{-1}(\zeta')\in[c,x]$. The point $\zeta$ has neighborhood, say $I_\zeta\subset [c,x]$ that maps $2:1$ onto $[c,x]$ (the union of the two intervals constructed above), and then $\zeta'$ has a neighborhood $I_{\zeta'}\subset[z',y']$ with $p_c^{\circ k}(I_{\zeta'})=p_c^{\circ k}(I_\zeta)\subset[\beta,y]$.
The bijection $B_0$ of precritical points with $m=0$ thus extends to a bijection between intervals $I\subset[c,x]$ that map homeomorphically onto $[c,x]$ after some number of iterations without visiting $(c,x)$ before, and intervals $I'\subset [z',y']$ that map homeomorphically onto $[z',y']$ after the same number of iterations and without ever visiting $(z',y')$; this bijection respects the number of iterations as well as the order along the intervals within $[c,x]$ and $[z',y']$ (the intervals are obviously disjoint). Denote this bijection of intervals by $B^*_0$.
Now suppose the statement is shown for all precritical points on $[c,x]$ that visit $(c,x)$ at most $m$ times, for some $m\ge 0$; in particular, we have an injection, say $B_m$, from precritical points on $(c,x)$ that map into $(c,x)$ exactly $m$ times, to precritical points on $(z',y')$ that map into $(z',y')$ exactly $m$ times. Consider any precritical point $\zeta\in(c,x)$ that visits $(c,x)$ exactly $m+1$ times, and let $s$ be minimal such that $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$. Then there is an interval $I\ni \zeta$ so that $p_c^{\circ s}\colon I\to[c,x]$ is a homeomorphism (same reasoning as above).
Let $I':=B^*_0(I)$. Then $p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)\in(c,x)$ is a precritical point that visits $(c,x)$ only $m$ times, and $B_{m+1}(\zeta)=\zeta':= f^{\circ(-s)}\circ B_m \circ p_c^{\circ s}(\zeta)$, choosing the branch $f^{\circ(-s)}\colon [y',z']\to I'$.
Since the map $B^*_0$ is injective, different intervals $I$ land in disjoint intervals $I'$, and since $B_m$ is injective by induction, the restriction of $B_{m+1}$ that run through any particular $I$ is injective too, so in total $B_{m+1}$ is injective as claimed.
This takes care of all precritical points on $[c,x]$, and we still have to deal with those on $[x,-\alpha]$. But those with orbits that never run through $[c,x]$ are unaffected by the changed dynamics, and the injection easily extends to those that map into $[c,x]$ under $p_c$.
It remains to show that the map $B$ satisfies Properties (A) -- (C). Let us extend $B_0^*$ to all intervals in $[x,-\alpha]$ that are injective preimages of $[c,x]$ and never run through $[c,x]$ before mapping into $[c,x]$. It is easy to see that $B_0^*(I)\subset I$ for every such interval $I$, because $[z',y']\subset [z',x]$ and $g_c^{\circ -1}[c,x]=f^{-1}[z',x]$, and induction is applied. Since $x_*$ never visits $[x,c]$, we see that $x_*\not \in I$ for every maximal pre-image $I$ of $[c,x]$. Also, by construction, $\zeta \in I$ if and only if $B(\zeta)\in I$ for every precritical $\zeta$ and an interval $I$ as above. Therefore, $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ are on the same side of $x_*$. It is clear that $\zeta$ and $B(\zeta)$ have the same return times to $[c,-\alpha]$ and $[z',-\alpha]$ because $p_c^{\circ k}[c,x]=f^{\circ k}[z',y']$. And the dynamical relation $B(p_c^{\circ k}(\zeta))=p_{c'}^{\circ k}(B(\zeta))$ holds by construction. Thus Properties (A) and (B) hold. To prove (C) set $J$ to be any pre-image of $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ so that $J\subset [x,y']$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees}]
From Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} we have an injection of precritical points of $p_{c}$ of any given generation on $[-\alpha,c]$ to precritical points of $p_{c'}$ of the same generation on $[-\alpha',c']$, and by claim (B) this injection restricts to the arcs $[-\alpha,\alpha]$ and $[-\alpha',\alpha']$. This immediately proves the first half of part a), and the second half follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}.
Part b) of Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} follows from claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}: a precritical orbit of $p_{c'}$ has strictly more choices than a precritical orbit of $p_c$ thanks to the interval $J$. More precisely, consider the Hubbard tree $H_{c'}$ of $p_{c'}$; and let us add the forward orbit of the ends of $J$ into the vertex set of $H_{c'}$. Denote by$A'$ the associated automaton of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$, see Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} for a formal definition of an associated automaton. And let $A'_*\subset A'$ be the sub-automaton obtained from $A'$ by removing all states within the interval $J$ as well as all arrows starting or ending at the removed states. Then the entropy of $c$ is bounded by the entropy of $A'_*$ by claim (C) of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical}, while the entropy of $c'$ is equal to the entropy of $A'$. Since $A'$ is irreducible, the entropy of $A'$ is strictly bigger than the entropy of $A'_*$.
\end{proof}
%\goodbreak
%\newpage
\section{Irrational Angles and the Tiozzo Conjecture}
In this brief section, we will complete the proof of the Tiozzo Conjecture.
\begin{lemma}[Bound for Irrational Angles]
\label{Lem:IrrationalAngle} \lineclear
For every angle $\theta\in\Circle$ (dyadic or not) and every $n\in\N$ there is an $\eps>0$ so that $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ for all dyadic angles $\theta'$ with $|\theta'-\theta|<\eps$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
All the relevant precritical points correspond to non-degenerate leaves in the lamination, and there are finitely many of level $n$. As the characteristic angle $\theta$ changes, say by some $\eps>0$, then a precritical leaf of generation $k$ changes continuously by $\eps/2^k$, except when an endpoint of that precritical leaf moves through $\theta$, that is, when $\theta$ itself is periodic of period dividing $k$.
In the exceptional case that $\theta$ is periodic, there are preimage leaves that terminate at $\theta$ itself, but these do not separate and are thus not counted.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[The Tiozzo Conjectures]
\label{Cor:TiozzoConj} \lineclear
The entropy function $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ has the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)]
Every dyadic angle is an isolated local maximum of the entropy function.
\item[b)]
Conversely, every local maximum of $h$ is dyadic.
\item[c)]
Within every wake, the entropy function has a unique global maximum, and it occurs at the unique dyadic of lowest denominator in the wake.
\item[d)]
Within every wake, for each $n$ the function $N_\theta(n)$ assumes its maximum at the dyadic of least generation (of course, this maximum is not unique).
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Fix a dyadic angle $\theta_0$ and let $I=I(\theta_0)\subset\Circle$ be the open interval of angles $\theta$ for which the combinatorial arcs to $c(\theta)$ intersect the interior of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$ (not the long vein). In other words, if $c_*$ is the endpoint of the vein of $c(\theta_0)$, then $I$ consists of the angles within the same subwake of $c_*$ that $c(\theta)$ is in. Clearly $\theta_0\in I$. Every dyadic angle in $I$ is either directly or indirectly subordinate to $\theta_0$ (where the latter means that there is a finite sequence of dyadic angles ending at $\theta_0$ so that each is directly subordinate to the next).
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:RelationDyadicTrees} part b), we know that $h$ restricted to dyadic angles in $I$ has its unique maximum at $\theta_0$.
We claim that for every $\theta\in I$ and every $n\in\N$ we have $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ and hence $h(\theta)\le h(\theta_0)$. Indeed, for every $n$ there is a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ sufficiently close to $\theta$ with $N_\theta(n)\le N_{\theta'}(n)$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:IrrationalAngle}), and $N_{\theta'(n)}\le N_{\theta_0}(n)$ by definition of $I$. Therefore $\theta_0$ is a (weak) local maximum of $N_\theta(n)$ and of $h$.
However, if $\theta$ is dyadic, then we even have $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$. If $c(\theta)\prec c(\theta_0)$, then $h(\theta)<h(\theta_0)$ by monotonicity along dyadic veins. Otherwise, choose a new dyadic $\theta'$ so that $\theta\in I(\theta')$ but $\theta_0\not\in I(\theta')$. We then have $h(\theta)\le h(\theta')<h(\theta_0)$. Therefore, $\theta_0$ is the unique global maximum within $I(\theta_0)\ni\theta_0$. This proves claim a) in the stronger form that $h$ has a unique global maximum on $I(\theta_0)$, and this occurs at $\theta_0$.
For part c), consider any hyperbolic component $W$ and let $I$ be the open interval of angles within its wake. Let $\theta_W$ be the unique dyadic of lowest generation within $I$. Then $I(\theta_W)\supset I$, and on this interval $h$ has its unique global maximum at $\theta_W$. Now suppose $W$ is a wake that is not the wake of a hyperbolic component: then either it is one of the subwakes of a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters, or an irrational wake (bounded by two irrational angles with equal angled internal address). But such wakes are exhausted by wakes of hyperbolic components, so the claim holds for them as well. Part d) also follows.
For claim b), suppose $\theta$ is a local maximum of $h$, and let $I\subset\Circle$ be an interval on which $\theta$ is the global maximum. By monotonicity, $\theta$ lands (combinatorially) at an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. If $\theta$ is not dyadic, then choose a dyadic angle $\theta'\in I$ with $\theta\in I(\theta')\subset I$.
Then the unique global maximum of $h$ within $I(\theta')$ is at $\theta'$, so $\theta=\theta'$ is dyadic.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Continuity of Entropy}
\label{Sec:Continuity}
We start with a combinatorial estimate. A ``combinatorial pattern of length $n$ with gap size $s$'' is a finite sequence of integers $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ with $1\le j_1< j_2 < \dots < j_m< n$ and $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s$ and $n-j_m\ge s$.
\begin{lemma}[Number of Combinatorial Patterns]
\label{Lem:CombinatorialPatterns}
The number of combinatorial patterns of length $n$ with gap size $s$ is at most $e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The number of combinatorial patterns equals the number of binary sequences of length $n$ where two consecutive digits $1$ have distance at least $s$, and so that the final digit is a $1$. Write $n=ks+r$ with $r<s$. Then each block of $s$ consecutive entries has $s+1$ possibilities because it has at most a single $1$, and the last block has $r-1$ digits $0$ followed by a $1$, so it has $1$ possibility. The number of combinatorial patterns is thus at most $(s+1)^k\le e^{k\log(s+1)}\le e^{(n/s)\log(s+1)}$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
In the following proof, it will be convenient to define relevant precritical points as precritical points on $[\alpha,\beta]$, i.e.\ precritical leaves separating the two fixed points $\alpha$ and $\beta$ or their corresponding leaves in the lamination (rather than separating $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$ as before).
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Different Counts Yield Identical Entropy]
\label{lem:DifferCounts}
\lineclear
In any invariant quadratic lamination, let $N_1(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves that separate $\alpha$ from $-\alpha$, and let $N_2(n)$ be the number of precritical leaves of generation $n$ separating the leaves corresponding to the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points. Then
\[
\limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_1(n) = \limsup_n \frac 1 n \log N_2(n)
\;;
\]
in other words, both counting functions define the same entropy.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $-\alpha\in[\alpha,\beta]$, we clearly have $N_1(n)\le N_2(n)$. To show the converse, we claim that $N_2(n) \le (N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+ N_1(n-2)+\dots) $.
To see this, denote $\alpha_0:=\alpha$ and, recursively, $\alpha_{n+1}$ to be the unique preimage of $\alpha_n$ on $[\alpha,\beta]$, so $\alpha_1=-\alpha$. Then $[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_n]$ maps homeomorphically onto $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n-1}]$ and $[\alpha,\beta]=\bigcup_{n\ge 0}[\alpha_{n},\alpha_{n+1}]$. If $N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n)$ denotes the number of precritical points of generation $n$ on $[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]$, then we have $N_{[\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_{n+2}]}(n)=N_{[\alpha_n,\alpha_{n+1}]}(n-1)$ and $N_{[\alpha_{0},\alpha_{1}]}(n)=N_1(n)$ and indeed $N_2(n) = N_1(n)+N_1(n-1)+N_1(n-2)+\dots$. If $N_1\le C e^{(h+\eps)n}$ for all $n$, then $N_2(n)\le 2Cn e^{(h+\eps)n}$. Therefore, $N_1$ and $N_2$ define the same entropy.
\end{proof}
In view of this lemma, we will take the liberty in the following result to count relevant precritical points (leaves) as those separating the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ fixed points.
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Bound on Entropy Increase]
\label{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} \lineclear
Suppose $c_1\prec c_2$ and $[c_1,c_2]$ is a (combinatorial) arc in $\M$ such that $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$. Then there is an $s>0$ with the following property: if $[c,c']$ is a dyadic vein of generation at least $s$ that terminates at $c\in [c_1,c_2]$, then $\tilde h(c')-\tilde h(c_2)\le \eps$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $h:=\tilde h(c_2)$. There is a $C>0$ so that all $c\in [c_1,c_2]$ satisfy $N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)\le Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$ for all $n$. We may suppose that $s$ is large enough so that $2C\le e^{(h+\eps/2)s}$. Let $s'\ge s$ be the generation of $c'$.
Let $f' \colon H'\to H'$ denote the Hubbard tree of the dyadic parameter $c'$ and $f\colon H\to H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$ (as endpoint of a dyadic vein in $\M$, $c$ is postcritically finite, so both Hubbard trees exist and are finite). Let $x\in H'$ be the dynamical counterpart of $c$.
Recall that $x$ is a characteristic periodic or preperiodic point in the sense that the entire orbit of $x$ is contained in the closure of the component of $H'\sm\{x\}$ that contains $0$.
In particular, the orbit of $x$ is disjoint from $(x,c']$. It follows that any connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ is either contained in $[x,c']$ or intersects it at most in $\{x\}$. (Otherwise, $x$ would be in the interior of $I$ and after $n$ iterates $x$ would be mapped into $(x,c']$.)
We know from Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} that
\begin{equation}
(f')^{\circ (s')}([x,c']) \subset[\alpha,\beta]
\;.
\label{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}
\end{equation}
and, moreover, the orbit of $(f')^{\circ m}([x,c'])$ for $m\in \{0,1,\dots , s'-1\}$ does not contain $0$.
By a maximal preimage of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n>0$ we
mean a connected component $I$ of $(f')^{-n}[x,c']$ so that $I\not\subset (f')^{-m}[x,c']$
for every $m\in\{1,2,\dots,n\}$; equivalently, $(f')^{\circ m}(I)\not \subset [x,c']$ for all $m<n$.
We denote by $M$ the set of all maximal preimages of $[x,c']$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$.
An \emph{itinerary} of $I$ will be a sequence $s_{0}s_1\dots s_{n-2}\in\{\0,\1\}^\N$ where each $s_{i}$ describes the connected component of $H'\setminus \{0\}$ containing $(f')^i(I)$ (labeled for instance so that the critical value is in the component with label $\1$).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:PreCritInterv}
There is an itinerary preserving inclusion from
\begin{itemize}
\item the set $M$ of maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ of generation $n$; to
\item the set of precritical points of $f:H\to H$ of generation $n$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, a maximal preimages of $[x,c'] \subset H'$ belongs to the interval $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H'$ if and only if the corresponding precritical point belongs to $[\alpha,\beta]\subset H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $[c', c]$ is a dyadic vein, we may associate to $f:H\to H$ and $f'\colon H' \to H'$ the automata $A$ and $A'$ as in Section~\ref{ss:HaubTrees} such that there is an inclusion $J:A\hookrightarrow A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'} we denote by $e_0$ the unique state of $A'$ containing the critical point.
Then maximal preimages $I$ of $[x,c']$ of generation $n$ are in bijection with paths $s$ in $J( A)$ of length $n-1$ terminating at $e_0$ and starting at states in $[x,\beta]$. Indeed, every such $s$ is uniquely described by a sequence of states $s_0,s_1,\dots , s_{n-2}$ in $A'$ such that $(f')^{\circ i}(I) \subset s_i$. Since $I$ is a maximal preimage, all $s_i$ are in $J(A)$.
Further, $J^{-1}(s)$ defines a unique critical point in $[c,\beta]$ of $f$ because $J^{-1}(s)$ starts at a state in $[c,\beta]$ and terminates at $J^{-1}(e_0)$ containing the critical point. This constructs the required injection.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
By Lemma~\ref{lem:PreCritInterv} the number of intervals in $M$ of generation $n$ that are in $[\alpha,\beta]$ is bounded above by $Ce^{(h+\eps/2)n}$.
In order to bound the number of precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of any generation $n$ in the dynamics of $f'\colon H'\to H'$, consider any relevant (i.e.\ between the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ points) precritical point $\ell$ of generation $n$. Let $j_1<j_2<\dots <j_m=n$ be the set of all iterates so that $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$.
Then $\ell$, $(f')^{\circ (j_1+s')}(\ell)$, $(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell)$,\dots , $(f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$ are within $[\alpha,\beta]$; compare \eqref{Eq:IterateOf[x,ctilde]}. This also implies that $j_{i+1}-j_i\ge s'$.
Let $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}\in M$ be the unique intervals in $M$ containing, respectively,
$\ell, (f')^{\circ(j_1+s')}(\ell),(f')^{\circ(j_2+s')}(\ell),\dots , (f')^{\circ(j_{m-1}+s')}(\ell)$; their respective generations are $j_1, j_2-j_1-s',\dots , j_{m}-j_{m-1}-s'$.
Then $\ell$ has itinerary $\s=s_0s_2\dots s_{n-2}$ of $\ell$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $s_0s_1\dots s_{j_1-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_0$;
\item $s_{j_i}s_{j_i+1}\dots s_{j_i+s'-1}$ is the kneading sequence of $c'$;
\item $s_{j_{i}+s'}s_{j_{i}+s'+1}\dots s_{j_{i+1}-2}$ is the itinerary of $I_i$; and
\item all $s_{j_{i}-1}$ are arbitrary in $\{\0,\1\}$.
\end{itemize}
We justify this as follows:
$(f')^{\circ(j_1-1)} $ maps $I_0$ homeomorphically, while $(f')^{\circ j_1}\colon I_0\to [x,\tilde c]$ is a $2:1$-map, so the first $j_1-2$ iterates do not contain $0$ and all points in $I_0$ have the same entries in their itineraries up to entry number $j_1-2$.
Since $(f')^{\circ j_i}(\ell)\in [x,c']$, the next iterates are the same as for $[x,c']$ and, in particular, for $c'$, hence equal to the kneading sequence of $c'$, at least before $c'$ lands at the $\beta$ fixed point, that is for $s'-1$ iterations. The iterate $(f')^{\circ (j_i+s')}(\ell)$ is by definition in $I_i$, and this interval travels forward homeomorphically until it covers $0$, which is the iteration before it reaches $[x,c']$ the next time; since the latter is at iterate $j_{i+1}$, the itinerary of $\ell$ coincides with that of $I_i$ until position $j_{i+1}-2$. In the subsequent iterate, the image interval $(f')^{\circ j_{i+1}-j_i-1}(I_i)$ contains $0$, so both entries in the itinerary might be possible.
Now consider the set of all precritical points in $[\alpha,\beta]$ of generation $n$ corresponding to a particular combinatorial pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$.
We just showed that in order to determine the itinerary of $\ell$ we only need to specify $s_{j_1-1},s_{j_2-1},\dots , s_{j_m-1}\in \{\0,\1\}$ as well as the intervals $I_0,I_1,\dots , I_{m-1}$ as above; their numbers we estimated above. Therefore, the total number of precritical points with pattern $(j_1,j_2,\dots,j_m,n)$ is at most
\[
2 C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_1-1)} \left(\prod_{i=1}^{m-1} 2C e^{(h+\eps/2)(j_{i+1}-j_i-s'-1)}\right)\le2C e^{(h+\eps/2)n}
\]
because $2Ce^{-s'}\le 1$ by hypothesis.
Since the number of combinatorial patterns is at most $e^{\log(s'+1)n/s'}$, it follows that $N_{\tilde c}(n) \le 2 C e^{n(h+\eps/2+\log(s'+1)/s')}$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\tilde h(\tilde c)
&\le \limsup_n \frac{1}{n}\left(\log 2 +\log C + n (h+\eps/2)+\frac{n}{s'}\log(s'+1) \rule{0pt}{11pt} \right)
\\
&\le h+\eps/2+ \frac{\log (s'+1)}{s'} \le h+\eps
\;
\end{align*}
if $s'\ge s$ is sufficiently large.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy Near Veins]
\label{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins} \lineclear
Suppose $\theta\in\Circle$ is such that topological entropy is continuous along the (combinatorial) vein connecting the parameters $0$ to $c(\theta)$ in $\M$. Then $h$ is continuous for all parameters on $[0,c(\theta)]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
It may be helpful to explain the statement. Let $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to \C$ be a parametrization of the (combinatorial) arc $[0,c(\theta)]$. Then the hypothesis says that $h(\gamma(t))$ is continuous for $t\in[0,1]$ (only considering parameters along the arc). The conclusion is that then $h\colon\M\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\gamma(t)$ for all $t$. (Note that this hypothesis is known to be true for all angles $\theta\in\Circle$, except when $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$ at an irrational angle \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}; we will treat the missing case in Section~\ref{Sec:IrratEndpoints}).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, suppose $c_a\prec c_b$ are two parameters in $\M$ with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$; we allow $c_b$ to be a (combinatorial) endpoint of $\M$. Denote by $\text{wake}(c_a)$ the open wake of $c_a$: this is the set of all parameters in $\M$ that are separated from $0$ by two parameter rays landing at (or accumulating at) $c_a$. If $c_a$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then we set $\text{wake}(c_a)$ to be the subwake of $c_a$ containing $c_b$. Similarly $\text{wake}(c_b)$ is defined; if $c_b$ is a combinatorial endpoint of the Mandelbrot set, then $\text{wake}(c_b)=\emptyset$. Set $W:=\ovl{\text{wake}(c_a)}\sm\text{wake}(c_b)$. By Lemma~\ref{Lem:BoundEntropyIncrease} there are at most finitely many dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ with $c_i\in [c_a,c_b]$ such that the entropy variation along $[c_i,c'_i]$ exceeds $\eps$, and so that $c_b\not\in(c_i,c'_i]$. We will construct a ``reduced wake'' $W'\subset W$ in which the entropy variation is at most $2\eps$.
By the Branch Theorem \cite{Orsay}, \cite[Theorem~3.1]{MandelBranch}, the points $c_i$ are either Misiurewicz-Thurston parameters or centers of hyperbolic components. In both cases, we will exclude a subwake at $c_i$ from $W$ where the entropy variation is large.
If $c_i$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, let $W_i$ be the subwake of $c_i$ containing $c'_i$ and thus $[c_i,c'_i]$ (this subwake does not contain $c_b$). If $c_i$ is the center of a hyperbolic component, say $H_i$, then let $W_i$ be the subwake of $H_i$ that contains $c'_i$ (the root of this wake is a bifurcation parameter on $\partial H_i$).
Set $W':=W\sm \bigcup_i \ovl{W_i}$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:TiozzoConj} (the Tiozzo Conjecture), the maximal entropy for angles within $W'$ (or more precisely, the entropy of angles corresponding to rays in $W'$) occurs either at $c_b$ or at a dyadic parameter $c'\in W'$, and in both cases it is at most $\tilde h(c_a)+2\eps$.
To prove continuity of $h$ at $\theta$, we first discuss the case that $c(\theta)$ is an endpoint of $\M$. By hypothesis, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial vein $[0,c(\theta)]$, so there is a $c_a\in\M$ with $0\prec c_a\prec c(\theta)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c(\theta)) -\tilde h(c_a) \le \eps$. Now we use the argument from above and construct a wake $W'$ as described.
Then all angles $\theta'\in W'$ satisfy $|h(\theta')-h(\theta)|\le 2\eps$, and these angles form a neighborhood of $\theta$, which completes the proof in this case.
The second case is that $c(\theta)$ is not an endpoint of the Mandelbrot set and $c(\theta)$ is neither on the boundary of a hyperbolic component nor a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter. We may choose an arc $(c_a,c_b)\ni c(\theta)$ (i.e., $c_a\prec c(\theta)\prec c_b$) with $0\le \tilde h(c_b)-\tilde h(c_a)\le 2\eps$ and proceed as above.
If $c(\theta)$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston-parameter, then there are finitely many branches, and the previous argument works separately for all the individual branches.
If $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of a single hyperbolic component $H$, let $c_a\in \partial H$ be the root of $H$ (the boundary point with multiplier $1$) and let $c_b$ be the period-doubling bifurcation point (the boundary point with multiplier $-1$). Then all dyadic parameters $c'\in W=\text{wake}(c_a)\sm\ovl{\text{wake}(c_b)}$ have the endpoints of their veins in $W\setminus \{c(\theta)\}$. The entropy variation of $[c_a,c_b] $ is $0$, in particular less than $\eps$.
Hence $W'$ as above provides a neighborhood of $\theta$ with small entropy variation.
Finally, if $c(\theta)$ is on the boundary of two hyperbolic components, then the previous argument works separately
for both hyperbolic components.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Continuity of Entropy]
\label{Thm:Continuity} \lineclear
If $\theta\in\Circle$, then $h\colon\Circle\to[0,\log 2]$ is continuous at $\theta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{Thm:ContinuityNearVeins}, entropy is continuous at all angles $\theta\in\Circle$ for which entropy restricted to the combinatorial arc $[0,c(\theta)]$ is continuous. This is true for all parameters $c(\theta)$ with $\theta\in\Q/\Z$ by work of Tiozzo~\cite{TiozzoThesis} and Jung \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, and consequently for all parameters that are not (combinatorial) endpoints of $\M$ at irrational angles. For combinatorial endpoints $c(\theta)$ with irrational $\theta$, we will prove this in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{corollary}[Existence of Limit]
\label{Cor:ExistenceLimit} \lineclear
In the dynamics of $p_c$, the limit $\lim_{n\to\infty} (1/n)\log N(n)$ exists whenever $p_c$ is non-renormalizable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, if $c$ is non-renormalizable and postcritically finite, then $\limsup_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)=\lim_n\frac 1 n \log N_c(n)$ by irreducibility of the associated subshift of finite type. If $c$ is not postcritically finite and not an endpoint of $\M$ (that is, $c$ is associated to two external angles in $\M$), then there are two non-renormalizable parameters $c_1$ and $c_2$ with $N_{c_1}(n)\le N_c(n)\le N_{c_2}(n)$ and $0\le \tilde h(c_2)-\tilde h(c_1)\le\eps$ for arbitrary $\eps>0$ and the result holds as well (here we use continuity of entropy).
Finally, if $c$ is a non-renormalizable endpoint, then by continuity of $\tilde h$ for any $\eps>0$ there exists a postcritically finite non-renormalizable parameter $c_1\prec c$ so that $\tilde h(c)-\tilde h(c_1)\le \eps$.
By monotonicity, we have $\liminf(1/n)N_c(n)\ge \liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)$, and
$\limsup(1/n)N_c(n)=\tilde h(c)\le \tilde h(c_1)+\eps=\liminf(1/n)N_{c_1}(n)+\eps\le \liminf(1/n)N_{c}(n)+\eps$. Since $\eps>0$ was arbitrary, the claim follows in this case too.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\section{Irrational endpoints}
\label{Sec:IrratEndpoints}
In this section, we prove that for every combinatorial endpoint $c$ of $\M$, entropy is continuous along the combinatorial arc $[0,c]$. This is known when $c$ is postcritically finite \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung}, but we need it in all cases. This proof provides the missing step in the continuity proof in Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity}.
We will approximate the irrational endpoints by dyadic ones, and of course we need uniform estimates for the latter (see Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}).
\subsection{Hubbard trees}
\label{ss:HaubTrees}
We need to start by discussing some more properties of Hubbard trees of postcritically finite polynomials.
The \emph{marked points} or \emph{vertices} of the Hubbard tree are the endpoints, branch points, and the postcritical points. (In fact, all endpoints are postcritical points; critical points are not included in their own right, but they might be postcritical, for instance when they are periodic, and when the degree is greater than $2$ then they might also be branch points.) Since the set of vertices is forward invariant, every edge (a closed arc connecting two vertices) maps over one or several entire edges, so that the image contains every edge the interior of which intersects the image; in other words, the edges form a Markov partition on the Hubbard tree. --- Here, we will only discuss quadratic polynomials and Hubbard trees.
If $H_r\subset H$ is a proper subtree of $H$ with the property that $p_c^{\circ n}(H_r)\subset H_r$ for some period $n\ge 2$, then $p_c$ is \emph{renormalizable}; it is well known that this means the $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded copy of the Mandelbrot set within itself.
The main part of the argument below will be in the case that there exists an edge $e\subset H$ so that $p_c^{\circ n}(e)=H$ for every sufficiently big $n$. If $p_c$ is non-renormalizable, then every edge will do; otherwise there may still be some edge (outside of ``little Julia sets'') with this property. If there is no such edge, then we are in the ``immediate satellite renormalizable case'', that means $p_c$ belongs to a small embedded Mandelbrot set that touches the main cardioid of $\M$.
\emph{Standing Assumption:} In this subsection and the next one (Section~\ref{ss:Automata}), we assume that $H$ has an edge for which a finite iterate covers the entire Hubbard tree $H$, so that $c$ is not immediate satellite renormalizable. (In fact, this assumption will continue to hold, in different notation, until we give the proof of the general case in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}).
Consider a dyadic endpoint $c'$ with Hubbard tree $H'$ and external angle ${q}/{2^m}$. Then the critical value and every postcritical point are endpoints of $H'$, so vertices of $H'$ are either endpoints or branch points. Easy calculations show that $H'$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item $m+1$ endpoints;
\item at most $m-2$ branch points;
\item at most $2m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Let $c$ be the postcritically finite parameter where the vein of $c'$ terminates. We denote by $H$ the Hubbard tree of $c$; note that $\beta \not\in H$.
Denote by $x\in H'$ the dynamic counterpart of $c$ as in Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\begin{lemma}
The set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}\setminus \{\text{vertices of }H'\}$ contains at most $m$ points; equivalently, $p_{c'}^{\circ m}(x)$ is a branch point of $H'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde c$ be the dyadic parameter with $c'\lhd \tilde c$, so $c'$ is directly subordinate to $\tilde c$. Then $c\prec c'$ and $c\prec \tilde c$.
Denote by $\tilde q/ 2^n$ the external angle of $\tilde c$; note that $n<m$.
We will work in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, the rays landing at $x$ (this point is denoted by $x_*$ in Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}) separate $R(0), R(\tilde q/2^n)$, and $R(q/2^m)$.
Let $x(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ be the landing point of $R(\tilde q/ 2^n)$ and consider the arc $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$ in the filled-in Julia set of $p_{c'}$ (which is a dendrite). Then $x$ has at least three branches in $ H'\cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$: two of them are the branches to the critical point and to the critical value at angle $q/2^m$, and the third is $[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]$.
We claim that $p_{c'}^{\circ n}[x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\subset H'$. Indeed, let $T_k$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. Then $p_{c'}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$ by \eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1}. Therefore, $p_{c'}(T_{k-1})\subset T_{k-2}\cup H'$ and, by induction, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(T_{n})\subset H'$.
Therefore, $p_{c'}^{\circ n}(x)$ has at least $3$ branches in $H'$ because $p_{c'}^{\circ n}:H' \cup [x(\tilde q/ 2^n),x]\to H'$ is locally a homeomorphism at $x$, and $n<m$.
\end{proof}
Let us now refine $H'$ by adding the finite set $\{ p_{c'}^{\circ k}(x): k\ge 0\}$ to its vertex set. The new tree, still called $H'$, has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $3m-1$ vertices; and
\item at most $3m-2$ edges.
\end{itemize}
Here and elsewhere, we find it convenient to express some combinatorial properties in terms of \emph{automata}. We would like to reassure the reader that we only use a basic notion without results from automata theory and hope it will not be distracting. More precisely, given a postcritically finite polynomial $p_{c'}$ with Hubbard tree $H'$, we associate to it an automaton $A'$ in a natural way, as follows. The states of $A'$ correspond to the edges of $H'$. An arrow connects two edges $e_1$ and $e_2$ so that the image of $e_1$ contains $e_2$; the number of arrows from $e_1$ to $e_2$ equals the number of times the edge $e_1$ covers $e_2$ under $p_{c'}$ (this is well defined because we have a Markov partition). This number of arrows equals $0$ or $1$, except for the unique edge (if any) that contains the critical point in its interior.
Similarly, denote by $A$ the natural automaton associated with $p_c\colon H\to H$.
\emph{Overview on the argument.}
The key idea of our proof consists of identifying the dynamics of $p$ on $H$ as an embedded subset of the dynamics of $p'$ on $H'$. Since entropy measures the growth rate of choice of orbits of length $n$, the entropy of $p'$ on $H'$ is no less than the entropy of $p$ on $H$, and we need to give an upper bound on the difference. An orbit in $H'$ that realizes the additional choice is one that leaves the embedded image of $H$ in $H'$, and we show that it starts on a single edge $[x,c']$ at the critical value. We show that this edge maps forward homeomorphically a large number of iterations: so if some orbit uses the additional choice, then it will not have any choice for a long time, and this will give an upper bound on the entropy increase. We will do much of the argument in terms of the automaton $A$ that we consider as a sub-automaton of $A'$.
We start the construction by describing the relation between $H,A$ and $H',A'$ in the following lemma. We define an end-edge of $H'$ to be any edge so that among the two vertices it connects there is one endpoint of $H'$.
\begin{lemma}[Identifying $A$ as Sub-Automaton of $A'$]
\label{lem:AandA'} \lineclear
Denote by $H'_*$ the sub-tree of $H'$ obtained from $H'$ by removing all its end-vertices and (open) end-edges. Then there is a homeomorphism $J:H \to H'_*$
such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$J$ is a tree-isomorphism, i.e.\ $J$ sends vertices and edges of $H$ to vertices and edges of $ H'_*$ respectively;
\item
if $y$ is a vertex of $H$, then $J(y)$ has the same itinerary as $y$; and
\item
$J$ respects the dynamics in the sense that
an edge $e_1$ of $H$ covers once, resp twice, an edge $e_2$ under $p_c$ if and only if $J(e_1)$ covers once, resp twice, $J(e_2)$ under $p_{c'}$.
\end{enumerate}
There is a unique edge $e_0$ of $H'$ containing the critical point of $p_{c'}$. If $c$ is strictly pre-periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is in the interior of $J^{-1}(e_0)$. If $c$ is periodic, then the critical point of $p_c$ is on the boundary of $J^{-1}(e_0)$.
The map $J$ induces an inclusion $A \hookrightarrow A'$ by mapping a state $e$ of $A$ into the state $J(e)$ of $A'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us first define the map
\[
J: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Recall that every vertex of $H$ is a postcritical point or a branch point.
If $y\in \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}$ (in the dynamics of $p_c$) is a branch point of $H$, then $y$ is not a pre-critical point because the latter points have valence $1$ or $2$ in $H$.
In particular, there are at least $3$ external rays landing at $y$. By Corollary~\ref{Cor:CountPartsHubTree} these rays at the same angle also land together in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$ and the landing point, say $y'$, is in $H'_*$. We define $J(y):=y'$.
Further, let $x=J(c)$ be the dynamical counterpart (again in the dynamics of $c'$) of the parameter $c$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}. Then we set $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c)):= p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)\in H'_*$ for all $k\ge 0$. We claim that this definition is consistent and, moreover, that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
$J$ is injective on the set of vertices and
\item[(b)] $J$ preserves orientation in the following sense: if a ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ lands at a non-precritical point of $H$ so that $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates two vertices $v_1,v_2\in H$, then $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ separates $J(v_1)$ and $J(v_2)$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$.
\end{itemize}
If $c$ is a Misiurewicz-Thurston parameter, then $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of at least two external rays (because $c\prec c'$ is not an endpoint). Moreover, $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ is the landing point of a ray $R(\phi)$ if and only if $R(\phi)$ lands at $J(p^{\circ k}_c(c))$ in the dynamical plane of $p_{c'}$. Thus $J$ is well defined and satisfies (a) and (b).
The other case is that $c$ is the center of a hyperbolic component $W$. In this case, no ray lands at $p^{\circ k}_c(c)$ for $k\ge 0$ because these points are in the Fatou set. By definition, $J(c)=x$ is the landing point of periodic rays, say $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$, so that $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$ bounds the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$. Denote by $c_*\in \partial W$ the landing point of $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. For a parameter $w\in \ovl W$, let $\gamma_w$ be a non-repelling periodic point; there is a unique continuous choice so that $\gamma_c=c$. Moreover, $\gamma_{c_*}$ is the landing point of the ray pair $RP(\phi_-,\phi_+)$. Observe also that the cycle $\{p_w^{\circ k}(\gamma_w)\}_{k\ge 0}$ for $w\in W\cup\{c_*\}$ does not cross any ray pair $RP(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ as in claim (b). This proves claim (b) because the rays landing at non-precritical points of $H$ plus rays $R(\phi_-)$ and $R(\phi_+)$ are stable in the subwake of $c$ containing $c'$.
%\newpage
We now extend $J$ to a continuous map $J:H\to H'_*$ that is injective on every edge of $H$. Since $J$ preserves orientation of vertices of $H$, the extension is an embedding.
Since $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(c')$ is not in the image of $J$ for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$ but $p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ is in the image of $J$ for all $k\ge 0$, the image of $H$ under $J$ is the connected hull of $\cup _{k\ge 0} p^{\circ k}_{c'}(x)$ (the tree $H$ is the connected hull of the orbit of $c$ under $p_c$, and the map $J$ preserves external angles of rays landing at vertices). By Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge} the images $p^{\circ k}_{c'}([c',x])$ are arcs with disjoint interiors for $k\in \{0,1,\dots, m\}$. Thus there is no branch point in $H'\setminus J(H)$. Therefore, $J$ maps $H$ bijectively onto $ H'_*$.
In the standard definition of Hubbard trees, every vertex of $H'$ is a branch point or an endpoint, and the postcritical points are exactly the endpoints. Remember, however, that we added the orbit of $x$ to the set of vertices of $H'$. The vertices of $H'_*$ are thus the branch points in $H'$ and the orbit of $x$, and all are $J$-images of vertices in $H$. Therefore $J$ is a bijection from vertices of $H$ to vertices of $H'_*$, and claim (1) follows.
Observe that $J$ is a conjugacy between
\[
p_c: \{\text{vertices of $H$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H$}\}
\]
and
\[
p_{c'}: \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\} \to \{\text{vertices of $H'_*$}\}.
\]
Therefore, if $e_1$ is an edge of $H$ so that the critical point $0$ is not in the interior of $e_1$, then $p_{c}(e_1)\supset e_2$ if and only if $p_{c'}(J(e_1))\supset J(e_2)$. Moreover, $p_c$ and $p_{c'}$ restricted to $e_1$ and $J(e_1)$ respectively have degree $1$. If the interior of $e_1=[a,b]$ contains the critical point of $p_c$, then $p_c([a,0])=[p_{c}(a),c]$ and $p_c([0,b])=[c,p_{c}(b)]$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $J(e_1)$ because all other edges of $H'$ are mapped injectively under $p_{c'}$. We have $p_{c'}([J(a),0])=[J(p_c(a)),c')]\supset [J(p_c(a),J(c)]$ and $p_{c'}([0,J(b)])=[c',J(p_c(b))]\supset [J(c), J(p_c(b)]$. This finishes the proof of (1)--(3).
The critical point $0$ is not a vertex of $H'$ because $0$ is a strictly preperiodic point of $p_{c'}:H'\to H'$. Hence $0$ is in the interior of an edge $e_0\subset H'$. Since $x\in p_{c'}(e_0)$ we have $c\in p_{c}(J^{-1}(e_0))$. Therefore, $J^{-1}(e_0)$ contains the critical point $0$. Moreover, $0$ is in the interior of $e_0$ if and only if $0$ is strictly preperiodic under $p_c$.
Clearly, $J$ injects the set of states of $A$, which are edges of $H$, into the set of states of $A'$, which are edges of $H'$. It follows from (3) that the number of arrows from $a_1$ to $a_2$ (i.e., the degree of the corresponding map on the edge) is equal to the number of arrows from $J(a_1)$ to $J(a_2)$.
\end{proof}
\goodbreak
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:EdgesOfH}
The tree $H$ has
\begin{itemize}
\item at most $2m-2$ vertices; and
\item at most $2m-3$ edges.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Automata}
\label{ss:Automata}
Let us look in detail at the automata $A'$ and $A$ introduced above. For simplicity, we write $A\subset A'$, see Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}.
Whether or not the dynamics on a Hubbard tree is renormalizable is encoded in the associated automaton. We write
$A=A_n\cup A_r$ so that
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_n$ (the non-renormalizable edges) contains all states that, for a fixed finite iterate, reach all states of $A$ simultaneously; and
\item $A_r$ (the renormalizable edges) contains all states from which {not all} of $A$ can be reached simultaneously: these correspond to edges within the Hubbard trees of ``smalls Julia sets'' corresponding to renormalization domains).
\end{itemize}
The dynamics on the Hubbard tree is renormalizable if and only if $A_r\neq \emptyset$.
An automaton is called \emph{irreducible} if every state of $A$ can be reached from each other. This is certainly the case when $A$ is non-renormalizable, but may also happen in the renormalizable case: for instance, the Hubbard tree of the rabbit polynomial with a superattracting $3$-cycle has its Hubbard tree in the form of a topological \textsf{Y} where the three edges are permuted cyclically: the automaton has the form $e_0\to e_1\to e_2\to e_0$ and is irreducible, but the dynamics is renormalizable. The difference is that no edge covers all of $A$ after the same number of iterations.
If $A_r\neq\emptyset$, so that the dynamics is renormalizable, then we may have $A_n=\emptyset$ or $A_n\neq \emptyset$. The former case, $A_n=\emptyset$, was defined earlier as the case of immediate satellite renormalization.
Recall our earlier assumption that $A_n\neq\emptyset$: so we are not in the immediate satellite renormalizable case.
We also remark that there are no arrows from $A_r$ to $A_n$, so within $A$ there is no escape from the set of renormalization states $A_r$. However, in $A'\supset A$, if $A_r\neq\emptyset$, then there are two arrows from $A_r$ to $[c',x]$, which is a state in $A'\setminus A$.
There are the following special states of $A$ and $A'\supset A$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the $0$-state in $A'$ contains the critical point; this state is the edge $e_0$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:AandA'}; we set the $0$-state of $A$ to be $J^{-1}(e_0)$; this convention is compatible with the inclusion $J\colon A\hookrightarrow A'$;
\item
the $[c',x]$-state of $A'\setminus A$;
\item
states of $A$ and of $A'$ that belong to the interval $[\alpha, -\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
A \emph{path} in $A$ or $A'$ is a sequence of arrows so that each arrow starts where the previous arrow ends. The \emph{length} of a path is the number of arrows it contains. We can also think of a path as a sequence of states so that there is an arrow from every state to the subsequent one (that is, a sequence of edges in the Hubbard tree so that each edge covers the next one under the map). When a path connects two states that are connected by multiple arrows, then there are accordingly multiple paths along this sequence of states (as an example, in $A'$ there are two paths of length $1$ from the $0$-state to the $[c',x]$-state).
We define a \emph{relevant precritical path} in $A'$ or in $A$ as a path that starts at a state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and terminates at the $0$-state. By basic properties of symbolic dynamics, relevant precritical paths in $A'$ are in bijection with precritical points of $p_{c'}$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ because the critical point of $p_{c'}$ is not a vertex of $H'$. Different relevant precritical paths in $A$ encode different precritical points of $p_c$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
Every relevant precritical path $s$ in $A'$ has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DecompOfs}
s=b_0c_0a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\end{equation}
such that (roughly: $a_i, b_i, c_i$ are the sub-paths in $ A'\setminus A$, in $A_n$, and in $A_r$ respectively)
\begin{itemize}
\item
$a_i$ is an (almost) ``choiceless'' path that starts at the $0$-state, then goes to $[x,c']$, then travels outside of states in $[\alpha, -\alpha]$, and terminates at the first state reached in $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset A$;
\item
if $a_i$ terminates at a state in $A_r$, then $b_i=\emptyset$; otherwise, $b_i$ is a path that starts at the state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ where $a_i$ terminates and continues while states in $A_n$ are visited; (if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$)
\item
if $A_r=\emptyset$, then $c_i=\emptyset$; otherwise: if $b_i\not=\emptyset$, then $c_i$ is a path that starts in $A_n$ where $b_i$ terminates, and immediately moves into $A_r$, and otherwise it starts at a state in $A_r$ where $a_i$ terminates; the end of $c_i$ is the $0$-state, and until then the path remains in $A_r$ (again, if $i=0$, then instead of the terminal state of $a_i$ we take the initial state of $s$).
\end{itemize}
Observe that paths in $A'$ that are not in $A$ start on the edge $[x,c']$, so they are described by the $a_i$ that are long and have almost no choice, hence contribute little additional entropy.
Every $a_i$ has length at least $m+1$ because $[x,c']$ needs $m$ iteration to reach $[\beta,\alpha]$, and might need further iterations to land in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ (Lemma~\ref{Lem:InjectiveDynamicsLastEdge}). Once it lands there, we are either in $A_n$ and we continue with a path $b_i$ as long as we stay in $A_n$, or we are already in $A_r$ and $b_i=\emptyset$, and $c_i$ continues until the next visit of the $0$ state.
We will refer to $a_i$ as \emph{detours} (the long almost choice-less parts).
Defining $\ell_i,t_i, k_i$ as the lengths of $a_i, b_i, c_i$ respectively, we say that $s$ has \emph{combinatorial pattern} $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$.
\begin{lemma}[Almost Choiceless Paths]
\label{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}
There are at most two possible paths in $A'$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at the $0$-state;
\item then immediately go to the $[c',x]$-state;
\item then travel outside $[\alpha,-\alpha]$; and
\item terminate at a given state in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Such paths have length $\ell\ge m+1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, the edge of $H'$ associated with the $0$-state covers $[c,x]$ with degree $2$ under $p_{c'}$. Then $[x,c]$ maps injectively for at least $m+1$ iterations until $[x,c]$ starts to partially cover $[\alpha,-\alpha]$. But this is, by definition, when the path under discussion terminates.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{lemma}[Number of Paths $c_i$]
\label{lem:c_iPaths}
Suppose $c$ is renormalizable. Let $g$ be the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$. Then there are at most $2^{{k}/{g}}$ paths in $A$ that
\begin{itemize}
\item start at a given state in $A_n$ or in $A_r$;
\item all subsequent states are within $A_r$;
\item terminate at the $0$-state; and
\item have length $k$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $H_0,H_1,\dots H_{g-1}$ be the cycle of small Hubbard trees associated with the the largest renormalizable Hubbard trees (corresponding to the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$). Then the degree $p_c^{\circ gt}:H_{0}\to H_{0}$ is at most $2^t$ for all $t$. Therefore, there are at most $2^{t}$ paths in $A_r$ with length $k\in \{ gt,gt+1,\dots, g(t+1)-1\}$ that terminate at the $0$-state; so for given length $k$, the number of such paths is at most $2^t=2^{\lfloor k/g \rfloor}$ (and we have not even counted the first step from a given state of $A$ to $A_r$).
\end{proof}
Fix a combinatorial pattern $P=(t_0,k_0,\ell_1,t_1,k_1,\ell_2,t_2,k_2,\dots,\ell_p,t_p,k_p)$ and let $n=|P|=t_0+k_0+\sum_{i\ge 1}^p(\ell_i+t_i+k_i)$.
When comparing entropy in $A'$ and in $A$, we will consider the additional relevant precritical paths in $A'$ and show that they correspond to relevant precritical paths in $A$ of bounded length, so that there are not too many additional paths in $A'$. More precisely, if a detour has length $\ell_i\ge 3m$ then the new path within $A$ will be shorter (or have equal length) than before.
We thus introduce a quantity $\kappa$, called \emph{uncertainty of $P$}, that measures the possible increase of length as follows:
\[
\kappa(P):= \frac 1 n \sum_{|\ell_i|<3m}(3m- \ell_{i})
= \frac 1 n \sum_i \max(0,3m-\ell_i)
\]
(the first sum is taken over all $\ell_i$ that are less than $3m$). Higher values of $\kappa$ create problems. Since all $\ell_i>m$ and $\sum\ell_i\le n$, we have $3m-\ell_i\le 2m < 2\ell_i$ and $\kappa(P)\in[0, 2]$.
Denote by $N'(P)$ the number of all precritical paths in $A'$ with pattern $P$.
For $\kappa\in [0,2]$ define
\[
N'(\kappa,n):= \sum_{\kappa(P)\le \kappa,\ \ |P|=n} N'(P)
\;,
\]
the numbers of precritical itineraries with small uncertainty.
We define $S'(\kappa,n)$ to be the corresponding set of relevant precritical paths with small uncertainty, so that $N'(\kappa,n)=|S'(\kappa,n)|$.
\begin{lemma}[Replacing a Path in $A'$ by a Path in $A$]
\label{lem:substitution} \lineclear
If $s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p$ is a precritical path in $A'$ with uncertainty $\kappa$, then there are paths $a^*_i$ in $A_n$ with lengths in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$ such that
$s^*:=b_0 a^*_1 b_1a^*_1b_2a^*_2\dots a^*_p b_pc_p$ is a path in $A$. If $n$ is the length of
$s$, then $s^*$ has length at most $n + \kappa n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that some $b_i$ might be empty paths. Choose a state $a\in A_n$. For convenience, we say that $a$ is the beginning and the end of every empty $b_i$.
Since $A_n$ is irreducible and has less than $2m$ vertices (Corollary~\ref{cor:EdgesOfH}) we may replace every $c_ia_{i+1}$ by a path $a^*_{i+1}$ in $A_n$ of length at most $2m$ so that $a^*_{i+1}$ connects the end of $b_{i}$ with the beginning of $b_{i+1}$ (which are by definition both in $A_n$); by adding $m$ arbitrary steps at the beginning, we may arrange things so that $a^*_i$ has length in $\{m,\dots,3m\}$.
Since the length of each $a_i$ is at least $m$, this procedure increases the length of $s$ by at most $\kappa n$ (and even shortens whenever $c_ia_{i+1}$ has length greater than $3m$).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Counting Patterns]
\label{lem:PatternsGrowth}
The quantity
\[
\limsup_{n}\frac{1}{n}\log\left(\# \{\text{patterns of length }n\}\rule{0pt}{11pt}\right)
\]
tends to $0$ as $m$ tends to infinity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every pattern $P$ is uniquely characterized by a non-decreasing sequence of positive integers
\[t_0,t_0+k_0,t_0+k_0+\ell_1, t_0+k_0+\ell_1+t_1, \dots. \]
Since $\ell_i\ge m+1$, for every $q\in\{0,\dots,\lfloor n/m\rfloor\}$ the interval $[qm,(q+1)m)$ contains at most $3$ elements of the above sequence; and the same is true for the final interval $[\lfloor n/m\rfloor m+1, n]$. Therefore, the number of all patterns is bounded by $Z(n,m):=((m+1)^3)^{(n/m)+1}=e^{{3(n+m)\log(m+1)}/{m}}$. For fixed $m$, we have $\limsup_n (1/n)\log Z(n,m)=3\log(m+1)/m$, and indeed this tends to $0$ as $m\to\infty$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\begin{proposition}[Uniformity]
\label{prop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon >0$ there are $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0$ depending only on $\varepsilon$ but not on $c$ and $c'$ such that the following holds. If
\begin{itemize}
\item $m\ge \overline m$,
\item either $c$ is non renormalizable, or the period of the biggest small Mandelbrot set containing $c$ is at least $\overline g$,
\item $\kappa\le \ovl \kappa$, and
\item $h$ is the entropy of the parameter $c$,
\end{itemize}
then
%\newpage
\[
N'(\kappa,n)\le C e^{(h+\eps)n} % \sum_{\nu\le n}N(\nu)
\]
for some constant $C>0$ depending on $c$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Since $h$ is the entropy of $c$, there is a constant $C_1>0$ such that
\[
N(n)\le C_1e^{(h+\eps/3)n},
\]
where $N(n)$ counts the number of relevant precritical paths in $A$ of generation $n$.
Our first claim is that there are at most $ 2^{{n}/{g}+{n}/{m}}$ precritical paths
\[
s=b_0c_0 a_1b_1c_1a_2b_2c_3\dots a_pb_pc_p
\]
with fixed $(b_i)_{i\le p}$ of a given pattern $P$ of length $n$. Indeed, the beginning of the $c_i$ is fixed by $b_i$, or by $a_i$ if $b_i$ is empty, and the end is at the $0$ state, so by Lemma~\ref{lem:c_iPaths} there are at most $2^{k_i/g}$ choices for each $c_i$ and in total at most $2^{n/g}$ choices for all $c_i$ combined (in the non-renormalizable case, the $c_i$ are empty and there is no choice at all). Each $a_i$ has at most two choices by Lemma~\ref{lem:ChoiceLessPaths}, and since their length is at least $m$, there are no more than $n/m$ such choices.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:substitution} we may substitute $c_ia_i$ by $a^*_i$ with $m\le |a^*_i|\le 3m$ and get a precritical path
\[s^*=b_0a^*_1b_1a^*_2b_2\dots a^*_pb_p c_p\]
in $A$ with length at most $ n+\kappa(P) n $. Denoting the length of $a_i^*$ by $\ell_i^*$, we call the numbers $Q=(t_0,0, \ell^*_1, t_1,0,\ell^*_2,\dots,\ell^*_p,t_p,k_p)$ the pattern of $s^*$.
Our next claim is that for fixed patterns $P$ and $Q$, the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is at most
\[
2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}=C_1e^{((h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m)n}
\;.
\]
Indeed, the number of paths $s$ for a given pattern $P$ with fixed $b_i$ is at most $2^{{n}/{g}+ {n}/{m}}$. Different $b_i$ clearly lead to different $s^*$ because we know from $P$ were in $s^*$ the $b_i$ are located. The length of $s^*$ is bounded by $(1+\kappa(P))n$; hence the number of different $s^*$ is bounded by $\max_{1\le \mu \le (1+\kappa(P))n} N(\mu)\le C_1e^{(h +\eps/3)(1+\kappa (P))n}\le C_1 e^{(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl\kappa)n}$ because each $s^*$ is a precritical path in $A$.
If $g$ and $m$ are sufficiently large and $\ovl \kappa$ is sufficiently small, then $(h+\eps/3)(1+\ovl \kappa)+ 1/g+1/m\le h+2\eps/3$, and the number of triples $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ is bounded by
\[
C_1e^{(h+2\eps/3)n}
\]
Since every $s\in S'(\kappa,n)$ is a part of at least one triple $(s,(b_i)_{i\le p},s^*)$ for some patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $\kappa(P)\le \kappa$ we get the estimate
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le \left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| C_1 \ e^{(h+2\eps/3) n}
\;,
\]
where $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right|$ denotes the number of pairs of patterns $P$ and $Q$ with $|P|=n$ and $|Q|\le n+\kappa(P)n$. Lemma~\ref{lem:PatternsGrowth}, the number $\left|\{(P,Q)\}\right| $ is bounded by $C_2e^{(\eps/3) n}$ for some constant $C_2>0$. We get
\[
N'(\kappa, n)\le C_1C_2 \ e^{(h+\eps) n}
\;;
\]
this finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{Continuity at Irrational Endpoints}
Let $c_{\infty}$ be a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set.
There a sequence of dyadic veins $[c_i,c'_i]$ approximating $c_{\infty}$ in the following way
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1\prec c_2\prec\dots \prec c_{\infty}$;
\item $c_{i+1}\in [c_i,c'_i]$; and
\item $ \dots c_i \lhd \dots \lhd c'_2\lhd c'_1$.
\end{itemize}
Figure~\ref{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint} illustrates the arrangement of these points.
Note that once $c_1$ is chosen, the remaining parameters are uniquely determined: $c'_i$ is the dyadic of least generation with $c'_i\succ c_i$, and $c_{i+1}$ is the branch point in the vein of $c'_i$ where the vein to $c_\infty$ branches off.
We assume that $c_{\infty}$ is not in any immediate satellite small copy of the Mandelbrot set. More precisely, since we work with automata only in the postcritically finite case, the assumption that we make is this:\begin{itemize}
\item all $c_i$ are outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set
\end{itemize}
(note that if any $c_i$ is outside of immediate satellite copies, then all subsequent ones are as well: so, possibly up to truncating an initial part of the sequence $(c_i)$, the assumption on $c_\infty$ is that there exists a postcritically finite $c_1\prec c_\infty$ outside of immediate satellite copies).
The case that $c_\infty$ is immediate satellite renormalizable will be treated in Corollary~\ref{cor:RadialContin}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\framebox{\includegraphics{FigAllBranchPoints.pdf}}
\caption{The relative (combinatorial) positions of the parameters $c_i$, $c_\infty$ and $c'_i$ used in the proof.}
\label{Fig:IrrationalEndpoint}
\end{figure}
Similar to the previous discussion we specify the following objects
\begin{itemize}
\item $H'_i$ is the Hubbard tree of $c'_i$ with dynamics $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$ \,;
\item
$S'_{i}(n)\subset [\alpha,-\alpha]\subset H'_i$ is the set of relevant precritical points of generation $n$ in $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ for the parameter $c'_i$\,;
\item
$N'_{i}(n):= |S'_i(n)|$ is its cardinality;
\item
$h_i=\tilde h(c_i)$ and $h'_i=\tilde h(c'_i)$ are the entropies;
\item
$m_i$ is the generation of the dyadic parameter $c'_i$\,;
and
\item for $j\le i$ we denote by $x_j^{(i)}\in H_i$ the dynamical counterpart of $c_j$ in $p_{c'_i}:H'_i\to H'_i$, see Definition~\ref{Def:DynamCounterpart}.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We will now introduce the sets $S'_i(j,\kappa, n)$ for all $j\le i$; these sets are defined in a similar way as $S'(\kappa,n)$ in Section~\ref{ss:Automata}. Consider a precritical point $y\in S'_i(n)\subset H'_i$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Iter:K:ell}0=\tilde \ell_0 <\tilde t_0<\tilde \ell_1<\tilde t_1< \dots < \tilde t_p=n
\end{equation} be the iteration times of $y$ (depending on $j$) uniquely specified as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\tilde t_k>\tilde \ell_k$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde t_k}_{c'_i}(y) \in [ c'_i, x_{j}^{(i)}]$;
\item
$\tilde \ell_k>\tilde t_{k-1}$ is the first time so that $p^{\circ \tilde \ell_k}_{c'_i}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
%\newpage
We also set $\ell_k:=\tilde \ell_k- \tilde t_{k-1}$ and $t_k:= \tilde t_k-\tilde \ell_k$. Clearly, \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is uniquely specified by $(t_0,\ell_1, \dots, t_p)$.
We define \emph{the uncertainty of $y$ with respect to $x_j^{(i)}$} as
\[
\kappa_j(y):= \frac 1 n \sum_{\ell_k<3m_j}(3m_j- (\ell_k+1))
= \frac 1 n \sum_k \max(0,3m_j-(\ell_k+1)).
\]We denote by $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ the set of all $y\in S'_i(n)$ such that $\kappa_j(y)<\kappa$.
Let us also define \[I_j(y):= \bigcup_{\ell_k<3m_j} \{\tilde t_{k-1}, \tilde t_{k-1}+1,\dots, \tilde \ell_{k} \}.\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:I_j}
For all $j$ and $y$ the set $I_j(y)$ is a union of blocks of consecutive numbers so that each block has length $\ell_k+1\in[m_j,\dots, 3m_j]$, and
\begin{itemize}
\item
its first number is the unique number $t$ in the block that satisfies $p_{c'_i}^{\circ t}(y)\in [c'_i, \alpha]$; %x_j^{(i)}]$.
\item
its last number is the unique number $\ell$ in the block that satisfies
$p_{c'_i}^{\circ \ell}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$.
\end{itemize}
Furthermore,
\( \displaystyle \kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|.\)
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have $\ell_k<3m_j$ by definition of $I_j(y)$ and we need to prove the lower bound $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
For every integer $k\ge 0$, let $T_k\subset H'_i$ be the minimal tree connecting the $\alpha$ fixed point to all dyadic endpoints of generation at most $k$. In particular, $[\alpha,-\alpha]\subset T_0$. By~\eqref{eq:T_k-2InT_k-1} we have $p_{c'_i}^{-1}(T_{k-2})\subset T_{k-1}$.
By construction, $c'_i$ and $c'_{j-1}$ are in different sublimbs of $c_{j}$. Thus, by Lemma~\ref{Lem:DirectlySubordinateDynamics}, $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})$ is disjoint from $T_{m_j-1 }$; and we get $[c'_i,x_{j}^{(i)})\cap p_{c'}^{\circ -k} [\alpha,-\alpha]=\emptyset$ for all $k< m_j$. This shows that $\ell_k\ge m_j -1$.
We certainly have $p_{c'_i}^{\circ \tilde t_{k-1}}(y)\in[c'_i,x^{(i)}_j]\subset [c'_i,\alpha]$, and since $p_{c'}^{-1}([c'_i,\alpha])=[\alpha,-\alpha]$, the block would end before the orbit could enter $[c'_i,\alpha]$
again. The claim about the last number is obvious.
Finally, $3m_j-(\ell_k+1) \le 2m_j \le 2(\ell_k+1)$, and taking the sum we conclude $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)|$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:MonotIncl}
For $j<i$ the injection $B:S'_{i}(n)\to S'_{i-1}(n)$ of Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} injects $S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$ into $S'_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $x_j^{(i)}$ and $x_j^{(i-1)}$ are the dynamical counterparts of $c_j$ in the dynamical planes of $p_{c_i}$ and $p_{c_{i-1}}$ respectively. Consider $y\in S'_i(j,\kappa,n)$. It follows from Proposition~\ref{Prop:InjectionPrecritical} parts (A) and (B) that
\begin{itemize}
\item $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ if and only if $p^{\circ \ell}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [\alpha,-\alpha]$ for all $\ell\ge 0$; and
\item $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i}}(y)\in [c'_{i},x_j^{(i)}]$ if and only if $p^{\circ t}_{c'_{i-1}}(B(y))\in [c'_{i-1},x_j^{(i-1)}]$ for all $t \ge 0$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the first claim follows from Part (B) applied to $c_*=0$ (recall that the dynamical counterpart of $c_*=0$ is the $\alpha$-fixed point). The second claim follows from Part (A) combined with Part (B) applied to $c_*=c_j$.
Therefore, our surgery respects the sequence \eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell}: for fixed $j$ and every $y\in S_i(n)$ the point $B(y)$ has the same sequence as $y$.
Hence $\kappa(y)=\kappa(B(y))$ and $B(y)\subset S_{i-1}(j,\kappa,n)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:SmallKappa}
For every $\delta>0$ and for every $i'\ge 0$ there is an $i''>i'$ such that for every $n\ge 0$ we have
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\delta,n).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a subsequence of indices $i'=i_1< i_2< \dots < i_h$ so that $3m_{i_r}< m_{i_{r+1}}$ and $h> 2/\delta$. We show that $i'':= i_h$ satisfies the claim of the lemma. It is sufficient to show that for every $y\in S'_{i_h}(n)$ there is an $s<h$ such that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j} that $I_{i_1}(y), I_{i_2}(y), \dots , I_{i_h}(y)$ consist of pairwise disjoint blocks. Thus all $I_{i_s}$ are pairwise disjoint subsets of $\{1,2,\dots ,n\}$. Hence
\[\frac 1 n (|I_{i_1}(y)|+ |I_{i_2}(y)|) + \dots + |I_{i_h}(y)|) \le 1.\]
Since $\kappa_j(y) \le \frac 2 n |I_j(y)| $, again Lemma~\ref{lem:I_j}, we have
\[\kappa_{i_1}(y)+\kappa_{i_2}(y)+\dots +\kappa_{i_h}(y)\le 2;\]
this implies that $\kappa_{i_s}(y)<\delta$ for some $s<h.$
\end{proof}
The next lemma is a corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}
For every $\varepsilon>0$ there is an $i'\ge 0$ and $\overline \kappa>0$ such that if $ j \ge i'$ and $\kappa\le \overline \kappa$, then
\[|S'_j(j,\kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}\] for all $n>0$ and some constant $C_j>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For a given $\varepsilon $ fix $\overline g, \overline m, \ovl\kappa>0 $ as in Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}. We may choose a big enough $i'$ such that for all $j\ge i'$
\begin{itemize}
\item $m_j\ge \overline m$; and
\item $c_j$ is either non-renormalizable or the renormalization period of $c_j$ is at least $\overline g$.
\end{itemize}
We will now apply Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity} to the pair $c:=c_j$ and $c':= c'_j$; then $h_j=h$ is the entropy of $c=c_j$.
Observe first that $|S'_j(j, \kappa,n)| = |S'( \kappa, n)|= N'(\kappa,n)$ after the substitution. Indeed, every relevant pre-critical point of $p_{c'_j}$ is uniquely characterized by a precritical path in $A'$ (again by a fundamental property of the symbolic dynamics because the critical point is in the interior of the $0$-state of $A'$.) This bijection preserves the uncertainties: if $y\in S'_j(j,\kappa,n)$ with Sequence~\eqref{eq:Iter:K:ell} is identified with a relevant precritical path $s$ with Decomposition~\eqref{eq:DecompOfs}, then $\ell_k +1 =\tilde \ell_k - \tilde t_k +1= |a_k|$. Hence $y$ and $s$ have the same uncertainties, and $S'_j(j, \kappa,n)$ and $S'( \kappa, n)$ are in bijection.
Now the lemma immediately follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Uniformity}.
\end{proof}
Remember that we continue to have the assumption that $c_\infty$ is a non-dyadic endpoint that is not immediate satellite renormalizable. In this case, we can now complete the proof.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity on Vein to $c_{\infty}$, Non-Renormalizable Case]
\label{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}
%\lineclear
For every $\eps>0$ there is an $\bar i\ge 1$ such that $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge \bar i$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Choose $\overline\kappa$ and $i'$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity}.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:SmallKappa} there is an $i''\ge i'$ such that
\[
S'_{i''}(n)\subset \bigcup_{j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}} S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n).
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:MonotIncl} there is an injection from $S'_{i''}(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ into $S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)$ for all $j\in \{i',\dots ,i''\}$. Therefore,
\[
N'_{i''}(n)=|S'_{i''}(n)|\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''} |S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:RefOfprop:Uniformity} we have $|S'_j(j,\overline \kappa,n)|\le C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n}$. Thus
\[
N'_{i''}(n)\le \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j e^{(\eps+h_j) n} \le \left( \sum_{j=i'}^{i''}C_j\right) e^{(\eps +h_{i''})n}
\]because $h_{i''}\ge h_{j}$ by monotonicity.
This proves that $h'_{i''}-h_{i''}\le \eps$, and since the sequence $h'_i-h_i$ is decreasing we have $h'_{i}-h_{i}\le \eps$ for all $i\ge i''$.
\end{proof}
%\newpage
\subsection{The Immediate Satellite Renormalizable Case}
In order to formulate our statements, we need to briefly review well known facts on renormalization; compare \cite{Polylike, McMullenRenormalization,MiSelfSim,MiRenorm}.
If $p_c$ is simple $m$-renormalizable, then there exists a ``little Mandelbrot set'' $\M'\subset\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters with $c\in\M'$ and a straightening homeomorphism $\chi\colon\M'\to\M$ so that $p_{\chi(c)}$ in the neighborhood of its filled-in Julia set is hybrid equivalent to $p_c^{\circ m}$ on a neighborhood of the little filled-in Julia set (except possibly at the root point $\chi^{-1}(1/4)$). The little Mandelbrot set has a main center $c_0:=\chi^{-1}(0)$ with a superattracting orbit of period $m$. In this case, we say that ``the parameter $c$ is $c_0$ tuned with $\chi(c)$''. We say $\M'$ is an \emph{immediate satellite copy of $\M$} if $\M'$ is attached to the main hyperbolic component of the Mandelbrot set. Dynamically, this means that the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c^{\circ m}$ is equivalent to $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$; in the postcritically finite case, this is equivalent to $A_n=\emptyset$.
\begin{lemma}[Immediate Satellite Renormalization and Entropy]
\label{Lem:Renormalization} \lineclear
If $\M'$ is an immediate satellite copy of $\M$ consisting of $m$-renormalizable parameters, then the straightening map $\chi:\M'\to \M$ satisfies
\[
\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))
\;.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $N_{c}(n)$ and $N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ be the numbers of precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_c$ and $p_{\chi(c)}$ respectively and let $\tilde N_{\chi (c)}(n)$ be the number of precritical points of $p_{\chi(c)}$ on $[\beta,-\beta]$.
The straightening map $\chi$ identifies the arc $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ of $p_{c}^{\circ m}$ with the arc $[\beta,-\beta]$ of $p_{\chi(c)}$. Therefore, $N_c(mn)= \tilde N_{\chi(c)}(n)$ while $N_c(mn+k)=0$ for all $k\in \{1,2,\dots, m-1\}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:DifferCounts}, the precritical points on $[\alpha,-\alpha]$ and those on $[\alpha,\beta]$ give the same entropies; and on $[\beta,-\beta]$ there can be at most twice as many precritical points of any generation $n$ as on $[\alpha,\beta]$.
Therefore, $\tilde h(c)=\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If $\chi\colon \M'\to\M$ is the straightening map of an arbitrary small copy of $\M$, we have
\[
\tilde h(c)=\max\left(\tilde h(c_0),\frac 1 m\tilde h(\chi( c))\right)
\;.
\]
This is obvious in the postcritically finite case and follows in general once we know that $\tilde h$ is continuous, which we are about to establish.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}[Continuity Along Vein to $c_{\infty}$, General Case.]
\label{cor:RadialContin}
\lineclear
Suppose that $c_{\infty}$ is a non-dyadic endpoint of the Mandelbrot set. Then the entropy is continuous along the vein $[c_{\infty}, 0]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen} proves the case when $c_{\infty}$ is outside of immediate satellite copies of the Mandelbrot set.
The second case is that there is a finite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots, \chi_n:\M_n\to \M $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty\in \M_*:=(\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1)^{-1}(\M)$ and $c'_{\infty}:=\chi_n \circ \chi \dots \circ \chi_1(c_\infty)$ is not immediate satellite-renormalizable. Entropy is continuous along the vein $[0,c_*]$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}, and continuous along the image $\chi_*^{-1}([0,c_*])=[c_0,c_{\infty}]$ by Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} (where $c_0$ is the main center of $\M_*$), and continuous along $[0,c_0]$ by \cite[Theorem~4.9]{Jung} (or Theorem~\ref{thm:ContAtIrrNonRen}). Therefore, entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
The final case is that there is an infinite sequence $\chi_1:\M_1\to \M, \chi_2:\M_2\to \M, \dots $ of immediate satellite renormalizations such that $c_\infty$ is in the domain of $\chi_n \circ \chi_{n-1}\circ \dots \circ \chi_1$ for all $n\ge 0$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{Lem:Renormalization} that the entropy of $c_\infty$ is $0$. Thus entropy is continuous along $[0,c_{\infty}]$.
\end{proof}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
\renewcommand{\top}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{top}}}
\newcommand{\comb}{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathrm{comb}}}
\appendix
\section{Core entropy and biaccessibility dimension}
\centerline{by Wolf Jung}
\bigskip
Here various definitions of core entropy shall be discussed and related to
the biaccessibility dimension. On a compact metric space, the topological
entropy of a continuous map is defined by a growth rate, which is referring
to preimages of covers, or to $\epsilon$-shadowing sets. See
\cite{deMelovanStrien} for details. When the underlying space is a compact
interval, a finite tree, or graph, several equivalent characterizations are due
to Misiurewicz and others. These include the growth rate of horse shoes,
laps (monotonic branches), periodic points, and preimages of a general point.
For real and complex quadratic polynomials, core entropy was defined by
Tao Li and Bill Thurston as the topological entropy of $p_c(z)$ on the
Hubbard tree; this definition applies to the postcritically finite case in
particular, and more generally to finite compact trees, but it does not work
when $c$ is an endpoint with a dense postcritcal orbit.
In general, the filled Julia set $\mathcal{K}_c$ consists of the Hubbard tree
$T_c$\,, the countable family of its preimages, and an uncountable family of
endpoints. The dynamics on $T_c$ is interesting because this tree is folded
over itself, while the iteration does not return to arcs of its preimages.
On the other hand, the endpoints form a set of full harmonic measure, while
the external angles of $T_c$ and its preimages form a set of Hausdorff
dimension $<1$ (unless $c=-2$). Since all biaccessible points are contained
in arcs iterated to $T_c$\,, these angles are called biaccessible
(or biaccessing). More precisely, the biaccessibilty dimension is defined as
follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item For the lamination generated by an angle $\theta\in S^1$
\cite{ThurstonLaminations}, consider all
angles of non-trivial leaves. Their Hausdorff dimension is the
\emph{combinatorial biaccessibility dimension} $B_\comb(\theta)$. The same
dimension is obtained from pairs of angles with the same itinerary, or from
pairs not separated by the precritical leaves: the diameter joining $\theta/2$
and $(\theta+1)/2$, and its preimages.
\item For a parameter $c\in\mathcal{M}$, the
\emph{topological biaccessibility dimension} $B_\top(c)$ is the Hausdorff
dimension of those angles, such that the dynamic ray is landing together with
another ray.
\end{itemize}
These definitions are related analogously to Lemma~\ref{Lem:defEntropy}:
\begin{lemma}[Combinatorial and topological biaccessibility]
Suppose that $\theta\in S^1$ and $c\in\partial\M$ belongs to the impression
of the parameter ray with angle $\theta$, or $c\in\M$ is hyperbolic and the
ray lands at the corresponding root. Then $B_\comb(\theta)=B_\top(c)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of the proof \cite{BruinSchleicher, Jung}] In the locally connected case, and
neglecting the countable family of angles at precritical or precharacteristic
points, two dynamic rays are landing together if and only if they are not
separated by a precritical ray-pair. When $\mathcal{K}_c$ is not
locally connected, exceptional sets of angles are shown to be negligible in
terms of Hausdorff dimension. These include the angles of non-landing rays,
and the possible angles of Cremer cycles.
\end{proof}
The following relation to entropy is due to Thurston \cite{TanLeiEntropy},
relying on earlier work by Furstenberg \cite{Furstenberg}
and Douady \cite{Douady}.
\begin{proposition}[Dimension and entropy of the tree]\label{Prop:Biaccessibility}
Suppose $\mathcal{K}_c$ is locally connected with empty interior, or $f_c$ is
parabolic or hyperbolic with a real multiplier.
Using regulated arcs, define the tree $T_c$ as the path-connected hull of
the critical orbit. If $T_c$ is compact, consider the topological entropy of
$p_c(z)$ on $T_c$\,. Then it is related to
the biaccessibility dimension by $h_\top(T_c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is found in version 1 of \cite{BruinSchleicher} and in
\cite{TiozzoThesis, Jung}:
since $\theta\mapsto z(\theta)$ is a semi-conjugation with finite fibers, we may
consider the topological entropy of the angle-doubling map on the compact set
of angles of $T_c$ \cite[Thm.~II.7.1]{deMelovanStrien}. And this equals the
Hausdorff dimension \cite[Proposition~III.1]{Furstenberg}, except for the
base 2 instead of e in the logarithm of the growth factor $\lambda$.
\end{proof}
While the definition of $h_\top(T_c)$ requires a compact tree $T_c$\,,
a general notion was given in Definition~\ref{Def:CoreEntropy} in terms
of precritical ray pairs:
\begin{theorem}[Dimension and entropy in general]\label{Thm:Biaccessibility}
Entropy and biaccessibility dimension are related as follows for
all parameters $c\in\mathcal{M}$ and all angles $\theta\in S^1$\,:
\begin{equation}
\tilde h(c)=B_\top(c)\cdot\log2
\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
h(\theta)=B_\comb(\theta)\cdot\log2 \ .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First, suppose that $c=c(\theta)$ is postcritically finite or belongs
to a dyadic vein. In particular, $\mathcal{K}_c$ is
locally connected and $T_c$ is compact with finitely many endpoints. Then
the growth rate of lap numbers is equal to the growth rate of precritical
points on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, so $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$, and
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} applies.
Second, suppose that $c$ is a non-renormalizable irrational endpoint, and
approximate it with biaccessible parameters $c_n$ before $c$. Then monotonicity
\cite[Proposition~4.6]{Jung} and continuity give
\begin{equation}
B_\top(c)\cdot\log2\ge\lim B_\top(c_n)\cdot\log2
=\lim\tilde h(c_n)=\tilde h(c) \ .
\end{equation}
For the opposite estimate, note that the plane is cut into pieces successively
by precritcal ray pairs, and the angles of a piece of level $n$ form up to $n$
intervals of total length $2^{-n}$ according to
\cite[Lemma~4.1]{BruinSchleicher}. Recall that $N(n)$ is the number of
precritcal points of \textsc{Step} $n$ on $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$, and denote
the number of pieces intersecting this arc by $V(n)$. Then
$V(n)=1+N(1)+\dots+N(n)$ is growing by the same factor $\lambda=e^h$ as $N(n)$,
and the same holds for $n \cdot V(n)$. The $b$-dimensional Hausdorff measure
of the angles of $[\alpha_c\,,-\alpha_c]$ is estimated as
\begin{equation}
\mu_b\le\lim n \cdot V(n) \cdot 2^{-bn} \ ,
\end{equation}
which is 0 when $b>\log\lambda/\log2=\tilde h(c)/\log2$. So the Hausdorff
dimension is estimated as $B_\top(c)\le\tilde h(c)/\log2$ as well,
implying equality.
Finally, both $\tilde h(c)$ and $B_\top(c)$ are constant on the main molecule
and on primitive small Mandelbrot sets, and both are scaled by the period of
immediate satellite renormalization. Now all cases are covererd by the
Yoccoz Theorem.
\end{proof}
Continuity of entropy according to Theorem~\ref{Thm:Continuity} gives:
\begin{corollary}[Continuity of biaccessibility dimension]
The biaccessibility dimension $B_\comb(\theta)$ is continuous on $S^1$ and
$B_\top(c)$ is continuous on the Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$.
\end{corollary}
Proposition~\ref{Prop:Biaccessibility} and Theorem~\ref{Thm:Biaccessibility}
show that the definition
of entropy in terms of precritical points is a generalization
of the original definition in terms of a compact core:
\begin{corollary}[Extending the definition of core entropy]
We have $h_\top(T_c)=\tilde h(c)$ whenever $T_c$ is defined and compact.
\end{corollary}
\begin{thebibliography}{ABC}
\bibitem[BS]{BruinSchleicher} H.~Bruin, D.~Schleicher,
Hausdorff dimension of biaccessible
angles for quadratic polynomials, Preprint. ArXiv:1205.2544, 28 pp.
\bibitem[D]{Douady} A.~Douady, Topological entropy of unimodal maps:
monotonicity for quadratic polynomials, in:
\emph{Real and complex dynamical systems}
(Hiller{\o}d 1993), NATO Adv.~Sci.~Inst.~Ser.~C
Math.~Phys.~Sci.~\textbf{464}, Kluwer 1995, 65--87.
\bibitem[DH1]{Orsay} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{Etude dynamique des polyn\^omes complexes} (The Orsay Notes). Publications Math\'ematiques d'Orsay 1984-02 (1984) (premi\`ere partie) and 1985-04 (1985) (deuxi\`eme partie).
\bibitem[DH2] {Polylike} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{On the dynamics of polynomial-like mappings}. Annales Scientifiques de l'\'Ecole Normale Sup\'erieure. Quatri\`eme S\'erie. V 15 (1985), 287--343.
\bibitem[DH3]{DHThurston} Adrien Douady and John Hubbard, \emph{A proof of {T}hurston's topological characterization of rational functions}. Acta Mathematica. V 171 (1993), 263--297.
\bibitem[F]{Furstenberg} H.~Furstenberg, Disjointness in ergodic theory,
minimal sets, and a problem in Diophantine approximation,
Math.~Systems Theory~\textbf{1}, 1--49 (1967).
\bibitem[HS]{Spiders} John Hubbard and Dierk Schleicher. \emph{The spider algorithm}. Complex dynamical systems ({C}incinnati, {OH}). Proc. Sympos. Appl. Math. V 49 (1994), 155--180.
\bibitem[Ju]{Jung} Wolf Jung, \emph{Core entropy and biaccessibility of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1401.4792 (2014), 46 pp.
\bibitem[TL]{TanLeiEntropy} Tan Lei, \emph{On W. Thurston's core-entropy theory}. Presentation, given in Toulouse (January 2014) and elsewhere.
\bibitem[Mc]{McMullenRenormalization} Curt McMullen, \emph{Complex dynamics and renormalization}. Annals of Mathematics Studies \textbf{135},
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1994).
\bibitem[dMS]{deMelovanStrien} W.~de Melo, S.~van Strien,
\emph{One-dimensional dynamics}, Springer 1993.
\bibitem[M1]{MiSelfSim} John Milnor, \emph{Self-similarity and hairiness in the {M}andelbrot set}. Computers in geometry and topology. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. V 114, 211--257, (1989).
\bibitem[M2]{MiRenorm} John Milnor, \emph{Local connectivity of {J}ulia sets: expository lectures}. In: The {M}andelbrot set, theme and variations. London Math. Soc. V 274, 67--116 (2000).
\bibitem[M3]{MiOrbits} John Milnor, \emph{Periodic orbits, externals rays and the Mandelbrot set: an expository account}. In: G\'eom\'etrie complexe et syst\`emes dynamiques (Marguerite Flexor, Pierrette Sentenac, and Jean-Christophe Yoccoz, eds). Ast\'erisque \textbf{ 261}, 277--333 (2000).
\bibitem[Sch]{MandelBranch} Dierk Schleicher,
\emph{On fibers and local connectivity of Mandelbrot and Multibrot sets}. In: M. Lapidus, M. van Frankenhuysen (eds): Fractal Geometry and Applications: A Jubilee of Benoit Mandelbrot. Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics \textbf{72}, American Mathematical Society (2004), 477--507.
\bibitem[T]{ThurstonLaminations} William P. Thurston, \emph{On the geometry and dynamics of iterated rational maps}. In: Complex dynamics, families and friends (Dierk Schleicher, ed.), AK Peters, Wellesley, MA (ISBN 978-1-56881-450-6), pp. 3--109 (2009).
\bibitem[Ti1]{TiozzoThesis} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Topological entropy of quadratic polynomials and dimension of sections of the Mandelbrot set}. Preprint, arXiv:1305.3542 (2013), 56 pp.
\bibitem[Ti2]{TiozzoPaper} Giulio Tiozzo, \emph{Continuity of core entropy of quadratic polynomials}. Preprint, arXiv:1409.3511 (2014), 25 pp.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document$, or at least in its combinatorial models).
Bill Thurston inspired a number of people to investigate core entropy. In particular, there are a survey on current work and open problems by Tan Lei~\cite{TanLeiEntropy}, a manuscript by Wolf Jung \cite{Jung}, and two manuscripts by Giulio Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoThesis,TiozzoPaper}. An independent proof of continuity of core entropy can be found in the recent manuscript \cite{TiozzoPaper}.
\emph{Acknowledgements}. We would like to thank Henk Bruin, John Hubbard, Tan Lei, Mikhail Lyubich, John Milnor, Bill Thurston, Giulio Tiozzo, Jean-Christophe Yoccoz and especially Wolf Jung for interesting and helpful discussions. In the spring of 2014, we had the opportunity to give various presentations about this result in Bremen, Moscow and Stony Brook, and we thank the audiences for their questions and suggestions.
Finally, we would like to thank Cornell University and the ICERM institute in Providence for their hospitality and support in the spring of 2012 where many of our initial discussions were carried out.
\goodbreak
|
\section{Introduction}
Local, Lorentz-invariant theories that modify gravity at cosmological scales, ($\sim 10^{28}~cm$),
do so at the expense of extra gravitationally coupled degrees of freedom.
The latter need to be "hidden" at shorter, astrophysical scales
($ \sim 10^{26}~cm$ and below), to avoid conflict with observations. One of the intricate mechanisms that provide
such suppression at shorter scales is the Vainshtein mechanism \cite{Vainshtein:1972aa}.
While this mechanism was originally formulated in the context of massive gravity, it has
a broader scope \cite{Deffayet:2002aa,Babichev:2013aa} (for a nice and comprehensive
review of screening mechanisms in cosmology, see \cite{Joyce:2014aa}).
A majority of Vainshtein solutions discussed so far
in the literature exhibit superluminal perturbations; this has been shown
in the context of the DGP model \cite{Dvali:2000hr}
in the decoupling limit \cite{Luty:2003vm} in Ref. \cite{Nicolis:2004qq,Adams:2006sv},
and has been extended to the most general \emph{Galileon} theory in \cite{Nicolis:2008in}. Moreover, it has been demonstrated in \cite{deFromont:2013iwa}, that the same feature persists for Vainshtein solutions in multi-Galileon systems. Whether or not superluminalities always imply
acausality -- which is a subtle issue -- will not be discussed here; instead, we note that
it would be easier if the superluminal modes were absent altogether.
An example of a nonlinear scalar theory that exhibits the Vainshtein mechanism without
superluminal modes was found in \cite{Berezhiani:2013aa}. Its features that enable
to avoid superluminal modes are: a choice of a sign of a nonlinear term, and choice of
boundary cosmological conditions for the solution.
The question is if there are other similar examples, and if they share common features with the one
of \cite{Berezhiani:2013aa}. In particular it is interesting to know if such solutions can
exist in full-fledged theories of massive gravity and their extensions, where tensor and vector
modes, in addition to scalars, are also relevant. These are the questions studied in the present work.
Whether or not the graviton can consistently have a nonzero mass has been a subject of discussion for
more than seven decades. The unique linear theory of a massive spin-2 field, proposed by Fierz and Pauli (FP) \cite{FP:1939aa}, consists of linearized General Relativity (GR) supplemented by a special mass term for the metric perturbation. The special structure of the FP mass guarantees that there are no more than $5$ degrees of freedom propagating on flat space, as required by the representation theory of the Poincar\' e group.
Naively, the massless limit of FP massive gravity
would be expected to reduce to GR; this however is not the case, and regardless of how small the mass is, the presence of extra degrees of freedom leads to order-one deviations from GR \emph{at all length scales} -- the phenomenon known as the van Dam-Veltman-Zhakarov (VDVZ)
discontinuity \cite{vDV:1970aa,Z:1970aa}.
Continuity in physical predictions can be restored in nonlinear extensions of the the FP gravity through the {Vainshtein mechanism} \cite{Vainshtein:1972aa}, whereby nonlinear effects screen out extra contributions to the gravitational potential beyond the standard general-relativistic one. The success of the Vainshtein mechanism thus manifestly depends on nonlinear properties of a given extension of the Fierz-Pauli model.
It has been believed for a long time however, that a generic interacting theory of massive gravity
would necessarily contain a sixth light ghost degree of freedom -- the so-called Boulware-Deser (BD) ghost \cite{Boulware:1972aa}. The latter would lead to a catastrophic instability of the system, effectively rendering the Vainshtein mechanism useless.
This has changed with an explicit construction of the Lagrangian free from the BD ghost: First, the BD ghost has been eliminated by a careful choice of the graviton potential consisting of an infinite series of interactions of the form that projects it out order-by-order in perturbation theory \cite{deRham:2010ik}. The infinite series can be resummed into a compact expression \cite{Rham:2011aa}, referred to as the dRGT theory. The full non-perturbative proof of ghost-freedom in this theory has been given in Refs. \cite{Hassan:2011hr,Deffayet:2013aa,Mirbabayi:2011aa,Kugo:2014aa}.
While the dRGT theory guarantees 5 degrees of freedom on an arbitrary background,
it only guarantees that these 5 are healthy on (nearly) flat backgrounds. This is because
the theory is strongly coupled at a low scale -- incomplete in that sense --
and some of the 5 modes may flip signs of their kinetic terms on strong enough backgrounds,
converting them into ghost (these latter should not be confused with the BD ghost that is absent now).
Perhaps the minimal way to extend the dRGT model is by introducing into the theory a new scalar field $\sigma$, referred to as quasidilaton, which nonlinearly realizes an Abelian global symmetry \cite{DAmico:2012aa},
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma \to \sigma-\alpha M_{\rm Pl}~, ~~~~~\phi^a \to e^\alpha\phi^a~.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\phi^a$ are the four auxiliary (St\"{u}ckelberg) fields, required to formulate the theory in a diffeomorphism-invariant way.
It has been shown recently \cite{Gabadadze:2014aa}, that the quasidilaton
admits self-accelerated solutions in the decoupling limit, similar to the ones of dRGT gravity \cite{Rham:2011ab}. An important difference from massive gravity however, is that the presence of the quasidilaton makes it possible to avoid all of the stability problems associated with the former class of cosmologies.
The key aspect for viability of cosmological solutions in modified gravity is the existence and stability of a mechanism that would allow to screen extra contributions to the gravitational potential at distances where GR agrees
with observations with an excellent accuracy.
In massive gravity, as discussed above, it is the Vainshtein mechanism that makes this possible. The analysis of spherically symmetric solutions in the decoupling limit of the dRGT theories has revealed however that in general, the Vainshtein mechanism is accompanied with various kinds of instability \cite{Berezhiani:2013ab}. The only way to avoid these is to
restrict to a particular corner of the parameter space, where the scalar and the tensor modes can be decoupled by a local field redefinition \cite{Berezhiani:2013aa}. The obtained solution has no superluminal modes.
The above observations motivate to look for a stable realization of the Vainshtein mechanism in quasidilaton theories. We will focus on the decoupling limit theory, analogous to the one of massive gravity with stable Vainshtein solutions, where the tensor and the scalar modes can be treated independently, but will also account for the vector modes.
We will show that in a large fraction of the free parameter space the solutions are pathological,
as they exhibit various instabilities. However, we'll find a small region of the parameter space
where a satisfactory solution can be obtained. This solution exhibits the Vainshtein mechanism without
instabilities or superluminal modes, and asymptotes to a cosmological solution away from a source.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: we will start with a brief review of the original quasidilaton theory in Sec. 2, and derive its decoupling limit action, along with the equations of motion for spherically symmetric configurations in Sec. 3. In Secs. 4 and 5, we carry out a detailed analysis of the time-independent and time-dependent solutions respectively. In Sec 6. we consider the decoupling limit action of the most general quasidilaton theory, obtained by supplementing the original Lagrangian by the Horndeski terms for $\sigma$ \cite{Horndeski:1974aa,Deffayet:2013ab,Deffayet:2009aa}. This will provide the first completely stable realization of the Vainshtein mechanism in the given class of theories.
We summarize our results in Sec 7.
We adopt the signature $(-,+,+,+)$ for the metric throughout this work, and use the following notation for various contractions of rank-2 tensors:
$${\cal K}^{\mu}_{~\mu}=[{\cal K}],~~
{\cal K}^{\mu}_{~\nu}{\cal K}^{\nu}_{~\mu}=[{\cal K}^2],~~
{\cal K}^{\mu}_{~\alpha}{\cal K}^{\alpha}_{~\beta}{\cal K}^{\beta}_{~\mu}=[{\cal K}^3]~, \text{~etc.}$$ Moreover, certain expressions involving the Levi-Civita tensor will be shortcut in the following way:
$\varepsilon^{\mu\alpha\rho\sigma}\varepsilon^{\nu\beta}_{~~\rho\sigma}\Pi_{\mu\nu}\Pi_{\alpha\beta}
\equiv\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi$,
$\varepsilon_\mu ^{~\gamma\alpha\rho}\varepsilon_{\nu \gamma}^{~~\beta\sigma}
\Pi_{\alpha\beta}\Pi_{\rho\sigma}\equiv\varepsilon_\mu\varepsilon_\nu\Pi\Pi$,
$(B^2)^\mu_\nu\equiv B^\mu_{~\alpha} B^\alpha_{~\nu}$,
$\varepsilon\varepsilon B\partial A \equiv \varepsilon_{\mu_1 \mu_2 \mu_3 \mu_4}\varepsilon^{\nu_1 \nu_2 \mu_3 \mu_4} B^{\mu_1}_{~\nu_1} \partial_{\nu_2} A^{\mu_2}$, and so on.
\section{The Quasidilaton}
The dRGT theory is specified by supplementing the standard Einstein-Hilbert action with special mass and potential terms for the metric perturbation. In its diff-invariant formulation involving four scalar St\" uckelber fields $\phi^a$, the theory takes on the following form \cite{Rham:2011aa}
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{MG}={M_{\rm Pl}^2\over 2}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g}\left[R
-{m^2 \over 4}\left( {\cal U}_2+ \alpha_3 {\cal U}_3 + \alpha_4 {\cal U}_4\right)
\right]+S_m[g_{\mu\nu}, \psi],
\end{eqnarray}
where we have defined
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Potential}
{\cal U}_2&=&
4\left([{\cal K}^2]-[{\cal K}]^2\right),
\nonumber\\
{\cal U}_3&=&
-[{\cal K}]^3+3[{\cal K}][{\cal K}^2]
-2[{\cal K}^3],
\\
{\cal U}_4&=&
-[{\cal K}]^4+6[{\cal K}]^2[{\cal K}^2]
-3[{\cal K}^2]^2-8[{\cal K}][{\cal K}^3]+6[{\cal K}^4],\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal K}^{\mu}_{~\nu}=\delta^{\mu}_{~\nu}
-\sqrt{\eta_{ab}g^{\mu\alpha}\partial_{\alpha}\phi^a\partial_{\nu}\phi^b}.
\end{eqnarray}
One can always fix the unitary gauge $\phi^a=\delta^a_\mu x^\mu$, in which all five degrees of freedom, present in the theory sit in the metric perturbation $h_{_{\mu \nu}}\equiv g_{_{\mu \nu}}-\eta_{_{\mu \nu}}$.
It is sometimes useful to view the four scalars $\phi^a$ as certain target-space coordinates of a flat manifold in which our dynamical manifold, parametrized by the coordinates $x^\mu$ is embedded as a spacetime-filling brane. A natural question is then whether one can define a theory, invariant under \textit{quasidilatations} -- a global Abelian symmetry, under which the target space coordinates scale with respect to those of the dynamical spacetime, $\phi^a\to e^\alpha\phi^a$. This requires introducing a goldstone field $\sigma$ -- \textit{the quasidilaton} -- that nonlinearly realizes the symmetry at hand
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma \to \sigma-\alpha M_{\rm Pl}~
\label{Symmetry}
\end{eqnarray}
and enters the action through an extended ${\cal K}$ - tensor
\begin{eqnarray}
\bar{{\cal K}}^{\mu}_{~\nu}=\delta^{\mu}_{~\nu}-e^{\sigma/ M_{\rm Pl}}\sqrt{\eta_{ab}g^{\mu\alpha}\partial_{\alpha}\phi^a\partial_{\nu}\phi^b}~.
\end{eqnarray}
Then the full action including the quasidilaton is given by the following expression
\cite{DAmico:2012aa}
\begin{eqnarray}
S&=&{M_{\rm Pl}^2\over 2}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g}\left[R
-{\omega}g^{\mu\nu}\partial_{\mu}\sigma\partial_{\nu}\sigma
-{m^2 \over 4}\left( {\bar{\cal U}}_2+ \alpha_3 {\bar{\cal U}}_3 + \alpha_4 {\bar{\cal U}}_4\right)
\right]\nonumber\\
&+&S'+S_m[g_{\mu\nu}, \psi]+\dots ~.
\label{Action}
\end{eqnarray}
Here we have added a kinetic term for the new scalar $\sigma$, and
the potentials ${\bar{\cal U}}_i$ are defined in terms of $\bar{{\cal K}}$ as in (\ref{Potential}).
In addition, we have allowed for an extra piece in the action, invariant under the quasidilaton symmetry (\ref{Symmetry}),
\begin{eqnarray}
S'= M_{\rm Pl}^2m^2 \alpha_5 \int d^4x \sqrt{-g} \,
e^{4\sigma / M_{\rm Pl}} \sqrt{\det{(g^{\mu\alpha}\partial_\alpha\phi^a\partial_\nu\phi_a)}}.
\label{Action2}
\end{eqnarray}
In the dRGT theory,
this term is non-dynamical, ${\cal L}' \sim \sqrt{-\eta}$,
which is however not true in the presence of the quasidilaton. Moreover, it includes a tadpole for $\sigma$ and is therefore expected to contribute to asymptotically non-trivial backgrounds, which we will be interested in in this paper. Furthermore, the ellipses denote possible extra terms involving $\sigma$ consistent with the quasidilaton symmetry, that we will consider in what follows.
A further extension of the quasidilaton has been found in Ref. \cite{Felice:2013aa}, obtainable via replacing $f_{\mu\nu}$ with a new fiducial metric
\begin{equation}
{\bar f}_{\mu\nu} \equiv f_{\mu\nu}- (\alpha_\sigma /M_{\rm Pl}^2m^2) {\rm e}^{-2\sigma/M_{\rm Pl}}\partial_\mu \sigma\partial_\nu \sigma~.
\end{equation}
The resultant theory is still manifestly invariant under (\ref{Symmetry}) and with a little more work one can show that it is also devoid of the BD ghost (see \cite{Mukohyama:2013aa} for a detailed discussion).
We will focus on the action (\ref{Action}) - (\ref{Action2}) for definiteness throughout the present paper. In fact, the theory we consider leads to the \textit{most general decoupling limit action of a tensor and two scalars, invariant under galilean symmetry}. Since we are primarily interested in the decoupling limit in this work, we expect our analysis to capture the phenomenological aspects of any extension of massive general relativity, based on the quasidilaton and (approximate) galilean symmetries.
\section{Decoupling limit}
\label{sec:3}
In gauge theories in general, and in massive gravity in particular, there exists a very convenient regime of the theory -- \emph{the decoupling limit} -- where most of the complications associated with the low-energy dynamics go away. In the case of the ghost-free massive general relativity, the decoupling limit captures physics at distances in the range $(M_{\rm Pl} m^2)^{-1/3}< r < m^{-1}$, essentially encompassing all relevant astrophysical and cosmological scales (given that the most reasonable choice for the graviton mass is around the current Hubble scale $m\sim H_0^{-1}$).
Our analysis of spherically symmetric solutions in theories with the quasidilaton will be carried out exclusively in this limit.
Let us consider small fluctuations of the St\"{u}ckelberg fields around their unitary gauge values,
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi^a=\delta^a_\mu x^\mu - {\eta^{a\mu} A_\mu \over M_{\rm Pl}m}
- {\eta^{a\mu} \partial_\mu \pi \over M_{\rm Pl}m^2},
\end{eqnarray}
while the metric is expanded around the Minkowski spacetime in the usual way,
$g_{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\mu\nu}+h_{\mu\nu}/M_{\rm Pl}$.
The decoupling limit, in which $\pi, A$ and $h$ capture respectively the helicity- 0, 1, and 2 components of the massive graviton, is then defined in the following way
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{\rm Pl} \to \infty, \qquad m \to 0,
\qquad \Lambda = (M_{\rm Pl}m^2)^{1/3}={\rm fixed},
\qquad {T_{\mu\nu} \over M_{\rm Pl}}={\rm fixed}~,
\end{eqnarray}
and the scalar-tensor part of the action for massive GR plus the quasidilaton reduces to the following expression
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal L}_{\rm DL}^{( h,\pi,\sigma)}
=-{1\over 4} h^{\mu\nu}{\cal E}_{\mu\nu}^{\alpha\beta}h_{\alpha\beta}
-{\omega \over 2} \partial^\mu\sigma\partial_\mu\sigma
-h^{\mu\nu} \left[{1\over 4}\varepsilon_\mu\varepsilon_\nu \Pi
-{\alpha \over 4 \Lambda^3}\varepsilon_\mu\varepsilon_\nu \Pi\Pi
-{\beta\over 2\Lambda^6}\varepsilon_\mu\varepsilon_\nu \Pi\Pi\Pi\right]\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
+\sigma\left[4\alpha_5 \Lambda^3+ \gamma_0\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi
+{\gamma_1\over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_2\over \Lambda^6}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_3\over \Lambda^9}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi\Pi\right]\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
+{1 \over 2M_{\rm Pl}}h^{\mu\nu}T_{\mu\nu} ~,
\label{LagrangianDL}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have made use of the following notation,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\alpha=-{3 \over 4 }\alpha_3 -1,\qquad
\beta=-{1 \over 8} \alpha_3 - {1\over 2}\alpha_4,\qquad
\gamma_0={1 \over 2} -{2 \over 3} \alpha_5, \nonumber\\
&&\gamma_1={3 \over 8} \alpha_3 - {1\over 2}-\alpha_5,\qquad
\gamma_2={1 \over 2} \alpha_4 - {3\over 8}\alpha_3 - {2\over 3}\alpha_5,\qquad
\gamma_3=-{1 \over 2} \alpha_4 - {1\over 6}\alpha_5~.
\end{eqnarray}
The lagrangian ${\cal L}_{\rm DL}^{( h,\pi,\sigma)}$ is invariant under linearized gauge transformations $h_{\mu\nu} \to h_{\mu\nu} + \partial_{\mu}\xi_{\nu}+\partial_{\nu}\xi_{\mu}$, as well as internal galilean transformations for $\pi$ and $\sigma$, $\partial_\mu \pi \to \partial_\mu \pi + c_\mu$ and $\partial_\mu \sigma \to \partial_\mu \sigma + d_\mu$.
Furthermore, the complete decoupling limit additionally features the mixing and interaction terms for the gelicity-1 and helicity-0 gravitons specified by the following action
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal L}_{\rm DL}^{(A)}=-{1\over 4}
\biggl[
\Lambda^3 \varepsilon\varepsilon BB + 2(1-\alpha)\varepsilon\varepsilon BB \Pi
-{\alpha+6\beta \over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon BB\Pi\Pi
+\varepsilon\varepsilon B^2 \Pi
-{ \alpha \over \Lambda^3} \varepsilon\varepsilon B^2 \Pi\Pi
\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
-{2 \beta \over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon B^2 \Pi\Pi\Pi
+2\Lambda^{3/2} \varepsilon\varepsilon B \partial A
-{4 \alpha \over \Lambda^{3/2}}\varepsilon\varepsilon B \partial A \Pi
-{12 \beta \over \Lambda^{9/2}}\varepsilon\varepsilon B \partial A \Pi \Pi
\biggr].
\label{LagrangianVector}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $B_{\mu\nu}$ is an auxiliary non-dynamical anti-symmetric tensor which can in principle be algebraically integrated out\footnote{The vector-scalar lagrangian \eqref{LagrangianVector} has first been derived in the vielbein formalism in \cite{Gabadadze:2013aa,Ondo:2013wka}.}, and the action is invariant under $U(1)$ gauge transformations, $A_\mu \to A_\mu + \partial_\mu \chi$. For the spherically symmetric solutions we consider below, $A_\mu = 0$ at the background level and the vector action will only be relevant for their perturbative stability.
In the special case of $\beta=0$, the helicity-2 mode in (\ref{LagrangianDL}) can be completely decoupled from the rest of the fields through the following field redefinition
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{newframe}
h_{\mu\nu} \to h_{\mu\nu}+\pi\eta_{\mu\nu}
-{\alpha \over \Lambda^3} \pi \Pi_{\mu\nu},
\end{eqnarray}
which is not true in the presence of the $h^{\mu\nu}\varepsilon_\mu\varepsilon_\nu \Pi\Pi\Pi$ interaction. The quasidilaton action in the new frame defined by \eqref{newframe} is then given by the following bi-\emph{Galileon} \cite{Nicolis:2008in} theory
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal L}_{\rm DL}=-{1\over 4} h^{\mu\nu}{\cal E}_{\mu\nu}^{\alpha\beta}h_{\alpha\beta}
-{\omega \over 2} \partial^\mu\sigma\partial_\mu\sigma
\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
-{1\over 8} \pi\left[\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi
-{2 \alpha \over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi\Pi
+{\alpha^2 - 4 \beta \over \Lambda^6}
\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi
+{4\alpha\beta \over \Lambda^9}\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi\Pi\Pi\Pi
\right]
\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
+\sigma\left[4\alpha_5 \Lambda^3+ \gamma_0\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi
+{\gamma_1\over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_2\over \Lambda^6}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_3\over \Lambda^9}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi\Pi\right]
\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
+{1 \over 2M_{\rm Pl}}h^{\mu\nu}T_{\mu\nu}
+{1 \over 2M_{\rm Pl}}\pi T
-{\alpha \over 2M_{\rm Pl}\Lambda^3} \pi \Pi_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu\nu}.
\label{LagrangianDL2}
\end{eqnarray}
Throughout this paper we will concentrate on $\beta=0$ for simplicity.
Varying the action with respect to $\pi$, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{1\over 4}\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi
-{3\alpha \over 4 \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi\Pi
+{\alpha^2\over 2\Lambda^6}\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi\Pi\Pi
-\gamma_0\varepsilon\varepsilon\Sigma
-{2\gamma_1\over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Sigma\Pi
-{3\gamma_2\over \Lambda^6}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Sigma\Pi\Pi\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-{4\gamma_3\over \Lambda^9}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Sigma\Pi\Pi\Pi
={1 \over 2M_{\rm Pl}}T-{\alpha \over M_{\rm Pl}\Lambda^3}\Pi_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu\nu}~,
\end{eqnarray}
while the $\sigma$-equation of motion reads
\begin{eqnarray}
&&-{\omega \over 6} \varepsilon\varepsilon\Sigma
+4\alpha_5 \Lambda^3+\gamma_0\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi
+{\gamma_1\over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_2\over \Lambda^6}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_3\over \Lambda^9}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi\Pi=0~.
\end{eqnarray}
The tensor mode on the other hand obeys exactly the same Einstein's equations as in general relativity.
In what follows, we will allow for time-dependent background solutions for the scalars $\pi$ and $\sigma$. To this end, the general ansatz that we will adopt has the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\pi(t,x) \to {a \over 2} \Lambda^3 t^2 + \pi(r),\nonumber\\
&&\sigma(t,x) \to {b \over 2} \Lambda^3 t^2 + \sigma(r)~,
\label{backgroundPiSigma}
\end{eqnarray}
which reduces the $\pi$-equation of motion to
\begin{eqnarray}
&& -{a \over 2} + 2 b \gamma_0
+\left({3 \over 2} + 3 a \alpha + 4b \gamma_1\right)\lambda
-(3\alpha+3a\alpha^2-6b\gamma_2)\lambda^2
+(\alpha^2+8b\gamma_3)\lambda^3
\nonumber\\
&&
-(6\gamma_0-4a\gamma_1)\lambda_\sigma
-(8\gamma_1-12a \gamma_2)\lambda_\sigma \lambda
-(6\gamma_2 - 24a \gamma_3)\lambda_\sigma \lambda^2
=(1+2a\alpha)\left({r_* \over r} \right)^3~,
\label{EOM_pi}
\end{eqnarray}
while the $\sigma$ e.o.m yields
\begin{eqnarray}
&&4\alpha_5 + 6 a \gamma_0 - b \omega
-6(3\gamma_0-2a\gamma_1)\lambda
\nonumber\\
&& ~~~~~~~~~~
-6(2\gamma_1-3a\gamma_2)\lambda^2
-6(\gamma_2-4 a \gamma_3)\lambda^3
+3\omega\lambda_\sigma
=0~.
\label{EOM_sigma}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, we defined the dimensionless variables $\lambda$, $\lambda_{\sigma}$
and the Vainshtein radius $r_*$ as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\lambda\equiv {\pi' \over \Lambda^3 r}, \qquad
\lambda_\sigma\equiv {\sigma' \over \Lambda^3 r}, \qquad
r_*\equiv \left({M\over 4\pi M_{\rm Pl}^2 m^2}\right)^{1/3}.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Time-independent background solutions}
\label{sec:4}
In this section, we assume a static ($a=b=0$) background solution and study its stability under small perturbations. Moreover, we will set $\alpha_5=0$ to start with.
In this case, the equation of motion for $\lambda$ can be
obtained by combining Eqs. (\ref{EOM_pi}) and (\ref{EOM_sigma}),
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{3 \over 2} \left(1-{6 \over \omega}\right) \lambda
-\left(3\alpha + {36 \gamma_1 \over \omega}\right) \lambda^2
+ \left(\alpha^2-{32 \gamma_1^2 + 24\gamma_2 \over \omega}\right) \lambda^3\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-40 {\gamma_1\gamma_2 \over \omega}\lambda^4
-{12\gamma_2^2 \over \omega}\lambda^5
= \left({r_* \over r}\right)^3.
\label{master}
\end{eqnarray}
For $r \gg r_*$, five possible asymptotic solutions are
obtained by solving $P(\lambda)=0$, the latter function defined by the left hand side of Eq.~(\ref{master}).
One is the trivial $\lambda=0$, and the rest of these we denote by $\lambda_{1,2,3,4}=const$.
The solution $\lambda(r\to \infty)=0$ corresponds to asymptotically Minkowski geometry, the leading piece given as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda \simeq \frac{2 \omega}{3(\omega-6)}\left(\frac{r_*}{r}\right)^3~.
\label{Minkowsol}
\end{eqnarray}
The other $\lambda(r\to\infty)\neq 0$ solutions correspond to cosmological backgrounds. Inside the Vainshtein radius, $r \ll r_*$, the highest nonlinear term $\lambda^5$ dominates,
and there are two solutions depending on the sign of $\omega$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda \simeq \pm\left({ 3 |\omega|\over 16(1+\alpha)^2}\right)^{1/5}
\left({r_* \over r}\right)^{3/5}.
\label{solin}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, negative $\lambda$ corresponds to positive $\omega$, and vice versa.
As it can be straightforwardly verified from the explicit form of the action, negative $\omega$ unambiguously leads to a ghost in the $\sigma$ field, so we disregard this possibility, fixing the lower sign in (\ref{solin}).
This solution is the only one inside the Vainshtein radius -- no matter what it matches to outside.
It is interesting to evaluate the effective energy density and pressure
contributed from the scalar modes, i.e. effective $\pi$ stress tensor, to which the physical metric (the one before the field redefinition \eqref{newframe}) couples to.
For the asymptotic Minkowski solution, the effective energy density at large distances reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho=M_{\rm Pl}G_{00}\simeq-\frac{4\alpha\omega^2\Lambda^3 M_{\rm Pl}}{3(w-6)^2}
\left(\frac{r_*}{r}\right)^6,
\end{eqnarray}
while the pressure is given by the following expression
\begin{eqnarray}
p={M_{\rm Pl} \over 3} G^i_{i}
\simeq \frac{4\alpha\omega^2\Lambda^3 M_{\rm Pl}}{9(w-6)^2}
\left(\frac{r_*}{r}\right)^6~,
\end{eqnarray}
rendering the effective equation of state $w\simeq -1/3$.
Positive energy density requires $\alpha<0$
for this solution; negative $\alpha$ however will always lead to a ghost inside reasonable sources \footnote{
One can see this by e.g. considering a static lump of dust of constant density,
$T_{\mu\nu}=\rho \delta_\mu^0\delta_\nu^0 \theta(R-r)$,
where $R$ denotes its size.
Then, the leading contribution to the kinetic term for the $\pi$-perturbations is given by
$(\alpha \rho /M_{\rm Pl} \Lambda^3)(\delta\dot{\pi})^2$,
leading to a ghost unless $\alpha>0$.
Now, the structure of the matter couplings to gravity in the present case is the same as in the original dRGT theory, so that the same argument goes through here to constrain the sign of $\alpha$.
} \cite{Berezhiani:2013aa}.
One thus concludes that the asymptotically Minkowski solutions are always plagued by a ghost instability.
For the rest of the constant $\lambda$ solutions, $\lambda_{1,2,3,4}$,
the asymptotic effective energy density and pressure read
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho\simeq-3\lambda(1-\alpha\lambda)\Lambda^3 M_{\rm Pl},\qquad p \simeq-\lambda(-2+\alpha\lambda)\Lambda^3 M_{\rm Pl}~.
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\lambda$ has to be negative everywhere\footnote{
We have argued below eq. (\ref{solin}), that $\lambda$ has to be negative
inside the Vainshtein radius in order to avoid ghosts.
Now, $P(\lambda)$ becomes infinity as r goes to zero and is everywhere nonzero except for spatial infinity.
This means that $\lambda$ does not cross zero anywhere in space for the solutions at hand (since $P(0)$ would vanish at a finite distance from the origin if this were not true), being negative also outside of the Vainshtein radius.
}, we have positive energy and negative pressure for the case that the system is ghost free in the region within the source, $\alpha>0$. Whether or not ghost-freedom persists for the rest of the space, we investigate next.
Let us slightly perturb our background solution. The detailed derivation of the perturbation action is given in Appendix \ref{sec:scalar-perturbations}.
The leading piece in the kinetic term for $\pi$-perturbations (denoted by $\phi(t,\vec{x})$ in what follows) in the region inside the Vainshtein radius is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L}^{(2)}_{DL} = -\frac{3^{4/5}}{10\times 2^{1/5}}
\frac{(1+\alpha)(10+7\alpha)}{\omega}\bigg [\frac{\omega}{(1+\alpha)^2}\bigg ]^{4/5}
\left({r_*\over r}\right)^{12/5} \dot\phi ^2+\dots~.
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\alpha$ has to be positive,
one can see that $\phi$ becoming a ghost somewhere in space is unavoidable.
Let us for completeness also check the kinetic term for the $\sigma$ perturbation (denoted by $\psi(t,\vec{x})$ throughout the present work).
The general expression for the kinetic terms in the quadratic perturbation lagrangian is of the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal L}^{(2)}_{\rm DL} \supset
{\cal A}_1 (\partial_t \phi)^2+{\cal B}_1 (\partial_t \psi)^2
+{\cal C}_1 (\partial_t \phi)(\partial_t \psi)
={\cal A}_1 \left(\partial_t \phi+\frac{{\cal C}_1 }{2{\cal A}_1 }\partial_t \psi\right)^2
+\left({\cal B}_1-\frac{{\cal C}_1^2}{4{\cal A}_1 }\right) (\partial_t \psi)^2.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
On the solution \eqref{solin} inside Vainshtein radius, the analysis of Appendix \ref{sec:scalar-perturbations} gives
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal A}_1 \propto \left({r_* \over r}\right)^{12/5}, \qquad
{\cal C}_1 \propto \left({r_* \over r}\right)^{9/5}~,
\label{coefficientV}
\end{eqnarray}
meaning that ${\cal C}_1^2/4{\cal A}_1 \propto (r_*/r)^{6/5}\gg {\cal B}_1$ (since ${\cal B}_1=\omega/2$ is just a constant).
We thus arrive at a conclusion that both of the scalar modes are ghosts inside the Vainshtein radius (and outside the source).
One can show, that including the extra term (\ref{Action2}) in the action does not help: even if we include this term, the qualitative structure of the solutions remains intact. In particular, the coefficients ${\cal A}_1$ and ${\cal C}_1$
still go as $({r_* / r})^{12/5}$ and $({r_* / r})^{9/5}$
respectively for $r\ll r_*$, turning at least one of the two scalars into a ghost
on the time-independent solutions.
In the next section, we will attempt to fix the problem by allowing time-dependence for the background.
\section{Time-dependent case}
\label{sec5}
In this section we investigate the case of time-dependent background configurations,
\begin{equation}
a\neq 0, \qquad b \neq 0~.
\end{equation}
We note that while the fields are time dependent, they enter the Lagrangian with derivatives
so that the stress-tensors of these fields on the solutions at hand
are time-independent. In subsections 1 and 2 we still set the parameter $\alpha_5$ to zero, and study
the case of $\alpha_5 \neq 0$ in subsection 3.
\subsection{Asymptotically de Sitter}
To start with, we consider a solution, corresponding to $1+2\alpha a \neq 0$.
As it can be straightforwardly verified, we then have exactly the same ghost problem inside the Vainshtein radius as described in the end of the previous section\footnote{Indeed, the fact that the background configurations have an additional time-dependent piece can not change the kinetic terms for their perturbations -- they can only affect the gradient energy. This follows from the special galileon structure of our decoupling limit lagrangian.}. Let us nevertheless have a closer look at possible asymptotically de Sitter backgrounds.
The condition for de Sitter asymptotics can be recast in terms of the effective $r\to \infty$ equation-of-state parameter,
\begin{eqnarray}
w\equiv {p \over \rho}
=\frac{a-2a\alpha\lambda-\lambda(2-\alpha\lambda)}{3\lambda(1-\alpha \lambda)}=-1~.
\end{eqnarray}
This is solved for $\lambda=1/2\alpha$ and $\lambda = -a$ and both of these conditions can not be imposed at the same time unless $1+2\alpha a$ vanishes.
Let us first consider the case $\lambda=1/2\alpha$. As shown in Appendix \ref{sec:vector-perturbations}, this parameter choice kills the kinetic term for the vector mode at the quadratic level, leading to infinitely strongly coupled vector perturbations.
The second, $\lambda = -a$ case on the other hand, corresponds to a Lorentz-invariant profile for the $\pi$ field, and has been considered as a special $\beta=0$ subclass of the self-accelerating solutions, found in \cite{Gabadadze:2014aa}\footnote{Note that the parameter space on Fig. 1 of \cite{Gabadadze:2014aa} corresponds to a particular choice of the parameter $\omega$.}.
These solutions can be discarded on the basis of our analysis of the previous section. Indeed, the Vainshtein solution in the vicinity of the source
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda \sim
\left({r_* \over r}\right)^{3/5},
\end{eqnarray}
is the same one as in the previous section (with a difference only in numerical coefficients), and therefore at least one of the scalars has to be a ghost inside the Vainshtein radius for our choice of the parameters.
Finally, we look at the case that both conditions, $\lambda=1/2\alpha$ and $\lambda = -a$, are imposed. This is only possible if $1+2\alpha a = 0$, which means that the source term in the scalar background equations vanishes. As already noted above, the condition $\lambda=1/2\alpha$ leads to infinitely strongly coupled vector perturbations, so we discard this possibility.
\subsection{Solutions with decoupled sources}
We now turn to the special case, $1+2\alpha a = 0$, $\lambda \neq 1/2 \alpha$, and $\lambda \neq -a$, for which the equation of motion for $\pi$ no longer depends on the source. This can potentially take care of the ghost problem inside the Vainshtein radius, since the scalar profiles correspond to $\lambda,\lambda_\sigma=const$ everywhere in space, describing cosmologies with the equation of state parameter $w\neq -1$.
To simplify the analysis, let us consider the limit $\omega \to \infty$, where the interactions between $\pi$ and $\sigma$ is absent, and expand the solution around it.
To do so, it is convenient to define a canonically normalized $\sigma$ field, $\sigma \equiv {\tilde \sigma / \sqrt{\omega}}$, and consider an expansion in the inverse powers of the large parameter
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda=\lambda_1+ \lambda_2 \omega^{-1/2} +{\cal O}(\omega^{-1}), \qquad
{\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma}={\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma,1}
+ {\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma, 2} \omega^{-1/2} +{\cal O}(\omega^{-1})~,
\label{expandedsigma}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${ \lambda}_{\sigma}=\tilde \lambda_\sigma/\sqrt{\omega}$. The zeroth order, $\omega\to\infty$ solutions are given as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda_1={1 \over 2 \alpha}, \frac{1\pm \sqrt{3}}{2\alpha}, \qquad
{\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma,1}={{\tilde b}\over 3},
\label{lambda1}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have defined ${ b}=\tilde b/\sqrt{\omega}$, in accord with the canonical normalization of the quasidilaton.
Since $\pi$ and $\sigma$ are decoupled in this limit, the solution for $\pi$ is exactly the same as the one in massive gravity, found in Ref. \cite{Berezhiani:2013aa}, while $\sigma$ is just a free massless scalar. The first of the above profiles for $\lambda_1$ corresponds to the self-accelerating background with infinitely strongly coupled vector perturbations, considered in the previous section. We therefore focus on one of the other two solutions\footnote{Considering the other one, $\lambda_1=(1- \sqrt{3})/2\alpha$, will lead to similar conclusions.}, $\lambda_1=(1+ \sqrt{3})/2\alpha$, in which case the next order terms in the $1/\sqrt{w}$ expansion are
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda_2 &=& \frac{2 \left(\sqrt{3} \alpha ^3-6
\alpha ^2-3 \alpha +2
\sqrt{3}+3\right) b}{9 \alpha ^3},\nonumber\\
\tilde\lambda_{\sigma, 2} &=& -\frac{3 \alpha ^3+\left(8+6
\sqrt{3}\right) \alpha
^2-\left(17+9 \sqrt{3}\right)
\alpha +3 \sqrt{3}+5}{6 \alpha ^4}.
\label{lambda2}
\end{eqnarray}
The coefficients of the kinetic and gradient terms in the quadratic perturbation lagrangian for the background of interest are summarized in \ref{sec:perturbation-timedependent}. As long as $\omega$ is large enough, one can clearly see from these expressions that the conditions for avoiding ghost and gradient instabilities for all helicities are satisfied if
\begin{equation}
0<\alpha<\frac{2+\sqrt{3}}{4}~.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the speed of sound for one combination of the scalar modes and that of the vector helicities, $c_s^{2(-)}$ and $c_{sA}^{2}$, are strictly subluminal, the former propagating at a quarter of the speed of sound. The remaining scalar on the other hand, propagates at the following speed
\begin{eqnarray}
c_s^{2(+)}&=&1+{2 (2+\sqrt{3}-\sqrt{3} \alpha -2\sqrt{3} \alpha^2 + \alpha^3 )^2\over 3 \alpha ^6 \omega}
+{\cal O}(\omega^{-3/2})~,
\end{eqnarray}
which is always slightly superluminal for large $\omega$.
Beyond the $1/\omega$ expansion, one can employ numerical analysis to explore the stable parameter space. The qualitative picture is the same as for the large $\omega$ case: one can readily find a parameter space, devoid of ghosts and gradient instability. Furthermore, all modes propagate at subluminal speed, except for one combination of the scalars, which becomes (exactly luminal) $\sigma$ in the limit of large $\omega$.
The picture remains qualitatively similar for the case of nonzero $\alpha_5$.
To avoid the ghost problem inside the Vainshtein radius, we still need to impose $1+2\alpha a=0$, and then expand the solutions around their $\omega \to \infty$ values, as above. Nonzero $\alpha_5$ does not change the zeroth order background profiles, since it enters only through the potential for $\sigma$, which makes its effects suppressed by powers of $\sqrt{\omega}$. This means that all quantities, possibly except of $c_s^{2(+)}$, determining stability and (sub)luminality of perturbations remain intact, since they are all dominated by the zeroth order contributions. Now, $c_s^{2(+)}$ is exactly one at the zeroth order, and as shown above, receives a slightly superluminal correction in the case of vanishing $\alpha_5$ at $\mathcal{O}(\omega^{-1})$.
One can straightforwardly convince oneself, that unfortunately the same conclusion persists for $\alpha_5\neq 0$, the speed of sound $c_s^{2(+)}$ being corrected by a positive-definite ($\alpha_5$-dependent) quantity at order $\omega^{-1}$.
Furthermore, as we checked via numerical analysis, the situation is the same for $\mathcal{O}(1)$, or smaller values of $\omega$, corresponding to stable backgrounds with all modes, but one scalar propagating at superluminal velocity.
\section{Extended theory}
\label{sec6}
We have seen in the previous sections that static solutions, that excite the helicity-zero polarization of the graviton in the original quasidilaton theory are in general problematic, due to the issues with the propagation of ghosts in the Vainshtein region. Mathematically, the problems arise due to the kinetic term of the quasidilaton, ${\cal B}_1=\omega/2$, becoming parametrically suppressed with respect to the mixing with the helicity-0 graviton as $r\ll r_*$. One might therefore think that the situation can be improved by supplementing the $\sigma$ sector by Galileon interactions \cite{Nicolis:2008in} in the decoupling limit, since this would make the kinetic coefficient of the quasidilaton space-dependent, and possibly enhanced within the Vainshtein radius. In addition, we saw that while the ghost problem can be avoided for solutions with decoupled sources (i.e. the ones that \emph{do not} excite the longitudinal graviton), one combination of the scalar modes always propagates at a superluminal speed. This can be seen in the $\omega\to \infty$ limit, by noting that the quasidilaton becomes a free field propagating at exactly the unit speed, while the next order, $1/\omega$ correction to the speed of sound always happens to be in the superluminal direction for the solutions of interest. On the other hand, if the $\omega \to \infty$ limit does not describe a trivial (free) quasidilaton sector, with possibly a nontrivial background $\sigma$-profile characterized by subluminal excitations, one can in principle get rid of superluminal propagation altogether.
Finally, a very important motivation beyond extending the decoupling limit of the original quasidilaton is the realization that the resulting theory can capture all possible technically natural spherically symmetric and static solutions in the most general extensions of the full original quasidilaton (i.e. the theory beyond any limit). Indeed the decoupling limit we will consider in fact represents the most general ghost-free theory of a tensor and a pair of scalars, invariant under internal galilean transformations. This guarantees that any ghost-free modification of the original quasidilaton is bound to reduce to what we consider below at sufficiently short distances. Moreover, the decoupling limit treatment guarantees that the obtained solutions lie well within the regime of validity of the effective theory, and are fully insensitive to any possible UV physics.
We therefore wish to consider the following action,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal L}_{\rm DL}=-{1\over 4} h^{\mu\nu}{\cal E}_{\mu\nu}^{\alpha\beta}h_{\alpha\beta}
-{1\over 8} \pi\left[\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi
-{2 \alpha \over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon \Pi\Pi
+{\alpha^2 \over \Lambda^6}
\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi
\right]
\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
-\sigma \biggl[
{\omega \over 12}\varepsilon \varepsilon \Sigma
+{\xi_1 \over 6\Lambda^3}\varepsilon \varepsilon \Sigma\Sigma
+{\xi_3 \over 4\Lambda^6}\varepsilon \varepsilon \Sigma\Sigma\Sigma
+{\xi_5 \over 10\Lambda^9}\varepsilon \varepsilon \Sigma\Sigma\Sigma\Sigma
\biggr]
\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
+\sigma\left[4\alpha_5 \Lambda^3+ \gamma_0\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi
+{\gamma_1\over \Lambda^3}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_2\over \Lambda^6}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi
+{\gamma_3\over \Lambda^9}\varepsilon\varepsilon\Pi\Pi\Pi\Pi\right]
\nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~
+{1 \over 2M_{\rm Pl}}h^{\mu\nu}T_{\mu\nu}
+{1 \over 2M_{\rm Pl}}\pi T
-{\alpha \over 2M_{\rm Pl}\Lambda^3} \pi \Pi_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu\nu}
\label{LagrangianDLH2}
\end{eqnarray}
which, as shown in appendix \ref{sec:complete-lagrangian-in-the-decoupling-limit}, can be obtained as the decoupling limit of the quasidilaton with ghost-free Horndeski interactions. Here we have set $\beta=0$ and $\alpha_5=0$ as above, as well as $\xi_2=\xi_4=0$, where $\xi_{2,4}$ are the coefficients in front of the nonlinear interaction terms between the quasidilaton and the helicity-2 graviton in the extended theory. The parameter choice $\beta=\xi_4=0$ ensures the absence of scalar-tensor interactions unremovable by a tensor mode redefinition, while $\xi_2=0$ removes the disformal coupling of $\sigma$ to the energy momentum tensor.
The given choice of the model parameters thus corresponds to just the Galileon interactions for $\sigma$, contributed by the additional Horndeski terms.
The $\pi$-equation of motion, that follows from \eqref{LagrangianDLH2} reads
\begin{eqnarray}
&& -{a \over 2} + 2 b \gamma_0
+\left({3 \over 2} + 3 a \alpha + 4b \gamma_1\right)\lambda
-(3\alpha+3a\alpha^2-6b\gamma_2)\lambda^2
+(\alpha^2+8b\gamma_3)\lambda^3
\nonumber\\
&&
-(6\gamma_0-4a\gamma_1)\lambda_\sigma
-(8\gamma_1-12a \gamma_2)\lambda_\sigma \lambda
-(6\gamma_2 - 24a \gamma_3)\lambda_\sigma \lambda^2
=(1+2a\alpha)\left({r_* \over r} \right)^3,
\label{EOM_piH}
\end{eqnarray}
while the equation of motion for $\sigma$ takes on the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
&&4\alpha_5 + 6 a \gamma_0 - b \omega
-6(3\gamma_0-2a\gamma_1)\lambda
-6(2\gamma_1-3a\gamma_2)\lambda^2
-6(\gamma_2-4 a \gamma_3)\lambda^3
\nonumber\\
&& ~~~~~~~~~~
+3\omega\lambda_\sigma
-6b\xi_1 \lambda_\sigma
+6(\xi_1-3b\xi_3)\lambda_\sigma^2
+6(\xi_3-2b\xi_5)\lambda_\sigma^3
=0~.
\label{EOM_sigmaH}
\end{eqnarray}
In the rest of this section, we will study solutions to these equations analogous to the ones previously obtained, as well as the details of the spectra of perturbations on the corresponding backgrounds.
\subsection{Time-independent solutions}
\label{sec6.1}
We start out by considering time-independent Vainshtein solutions. The simplest extension of our previous analysis would correspond to setting $\xi_3=\xi_5=0$, in which case the solution inside the Vainshtein radius gives, $\lambda \propto (r_*/r)^{6/7}$ and $\lambda_\sigma \propto (r_*/r)^{9/7}$. This yields the following $r\ll r_*$ behavior of the kinetic coefficients in the quadratic perturbation action for the scalar modes, ${\cal B}_1 \propto (r_*/r)^{9/7}$, ${~\cal C}_1^2/{\cal A}_1 \propto (r_*/r)^3$, leading again to a scalar ghost in the Vainshtein region. This, as we now show, can be avoided upon inclusion of the quartic Galileon, $\xi_3 \neq 0$.
To make things simple and analytic, we again consider the further limit, in which $\pi$ and $\sigma$ are decoupled. To this end, one can again set $\omega \to \infty$ just as we did in the previous section; however, in contrast to the previous case, we'd like the resulting $\sigma$ sector to retain Galileon interactions in order to allow for non-trivial backgrounds. This requires to scale the ${\tilde \xi}$ coefficients accordingly, the proper limit defined as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega \to \infty,\qquad
{\tilde \xi}_1 \equiv {\xi_1 \over \omega^{3/2}}={\rm finite},\qquad
{\tilde \xi}_3 \equiv {\xi_3 \over \omega^{2}}={\rm finite},\qquad
{\tilde \xi}_5 \equiv {\xi_5 \over \omega^{5/2}}={\rm finite}~.
\end{eqnarray}
The action (\ref{LagrangianDLH2}) then splits up in this limit into separate, non-interacting Galileon theories for $\pi$ and $\sigma$. For simplicity, we further impose the condition that the two Galileon sectors are of similar structure. This can be achieved by requiring
\begin{eqnarray}
\xi_3={\xi_1^2 \over 3\omega}, \qquad \xi_5=0~,
\label{symmetricCondition}
\end{eqnarray}
which makes the two sectors symmetric under the interchange $(\pi \leftrightarrow \tilde\sigma, ~\alpha \leftrightarrow -{\tilde \xi_1})$, apart form the source term in the equation of motion for $\pi$.
We then expand the solutions in terms of $\omega^{-1/2}$ as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\lambda = x_1 + x_2 \omega^{-1/2}+{\cal O}(\omega^{-1}),
\qquad {\tilde \lambda}_\sigma = y_1 + y_2 \omega^{-1/2} +{\cal O}(\omega^{-1}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $x_1$ and $y_1$ are determined from,
\begin{eqnarray}
2\alpha^2 x_1^3 -6 \alpha x_1^2 +3 x_1&=& 2\({r_* \over r}\)^2~,\\
2 \xi_1^2 y_1^3+6\xi_1 y_1^2 + 3 y_1&=&0~,
\end{eqnarray}
The expressions for $x_2$ and $y_2$ can then be obtained perturbatively.
In general, there are multiple solutions within the Vainshtein radius, out of which we will focus on the following one
\begin{eqnarray}
x_1&=& {1 \over \alpha^{2/3}} {r_* \over r} +{1 \over \alpha} +{1 \over 2 \alpha^{4/3}} {r \over r_*} + {\cal O}\({r \over r_*}\)^2\\
y_1&=& - {3 +\sqrt{3} \over 2 {\bar \xi_1}}\\
x_2&=& - {(3 +\sqrt{3}) \gamma_2 \over \alpha^2 {\bar \xi_1}} - {2(3 +\sqrt{3}) (2\alpha \gamma_1 + 3\gamma_2) \over 3\alpha^{7/3} {\bar \xi_1}} {r \over r_*} + {\cal O}\({r \over r_*}\)^2
\\
y_2&=& {2 \gamma_2 \over (1+\sqrt{3}) \alpha^2} \({r_* \over r} \)^3+ {2 (2 \alpha\gamma_1+3\gamma_2) \over (1+\sqrt{3})\alpha^{7/3} } \({r_* \over r} \)^2 + {\cal O}\({r_* \over r}\)~.\\
\end{eqnarray}
The leading terms in the expression for $x_1$ and $y_1$ correspond to the `restricted Galileon' discussed in \cite{Berezhiani:2013aa}.
Since there is no source term in the $\sigma$-equation, the $\omega \to \infty$ solution describes a cosmological background, $\lambda_\sigma={\rm const}$; couplings between the $\pi$ and $\sigma$ sectors on the other hand introduce weak space dependence in $\lambda_\sigma$ within the Vainshtein radius.
Once substituted into the expressions for the kinetic coefficients of the quadratic perturbation action, the above background solution yields
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal A}_1 &=&\[{3 \alpha^{2/3} \over 2}\({r_* \over r}\)^2 + {\cal O}\({r_* \over r}\)\] \omega^0 + {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
{\cal B}_1 - \frac{{\cal C}_1^2}{4{\cal A}_1} &=& 5+3\sqrt{3} + {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2})~.
\end{eqnarray}
For positive $\alpha$, the solution at hand is free from scalar ghosts.
The radial and angular sound speeds can be evaluated following the procedure, outlined in Appendix \ref{sec:scalar-perturbations}
\begin{eqnarray}
c_r^{2(+)}&=&\[ 1- {2 \over \alpha^{1/3}} {r \over r_*}+ {\cal O}\({r \over r_*}\)^2~\] \omega^0
+{\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\label{cr2+}\\
c_r^{2(-)}&=& 1-{\sqrt{3} \over 2} +{\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}), \label{cr2-}\\
c_\Omega^{2(+)}&=& \[ {1 \over \alpha^{2/3}} \({r \over r_*}\)^2+ {\cal O}\({r \over r_*}\)^3~ \] \omega^0
+{\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\label{cO2+}\\
c_\Omega^{2(-)}&=& 1-{\sqrt{3} \over 2} +{\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2})\label{cO2-}.
\label{angularSS}
\end{eqnarray}
All these expressions are manifestly positive for large $\omega$. Furthermore, the radial sound speed for $\pi$ (\ref{cr2+}) is slightly subluminal while the angular speed (\ref{cO2+}) is suppressed by the small factor $(r / r_*)^2$, making it extremely subluminal inside the Vainshtein radius (this is generic to Vainshtein solutions in Galileon theories \cite{Nicolis:2008in}). Both radial and angular sound speed for $\sigma$, (\ref{cr2-}) and (\ref{cO2-}), are also subluminal, $c_{r,~\Omega}^{~2(-)} \approx 0.134$.
The kinetic coefficients and the sound speeds in various directions of the vector perturbations are given as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{tr} &=& \[{\alpha^{4/3} \over (1-2\alpha)} {r_*\over r}+ {\cal O}(r^0)\]\omega^0+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
C_{t\theta} &=&\[ {\alpha \over 2}+ {\cal O}(r)\]\omega^0+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
c_r^{2(A)}&=& \[1-{2\over \alpha^{1/3}} {r\over r_*}+ {\cal O}(r^2)\]\omega^0+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
c_{\Omega,1}^{2(A)}&=&\[{1-2\alpha \over 2 \alpha^{1/3}} {r\over r_*}+ {\cal O}(r^2)\]\omega^0+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}), \\
c_{\Omega,2}^{2(A)}&=&\[{1 \over 2 \alpha^{2/3}} \( {r\over r_*}\)^2+ {\cal O}(r^3)\]\omega^0+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}).
\end{eqnarray}
The latter expressions show that the vector perturbations are also free of ghosts, gradient instabilities, and superluminal propagation for large $\omega$, and as long as $0 < \alpha<1/2$ is satisfied.
We proceed by looking at the behaviour of the solutions at large distances. The asymptotically Minkowski solution is the same as the one in (\ref{Minkowsol}), which as we have argued above, leads to ghosts inside reasonable sources. We thus disregard this branch, moving to the asymptotically curved, cosmological solutions in the $\omega \to \infty$ limit. The field profiles in this limit read
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda_{\rm decoupled}=0, ~\frac{3 \pm \sqrt{3}}{2\alpha}, \qquad
{\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma,{\rm decoupled}}= 0, ~- \frac{3 \pm \sqrt{3}}{2 {\tilde \xi_1}}~,
\end{eqnarray}
and they are identical due to the $\alpha\to -\tilde \xi_1$ interchange symmetry we have imposed above.
The solution $\lambda_{\rm decoupled}=(3 - \sqrt{3}) /2\alpha$ leads to the wrong sign for the kinetic term of $\pi$-perturbations, ${\cal A}_1 = 3(5-3\sqrt{3})/2<0$, we therefore disregard it (and its dual in the $\sigma$ sector), and concentrate on the only remaining solution for $\lambda_{\rm decoupled}$ (this is also the one that matches the field profiles inside the Vainshtein region, obtained above). Furthermore, we will concentrate on the only remaining nozero solution for the quasidilaton, corresponding to ${\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma,{\rm decoupled}}=-(3 + \sqrt{3}) /2\tilde \xi_1$.
The perturbations over the obtained background can be treated along the lines of what we did in the previous section in eq. (\ref{expandedsigma}). The expressions for quantities, determining stability and the speed of propagation of fluctuations of various helicity read
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal A}_1 &=& \frac{3}{2} \left(5+3 \sqrt{3}\right)+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
{\cal B}_1-{{\cal C}_1^2 \over 4{\cal A}_1} &=& 5+3 \sqrt{3}+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
c_s^{2(+)}&=&1-\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
c_s^{2(-)}&=&1-\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
{\bar D}_1&=& \frac{\left(2+\sqrt{3}\right) \alpha }{3+\sqrt{3}-4 \alpha} + {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2}),\\
c_s^{2(A)}&=& \frac{-2 \sqrt{3} \alpha +2 \alpha +\sqrt{3}}{6+2 \sqrt{3}-4 \alpha }+ {\cal O}(\omega^{-1/2})~.
\end{eqnarray}
One can see, that for $0<\alpha < (3+\sqrt{3})/4$ and for sufficiently large $\omega$, the system is free from any sort of instability and all speeds of sound are safely subluminal.
\subsection{Time-dependent solutions}
We have seen that extending the quasidilaton by Horndeski-like terms can take care of stability problems associated with time-independent solutions in the original theory.
In principle, for a certain subclass of time-dependent solutions one can again use the same arguments as before: the stable solutions (both inside and outside the Vainshtein radius) can be explicitly constructed by expanding around the time-independent solutions obtained in Sec.~\ref{sec6.1} as long as the contributions from the time-dependent pieces of the scalar fields, $a$ and $b$, are small. Therefore, the time-dependent solutions are also free of ghosts, tachyons, gradient instabilities, and superluminal modes in the extended quasidilaton theory.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{timeindHorn.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{This plot shows
the condition for avoiding ghosts, tachyon, gradient instabilities, superluminal modes for the time-dependent solution with $1+\alpha a=0$.
The parameters are chosen to be $\lambda=3$, $\lambda_\sigma=1$, and $\xi_3=50$.
}
\label{fig:TimedependentHorn}
\end{figure}
Next we would like to focus the special case with decoupled sources, analogous to the one of Sec. \ref{sec5}.
To this end, we again focus on solutions corresponding to $1+\alpha a=0$. Moreover, to simplify the analysis we will again impose symmetry under $\pi \leftrightarrow \tilde\sigma$, which, in addition to (\ref{symmetricCondition}), requires $b={{\omega} / 2\xi_1}$ to hold. The relevant solution in the $\omega \to \infty$ limit then reads \cite{Berezhiani:2013aa}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{solstd}
\lambda_{\rm decoupled}={1\over 2\alpha}, ~\frac{1 \pm \sqrt{3}}{2\alpha}, \qquad
{\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma,{\rm decoupled}}=- {1\over 2\xi_1}, ~- \frac{1 \pm \sqrt{3}}{2 {\tilde \xi_1}}
\end{eqnarray}
The solution $\lambda_{\rm decoupled}={1/ 2\alpha}$ corresponds to a de Sitter background with infinitely strongly coupled vector perturbations, as shown above. We therefore disregard it.
The analysis of perturbations in $1/\omega$ expansion for one representative background from \eqref{solstd}, corresponding to $\lambda_{\rm decoupled}=(1 + \sqrt{3})/(2\alpha),~{\tilde \lambda}_{\sigma,{\rm decoupled}}= - (1 - \sqrt{3})(2 {\tilde \xi_1})$ , is given in Appendix \ref{sec:perturbation-timedependent-Horn}. Most importantly, the $\omega\to\infty$ solutions are free of ghosts, gradient instability and superluminal propagation for all modes present in the theory for
\begin{equation}
0<\alpha < \frac{1}{4} (2+\sqrt{3})~.
\end{equation}
Since perturbations are stable and safely subluminal for $\omega\to \infty$, we expect that they generically remain such at least down to moderate values of $\omega$ (when all other parameters are taken of order unity).
Finally, for illustrative purposes we provide a different, numerically obtained example of a parameter space completely free of all kinds of instability and superluminal propagation.
Rather than solving for the quantities $\lambda$ and $\lambda_\sigma$, we treat these as input parameters, and solve for $\xi_1$ and $b$
instead (we have assumed $\alpha_5=\xi_5=0$ in this analysis). The results, displayed on Fig. \ref{fig:TimedependentHorn} confirm that there is typically a rich parameter space for stable and subluminal backgrounds.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we have investigated spherically symmetric solutions in the decoupling limit
of quasidilaton theory in the absence of the un-diagonalizable interaction term,
$h^{\mu\nu}\varepsilon_\mu\varepsilon_\nu \Pi\Pi\Pi$.
In the decoupling limit of the \emph{original} quasi-dilaton theory (\ref{LagrangianDL2}), we have found that
\begin{itemize}
\item Both of the scalar perturbations become ghosts inside the Vainshtein radius for
spherically symmetric configurations that asymptote to Minkowski space at infinity.
\item The only option to avoid ghosts is to consider solutions that correspond to $1+\alpha a =0$,
which leads to vanishing of the source term in the $\pi$ equation of motion, and to a modification of the boundary conditions at infinity.
In this case, there are no ghosts, tachyons or gradient instability, but one scalar
mode always propagates with a superluminal group velocity.
\end{itemize}
Thus the condition $1+\alpha a =0$ is crucial in order to have stable solutions in the original quasidilaton theory, where
any asymptotically-flat background always suffers from ghost excitations in the
Vainshtein region.
Furthermore, we show that a general self-accelerated solution found in \cite{Gabadadze:2014aa}, when
restricted to a special case of $\beta=0$, shares the same problem: the kinetic term of
the scalar field, which has a right sign on a de Sitter background, flips the sign inside the Vainshtein radius.
This means that the sign of the kinetic term vanishes somewhere as one approaches a source from far away;
at that point one of the scalar fields becomes infinitely strongly coupled and the classical solution -- meaningless.
A way to avoid ghost instability inside the Vainshtein solution is to supplement the theory by shift-symmetric Horndeski
terms for the $\sigma$ field; the latter are naturally allowed by the quasidilaton symmetry (\ref{Symmetry}). By adding these terms, the $\sigma$ field acquires the cubic, quartic, and quintic Galileon self-interactions in the decoupling limit, which can in principle cure the ghost problem inside the Vainshtein radius. In particular, we find in this case, that
\begin{itemize}
\item The solution approaching Minkowski spacetime at large distances cannot be allowed due to the presence of a ghost in the scalar sector.
\item There exists another branch of solutions with cosmological
asymptotics at large distances, that is free of ghosts, tachyons, gradient instability, and
superluminal propagation. The latter class of solutions are of a highest interest.
\end{itemize}
As we pointed out above, throughout this paper we set the coefficient of the
interaction term, $h^{\mu\nu}\varepsilon_\mu\varepsilon_\nu \Pi\Pi\Pi$, to zero.
This is a technically natural choice \cite{Rham:2012aa},
however, inclusion of this term may open novel
branches of solutions and should be investigated in future.
\acknowledgments
GG's work is supported by NASA grant NNX12AF86G S06, and NSF grant PHY-1316452.
R.K. is supported in part by JSPS Postdoctoral Fellowships for Research Abroad. The work of D.P. is supported in part by MIUR-FIRB grant RBFR12H1MW and by funds provided by Scuola Normale Superiore through the program "Progetti di Ricerca per Giovani Ricercatori".
|
\section{Introduction}
The purpose of this paper is to present proof methods to deal with
the correctness related issues of definite clause logic programs. The goal is that the
methods are 1.~simple and applicable in the practice of Prolog programming,
and 2.~declarative
(i.e.\ not referring to any operational semantics),
in other words depending only on logical reading of programs%
.
The notion of program correctness (in imperative and functional programming) splits
in logic programming into correctness and completeness.
Correctness means that all answers of the program are compatible with the specification,
completeness -- that the program produces all the answers required by the
specification.
A specification may be {\em approximate}\/:
for such a specification
some answers are allowed, but not required to be computed.
We point out various advantages of using approximate specifications.
For proving correctness we use the method of \cite {Clark79}.
For proving completeness we introduce a simplification of the method of
\cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05}.
We introduce a new notion of semi-completeness; semi-completeness and
termination imply completeness.
We discuss a few sufficient conditions for completeness.
We also propose a way of proving
that completeness is preserved under pruning of SLD-trees
(due to e.g.\ the cut of Prolog).
This is augmented by a way of proving correctness for such trees,
taking into account that pruning may remove some answers.
We are interested in treating logic programming as a declarative programming
paradigm,
and in reasoning about programs declaratively, i.e.\
independently from their operational semantics.
The correctness proving method
is declarative, so is the method of proving semi-completeness.
However some of the sufficient conditions for completeness are not declarative,
as they refer to an operational notion of termination (finiteness of SLD-trees).
Notice that in most practical cases termination has to be established anyway.
So such way of proving completeness may be a reasonable compromise
between declarative and non-declarative reasoning.
This paper provides small examples, for a more substantial application of the
presented proof methods see \cite{drabent12.iclp}.
That paper presents a construction of a practical Prolog program, the SAT
solver of \cite{howe.king.tcs}. Starting from a formal specification,
a logic program is constructed hand in hand with its
correctness and completeness proofs. Then control is added (delays, and
pruning SLD-trees) to obtain the final Prolog program.
The added control preserves correctness,
the approach presented here makes it possible to formally prove that the
completeness is preserved.
That example illustrates also usefulness of approximate specifications.
The consecutively constructed programs are not equivalent --
their main predicates define different relations.
So it is not a case of semantics preserving program transformation.
What is preserved is correctness and completeness w.r.t.\
the same approximate specification.
An activity related to proving correctness and completeness of programs
is program diagnosis -- locating errors in programs. We show a
correspondence between the presented proof methods and declarative diagnosis
(called also algorithmic debugging).
We show how an important drawback of declarative diagnosis can be easily
overcome by employing approximate specifications.
\paragraph{Preliminaries}
In this paper we consider definite clause programs (i.e.\ logic programs without
negation). We use the standard notation and definitions \cite{Apt-Prolog}.
Given a predicate symbol $p$, by an {\em atom for} $p$ (or {\em $p$-atom})
we mean an atom whose
predicate symbol is $p$, and by a {\em clause for} $p$ -- a clause whose head
is an atom for $p$.
The set of the clauses for $p$ in the program under consideration is called
{\em procedure} $p$.
We assume a fixed alphabet of function and predicate symbols,
not restricted to the symbols from the considered program.
The only requirement is that the Herbrand universe is nonempty. In particular,
the set of function symbols may be finite or infinite.
The Herbrand universe will be denoted by {\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace, the Herbrand base by {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace,
and the sets of all terms, respectively atoms, by {\ensuremath{\cal{T U}}}\xspace and {\ensuremath{\cal{T B}}}\xspace.
By $ground(E)$ we mean the set of ground instances
of a term, atom, etc $E$.
For a program $P$, $ground(P)$ is the set of ground instances of the
clauses of $P$.
The least Herbrand model of a program $P$ will be denoted by ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$.
It is the least fixed point of the immediate consequence operator
$T_P\colon 2^{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\to 2^{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace$;
\
${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P = \bigcup_{i=1}^\infty T_P^i(\emptyset)$.
By a computed (respectively correct) answer for a program $P$ and a
query $Q$ we mean an instance $Q\theta$ of $Q$ where $\theta$ is a computed
(correct) answer substitution \cite{Apt-Prolog} for $Q$ and $P$.
We often say just
{\em answer}
%
as each computed answer is a correct one,
and each correct answer (for $Q$) is a computed answer
(for $Q$ or for some its instance).
Thus, by soundness and completeness of SLD-resolution,
$Q\theta$ is an answer for $P$ iff $P\models Q\theta$.
By ``declarative'' (property, reasoning, \ldots)
we mean referring only to logical reading of programs,
thus abstracting from any operational semantics.
So $Q$ being and answer for $P$ is a declarative property.
Properties depending on the order of atoms in clauses will not be considered
declarative, as logical reading does not distinguish equivalent formulae,
like
$\alpha\land\beta$ and $\beta\land\alpha$.
Names of variables begin with an upper-case letter.
We use the list notation of Prolog. So
$[\seq t]$ ($n\geq0$) stands for the list of elements $\seq t$.
Only a term of this form is considered a list.
(Thus terms like $[a,a|X]$, or $[a,a|a]$, where $a$ is a constant,
are not lists).
{\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}}\xspace stands for the set of natural numbers, and {\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}}\xspace for the set of integers;
$f\colon A\hookrightarrow B$ states that $f$ is a partial function from $A$ to $B$.
\paragraph{Organization of the paper}
The next section introduces the notions of specification, correctness and
completeness, and discusses approximate specifications.
Sections \ref{sec:correctness} and \ref{sec:completeness}
deal with proving, respectively, correctness and completeness of programs.
Proving completeness and correctness in the context of pruning of SLD-trees
is discussed in Section \ref{sec:pruning}.
Section \ref{sec:dd} discusses declarative diagnosis.
Section \ref{sec:related} is an overview of related work,
Section \ref{sec:discussion} provides additional discussion of the proposed
methods,
and the next section concludes the paper. Two appendices include results
about completeness of the proof methods, and proofs
missing in the main text.
\pagebreak[3]
\section{Basic notions}
\label{sec:basic}
\subsection{Correctness and completeness}
\label{sec:corr+compl}
The purpose of a logic program is to compute a relation, or a few relations.
It is convenient to assume that the relations are on the Herbrand universe.
A specification should describe them. In most cases
all the relations defined by a program should be described,
an $n$-ary relation for each
$n$-argument predicate symbol.
It is convenient to describe such family of relations as a Herbrand
interpretation $S$:
a tuple $(\seq t)$ is in the relation corresponding to a predicate symbol $p$
iff \mbox{$p(\seq t)\in S$.}
So by a (formal) {\bf specification} we mean
a Herbrand interpretation; given a specification $S$, each $A\in S$ is
called a {\em specified atom}.
In imperative programming, correctness usually means that the program results
are as specified. In logic programming, due to its non-deterministic nature,
we actually have two issues: {\bf correctness} (all the results are
compatible with the specification) and {\bf completeness} (all the results
required by the specification are produced).
In other words, correctness means that the relations defined by the program are
subsets of the specified ones, and completeness means inclusion in the
opposite direction.
In terms of specified atoms and the least Herbrand model ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ of a
program $P$, we define:
{\sloppy\par}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:corr:compl}
Let $P$ be a program and $S\subseteq{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace$ a specification.
$P$ is {\bf correct} w.r.t.\ $S$ when ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\subseteq S$;
it is {\bf complete} w.r.t.\ $S$ when ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\supseteq S$.
\end{definition}
We will sometimes skip the specification when it is clear from the context.
We propose to call a program {\bf fully correct} when it is both correct and complete.
It is important to relate correctness and completeness to
answers of programs.
The relation is not trivial as, for a program $P$ and a query $Q$,
the equivalence
${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\models Q$ iff $P\models Q$ is not true in some cases.%
\footnote{
\label{footnote:example:notequivalent}
For instance assume a two element alphabet of
function symbols, with a unary $f$ and
a constant $a$. Take $P = \{\, p(a).\ p(f(Y)).\}$.
Then ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P= {\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace$. Hence ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\models p(X)$ but $P\mathrel{\,\not\!\models} p(X)$.
} %
\pagebreak[3]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:MP}
Let $P$ be a program, and $Q$ a query such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item
\label{lemma:MP:condition}
$Q$ contains exactly $k\geq0$ variables, and
the underlying language has (at least) $k$ constants not occurring in $P,Q$
or a non-constant function symbol not occurring in $P,Q$.
\end{enumerate}
Then ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\models Q$ iff $P\models Q$.
\end{lemma}
See Appendix \ref{appendix} for a proof.
In particular, the equivalence holds for ground queries.
It also holds when the set of function symbols is infinite (and $P$ is finite).
Note that condition (\ref{lemma:MP:condition}) is satisfied by any Prolog
program and query, so the equivalence holds in practice.
Now we are ready to relate program answers to the correctness and completeness
of programs.
(Remember that $Q$ is an answer for $P$ iff $P\models Q$.)
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:answers}
Let $P$ be a program, and $S$ a specification.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$P$ is correct w.r.t.\ $S$ iff $S\models Q$ for each answer $Q$ for $P$.
\item
\label{prop:answers:cond2}
$P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$ iff
\\
\mbox{}\hfill
$Q$ is an answer for $P$ for any\/ {\em ground} query $Q$ such that $S\models Q$.
\item
\label{prop:answers:cond:infinite}
If the set of function symbols of the underlying language is infinite
and $P$ is finite then
\\
$P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$ iff
$Q$ is an answer for $P$ for any query $Q$ such that $S\models Q$.
\item
\label{prop:answers:cond3}
$P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$ iff
$Q$ is an answer for $P$ for any query $Q$ such that $S\models Q$
%
and condition (\ref{lemma:MP:condition}) of Lemma \ref{lemma:MP} holds.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
The proposition also holds when $Q$ is restricted to be an atom.
\begin{proof}
For the first case, assume ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\subseteq S$ (i.e.\ $P$ is correct).
If $P\models Q$ ($Q$ is an answer) then ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\models Q$, hence $S\models Q$.
Conversely,
$S\models Q$ for each (atomic) answer $Q$ for $P$
implies that
$S\models A$ for each $A\in{\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$, hence ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\subseteq S$.
For cases \ref{prop:answers:cond2},
\ref{prop:answers:cond:infinite}, \ref{prop:answers:cond3}
it is sufficient to show the ``if'' of case \ref{prop:answers:cond2}
and the ``only-if'' of case \ref{prop:answers:cond3}.
For the ``only-if'' of case \ref{prop:answers:cond3},
assume $S\subseteq {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ ($P$ complete) and $S\models Q$.
Then ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\models Q$ and, by Lemma \ref{lemma:MP}, $P\models Q$.
For the ``if'' of case \ref{prop:answers:cond2}
assume the right hand side of the equivalence.
So for every ground atom $A$ we have
that $S\models A$ implies $P\models A$, hence ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\models A$.
Thus $S\subseteq {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$.
\end{proof}
The following auxiliary notions will be used.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:corr:compl:aux}
A {\em predicate} $p$ in $P$ is
{\em correct} w.r.t.\ $S$ when each $p$-atom of ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ is in $S$, and
{\em complete} w.r.t.\ $S$ when each $p$-atom of $S$ is in ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$.
An {\em answer} $Q$ is {\em correct} w.r.t.\ $S$ when $S\models Q$.
$P$ is {\em complete for a query} $Q$ w.r.t.\ $S$
when
$S\models Q\theta$ implies that $Q\theta$ is an answer for $P$,
for any ground instance $Q\theta$ of $Q$.
\end{definition}
Informally, complete for $Q$ means that all the answers for $Q$ required
by the specification are computed.
Note that a program is complete w.r.t.\ S
iff it is complete w.r.t.\ S for any query
iff it is complete w.r.t.\ S for any query $A\in S$.
There is an alternative way to define program completeness, namely by
$S\models Q$ implying $P\models Q$, for every $Q$
\cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05}.
It was not chosen here,
as the two notions of completeness are equivalent in the practical case of an
infinite alphabet of function symbols.
Also, it seems that the chosen version leads to simpler sufficient conditions
for completeness.
\subsection{Approximate specifications}
\label{par:approximate}
Notice that if a program $P$ is both correct and complete w.r.t.\ $S$
then ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P=S$ and the specification describes exactly the relations defined by
$P$. Often it is difficult (and not necessary) to specify the relations
exactly.
The relation defined by the program is often not exactly the one intended by
the programmer. Such discrepancy is however not an error,
because for all intended usages of the program the answers are the same as
for a program
defining the intended relation.
For certain atoms it is irrelevant whether they are, or are not, in ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$.
We illustrate this issue by some examples.
\begin{example}
\label{ex:spec-append}%
The well-known program
\[
{\rm APPEND} = \{\, \
app(\,[H|K],L,[H|M]\,) \gets app(\,K,L,M\,). \ \ \ \
\linebreak[3]
app(\,[\,],L,L\,). \
\,\}
\]
does not define the relation of list concatenation.
For instance, ${\rm APPEND} \models app([\,],1,1)$.
In other words, APPEND is not correct w.r.t.\
\[
S_{\rm APPEND}^0 = \{\, app(k,l,m)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \mid
k,l,m \mbox{ are lists, } k*l=m
\,\},
\]
where $k*l$ stands for the concatenation of lists $k,l$.
It is however complete w.r.t.\ $S_{\rm APPEND}^0$, and correct w.r.t.\
\[
S_{\rm APPEND} = \{\, app(k,l,m)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \mid
\mbox{if $l$ or $m$ is a list then }
app(k,l,m)\in S_{\rm APPEND}^0
\,\}.
\]
Correctness w.r.t.\,$S_{\rm APPEND}$ and completeness
w.r.t.\,$S_{\rm APPEND}^0$ are sufficient to show that
APPEND will produce the required
results when used to concatenate or split lists.%
\footnote{
Formally:
In such usage, in a query $Q=app(s,t,u)$ the
argument $t$ (and $s$) is a list, or $u$ is a list.
By the correctness w.r.t.\,$S_{\rm APPEND}$,
for any answer $Q\theta$, we have $S_{\rm APPEND} \models Q\theta$.
As $t\theta$ or $u\theta$ is a list, each ground instance of $Q\theta$ is in
$S_{\rm APPEND}^0$. Hence $S_{\rm APPEND}^0\models Q\theta$.
Conversely,
whenever a list $u\sigma$ is the concatenation of
$s\sigma$ and $t\sigma$ (equivalently $S_{\rm APPEND}^0 \models Q\sigma$)
then $P\models Q\sigma$, by the completeness w.r.t.\,$S_{\rm APPEND}^0$ and
Prop.\,\ref{prop:answers}(\ref{prop:answers:cond3}),
provided the assumptions of
Prop.\,\ref{prop:answers}(\ref{prop:answers:cond3}) hold.
Thus $Q\sigma$ is an instance of some computed answer
for $Q$ and APPEND.
For certain restricted alphabets the assumptions of
Prop.\,\ref{prop:answers}(\ref{prop:answers:cond3}) are violated.
Then there exist programs complete w.r.t.\,$S_{\rm APPEND}^0$, for which
some $Q$ is not an answer, despite $S_{\rm APPEND}^0\models Q$.
(Note that now $S_{\rm APPEND}^0$ denotes a different set, as {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace is changed.)
For instance if $[\,],[\,|\,]$ are the only function symbols then
$Q=app([X],[\,],[X])$ is not an answer a program $P$ obtained from APPEND by
replacing the first clause by
$app(\,[[\,]|K],L,[[\,]|M]\,) \gets app(\,K,L,M\,)$
and
$app(\,[[H|T]|K],L,[[H|T]|M]\,) \gets app(\,K,L,M\,)$.
Note that $S_{\rm APPEND}^0\models Q$ and
$P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S_{\rm APPEND}^0\models Q$.
} %
Note that understanding the exact relation defined by the program is unnecessary.
See \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05} for further discussion.
When we are only interested in using APPEND to concatenate lists,
the specification for correctness can be weakened by replacing
``if $l$ or $m$ is a list'' by ``if $l$ is a list''.
Similarly, if only list splitting is of interest then ``if $m$ is a list''
can be used.
Note that $S_{\rm APPEND}$ is given as the union of
$S_{\rm APPEND}^0$
and the complement $\overline T$ of the set
$
T = \{\, app(k,l,m)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \mid
\mbox{ $l$ or $m$ is a list}
\,\}.
$
The intuition is that it is irrelevant whether the atoms from $\overline T$
are in ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_{\rm APPEND}$.
\end{example}
A similar example is given in Sect.\,\ref{sec:dd-drawback}
where in an insertion sort program it is irrelevant how elements should be
inserted into an unsorted list.
\begin{example}
Programmers often do not know the exact relations defined by logic programs.
For most programs in textbooks, the exact relations defined by the
predicates are not explained. For instance this concerns the programs in
Chapter 3.2
of \cite{Sterling-Shapiro}
defining predicates
{\tt member/2}, {\tt sub{}list/2}, {\tt prefix/2}, {\tt suffix/2},
and {\tt append/3}.
Similarly to the case of APPEND described above, the relations
defined by the programs are not what we understand as the list membership
relation, the ${\it sub list}$ relation etc.
The programs define certain supersets of these relations.
(They are complete w.r.t.\ specifications describing the relations.)
Suitable specifications for correctness can be easily
constructed, similarly as for APPEND. Understanding the exact relations
defined by the programs is unnecessary, and they are not discussed in
the book.
The exact relations defined by programs are quite often misunderstood.
\noindent
For instance, in
\cite[Ex.\,15]{DBLP:journals/jlp/DevilleL94}
it is claimed that a program $Pro g_1$
defines the relation of list inclusion. In our terms, this means that
predicate
${\it included}$ of $Pro g_1$ is correct and complete w.r.t.\
\[
\left\{\, {\it included}(l_1,l_2)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\ \left| \
\begin{array}{l}
l_1,l_2 \mbox{ are lists},
\\
\mbox{every element of $l_1$ belongs to $l_2$}
\end{array}
\right.\right\}.
\]
However the correctness does not hold:
The program contains a unary clause ${\it included}([\,],L)$,
so $Pro g_1\models{\it included}([\,],t)$ for any term $t$,
\end{example}
The examples show that it is often not necessary to know the semantics of a
program exactly, and that its approximate description is sufficient.
An {\bf approximate specification} is a pair of specifications
$S_{\it c o m p l}, S_{corr}$, for completeness and correctness.
The intention is that the program is complete w.r.t.\ the former, and correct
w.r.t.\ the latter:
$S_{\it c o m p l}\subseteq {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P \subseteq S_{corr}$.
In other words, the specifications $S_{\it c o m p l}, S_{corr}$ describe,
respectively, which atoms have to be computed, and
which are allowed to be computed.
(And for the atoms from
$S_{corr} \setminus S_{\it c o m p l}$
the semantics of the program is irrelevant.)
\paragraph{Comments}
\label{par:approximate:comments}
An obvious role of approximate specifications
is to describe only some
properties of a program. Ex.\,\ref{ex:split-corr} below shows a case where
only the lengths of lists are taken into account, not their elements.
Typed logic programming \cite{types.lp.92} is outside of the scope of this
paper. But it is worth mentioning here that,
for some programs, introducing types may change their semantics,
so that they define exactly the intended relations.
For instance in an appropriate typed logic,
the APPEND program of Ex.\,\ref{ex:spec-append}
(with the arguments of $app$ typed to be lists)
would define exactly the relation of list concatenation
Thus such typed APPEND would be correct and complete w.r.t.\ $S_{\rm APPEND}^0$,
and the need for an approximate specification disappears.
On the other hand,
to obtain a similar result for procedure ${\it insert}$ of
Ex.\,\ref{ex:inc-diag2} it is necessary to employ a type of sorted integer
lists,
which seems to be outside of the scope of known type systems for logic programs.
Often, while developing a program, the exact relations to be defined
should not be fixed in advance. This would mean taking some design decisions
too early.
For instance, beginning with $S_{\rm APPEND}^0$ (or with $S_{\rm APPEND}$) as
an exact
specification of an append program would lead to a program less efficient and
more complicated than APPEND.
A larger example is shown in \cite{drabent12.iclp}:
a program is derived by stepwise refinement,
and the semantics of (common predicates in) consecutive versions of the
program differ.
What does not change is an approximate specification (of the common predicates);
the correctness and completeness is preserved in all the versions.
This example suggests a generalization of the paradigm of program development
by semantics preserving program transformations
\cite{DBLP:journals/jlp/PettorossiP94}.
It shows that it is useful and natural to use transformations which instead
preserve correctness and completeness w.r.t.\ an approximate specification.
Importance of approximate specifications for declarative diagnosis is pointed
out in Sect.\,\ref{sec:dd}.
\section{Proving correctness}
\label{sec:correctness}
To prove correctness we use the following property
\cite {Clark79};
see \cite {DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05}
for further examples, explanations, references and discussion.
\begin{theorem}[Correctness]
\label{th:correctness}
A sufficient condition for a program $P$ to be correct w.r.t.\
a specification $S$ is
\nopagebreak
\vspace{-2ex}
\[
S\models P.
\]
\end{theorem}
So the sufficient condition states that,
for each ground instance
$
H\gets \seq B
$
of a clause of the program,
if $\seq B\in S$ then $H\in S$.
\begin{proof}
$S\models P$ means that $S$ is a Herbrand model of $P$, thus ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\subseteq S$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:split-corr}%
Consider a program SPLIT:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& s( [\,], [\,], [\,] ). \label{split1}\\
&& s( [X|X s], [X|Y s], Zs ) \gets s( X s, Z s, Y s ). \label{split2}
\end{eqnarray}
\newcommand*{\ensuremath{S}\xspace}{\ensuremath{S}\xspace}
Let $|l|$ denote the length of a list $l$.
A specification
\[
\ensuremath{S}\xspace = \{\, s(l, l_1, l_2) \mid
l, l_1, l_2 \mbox{ are lists, } 0\leq |l_1|-|l_2| \leq 1 \,\}
\]
describes
how the sizes of the last two arguments of $S$ are related.
It is easy to show that
the program is correct w.r.t.\ \ensuremath{S}\xspace, by Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}.
Consider a ground instance
$s( [h|t], [h|t_2], t_1)\gets s( t, t_1, t_2)$ of (\ref{split2}).
Assume $s(t, t_1, t_2)\in\ensuremath{S}\xspace$. Thus $ [h|t], [h|t_2], t_1$ are lists.
Let $m= |t_1|-|t_2|$. As $m\in\{0,1\}$, we have
$|[h|t_2]|-|t_1| = 1- m \in\{0,1\}$. So the head
$s( [h|t], [h|t_2], t_1)$ is in \ensuremath{S}\xspace.
The proof for (\ref{split1}) is trivial.
A stronger specification with respect to which SPLIT is correct is shown
below.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
To show that program APPEND is correct w.r.t.\ $S_{\rm APPEND}$ from
Ex.\,\ref{ex:spec-append},
take a $(H\gets B)\in ground({\rm APPEND})$ such that
$B = app(k,l,m)\in S_{\rm APPEND}$.
So $H = app(\,[h|k],l,[h|m]\,)$.
If $l$ or $[h|m]$ is a list then
$k,l,m$ are lists and $k*l=m$. So
$[h|k],l,[h|m]$ are lists and
$[h|k]*l=[h|m]$. Thus $H\in S_{\rm APPEND}$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:split-corr2}%
Now we show correctness of SPLIT w.r.t.\ a more precise specification
%
\[
S_{\rm SPLIT} =
\left\{\,
\begin{array}{l}
%
%
s([\seq[2n]t], [t_1,\cdots,t_{2n-1}], [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] ),
\\
s([\seq[2n+1]t], [t_1,\cdots,t_{2n+1}], [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] )
\end{array}
\,
\left|
\,
\begin{array}l
%
n\geq0,\\ \seq[2n+1] t\in {\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace \\
\end{array}
\right.\right\}
,
\]
where
$[t_k,\cdots,t_l]$ denotes the list $[t_k,t_{k+2},\ldots,t_l]$,
for $k,l$ being both odd or both even.
For (\ref{split1}) the proof is trivial.
Consider a ground instance $H\gets B$ of (\ref{split2}).
Assume $B\in S_{\rm SPLIT}$.
If
$B= s([\seq[2n]t], \linebreak[3]
[t_1,\cdots,t_{2n-1}],\linebreak[3] [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] )$
then
$H=s([t_0,\seq[2n]t], \linebreak[3]
[t_0,t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}], [t_1,\cdots,t_{2n-1}] )$,
for some $t_0$.
If $B= s([\seq[2n+1]t],\linebreak[3]
[t_1,\cdots,t_{2n+1}],\linebreak[3] [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] )$
then
$H= s([t_0,\seq[2n+1]t], [t_0,t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}], [t_1\cdots,t_{2n+1}] )$.
In both cases $H\in S_{\rm SPLIT}$.
(To see this, rename each $t_i$ as $t'_{i+1}$.)
\end{example}
%
Completeness of this correctness proving method is discussed in
Appendix
\ref{appendix:compl}.
\section{Proving completeness}
\label{sec:completeness}
We first introduce a notion of semi-completeness, and sufficient conditions
under which semi-completeness of a program implies its completeness.
The next subsection presents a sufficient condition for semi-completeness.
For cases where completeness does not follow from semi-completeness, we
present a way of proving completeness directly. This section is concluded by
sufficient conditions under which pruning of SLD-trees preserves
completeness.
\subsection{Semi-completeness}
Before discussing semi-completeness we present a few auxiliary notions,
which have been introduced in a context of proving program termination.
\begin{definition}
A {\bf level mapping} is a
function $|\ |\colon {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\to {\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}}\xspace$ assigning natural numbers to atoms.
A program $P$ is {\bf recurrent} {\em w.r.t.\ a level mapping}~$|\ |$
\cite{DBLP:journals/jlp/Bezem93,Apt-Prolog} if, in
every ground instance $H\gets\seq B\in ground(P)$ of its clause ($n\geq0$),
$|H|>|B_i|$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n$.
A program is {\em recurrent}
if it is recurrent w.r.t.\ some level mapping.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:acceptable}%
A program $P$ is {\bf acceptable} w.r.t.\ a specification $S$ and a level
mapping $|\ |$ if
$P$ is correct w.r.t.\ $S$, and for every
$H\gets\seq B\in ground(P)$
we have $|H|>|B_i|$ whenever $S\models B_1,\ldots,B_{i-1}$.
A program is {\em acceptable} if it is acceptable w.r.t.\ some level mapping
and some specification.
\end{definition}
This definition is more general than the original one
\cite{AP93,Apt-Prolog}
which uses a model of $P$, instead of a specification for which $P$ is
correct.
Both definitions are equivalent.%
\footnote{
They define the same programs to be acceptable.
More precisely,
a program $P$ is acceptable w.r.t.\
%
$|\ |$ and a specification $S$
iff, according to the original definition,
$P$ is acceptable w.r.t.\ $|\ |$ and a model $I$ of $P$.
(The ``only-if'' case holds for each model $I$ such that
${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\subseteq I\subseteq S$,
the ``if'' case for each $S$ such that ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\subseteq S\subseteq I$.)
%
} %
We now introduce a notion of semi-completeness. It may be seen as a step on
the way to proving completeness.
\begin{definition}
A program $P$ is {\bf semi-complete}
w.r.t.\ a specification $S$ if
$P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$ for
(cf.\ Df.\,\ref{def:corr:compl:aux})
any query $Q$ for which there exists a finite SLD-tree.
\end{definition}
Note that the existence of a finite SLD-tree means
that $P$ with $Q$ terminates under some selection rule.
For a semi-complete program, if a computation for a query $Q$
terminates then all the required by the specification answers for $Q$ have
been obtained.
Obviously, a complete program is semi-complete.
We also have:
\begin{proposition}[Completeness]
\label{prop:semi-compl}%
Let a program $P$ be semi-complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
The program is complete w.r.t\ $S$ if
\begin{enumerate}
\item
\label{prop:semi-compl:term}
for each query $A\in S$ there exists a finite SLD-tree, or
\item
\label{prop:semi-compl:recu}
the program is recurrent, or
\item
\label{prop:semi-compl:accept}
the program is acceptable
(w.r.t.\ a specification $S'$ possibly distinct from $S$).
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
Note that condition (\ref{prop:semi-compl:term}) is equivalent
to each $A\in S$ being an instance of a query $Q$ with a finite SLD-tree.
\begin{proof}
For a program $P$ semi-complete w.r.t.\ $S$, the first part of condition
(\ref{prop:semi-compl:term}) implies that
$P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$ for each query $A\in S$;
hence $S\subseteq {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$.
Condition (\ref{prop:semi-compl:recu}), or (\ref{prop:semi-compl:accept})
implies that for any ground query
each SLD-tree, respectively each LD-tree,
is finite \cite{Apt-Prolog}. Hence it implies
condition~(\ref{prop:semi-compl:term}).
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proving semi-completeness}
\label{sec:semi-compl}
We need the following notion.
\begin{definition}
A ground atom $H$ is
{\bf covered} {\em by a clause} $C$ w.r.t.\ a specification $S$ \cite{Shapiro.book}
if $H$ is the head of a ground instance
$
H\gets \seq B
$
($n\geq0$) of $C$, such that all the atoms $\seq B$ are in $S$.
A ground atom $H$ is {\em covered by a program} $P$ w.r.t.\ $S$
if it is covered w.r.t.\ $S$ by some clause $C\in P$.
A specification $S$ is {\em covered by a program} $P$
if each $H\in S$ is covered by $P$ w.r.t.\ $S$.
\end{definition}
For instance, given a specification
$S = \{ p(s^i(0))\mid i\geq0 \}$,
atom $p(s(0))$ is covered both by
$p(s(X))\gets p(X)$ and by
$p(X)\gets p(s(X))$.
Now we are ready to present a sufficient condition for semi-completeness,
which together with Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl}
provides a sufficient condition for completeness.
\begin{theorem}[Semi-completeness]
\label{th:completeness}%
If a specification $S$ is covered by a program $P$
then $P$ is semi-complete w.r.t.~$S$.
\end{theorem}
The proof
is presented in Appendix
\ref{appendix}. %
Note that the sufficient condition of Th.\,\ref{th:completeness}
is equivalent to $S\subseteq T_P(S)$;
the latter implies $S\subseteq {\it g f p}(T_P)$.
It is also equivalent to $S$ being a model of ONLY-IF$(P)$,
a theory used in defining the completion of $P$
(see e.g.\ \cite{Doets} or \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05} for a definition).
\begin{example}
\label{ex:split-compl}%
We show that program SPLIT from Ex.\,\ref{ex:split-corr} is complete w.r.t.
the specification from Ex.\,\ref{ex:split-corr2},
\[
S_{\rm SPLIT} =
\left\{\,
\begin{array}{l}
s([\seq[2n]t], [t_1,\cdots,t_{2n-1}], [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] ),
\\
s([\seq[2n+1]t], [t_1,\cdots,t_{2n+1}], [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] )
\end{array}
\,
\left|
\,
\begin{array}l
n\geq0,\\ \seq[2n+1] t\in {\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace \\
\end{array}
\right.\right\}
,
\]
where
$[t_k,\cdots,t_l]$ denotes the list $[t_k,t_{k+2},\ldots,t_l]$,
for $k,l$ being both odd or both even.
Atom
$s([\,],[\,],[\,])\in S_{\rm SPLIT}$ is covered by clause (\ref{split1}).
For $n>0$,
any atom
$A= \linebreak[3]
s([\seq[2n]t], \linebreak[3]
[t_1,\cdots,t_{2n-1}],\linebreak[3] [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] )$
is covered by an instance of (\ref{split2}) with a body
$B= \linebreak[3]
s([t_2,\ldots,t_{2n}], \linebreak[3]
[t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] ,\linebreak[3] [t_3,\cdots,t_{2n-1}]
)$.
Similarly,
for $n\geq0$ and any atom
$A= s([\seq[2n+1]t],\linebreak[3]
[t_1,\cdots,t_{2n+1}],\linebreak[3] [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}] )$,
the corresponding body is
$B= s([t_2,\ldots,t_{2n+1}],\linebreak[3] [t_2,\cdots,t_{2n}],
\linebreak[3] [t_3,\cdots,t_{2n+1}] )$.
In both cases, $B\in S_{\rm SPLIT}$.
(To see this, rename each $t_i$ as $t'_{i-1}$.)
So $S_{\rm SPLIT}$ is covered by SPLIT.
Thus SPLIT is semi-complete w.r.t.\ $S_{\rm SPLIT}$, by
Th.\,\ref{th:completeness}.
Now by Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl} the program is complete, as it is
recurrent under the level mapping
\[
| \, s(t,t_1,t_2) | = |t|,
\quad \mbox{where} \quad
\begin{array}[t]{l}
|\, [h|t]\, | = 1+|t|, \\
|f(\seq t)| = 0 \ \mbox{ where $n\geq0$ and $f$ is not }[\ | \ ], \\
\end{array}
\]
(for any ground terms $h,t,\seq t$, and any function symbol $f$).
\end{example}
\begin{example}
Consider program APPEND and specification $S_{\rm APPEND}^0$ from
Ex.\,\ref{ex:spec-append}.
We encourage the reader to check that each
$A\in S_{\rm APPEND}^0$ is covered (by APPEND w.r.t.\ $S_{\rm APPEND}^0$).
Hence by Th.\,\ref{th:completeness} the program is semi-complete
(w.r.t.\ $S_{\rm APPEND}^0$). Now its completeness follows by
Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl}, as the program is recurrent under the level
mapping $|app(t,t_1,t_2) | = |t|$, where $|t|$ is as in the
Ex.\,\ref{ex:split-compl}.
\end{example}
The notion of semi-completeness is tailored for finite programs. An SLD-tree
for an infinite program may be infinite, but with all branches finite. Then
a slight generalization of Th.\,\ref{th:completeness}
applies (Appendix, Prop.\,\ref{prop:compl:infi}, Ex.\,\ref{ex:prop:compl:infi}).
\newcommand{\propcompletenessinfinite}
{%
If all the atoms from a specification $S$ are covered w.r.t.~$S$
by a program $P$,
and there exists an SLD-tree for $P$ and a query $Q$ with no infinite
branches then $P$ is complete for $Q$.
}
\subsection{Proving completeness directly}
\label{sec:completeness-directly}
Semi-completeness and completeness are declarative properties of programs.
However
the sufficient conditions for completeness of
Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl}(\ref{prop:semi-compl:term}) and
\ref{prop:semi-compl}(\ref{prop:semi-compl:accept}) are not declarative.
The former refers explicitly to an operational notion of SLD-tree.
The latter employs the notion of acceptable program, which depends
on the order of atoms in program clauses, and is related to LD-resolution;
this should not be considered as a purely logical reading of formulae.
Only condition (\ref{prop:semi-compl:recu}) of
Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl} can be considered declarative,
as it solely depends on logical reading of program clauses.
However, this condition is often inapplicable, as many practical programs are
not recurrent.
Note that the sufficient condition for semi-completeness of
Th.\,\ref{th:completeness} is declarative.
We are interested in declarative reasoning about logic programs.
So we present another declarative sufficient condition for completeness.
It is a reformulation of Th.\,6.1 from \cite{Deransart.Maluszynski93}.
It is applicable in cases where completeness does not follow from
semi-completeness.
We first generalize the notion of level mapping
by allowing that it is a {\em partial}
function $|\ |\colon {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\hookrightarrow {\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}}\xspace$ assigning natural numbers to some atoms.
\begin{definition}
A ground atom $H$ is {\bf recurrently covered}
by a program $P$ w.r.t.\ a specification $S$ and a level mapping
$|\ |\colon {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\hookrightarrow {\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}}\xspace$
if $H$ is the head of a ground instance
$
H\gets \seq B
$
($n\geq0$)
of a clause of the program, such that
$|H|, |B_1|, \ldots |B_n|$ are defined,
$\seq B\in S$,
and $|H|>|B_i|$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n$.
\end{definition}
For instance, given a specification
$S = \{\, p(s^i(0))\mid i\geq0 \,\}$,
atom $p(s(0))$ is recurrently covered by a program
$\{\, p(s(X))\gets p(X). \}$ under a level mapping for which
$|p(s^i(0))|=i$.
No atom is recurrently covered
by a program \mbox{$\{\, p(X)\gets p(X). \}$}.
Obviously, if $H$ is recurrently covered by $P$ then it is covered by $P$.
\begin{theorem}[Completeness 2]
\label{th:completeness:recu}%
If, under some level mapping $|\ |\colon {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\hookrightarrow {\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}}\xspace$,
all the atoms from a specification $S$ are
recurrently covered by a program $P$ w.r.t.\ $S$
then $P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}\nopagebreak
Note first that $|A|$ is defined for all $A\in S$.
We show that $A\in {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ for each $A\in S$, by induction on $|A|$.
Let $n\geq0$,
assume that $B\in {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ whenever $B\in S$ and $|B|<n$.
Take an $A\in S$ with $|A|=n$.
As $A$ is recurrently covered, there is a clause instance $A\gets\seq[m] B$
($m\geq0$)
with $B_i\in S$ and $|B_i|<n$ for each $i$. So $\seq[m] B\in {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$,
and $A\in {\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:graph}
Consider a directed graph $E$. As a specification for a program describing
reachability in $E$, take
$S = S_p\cup S_e$,
where
$
S_p = \{\, p(t,u) \mid
\mbox{there is a path from } t \mbox{ to } u \mbox{ in } E \,\}
$,
and
$
S_e = \{\, e(t,u) \mid (t,u)\mbox{ is an edge in } E \,\}
$.
Let $P$ consist of
a procedure $p$:
\[
\begin{array}[t]{l}
p(X,X). \\
p(X,Z) \gets e(X,Y),\, p(Y,Z). \\
\end{array}
\]
and a procedure $e$,
which is a set of unary clauses describing the edges of
the graph. Assume the latter is complete w.r.t.\ $S_e$.
Notice that when $E$ has cycles then
infinite SLD-trees cannot be avoided, and
completeness of $P$ cannot be shown by
Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl}.
To apply Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:recu},
let us define a level mapping for the elements of $S$ such that
$|e(t,u)| = 0$ and
$|p(t,u)|$ is the length of a shortest path in $E$ from $t$ to $u$
(so $|p(t,t)|=0$).
Consider an atom $p(t,u)\in S$ where $t\neq u$.
Let
$t=t_0,\seq t=u$ be a shortest path from $t$ to $u$.
Then $e(t,t_1),p(t_1,u)\in S$,
$|p(t,u)|=n$, $|e(t,t_1)|=0$, and $|p(t_1,u)|=n-1$.
Thus $p(t,u)$ is recurrently covered by $P$ w.r.t.\ $S$ and $|\ |$.
The same trivially holds for the remaining atoms of $S$, as they are
instances of unary clauses of $P$.
By Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:recu}, $P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
Note that $P$ is not correct w.r.t.\ $S$, unless {\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace is the set of nodes of $E$
\end{example}
Completeness of the presented completeness proof methods is discussed in
Appendix
\ref{appendix:compl}.
In particular it is shown that, in a certain sense, the sufficient
condition for semi-completeness of Th.\,\ref{th:completeness}
is a necessary condition for completeness.
\section{Pruning}
\label{sec:pruning}
Pruning some parts of SLD-trees is often used to improve efficiency of programs.
In Prolog it is implemented by using the cut, the if-then-else construct, or
by built-ins, like {\tt once/1}.
Pruning preserves the correctness of a logic program, it also preserves
termination under a given selection rule,
but may violate the program's completeness.
Consequently,
the answers of a program $P$ executed with pruning may be correct w.r.t.\
a specification $S$ for which $P$ is not correct;
the related programming technique is known as ``red cuts''
\cite{Sterling-Shapiro}.
This section deals with reasoning about the answers of programs with pruning.
The focus is on proving completeness.
We begin with a formalization of pruning.
Then we introduce a sufficient condition for completeness,
and present examples.
We conclude with an approach to prove correctness of the answers of pruned trees.
\subsection{Pruned SLD-trees}
By a {\bf pruned SLD-tree} for a program $P$ and a query $Q$ we mean a tree
with the root $Q$
which is a connected subgraph of an SLD-tree for $P$ and $Q$.
By an {\em answer} of a pruned SLD-tree we mean the computed answer of a
successful SLD-derivation which is a branch of the tree.
We will say that a pruned SLD-tree $T$ with root $Q$
is {\bf complete} w.r.t.\ a specification $S$
if, for any ground $Q\theta$,
$S\models Q\theta$ implies that $Q\theta$ is an instance of an answer of $T$.
Informally, such a tree produces all the answers for $Q$ required by $S$.
To facilitate reasoning about the answers of pruned SLD-trees,
we will view pruning as applying only certain clauses
while constructing the children of a node.
So we introduce subsets $\seq\Pi$ of $P$. The intention is that
for each node the clauses of one $\Pi_i$ are used.
Programs $\seq\Pi$ may be not disjoint.%
\input{diagram-pruning}
\[
{\mytreepicture[i]}
\]
\begin{definition}
Given programs $\seq{\Pi}$ ($n>0$),
a {\bf c-selection rule} is a function%
\
assigning to a query $Q'$ an atom $A$
in $Q'$ and one of the programs $\emptyset,\seq{\Pi}$.
A {\bf csSLD-tree} (cs for clause selection) for a query
$Q$ and programs
$\seq\Pi$, via a c-selection rule $R$,
is constructed as an SLD-tree, but
for each node its children are constructed using the program selected by the
c-selection rule.
An {\em answer} of the csSLD-tree is the answer of a successful derivation
which is a branch of the tree.
\end{definition}
A c-selection rule may choose the empty program, thus
making a given node a leaf.
Note that program $\Pi_i$ selected for a node $Q'$ may contain clauses
inapplicable in constructing the children of the node.
A csSLD-tree for $Q$ and $\seq\Pi$ is a pruned SLD-tree
for $Q$ and $\bigcup_i\Pi_i$. Conversely, for each pruned SLD-tree $T$
for $Q$ and a (finite) program $P$ there exist $n>0$, and
$\seq\Pi\subseteq P$ such that
$T$ is a csSLD-tree for $Q$ and $\seq\Pi$.
It may be needed that different atoms or programs are selected for repeated
occurrences of the same query.
So, formally, a c-selection rule is a function of a sequence of queries
(a path in a tree) $Q,\ldots,Q'$.
%
Also, strictly speaking, not an atom, but
an occurrence of an atom in $Q'$ is selected.
In some cases it may be convenient to treat a c-selection rule as a function
of not only the sequence of queries, but also of
(the not pruned part of) the subtree rooted at $Q'$
(as often the decision about pruning is taken after a part of the subtree has
been computed).
\begin{example}
\label{ex:overlap}
Consider a Prolog program
\[
\newcommand{\mathrel{\texttt{:-}}}{\mathrel{\texttt{:-}}}
c(L1,L2) \mathrel{\texttt{:-}} m(X,L1), m(X,L2), !.
\qquad
\begin{array}[t]{l}
m(X, [X|\_] \, ). \qquad
m(X, [\_|L] \, )\mathrel{\texttt{:-}} m(X,L). \\
\end{array}
\]
which is a logic program $P$ with the cut added.
Let $\Pi_1 = P$ and \ $\Pi_2=\{m(X, [X|\_] \, ).\}$.
Consider a query $Q=c( [\seq[k] t], [\seq u])$, the SLD-tree $T$ for $Q$ via the
Prolog selection rule, and the csSLD-tree $T'$ which is
$T$ pruned due to the cut.
Note that the single cut may prune many subtrees of $T$.
If $Q$ does not succeed then $T'=T$.
Otherwise $T'$ is $T$ without all the nodes to the right of the leftmost
successful branch.
So in $T'$, for a node $Q$ with an $m$-atom selected, $\Pi_2$ is selected
whenever there is a success in the subtree rooted in the first child of $Q$;
otherwise $\Pi_1$ is selected.
The c-selection rule of $T'$ can be expressed as a function of a node:
$\Pi_2$ is selected for a node
$Q_i= m(X, [\SEQ t i k]), m(X, [\seq u])$ in $T'$
if $t_i$ is unifiable with some element of $[\seq u]$.
Otherwise $\Pi_1$ is selected for $Q_i$.
For a node of the form $Q'_j= m(t, [\SEQ u j n])$,
program $\Pi_2$ is selected if $t$ is unifiable with $u_j$,
otherwise $\Pi_1$ is selected.
\end{example}
In this example, determining the c-selection rule corresponding to the cut
was not straightforward.
Simpler cases are provided by Examples
\ref{ex:adam}, \ref{ex:pruning1}, \ref{ex:pruning2} below.
\subsection{Completeness of pruned trees}
We begin with an example illustrating some difficulties related to
completeness of pruned csSLD-trees. Then, after introducing some auxiliary
notions, a sufficient condition for completeness is presented.
Some example completeness proofs follow.
We conclude with an example of a completeness proof in a case for which the
sufficient condition is not applicable directly.
\begin{example}
\label{ex:prune}%
We show that completeness of each of $\seq\Pi$ is not sufficient for
completeness of a csSLD-tree for $\seq\Pi$.
Consider a program $P$:
\vspace*{-1.5\abovedisplayskip}
\[
\hspace{-3em}
\begin{minipage}{.35\textwidth}%
\begin{eqnarray}
&&
\label{Excl1}
q(X)\gets p(Y,X). \\
&&
\label{Excl2}
p(Y,0).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{minipage}
\qquad\quad
\begin{minipage}{.4\textwidth}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Excl3} &&
p(a,s(X))\gets p(a,X). \\
\label{Excl4} &&
p(b,s(X))\gets p(b,X).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{minipage}
\]
and programs $\Pi_1= \{(\ref{Excl1}), (\ref{Excl2}), (\ref{Excl4})\}$,
$\Pi_2= \{(\ref{Excl1}), (\ref{Excl2}), (\ref{Excl3})\}$,
As a specification for completeness consider
$S_0=\{\,q(s^j(0)) \mid j\geq0 \,\}$.
Each of the programs $\Pi_1, \Pi_2,P$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S_0$.
Assume a c-selection rule $R$ choosing alternatively $\Pi_1,\Pi_2$ along
each branch of a tree.
Then the csSLD-tree for $q(s^j(0))\in S_0$ via $R$ (where $j>2$)
has no answers,
thus the tree is not complete w.r.t.\ $S_0$.
Similarly the csSLD-tree for $q(X)$ is not complete.
\end{example}
Consider programs $P,\seq\Pi$ and specifications $S,\seq S$, such that
$P\supseteq\bigcup_{i=1}^n\Pi_i$ and $S=\bigcup_{i=1}^n S_i$.
The intention is that each $S_i$ describes which answers are to be produced by
using $\Pi_i$ in the first resolution step.
We will call $\seq {\Pi}$, $\seq S$ a {\bf split} (of $P$ and $S$).
\begin{definition}
\label{def:suitable}
Let $\S =\seq {\Pi}$, $\seq S$ be a split, and $S=\bigcup S_i$.
Specification $S_i$ is {\bf suitable} for an atom $A$
w.r.t.\ \S
when no instance of $A$ is in $S\setminus S_i$.
(In other words, when $ground(A)\cap S \subseteq S_i$.)
We also say that a program $\Pi_i$ is {\bf suitable} for $A$ w.r.t.\ \S
when $S_i$ is.
A c-selection rule is {\bf compatible} with \S if for each non-empty query
$Q'$ it selects an atom $A$
and a program $\Pi$, such that
\quad
-- $\Pi\in\{\seq\Pi\}$ is suitable for $A$ w.r.t.\ \S, or
\quad
-- none of $\seq\Pi$ is suitable for $A$ w.r.t.\ \S and $\Pi=\emptyset$
(so $Q'$ is a leaf).
A csSLD-tree for $\seq {\Pi}$ via a c-selection rule compatible with \S
is said to be {\bf weakly compatible} with \S.
The tree is {\bf compatible} with \S when
for each its nonempty node some $\Pi_i$ is selected.
\end{definition}
The intuition is that
when $\Pi_i$ is suitable for $A$
then $S_i$ is a fragment of $S$ sufficient to deal with $A$.
It describes all the answers for query $A$ required by~$S$.
The reason of incompleteness of the trees in Ex.\,\ref{ex:prune}
may be understood
as selecting a $\Pi_i$ not suitable for the selected atom.
Take $\S=\Pi_1,\Pi_2, S_0\cup S_1',S_0\cup S_2'$,
where
$S_1' = \{\,p(b,s^i(0)) \mid i\geq0 \,\}$ and
$S_2' = \{\,p(a,s^i(0)) \mid i\geq0 \,\}$.
In the incomplete trees,
$\Pi_1$ is selected for an atom $A=p(a,u)$,
or $\Pi_2$ is selected for an atom $B=p(b,u)$ (where $u\in{\ensuremath{\cal{T U}}}\xspace$).
However
$\Pi_1$ is not suitable for $A$
whenever $A$ has an instance in $S$
(as then $ground(A)\cap S \subseteq S_2'$,
thus $ground(A)\cap S \not\subseteq S_0\cup S_1'$);
similarly for $\Pi_2$ and $B$.
When $\Pi_i$ is suitable for $A$ then if
each atom of $S_i$ is covered by $\Pi_i$
(w.r.t.\ $S$)
then using for $A$ only the clauses of $\Pi_i$ does not impair
completeness w.r.t.~$S$:
\newcommand{\thcompletenesspruned}[1]
{%
Let $P\supseteq\bigcup_{i=1}^n\Pi_i$ (where $n>0$) be a program,
$S=\bigcup_{i=1}^n S_i$ a specification, and
%
$T\!$ a csSLD-tree for $\seq\Pi$.
If
\begin{enumerate}
\item
\label{prop:cssld.complete.cond0}
for each $i=1,\ldots,n$,
all the atoms from $S_i$ are covered by $\Pi_i$ w.r.t.\ $S$, and
\item
\label{prop:cssld.complete.cond1}
$T$ is compatible with $\seq\Pi,\seq S$,
\item
\label{prop:cssld.complete.cond2}
\begin{enumerate}
%
\item
\label{prop:cssld.complete.cond2a}
#1
\item
\label{prop:cssld.complete.cond2b}
%
program $P$ is recurrent, or
\item
\label{prop:cssld.complete.cond2c}
$P$ is acceptable and
$T$ is built under the Prolog selection rule
%
%
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
then $T$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
} %
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:completeness:pruned}%
\label{prop:cssld.complete}%
\thcompletenesspruned{ $T$ is finite, or}
\end{theorem}
See Appendix \ref{appendix} for a proof.
Note that in \ref{prop:cssld.complete.cond2c}
the program may be acceptable w.r.t.\ a specification distinct from $S$.
\begin{example}
\label{ex:adam}
A Prolog program \cite{clocksin-mellish-1ed}
\[
{\tt
n o p(a d a m,0) \texttt{ :- !.}
\qquad
n o p(eve,0) \texttt{ :- !.}
\qquad
n o p(X,2).
}
\]
is an example of difficulties and dangers of using the cut in Prolog.
(We do not discuss here the (in)correctness of the program.)
Due to the two occurrences of the cut, for an atomic query $A$
only the first clause with the head unifiable with $A$ will
be used.
The program can be seen as logic program $P=\Pi_1\cup\Pi_2\cup\Pi_3$ executed
with pruning, where (for $i=1,2,3$)
$\Pi_i$ is the $i$-th clause of the program
with the cut removed.
The intended meaning is $S=S_1\cup S_2\cup S_3$, where
$S_1 = \{ n o p(a d a m,0) \}$,
$S_2 = \{ n o p(eve,0) \}$, and
$S_3 = \left\{ \rule{0pt}{1.9ex}
n o p(t,2)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \mid t\not\in\{a d a m,eve\} \right\}$.
Note that all the atoms from $S_i$ are covered by $\Pi_i$ (for $i=1,2,3$).
Let \S be $\Pi_1,\Pi_2,\Pi_3,S_1, S_2, S_3$.
Consider a query $A=n o p(t,Y)$ with a ground $t$.
If $t=a d a m$ then only $\Pi_1$ is suitable for $A$ w.r.t.\ \S,
as $ground(A)\cap S = S_1$.
If $t=eve$ then only $\Pi_2$ is suitable.
For $t\not\in\{a d a m,eve\}$ the suitable program is $\Pi_3$.
So for a query $A$ the pruning due to the cuts in the program results in
selecting a suitable $\Pi_i$, and the obtained
csSLD-tree is compatible with \S.
By Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned}
the tree is complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
For a query $n o p(X,Y)$ or $n o p(X,0)$ only the first clause, i.e.\ $\Pi_1$,
is used. However $\Pi_1$ is not suitable for the query (w.r.t.\ \S),
and the csSLD-tree is not compatible with \S. The premises of
Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned} do not hold, and
the tree is not complete (w.r.t.\ S).
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:pruning1}%
The following program SAT0 is a simplification of a fragment of the SAT solver
of \cite{howe.king.tcs}
discussed in \cite{drabent12.iclp}.
Pruning is crucial for the efficiency and usability of the original program.
\begin{quote}
\mbox{}\hspace{-3em}
\begin{minipage}[t]{.5\textwidth}%
\vspace{-3\abovedisplayskip}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&
\label{SCcl1}
p( P{\mbox{\tt-}} P, \, [\,] ).
\\
&&
\label{SCcl2}
p( V{\mbox{\tt-}} P, \, [B|T] ) \gets q( V{\mbox{\tt-}} P, \, [B|T] ). \\
&&
\label{SCcl3}
p( V{\mbox{\tt-}} P, \, [B|T] ) \gets q( B, \, [V{\mbox{\tt-}} P|T] ).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{.4\textwidth}%
\vspace{-3\abovedisplayskip}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&
\label{SCcl4}
q( V{\mbox{\tt-}} P, \, \mbox{\LARGE\_}\, )\gets V=P. \\
&&
\label{SCcl5}
q(\, \mbox{\LARGE\_}\, , \, [A|T] )\gets p( A, T). \\
&&
\label{SCcl6}
P = P.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{minipage}
\end{quote}
The program is complete w.r.t.\ a specification
\[
S =
\left.\left
\{\,
\begin{array}{l}
p(t_0{\mbox{\tt-}} u_0,[t_1{\mbox{\tt-}} u_1,\ldots, t_n{\mbox{\tt-}} u_n]), \\
q(t_0{\mbox{\tt-}} u_0,[t_1{\mbox{\tt-}} u_1,\ldots, t_n{\mbox{\tt-}} u_n])
\end{array}
\, \right| \,
\begin{array}{l}
n\geq0,
\ t_0,\ldots,t_n,u_0,\ldots,u_n \in\mathbb{T},
\\
t_i=u_i \mbox{ for some } i\in \{0,\ldots,n\}\,
\end{array}
\right
\}\cup S_=
\]
where $\mathbb T = \{{\it false}, {\it true}\}\subseteq{\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace$, and
$S_= = \{\, t{=}t \mid t\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace \,\}$.
We omit a completeness proof,
mentioning only that SAT0 is recurrent w.r.t.\ a level mapping
$|p(t,u)| = 2|u|+2$,
$|q(t,u)| = 2|u|+1$, $|{=}(t,u)|=0$,
where $|u|$ for $u\in {\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace$ is defined in Ex.\,\ref{ex:split-compl}.
The first case of pruning is related to redundancy within
(\ref{SCcl2}), (\ref{SCcl3});
both
$\Pi_1={\rm SAT0}\setminus \{(\ref{SCcl3})\}$ and
$\Pi_2={\rm SAT0}\setminus \{(\ref{SCcl2})\}$
are complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
For any selected atom at most one of (\ref{SCcl2}), (\ref{SCcl3}) is to be
used, and the choice is dynamic.
As the following reasoning is independent from this choice, we omit further
explanations.
So in
such pruned SLD-trees
the children of each node are constructed using one of programs
$\Pi_1, \Pi_2$.
Thus they are csSLD-trees for $\Pi_1, \Pi_2$.
They are compatible with $\S= \Pi_1, \Pi_2, S, S$
(as $\Pi_1, \Pi_2$ are trivially suitable for any $A$, due to
$S\setminus S_i=\emptyset$ in Df.\,\ref{def:suitable}).
Each atom of $S$ is covered w.r.t.\ $S$ both by $\Pi_1$ and $\Pi_2$.
As SAT0 is recurrent,
by Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned},
each such tree is complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:pruning2}%
We continue with program SAT0 and specification $S$ from the previous
example, and add
a second case of pruning.
When the selected atom is of the form $A=q(s_1,s_2)$ with a ground $s_1$ then
only one of
clauses (\ref{SCcl4}), (\ref{SCcl5}) is needed --
(\ref{SCcl4}) when $s_1$ is of the form $t{\mbox{\tt-}} t$, and (\ref{SCcl5})
otherwise.
The other clause can be abandoned without losing the completeness w.r.t.\ $S$.%
\footnote
{
The same holds for $A$ of the form $q(s_{11}{\mbox{\tt-}} s_{11},s_2)$, or
$q(s_{11}{\mbox{\tt-}} s_{12},s_2)$ with non-unifiable $s_{11}$, $s_{12}$.
The pruning is implemented using the if-then-else construct in
Prolog: \
{\tt q(V-P,[A|T]) :- V=P -> true ; p(A,T).}
(And\,
{\tt p(V-P,[B|T]) :- non{}var(V) -> q(V-P,[B|T]) ; q(B,[V-P|T])}\,
implements the first case of pruning.)
}%
Actually, SAT0 is included in a bigger program, say $P={\rm SAT0}\cup\Pi_0$.
We skip the details of $\Pi_0$, let us only state that $P$ is recurrent,
$\Pi_0$ does not
contain any clause for $p$ or for $q$, and that
$P$ is complete w.r.t.\ a specification $S'=S\cup S_0$ where
$S_0$ does not contain any $p$- or $q$-atom.
(Hence each atom of $S_0$ is covered by $\Pi_0$ w.r.t.\ $S'$.)
%
To formally describe the trees for $P$ resulting from both cases of pruning,
consider the following programs and specifications:
\[
\begin{tabular}[t]{l @{\ \ }l}
$\Pi_1 = \{(\ref{SCcl1}),(\ref{SCcl2})\}$, \
$\Pi_2 = \{(\ref{SCcl1}),(\ref{SCcl3})\}$,
& $S_1=S_2=S\cap \{\,p(s,u)\mid s,u\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace\,\}$,
\\
$\Pi_3 = \{(\ref{SCcl4})\}$,
& $S_3=S\cap\{\,q(t{\mbox{\tt-}} t,s)\mid t,s\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace \,\}$,
\\
$\Pi_4 = \{(\ref{SCcl5})\}$,
& $S_4= S\cap\{\,q(t{\mbox{\tt-}} u,s)\mid t,u,s\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H U}}}\xspace,t\neq u \,\}$,
\\
$\Pi_5 = \{(\ref{SCcl6})\}$,
& $S_5 = S_=$.
\end{tabular}
\]
Let \S be $\Pi_0,\ldots,\Pi_5,S_0,\ldots,S_5$.
Each atom from $S_i$ is covered by $\Pi_i$ w.r.t.\ $S$ (for $i=0,\ldots,5$).
For each $q$-atom with its first argument ground,
$\Pi_3$ or $\Pi_4$ (or both) is suitable.
For each remaining atom from {\ensuremath{\cal{T B}}}\xspace,
(at least) one of programs $\Pi_0,\Pi_1,\Pi_2,\Pi_5$ is suitable.
Consider a pruned SLD-tree $T$ for $P$ (employing the two cases of pruning
described above).
Assume that each $q$-atom selected in $T$ has its first argument ground.
Then $T$ is a csSLD-tree compatible with \S.
From Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned} it follows that $T$ is complete
w.r.t.\ $S$.
The restriction on the selected $q$-atoms can be
implemented by means of Prolog delays. This can be done in such a way
that floundering is avoided for the intended initial queries
\cite{howe.king.tcs}.
So the obtained pruned trees are as $T$ above, and
the pruning preserves completeness of the program.
\end{example}
\subsubsection{Sufficient condition not applicable directly}
Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned} has an additional consequence.
Not only $T$ but also any its subtree is complete w.r.t.\ $S$
(as the subtree satisfies the premises of Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned}).
So the theorem is not (directly) applicable when a csSLD-tree is complete,
but pruning removes some answers for a query within the tree
(cf.\ Ex.\,\ref{ex:compl.pruning.inapplicable}). We show how in such case
completeness can be proved by splitting the specification into subsets to
which Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned} is applicable
(cf.\ Ex.\,\ref{ex:pruning.proved}).
\begin{example}
\label{ex:compl.pruning.inapplicable}
Consider the
program $P$ from Ex.\,\ref{ex:overlap}.
Procedure $p$ of $P$ is complete w.r.t.\ a specification
\[
S_p = \left\{\, c(l_1,l_2)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \: \left|
\begin{tabular}{@{\ }l@{}}
$l_1,l_2$ are lists with\\ a common element
\end{tabular}\!
\right.\,\right\}.
\]
The pruning does not impair completeness for ground queries of the form
$Q=c(t_1,t_2)$.
To apply Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned} to prove the completeness,
each atom of $S_P$ has to be covered by the first clause of $P$ w.r.t.\ $S$.
Hence a specification $S = S_p\cup S_m$ is needed where
$S_m \supseteq \{\, m(t_i,[\seq t])\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \mid n>0,\ 1\leq i \leq n \,\}$.
Consider now a pruned tree for such $Q$, and its subtree $T''$ rooted at
$Q'= m(X,l_1), m(X,l_2)$.
The subtree is not complete whenever $l_1,l_2$ have more than one common
element.
Thus for each such case Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned} is inapplicable.
(We skip a longer justification that it is not applicable in most cases where
the lists have one common element.)
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:pruning.proved}
The previous example shows a case where completeness of pruned trees
w.r.t.\ a specification cannot be shown by Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned}.
However completeness of the pruned trees w.r.t.\ $S_p$ can be shown by
splitting the specification into subsets.
Consider the same program $P$,
ground lists $l_1=[\seq[k] t],\ l_2=[\seq u]$ with a common element.
We construct a specification $S'$ sufficient to prove
(by Th.\ref{th:completeness}) that
$c(l_1,l_2)$ is an answer of $P$.
Note that there exist
a term $t$ and indices $g,h$ such that $t=t_g=u_h$,
no $t_i$ is a member of $l_2$ for $i=1,\ldots,g-1$, and
$u_j\neq t$ for $j=1,\ldots,h-1$. Let
$S' = \{\, c(l_1,l_2) \,\} \cup S'_m$ where
\[
S'_m =
\{\,
m(t,[\SEQ t i k]) \mid 1\leq i \leq g
\,\} \cup
\{\,
m(t,[\SEQ u j n]) \mid 1\leq j \leq h
\,\}.
\]
Informally, $S'$ may be understood as the subset of ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ needed to obtain
$c(l_1,l_2)$,
by means of the clauses involved in a pruned tree for $c(l_1,l_2)$.
Let $\S = \Pi_1,\Pi_2,S_1,S_2$, where $\Pi_i$ are as in Ex.\,\ref{ex:overlap},
$S_1=S'$,
$S_2= \{\,
m(t,[\SEQ t g k]),\ \linebreak[3]
m(t,[\SEQ u h n])
\,\}
$.
All the atoms from $S_i$ are covered by $\Pi_i$ w.r.t.\ $S'$ (for $i=1,2$).
Consider the csSLD-tree $T'$ for the (ground) query $Q = c(l_1,l_2)$.
From the description in Ex.\,\ref{ex:overlap} of the c-selection rule,
it follows that whenever $\Pi_2$ is selected together with an atom $A$ in $T'$
then $A= m(X,[\SEQ t g k])$ (for some variable $X$) or $A= m(t,[\SEQ u h n])$.
In both cases $ground(A)\cap S' \subseteq S_2$.
Thus $T'$ is compatible with \S and, as it is finite,
by Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:pruned} $T'$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S'$.
It follows that, for each $Q\in S_p$, the pruned tree is complete w.r.t.
$\{Q\}$.
Hence for each ground query of the form $Q=m(s_1,s_2)$
the csSLD-tree for $Q$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S_p$.
\end{example}
\subsubsection{Another sufficient condition for completeness}
By generalizing
Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:recu} to pruned SLD-trees, we obtain a sufficient
condition for completeness which it does not require that the trees are finite.
See Appendix \ref{appendix} for a proof.
\newcommand{\propcompletenesspruned}
{%
Let $P \supseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^n\Pi_i$ (\/$n>0$) be a program,
$S=\bigcup_{i=1}^n S_i$ a specification,
$|\ |\colon {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\hookrightarrow {\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}}\xspace$ a level mapping, and
%
$T\!$ a csSLD-tree for $\seq\Pi$.
If
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$T$ is compatible with $\seq\Pi,\seq S$,
\item
each atom from $S_i$ is recurrently covered by $\Pi_i$ w.r.t.\ $S$
and $|\ |$,
for each $i=1,\ldots,n$,
\nopagebreak
\end{enumerate}
\nopagebreak
then $T$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
}
\enlargethispage*{3ex}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:cssld.complete2}%
\propcompletenesspruned
\pagebreak[3]
\end{proposition}
\begin{example}
Consider the program $P$, specification $S$ and the level mapping $|\ |$ from
Ex.\,\ref{ex:graph}.
Consider a c-selection rule $R$ which selects the
first atom of the query, and if the atom is of the form
$p(t,t)$ it selects $\Pi_1=\{\, p(X,X) \,\}$,
if it is of the form $p(t,u)$ with distinct ground $t,u$ then it selects
$\Pi_2=\{\, p(X,Z) \gets e(X,Y),\, p(Y,Z) \,\} $,
otherwise the whole program is selected, $\Pi_3=P$.
Let $S_1=\{\, p(t,t) \mid t \mbox{ is a node of } E \,\}$,
\linebreak[3]%
\mbox{$S_2=\{\, p(t,u)\in S \mid t\neq u \,\}$}, $S_3=S$.
Note that $R$ is compatible with $\S= \Pi_1,\Pi_2,\Pi_3, S_1,S_2,S_3$
(as in the first case
$ground(p(t,t))\cap S = S_1$, and in the second case
$\{p(t,u)\}\cap S = S_2$).
{\sloppy\par}
From the reasoning in Ex.\,\ref{ex:graph} it follows that each atom from $S_i$
is recurrently covered by $\Pi_i$ w.r.t.\ $S$, for $i=1,2,3$.
Thus by Prop.\,\ref{prop:cssld.complete2},
any csSLD-tree for $P$ via $R$ is complete w.r.t.\ $S$.
Note that the tree may have infinite branches.
\end{example}
\subsection{Correctness of answers of pruned trees}
The answers of pruned trees are, obviously, logical consequences of the program.
However, it may happen that, due to pruning, not all such consequences are
obtained.
This feature is sometimes used in Prolog programming; it is called ``red cuts''
\cite{Sterling-Shapiro}.
In this section we show how to characterize more precisely the answers in
such cases. We present a sufficient condition for the answers of csSLD-trees to
be correct (cf.\ Df.\,\ref{def:corr:compl:aux}),
w.r.t.\ a specification for which the program may be not correct.
Informally, the idea is to apply the condition of
Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}
only to those instances of program clauses which were employed in the pruned
trees.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:cssld.correct}
Let $T$ be a csSLD-tree for a query $Q$ and programs $\seq\Pi$, and $S$ be a
specification.
If
\[
\begin{minipage}{.7\textwidth}
$\seq[m]B\in S$ implies $H\in S$,
for each $i=1,\ldots n$ and each $(H\gets\seq[m]B)\in ground(\Pi_i)$ such that
$H$ is an instance of some selected atom $A$ for which $\Pi_i$ is selected
in $T$,
\end{minipage}
\]
then each answer $ Q\theta$ of $T$ is correct w.r.t.\ $S$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Assume the premises of the theorem holds.
We have to show that $S\models Q\theta$.
Answer $Q\theta$ is obtained out of a successful branch of the tree.
The branch represents a derivation with queries $\SEQ Q 0 k$,
mgu's $\seq[k]\theta$, and renamed clauses $\seq[k]C$,
where $Q_k$ is empty, $Q_0=Q$, and $Q\theta = Q\SEQC \theta 1 k$.
By induction on $k-i$ we obtain $S\models Q_i\SEQC\theta {i+1} k$ for
$i=k, k{-}1,\ldots, 0$.
The base case is obvious.
For the inductive step, assume $S\models Q_i\SEQC\theta {i+1} k$.
Let $Q'\in ground(Q_{i-1}\SEQC\theta i k)$, and $A$ be the atom selected in
$Q_{i-1}$ together with a program $\Pi_j$.
So $C_i\in\Pi_j$.
A ground instance $Q''$ of $Q_i\SEQC\theta {i+1} k$ can be obtained out of
$Q'$ by replacing an instance $H$ of $A$ by a sequence of atoms $\seq[m]B$,
where $(H\gets\seq[m]B)\in ground(C_i)$.
As each atom of $Q''$ is in $S$, so is each atom of $Q'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
Let us continue Ex.\,\ref{ex:adam}. The program is obviously not correct
w.r.t.\ $S$. However, we show that for queries of the form
$A = n o p(t,Y)$, where $t$ is ground,
the answers of pruned trees are correct w.r.t.\ $S$.
The condition of Th.\,\ref{th:cssld.correct} obviously holds for $\Pi_1,\Pi_2$.
Consider $\Pi_3$, it is selected together with $A = n o p(t,Y)$ only if
$t\not\in\{a d a m,eve\}$. Then any ground instance $H$ of both $A$ and
the head $n o p(X,2)$ of the clause from $\Pi_3$ is in $S$.
Thus the premise of Th.\,\ref{th:cssld.correct} is satisfied.
Note that it is not satisfied
for e.g.\ a query $A'= n o p(Y,2)$ ($t\in{\ensuremath{\cal{T U}}}\xspace$), and that
the pruned tree for such $A'$ is not correct w.r.t.\ $S$.
\end{example}
\section{Relations with declarative diagnosis}
\label{sec:dd}
We now discuss the relation between program diagnosis, and proving
correctness and completeness of programs.
We first introduce declarative diagnosis of logic programs, together with
comparing diagnosis and the proof methods of Sections
\ref{sec:correctness}, \ref{sec:completeness}.
Then we show how diagnosis can be performed by attempting a correctness or
completeness proof of a concerned program.
Then we present a main contribution of this section --
how a substantial drawback of declarative diagnosis can be avoided
by employing approximate specifications.
\subsection{Declarative diagnosis}
\label{sec:dd.sub}
Declarative diagnosis,
called sometimes algorithmic, or declarative, debugging,
was introduced by
\citeN{Shapiro.book}
(see also \cite{DNM89,DBLP:conf/acsc/Naish00} and references therein).
It provides methods to locate
the reasons of incorrectness or incompleteness of programs.
A diagnosis algorithm starts with a {\em symptom}, obtained from testing the
program, and showing incorrectness or incompleteness of the program
w.r.t.\ its specification $S$.
The symptom is
an answer $Q$ such that \mbox{$S\mathrel{\,\not\!\models} Q$}, or a
query $Q$ for which computation terminates but some answers required by $S$ are not produced.
(A less general notion of incompleteness symptom is an atom $A\in S$ for
which the program finitely fails.)
The located error turns out to be a fragment of the program
which violates our sufficient condition for
correctness or, respectively, semi-completeness.
\paragraph{Incorrectness diagnosis}
In declarative diagnosis,
the reason for incorrectness is an incorrect instance of a program clause.
An incorrect clause instance
is one which violates the sufficient condition of Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}.
Obviously, by Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}
if the program is incorrect then such clause must exist.
On the other hand,
a violation of the sufficient condition does not imply that the
program is incorrect (cf.\ Ex.\,\ref{ex:weak-spec} in the Appendix).
Incorrectness diagnosis cannot be made more precise; we cannot say which part
of the incorrect clause is wrong, as different modifications of various parts
of the incorrect clause may lead to a correct one.
Technically, an incorrectness diagnosing algorithm works by constructing a
proof tree for an atomic symptom $Q$, and then searching the tree for an incorrect
clause instance.
(In \cite{Apt-Prolog} proof trees are called implication trees.)
Notice that the actions performed by the algorithm boil down to checking
the sufficient condition for correctness of Th.\,\ref{th:correctness},
but only for some clause instances -- those involved in producing the symptom.
\begin{example}[Incorrectness diagnosis]
\label{ex:inc-diag}%
Consider a buggy insertion sort program \cite[Sect.\,3.2.3]{Shapiro.book}:
\[
\newcommand{\color[rgb]{.7, 0, 0}}{\color[rgb]{.7, 0, 0}}
\mbox
{\tt\small
\begin{tabular}{@{}l}
isort([],[]).
\\
isort([X|Xs],Ys) :- isort(Xs,Zs), insert(X,Zs,Ys).
\\[1ex]
insert(X,[],[X]).
\\
insert(X,[Y|Ys],[Y|Zs]) :- Y > X, \mylonger{insert(X,Ys,Zs).}
\\
insert(X,[Y|Ys],[X,Y|Ys]) :- X =< Y.
\end{tabular}%
} %
\]
Procedure ${\it isort}$
should define the sorting relation for lists of integers.
Procedure ${\it insert}$
should describe inserting an element into a sorted list, producing
a sorted list as a result. The program computes an incorrect answer
$A = {\it isort}( [2,1,3], [2,3,1] )$.
(Formally, $S\mathrel{\,\not\!\models} A$, where $S$ is a
specification known by the user; we do not formalize $S$ here.)
Thus $A$ is a symptom of incorrectness.
The diagnoser constructs a proof tree
\[
\newcommand{\color[rgb]{.7, 0, 0}}{\color[rgb]{.7, 0, 0}}
\newlength{\myextra}
\setlength{\myextra}{1ex}
\begin{array}[t]{@{}cc}
\color[rgb]{.7, 0, 0}
{\it isort}( [2,1,3], [2,3,1] )
\qquad
\\[\myextra]
{\color[rgb]{.7, 0, 0}
{\it isort}([1,3],[3,1])
}
\qquad\qquad\qquad
\mbox{${\it insert}(2,[3,1],[2,3,1])$}
\\[\myextra]
{\it isort}([3],[3])
\qquad
{\color[rgb]{.7, 0, 0}
{\it insert}(1,[3],[3,1])
}
\qquad\qquad\qquad \cdots \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad
\\[\myextra]
\quad
\cdots
\qquad\qquad
3>1
\qquad
{\it insert}(1,[\,],[1])
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad
\end{array}
\hspace{-3em}
\]
Starting from the root of the proof tree,
the diagnosis algorithm asks the user whether the
children of the current node are correct w.r.t.\ the user's specification.
When all the answers are YES, the
current node together with its children are an incorrect clause instance --
the error is found. An answer NO means that a new incorrect node is found,
and it becomes the current node.
For the tree above, the questions are first asked about the two children of the
root. The child $ A={\it isort}([1,3],[3,1])$ is found incorrect,
formally $S\mathrel{\,\not\!\models} A$.
(The question about the second child
is discussed in the next example.)
Queries about the children of $A$
lead to identifying ${\it insert}(1,[3],[3,1])$ as incorrect.
As both its children are found correct, the algorithm returns
${\it insert}(1,[3],[3,1]) \gets 3\mathop{>}1, {\it insert}(1,[\,],[1])$
as an incorrect clause instance.
(The nodes found incorrect are marked in the diagram.)
Note that more precise locating of the error is impossible, The wrong
clause may be corrected for instance by swapping $X$ and $Y$ in $Y>X$, or
in the first and last atom of the clause.
Thus we cannot determine which fragment of the clause is erroneous.
\end{example}
\paragraph{Incompleteness diagnosis}
There exist a few versions of incompleteness diagnosis algorithms.
Some of them start with a symptom which is a finitely failed specified atom
$A\in S$. Some use instead a query $Q$ for which the SLD-tree is
finite, and some answers required by the specification $S$ are missing.
As the reason for incompleteness,
a not covered specified atom is found, say $p(\ldots)\in S$.
Alternatively, the result of the diagnosis is an atom $B = p(\ldots)$
which has a not covered specified instance $B\theta\in S$.
In both cases procedure $p$ is identified as erroneous.
Existence of a not covered specified atom violates the sufficient condition for
semi-completeness of Th.\,\ref{th:completeness}.
Conversely, if the program is not complete for a query $Q$ with a finite SLD-tree
then it is not semi-complete and, by Th.\,\ref{th:completeness},
there must exist a not covered specified atom.
Again, violating the sufficient condition for completeness does not imply
that the program is not complete.
Roughly speaking, the specification may be not sufficiently general,
cf.\ Ex.\,\ref{ex:weak-spec}.
Similarly to incorrectness, incompleteness diagnosis cannot be made more
precise:
A whole procedure is located,
and it cannot be determined which fragment of the
procedure is wrong, or whether a clause is missing.
We skip an example, and details of incompleteness diagnosis algorithms, see
e.g.\ \cite{Shapiro.book,DNM89,DBLP:journals/ngc/Naish92}.
We only point out a relation between completeness proving and some of such
algorithms (like that of \cite{Shapiro.book}).
The actions performed by such algorithm boil down
to checking
the sufficient condition for semi-completeness of Th.\,\ref{th:completeness}.
In contrast to completeness proofs, the condition is checked only for some
specified atoms, they are instances of atoms selected in the SLD-tree
producing the symptom.
\paragraph{Diagnosis by proof attempts}
In a sense, the proof methods presented in this paper supersede the
declarative diagnosis methods.
An attempt to prove a buggy program to be correct (complete) results in
violating the corresponding sufficient condition for some clause (specified
atom).
Any error located by diagnosis will also be found by a proof attempt;
moreover
no symptom is needed, and all the errors are found.
For instance, in this way
the author found an error in an early version of one of the examples
from \cite{drabent12.iclp}.
However the sufficient condition has to be checked for all the
(instances of the)
clauses of the program (when proving correctness), or for all specified atoms
(in the case of completeness).
\subsection{A main drawback of declarative diagnosis}
\label{sec:dd-drawback}
Declarative diagnosis requires the user to know an exact specification (a
single intended model) of the program. The program has to be (made) correct
and complete w.r.t.\ this specification. This is a serious difficulty in
diagnosing actual programs
\cite[Sect.\,26.8]{DNM89},
\cite{DBLP:conf/acsc/Naish00}.
Some diagnoser queries,
like ``is\linebreak[3] $append( [a], b, [a|b] )$ correct'',
may be confusing and hardly possible to answer,
as the programmer often does not know some details of the
intended model,
like those related to applying $append$ to non lists.
In the author's opinion this was a main reason of the lack of
acceptance of declarative diagnosis in practice.
\pagebreak[3]
\begin{example}[Exact specification unfeasible]
\label{ex:inc-diag2}
\nopagebreak
The previous example shows a diagnoser query which is hardly possible to answer.
Determining correctness of $B ={\it insert}(2,[3,1],[2,3,1])$ is
confusing, as the user does not know how insertion into unsorted lists should
behave.
From a formal point of view, the user does not know an exact specification of
${\it insert}$.
Actually, both cases of atom $B$ being correct or incorrect are reasonable.
They result in locating various errors,
and lead to various versions of the final, corrected program.
If the specification for ${\it insert}$ is
\footnote{
An (exact) specification for the remaining predicates is obvious:
\\[.5ex]
$
\begin{array}{c}
\left\{\,
{\it sort}( l_1, l_2) \in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \ \left| \
\mbox
{\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}
$l_1$ is a list of integers, \\
$l_2$ is a sorted permutation of $l_1$ \\
\end{tabular}%
}
\right.\right\}
\cup
\left\{\,
\begin{array}{@{}r@{}}
{>}( i_1, i_2) \in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \\
{=}{<}( j_1, j_2) \in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace
\end{array}
\ \left| \
\mbox
{\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}
$i_1,i_2,j_1,j_2$ are integers,\\
$i_1>i_2$, $j_1 \leq j_2$
\end{tabular}%
}
\right.\right\}.
\end{array}
$
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
} %
\[
S^0_{\it insert} = \left\{\,
{\it insert}( n, l_1, l_2) \in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\ \left| \
\mbox
{\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}
$l_1, l_2$ are sorted lists of integers, \\
%
${\it elms}(l_2) = \{n\}\cup {\it elms}(l_1)$
\end{tabular}
%
}
\right.\right\},
\]
where ${\it elms}(l)$ is the multiset of the elements of list $l$,
then $S^0_{\it insert}\mathrel{\,\not\!\models} B$ and
an erroneous clause instance is eventually found within the subtree rooted in
$B$. Correcting the program
would lead to a procedure ${\it insert}$ which is correct w.r.t.\
$S^0_{\it insert}$ but inefficient, as it assures that two of
its arguments are sorted lists of integers.
If the specification is
\[
S_{\it insert} = \left\{\,
{\it insert}( n, l_1, l_2) \in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \ \left| \
\mbox
{\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}
if $n\in{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}}\xspace$ and $l_1$ is a sorted lists of integers, \\
then ${\it insert}( n, l_1, l_2)\in S^0_{\it insert}$
\end{tabular}
%
}
\right.\right\}
\]
then $S_{\it insert}\models B$, and the diagnosis continues as in
Ex.\,\ref{ex:inc-diag}.
Each of the corrections described there leads to a program
with ${\it insert}$ correct w.r.t.\ $S_{\it insert}$.
One of the programs is
the ``right'' one -- Program 3.21 of \cite{Sterling-Shapiro}
(with
${\it insert}(X,[Y|Y s],[Y|Zs]) \gets \mbox{$X > Y$}, {\it insert}(X,Y s,Zs)$
as the corrected clause).
Notice that neither $S_{\it insert}$ nor $S^0_{\it insert}$ is an exact
specification of procedure ${\it isort}$ in the ``right'' program.
Providing its exact specification is not so obvious.
The ``right'' procedure is correct w.r.t.\ $S_{\it insert}$,
and complete w.r.t.\ $S^0_{\it insert}$.
Any such procedure, combined with procedure ${\it isort}$ from
Ex.\,\ref{ex:inc-diag}, would
implement a correct and complete predicate ${\it isort}$.
The programmer should have the freedom of choosing (and changing) the
actual semantics of ${\it insert}$, guided by e.g.\ the efficiency of the
program.
An exact specification would be counterproductive, at least at earlier stages
of program development.
So for this procedure one should take $S_{\it insert}$ as the specification for
correctness and $S^0_{\it insert}$ as the specification for completeness,
and apply them respectively in incorrectness and incompleteness diagnosis.
\end{example}
The discussion in the example suggests a natural way to overcome the
difficulty due to declarative diagnosis being based on a single intended
model of a program:
\begin{remark}
Declarative diagnosis should employ approximate specifications.
In the incorrectness diagnosis the specification for correctness
should be used, and in the incompleteness diagnosis -- the specification for
completeness.
\end{remark}
The problem of difficulties with exact specifications
was first dealt with in \cite{Pereira86}.
In that approach a specification also describes which atoms are
{\em admissible goals}, i.e.\ are allowed to be selected in SLD-trees.
Thus specifications and diagnosis are not declarative, as they refer to the
operational semantics.
\citeN{DBLP:conf/acsc/Naish00} introduces a three valued approach, in which
a specification classifies
each ground atom as {\em correct}, {\em erroneous} or {\em inadmissible}.
For such specifications, three-valued declarative debugging algorithms
are presented.
From our point of view, the set of non-erroneous atoms can be understood as
a specification for correctness, and the set of correct atoms as a
specification for completeness. However introducing debugging algorithms
based on a three-valued logic seems to be an unnecessary complication.
In the approach proposed here the standard two-valued diagnosis algorithms remain unchanged.
\section{Related work}
\label{sec:related}
\paragraph{Approximate specifications}
The difficulties related to dealing with exact semantics of logic programs
have been recognized by a few authors.
\citeN[and the references therein]{Naish.Sondergaard13}
propose employing a 3-valued or 4-valued logic.
The logical value {\bf i} (inadmissible)
is given to the atoms that, in our approach, are in the difference
$S_{corr}\setminus S_{\it c o m p l}$
between the specification for correctness and that for completeness.
\citeN{Apt-Prolog} and
\citeN{Deville} present approaches in which it is possible to deal with a suitable
subset of ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ instead of ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ itself.
\citeN{Apt-Prolog} employs preconditions and postconditions,%
\footnote{
Technically, pre- and postconditions are sets of atoms closed under
substitution.
}
and a sufficient condition that,
for any atomic query $A$,
if $A\in pre$ then
$A\theta\in post$ for any computed answer $A\theta$
(where $pre$ and $post$ is, respectively, a pre- and postcondition).
In this way ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P$ is in a sense replaced by $post$,
more precisely by the set ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\cap pre$, called ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_{(pre,post)}$.
(See also {\it\nameref{par:related:proofmethods}} below.)
Eg.\ for program APPEND the precondition may be
$pre = \{\, app(k,l,m) \in{\ensuremath{\cal{T B}}}\xspace \mid
\mbox{$l$ or $m$ is a list}
\,\}
$,
and the postcondition may describe exactly the list concatenation relation:
$post = \{\, app(k,l,m)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{T B}}}\xspace \mid k,l,m \mbox{ are lists, } k*l=m
\,\}
$;
this gives ${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_{(pre,post)} = post = S_{\rm APPEND}^0$
(see Ex.\,\ref{ex:spec-append}).
In \cite{Deville} the notions of correctness and completeness of programs
involve, for each predicate,
the intended relation (on ground terms) and the so-called domain.
Let us represent them as Herbrand interpretations, the intended relations as
$rel\subseteq{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace$ and the domains as $d o m\subseteq{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace$.
Then correctness (called there partial correctness) of a definite clause
program $P$ is equivalent to
${\ensuremath{\cal M}}\xspace_P\cap d o m\subseteq rel \cap d o m$, and completeness means inclusion in
the other direction.
For the APPEND example,
$d o m = \{\, app(k,l,m)\in{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace \mid
k,l,m\mbox{ are lists}
\,\}
$
and
$ rel = S_{\rm APPEND}^0$.
Sometimes
it is claimed that programs like APPEND are simply wrong and should be
modified, so that the resulting
program defines ``the right'' relation
\cite{Naish96,Apt95}.
For the APPEND program this may be done by modifying its non-recursive clause
so that its variable is restricted to be bound to a list.
The clause becomes $app([\,],L,L) \gets list(L)$,
and an appropriate definition of $list$ is added.
The resulting program APPEND-T defines exactly the list concatenation.
The program is believed to be simpler to reason about, but
is impractical due to its inefficiency.
\citeN[p.\,187]{Naish96} proposes that the meaning of the original program
should be defined as the standard meaning of the modified program.
Summarizing,
within the standard logic programming,
employing approximate specifications seems simpler
than the approaches outlined above,
refers only to the the basic notions of logic programming,
and is at least as powerful.
See \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05} for further discussion.
\paragraph{Proof methods}
\label{par:related:proofmethods}
Now we discuss the work on proving correctness and
completeness of logic programs.
We omit most of those based on operational semantics.
Our definitions of correctness and completeness (Df.\,\ref{def:corr:compl})
are basically the same as those in \cite{Sterling-Shapiro}.
However no particular method of reasoning on correctness and completeness is
given there, and the example informal proofs are made by analyzing possible proof trees.
The correctness proving method of \citeN{Clark79} used here
(Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}) should be
well-known, but is often neglected.
For instance, an important monograph \cite{Apt-Prolog} uses a method,%
\footnote{
It is basically the method of \cite{DBLP:conf/tapsoft/BossiC89}, (stemming
from \cite{DM88},
a paper focused on non-declarative properties of programs).
The employed notion of correctness says that,
given a precondition $pre$ and a postcondition $post$,
if the initial atomic query $A$ is in $pre$ then
in each LD-derivation each selected atom is in $pre$ and each
corresponding computed answer is in $post$.
Note that it depends on the order of atoms in a clause.
It implies a declarative property that, in our terminology, the program is
correct w.r.t.\ $({\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace\setminus pre)\cup(post\cap{\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace)$.
}
which is more complicated and not declarative.
It proves a certain property of LD-derivations, from which the
declarative property of program correctness follows.
See \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05} for comparison and argumentation that
the simpler method is sufficient,
and for its generalization to programs with negation.
Proving completeness has seldom been considered.
For instance it is not discussed in \cite{Apt-Prolog},%
\footnote{
Instead,
for a program $P$ and an atomic query $A$,
a characterization of the set of computed instances of $A$ is studied,
in a special case of the set being finite and the answers ground
\cite[Sect.\,8.4]{Apt-Prolog}.
This is based on finding the least Herbrand model (of $P$
or of a certain subset of $ground(P)$).
}
and \cite{hogger.book}.%
\footnote{
The notion of completeness is defined in \cite{hogger.book},
but no sufficient condition is discussed.
}
\,
\citeN{Kowalski85} discusses completeness, but the example proofs concern
only correctness.
As a sufficient condition for completeness of a program $P$
he suggests
$P\vdash T_S$, where $T_S$ is a specification in a form of a logical theory.
(A symmetrical criterion $T_S\vdash P$ is used for correctness, notice its
similarity to that of Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}.)
The condition seems
impractical as it fails when $T_S$ contains auxiliary
predicates, not
occurring in $P$.
It also requires that all the models of $P$ (including {\ensuremath{\cal{H B}}}\xspace) are models of the
specification.
But it seems that such specifications often have a
substantially restricted class of models, maybe a single Herbrand
model, cf.\ \cite{Deville}.
\citeN{DBLP:journals/jlp/Stark98}
presented an elegant method of reasoning about a broad class of properties of
programs with negation,
executed under LDNF-resolutions.
A tool to verify proofs mechanically was provided.
The approach involves a rather complicated induction scheme, so
it seems impossible to apply the method informally by programmers.
In \cite{Deville} correctness and completeness of a program follows from
construction. No direct sufficient criteria, applicable to arbitrary programs, are given.
The underlying semantics of programs is that of SLDNF-resolution, hence not
declarative.
\citeN{Deransart.Maluszynski93} present criteria for program completeness,
in a sophisticated framework of relating logic programming and
attribute grammars.
We present, as Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:recu},
their sufficient (and complete) criterion for completeness
in a simplified setting and with a short direct proof.
The method introduced here
(Th.\,\ref{th:completeness} with Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl})
is a simplification of that from \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05}.
Due to a restriction to specifications over Herbrand domains,
we could deal here with $ground(P)$ and covered ground atoms,
instead of a theory ONLY-IF$(P)$ and its truth in an interpretation,
as in the former work.
Another difference is employing here a new notion of semi-completeness.
Also,
the former work uses a slightly different notion of completeness
(cf.\ a remark in Sect.\,\ref{sec:corr+compl}),
and provides a generalization for programs with negation.
Some ideas of the current work appeared in
[\citeNP{drabent12.iclp}; \citeyearNP{drabent.corr.2012}]
(see also {\em\nameref{par:applications}} in Sect.\,\ref{sec:discussion}).
This includes a weaker version of Th.\,\ref{prop:cssld.complete}
on completeness of pruned SLD-trees.
The author is not aware of any other former work on proving completeness
in presence of pruning,
or on proving correctness of the answers of pruned SLD-trees
(w.r.t.\ specifications for which the program is not correct).
%
\smallskip
For the related work on declarative diagnosis see Sect.\,\ref{sec:dd}.
\section{Remarks}
\label{sec:discussion}%
\paragraph{Declarativeness}
\label{par:declarative}
In this paper we are mainly interested in declarative reasoning about logic
programs.
Correctness and completeness of logic programs are declarative properties.
However non declarative methods for dealing with correctness are often suggested,
cf.\ the
\hyperref[{par:related:proofmethods}]{previous section}.
If it were necessary to reason
non declaratively about correctness or completeness of programs
then logic programming would not deserve to be called a declarative
programming paradigm.
This paper presents declarative sufficient conditions for correctness
and semi-completeness
(Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}, \ref{th:completeness}).
Some of the conditions for completeness and completeness of pruned trees
are also declarative
(Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl}(\ref{prop:semi-compl:recu}),
Th.\,\ref{th:completeness:recu},
conditions \ref{prop:cssld.complete.cond0},
\ref{prop:cssld.complete.cond1},
\ref{prop:cssld.complete.cond2b} of
Th.\,\ref{prop:cssld.complete},
Prop.\,\ref{prop:cssld.complete2}),
so is the condition of Th.\,\ref{th:cssld.correct} for correctness in the
context of pruning.
The remaining sufficient conditions for completeness of
Prop.\,\ref{prop:semi-compl} and
Th.\,\ref{prop:cssld.complete} are not declarative.
They involve
termination or acceptability.
Notice that declarative completeness proofs either imply termination
(when the program is shown to be recurrent),
or require reasoning similar to that in termination proofs
(when showing that covered atoms are recurrently covered).
Notice also that in most practical cases termination has to be established anyway.
So proving completeness by means of semi-completeness and termination
may be a reasonable compromise
between declarative and non-declarative reasoning.
This paper introduced semi-completeness as a step to establishing
completeness.
Note that
semi-completeness alone may be a useful property, as it guarantees that whenever
the computation terminates, all the required answers have been computed.
\paragraph{Granularity of proofs}
The sufficient conditions studied in this paper impose a certain granularity
of proofs. Correctness proofs deal with separate program clauses.
Proofs of semi-completeness deal with whole program procedures
(to check that an atom $p(\ldots)$ is covered one has to consider all the
clauses for $p$). For completeness,
a certain level mapping has to be found, or program termination
is to be considered. In both cases the whole program has to be taken into
account.
\paragraph{Interpretations as specifications}
Specifications which are interpretations (as here, in \cite{Apt-Prolog},
and in the declarative diagnosis approaches)
have a limitation \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05}.
They cannot express that e.g.\ for a given $a$
there exists a $b$ such that $p(a,b)$ is the program's answer.
A specification has to explicitly state
some (one or more) particular $b$.
This limitation may possibly be overcome by employing
specifications in a form of logical theories,
where axioms like $\exists b.\, p(a,b)$ can be used.
\paragraph{Applications}
\label{par:applications}
We want to stress the simplicity and naturalness of the sufficient conditions
for correctness (Th.\,\ref{th:correctness}) and semi-completeness
(Th.\,\ref{th:completeness},
the condition
is a part of each discussed sufficient condition for completeness).
Informally, the first one says that the clauses of a program should produce
only correct conclusions, given correct premises.
The other says that each ground atom that should be produced by $P$
can be produced by a clause of $P$
out of atoms produced by $P$.
The author believes that this is a way a competent programmer reasons about
(the declarative semantics of) a logic program.
Paper \cite{drabent12.iclp} illustrates practical applicability of the
methods presented here.
It shows a systematic construction of a non-trivial Prolog program
(the SAT solver of \cite{howe.king.tcs}).
Starting from a formal specification, a definite clause logic program
is constructed hand in hand with proofs of its correctness, completeness,
and termination under any selection rule.
The final Prolog program is obtained by adding control to the logic program
(delays and pruning SLD-trees).
Adding control preserves correctness and termination.
However completeness may be
violated by pruning, and by floundering related to delays.
By Th.\,\ref{prop:cssld.complete},
the program with pruning remains complete.%
\footnote{
In the former paper a weaker version of Th.\,\ref{prop:cssld.complete} has
been used, and one case of pruning is discussed informally.
A proof covering both cases of pruning is illustrated here in
Ex.\,\ref{ex:pruning2}.
}
Proving non-floundering is outside of the scope of the current paper.
See e.g.\ \cite{king.non-suspension2008} for a related analysis algorithm,
which is applicable in this case \cite{king.personal}.
The example shows how much of the programming task can be
done declaratively,
without considering the operational semantics; how
``logic'' could be separated from ``control.''
It is important that all the
considerations and decisions about the program execution and efficiency
are independent from those related
to the declarative semantics: to the correctness and completeness
of the final program.
For the role of approximate specifications in this example, see
{\em\nameref{par:approximate:comments}} in
Sect.\,\ref{par:approximate}.
\paragraph{Future work}
A natural continuation of the work presented here is
generalization of the proof methods for programs with negation.
There are three semantics to deal with:
3-valued completion semantics of Kunen (Prolog with additional checks for
sound negation),
the well-founded semantics (the same with tabulation, as in XSB),
and the answer set semantics.
The approach for Kunen semantics could possibly
stem from that of \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05}.
Also generalization to constraint logic programming and to CHR (constraint
handling rules) could be of interest.
An interesting task is formalization and automatizing of correctness and
completeness proofs; a first step is formalization of specifications.
On the other hand, further examples of proofs for practical programs are due,
as are experiments with teaching programmers to informally use the proof methods
in practice.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
This paper presents proof methods for proving correctness and
completeness of definite clause programs.
The method for correctness \cite{Clark79} is simple and natural.
It should be well-known, but is often neglected.
Little work has been done on proving completeness, and this is the main
subject of this paper
(Sect.\,\ref{sec:completeness}).
A simplification of the approach of \cite{DBLP:journals/tplp/DrabentM05} is
presented.
We introduce a notion of semi-completeness, for which the corresponding
sufficient condition deals with program procedures separately,
%
while for completeness the whole program has to be taken into account.
Semi-completeness and termination imply completeness.
In practice this means that when a semi-complete program terminated it had
produced all the answers required by the specification.
The presented sufficient condition for semi-completeness corresponds to a
natural, intuitive way of reasoning about programs.
It is a necessary condition for program completeness
(in a sense made precise in Appendix \ref{appendix:compl}).
We showed a few sufficient conditions for program completeness;
all of them involve the above mentioned condition for semi-completeness.
Also, sufficient conditions were given for completeness being preserved
under SLD-tree pruning (Sect.\,\ref{sec:pruning}).
Logic programming could not be considered a declarative programming paradigm
unless there exist
declarative ways of reasoning about program correctness
and completeness
(i.e.\ reasoning
which abstracts from the operational semantics).
Regrettably,
non-declarative methods are usually suggested (cf.\ Sect.\,\ref{sec:related}).
The presented here methods for proving correctness and semi-completeness are
purely declarative (Sect.\,\ref{sec:discussion}),
however some of the sufficient conditions for
completeness are not, as they refer, maybe indirectly, to program termination.
Such methods may nevertheless be useful in practical declarative reasoning
about programs, as usually termination has to be established anyway.
A larger example of applying the proof methods described here is provided in
\cite{drabent12.iclp}.
That paper presents a construction of a non-trivial
program hand in hand with its correctness and completeness proofs.
The construction shows how
``logic'' could be separated from ``control'';
how the reasoning about correctness and completeness can be separated from
that related to the operational semantics, efficiency, etc
(cf.\ {\em\nameref{par:applications}} in Sect.\,\ref{sec:discussion}).
We point out usefulness of approximate specifications
(Sect.\,\ref{par:approximate}).
They are crucial for avoiding unnecessary
complications in constructing specifications and proofs.
It is often cumbersome and unnecessary to exactly describe the
relations computed by a program.
Approximate specifications are natural in the process of program development:
when starting construction of a program,
the relations it should compute are often known only approximately.
This suggests an extension of the well-known paradigm of program
development by semantics preserving transformations
\cite{DBLP:journals/jlp/PettorossiP94} --
one should also consider
transformations which preserve correctness and completeness
w.r.t.\ an approximate specification
(cf.\ {\em\nameref{par:approximate:comments}} in
Sect.\,\ref{par:approximate}).
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
In Sect.\,\ref{sec:dd} we compared the proof methods with declarative
diagnosis (algorithmic debugging).
Similarity was demonstrated between two ways of locating errors in
programs:
by means of declarative diagnosis, and by a failure of an attempt to
construct a correctness or completeness proof.
We also showed how approximate specifications
make possible avoiding a serious drawback of declarative diagnosis.
We argue that the proof methods presented here are simple, and
%
correspond to a natural way of declarative thinking about programs
(Sect.\,\ref{sec:discussion}).
We believe that they can be actually used -- maybe at an informal level -- in
practical programming; this is supported
by examples, particularly
by the main example of \cite{drabent12.iclp}.
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
The vortex coronagraph (VC) is a state-of-the-art instrument for extreme high-contrast astronomical imaging \cite{Mawet2005,Foo2005}. Recent on-sky observations with VC's on ground-based telescopes confirm that it is one of the best performing coronagraphic systems available, offering detection of dim companions at small angular separation from a star \cite{Mawet2010,Serabyn2010,Mawet2011a,Mawet2013a,Defrere2014}. Laboratory demonstrations have achieved contrast on the order of $10^{-9}$ at a few diffracted beamwidths, which may allow for direct detection and characterization of terrestrial exoplanets orbiting nearby stars \cite{Serabyn2013}.
One practical problem is that many telescope pupils have secondary mirror and other obstructing features, such as spiders and discontinuities between mirror segments, that degrade the starlight suppression capability of coronagraphs. Several solutions have been developed for the VC to remedy the central obscuration owing to the secondary mirror including the use of a sub-aperture \cite{Mawet2010,Serabyn2010,Mawet2011a,Serabyn2007,Ruane2013}, tandem coronagraphic stages \cite{Mawet2011b, Mawet2013b}, interferometers \cite{Riaud2014}, and ring-shaped pupil apodizers \cite{Mawet2013b,Mawet2013c}. In addition, spiders and aperture discontinuities may be compensated for by numerically optimized binary amplitude pupil apodizers \cite{Carlotti2011,Carlotti2013,Carlotti2014}, continuous focal plane phase correcting elements \cite{Ruane2015}, or lossless apodization with a pair of deformable mirrors \cite{Pueyo2013,Pueyo2014,Fogarty2014}.
We present a set of apodizers that offer a simple means to achieve high contrast in the presence of a central obscuration and radial spiders. The pupil functions are given by real-valued Zernike polynomials in field amplitude. The degree and azimuthal order of the Zernike polynomials are limited by the topological charge of the focal plane vortex phase element. This work represents a large expansion of the known analytical solutions for VC apodizers. The pupil functions described herein may be implemented by fabricating pupil-plane optical elements with complex transmittance, or possibly by use of lossless apodization techniques \cite{Guyon2003,Pueyo2013,Pueyo2014,Fogarty2014}.
\newpage
\section{VORTEX CORONAGRAPH WITHOUT APODIZATION}
The basic operation of the VC is as follows: A vortex phase element located in the focal plane of a Lyot-style coronagraph diffracts on-axis starlight outside of a downstream aperture stop, while allowing light from off-axis sources to reach the subsequent image plane (see Fig. \ref{fig:1}) \cite{Mawet2005,Foo2005}. Mathematically, however, the formation of the circular ``nodal area" in the starlight at the exit pupil is not intuitive and is briefly derived here.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics{figure1a.pdf} \hfill \includegraphics{figure1b.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ \label{fig:1}
(a) Schematic of a vortex coronagraph. The first pupil plane (PP1) is typically formed by the reimaged telescope pupil. The field at PP1 is denoted $P(r,\theta)$, which may include an apodizer. Lens L1 forms the first focal plane (FP1), where a vortex phase element applies transmission function $\exp(il\phi)$. Lens L2 forms a second pupil plane (PP2), where an aperture known as the Lyot stop (LS) truncates the field. Lens L3 forms an image in focal plane (FP2) with the on-axis starlight removed. Light rays representing on-axis (red) and off-axis (blue) sources are drawn. (b) The phase pattern of an $l = 2$ vortex phase element. (c) Field magnitude just before the LS for a distant point source that coincides with the $z$ axis. (d) The relative LS throughput $T^{(l)}/T^{(0)}$ (with LS radius 0.97 times that of AP) for a point source at angular displacement $\alpha$ from the $z$ axis shown in units of $\lambda/D$, where $D=2a$ (i.e. the pupil diameter).}
\end{figure}
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(a), the VC is a 4-$f$ optical system with a focal plane vortex phase element that has transmission $t(\phi)=\exp(il\phi),$ where $l$ is a nonzero even integer known as ``topological charge" and $\phi$ is the azimuthal angle in the first focal plane (FP1). Assuming an unobscured circular pupil with radius $a$ and without apodization, the field directly after the phase element owing to an on-axis point source may be written as
\begin{equation}
F\left(r',\phi \right)=\frac{k a^2}{f}\frac{J_1\left( k a r'/f\right)}{k a r'/f} e^{il\phi},
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
where $r'$ is the radial coordinate in FP1, $k = 2\pi/\lambda,$ $\lambda$ is the wavelength, $f$ is the focal length, $J_1$ is the Bessel function of the first kind, and constant phase factors have been dropped. The exit pupil (PP2) field is given by the Fourier transform of Eq. \ref{eq1}:
\begin{equation}
E\left(r'',\psi \right)=e^{il\psi}\frac{ka}{f}W_1^l(r''),
\end{equation}
where $\left( r'', \psi \right)$ are the polar coordinates in PP2 and
\begin{equation}
W_p^q(r'')=\int\limits_{0}^{\infty }{J_p\left({k a r'}/{f}\right)J_q\left( {k r'' r'}/{f}\right)dr'}.
\label{eq:Wpq}
\end{equation}
Eq. \ref{eq:Wpq} is related to the discontinuous integral of Weber and Schafheitlin \cite{Watson1922}. For $l$ is nonzero and even,
\begin{equation}
E\left(r'',\psi \right)=\left\{ \begin{matrix}
0 & r'' \le a \\
\frac{a}{r''}R_{|l|-1}^1\left( \frac{a}{r''} \right){e^{il\psi}} & r''>a \\
\end{matrix} \right. ,
\end{equation}
where $R_n^1$ are the radial Zernike polynomials (see Appendix \ref{sec:Zernikes} for definition) \cite{Carlotti2009}. The phase element and resulting field amplitude for $l=2$ are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(b)-(c). The field is zero-valued within the geometric image of the pupil; that is, a nodal area appears. An aperture stop known as the ``Lyot stop" (LS), with radius $a_L$ where $a_L<a$, is placed in PP2 to block all of the light from the on-axis source. Off-axis sources do not form a nodal area and are partially transmitted through the LS. We define the throughput power for given value of $l$ as
\begin{equation}
T^{(l)}=\int_0^{2\pi}\int_0^{a_L}\left|\tilde{E}\left(r'',\psi \right)\right|^2r''dr''d\psi,
\label{eq:throughputdef}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{E}\left(r'',\psi \right)$ is the field at PP2 owing to a point source displaced from the optical axis by angle $\alpha$; i.e. at $\alpha=0$, $\tilde{E}\left(r'',\psi \right)=E\left(r'',\psi \right)$. The relative LS throughput with $a_L=0.97a$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(d). For a non-apodized circular pupil $T^{(0)}/\mathcal{P}=\left(a_L/a\right)^2$, where $\mathcal{P}$ is the total power incident on PP2.
\section{ZERNIKE AMPLITUDE APODIZED VORTEX CORONAGRAPH}
In this section, we introduce pupil amplitude functions described by
\begin{equation}
P\left(r,\theta\right) = Z_n^m\left(r/a,\theta\right),\;\;\;\;\;r\le a,
\end{equation}
where $Z_n^m\left(r/a,\theta\right)$ are the real-valued Zernike polynomials and show that under certain conditions ideal contrast is achieved (see Fig. \ref{fig:2}). For $m\ge0$ (i.e. the even Zernike polynomials),
\begin{equation}
P\left(r,\theta\right) = R_n^m\left(r/a,\theta\right) \cos\left(m\theta\right),\;\;\;\;\;r\le a.
\label{eq:Zpupil}
\end{equation}
The field transmitted through a vortex phase element of charge $l$ in FP1, owing to an on-axis point source, is given by the product of $\exp\left(il\phi\right)$ and the Fourier transform of Eq. \ref{eq:Zpupil}:
\begin{equation}
F\left(r',\phi \right)=\frac{k a^2}{f}\frac{J_{n+1}\left( k a r'/f\right)}{k a r'/f} \cos\left(m\phi\right) e^{il\phi}.
\label{eq:PSF}
\end{equation}
The field in PP2 (just before the LS) is given by the Fourier transform of Eq. \ref{eq:PSF}:
\begin{equation}
E\left(r'',\psi \right)=\frac{k a}{2 f}e^{il\psi}\left[(-1)^m e^{im\psi}W_{n+1}^{l+m}(r'')+e^{-im\psi}W_{n+1}^{l-m}(r'')\right].
\label{eq:Wevens}
\end{equation}
Similarly, for $m<0$ (i.e. the odd Zernike polynomials)
\begin{equation}
E\left(r'',\psi \right)=\frac{k a}{i2 f}e^{il\psi}\left[(-1)^m e^{im\psi}W_{n+1}^{l+m}(r'')-e^{-im\psi}W_{n+1}^{l-m}(r'')\right].
\label{eq:Wodds}
\end{equation}
For an on-axis point source, a nodal area appears at PP2 if $|l|>n+|m|+1$ and $l$ is even valued. For $m=0$ and $|l|\le n$, the field at PP2 may be expressed
\begin{equation}
E\left(r'',\psi \right)=\left\{ \begin{matrix}
R_n^l\left(r''/a\right)e^{il\psi} & r'' < a \\
0 & r''\ge a \\
\end{matrix} \right. ,
\end{equation}
On the other hand, for $m=0$ and $|l|\ge n+2$
\begin{equation}
E\left(r'',\psi \right)=\left\{ \begin{matrix}
0 & r'' \le a \\
\frac{a}{r''}R_{|l|-1}^{n+1}\left( \frac{a}{r''} \right){e^{il\psi}} & r''>a \\
\end{matrix} \right. .
\end{equation}
More generally, analytical solutions for $E\left(r'',\psi \right)$ with $m\ne0$ that contain a nodal area in the on-axis starlight are written
\begin{equation}
E\left(r'',\psi \right)=\left\{ \begin{matrix}
0 & r'' \le a \\
g^{(l)}_{n,m}\left(r'',\psi \right) & r''>a \\
\end{matrix} \right. .
\end{equation}
Figure \ref{fig:2} shows the field patterns at PP2 for the first few Zernike amplitude apodizers with the lowest value of $l$ that yields a nodal area. Analytical expressions for $g^{(l)}_{n,m}\left(r'',\psi \right)$ are given in Appendix \ref{sec:EPfields}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics{figure2.pdf} \hfill \\
\begin{subfigure}{0.4\linewidth}
\hspace{4mm}\includegraphics[trim = 0 0 0 33mm,clip=true]{colorbarsforfig1.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{10mm}
\begin{subfigure}{0.4\linewidth}
\includegraphics[trim = 0 0 0 31.5mm,clip=true]{colorbarsforfig2.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ \label{fig:2}
Zernike amplitude apodizers shown for (a) $Z_1^1$, (b) $Z_2^0$, (c) $Z_2^2$, (d) $Z_3^1$, and (e) $Z_3^3$ with an unobscured circular pupil of radius $a$ (dotted circle). For each case, the following are shown: the pupil amplitude $|P(r,\theta)|$ and phase $\Phi\{P(r,\theta)\}$ in PP1, the corresponding point spread function magnitude in FP1 $|F(r',\phi)|$, the phase of the lowest charge vortex phase element in FP1 that produces a nodal area in PP2 $\Phi\{t(\phi)\}$, and the field magnitude just before the LS in PP2 $|E\left(r'',\psi \right)|$. $|F(r',\phi)|$ is shown over a $10\times10 \; \lambda \, F\#$ square, where $F\#=f/(2a)$.}
\end{figure}
\section{ZERNIKE AMPLITUDE APODIZER FOR E-ELT}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics{figure3.pdf}\hfill \\
\begin{subfigure}{0.4\linewidth}
\hspace{4mm}\includegraphics[trim = 0 0 0 33mm,clip=true]{colorbarsforfig1.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{10mm}
\begin{subfigure}{0.4\linewidth}
\includegraphics[trim = 0 0 0 31.5mm,clip=true]{colorbarsforfig2.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ \label{fig:3}
Pupil apodizer for a VC on the European Extremely Large Telescope (E-ELT). (a) The simplified pupil geometry matches well with the $Z_3^3$ Zernike polynomial (see Fig. \ref{fig:2}(e)). The pupil field just before the apodizer $P^{-}(r,\theta)$ is shown along with (b) the amplitude and (c) the phase of the apodized pupil $P(r,\theta)$. (d) An $l=8$ focal plane vortex phase element produces (e) the field at PP2 with $\sim99.98\%$ of the light located outside of the LS.}
\end{figure}
Large telescopes typically have a central obscuration owing to the secondary mirror and discontinuities formed by spider supports and spaces between mirror segments. The discontinuities cause on-axis starlight to leak into the LS of a VC, thereby limiting the starlight suppression (see e.g. Ref. [10]). To demonstrate how Zernike apodizing functions may be used, we consider a simplified pupil geometry of the future European Extremely Large Telescope (E-ELT) (see Fig. \ref{fig:3}(a)). The pupil of the E-ELT may be characterized by an outer octagon-like mirror and a centrally obscuring hexagonal secondary mirror whose width is $\sim25\%$ of the outer aperture dimension. The primary mirror is constructed of approximately 800 hexagonally packed mirror segments, which we ignore for this discussion. There are six radial spiders with width $\sim3\%$ of the outer aperture dimension. By inspection, the $Z_3^3$ Zernike polynomial apodizer has zero transmission along six radial lines. Naturally, we wish to align these with the spiders of the E-ELT pupil (see Fig. \ref{fig:3}(a)-(c)). The pupil obscurations fit within the dark regions of the apodizer and, therefore, the coronagraph acts similar to the example in Fig. \ref{fig:2}(e). Approximately $99.98\%$ of the on-axis starlight is relocated outside of a circular LS with radius $a_L=0.97a$ if $l\ge8$ and even valued (see Fig. \ref{fig:3}(d)-(e)). For this example, we choose the outer boundary of the apodizer to be a circle slightly smaller that the full E-ELT pupil. That is, the transmission of the apodizer is zero for $r>a$, leading to $\sim5\%$ loss in power. Optimization of the apodizer and Lyot stop boundaries may lead to better performance. This, and the effect of the individual mirror segments, will be considered in future work.
\section{Performance of Zernike Amplitude Apodized VC's}
In the section, we characterize the performance of Zernike amplitude apodized VC's with particular focus on a $Z_3^3$ apodizer for the E-ELT pupil with an $l=8$ vortex phase element in FP1.
\subsection{Pupil element transmission}
If a single optical element is used to produce the Zernike apodization over a circular pupil, the relative transmission of the element is given by
\begin{align}
\tau_{n,m}&=\frac{1}{\pi a^2}\int_0^{2\pi}\int_0^a |P(r,\theta)|^2\,r\,dr\,d\theta, \\
&=\frac{1}{\pi}\int_0^{2\pi}\int_0^1 \left[Z_n^m(\rho,\theta)\right]^2\,\rho\,d\rho\,d\theta,\\
&=\left\{ \begin{matrix}
\left(n+1\right)^{-1} & m=0 \\
\left(2n+2\right)^{-1} & m\ne0 \\
\end{matrix} \right. ,
\end{align}
where $\rho=r/a$. The numerical values of $\tau_{n,m}$ for the Zernike amplitude apodized VC's shown in Figs. \ref{fig:2} and \ref{fig:3} are reported in Table 1. Also shown is the relative throughput of the LS, $T^{(0)}_{n,m}/\mathcal{P}$, in each case (see Eq. \ref{eq:throughputdef}). In essence, Zernike amplitude apodizing elements have more loss at higher values of $n$ and $m$. Additional loss is expected owing to the downsized LS; that is, the LS transmission also decreases as $n$ and $m$ increase.
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{Performance of Zernike amplitude apodized VC with an unobscured circular pupil. $\tau_{n,m}$ is the apodizer transmission, $T^{(0)}_{n,m}/\mathcal{P}$ is the relative LS throughput for $l=0$ ($a_L=0.97a$), and IWA is the inner working angle.}
\label{tab:tab1}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} $n$ & $m$ & $l$ & $\tau_{n,m}$ & $T^{(0)}_{n,m}/\mathcal{P}$ & IWA $\left(\lambda/D\right)$ \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} 0 & 0 & 2 & 1.00 & 0.94 & 0.9 \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} 0 & 0 & 4 & 1.00 & 0.94 & 1.6 \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} 1 & 1 & 4 & 0.25 & 0.89 & 1.3 - 2.1 \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} 2 & 0 & 4 & 0.33 & 0.84 & 1.1 \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} 2 & 2 & 6 & 0.17 & 0.83 & 2.2 - 3.2 \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} 3 & 1 & 6 & 0.13 & 0.81 & 1.7 - 2.3 \\
\hline
\rule[-1ex]{0pt}{3.5ex} 3 & 3 & 8 & 0.13 & 0.78 & 3.2 - 4.0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[b!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics{figure4.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ \label{fig:4}
Off-axis throughput for Zernike amplitude apodized VC with an (a)-(e) unobscured circular pupil and (f) the simplified E-ELT pupil. The apodizers considered are (a) $Z_1^1$, (b) $Z_2^0$, (c) $Z_2^2$, (d) $Z_3^1$, and (e) $Z_3^3$. Throughput is plotted with angular displacement $\alpha$ along the vertical (solid) and horizontal (dashed) directions ($45^\circ$ direction is shown as dashed lines in (c)). The throughput for (f) the $Z_3^3$ apodizer applied to the E-ELT pupil is similar to (e). It is also shown in (e) that the throughput in the $Z_3^3$ case increases as $\alpha^2$ for small angles. }
\end{figure}
\subsection{Off-axis throughput}
The throughput for a point source displaced from the optical axis by angle $\alpha$ is plotted in Fig. \ref{fig:4} for all of the apodizers shown in Figs. \ref{fig:2} and \ref{fig:3}. The throughput curves are calculated by Eq. \ref{eq:throughputdef} and are normalized by the throughput in the $l=0$ case. The exit pupil fields are obtained using fast Fourier transforms on a $4096\times4096$ computational grid with 144 samples over the outer pupil dimension and 28 samples per $\lambda \, F\#$ in the image plane ($F\#=f/D$, where $D=2a$). The off-axis throughput is reduced as compared to the conventional VC without an apodizer (see Fig. \ref{fig:1}(d)). However, we find by inspection that for small angular displacements (i.e. $\alpha \lesssim \lambda/D$), the off-axis throughput increases as $\alpha^x$, where $x=|l|-n-|m|$. For the $Z_3^3$ apodized E-ELT pupil, the off-axis throughput of the $l=8$ VC increases as $\alpha^2$ at small angular displacements, which is comparable to the unobscured $l=2$ system without apodization. Thus, the throughput performance is very good at small angles, especially for a heavily obscured system with thick spiders.
\subsubsection{Inner working angle}
The ``inner working angle" (IWA) is a common measure of the off-axis throughput performance for coronagraphs, typically defined as the angle at which the throughput of a point source is half of its maximum \cite{Guyon2006}. The maximum throughput is achieved when $\alpha \gg \lambda/D$ and may be approximated by the throughput in the $l=0$ case. The IWA's of the Zernike amplitude apodized VC with an unobscured pupil are reported in Table 1. We argue that the IWA is not an optimal performance metric for this system because the off-axis throughput curve for the ELT design has a distinct ``shoulder" that causes the system to have large IWA although the throughput at small angular displacement is relatively high. For example, the throughput reaches $25\%$ of the maximum value at $\alpha=0.7\lambda/D$ for the E-ELT design (compared with $\alpha\approx0.5\lambda/D$ for $l=2$ and $\alpha\approx\lambda/D$ for $l=4$ in the case of an unobscured pupil without apodization).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics{figure5a.pdf}\includegraphics{figure5b.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ \label{fig:5}
(a) Azimuthally averaged radial profile of the PSF for the E-ELT pupil without (dashed line) and with (solid lines) the $Z_3^3$ pupil apodizer. The post-coronagraph on-axis PSF for an $l=8$ focal plane vortex phase element and $Z_3^3$ apodizer (blue line) estimates the residual starlight in the image plane. $\Omega$ denotes the angular coordinate in the image plane with respect to the optical axis. (b) Azimuthally averaged contrast curve for the apodized coronagraphic system, calculated by normalizing the post-coronagraph on-axis PSF by the peak irradiance of the $l=0$ apodized PSF (or equivalently, the PSF with $\alpha\gg\lambda/D$).}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Post-coronagraph point spread functions}
The residual irradiance owing to the on-axis star dictates the contrast performance of the coronagraph. The azimuthally averaged post-coronagraph on-axis point spread function (PSF) for the E-ELT system is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:5}(a). The PSF in the $l=0$ case with and without the apodizer are shown for comparison. The contrast is defined as the ratio between the residual starlight and the peak planet irradiance in the image plane (see Fig. \ref{fig:5}(b)). We find that the average contrast within $\Omega\le5\lambda/D$ of the star is $2.5\times10^{-6}$, where $\Omega$ is the angular coordinate in the image plane with respect to the $z$ axis.
Like other Lyot-style coronagraphs, the off-axis PSF is spatially-variant. The PSF for a few example angular displacements are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:6}. At small angular displacements, the PSF varies significantly. However, the PSF approaches Eq. \ref{eq:PSF} at $\alpha\gtrsim$ IWA. We note that the PSF's are wider than the VC without an apodizer and, therefore, the angular resolution may be reduced. The effective resolution depends strongly on the post-processing techniques used, a discussion of which is beyond the scope of this work.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics{figure6.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ \label{fig:6}
Post-coronagraph off-axis PSF's for angular displacements (a) $\alpha=1.5\,\lambda/D$, (b) $\alpha=4\,\lambda/D$, and (c) $\alpha=8\,\lambda/D$ in the $\Omega_x$ direction. (d)-(f) Same as (a)-(c), but with angular displacements in the $\Omega_y$ direction. $\left(\Omega_x,\Omega_y\right)$ are the angular coordinates with respect to the optical axis. For reference, the peak irradiance values, relative to the maximum of the $l=0$ apodized PSF, are (a) 0.23, (b) 0.23, (c) 0.38, (d) 0.23, (e) 0.31, and (f) 0.37.}
\end{figure}
\section{LINEAR COMBINATIONS OF ZERNIKE AMPLITUDE FUNCTIONS}
In this section, we briefly describe how the apodizers presented above may be generalized to linear combinations of Zernike polynomials, while maintaining ideal contrast for unobscured pupils. For a given value of $l$, a linear combination of Zernike amplitude apodization functions of the form
\begin{equation}
P\left(r,\theta\right) = \sum_{n,m}c_{n,m}Z_n^m\left(r/a,\theta\right),\;\;\;\;\;r\le a,
\label{eq:lincomb}
\end{equation}
yield an nodal area in the on-axis starlight at PP2 provided $l$ is even and $|l|>N+M+1$, where $N$ and $M$ are the maximum values of $n$ and $|m|$, respectively. The coefficients $c_{n,m}$ may be complex constants and each Zernike polynomial may be rotated an arbitrary amount owing to the symmetry of the vortex phase element and nodal area. Although most current implementations of the VC have vortex charge $l=2$ or $l=4$, increasing the value of $l$ allows for many possible apodization functions to be devised to improve performance with complicated pupil obstructions.
Low values of $l$ are typically used in practice because fabricating elements with higher $l$ values is technically challenging. We note, however, that high contrast may also be achieved even for functions that have Zernike coefficients $c_{n',m'}$, where $n'+|m'|+1>|l|$ provided the magnitudes of the lower order Zernike coefficients are relatively large. For an unobscured pupil, the fraction of total starlight power that leaks into the circular nodal area is $\eta=P_{leak}/\mathcal{P}$, where
\begin{equation}
P_{leak}=\sum_{n',m'}\left|c_{n',m'}\right|^2\tau_{n',m'}.
\end{equation}
The sum is taken over all indices $\{n',m'\}$ where $n'+|m'|+1>|l|$.
In general, the apodizers described in the previous sections may be further optimized for complicated apertures by introducing additional Zernike polynomials with $n+m+1<|l|$. Additionally, Zernike polynomials with $n+m+1>|l|$ may have a negligible effect to the contrast performance if $\left|c_{n,m}\right|^2\ll1$. Optimized apodizers are beyond the scope of this work and will be the topic of a future correspondence.
\section{CONCLUSION}
We have presented a set of apodizers for the VC that maintain ideal contrast when paired with unobscured circular apertures. The pupil field amplitude is described by Zernike polynomials or linear combinations thereof. These apodizers have features that are particularly useful for high-contrast imaging on ground-based telescopes with thick radial support structures that would otherwise severely limit the starlight suppression capability. Potential drawbacks of this approach include a loss in angular resolution owing to the widening of the PSF as well as reduced transmission. To mitigate the loss in the system and improve off-axis performance, we propose that this approach is used in combination with phase induced apodization techniques \cite{Guyon2003,Pueyo2013,Pueyo2014,Fogarty2014}. Our design for the E-ELT requires an $l=8$ vortex phase element, which is not typically used in practice due to fabrication challenges. However, the on-axis zero in the pre-coronagraph PSF is expected to reduce the sensitivity to central defects in the vortex phase element as compared to the conventional VC without a pupil apodizer or obscurations. Future work will investigate the implementation of lossless Zernike amplitude apodization and the reduced sensitivity to defects in the vortex phase element. In addition, we will implement relaxation techniques to smooth amplitude discontinuities in the pupil function when matched with heavily obscured apertures and explore potential contrast improvements via interferometry techniques \cite{Riaud2014}. We expect this work to improve on methods used to find optimized apodizers for complicated pupils by providing a new analytical basis for analysis \cite{Mawet2013b,Mawet2013c,Carlotti2011,Carlotti2013,Carlotti2014}.
|
\section{Introduction}
We will study random groups on $m$ generators,
given by choosing relators of length $\ell$ through
a random process.
For a function ${\sf num}:\mathbb N \to \mathbb N$,
let $\mathcal G(m,\ell,{\sf num})$ be the probability space of group presentations with $m$ generators and with
$|R|={\sf num}(\ell)$ relators of length $\ell$ chosen independently and uniformly from the
$(2m)(2m-1)^{\ell -1}\approx (2m-1)^\ell$ possible freely reduced words
of length $\ell$.
Then the usual {\em density model of random groups} is the special case ${\sf num}(\ell)=(2m-1)^{d\ell}$, and the parameter $0\le d\le 1$ is
called the {\em density}.
We will generalize in a natural way by defining
$$\mathcal{D}:=\frac 1\ell \log_{2m-1}({\sf num}(\ell))$$
and saying that the {\em (generalized) density} is $d=\lim_{\ell\to\infty} \mathcal{D}$.
The foundational theorem in the area of random groups is the result of
Gromov and Ollivier \cite[Thm 11]{Ollivier05} that $d=1/2$ is
the threshold for a phase transition between hyperbolicity
and triviality. To speak more precisely, the theorem is
that for
any ${\sf num}$ with $d>1/2$,
a presentation chosen
uniformly at random from $\mathcal G(m,\ell,{\sf num})$ will be isomorphic to $1$ or $\mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z$ with probability tending to $1$ as $\ell\to \infty$;
on the other hand, if $d({\sf num})<1/2$, a presentation chosen in the same manner will be an infinite, torsion-free, word-hyperbolic group with probability tending to $1$ as $\ell\to \infty$.
(From now on, we will say that a property of random groups is {\em asymptotically almost sure}
(or a.a.s.) for a certain $m$ and ${\sf num}$ if its probability tends to $1$
as $\ell\to\infty$.)
Here, we study the sharpness of this phase transition.
Letting $\mathcal{D}=1/2-f(\ell)$ for $f(\ell) = o(1)$
lets us use these functions $f$ to parametrize all
cases with generalized density $1/2$.
For simplicity of notation, where $m$ is understood to be fixed in advance, let us write
$\H(f)=\mathcal G\left(m,\ell,\ (2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12-f(\ell))}\right)$. Constant values of $f(\ell)$
change the density, but in the $f(\ell)\to 0$ case
we show here that the properties of random groups
in $\H(f)$ will depend on the rate of vanishing.
\begin{thm}\label{bigtheorem}
Consider the density $1/2$ model $\H(f)$ for various $f(\ell)=o(1)$.
$$\begin{cases}
G\in \H(f) \text{ a.a.s.\ infinite hyperbolic, for }
& f(\ell) \ge 10^5 \! \cdot \! {\log^{1/3}(\ell)}/{\ell^{1/3}};\\
G\in \H(f) \text{ a.a.s.\ $\cong 1$ or $\mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z$, for }
& f(\ell) \le {\log(\ell)}/{4\ell}-{\log \log (\ell)}/{\ell}.
\end{cases}$$
\end{thm}
Here and in the rest of the paper logarithms are taken base $2m-1$ and a group isomorphic
to $1$ or $\mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z$ is called ``trivial."
Theorem~\ref{bigtheorem} is illustrated in Figures \ref{slider} and \ref{alphabeta}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-4,0)--(4,0);
\node at (0,0) [above] {$ \mathcal{D} $};
\node at (0,-1.33) {$ f(\ell) $};
\node at (-5,0) {$f(\ell)\to 0$};
\node at (-5,-.33) {slowly};
\node at (5,0) {$f(\ell)\to 0$};
\node at (5,-.33) {fast};
\draw (-1.5,.5)--(-1.5,-1) node [below]
{$\frac{\log ^{1/3} \ell }{\ell ^ {1/3}}$};
\draw (2.5,.5)--(2.5,-1) node [below] {$\frac 1\ell$};
\draw (1.5,.5)--(1.5,-1) node [below] {$\frac{\log \ell}{4\ell}$};
\draw [blue, line width=10pt,-latex] (-1.5,0)--(-4,0);
\draw [red, line width=10pt,-latex] (1.5,0)--(4,0);
\node at (-1.5,1) [left] {$G$ infinite hyperbolic};
\node at (1.7,1) [right] {$G$ trivial};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{We study density $1/2$ by taking
${\sf num}(\ell)=(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 -f(\ell))}$ relators
for various functions $f(\ell)=o(1)$.}
\label{slider}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\alphabetafill
\caption{A finer view, taking $f(\ell) = f_{\alpha\beta}(\ell)
= \frac{\log^{\beta} (\ell)}{\ell ^{\alpha} }$.}
\label{alphabeta}
\end{figure}
To interpret
Figure \ref{alphabeta}, note that $\log^\beta (\ell) \ll \ell$ for all $\beta$.
If $G\in\H(f_{\alpha\beta})$ is
a.a.s.\ trivial, then $G'\in\H(f_{\alpha'\beta'})$ is a.a.s.\ trivial as well
whenever $\alpha'>\alpha$
or $\alpha'=\alpha$, $\beta'<\beta$.
Similarly if $G\in\H(f_{\alpha\beta})$ is a.a.s.\ hyperbolic, then the same is true of
$G'\in\H(f_{\alpha'\beta'})$ whenever $\alpha'<\alpha$ or $\alpha'=\alpha$, $\beta'>\beta$.
This implies in particular
that setting $d=1/2$ in the classical Gromov
model (which corresponds to $f=0$)
gives a.a.s.\ trivial groups.
In unpublished notes from around 2010, Gady Kozma had given an argument for
triviality at density $1/2$. We give an expanded exposition here.
By tracking through Kozma's argument as sharply as possible,
we find triviality at $f(\ell)={\log(\ell)}/{4\ell}-{\log \log (\ell)}/{\ell}$, which corresponds
to any number of relators greater than
$$
{\sf num}(\ell)=(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - f(\ell))}=(2m-1)^{\frac 12 \ell}\! \cdot \! \log(\ell) \! \cdot \! \ell^{-1/4}<(2m-1)^{\frac 12 \ell}\! \cdot \! \ell^{-\nicefrac 14+\epsilon}
$$
for any $\epsilon>0$.
(This is slightly sharper than Kozma's conclusion, and he notes that such a result---with a power of $\ell$
factor as we have here---would be interesting.)
On the other hand, our hyperbolicity result applies for any number of relators at most
$$
{\sf num}(\ell)=(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - 10^5\ell^{-1/3}\log^{1/3}\ell)}= (2m-1)^{\frac 12 \ell}\! \cdot \!
(2m-1)^{-10^5 \ell^{2/3}\log^{1/3}(\ell)},
$$
i.e., where $(2m-1)^{\frac 12 \ell}$ is divided by a factor that is intermediate between
polynomial and exponential.
In that case we obtain
\begin{thm}
For a sufficiently large constant $c$,
a random group in $\H(f_{\frac 13 \frac 13})$ is a.a.s.\ $\delta$--hyperbolic with
$\delta=c\ell^{5/3}$.
\end{thm}
By contrast, for $d<1/2$, the best known hyperbolicity constant is $\delta=c_d\ell$, for
a coefficient depending on the density.
The proof for triviality given below follows Kozma in using two elementary probabilistic
ingredients: a ``probabilistic pigeonhole principle" (Lemma~\ref{pigeons}) and a
``decay of influence estimate" (Lemma~\ref{decay}). These may be of independent interest, so
they are formulated in \S\ref{ingredients}
in more generality than we need here. The main idea is to find a single
short word that is trivial in $G$ and use it to replace
the relator set $R$ with an equivalent relator
set $\bar R$ with higher effective density.
For hyperbolicity, we follow Ollivier~\cite[Chapter V]{Ollivier05}
in proving a linear isoperimetric inequality,
using the local-to-global principle of Gromov as shown by Papasoglu
to argue that only a limited number
of Van Kampen diagrams need to be checked, then quoting some classic results of Tutte on enumeration of planar
graphs to accomplish the necessary estimates.
The sharpest phase transition
that one could hope for is to have some precise subexponential function $g(\ell)$
and a pair of constants $c_1<c_2$
so that ${\sf num}(\ell)=c_1 (2m-1)^{\frac 12 \ell} g(\ell)^{-1}$ and ${\sf num}(\ell)=c_2 (2m-1)^{\frac 12 \ell} g(\ell)^{-1}$
yield the hyperbolic and trivial cases, respectively. We hope that in future work we will be able
to obtain further refined estimates to ``close the gap."
After completing this project we learned of the 2014 preprint \cite{AFL} which
considers very similar threshold sharpness questions for a different model of random groups,
called the {\em triangular model}, in which all relators have length three.
They find a one-sided threshold for hyperbolicity and show that triviality admits a very sharp phase transition in a sense
similar to our sense above.
However, hyperbolicity is not known to have such a sharp threshold in either model, and furthermore there is no guarantee that the
hyperbolicity and triviality thresholds would agree, as we conjecture that they do.
\subsection{Conventions}
We will write $1$ for the group $\{1\}$ and will sometimes
use the term {\em trivial} to mean isomorphic to either
$1$ or $\mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z$. Throughout the note, when we show that
groups are a.a.s.\ ~{\em hyperbolic}, we are proving the same
strong isoperimetric inequality as for the $d<1/2$
case, so the groups in our hyperbolic range
are infinite, and furthermore torsion-free, one-ended,
with Menger curve boundary.
Since we are concerned with exponential growth with
base $(2m-1)$,
$\log$ will mean $\log_{2m-1}$.
We will use $c, c', c''$
for constants whose values depend on context and $K, k$
for functions of $\ell$. As usual,
denote $ f / g \to \infty$ by $f \gg g$.
Write $[n]$ for $\{1,\ldots,n\}$.
For a word $r$ of length $\ell$ we denote by
$r[i]$ ($1\leq i \leq \ell$) the $i$th letter of $r$,
and write
$r[i:j]$ (where $1\leq i<j\leq \ell$) for the subword $r[i]\, r[i+1]\cdots r[j]$ of $r$ (so that in particular $r=r[1:\ell]$).
For words $r, r'$ we write
$r=r'$ if $r, r'$ are the same words after free reduction, and
$r=_G r'$ if $r,r'$ represent the same element of
group $G$.
As mentioned above, we work with reduced words that need not be
cyclically reduced. For models of random groups with cyclically
reduced words we expect that the same threshold bounds hold.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We warmly acknowledge Gady Kozma for ideas and conversations. The main part of this work
was conducted during a research cluster supported by NSF CAREER-1255442.
\section{Some basic probabilistic facts}\label{ingredients}
\subsection{Distribution of letters in freely
reduced words}
Because the relators in these models of random groups
are chosen by the uniform distribution on freely
reduced words of a given length, it will sometimes
be useful to know the
conditional probability of seeing a particular letter
at a particular position in $r$,
given an earlier letter.
Let $m \ge 2$ be an integer and let $\mathfrak{m} = 1/(2m-1)$.
For any positive integer $n$ let $s_n$ be the partial
sum of the alternating geometric series
$$1-\mathfrak{m}+\mathfrak{m}^2- \dots,$$
i.e., $s_n = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} (-\mathfrak{m})^{k}$, and $s_0=0$.
Then $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty} s_n = \frac{1}{1+\mathfrak{m}}$.
The following lemma measures the decrease of influence of a
letter on its successors.
\begin{lem}[Distribution of letters]
Consider a random freely reduced infinite word
$w = x_0x_1x_2\dots$
in $m$ generators.
Then for $n > 0$,
$\begin{cases}
\Pr(x_n = x_0)=\mathfrak{m}\! \cdot \! s_{n-1},& n \text{ even};\\
\Pr(x_n=y)=\mathfrak{m}\! \cdot \! s_n,& n \text{ even}, y\neq x_0;\\
\Pr(x_n = x_0^{-1})=\mathfrak{m}\! \cdot \! s_{n-1},& n \text{ odd};\\
\Pr(x_n=y)=\mathfrak{m}\! \cdot \! s_n,& n \text{ odd}, y\neq x_0^{-1}.
\end{cases}$
\end{lem}
The proof is an easy induction.
Note that as $n \to \infty$ the probability of each
letter appearing at the $n$th place tends to
$\frac{\mathfrak{m}}{1+\mathfrak{m}}=1/2m$,
recovering the uniform distribution, as one would expect.
We immediately deduce bounds on the conditional
probability of a later letter given an earlier letter.
\begin{cor}[Decay of influence]\label{decay}
For any letters $x,y$ (not necessarily distinct) and for any $n\geq 1$,
$P_n(x,y)=\Pr(x_n=x \mid x_0=y)$ is bounded between
$\mathfrak{m}\! \cdot \! s_{n-1}$ and $\mathfrak{m}\! \cdot \! s_n$, i.e.,
$$\begin{array}{lcll}
\mathfrak{m}-\mathfrak{m}^2+\dots +\mathfrak{m}^{n-1}-\mathfrak{m}^{n} &\le \ P_n(x,y)\, \le&
\mathfrak{m}-\mathfrak{m}^2+\dots +\mathfrak{m}^{n+1}&(n \text{ even})\\
\mathfrak{m}-\mathfrak{m}^2+\dots -\mathfrak{m}^{n+1} &\le\ P_n(x,y)\, \le &
\mathfrak{m}-\mathfrak{m}^2+\dots -\mathfrak{m}^{n-1}+\mathfrak{m}^n &(n \text{ odd}).
\end{array}$$
In particular,
$\frac{2m-2}{(2m-1)^2}\le
\Pr(x_2=x \mid x_0=y)\le \frac{1}{2m-1} .$
\end{cor}
\subsection{A generalized ``probabilistic pigeonhole principle"}
Consider $z$ red balls and $z$ blue balls,
and so on for a total of $q$ colors. Each of these $qz$ balls is
thrown at random into one of $n$ boxes, giving $[n]$-valued random variables
$x_1,\dots,x_{qz}$.
We bound the probability that there is some box with
balls of all colors.
\begin{lem}[Probabilistic
pigeonhole principle on $q$ colors]
\label{pigeons}
Let $\mu$ be any probability measure on $[n]$. Fix arbitrary $q,z\in \mathbb N$ such that
$z\ge 2 n^{1-1/q}$. Then if
$x_1, \dots, x_{qz}$ are chosen randomly and independently under $\mu$,
\[ \Pr(\exists\, i_1,i_2,\dots,i_q
\text{ with } (j-1)z < i_j \le jz, \
x_{i_1} = x_{i_2}= \dots = x_{i_q})
\geq 1 - e^{\textstyle{-cz/{n}^{1-1/q}}} \]
for any $c\le -\frac 14 \ln(1-2^{-q})$, or in particular
$c\le 2^{-q-2}$.
\end{lem}
Note that as $n\to\infty$ a $q$-color
coincidence is asymptotically almost sure
as long as
$z \gg n^{1-1/q}$, and in particular a 2-color coincidence occurs if $z\gg \sqrt n$.
We further remark that this is equivalent to another probabilistic pigeonhole principle
(that for $z \gg n^{1-1/q}$ uncolored balls in $n$ boxes, some box contains at least $q$ balls
a.a.s.),
in the sense that each applies the other.
\begin{proof}
We start by considering the case of a 3-color coincidence ($q=3$). Let
$$X := \# \{ (i_1, i_2, i_3) \mid
(j-1)z<i_j\le jz, \
x_{i_1} = x_{i_2} = x_{i_3} \}.$$
Since $X \geq 0$ we can bound $\Pr(X>0)$ using the classical inequality $\Pr(X>0) > \mathbb E^2[X]/\mathbb E[X^2]$.
We compute expectation by finding the probability of coincidence for some choice
of distinct $i_1, i_2, i_3$ and multiplying by $z^3$:
$$ \mathbb E[X] = z^3 \Pr(x_{i_1} = x_{i_2} = x_{i_3}) = z^3 \sum_{p=1}^n \mu^3 (p). $$
We next write $X=\sum_{i_1}\sum_{i_2}\sum_{i_3} \delta_{x_{i_1}=x_{i_2}=x_{i_3}}$ and reindex as
$X=\sum_{i_4}\sum_{i_5}\sum_{i_6} \delta_{x_{i_4}=x_{i_5}=x_{i_6}}$, so by symmetry we get
\begin{align*} \mathbb E[X^2] = z^3 \Pr(x_{i_1} = x_{i_2} = x_{i_3}) &+ 3z^3 (z-1) \Pr(x_{i_1} = x_{i_2} = x_{i_3} = x_{i_4}) \\
&+ 3z^3(z-1)^2 \Pr(x_{i_1} = x_{i_2} = x_{i_3} = x_{i_4} =x_{i_5})\\
&+ z^3(z-1)^3\Pr(x_{i_1}=x_{i_2}=x_{i_3}, x_{i_4}=x_{i_5}=x_{i_6})
\end{align*}
with respect to any fixed $i_1,\dots,i_6$.
Using $1<r<s \Longrightarrow \| x \|_r \geq \| x \|_s$, we get
\[ \mathbb E[X^2] \leq z^3 \left (\sum_{p=1}^n \mu^3 (p) \right)^{3/3} + 3 z^4 \left( \sum_{p=1}^n \mu^3 (p) \right)^{4/3} + 3z^5 \left (\sum_{p=1}^n \mu^3 (p) \right)^{5/3} + z^6 \left (\sum_{p=1}^n \mu^3 (p) \right)^{6/3}. \]
These expectation formulas easily generalize from 3 to any number $q$ of colors:
\[ \mathbb E[X] = z^q \sum_{p=1}^{n} \mu^q(p) \ \ ; \qquad
\mathbb E[X^2]\leq\sum_{i=0}^q \left[{q \choose i}\cdot z^{q+i}
\cdot \left( \textstyle{\sum_{p=1}^n \mu^q(p)}
\right)^{\frac{q+i}{q}} \right]. \]
The probability of a coincidence is at least $\mathbb E^2[X]/\mathbb E[X^2]$.
First let us consider a simple case, where the number
of balls of each color is chosen to get good cancellation:
set $z_0:= \left(\sum_{p=1}^n \mu^q (p) \right)^{-1/q}$, so that $1\le z_0\le n^{1-1/q}$.
Then we get
$\Pr(X>0 \mid z\ge z_0)> 1/2^q$.
The general case is $z=\gamma z_0$ for arbitrary $\gamma$.
Divide up each of the intervals
$\bigl((j-1)z,jz\bigr]$ into subintervals of length $\lceil z_0 \rceil$, with the last
subinterval longer if necessary, and let $\rho$ be the number of subintervals (the hypothesis
that $z\ge 2 n^{1-1/q}$ ensures that $\gamma/4\le \rho\le \gamma$).
Let $X_k$ count the number of $q$-color coincidences which occur in the respective $k$th subintervals.
The above calculation
tells us that $\Pr(X_k>0)>1/2^q$.
By H\"older's inequality,
we have
$$1= \sum_{p=1}^n \mu(p)
= \sum_{p=1}^n \mu(p)\cdot 1
\le \left(\sum_{p=1}^n \mu^q(p)\right)^{1/q}\cdot
n^{1-1/q}$$
Thus we have $\gamma \ge \dfrac{z}{n^{1-1/q}}$.
It follows that
$$
\Pr(X >0)\ge 1-\prod_{k=1}^\rho\left(\Pr(X_k=0)\right)
\ge 1-\left(1-2^{-q} \right)^{\gamma/4}
\ge 1-\left(1-2^{-q} \right)^{\textstyle{ \frac 14 \! \cdot \! \frac{z}{n^{1-1/q}}}}.\qedhere
$$
\end{proof}
\noindent We emphasize that this result does not depend
on the choice of probability distribution $\mu$.
\section{The trivial range}
The usual proof that a random group $G$ is trivial at densities $d>1/2$ uses the
probabilistic pigeonhole principle to show that there are pairs of relators $r_1,r_2$
which have different initial letters $r_1[1]=x, r_2[1]=y$, but with
the remainder of the words equal.
Consequently $r_1r_2^{-1}=xy^{-1}$ is trivial.
In this way one shows that a.a.s.\ all generators and their inverses are equal in $G$.
To show triviality at density $d=1/2$ is more involved.
The overall plan here is to find shorter
trivial words than the ones from relator set $R$; treating these as
an alternate relator set
will push up the ``effective density" of $G$,
then a similar argument as before will show that the group is trivial.
\begin{thm}[Sufficient conditions for triviality]\label{triviality}
Given any $f(\ell)=o(1)$,
suppose there exists a function
$k: \mathbb N \to \mathbb N$ with $k(\ell)\le \ell$ for all $\ell$
and such that
\begin{equation}\tag{$\star$}\label{star}
k-2 \ell f \to \infty
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\tag{$\spadesuit$}\label{spade}
\frac{\ell - 2}{(2k+2)(2m-1)^{2k}} \to\infty
\end{equation}
as $\ell\to\infty$.
Then a.a.s.\ $G\in \H(f)$ is $1$ or $\mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z$.
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}\label{triviality-cor}
The functions $k(\ell)=\frac12 \log(\ell)-\log\log(\ell)$ and
$f(\ell) = \frac{\log(\ell)}{4\ell} - \frac{\log\log(\ell)}{\ell}$
satisfy \eqref{star}, \eqref{spade}.
Thus a random group in
$\H \left( \frac{\log(\ell)}{4\ell} - \frac{\log\log(\ell)}{\ell}\right)$ is
a.a.s.\ $1$ or $\mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z$.
\end{cor}
\subsection*{Outline of the proof of Theorem~\ref{triviality}}
\begin{enumerate}[(Step 1)]
\item Using the pigeonhole principle (Lemma \ref{pigeons}), we find a freely reduced word $w$ of length $2k$ such that $w=_G 1$.
The existence of such a $w$ is guaranteed by \eqref{star},
and we will use it to reduce other relators.
\item In each relator $r$ we set aside the first two letters for later use, and then
chunk the last $\ell-2$
letters into $b$ blocks of size $(2k+2)(2m-1)^{2k}$,
with the last block possibly smaller.
The \eqref{spade} condition says that $b\to\infty$.
We show that
$w$ appears in one of these blocks
surrounded by non-canceling letters is
with probability $>\frac 1 4$.
\item With these reductions, the probability that $r$
reduces to length at most $\ell'=\ell-\frac{bk}2$ is
more than $1/3$.
\item Finally we show that for this choice of $\ell'$,
conditions
\eqref{star} and \eqref{spade} ensure that
$d\ell-\frac{\ell '}2\to\infty$.
From this we deduce that
for any pair of generators $a_i$, $a_j$,
we can almost surely find two reduced relators
that start with $a_i$, $a_j$, respectively, and match
after that.
Therefore $a_i=_G a_j$ for all pairs of generators
(including $a_j=a_i^{-1}$),
which establishes the trivality result.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{triviality}]
\begin{step}
Suppose $k-2\ell f \to \infty$. Then a.a.s.\
there exists a reduced word $w$ of length $2k$ such that $w=_G 1$.
\end{step}
For each $r\in R$ the word $r[k+1:\ell]$ is one of the
$2m(2m-1)^{\ell-k-1}$ reduced words of length $\ell-k$.
We will find two relators $r_1,r_2$ such that their tails
match
(i.e., $r_1[k+1:\ell]=r_2[k+1:\ell]$) but they differ in
the previous letter ($r_1[k]\neq r_2[k]$).
We can conclude that $w=r_1 r_2^{-1}$ reduces to a word
of length $2k$.
For any word $w$ of length $p$, we define
$R_w$ to be the subset of relators beginning with
that word:
$$R_w:=\{r\in R \mid r[1:p]=w \}.$$
For letters $x,y,z$, $R_{xz}$ and $R_{yz}$ are disjoint
as long as $x$ and $y$ are distinct and neither one
is equal to $z^{-1}$. Fix such letters $x,y,z$.
There are $2m(2m-1)$ possible two-letter reduced words and since we choose $R$ uniformly, the
law of large numbers tells us that a.a.s.\
\[
|R_{xz}|>\frac 1{2m(2m-1)+1}\cdot |R|
=\frac {(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - f(\ell))} }{2m(2m-1)+1}.
\]
The same holds for $R_{yz}$.
We will check that
\[
\frac{(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - f(\ell))}}{2m(2m-1)+1}
\gg \sqrt{2m(2m-1)^{\ell-k-1}}.
\]
Using $2m-1\ge 3$,
we have
$2m(2m-1)+1 \le 2(2m-1)^2$ and
$2m(2m-1)^{\ell-k-1} \le 4(2m-1)^{\ell-k}$,
which gives
\[
\frac{(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - f(\ell))}}{2m(2m-1)+1}\cdot
\frac 1 {\sqrt{2m(2m-1)^{\ell-k-1}}}
\ge c (2m-1)^{{\ell(\frac 12 - f(\ell))} -\frac{\ell-k}{2}} = c (2m-1)^{\frac k2 - \ell f(\ell)}
\]
where $c=1/4(2m-1)^2>0$.
The right-hand side goes to infinity precisely
when \eqref{star} holds.
The purpose of introducing the letter $z$ is to ensure
that the tails of words in
$R_{xz}$ and $R_{yz}$ have
the same distribution.
Hence we can apply Lemma \ref{pigeons} (with $q=2$) to conclude that
a.a.s.\ there exist $r_1\in R_{xz}$ and
$r_2\in R_{yz}$
such that $r_1[k+1:\ell]=r_2[k+1:\ell]$. Then setting
$w=(r_1[1:k])^{-1}\cdot r_2[1:k]$,
we have $w=_G 1$.
\begin{step}
Let $w$ be as above
and $r$ be freely reduced of length $\ell$.
Set $s=(2k+2)(2m-1)^{2k}$ and
$b=\lfloor\frac{\ell-2}{s}\rfloor$.
From the third letter on, divide $r$ into $b$ blocks
of length $s$ (with possibly one shorter block at the end).
For each such block $B$, let $\lambda(B)$ be the last
letter of $r$ preceding $B$.
Then
the conditional probability that $w$ appears in $B$
given any particular value of $\lambda(B)$ is uniformly bounded
away from $0$ as follows:
\[
\forall g, \quad
\Pr\left(w \textrm{ appears in }B \mid \lambda(B)=g \right)
\geq 1-e^{-2/3}.
\]
\end{step}
Write $w=w_1\cdots w_{2k}$,
let $B$ be a block of size $(2k+2)(2m-1)^{2k}$, and divide it
into $(2m-1)^{2k}$ subblocks $B_1,\dots, B_{(2m-1)^{2k}}$ of size
$2k+2$. Let $E_i$ be the event that the word $w$ appears as $B_i[2:2k+1]$. See Figure \ref{subblock}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.9]
\draw [gray] (8,0) rectangle node [above=15pt] {$B_{i+1}$} (10,1);
\draw [gray] (-2,0) rectangle node [above=15pt] {$B_{i-1}$} (0,1);
\draw [thick] (0,0) rectangle node [above=15pt] {$B_{i}$} (8,1);
\node at (1.5,.5) {$w_1$};
\node at (2.5,.5) {$w_2$};
\node at (4.5,.5) {$\cdots$};
\node at (6.5,.5) {$w_{2k}$};
\foreach \x in {0,1,2,6,7}
{\draw [gray] (\x+.1,0.1) rectangle (\x+.9,.9);}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A part of block $B$. \label{subblock}}
\end{figure}
Let us compute the probability of $E_i$ given that none of
$E_1,\cdots E_{i-1}$ happens and given any last letter
$g_0$ before $B_i$. For $1\leq i\leq (2m-1)^{2k}$, we have
\begin{align*}
P_i&=\Pr(E_i \mid \neg E_1, \dots, \neg E_{i-1},
\lambda(B_i)=g_0)\\
&\stackrel{(1)}{=}
\Pr(B_i[2]=w_1 \mid
\neg E_1, \dots, \neg E_{i-1}, \lambda(B_i)=g_0)\cdot \left(\frac{1}{2m-1}\right)^{2k-1}\\
& \stackrel{(2)}{\geq}
\frac{2m-2}{(2m-1)^2}\cdot
\left(\frac{1}{2m-1}\right)^{2k-1}\ge
\frac 23 (2m-1)^{-2k}.
\end{align*}
Equality (1) follows from the fact that only $B_i[2]$ could be affected by previous letters in $r$.
Inequality (2) is an application of the decay of influence estimate (Corollary~\ref{decay}),
which guarantees that $\Pr(x_2=x \mid x_0=y)
\ge (2m-2)/(2m-1)^2$
for any $x,y$. We deduce that
\[
\prod_{i=1}^{(2m-1)^{2k}} \Pr(\neg E_i\mid \neg E_0, \dots,
\neg E_{i-1}, \lambda(B)=g_0)
=\prod_{i=1}^{(2m-1)^{2k}}
\left(1-P_i\right)
\leq
\left(1-\frac 23 (2m-1)^{-2k}\right)^{\textstyle{(2m-1)^{2k}}}
\leq e^{-2/3},
\]
and so finally for any $g_0$,
\[
\Pr(w \textrm{ appears in }B \mid \lambda(B)=g_0)
\geq 1-e^{-\frac 23}>\frac 14.
\]
\begin{extrastep}\label{extrastep}
If there exists a subword $w'$ of $B$ of the form
\[
w'=sdwd^{-1}t
\]
for any word $d$ and letters $s,t$ with $s\neq t^{-1}$,
then we say that \emph{$B$ has a $w$-reduction}. (In this case $w=_G 1 \implies w'=_G st$,
and $B$ remains freely reduced.)
For $k$ sufficiently large we bound \[
\Pr(\text{$B$ has a $w$-reduction}
\mid \lambda(B)=g_0)>\frac 14.
\]
\end{extrastep}
We want to bound from above the conditional probability that $w$ appears in $B$ in the wrong form for
a $w$-reduction.
This only happens if $B$ starts or ends with
$d w d^{-1}$
for some word $d=d_1\cdots d_n$.
Let us compute the probability that $B$ starts this way.
First we bound the probability that $w$
appears in the right place, then conditioning on that
we bound the other needed coincidences.
We have $\Pr(B[n+1]=w_1)\le \frac{1}{2m-1}$, and
$$\Pr(B[n+1:n+2k]=w \mid B[n+1]=w_1)
=\frac{1}{(2m-1)^{2k-1}}.$$
Next we consider whether
$B[n+1-j]=B[n+2k+j]^{-1}$ for each $j=1,\dots,n$.
For $j=1$, we have
$$
\Pr(B[n]=B[n+2k+1]^{-1}) = \frac{1}{2m-1}
\quad \text{or}\quad \frac{2m-2}{(2m-1)^2},
$$
depending on whether $w_1=w_{2k}$ or not, but in either
case this is $\le 1/(2m-1)$.
For $j=2,\dots,n-1$, the conditional probability
is exactly $1/(2m-1)$. For $j=n$, we have
the same two possibilities as before, depending on
whether $\lambda(B)=d_2$.
So all together we find
$$
\Pr(B \textrm{ starts with }dwd^{-1} \mid \lambda(B)=g_0)
\le \left(\frac{1}{2m-1}\right)^{2k+n}.
$$
The same inequality holds for finding $dwd^{-1}$ at the
end of $B$, so
$$
\Pr(\text{$w$ appears in $B$ with no $w$-reduction})
\le 2 \sum_{n=0}^\infty \left(\frac{1}{2m-1}\right)^{2k+n},
$$
and the right-hand side goes to $0$ as long as
$k\to\infty$.
So finally for sufficiently large $\ell$ (and therefore
$k$),
\[
\Pr( \textrm{$B$ has a $w$-reduction}
\mid \lambda(B)=g_0)>\frac 14.
\]
\begin{step}
For each relator $r$ denote by $\bar r$ the word obtained
by performing the first available
$w$-reduction in each block. By comparing to an appropriate
Bernoulli trial, for $k$ sufficiently large we show that
\[
\Pr\left(\# \{\textrm{reductions of }w\textrm{ in }B\}
>\tfrac b 4 \mid r[1:2]=g_1g_2 \right)
>\frac 1 3,
\]
and conclude that
\[
\Pr\left(\length(\bar r)<\ell -\tfrac{kb}2
\mid r[1:2]=g_1g_2 \right)>\frac 1 3.
\]
\end{step}
Let $X_i$, for $i=1,\dots, b$, be i.i.d.\ random variables such that $X_i=1$ with probability $1/4$
and $X_i=0$ with probability $3/4$. Then by the central limit theorem,
\[
\lim_{b\to\infty}\Pr\left({\textstyle\sum X_i}>\tfrac b4\right)
=\frac 12.
\]
Let $\widetilde X_i$ be the indicator random variable for a $w$-reduction in the $i$th block $B^{(i)}$ of $r$.
The variables $\widetilde X_1,\widetilde X_2, \dots$ are not independent, but each $\widetilde X_i$ depends only on $\lambda(B^{(i)})$. By Step 2.5 we know that for any $g_0$,
\[
\Pr(\widetilde X_i=1 \mid \lambda(B^{(i)})=g_0)>\frac 14 = \Pr(X_i=1),
\]
so
\[
\Pr\left(\textstyle{\sum_{i=1}^b\widetilde X_i} >\tfrac b4 \mid r[1:2]=g_1g_2\right)
\geq \Pr\left(\textstyle{\sum_{i=1}^bX_i}>\tfrac b4\right)
\to \frac 1 2.
\]
Thus for sufficiently large $\ell$,
\[
\Pr\left(\textstyle{\sum_{i=1}^b\widetilde X_i}>\tfrac b4 \mid r[1:2]=g_1g_2\right)> \frac 13,
\]
and since each reduction shortens the word by at least $2k$ letters we have
\[
\Pr\left(\length(\bar r)<\ell - \tfrac{bk}2 \mid r[1:2]=g_1g_2\right)> \frac 1 3.
\]
\begin{step}
Let $\bar R=\{\bar r\mid r\in R\}$ be the set of reduced words as above.
For each pair of distinct elements $x,y$ chosen from the generators and their inverses,
a.a.s.\ there exists a pair $\bar r_1,\bar r_2\in\bar R$ such that $\bar r_1[1]=x$, $\bar r_2[1]=y$,
and
\[
\bar r_1[2:\length(\bar r_1) ]=\bar r_2[2:\length(\bar r_2)].
\]
Consequently,
$x=_G y$. Triviality follows.
\end{step}
First, \eqref{spade} says that $b\to\infty$, so we have $b\geq 2$ for $\ell$ sufficiently large,
which gives
\[
\frac{bk}4-\ell f\geq \frac {k}2 -\ell f,
\]
and the right-hand side goes to infinity by \eqref{star}.
Next, let $x,y,z$ be chosen among the generators and their inverses such that $z^{-1}\neq x,y$
and $x\neq y$. Recall that $R_w$ denotes words beginning with word $w$.
We examine relators $r\in R_{xz}\cup R_{yz}$ such
that $\length(\bar r)\leq\ell' = l-\frac{bk}{4}$.
Note that $|R_{xz}|$ is close to $\frac{|R|}{2m(2m-1)}$ a.a.s.,
and we expect $1/3$ of these to have enough reductions
so their length is no more than $\ell'$.
So we get
\[
|\{r\in R_{xz}\mid\length(\bar r)\leq\ell'\}|
>\frac {(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - f)}}{3(2m)(2m-1)+1},
\]
and the same holds for $R_{yz}$.
To apply Lemma~\ref{pigeons} to get matching tails, we must compare
the number of shortened words
to the square root of the number of possible tails.
(The two colors are initial 2-letter words and the
boxes are final $(\ell'-2)$-letter words.)
In order to see that
\[
(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - f)}\gg \sqrt{(2m-1)^{\ell '-2}},
\]
note that
\[
\frac{(2m-1)^{\ell(\frac 12 - f)}}{\sqrt{(2m-1)^{\ell '-2}}}
\geq (2m-1)^{\tfrac{bk}4 - \ell f} \to\infty .
\]
We may conclude that a.a.s.\
there exists a pair of words $r_1\in R_{xz}$ and $r_2\in R_{yz}$ such that
\[
\bar r_1[3:\length(\bar r_1)]=\bar r_2[3:\length(\bar r_2)],
\]
and since $\bar r_1=_G 1 =_G \bar r_2$, we get
$xz=_G yz$,
so finally $x=_G y$.
This means that a.a.s.\
all generators and their inverses are equal in $G$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary~\ref{triviality-cor}]
For \eqref{star} we compute
$k - 2 \ell f=\log\log \ell$,
which goes to infinity.
Condition \eqref{spade} is equivalent to $b\to\infty$, and we calculate
\begin{align*}
\log b=\log \left( \frac{\ell - 2}{(2k+2)(2m-1)^{2k}} \right)
&= \log (\ell - 2) - \log (2k + 2) - 2k \\
& \geq \log \ell - \log\log\ell -\log\ell+2\log\log\ell - C\\
& = \log\log\ell -C
\end{align*}
for a suitable constant $C$.
\end{proof}
\section{The hyperbolic range}
To prove hyperbolicity, we establish an isoperimetric inequality on reduced van Kampen diagrams
(RVKDs) for a random group, as in Ollivier~\cite[Chapter 5]{Ollivier05}.
The main difference to our argument is that, rather than aiming to show a linear isoperimetric
inequality directly, we show that the random group satisfies a quadratic isoperimetric
inequality with a small constant.
This in turn implies that the group is hyperbolic by a well-known result of Gromov
(see Papasoglu~\cite{Papasoglu} and Bowditch~\cite{Bowditch}).
Following Ollivier,
we write $D$ for a (reduced) van Kampen diagram; $|D|$ for its number of faces, and $|\partial D|$ for the length of its boundary.
(Note $|\partial D|\ge \#$ boundary edges because of possible ``filaments.")
A path of contiguous edges so that
all interior vertices have valence two is called a
{\em contour}.
The key fact which allows us to check the isoperimetric inequality only on diagrams
of certain sizes is the following theorem of Ollivier, which is a variation on
Papasoglu's result in~\cite{Papasoglu}.
\begin{lem}[Local-global principle
\protect{\cite[Prop 9]{Ollivier07}}]\label{isoperimetric-inequality}
For fixed $\ell$ and $K\geq 10^{10}$, if
\[\underbrace{\tfrac{K^2}{4}\leq|D|\leq 480 K^2}_{{\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace}
\Rightarrow\underbrace{|\partial D|^2\geq 2\cdot 10^4
\ell^2|D|}_{{\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc j}}}\xspace},\]
then
\[
|D|\geq K^2\Rightarrow|\partial D|
\geq \frac{\ell}{10^4 K}|D|.
\]
\end{lem}
That is, if RVKDs in a certain size range satisfy
a good enough {\em quadratic} isoperimetric inequality,
then all RVKDs satisfy a {\em linear} isoperimetric
inequality. Later, we will let $K=K(\ell)$ to vary the window
of diagrams considered.
We will use Ollivier's definitions concerning {\em abstract
diagrams}, which are a device for precise bookkeeping
in van Kampen diagrams to control dependencies in
probabilities. Roughly speaking, an abstract diagram is a van Kampen
diagram where we forget the labelling of edges by generators and the labelling of
faces by relators. We do keep track
of the orientation and starting point of the boundary of each face,
and we also label faces so we know which faces bear the same relator.
(Since our relators are reduced but need not be cyclically reduced, each
face in an abstract diagram is allowed to have a single ``inward spur'',
see~\cite[Page 83, footnote 4]{Ollivier05}.)
For our group to be a.a.s.\ (infinite torsion-free)
hyperbolic, it suffices to have one RVKD for each
trivial word that satisfies the linear isoperimetric
inequality, so this statement for all RVKDs will be
more than enough.
To show
that a.a.s.\ all diagrams satisfy the hypothesis,
we show that the probability of a diagram existing
that has {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace but not {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc j}}}\xspace tends to $0$. To calculate
this, we must first get a bound on how many abstract
diagrams have {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace, and the probability that such an
abstract diagram is fufillable from our relator set.
\subsection{Probability of fulfillability}
Still following Ollivier, we estimate the probability that some relators exist to
fulfill $D$.
\begin{lem}[\protect{\cite[Lem 59]{Ollivier05}}]\label{fulfillability}
Let $R$ be a random set of relators with $|R|={\sf num}(\ell)$
at length $\ell$.
Let $D$ be a reduced abstract diagram. Then we have
\[
\Pr(D \textrm{ is fulfillable})
\leq (2m-1)^{\textstyle{\frac 1 2
\left(\frac{|\partial D|}{|D|}- \ell +2 \log{\sf num}\right)} }
=(2m-1)^{\textstyle{\frac 1 2 \left( \frac{|\partial D| }{|D|} - \ell (1-2\mathcal{D}) \right)}}
\]
\end{lem}
In our case, our choice of ${\sf num}(\ell)$ gives $\mathcal{D}=\frac 12 - f(\ell)$.
If a diagram satisfies {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace and not {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc j}}}\xspace, we get
$$\frac{| \partial D|}{|D|} < \frac{\sqrt{2} \! \cdot \! 10^2 \ell \sqrt{|D|}}{K^2/4}
< \frac{5 \! \cdot \! 10^3 \ell K}{K^2/4}=\frac{2\! \cdot \! 10^4\ell}{K}.$$
All together, we get
\[
\Pr(D \textrm{ is fulfillable})
\leq (2m-1)^{\textstyle{10^4 \frac{\ell}{K} - \ell\! \cdot \! f(\ell)} }.
\]
\subsection{Counting abstract diagrams}
There is a forgetful map from abstract diagrams $\Gamma$ to embedded planar graphs $\Gamma'$ that strips away the
data (i.e., subdivision of contours into edges, face labelings, and start points and orientations
for reading around each face). Figure~\ref{abstract-diagram} shows an example. To see that the planar
embedding matters, consider the two different ways
of embedding a figure-eight---clearly
different as van Kampen diagrams.
(\raisebox{-.05in}{\tikz \draw (0,0) circle (.2) (.4,0) circle (.2);} versus \raisebox{-.05in}{\tikz \draw (0,0) arc (-180:180:.22) (0,0) arc (-180:180:.17);} )
Adding data to a graph to recover an abstract diagram will be called {\em filling in}.
In order to find an upper bound on the number of van Kampen diagrams up to a certain size,
we will count possible abstract diagrams
by enumerating planar
graphs and ways of filling in.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.50]
\node at (4,3) {$\Gamma$};
\node at (17,3) {$\Gamma '$};
\node (v1) at (0,0) {};
\node (v2) at (-1,1) {};
\node (v3) at (-1,2.5) {};
\node (v4) at (0,3.5) {};
\node (v5) at (1.5,3.5) {};
\node (v6) at (2.5,2.5) {};
\node (v7) at (2.5,1) {};
\node (v8) at (1.5,0) {};
\node (v10) at (-1,-1) {};
\node (v11) at (-1,-2.5) {};
\node (v12) at (0,-3.5) {};
\node (v13) at (1.5,-3.5) {};
\node (v14) at (2.5,-2.5) {};
\node (v15) at (2.5,-1) {};
\node (v17) at (4,-3) {};
\node (v16) at (4,1.5) {};
\draw (0,0) node (v9) {};
\draw plot[smooth, tension=.7] coordinates {(v1) (v2) (v3) (v4) (v5) (v6) (v7) (v8) (0,0)};
\draw plot[smooth, tension=.7] coordinates {(v9) (v10) (v11) (v12) (v13) (v14) (v15) (v8)};
\draw plot[smooth, tension=.7] coordinates {(v7) (v16) (5.5,0.5) (5.5,-1.5) (v17) (v14)};
\draw (-1.1,2.6) -- (-0.9,2.4);
\draw (-0.1,3.6) -- (0,3.4);
\draw (1.5,3.6) -- (1.4,3.4);
\draw (-1.1,0.9) -- (-0.9,1);
\draw (2.4,2.4) -- (2.6,2.5);
\draw (-1.1,-1) -- (-0.9,-1.1);
\draw (-1.1,-2.6) -- (-0.9,-2.5);
\draw (-0.1,-3.6) -- (0,-3.4);
\draw (1.6,-3.6) -- (1.5,-3.4);
\draw (2.4,-1.1) -- (2.6,-1);
\draw (4,-2.9) -- (4.1,-3.1);
\draw (5.4,-1.5) -- (5.6,-1.6);
\draw (5.4,0.5) -- (5.6,0.6);
\draw (4,1.4) -- (4.1,1.6);
\node at (0.6,1.6) {1};
\node at (0.6,-2) {2};
\node at (4,-0.6) {1};
\draw [decorate,decoration=zigzag] (7,0) -- (9.8,0);
\draw [->] (9.8,0) -- (10,0);
\draw [->] (-1.1,0.9) -- (-1.2,1.2);
\draw [->] (-1.1,-2.6) -- (-0.95,-2.9);
\draw [->] (4.1,-3.1) -- (4.4,-2.95);
\node (r1) at (13,0) {};
\node (r2) at (12,1) {};
\node (r3) at (12,2.5) {};
\node (r4) at (13,3.5) {};
\node (r5) at (14.5,3.5) {};
\node (r6) at (15.5,2.5) {};
\node (r7) at (15.5,1) {};
\node (r8) at (14.5,0) {};
\node (r10) at (12,-1) {};
\node (r11) at (12,-2.5) {};
\node (r12) at (13,-3.5) {};
\node (r13) at (14.5,-3.5) {};
\node (r14) at (15.5,-2.5) {};
\node (r15) at (15.5,-1) {};
\node (r17) at (17,-3) {};
\node (r16) at (17,1.5) {};
\draw (13,0) node (r9) {};
\draw plot[smooth, tension=.7] coordinates {(r1) (r2) (r3) (r4) (r5) (r6) (r7) (r8) (13,0)};
\draw plot[smooth, tension=.7] coordinates {(r9) (r10) (r11) (r12) (r13) (r14) (r15) (r8)};
\draw plot[smooth, tension=.7] coordinates {(r7) (r16) (18.5,0.5) (18.5,-1.5) (r17) (r14)};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Abstract diagram and corresponding embedded planar graph.
\label{abstract-diagram}}
\end{figure}
\begin{prop}[Diagram count]
Let $N_{F}(\ell)$ be the number of abstract diagrams with at most $F$ faces, each of boundary length $\ell$.
Then $\log N_F(\ell)$ is asymptotically bounded above by $6 F \log\ell + 2F \log F$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Consider abstract diagrams with no more than $F$ faces.
Since there are $\ell$ edges on the boundary of each face, two orientations,
and at most $F$ faces, there are no more than $(2 \ell)^F$ choices of oriented start points.
Faces can have at most $F$ distinct labels, so there are at most $F^F$ possible labelings.
In order to estimate the number of ways we can subdivide the contours into edges,
we first count edges of $\Gamma '$. If $\Gamma'$ has no inward spurs, then every vertex
has valence at least three. Since the Euler characteristic is $V - E + F=1$,
we have $2E \geq 3V$, which simplifies to
$E\le 3F - 3 \le 3F$. Each face of $\Gamma'$ can have at most one inward spur, which increases the number of edges
by $\leq 2$ for each face, so the total number of edges in $\Gamma'$ satisfies $E\le 5F$.
The number of ways to put $\ell$ edges around each face can be overcounted
by the number of ways to subdivide each contour into exactly $\ell$ edges,
which is $\ell^E$ and so is bounded above by $\ell^{5F}$.
Tutte shows in \cite[p.~254]{Tutte63} that
the number of embedded planar graphs with exactly $n$ edges is $\frac{2(2n)!3^n}{n!(n+2)!} $.
Using $E \leq 5F$, and $(n/e)^n \leq n! \leq n^n$ (with lower bound from Stirling's formula), we get
\begin{align*} \textrm{\# ($\Gamma'$ with $\le 5F$ edges)}
& \le\sum_{n=1}^{5F} \frac{2(2n)!\, 3^n}{n!\, (n+2)!}
\leq 5F \frac{2(10F)!\, 3^{5F}}{(5F)!\,(5F+2)!} \\
& \leq \frac{(10F)! 3^{5F}}{(5F)!(5F)!} \leq
\frac{(10F)^{10F} 3^{5F}}{(5F/e)^{10F}} = (2e)^{10F} 3^{5F} \leq 3^{25F}.
\end{align*}
Combining the above information, we get
$$N_F(\ell)
\leq (2 \ell)^F F^F \ell^{5F} 3^{25F},$$
and so
$$\log N_F \leq F\log (2\ell)+ F\log F + 5F\log \ell + 25F\log 3.$$
Gathering terms of highest order, we have an upper bound by $6 F \log\ell+2F \log F$, as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor} \label{diagram-bound}
Let $N^I(\ell)$ be the number of reduced van Kampen
diagrams with property {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace at relator length $\ell$.
Then $\log N^I(\ell)$ is asymptotically bounded above by $3000 K^2 \log(K\ell)$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Considering all diagrams with $|D|\le 480K^2$ will be an overcount, so we use $F=480K^2$ in
the above estimate, i.e., $N^I(\ell)\le N_{480K^2}(\ell)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Hyperbolicity threshold}
\begin{thm}[Sufficient condition for hyperbolicity]\label{hyperbolicity} Given any $f(\ell)=o(1)$,
suppose there exists a function
$K: \mathbb N \to \mathbb N$ such that
\begin{equation}\tag{$*$}\label{asterisk}
3000 K^2 \log(K\ell) + 10^4 \tfrac{\ell}{K} - \ell\! \cdot \! f(\ell) \to -\infty.
\end{equation}
Then $G\in\H(f)$ is a.a.s.\ (infinite torsion-free) hyperbolic.
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}
In view of Corollary~\ref{diagram-bound},
one intuitive way of choosing a $K,f$ pair
is to take $K^2 \log \ell$ and $\ell f(\ell)$ to be of the
same order.
It turns out that
we can do slightly better than that by instead choosing
to equalize the orders of $\frac{\ell}{K}$ and
$\ell f(\ell)$, which gives the pair below.
\end{remark}
\begin{cor}
For any constants $c,c'$ with $0<4000c'^2+\frac{10^4}{c'}<c$,
the functions $f(\ell)=c \frac{\log^{1/3} (\ell) }{\ell ^ {1/3}}$ and $K(\ell)=c' \frac{\ell ^ {1/3}}{\log^{1/3} (\ell) }$
satisfy \eqref{asterisk}.
In particular, for $c>10^5$, a random group in
$\H\left(c \frac{\log^{1/3} (\ell) }{\ell ^ {1/3}}\right)$
is a.a.s.\ (infinite torsion-free) hyperbolic.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem]
Observe that
\begin{align*}
P:=\Pr \left( \substack{\exists
\textrm{ a van Kampen diagram }D \\
\textrm{ that satisfies {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace but not {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc j}}}\xspace}} \right)
& \leq \sum_{ \substack{\textrm{abstract diagrams } D \\ \textrm{ with {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace but not {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc j}}}\xspace}}}
\Pr(D \textrm{ is fulfillable}) \\
& \leq N^I(\ell) \cdot (2m-1)^{ 10^4 \frac{\ell}{K} - \ell\! \cdot \! f(\ell)},
\end{align*}
where $N^I(\ell)$ is as in Corollary~\ref{diagram-bound}
and $(2m-1)^{ 10^4 \frac{\ell}{K} - \ell\! \cdot \! f(\ell)}$
is the fulfillability bound from Lemma \ref{fulfillability}.
(Note that the last inequality vastly overcounts by replacing
$\left[\textrm{{\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace and not {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc j}}}\xspace}\right]$ with simply {\textrm{ \textcircled{\sc i}}}\xspace.)
We will show that the local-global principle
(Lemma \ref{isoperimetric-inequality}) holds a.a.s.\ for all diagrams,
by showing that for a $K,f$ pair as in the hypothesis, the above quantities go to zero.
In particular, we will show that $\log P\to -\infty$.
We have
$ \log P
\leq \log N^I + 10^4 \frac{\ell}{K} - \ell\! \cdot \! f(\ell).$
By applying
Corollary~\ref{diagram-bound}, we have this asymptotically bounded above by
$$3000 K^2 \log(K\ell) + 10^4 \tfrac{\ell}{K} - \ell\! \cdot \! f(\ell).$$
Requiring that this goes to $-\infty$ is exactly \eqref{asterisk}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary]
We calculate each of the four terms of \eqref{asterisk} using
$K=c'\ell^{1/3}\log^{-1/3}\ell$ and $f=c\ell^{-1/3}\log^{1/3}\ell$. We have
\[\begin{cases}
3000K^2\log(K\ell) \le 4000 c'^2 \ell^{2/3} \log^{1/3}\ell \ ;\\
10^4 \frac \ell K = \frac{10^4}{c'} \ell^{2/3} \log^{1/3}\ell\ ;\\
\ell f = c \ell^{2/3} \log^{1/3} \ell.
\end{cases}\]
Provided $4000c'^2 + \frac{10^4}{c'} < c$, the expression goes to $-\infty$
and \eqref{asterisk} is verified.
For example, we can choose $c'=1$ and $c=10^5$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Hyperbolicity constant}
\begin{thm}[Effective hyperbolicity constant]\label{hyperbolicity-constant}
Suppose $X$ is a 2--complex that is geometrically finite, i.e., there is some $N$ such that
every face has at most $N$ edges.
Suppose there is $\kappa>1/N$ so that $X$ has a linear isoperimetric inequality for large-area loops:
if an edge loop $\gamma$ in $X$ has area $\geq 18\kappa^2N^2$,
then $\gamma$ can be filled with at most $\kappa n$ cells.
Then the one-skeleton of $X$
has $\delta$--thin triangles for $\delta=120 \kappa^2 N^3$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We closely follow the proof
in \cite[III.H.2.9]{BridsonHaefliger} (replacing $K$ by $\kappa$ to avoid notation clash).
If there is a triangle which is not $6k=18\kappa N^2$--thin, one builds
a hexagon $\mathcal{H}$ (or quadrilateral) whose minimal area filling has area
$\geq \kappa(\alpha-2k) \geq \kappa(6k) = 18\kappa^2N^2$.
So this hexagon satisfies our linear isoperimetric hypothesis
$\mathrm{|\mathcal{H}|} \leq \kappa |\partial \mathcal{H}|$.
The remainder of the proof shows that the hexagon is $\delta$--thin provided
\[
\frac{\delta-3k}{3N} > 12 k\kappa \ \Longrightarrow
\delta > 3k+36kN\kappa = 9\kappa N^2 + 108\kappa^2N^3 \geq 117 \kappa^2 N^3.\qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Our density one-half random groups are hyperbolic with $\delta=c \ell^{5/3}$.
\end{cor}
By contrast, as noted above, the best known hyperbolicity constant for $d<1/2$ is proportional to $\ell$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary]
The output of the local-to-global principle was the linear isoperimetric inequality
$|\partial D| \ge \frac{\ell}{10^4 K}|D|$ and to get the needed case we used
$K(\ell)= \frac{\ell ^ {1/3}}{\log^{2/3} (\ell) }$.
This gives $|D|\le c'' \ell^{-2/3}\log^{-2/3}(\ell) \! \cdot \! |\partial D| \le c'' \ell^{-2/3} |\partial D|$, so we take $\kappa = c'' \ell^{-2/3}$ and $N=\ell$.
This linear isoperimetric inequality holds for all diagrams $D$ of size
$|D| \geq K^2$; observe that
$18\kappa^2 N^2 = 18 (c'' \ell^{-2/3})^2 \ell^2 \geq K^2$ for large $K$.
Therefore, Theorem~\ref{hyperbolicity-constant} gives that all triangles are $\delta$--thin
for a value of $\delta$ proportional to $\ell^{5/3}$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
Quantum transport through disordered mesoscopic systems and
its description by the Random Matrix Theory (RMT) have
been subject of an intense research for some time \cite{B97}. The
phenomenon of quantum scattering is universal --- it is
also encountered in other physical systems, like for example
in scattering of electromagnetic radiation by reflecting
obstacles.
In order to study properties of the quantum transport,
a two-dimensional model
of the disordered wire is considered.
The model, in which a number of point scatterers is randomly
distributed over a strip, is continuous and yet solvable ---
expressions for scattering matrix (the $S$-matrix) elements can be
given explicitly \cite{EGST96}.
Therefore, by means of varying the number of point scatterers
together with the length of the sample, it is possible to modify
properties of the electron transport through the wire in a well
controlled way. Hence one can observe various types of
the system behaviour ranging from the ballistic type of transport through
``diffusive-like'' scattering to the localization for a given
energy of incoming electrons \cite{JP95,GSZZ98}. The model allows to study
both macroscopic transport properties, like conductance, and
microscopic signatures of the scattering processes such as
eigenphase, $S$-matrix elements' statistics and time delay distributions.
The aim of this contribution is to
identify and investigate various
regimes of the transport in the model quantum wire.
The results will be compared with predictions of the standard Random
Matrix Theory of transport. The signatures of various regimes
of transport in the presence of the Time Reversal Symmetry will
be considered in order to reveal regimes of the universal behaviour of the model
and also deviations from that behaviour.
\section{THE MODEL}
A disordered quantum wire is modelled with a two-dimensional rectangular strip
of length $L$ and width $W$ ($W=\pi$ is taken) with hard walls \cite{EGST96,GSZZ98}.
There is a finite number, $N$, of point scatterers randomly and uniformly
distributed over the scattering region with coordinates $(x_j, y_j)$:
\begin{equation}
(x_j, y_j) \in (-L/2, L/2) \times (0, \pi), \qquad {\rm for} \qquad j=1, \ldots ,N
\label{xy}
\end{equation}
An electron can enter the strip either from the left
or from the right side. The number of channels, $M$, in the model wire is equal
to the integer part of length of the wavevector $\bf {k}$ of the incoming electron.
The scattering in the strip on impurities and boundaries
is assumed to be elastic and the electron--electron
interaction interaction is neglected. The hard wall
boundary condition means that the wavefunction vanishes on the boundaries
for all $x$:
\begin{equation}
\psi(x,0) = \psi(x,W) = 0.
\label{dirichlet}
\end{equation}
Figure~(\ref{model}) illustrates considered theoretical model of the quantum wire.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{model1.eps}
\caption{This illustrates a two-dimensional strip model of a quantum wire
with $N$ point scatterers. The length of the strip is $L$ and the width is $W$
It has been taken $W=\pi$ in order to have the number of open channels $M = [k]$
(integer part of the incident electrons' wavenumber $k$;
the electrons' energy $E = k^2$ in applied units here).
}
\label{model}
\end{figure}
The scattering matrix $S$ relates incoming waves, denoted by
$M$-component vectors $\bf{a}^l_{\rm{in}}$, $\bf{a}^r_{\rm{in}}$ (incoming waves
respectively from the left and right side -- see Figure~(\ref{model})),
with the outgoing waves
$\bf{a}^l_{\rm{out}}$, $\bf{a}^r_{\rm{out}} $ in the following way:
\begin{equation}
\{ \bf{a}^l_{\rm{out}}, \bf{a}^r_{\rm{out}} \} =
S \{ \bf{a}^l_{\rm{in}}, \bf{a}^r_{\rm{in}} \}.
\label{asa}
\end{equation}
The scattering matrix $S$ has therefore the following block structure:
\begin{equation}
S = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\bf{r} & \bf{t} \\
\bf{t'} & \bf{r'}
\end{array}
\right).
\label{Smat}
\end{equation}
Matrices $\bf{r}$ i $\bf{r'}$ (reflection submatrices) and $\bf{t}$ and $\bf{t'}$ (transmission
submatrices) have size $M \times M$, where $M$ is the number
of open channels. Matrix $S$ has a block symmetry, when $\bf{r'}=\bf{r}$ and $\bf{t'}=\bf{t}$.
The expressions for the $S$-matrix elements have the following form \cite{EGST96}:
\begin{equation}
r_{nm} (E) =
\frac{i}{\pi}
\ \sum_{j,k=1}^{N}
[\Lambda(E)^{-1}]_{jk}
\ \frac{\sin(m y_j) \sin(n y_k)}{\sqrt{ k_m(E) k_n(E) }} \
\exp[ i(k_m x_j + k_n x_k)]
\label{rnm}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
t_{nm} (E) = \delta_{n,m} \ + \
\frac{i}{\pi} \
\sum_{j,k=1}^{N} [\Lambda(E)^{-1}]_{jk}
\ \frac{\sin(m y_j) \sin(n y_k)}{\sqrt{ k_m(E) k_n(E) }} \
\exp[ - i(k_m x_j - k_n x_k)] ,
\label{tnm}
\end{equation}
where $E=k^2$ is the energy of incident electrons. Elements of the $N \times N$
matrix $\Lambda(E)$ read:
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_{jj} (E) = \alpha + \frac{1}{\pi} \
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \left [
\frac{1}{2n} - \frac{i\sin^2(n y_j)}{k_n(E)} \right ],
\label{lambdadiag}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_{jm} (E) = - \frac{i}{\pi} \ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}
\frac{\exp( i k_n(E) |x_j - x_m|)}{k_n(E)} \sin(n y_j)
\sin(n y_m) , \qquad j \neq m.
\label{lambdaoff}
\end{equation}
The longitudinal momentum $k_n$ satisfies the relation
\begin{equation}
k^2 = k_n^2 + n^2,
\label{klong}
\end{equation}
hence for $n > k$, it becomes imaginary $(k_n\sim i n)$,
what ensures the convergence of the series.
Conductance in the strip can be calculated using the Landauer formula:
\begin{equation}
G = G_0 {\rm Tr} \{tt^{\dagger}\},
\label{landauer2}
\end{equation}
where $G_0= e^2/h$ (the spin degeneracy factor is omitted).
The total cross-section, $\sigma$, for the scattering on a single point--like impurity
can be evaluated and the result is following \cite{GSZZ98}
\begin{equation}
\sigma=\frac{\pi^2}{k}\frac{1}{[\gamma+\ln(k/2)]^2+\pi^2/4} ,
\label{cross}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma \approx 0.5772... \ $ is the Euler constant.
The mean free path, $l_e$, can be calculated in a straightforward way (assuming the width
$W = \pi$):
\begin{equation}
l_e=1/\rho\sigma, \qquad \rho=N/(L \pi).
\label{le}
\end{equation}
This parameter is important for determining various regimes of the scattering occuring
in a mesoscopic sample.
Thus choosing parameters of the model so as to keep the ratio of $N$ and $L$ constant
we are able to fix the mean free path for elastic scattering.
\subsection{Statistical properties of the $S$-matrix ensemble}
For chaotic scattering models there is a conjecture that the Random Matrix Theory (RMT)
correctly describes statistical properties of the $S$-matrix ensemble\cite{BS88,BM94}.
Given that conjecture, the statistical properties of the unitary $S$-matrix can be described
by random matrices, which belong to appropriate Dyson circular ensembles \cite{B97}:
Circular Orthogonal Ensemble (COE) in the presence of the Time Reversal Symmetry (TRS)
or Circular Unitary Ensemble (CUE), when the TRS is broken.
The RMT yields some predictions for the mean and variance
of the conductance, when there is TRS present and no block symmetry (BS)
applied \cite{B97}:
\begin{equation}
\langle G \rangle_{\rm R} = \frac{M}{2} -
\frac{M}{4 M + 2},
\label{gavrmt}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
{\rm Var}_{\rm R} (G) =
\frac{M (M + 1)^2}{(2 M + 1)^2 (2 M +3)}.
\label{gvarmt}
\end{equation}
The above formulae yields
$\langle G \rangle_{\rm R} \approx 2.27 $
when the number of channels $M=5$ is taken.
Moreover, in the localization regime the
following relation holds between variance of the
logarithmic conductance and the mean logarithmic conductance \cite{B97}:
\begin{equation}
{\rm Var} ( {\rm ln} G) = 2 \langle - \ln G \rangle
\label{varlok}
\end{equation}
Another interesting prediction refers to the so called enhanced backscattering.
One may consider average
over the COE or CUE ensemble of squared matrix $S$ elements, that is probabilities.
The prediction based on
the RMT yields ($\beta=1$ for COE and $\beta=2$ for CUE) \cite{B97}:
\begin{equation}
\langle |S_{mn}|^2 \rangle_{\beta} = \frac{1 - (1-2/\beta)
\delta_{mn}}{2\ M -1 +2/\beta} ,
\label{scoue}
\end{equation}
In the presence of the TRS ($\beta=1$) the probability of scattering back to the same channel
is twice the value of the probability of the scattering to a different channel.
When the TRS is broken ($\beta=2$) there is no longer enhancement in the backscattering
-- the probability of backscattering is equally distributed over all channels.
\subsection{$S$ matrices with block symmetry}
For the ensemble of $S$-matrices with the block symmetry (BS) and TRS
the RMT prediction yields \cite{KZ97}:
\begin{equation}
\langle G \rangle_{\rm R} = \frac{M}{2},
\label{gavrmtbs}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
{\rm Var}_{\rm R} (G) =
\frac{M }{8 + 4 (M - 1)}.
\label{gvarmtbs}
\end{equation}
The above formulae yields
$\langle G \rangle_{\rm R} = 2.5$
when the number of channels $M=5$ is taken and is slightly larger than the average
without the block symmetry (the difference is the so called weak localization correction,
which also vanishes when the TRS is broken).
\subsection{The Wigner--Smith time delay}
Some properties of the scattering are well described in terms of the Wigner--Smith
time delay \cite{W55,S60}. The time delay is related to the time spent in the scattering
region by a wavepacket whose energy is $E$.
In the multichannel case, the Wigner-Smith time delays are
defined in terms of the matrix $Q(E)$ \cite{LSSS95},
expressed in terms of the scattering matrix and its energy derivative:
\begin{equation}
Q(E) = -i S^{\dagger} \frac{dS}{dE}
\label{wsdelay}
\end{equation}
Eigenvalues of the matrix $Q(E)$, $\tau_i$, $i=1, \ldots 2M$, are called proper times of delay.
\section{RESULTS}
Let us begin with demonstating various regimes of the electronic transport exhibited
by the model with the TRS present.
Figure (\ref{avcond}) shows on a log scale
average conductance $\langle G \rangle$ in units of $G_0$ versus length of the wire $L$.
The width of the strip is $W=\pi$.
The wavenumber of the incident electron, $k$, is fixed at a value of $k=5.5708$. For that energy
(which can be thought of as the Fermi energy in the contacts at temperature $T = 0$ Kelvin degrees)
there is $M=5$ open channels, and the corresponding $S$--matrix is 10 by 10.
The number of impurities $N=L$, so as to keep the constant mean free path $l_e \approx 9$.
The average has been computed out of 500 scattering matrices, each of them corresponding
to a random configuration of point--like scatterers.
For a long enough sample, i.e. $L > 100$,
(and correspondingly large number of impurities) one can observe that the
localization regime in transport sets in. This shows up in a characteristic exponential
behaviour of the mean conductance:
\begin{equation}
\langle G \rangle \sim \exp (- L/\xi)
\label{gexp}
\end{equation}
The localization length, fitted to the data (represented by filled triangles)
yields a value $\xi = 100 \pm 3$.
The quality of the least--square fit shows the red line in the figure.
\vskip 1.5truecm
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{avcond4.eps}
\caption{
Average conductance $\langle G \rangle$ in units of $G_0$ versus length of the wire $L$
shown on a log scale. Tne number of scatterers is equal to the length, $N=L$
This keeps a well defined mean free path.
Tne number of channels $M=5$. Triangles show results for the model, with an ensemble of
$500$ scattering matrices $S$, each corresponding to a different configuration of randomly
distributed over the wire $N$ point scatterrers. Note, that for long samples the mean
conductance decreases exponentially with $L$, $\langle G \rangle \sim \exp(- L/\xi)$.
The localization length, $\xi$, has been found by the least--square fit, to have a value
$\xi = 100 \pm 3$ for $L > 100$.
Circles show results, when the
scattering matrices have a block symmetry.
The inset shows a double-log scale plot of the quasi-diffusive region, for $ 10 < L < 100$,
for the $S$-matrices ensemble with and without block symmetry compared to the RMT predictions.
}
\label{avcond}
\end{figure}
In the same figure there are shown also results for the ensemble of $S$-matrices
with the block symmetry BS (open circles).
The block symmetry is obtained, when the
distributed point scatterers have a mirror symmetry with respect to the $y$-axis (that is
$N/2$ points have been randomly distributed for $x \in (-L/2, 0)$ and $y \in (0, \pi)$ and
then the other $N/2$ have been obtained by the transformation
$x \rightarrow -x, \quad y\rightarrow y$.
The inset in Figure~(\ref{avcond}) presents a double--log scale plot of the so called
``quasi--diffusive'' region, for $ 10 < L < 100$,
for the $S$-matrices ensemble with and without block symmetry compared to the RMT predictions.
Note, that there is an interval, where the mean conductance is
roughly inversly proportional to $L$, $<G> \sim L^{-c}$. Fitted value $c = 0.90 \pm 0.05$
is close to 1.
In order to illustrate further the intermediate, quasi-diffusive regime, let us
consider the variance of the conductance for discussed above ensembles of $S$--matrices.
Figure~(\ref{varcond}) shows dependence
of the variance of the conductance on the sample size $L$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{varcond4.eps}
\caption{
Variance of the conductance Var(G) as a function of the sample size $L$.
The TRS is present. Number of channels $M=5$. Triangles show results without
$S$-matrix block symmetry, and circles with that symmetry imposed. Horizontal lines
depict the RMT predicitions for both BS, and no BS present.
}
\label{varcond}
\end{figure}
Note that there is a narrow interval
in sample lengths $L \in (20, 50)$, where the variance weakly depends on the sample length. This
defines the intermediate (quasi-diffusive) transport regime, which separates regimes of
the ballistic and localized transport.
It is interesting to look into details of the $S$-matrix statistics in the
intermediate regime, and
see if it bears any deeper resemblance to the diffusive regime than just the fact, that
the mean value of the conductance and its variance have close values to the ones predicted
by the RMT.
Let us inspect Figure~(\ref{3d}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{sabs2n17.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{sabs2n17unfo.eps}
\caption{
Averege over ensemble of squared absolute values of the $S$-matrix elements.
The left panel
shows raw data, whereas the right panel presents the data after unfolding
procedure.
Note, that after unfolding, it becomes clear that there exists enhancement
on the diagonal.
This indicates, that scattering back to the same channel is twice (roughly)
larger than
scattering back to a different channel.
}
\label{3d}
\end{figure}
Figure~(\ref{3d}) presents
averege of squared absolute values of $S$-matrix elements evaluated for
an ensemble of 1000 $S$--matrices. In general however,
an ensemble of $S$--matrices describing the scattering in the model wire
for a number of configuration of $N$ impurities
does not necessarily comply with the asumption for the RMT ensemble, saying that the average
of the matrix elements over the ensemble vanishes. This requirement is usually met in the pure
diffusive regime in the quantum chaotic scattering, where there is no direct processes present.
The left panel of the figure
shows raw data, whereas the right panel presents the data after unfolding procedure
described in \cite{FM85}. This procedure transforms the ``raw'' ensemble into
an equivalent ensemble, whose average over the ensemble vanishes
$\langle S \rangle = 0$. It is clear, that after removing ``direct components'' (i.e. a memory of
the incdent channel), there is much better agreement with Equation~(\ref{scoue}),
describing an enhancement on the diagonal.
This indicates the fact, that scattering back to the incident channel
is indeed roughly twice as large than
scattering back to a different channel. Therefore in the present model we recover a well known
universal result.
It is interesting to note, that the nearest neighbour NNS
statistics, both for raw $S$-matrix eigenphases and unfolded data
exhibit the Wigner behaviour --- see Figure~(\ref{psunfo}).
\begin{equation}
P(s) = \frac{s\pi}{2} \exp \left[-\frac{s^2\pi}{4} \right],
\label{GOE}
\end{equation}
where $s$ denotes the spacing of the $S$-matrix eigenphases.
This means that the NNS statistics, $P(s)$, is not so sensitive in revealing the universality
regime, which complies fully with the RMT requirements and predicitons.
\vskip 0.5truecm
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{psn17.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{psn17unfo.eps}
\caption{
Nearest neigbour statistics, $P(s)$, for raw data (left panel) and unfolded
data (right panel). Parameters the same as in
{ \protect{Figure~(\ref{3d})} }.
Note that there is virtually no difference between results shown on both panels.
Both panels show a good agreement with the Wigner surmise (red curve).
For a reference, there is also shown a Poisson distribution
$P(s) = \exp(-s)$ (green curve).
}
\label{psunfo}
\end{figure}
In summary, the ``quasi--diffusive'' regime disscussed above bears some
resemblance to the universal
diffusive regime at the microscopic level, where the standard RMT theory of transport
\cite{B97} holds, provided
that one looks at statistical properties of the fluctuations around mean values of the
$S$-matrix ensemble rather that considers the ``raw'' ensemble itself.
At the macroscopic level, the conductance shows up some indication
of the ``ohmic behaviour'', that is $\langle G \rangle \sim 1/L$, and the variance
of the conductance is weakly dependent on the sample size. The ``quasi--diffusive''
regime of transport is a transition regime between the ballistic transport and the
In Figure~(\ref{avcond}) we have seen that for $L > 100$ one can see exponential decay
of averaged over ensemble conductance. Instead of conductance itself let us look at
logarithm of conductance. Figure~(\ref{lokal}) presents both average (filled dots)
and variance (filled squares)
of the logarithmic conductance.
The inset shows the corelation between variance and the average
of $ {\rm ln} G$. The fitted slope $1.99 \pm 0.05$ is in perfect agreement with the theoretical
prediction of 2. This result supports a claim, that this regime is indeed
characterized by the localization
in electronic transport through the model quantum wire. Again considered model captures well
features of the Anderson localization.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{lokal4.eps}
\caption{
Average logarithmic conductance (filled dots) and variance of the logarithmic conductance
(filled squares)
as a function of the sample length. The inset ilustrates corelation
between average and the variance of the logarithmic conductance ${\rm ln} G$.
Each point corresponds to a different sample length $L$.
The inset shows correlation between
the variance and the average of the ${\rm ln} G$.
}
\label{lokal}
\end{figure}
In order to see some more details of the transport mechanism, let us consider time
delay distributions in the region of the localized transport.
Figure~(\ref{tdelog}) shows a distribution of logarithms of
of the time delay, $\log \tau$ for $L=200$ and $L=800$. For longer samples ($L=800$),
the distribution shows well pronounced maximum for time delays that are one order
of magnitude longer than in the case of shorter samples ($L=200$).
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{logtauny2.eps}
\caption{
Distribution of logarithms of time delays, ${\rm log} \tau$ for $L=N=200$ and $N=L=800$.
}
\label{tdelog}
\end{figure}
Figure~(\ref{tdelay}) presents the tail of the distribution
$P(\tau)$ of time delays obtained for an ensemble of $10^4$ scattering matrices.
The distribution resulting from adopted here theoretical model is compared with
a theoretical prediction of \cite{TC99}.
The fitted curve on the right panel of Figure~(\ref{tdelay}) has been
derived for a one-dimensional random potential in \cite{TC99} and reads:
\begin{equation}
P(\tau) = \frac{\xi}{2 k \tau^2} \exp \left [ - \frac{\xi}{2 k \tau} \right ]
\label{ptau}
\end{equation}
The localization length $\xi$ is taken to have a value of 100 (as computed above) and $k=5.5708$.
Thus presented here two-dimensional model essentially behaves like one-dimensional model
in the limit of long times. Therefore also with this respect, the model exhibits a generic behaviour.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{ptau400col.eps}
\caption{
Time delay distribution $P(\tau)$ for $L=N=400$. Note a good
agreement with the prediction
for a one-dimensional random potential in the tail of
the distribution (solid curve).
There is $10^4$ $S$-matrices in the ensemble to calculate this distribution.
}
\label{tdelay}
\end{figure}
\section{SUMMARY}
Presented continuous and solvable
(though not in a form of closed analytical expressions)
model of electronic transport in disordered quantum wires
is capable of reproducing a whole range of universal
phenomena.
Both micro ($S$-matrix statistics) and macro (conductance)
signatures show consistant features of
the ballistic, intermediate ``quasi-diffusive'' and Anderson localization regime
in the transport.
Results of the model agree very well with the predictions of the standard
transport theory based on the RMT for a wide range of parameters.
This allows to identify regimes of universal behaviour of the system.
Moreover, thanks to flexibility and simplicity, presented model offers interesting
possibilities of extending the standard transport approach beyond
the quasi one--dimensional case in the regime of diffusive scattering.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
The author wishes to thank the Organizers for financial support of his
attendance to the Nanotubes and
Nanostructures 2001 School and Workshop in Frascati, Italy.
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the main motivations for the study of matter at densities in
excess of the nuclear saturation density is, besides the application
to the physics of neutron stars, the possibility of unveiling new
phases of matter. Among these more exotic phases, quark matter is the
most sought out as its existence is all but guaranteed by the fact
that QCD becomes weakly coupled at arbitrarily high densities.
However, even if the transition to quark matter occurs at densities
inaccessible to neutron stars, nucleons are not obviously the only
relevant degrees of freedom. Of particular interest is the possible
existence of $\Lambda$ particles. Due to a combination of
circumstances they are likely the first one to appear as the density
of matter increases. First, they are the lightest baryon (besides
nucleons). Second, they are neutral so their appearance does not incur
in the appearance of an electron and the consequent cost of an
electron Fermi energy. Finally, as we will argue below, the
phenomenology of hypernuclei strongly suggests that $\Lambda$s are
attracted to neutron matter, lowering the energetic cost of $\Lambda$s
even further.
How can the presence of $\Lambda$s be inferred from neutron star
observations? For a given (zero temperature) equation of state,
general relativity predicts a specific relation between the star mass
and radius. Radii are very difficult to measure because of the large
systematic uncertainties involved~\cite{SLB13,Lattimer14b}. Current
constraints on the mass-radius relation from radius measurements are
not strong enough to significantly constrain the presence of
$\Lambda$s. However, one feature of general relativity is particularly
helpful for putting bounds on the equation of state. For a given
equation of state there is a maximum mass beyond which the star will
collapse into a black hole, regardless of its radius. Thus, the
discovery of two stars with masses around two solar masses requires
fairly stiff equations of state and is in tension with the presence of
$\Lambda$ particles, which soften the equation of state significantly.
In fact, the equation of state of matter formed by nucleons only can
be softened by having neutron on the top of the Fermi sphere
transforming (through weak interactions) into $\Lambda$s at rest. As a
result, the same baryon density can be achieved with a smaller energy
density. A rough estimate of the density for the onset of $\Lambda$
appearance can be obtained by equating the neutron Fermi energy to the
mass difference between neutrons and $\Lambda$s. For realistic
equations of state this density is around a few times nuclear
saturation density, well inside the range relevant for neutron stars.
Simple calculations assuming a weak interaction between neutrons and
$\Lambda$s show that the softening of the equation of state makes it
very difficult for an equation of state with $\Lambda$ degrees of
freedom to support a star with a mass around two solar masses as
recently observed~\cite{Demorest:2010bx,Antoniadis:2013pzd}. This
apparent contradiction is sometimes referred to as ``the hyperon
problem''~\cite{Chen11,Weissenborn12,Dexheimer13,Whittenbury14,Yamamoto14,Drago14,Lopes14,Lonardoni14,vanDalen14}.
A few ways to solve this paradox immediately come to mind. Simply
assuming a harder equation of state for nucleonic matter does not
necessarily solve the problem and can actually make it worse. A hard
equation of state for the neutrons {\it lowers} the density at which
hyperons appear. Another solution would be to assume that the
interaction between $\Lambda$s and neutrons is sufficiently repulsive
to raise the effective mass of the $\Lambda$ particle in dense neutron
matter, raising the threshold for $\Lambda$ appearance and postponing
the softening of the equation of state to irrelevant densities.
However, we know that $\Lambda$s are in fact {\it attracted} to
nuclear matter since stable (against strong interactions) bound states
of a $\Lambda$ particle with a variety of nuclei are know (for a
review see~\cite{Hashimoto2006564}). Microscopic meson exchange models
of $\Lambda$-nucleon interaction also indicates an attraction between
$\Lambda$ and neutrons. They are not sufficient to explain away the
``hyperon problem'' but the addition of a repulsive enough three-body
force ($\Lambda$NN) might. In fact, one such a model has been
constructed~\cite{Lonardoni14}. The difficulty with this approach is
that the $\Lambda$NN three-body force is very little constrained by
either experiment or theory. A lattice QCD calculation of the
$\Lambda$N and $\Lambda$NN interaction, although very difficult, is
likely to come out in the near future and, in fact, might be the first
reliable calculation of forces between baryon to be accomplished
\cite{Beane:2003yx,Beane:2006gf,Beane:2012ey}.
In this paper we will not discuss any microscopic model and, instead,
take a radically phenomenological approach. First we will review --
and slightly extend -- what can be learned about the properties of
$\Lambda$s in a dense medium from a simple-minded phenomenology of
hypernuclei. More precisely, we will review the extraction of the
$\Lambda$ mass shift in {\it nuclear} matter and discuss a bound on
the $\Lambda$ mass shift in {\it neutron} matter. This analysis will
tell us about the $\Lambda$ properties in neutron/nuclear matter at
nuclear saturation densities. We will then use the existence of the
neutron stars with $M\approx 2 \mathrm{M}_{\odot}$ to establish constraints on
the change of these properties with density. We will show that, to no
surprise, the attraction between $\Lambda$s and neutrons at nuclear
densities has to quickly into a repulsion and will quantify this
statement. We will end by commenting on microscopic mechanisms for
this change as well as possible hypernuclei experiments which could
help our approach narrow down the range of empirically acceptable
equations of state.
\section{Hypernuclei and the interaction between $\Lambda$ and
nuclear/neutron matter}
The existence of bound states of one $\Lambda$ particle to a number of
nuclei indicates that the interaction between $\Lambda$s and nucleons
is mostly attractive. A more quantitative statement statement can be
made if we consider the binding energies is some detail.
Fig.~\ref{fig:hypernuclei} shows the measured binding energies of a
$\Lambda$ particle as a function of the mass number $A$ of the nucleus
(from the data compiled in~\cite{Samanta:2005kd,Hashimoto2006564}). In
some cases, more than one hypernucleus with the same value of $A$
appears. In the case of small $A$ they correspond to nuclei with
different atomic numbers $Z$. For the larger values of $A$ they
correspond to different excited states of the same nucleus
corresponding to different values of the angular momentum $l$ as, for
instance, the five states in ${}^{208}$Pb.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{hypernuclei.pdf}
\caption{$\Lambda$ binding energies of known hypernuclei (in MeV).
Data taken from~\cite{Samanta:2005kd} and~\cite{Hashimoto2006564}.}
\label{fig:hypernuclei}
\end{figure*}
The detailed value of these binding energies can only be computed in
detailed calculations, either starting from the largely unknown
$\Lambda$-nucleon and $\Lambda$-nucleon-nucleon forces or, more
ambitiously, from QCD. Both approaches are in their infancy but, once
they succeed one can imagine extend them to the study of hyperon in a
neutron medium. However, simple phenomenological methods, akin to the
mass formula for non-strange nuclei, can shed light on the
data and have the additional advantage of being immediately extendable
to strange dense matter. The basic observation is that the interaction
between one $\Lambda$ and the nucleons is short range; in fact, it is
expected to be of even shorter range than nuclear forces on account of
the absence of the one-pion exchange component which cannot occur for
an isoscalar particle. Thus, a $\Lambda$ particle inside a
hypernucleus interacts with only a few nucleons around it. Since
nuclei have a fairly constant density, the main effect of the
$\Lambda$-nucleon interaction is to provide a spherical constant
potential well inside which the $\Lambda$ particle moves freely. The
depth of this well is also expected to be the same for every nucleus,
again on account of nuclear saturation. This simple model corresponds
to a $\Lambda$ binding energy given by energy of a $\Lambda$ particle
in a spherical well with radius proportional to $A^{1/3}$ plus a fixed
shift:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:two_param}
B_\Lambda = \Delta E - c \frac{z^2_{l n}}{A^{2/3}},
\end{equation}
where $z_{l n}$ is the $n^{th}$ zero of the $l^{th}$ spherical Bessel
function, $A$ is the mass number of the nucleus {\it not} including
the $\Lambda$ and $\Delta E$ and $c$ are fitting parameters. The
values $\Delta E= 24.6$ MeV and $c=68.7$ MeV were obtained from a fit
of the $A\geq 8$ nuclei (we exclude very small nuclei where this
approach clearly does not make sense). This simple fit does a
reasonable job at the qualitative level but leaves a lot of room for
improvement. As a way of describing the goodness of the fit we notice
that, if we add (in quadratures) a theoretical uncertainty of $10\%$,
the $\chi^2$ per degree of freedom of this fit is about 10.
Two improvements on the model in eq.~\ref{eq:two_param} make it work
much better. One is to use a more precise description of nuclear radii
in the kinetic energy term. Nuclear radii, as measured in elastic
electron scattering, can be parametrized by $R=r_0 (A^{1/3} +1.565
A^{-1/3} - 1.043 A^{-1})$\cite{Friedrich1982192}. The parameter $r_0$
is absorbed in $c$ and is unimportant. This parametrization of the
nuclear radius provides a more accurate determination of the kinetic
energy of the $\Lambda$ as a function of $A$. An alternative procedure
would be to let the constants 1.565 and $-$1.043 to float during the fit
but similar results are obtained so, for the sake of brevity, we will
not pursue it here. At the boundary of the nucleus the $\Lambda$
particle potential has to change to zero. Using a smooth shape for the
potential as a function of the distance from the center (as opposed to
the step function implicit in eq.~\ref{eq:two_param}) might be more
realistic. A similar effect is caused by the thin neutron skin near
the boundary. One way of dealing with these corrections is to solve
for the $\Lambda$ energy levels in a Woods-Saxon potential as done in
\cite{PhysRevC.38.2700}. In order to obtain analytic expressions, we
chose to include these effects perturbatively, assuming only that the
distance over which the potential transitioned to zero was much
smaller than the nucleus radius. A simple first order perturbative
calculation leads to a dependence of the energy of the form $\sim
1/R^3 \sim 1/A$ for this contribution. These two effects combined
change eq.~\ref{eq:two_param} to
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:three_param}
B_\Lambda = \Delta E - c \frac{z^2_{l n}}
{ (A^{1/3} +1.565 A^{-1/3} - 1.043 A^{-1})^2 } + \frac{e}{A}.
\end{equation}
Fitting the three parameters $\Delta E, c$ and $e$ in
eq.~\ref{eq:four_param} to the binding energy of the $\Lambda$ to
nuclei with $A\geq 16$ we obtain $\Delta E = 28.5$ MeV, $c=119$ MeV
and $e=-64.7$ MeV. We again add in quadrature a theoretical uncertainty
of $10\%$ to the experimental uncertainty. The plots in
fig.~\ref{fig:hypernuclei_c1c2e0_a} and
fig.~\ref{fig:hypernuclei_c1c2e0_b} show this fit compared to the
available data. This fit works very well for most nuclei with $A\geq
8$, including the excited levels of ${}^{208}$Pb. By varying details
of the fit, as the minimum value of $A$ and/or the assumed theoretical
error a likely range for $27.5 {\rm \ MeV} \leq \Delta E \leq 29.5
{\rm \ MeV}$ is obtained.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{hypernuclei_c1c2e0_a.pdf}
\caption{$\Lambda$ binding energies of known single-$\Lambda$
hypernuclei and the three parameter fit from
eq.~\ref{eq:three_param}. Only nuclei with $A\geq 8$ were used in
the fit. }
\label{fig:hypernuclei_c1c2e0_a}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{hypernuclei_c1c2e0_b.pdf}
\caption{Detail of fig.~\ref{fig:hypernuclei_c1c2e0_a} for low A.}
\label{fig:hypernuclei_c1c2e0_b}
\end{figure}
These results indicate that the binding energy of a $\Lambda$ particle
in nuclear matter is about $28$ MeV. But in neutron stars, the more
relevant quantity is the shift in energy of a $\Lambda$ particle in
{\it neutron} matter. The data set, however, includes hypernuclei with
neutron excess $(A-2Z)/A$ varying from $-$0.07 to 0.21 among larger
nuclei with $A\geq 10$ and it is a natural question whether this
spread in neutron excess can be explored in order bound the energy
shift in neutron matter.
Starting from the good fit in eq.~\ref{eq:three_param} (very similar
to the one in~\cite{PhysRevC.38.2700}) we can address the variation of
$\Lambda$ mass with the neutron excess by adding an extra term
proportional to the neutron excess $(A-2Z)/A$ to
eq.~\ref{eq:three_param}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:four_param}
B_\Lambda = \Delta E - c \frac{z^2_{l n}}
{ (A^{1/3} +1.565 A^{-1/3} - 1.043 A^{-1})^2 } +
\frac{e}{A}+d \left(\frac{A-2Z}{A}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
Terms linear in the neutron excess $(A-2Z)/A$ are not expected as they
are proportional to isospin breaking terms. In fact, a term
proportional to $(A-2Z)/A$ does not improve the fit. A four parameter
fit of the $A\geq 8$ nuclei gives $\Delta E = 28.5$ MeV, $c=120$ MeV,
$e=-65.1$ MeV and $d=4.99$ MeV and is compared to the data in
fig.~\ref{fig:hypernuclei_2_a} and \ref{fig:hypernuclei_2_b}. This fit
is modestly better than the simpler three-parameter fit in
eq.~\ref{eq:three_param} suggesting a small dependence of the binding
energies on the neutron excess. In order to estimate the range of
acceptable values of $d$ we computed the $\chi^2$ per degree of
freedom of a fit of eq.~\ref{eq:four_param} with fixed value of $d$.
We find that it changes from $\chi^2=1.3$ at $d=4.99$ MeV (the
preferred value) to $\chi^2=2$ at $d=20$ MeV or $d=-10$ MeV. Changes
in the estimated theoretical uncertainty and minimum value of $A$ used
in the fit do not change this result by more than its uncertainty. We
take this as evidence that values of $d$ outside the range $-10{\rm
\ MeV} \alt d \alt15 {\rm \ MeV}$ are disfavored by hypernuclei
data. It should be stressed however, that the systematic errors
involved in the arbitrary choice of parametrizations are difficult to
estimate and are not included in a rigorous way in our estimate. On
the experimental side, the observation of further large, neutron rich
hypernuclei would help constrain the value of the parameter $d$.
The small dependence of the $\Lambda$ binding energy on the neutron
excess is expected, at least at small enough densities. In fact, the
shift in the energy of a $\Lambda$ particle at small densities is
proportional to the density of the particles in the medium (and
proportional to the forward scattering
amplitude~\cite{Eletsky:1996jg}). But, due to isospin symmetry, the
scattering amplitude for $\Lambda$-proton and $\Lambda$-neutron is
(approximately) the same. Whether the $\Lambda$ scatters out of a
density $n$ of neutrons or a density $x n$ of protons and $(1-x)n$ of
neutrons, the total shift in energy is the same. At high enough
densities, the dependence of the energy shift with the density of
scatterers is no longer linear and a dependence on the proton fraction
appears, even if isospin symmetry were exact.
\begin{figure}[!tbp]
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{hypernuclei_bestd_a.pdf}
\caption{$\Lambda$ binding energies of known single-$\Lambda$
hypernuclei and the four parameter fit from
eq.~\ref{eq:four_param}. }
\label{fig:hypernuclei_2_a}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{hypernuclei_bestd_b.pdf}
\caption{Detail from fig.~\ref{fig:hypernuclei_2_a} for low A.
Only nuclei with $A\geq8$ were used in the fit. }
\label{fig:hypernuclei_2_b}
\end{figure}
\section{Equation of state including hyperons}
We can now use the lessons from the previous section, in special the
estimated shift in energy of a single $\Lambda$ particle in neutron
matter, to construct equations of state for matter at the densities
relevant for neutron star physics. The first observation is that the
presence of too many $\Lambda$s softens the equation of state too much
to accommodate two solar masses stars. As we will see below,
typically, a
$\Lambda$ fraction of no more than about $10\%$ is required.
Consequently, the $\Lambda-\Lambda$ interaction plays a small role and
will be neglected. The energy density is then a linear function of the
$\Lambda$ fraction $y$. We can write the energy density with baryon
number density $n$ and proton fraction $x$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:epsilon_nxy}
\epsilon(n,x,y) = \epsilon_N(n,x,y) +
\frac{(3\pi^2 y n)^{5/3}}{10\pi^2 M_\Lambda} +
y n \left\{ M_\Lambda + \left[E_\Lambda +
\left( x-\frac{1}{2} \right)^2 S_\Lambda \right]f(n) \right\},
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon_N$ is the energy of the nucleons, $E_\Lambda$ is the
shift in the $\Lambda$ energy in nuclear matter (at the saturation
density $n_0$), $S_\Lambda$ parametrizes the shift of this energy as
the proton fraction changes (from nuclear matter with $x=1/2$ to
neutron matter with $x=0$). Finally, the function $f(n)$ (with
$f(n_0)=1$) parametrizes the change in the $\Lambda$ energy as the
baryon density is changed. Before we discuss the bound on each of
these parameters, let us comment on the choice of the form in
eq.~\ref{eq:epsilon_nxy}. Terms linear in $x-1/2$ (or higher odd
powers of $x-1/2$) are expected to be very small as they result from
isospin breaking effects. As commented above, we will be interested in
small values of $y$ for which a linear approximation suffices.
Finally, if $\Lambda$s did not interact with nucleons, the parameters
$E_\Lambda$ and $S_\Lambda=0$ would vanish and the $\Lambda$
contribution to the energy density would be given by the free gas term
(the term proportional to $y^{5/3}$) plus the contribution of their
rest mass.
The information obtained from the study of hypernuclei discussed above
sets bounds on the values of $E_\Lambda$ and $S_\Lambda$. The
$\Lambda$ energy shift in nuclear matter ($x=1/2$), determines
$E_\Lambda =\Delta E = 28.5\pm 2.0 $ MeV. This determination is
reliable and consistent with the energy shift arising from somewhat
different hypernuclei models (for instance, from models including a
spin-orbit force~\cite{PhysRevC.38.1322}). The bounds on $S_\Lambda$
are looser and follows from our analysis of the previous section
\begin{equation}
S_\Lambda=4 d \approx 20 \pm 60 {\rm \ MeV}.
\end{equation}
Unfortunately, it does not seem to be currently possible to
extract any information about the dependence of the $\Lambda$ energy
away from the saturation density from the phenomenology of
hypernuclei. In our parametrization of the equation of state, this
dependence is contained in the function $f(n)$ and we will use the
existence of two solar mass neutron stars to constrain it. One thing
we do know about $f(n)$ is that $f(n) \sim n$ for small values of $n$
(the proportionality constant being related to the forward scattering
amplitude~\cite{Eletsky:1996jg}). At higher densities, however, the
trend of decreasing in-medium $\Lambda$ mass with the density has to
stop. Otherwise, the number of $\Lambda$s grows quickly and the
equation of state is too soft to support two solar mass stars. Since
we know little about the process leading to the reversal of the trend
we will simply parametrize $f(n)$ in terms of two parameters $\Delta$
and $\delta$:
\begin{equation}
f(n/n_0) = \frac{n}{n_0}\frac{1}{1-\Delta^{-\delta}}
\left[ 1-\left( \frac{n}{\Delta n_0} \right)^\delta\right].
\end{equation}
The parameters $\Delta$ fixes the density beyond which the $\Lambda$
in-medium mass is larger than in the vacuum and it is essential for
the plausibility of the equation of state while the parameter $\delta$
determines the shape of the mass dependence with density and is of
lesser importance. The function $f(n/n_0)$ is plotted in
fig.~\ref{fig:f} for several values of $\Delta$ and $\delta$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{f.pdf}
\caption{ The function $-f(n/n_0)$ for $\Delta=1.5, 2.0$ and $2.5$
and $\delta=3$ (solid line, blue online) and $\delta=1$ (dashed,
yellow online).}
\label{fig:f}
\end{figure}
Now we will discuss the non-strange equation of state
$\epsilon_N(n,x,y)$. The highest momentum collisions in neutron matter
occur between two back-to-back neutrons at the top of the Fermi
surface. At low densities, below $n\alt 2 n_0$, these momenta are
below the inelastic threshold and non-relativistic potential models
are adequate to describe them. The force between nucleons can be
inferred from the well know measured phase shifts. This program has
been carried out and explain well not only nucleon-nucleon scattering
but, when phenomenological three-body forces are included, the binding
energy of light nuclei. Models with two and three-body forces
determined this way were used to study neutron matter (but not nuclear
matter)~\cite{Gandolfi:2011xu,Steiner:2012,Gandolfi:2013baa} using
Monte Carlo methods. The dependence on the three-body force, which is
less well known than the two-body force, is modest at low densities
but becomes more important at higher densities ($n \agt 2 n_0)$. The
same nucleon-nucleon phase shifts can be fit by potentials obtained
from a low energy chiral expansion. It has been claimed that the
chiral potential, after being evolved according to the renormalization
group, can be used perturbatively in calculations of cold neutron
matter~\cite{Hebeler:2009iv}. The resulting equation of state is very
similar, including its uncertainties, as the one obtained by Monte
Carlo methods~\cite{Hebeler:2010jx, Hebeler:2013nza}. For neutron star
applications it is necessary to perform a small extrapolation of the
pure neutron matter equation of state to non-zero proton fractions
$x\neq 0$. This extrapolation, besides being small ($x \alt 6\%$ near
saturation), is guided by the empirical values of the symmetry energy
and its density dependence. The easiest way to incorporate this
information is to parametrize $\epsilon_N$, for instance, in the
Skyrme-like form:~\cite{Skyrme:1959,Hebeler:2013nza}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:epsilon}
\epsilon_N(n,x,y) &=&(1-y)n M_N +
\frac{3n T_0}{5} \left( x^{5/3} + (1-x-y)^{5/3}\right)
\left( \frac{2n}{n_0}\right)^{2/3} \nonumber \\
&-& T_0\left[ (2\alpha-4\alpha_L)x(1-x-y) +
\alpha_L(1-y)^2 \right]\frac{(1-y)^2n^2}{n_0}\nonumber\\
&+&(1-y)n T_0\left[ (2\eta-4\eta_L)x(1-x-y) + \eta_L (1-y)^2\right]
\left(\frac{(1-y)n}{n_0}\right)^\gamma,
\end{eqnarray}
with $T_0=(3\pi^2 n_0/2)^{2/3}/2M_N$. When reduced to pure neutron
matter ($x=y=0$), eq.~\ref{eq:epsilon} fits the Monte Carlo results of
refs.
\cite{Hebeler:2010jx,Hebeler:2013nza,Gandolfi:2011xu,Gandolfi:2013baa}
very well and it is a convenient manner to parametrize them. Away from
$x=0$ it is the most general even function of $x-(1-y)/2$ (as required
by isospin symmetry) up to quadratic order in $x-(1-y)/2$.
The five parameters $\alpha, \alpha_L,\eta,\eta_L$ and $\gamma$ can be
determined by the empirical knowledge of five quantities:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:empirical}
-B &=& \epsilon_N(n_0,1/2,0)+\frac{M_N+M_P}{2},\nonumber\\
p&=&n^2 \frac{\partial \epsilon_N/n}{\partial n}|_{n=n_0, x=1/2,y=0}=0,\nonumber\\
K &=& 9 n_0^2 \frac{\partial^2\epsilon_N}{\partial n^2}|_{n=n_0, x=1/2, y=0},\nonumber\\
S &=& \frac{n_0}{8}\frac{\partial^2\epsilon_N}{\partial x^2}|_{n=n_0, x=1/2,y=0},\nonumber\\
L &=& \frac{3n_0}{8}\frac{\partial^3\epsilon_N}{\partial n\partial x^2}|_{n=n_0, x=1/2,y=0}.
\end{eqnarray}
The analysis of nuclear masses predicts $B=16\pm 0.1$ MeV and $n_0 =
0.16\pm0.01~\mathrm{fm}^{-3}$~\cite{Kortelainen14} and the study of
giant resonances imply $K=235\pm 25$ MeV for the nuclear
incompressibility. Finally, a wide range of experimental data from
nuclear masses, dipole polarizabilities, and giant resonances implies
$S=32 \pm 2$ MeV for the symmetry energy and $L=50 \pm 15$ MeV (see
\cite{Lattimer:2012xj,Lattimer14a} and references therein). Given
values of $B$, $n_0$ and $K$, one can determine $\alpha$, $\eta$, and
$\gamma$, and then $S$ and $L$ can be used to obtain $\alpha_L$ and
$\eta_L$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{delldel20.pdf}
\noindent
\caption{Monte Carlo probability distribution of neutron
star models with $M > 2 \mathrm{M}_{\odot}$ in the
$\delta-\Delta$ plane.}
\label{fig:delldel}
\end{figure}
After a set of parameters is chosen, the $\beta-$equilibrated state is
found by minimizing $\epsilon(n,x,y)$ in relation to $x$ and $y$ for
any given value of $n$. At the highest density considered and for all
parameters used $x<25\%$, confirming that the extrapolation is
relatively small. In any viable equation of state $y$ is very rarely
larger than 10\% substantiating the assumed linear dependence on $y$
on eq.~\ref{eq:epsilon_nxy}.
It follows the discussion above that all but two the parameters in our
equation of state (eq.~\ref{eq:epsilon_nxy}), namely, $\alpha,
\alpha_L, \eta, \eta_L, \gamma, E_\Lambda, S_\Lambda$, are
constrained, to a larger or lesser degree, by empirical information.
We can now use the existence of neutron stars with $M\approx 2
\mathrm{M}_{\odot}$ to constrain the remaining two, $\Delta$ and
$\delta$. The parameter $\Delta$ sets the density, in units of
the saturation density, beyond which the
$\Lambda$ is repelled, as opposed to attracted, to dense matter. If
$\Delta$ is too large, there is a large range of densities where the
presence of $\Lambda$ particles is energetically favored, making the
equation of state to soft too support $M\approx 2 \mathrm{M}_{\odot}$
stars. From microphysics, the only thing we know about $\Delta$ is
that $\Delta>1$. The parameters $\delta$ fixes the shape of the
in-medium $\Lambda$ energy as a function of the density. As we will
see, neutron star masses puts very loose bounds on it and $\delta$
plays very little role in our discussion.
Taking $B=16$ MeV, $n_0 = 0.16~\mathrm{fm}^{-3}$, we perform a Monte
Carlo simulation (based on the work in
Refs.~\cite{Steiner10,SLB13,Steiner14}) over the estimated values of
the parameters $K$, $S$, $L$ as in Ref.~\cite{Bedaque15} and also over
the new parameters $E_{\Lambda}$, $S_{\Lambda}$, $\Delta$ and
$\delta$. We use Gaussian distributions for all parameters except for
$\Delta$ and $\delta$. For $\Delta$, we use a uniform distribution
between 1 and 10 and for $\delta$ we use a log-normal distribution
centered at 1. The width is fixed at 1/2 (taking logs with base 10)
and the one-sigma range is approximately $1/3$ to $3$. We compute the
equation of state using \ref{eq:epsilon_nxy} and solve the
Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov equations, rejecting all points which do not
have $M > 2 \mathrm{M}_{\odot}$. The results are given in
fig.~\ref{fig:delldel}. As $\Delta$ becomes large, the pressure of
matter decreases with increasing energy density, so values of
$\Delta>4$ are not explored by the Monte Carlo. This puts a strict, if
not unsurprising, bound on how fast the $\Lambda$ binding has to
change with density. The upper left corner of the plot is ruled out
(small values of $\delta$ and large values of $\Delta$) by the maximum
mass constraint. This result is consistent with many other previous
works which found that the ``hyperon problem'' could be solved with an
appropriate variation of model parameters. We find this is also the
case in our phenomenological model for small $\Delta$ or large
$\delta$.
The results above were obtained under some assumptions that we will
now discuss. The first was the non-strange equation of state
eq.~\ref{eq:epsilon}; while it parametrizes well the fairly well know
low density ($n \alt 2 n_0$) equation of state, it is unknown how well
it does at higher density. The high density behavior of
eq.~\ref{eq:epsilon} is dominated by the value of the exponent
$\gamma$: higher $\gamma$ corresponding to stiffer equations of state.
The exponent $\gamma$ itself is largely determined by the value of the
nuclear matter compressibility $K$ and is little affected by the
remaining parameters in eq.~\ref{eq:empirical}. Thus, the non-strange
equations of state with larger values of $K$ are the ones stiffer at
high densities. It turns out, however, that increasing the value of
$K$ -- even outside the empirically acceptable range -- does not
increase the range of value of $\Delta$ consistent with $M > M_\odot$
stars. Fig.~\ref{fig:KDelta} demonstrates this, where it is clear that
$K$ and $\Delta$ are essentially uncorrelated. The reason is that, as
mentioned above, increase the energetic cost of nucleons only triggers
the formation of more $\Lambda$s without an increase of pressure on
energy density. It should be pointed out, however, that with the
assumed form of the $\Lambda$ energy density
(eq.~\ref{eq:epsilon_nxy}), very stiff equations of state lead to an
instability where a large number of $\Lambda$s appear. In a more
complete model including $\Lambda-\Lambda$ interactions this
instability would be cutoff by the repulsion between $\Lambda$s. Thus,
the possibility remains that a stiff non-strange equation of state
coupled to a non-linear dependence of the energy density with the
$\Lambda$ fraction ($y$) would support $M>2.4M_\odot$ stars,
regardless of the value of $\Delta$. The few doubly strange
hypernuclei presently known might be used to extract some information
about $\Lambda-\Lambda$ interaction in nuclear matter but the
extrapolation of that to neutron matter at higher densities seem too
unconstrained to be pursued at the moment. Another possibility is the
onset of quark matter at relatively low
densities~\cite{Chen11,Dexheimer13,Whittenbury14}, maybe even at lower
densities than the threshold for hyperon formation. That possibility,
of course, obviates the hyperon problem while, at the same time,
leading to problems of their own that could be solved by postulating a
stiffer quark matter equation of state~\cite{Blaschke14}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{Kcap_delta20.pdf}
\noindent
\caption{Monte Carlo probability distribution of incompressbility
(x-axis) and the parameter $\Delta$ (y-axis) for star models with $M
> 2 \mathrm{M}_{\odot}$}
\label{fig:KDelta}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
We argued that the empirical knowledge of the $\Lambda$ separation
energy in $\Lambda$-nuclei provides information not only about the
mass shift of the $\Lambda$ particle in nuclear matter but also some
bounds on the mass shift in {\it neutron} matter. We use this bound to
construct a phenomenological model for the energy density of
neutron/proton/$\Lambda$/electron dense matter. This model contains,
besides the parameters constrained by microphysics, two new parameters
describing the change of the $\Lambda$ mass shift with density. One of
them, $\Delta$, determines the density at which the $\Lambda$-neutron
matter interaction changes from atractive to repulsive. We found that
$\Delta$ is constrained to lie in the range $1<\Delta\alt 3$ in order
to ensure hydrodynamic stability and to ensure that
stars with $M > 2M_\odot$ are supported. We do not find strong
correlations between our model parameters and the radius of low-mass
neutron stars. This implies that other works which have found that
neutron star radius measurements are strong probes of
$\Lambda$-nucleon interactions are at least somewhat model-dependent.
The possible presence of quarks will only strengthen this conclusion.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of
Energy Office of Science, Office of Nuclear Physics under Award Number
DE-FG02-93ER-40762. The solver for the stellar structure equations was
obtained from O$_2$scl~\cite{o2scl} and the Monte Carlo was based on the
Bayesian analysis routines in~\cite{bamr}.
\end{acknowledgments}
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
With their extreme magnetic fields, soft gamma-ray repeaters and anomalous X-ray pulsars are very active types of neutron stars exhibiting outbursts and more rarely giant flares releasing energies up to $\sim 10^{46}$~erg within a second (see e.g. \cite{esposito2021} for a recent review). So far, 24 of these magnetars have been identified according to the McGill Online Magnetar Catalog\footnote{\url{http://www.physics.mcgill.ca/~pulsar/magnetar/main.html}} \cite{mcgill2014}. Their magnetic field is also thought to power their persistent X-ray luminosity $\sim 10^{33}-10^{35}$ erg/s, which is well in excess of their rotational energy and which implies
higher surface temperatures than in weakly magnetized neutron stars of the same age~\cite{vigano2013}.
The most widely accepted heating mechanism involves crustal deformations beyond the elastic limit induced by magnetic stresses (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{degrandis2020}; see Ref.~\cite{beloborodov2016} for alternative models). Because the melting temperature of an electron-ion Coulomb solid increases with density~\cite{fantina2020,carreau2020}, this mechanism is most effective in the inner region of the crust. However, heat sources are not expected to be found
in such deep region of the star~\cite{kaminker2006,kaminker2009}.
Alternatively, the magnetic energy may be converted into heat through electron captures by nuclei in the outer crust~\cite{cooper2010}. This mechanism is analogous to crustal heating in accreting neutron stars~\cite{haensel1990}, the matter compression being induced here by the magnetic-field decay rather than accretion from a stellar companion. We have recently estimated the maximum amount of heat that could be possibly released by these processes and the location of the heat sources~\cite{chamel2021}. In addition to electron captures, we have also considered pycnonuclear fusion of light elements. After briefly reviewing our assumptions and our treatment of dense matter, new results are reported using a different nuclear model.
\section{Compression-induced reactions in magnetar crusts}
\subsection{Initial composition}
We assume that each crustal layer is made of nuclei $(A,Z)$ with proton number $Z$ and mass number $A$ in a charge neutralizing background of free electrons.
We take into account Landau-Rabi quantization for electrons (see, e.g. Chapter 4 of Ref.~\cite{haensel2007}) and consider that electrons all lie in the lowest level, which occurs whenever $B\gtrsim 5.72\times 10^{16}$~G~\cite{chamel2015b}. Quantization effects are expected to be very strong for such fields because the temperatures prevailing in a magnetar, $T\sim 10^8-10^9$~K, are much lower than the characteristic temperature
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TB}
T_B=\frac{m_e c^2}{k_B} B_\star\approx 5.93\times 10^9 B_\star~\rm K\, ,
\end{equation}
where $k_B$ denotes Boltzmann's constant, $c$ is the speed of light, $m_e$ is the electron mass, and we have introduced the dimensionless magnetic field strength $B_\star\equiv B/B_{\rm rel}\gg1 $ with:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Bcrit}
B_{\rm rel}=\frac{m_e^2 c^3}{e \hbar}\approx 4.41\times 10^{13}\, \rm G\, ,
\end{equation}
($e$ is the elementary electric charge and $\hbar$ is the Planck-Dirac constant).
The electron-ion plasma may not necessarily be in a solid state, especially in the shallow layers. A lower bound on the melting temperature can be found by ignoring the magnetic field~\cite{potekhin2013}, and is typically of order $T_m\sim 10^9$~K (see Ref.~\cite{fantina2020} for more details).
In this study, thermal effects on thermodynamic quantities will be neglected.
Assuming the crust is initially in full thermodynamic equilibrium in presence of some magnetic field, the composition is found by minimizing the Gibbs free energy per nucleon (see Ref.~\cite{chamelfantina2015}).
This minimization can be performed numerically in a very efficient way by using the iterative approach proposed in Ref.~\cite{chamel2020}.
\subsection{Magnetic field decay and electron captures}
The compression of the crust induced by the decay of the magnetic field occurs very slowly, on a typical time scale of millions of years~\cite{pons2019}. The capture of one electron by the nucleus $(A,Z)$ (in its ground state since matter is assumed to be initially in equilibrium) becomes allowed once the local pressure attains some threshold value $P_\beta(A,Z,B_\star)$, which can be calculated analytically and is given by~\cite{chamel2021}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:exact-Pbeta}
P_{\beta}(A,Z,B_\star)&\approx& \frac{B_\star m_e c^2 }{4 \pi^2 \lambda_e^3 }\biggl[\gamma_e\sqrt{\gamma_e^2-1}-\ln\left(\sqrt{\gamma_e^2-1}+\gamma_e\right) \nonumber \\
&&+\frac{C \alpha }{3}\left(\frac{4 B_\star Z^2 }{\pi^2}\right)^{1/3} \left(\gamma_e^2-1\right)^{2/3} \biggr] \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda_e=\hbar/(m_e c)$ is the electron Compton wavelength, $\alpha=e^2/(\hbar c)$ is the fine-structure constant, $C$ is a dimensionless constant characterizing the spatial arrangements of nuclei and for which we adopt the Wigner-Seitz value $C=-9/10 (4\pi/3)^{1/3}\approx -1.4508$~\cite{salpeter1954}. Here $\gamma_e$ is the threshold electron Fermi energy in units of $m_e c^2$ given by \cite{chamel2021}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:exact-gammae}
\gamma_e=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle 8|\bar F(Z, B_\star)|^{3/2}\, {\rm cosh}^3\left(\frac{1}{3}{\rm arccosh~} \frac{\gamma_e^{\beta}}{2 |\bar F(Z, B_\star)|^{3/2}}\right) & {\rm if} \ \upsilon\geq 1\, ,\\
\displaystyle 8|\bar F(Z, B_\star)|^{3/2}\, \cos^3\left( \frac{1}{3}\arccos \frac{\gamma_e^{\beta}}{2 |\bar F(Z, B_\star)|^{3/2}}\right) & {\rm if} \ 0\leq \upsilon< 1\, ,
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\bar F(Z,B_\star)\equiv \frac{1}{3} C\alpha \left(\frac{B_\star}{2\pi^2}\right)^{1/3} \biggl[Z^{5/3}-(Z-1)^{5/3} + \frac{1}{3} Z^{2/3}\biggr]\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:muebeta}
\gamma_e^{\beta}\equiv -\frac{Q_{\rm EC}}{m_e c^2} + 1 \, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
Q_{\rm EC}(A,Z) = M^\prime(A,Z)c^2-M^\prime(A,Z-1)c^2-E_{\rm ex}(A,Z-1)\, .
\end{equation}
Here $M^\prime(A,Z)$ denotes the nuclear mass including the rest mass of $Z$ electrons and $E_{\rm ex}(A,Z-1)$ is the excitation energy of the daughter nuclei. The mean baryon number density at the onset of the first electron capture is given by~\cite{chamel2021}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:exact-rhobeta}
n_\beta(A,Z,B_\star) = \frac{B_\star}{2\pi^2 \lambda_e^3} \frac{A}{Z} \sqrt{\gamma_e^2-1} \, .
\end{equation}
No heat is released by this first electron capture since it proceeds in quasiequilibrium. However, the daughter nucleus (in some excited state) $(A,Z-1)$ is almost always unstable against a second electron capture off-equilibrium thus depositing some heat at the \emph{same} pressure $P_\beta(A,Z,B_\star)$. The maximum amount of heat per nucleus can be estimated analytically ignoring the fraction of energy carried away by neutrinos~\cite{chamel2021}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:heat-ocrust}
\mathcal{Q}(A,Z,B_\star) &=&Q_{\rm EC}(A,Z-1)-Q_{\rm EC}(A,Z)+ 2 E_{\rm ex}(A,Z-1) \nonumber \\
&-& m_e c^2 C \alpha \left(\frac{B_\star }{2\pi^2}\right)^{1/3}(\gamma_e^2-1)^{1/6}\biggl[Z^{5/3}+(Z-2)^{5/3}-2 (Z-1)^{5/3}\biggr]\, .
\end{eqnarray}
Leaving aside the small terms on the second line, the maximum heat released is thus completely determined by nuclear data alone, independently of the magnetic field and whether the electron-ion plasma is solid or not.
In the densest regions of the outer crust, fusion of the lightest nuclei might occur~\cite{yakovlev2006}. Considering that such reactions become allowed at pressure $P_{\rm pyc}=P_\beta$ yields the following upper bound on the heat released per parent nucleus:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{Q}_{\rm pyc}(A,Z,B_\star)&=& M^\prime(A,Z-1)c^2-\frac{M^\prime(2A,2Z-2)c^2}{2}+E_{\rm ex}(A,Z-1)\nonumber \\
&+& m_e c^2 C \alpha (1-2^{2/3}) \left(\frac{B_\star \gamma_e}{2 \pi^2} \right)^{1/3} (Z-1)^{5/3} \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $\gamma_e$ given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:exact-gammae}).
The bottom of the outer crust is marked by the emission of free neutrons~\cite{chamel2015b,chamel2015a}. We have not considered reactions occurring in deeper layers (inner crust).
\section{Results and discussion}
\subsection{Numerical estimates}
We have calculated the crustal heat using nuclear masses and $Q_\beta(A,Z-1) = -Q_{\rm EC}(A,Z)$ values from the 2016 Atomic Mass Evaluation \cite{ame2016}, excitation energies from the Nuclear Data section of the International Atomic Energy Agency website\footnote{\url{https://www-nds.iaea.org/relnsd/NdsEnsdf/QueryForm.html}}, as well as
predictions from the atomic mass model HFB-27 based on self-consistent deformed Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov calculations~\cite{goriely2013b}. Further details can be found in Ref.~\cite{chamel2021}.
The magnetic field strength was set to $B_\star=2000$. The initial equilibrium composition was taken from Ref.~\cite{chamel2020}. As for possible contamination of the crust with light elements from the interstellar medium, we considered carbon and oxygen.
Results are summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:heat}.
Comparing the present results with those previously obtained using the HFB-24 mass model in Ref.~\cite{chamel2021}, we notice that the reactions releasing the largest amount of heat are the same, namely, $^{12}\mathrm{C} \rightarrow {}^{12}\mathrm{Be}$, ${}^{16}\mathrm{O} \rightarrow {}^{16}\mathrm{C}$, and $^{62}\mathrm{Cr} \rightarrow {}^{62}\mathrm{Ti}$ considering ground-state-to-ground-state transitions (the heat released being
$\sim 0.14$~MeV, $\sim 0.15$~MeV, and $\sim 0.09$~MeV per nucleon), and $^{82} \mathrm{Ge} \rightarrow {}^{82}\mathrm{Zn}$, $^{88} \mathrm{Sr} \rightarrow {}^{88}\mathrm{Kr}$, $^{88} \mathrm{Kr} \rightarrow ^{88} \mathrm{Se}$, and $^{86} \mathrm{Kr} \rightarrow {}^{86}\mathrm{Se}$ considering ground-state-to-excited-state transitions (the heat released being $\sim 0.1$~MeV, $\sim 0.08$~MeV, $\sim 0.07$~MeV, $\sim 0.09$~MeV per nucleon, respectively).
Note that for the latter reactions, as well as for the reactions involving carbon and oxygen, the amount of heat released is only determined by experimental data, thus independent of the adopted mass model (see also Tables~1 and 3 in Ref.~\cite{chamel2021}).
The most noticeable difference between the predictions of the mass models HFB-24 and HFB-27 concerns the heat released in the ground-state-to-ground-state transitions $^{56}\mathrm{Ti} \rightarrow {}^{56}\mathrm{Ca}$ and ${}^{80}\mathrm{Zn} \rightarrow {}^{80}\mathrm{Ni}$.
In the former (latter) reaction, the heat predicted by HFB-27 is a factor of $\sim 2$ ($\sim 3$) higher than that calculated using the HFB-24 mass model.
The reason stems from the discrepancy in the $Q_{\rm EC}$ values, see Eq.~(\ref{eq:heat-ocrust}).
Indeed, the difference in $|Q_{\rm EC}(Z) - Q_{\rm EC}(Z-1)|$ calculated using the HFB-24 and HFB-27 mass model amounts to $\sim 1.3$~MeV ($\sim 0.9$~MeV) for the transition from $^{56} \mathrm{Ti}$ to $^{56} \mathrm{Ca}$ (from $^{80} \mathrm{Zn}$ to $^{80} \mathrm{Ni}$).
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics{qheat_formula_posit_even_AME2016-HFB27_B2000_selected-nuclei-scatter.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:heat}Heat $q$ per nucleon (in MeV) from selected electron captures in the crust of a magnetar with a magnetic field $B_\star=2000$ in a pressure $P$ (in dyn~cm$^{-2}$)--mass density $\rho$ (in g cm$^{-3}$) diagram, considering transitions from the ground state of the parent nucleus to either the ground state (squares) or the first excited state (triangles) of the daughter nucleus. The size of each symbol is proportional to the amount of heat deposited as indicated. }
\end{figure}
The maximum amount of heat released per nucleon is found to be $\sim 0.1$~MeV from electron captures, and $\sim 1-2$~MeV from pycnonuclear fusions.
The total amount of heat deposited in the outer crust of a magnetar is comparable to that found in accreting neutron stars although the initial composition and the physical conditions are totally different~\cite{chamel2020b}. However, heat in a magnetar is deposited at higher densities, $\rho_\beta\sim 10^{10}-10^{11}$~g~cm$^{-3}$ (corresponding to pressures $P_\beta\sim 10^{29}-10^{30}$~dyn~cm$^{-2}$) for the magnetic field considered.
\subsection{Astrophysical implications}
The range of densities where most of the heat from nuclear reactions is released corresponds to that determined empirically by fitting the observed thermal luminosity using magnetar cooling simulations~\cite{kaminker2006,kaminker2009}.
The time $\tau$ required for all the nuclei $(A,Z)$ to capture electrons, roughly given by \cite{chamel2021}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:age}
\tau \sim \frac{4 \pi }{B^2}\biggl[ P_\beta(A,Z,B_\star)-P_{\rm min}(A,Z,B_\star) \biggr]~\rm Myr
\end{equation}
($P_{\rm min}(A,Z,B_\star)$ being the lowest pressure at which parent nuclei $(A,Z)$ were initially found), is of the same order in the different crustal layers, and more importantly of the same order as the kinematic age of magnetars (a few thousand years).
Finally, the heat power, estimated as \cite{chamel2021}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:power}
W^\infty\sim
\frac{1}{\tau} \sum \mathcal{Q}(A,Z) \mathcal{N}(A,Z)\sim 10^{35}-10^{36} \ \rm erg/s \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{N}(A,Z)$ is the total number of nuclei $(A,Z)$,
is of the same order as that obtained in Refs.~\cite{kaminker2006,kaminker2009}.
The compression of matter caused by the spin down of the star could also trigger nuclear reactions, as studied in millisecond pulsars~\cite{IidaSato1997}. However, this heating becomes ineffective several days after the formation of the star~\cite{chamel2021} and can thus be ignored.
\section{Conclusions}
Our analysis suggests that electron captures by nuclei and pycnonuclear fusion reactions in the outer crust of a magnetar induced by the decay of the magnetic field could be a robust source of internal heating. Unlike the commonly accepted dissipation of elastic energy due to crust failure, the heating from electron captures remains effective even if some part of the crust is melted. Although for simplicity we have considered an extremely quantizing magnetic field, we have shown that the maximum amount of heat is essentially determined by nuclear data alone. Therefore, our estimate remains a fairly good approximation for neutron stars with lower magnetic fields, as confirmed by our recent study~\cite{ChamelFantina2022}. Only the location of the heat sources will vary substantially depending on the magnetic field strength. The models HFB-24 and HFB-27 predict similar results for the main heat sources, however significant differences are found for some minor reactions.
\ack
The work of N.C. was funded by Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique-FNRS (Belgium) under Grant Number IISN 4.4502.19. L.S., P.H., and J-L.Z. acknowledge the financial support from the National Science Centre (Poland) Grant Number 2018/29/B/ST9/02013. This work was also partially supported by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology Action CA16214 and the CNRS International Research Project (IRP) ``Origine des \'el\'ements lourds dans l'univers: Astres Compacts et Nucl\'eosynth\`ese (ACNu)''.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Intro}
The extremely hot, tenuous and outermost atmosphere of the sun is called the solar corona. This extends to several millions of kilometres above the visible surface of the Sun (i.e., solar photosphere) and is much fainter than the photosphere. The solar corona is naturally seen in visible light only during a total solar eclipse when the moon shadows the bright photosphere. The solar corona is also observable with an instrument called coronagraph which was introduced in 1931 by the French astronomer Bernard Lyot (\cc{Lyot 1939}). A coronagraph creates an artificial eclipse by selectively blocking out the photospheric light from the disk of the Sun so to observe the corona.
It is now understood that the solar corona releases a constant out-stream of energized charged particles which is called solar wind (\cc{Biermann 1951}; \cc{Parker 1958}). The solar wind fills the interplanetary space and its existence was first confirmed by direct observations from spacecraft Luna 1 (\cc{Gringauz \etal 1960}). In addition to ubiquitous solar wind, the solar corona frequently expels large-scale magnetized plasma structures into the heliosphere. Such episodic expulsions of plasma from the Sun are called Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs). The earliest observation of a CME probably dates back to the eclipse of 1860 as clearly seen in a drawing recorded by G. Temple. Some definite inferences for CMEs from the Sun were made before their formal detections (\cc{Chapman \& Ferraro 1931}; \cc{Eddy 1974}). However, CMEs were first detected in 1971 by a coronagraph onboard NASA’s seventh \textit{Orbiting Solar Observatory (OSO-7)} satellite (\cc{Tousey 1973}). The name CME was initially coined for a feature which shows an observable change in coronal structure that occurs on a time scale of few minutes to several hours and involves the appearance (and outward motion) of a new, discrete, bright, white-light feature in the coronagraphic field of view (FOV)
(\cc{Hundhausen \etal 1984}).
The observations of CMEs have been made using white-light coronagraphs, interplanetary scintillation measurements, and \textit{in situ} observations. The coronagraphs record a two-dimensional (2D) image of a three-dimensional (3D) CME projected onto the plane of the sky. Therefore, the morphology of CME in coronagraphic observations depends on the location of the observing instruments (e.g., coronagraphs) and the launch direction of CME from the Sun. The CMEs launched from the Sun toward or away from the Earth, when observed by the near-Earth coronagraphs will appear as `halos' surrounding the occulting disk of coronagraphs (\cc{Howard \etal 1982}). Such a CME is called a ``halo'' CME (Figure~\cc{\ref{haloCME}}). An example of coronagraph observing from near Earth is \textit{ Large Angle Spectrometric COronagraph } (LASCO) onboard \textit{SOlar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO)} located at the L1 point of the Sun-Earth system. A CME having 360$\arcdeg$ apparent angular width is called ``full halo'' and with apparent angular width greater than 120$\arcdeg$ but less than 360$\arcdeg$ is called as ``partial halo''. Such a nomenclature of a CME is restricted by its viewing perspective. The observations of solar activity on the solar disk, associated with CME, are necessary to help distinguish whether a halo CME was launched from the front or backside of the Sun relative to the observer. It is important to note that among all the CMEs, only about 10\% are partial halo type (i.e. width greater than 120$\arcdeg$) and about 4\% are full halo type (\cc{Webb \etal 2000}).
The CMEs observed as front-side halo are important as they are the key link between solar eruptions and major space weather phenomena. The term space weather refers to conditions in the space between the Sun and Earth (e.g., in the solar wind, Earth's magnetosphere, ionosphere, and thermosphere) that can influence the performance and reliability of space-borne and ground-based technological systems and can endanger human life or health. The majority of geomagnetic storms of solar cycles 23 and 24 are known to be caused by halo CMEs, confirming the importance of the source location of CMEs (\cc{Gopalswamy 2010}; \cc{Lawrance \etal 2020}). The source regions of front-side halo CMEs can be studied in greater detail with instruments capable of imaging the structures at the base of the corona. The example of such instruments are \textit{Extreme-ultraviolet Imaging Telescope} (EIT) onboard \textit{SOHO}, \textit{Atmospheric Imaging Assembly} (AIA) onboard \textit{Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO)} and \textit{Extreme-Ultraviolet Imager} (EUVI) as a part of \textit{Sun Earth Connection Coronal and Heliospheric Investigation} (SECCHI) package onboard \textit{Solar TErrestrial RElations Observatory (STEREO)} (\cc{Delaboudini{\`e}re \etal 1995}; \cc{Lemen \etal 2012}; \cc{Howard \etal 2008}). If such CMEs do not get a large deflection during their interplanetary propagation, they are expected to be sampled at observer's location by \textit{in-situ} spacecraft (\cc{Webb \etal 2000}). It is important to note that CMEs are the 3D structure, therefore single-point imaging observations would suffer from the unavoidable projection effect (\cc{Burkepile \etal 2004}). In the case of a halo CME, the projection effects are considerably large and the measured speed of a CME is underestimated while its angular width is overestimated (\cc{Xie \etal 2004}). The CME's initial speed, angular width, direction, and background solar wind are known to govern the transit time of the CME from the Sun to 1 AU (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2000a}; \cc{M{\"o}stl \& Davies 2013}). It is shown that even CMEs of equal speeds but different geometry and propagation direction can take quite different transit times to reach Earth. Therefore, the kinematic and geometric parameters of halo CMEs need further corrections for accurate forecasting of their arrival time (\cc{Shen \etal 2014}). In addition to forecasting purpose, the projection effects on halo CMEs also impose limitations on our understanding of physical characteristics of CMEs.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{haloCME28Dec2000c2rdiff.eps}
\caption[A ``halo'' CME observed by LASCO-C2 coronagraph on \textit{SOHO}]{An image of a ``halo'' CME observed by LASCO-C2 coronagraph onboard \textit{SOHO}. The CME was launched from the Sun on 2000 December 28. The white circle in the center is the size and location of the solar disk, which is obscured by the coronagraph's occulter, covering up to 1.7 \textit{R$_\odot$}. (\cc{\textit{Image credit: \url{http://lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil}})}}
\label{haloCME}
\end{figure}
Some CMEs observed near the Sun often appear as a ``three-part'' structure comprising of an outer bright frontal loop (i.e. leading edge), and a darker underlying cavity within which is embedded a brighter core as shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{threepartCME}} (\cc{Illing \& Hundhausen 1985}). The front may contain swept-up material by erupting flux ropes or the presence of pre-existing material in the overlying fields (\cc{Illing \& Hundhausen 1985}; \cc{Riley \etal 2008}). The cavity is a region of lower plasma density but probably higher magnetic field strength, i.e., a manifestation of a driving flux rope (\cc{Forsyth \etal 2006}). The brightest component of the three-part structure, i.e., the core of the CME can often be identified as prominence (i.e., filament) material based on their visibility in chromospheric emission lines (\cc{Bothmer \& Schwenn 1998}; \cc{Schmieder \etal 2002}). Contrary to an established perspective held for several decades, recently it has been shown that bright cores can be observed in many CMEs which are not associated with filament eruptions in any way (\cc{Howard \etal 2017}; \cc{Song \etal 2017}). Moreover, they found that in some cases where CMEs were associated with filament eruptions, the bright cores neither geometrically resemble eruptive filaments nor exhibit H$\alpha$ emission as expected from cool filament materials in the coronagraphic field of view. Based on this, \cc{Howard \etal (2017)} suggested that the bright core within the cavity could be an optical illusion produced by the geometrical projection of a twisted 3D flux rope into a 2D plane or it can appear due to the natural evolution of an erupting flux rope (\cc{Howard \etal 2017}).
It is noted that the frequency of occurrence of CMEs around solar maximum is $\approx$ 5 per day and at solar minimum is $\approx$ 4 per week (\cc{St. Cyr \etal 2000}; \cc{Webb \& Howard 2012}). CMEs having a three-part structure are only about 30\% of all the CMEs from the Sun, yet this is considered as the ``standard CME'' configuration in observational and theoretical studies (\cc{Gopalswamy 2004}; \cc{Gopalswamy 2006a}). Despite the common association of CMEs with eruptive filaments and flux ropes, surprisingly only about 4\% of the Earth-arriving ICMEs show the signatures of filaments and only about 35\% of ICMEs show the signatures of flux ropes in \textit{in-situ} observations at 1 AU (\cc{Lepri \& Zurbuchen 2010}; \cc{Richardson \& Cane 2010}). The absence of flux rope in some ICMEs is understood in term of geometric selection effect (\cc{Kilpua \etal 2011}; \cc{Song \etal 2020}), but the rarely observed filaments at large distances from the Sun pose a question if they survive at all beyond a few solar radii from the Sun. There are case studies that have shown that soon after the launch of a filament from the Sun, it may get fragmented into magnetic Rayleigh–Taylor (MRT) unstable plasma segments and fall back into the solar atmosphere (\cc{Innes \etal 2012}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2018a}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2018b}). \cc{Joshi \etal (2013)} have shown a case study where the core of a CME associated with an asymmetric filament eruption exhibited downfall of its plasma which they explained using a self-consistent model of a magnetic flux rope. Thus, the draining of filament plasma can be partly responsible for their absence in coronagraphic and \textit{in situ} observations. Also, the ionization of the filament material can take place during its evolution away from the Sun (\cc{Howard 2015}), and this can make them spread out across their respective field lines and become indistinguishable from the material making up the surrounding CME.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim = 10mm 76mm 165mm 34mm, clip]{CME3part.pdf}
\caption[A classical CME with 3-part structure]{A classical 3-part CME seen in the LASCO-C3 field of view on 2000 February 27 at 07:42 UT, showing a bright frontal loop surrounding a dark cavity with a bright core. (\cc{\textit{Image credit: \url{http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov}})}}
\label{threepartCME}
\end{figure}
It is known that not all CMEs appear to have a very large angular width in coronagraphic images, in fact, some CMEs appear as narrow jets. However, it should be noted that wide CMEs are not necessarily very global but rather may have a propagation direction along the Sun-observer line, and so they appear large by perspective as noted for the so-called halo CMEs. CME's are classified as narrow when they have an apparent angular width less than 20$^{\circ}$ and they are a small subset of all CMEs (\cc{Yashiro \etal 2003}). The average width of normal three-part structure CMEs has been reported to range from 50$^{\circ}$ to 70$^{\circ}$ depending on the inclusion of partial halos, full halos, and different phase of a solar cycle (\cc{St. Cyr \etal 2000}; \cc{Webb \& Howard 2012}). Based on the LASCO CMEs in the CDAW catalog (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2010}), narrow CMEs are found to be only about 12\% and 22\% of the total number of CMEs during the minimum and maximum of solar cycle 23, respectively (\cc{Yashiro \etal 2003}). According to \cc{Gilbert \etal (2001)}, the average speeds of narrow CMEs are similar to that of normal CMEs. The speeds of narrow CMEs near the Sun range from few km s$^{-1}$ to 1150 km s$^{-1}$ but for the normal CMEs it can range from few km s$^{-1}$ to 3000 km s$^{-1}$ (\cc{St. Cyr \etal 2000}). On the other hand, \cc{Yashiro \etal (2003)} find that narrow CMEs tend to be faster than normal CMEs during solar maximum. The average mass of a narrow CME is less than about 10\% of the mass of a normal CME which is $\sim$1.5 $\times$10$^{12}$ kg. It has been found that narrow CMEs are the outward extensions of EUV jets and they probably have different acceleration mechanisms than normal CMEs (\cc{Wang \etal 1998}). Recent studies have focused on investigating the triggering mechanism and kinematics of jet-like CMEs (\cc{Solanki \etal 2019, 2020}). Also, studies have reported the simultaneous launch of jet-like and bubble-like CMEs to investigate their eruption mechanisms (\cc{Shen \etal 2012a}; \cc{Duan \etal 2019}).
The triggering and driving mechanisms of CMEs have been the subject of extensive research aimed at developing CME initiation models constrained by observations (\cc{Chen 2011}). The launch of CMEs requires that the magnetic field lines must be opened by some processes to allow the plasma to escape from the Sun. The onset of CMEs has been associated with many solar disk phenomena such as flares (\cc{Feynman \& Hundhausen 1994}), prominence eruptions (\cc{Hundhausen 1999}), coronal dimming (\cc{Sterling \& Hudson 1997}), arcade formation (\cc{Hanaoka \etal 1994}). In fact, it has been observed that the CMEs often show spatial and temporal relation with solar flares, eruptive prominences (\cc{Munro \etal 1979}; \cc{Webb \& Hundhausen 1987}; \cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2003b}) and with helmet streamer blowouts. Solar flares are observed as localized sudden brightening on the Sun across all wavelengths at the time scale of minutes (\cc{Aschwanden 2002}; \cc{Benz 2008}) and historically they were considered to be the drivers for CMEs and interplanetary shocks. Many strong CMEs are associated with intense flares but most of the flares are “confined” or “compact” and occur independently of CMEs, and thus there is no one-to-one relationship between flares and CMEs (\cc{Yashiro \etal 2008}).
Based on several studies in the last two decades, it seems that CMEs and flares are part of a single magnetically-driven phenomenon which creates a larger net energy reservoir available for both phenomena (\cc{Compagnino \etal 2017}). Therefore, a unified standard flare model known as Flux Cancellation or Catastrophe model has been developed and refined over the last few decades (\cc{Forbes \& Isenberg 1991}; \cc{Priest \& Forbes 2002}). Another model called Breakout model has been developed to describe the association of CMEs with flares (\cc{Antiochos \etal 1991}). Therefore, it is evident that although CMEs and flares may not be causally related, they both seem to be involved with the reconfiguration of complex magnetic field lines within the corona caused by the same underlying physical processes, e.g., magnetic reconnection (\cc{Priest \& Forbes 2002}; \cc{Compagnino \etal 2017}).
Furthermore, the eruption of prominences is also often associated with CMEs, with the erupted material forming their bright cores. The prominences are caused by the formation of flux ropes low in the sheared magnetic structure in the corona but they are about one hundred times cooler and denser than the corona. It is established that prominences appear as bright features at the limb but appear darker than their background on the solar disk where they are called filaments. It is now suggested that perturbations (i.e., precursor activities) in coronal magnetic fields forming a CME begin well before any observed associated surface activity such as flares or erupting prominences (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2006}). Some of the CMEs are known to appear from the blowout of a helmet streamer due to dynamical evolution of arcades, flux emergence, or shearing of magnetic field lines (\cc{Vourlidas \etal 2002a}, \cc{Gopalswamy 2006a}). A streamer is a dense structure containing closed and open fields which are observed by coronagraphs above the solar limb.
In the attempt to establish the association between CMEs observed in coronagraphs and their signatures at the solar surface, it has been noted that some CMEs do not have easily identifiable signatures (such as coronal dimming, coronal wave, filament eruption, flare, post-eruptive arcade) to locate their source regions on the Sun (\cc{Ma \etal 2010}; \cc{Vourlidas \etal 2011}). Such CMEs are called the ``problem or stealth CMEs'' \cc{Robbrecht \etal 2009}. On comparing CMEs with and without low coronal signatures it is found that stealth CMEs are slow, typically from 100 km s$^{-1}$ to 300 km s$^{-1}$ having gradual acceleration and their source regions are usually located in the quiet Sun in proximity with coronal holes rather than active regions (\cc{Ma \etal 2010}; \cc{Nitta \& Mulligan 2017}). Some stealth CMEs are found to be narrow but they can be wide enough to show the typical three-part structure of the CME. It was suggested by \cc{D'Huys \etal (2014)} that the physical process such as reconnection that enables the stealth CMEs probably occurs at higher altitude. They found that in most of the cases a stealth CME was preceded by another nearby CME which might have destabilized the coronal magnetic field making a path for the stealth CME. The modeling of stealth CMEs by \cc{Lynch \etal (2016)} confirmed the results of \cc{Howard \& Harrison (2013)} that there is no fundamental difference between stealth CMEs and most of the slow streamer blowout CMEs. The initiation mechanism and geoeffectiveness of stealth CMEs associated with the eruption of coronal plasma channel and jet-like structures have also been studied recently (\cc{Mishra \& Srivastava, 2019}).
The important lesson from earlier studies on the origin of CMEs is that although the physical processes making the eruption of CMEs differ in different models, the overall idea is essentially the same: a magnetic field configuration initially kept in equilibrium needs to be disturbed somehow to make the system erupt. One possibility is that the initial configuration may have an underlying sheared magnetic field (often called core) held down by an overlying field and the equilibrium can be disrupted by the magnetic reconnection between the sheared magnetic core and the overlying field. This can lead to the reconfiguration of magnetic field lines causing eruptions beyond the overlying fields (\cc{Antiochos \etal 1991}). There also exists a scenario of accumulating twist in the magnetic core leading to kink instability, which can push aside the overlying field and make eruption possible (\cc{T{\"o}r{\"o}k \& Kliem 2005}). Once the eruption of a CME has taken place, then the remaining magnetic field eventually closes, probably via some form of large-scale magnetic reconnection. It is noted that despite the development in understanding the origin of CMEs, the models are inadequate to completely match observations of an evolving CME under pressure, magnetic and gravitational forces (\cc{Gopalswamy 2004}; \cc{Webb \& Howard 2012}).
CMEs can lead to disturbances in the heliosphere, from their birth-place in the corona up to several AU distances away from the Sun, e.g., interplanetary shocks, radio bursts, intense geomagnetic storm, large solar energetic particles (SEPs) events and Forbush decreases (FDs) (\cc{Kahler \etal 1978}; \cc{Gosling 1993}; \cc{Wang \etal 2000}; \cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2000b}; \cc{Gopalswamy 2006b}; \cc{Richardson \& Cane 2010}; \cc{Wiedenbeck \etal 2020}). It is shown that SEP events are associated with fast and wide CMEs near the Sun (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2003a}). The accelerated electrons by CME-driven shocks can produce Type II radio bursts that appear as slowly drifting features in radio dynamic spectra (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2013}). The distance of CME from the Sun at the time of onset of Type II bursts is the height where the CME becomes super-Alfv\'enic to drive fast mode MHD shocks. The height of shock formation is important in understanding the SEPs and their charge states. The studies on shock formation height suggest that shocks related to metric and decameter-hectometric (DH) type II bursts form at heights smaller and larger than 2 R$_\odot$ from the center of the Sun, respectively (\cc{Ramesh \etal 2012}; \cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2013}). Studies using extreme ultra-violet and white-light imaging observations of CMEs have suggested that the type II bursts can originate from anywhere on the shock front (i.e., at the nose or flanks) depending on which location is favorable for electron acceleration. The pre- and post-shock parameters of coronal plasma were studied by \cc{Bemporad \& Mancuso (2010)} and they found an increase in plasma temperature and magnetic field across the shock. The effects of shock compression have also been noted in the \textit{in situ} observations at 1 AU in the scenario where the following shocks penetrated through preceding ICMEs (\cc{Harrison \etal 2012}; \cc{Liu \etal 2012}; \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2014}).
CMEs and their driven shocks are found to interact with the atmosphere and magnetosphere of planets leading to severe space weather activity (\cc{Wang \etal 2003}; \cc{Schwenn 2006}; \cc{Baker 2009}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}; \cc{Luhmann \etal 2020}). A typical example of a space weather event is the geomagnetic storm in which a major disturbance of Earth's magnetosphere takes place due to the efficient transfer of energy from the solar wind into the space environment surrounding Earth. The effect of CMEs on a planet is governed by the magnetic nature of the planet. The Earth has a magnetic field and hence Earth-arriving ICME structures having strong southward magnetic field component (\textit{B$_{z}$}), interact with the Earth’s magnetosphere at the day-side magnetopause. In this interaction, solar wind energy is transferred to the magnetosphere, primarily via magnetic reconnection that produces non-recurrent geomagnetic storms (\cc{Dungey 1961}; \cc{Tsurutani \etal 1988}; \cc{Gonzalez \etal 1994}; \cc{Baker 2009}). It has been shown that 83\% intense geomagnetic storms are due to CMEs (\cc{Zhang \etal 2007}). Few of the intense storms may occur because of corotating interaction regions (CIRs). CIRs form when the fast speed solar wind overtakes the slow speed solar wind ahead and leads to the formation of an interface region that has increased temperature, density, and magnetic field. The arrival time of interacting CMEs and their geomagnetic consequences have also been studied extensively (\cc{Farrugia \etal 2006}; \cc{Lugaz \& Farrugia 2014}; \cc{Liu \etal 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}; \cc{Lugaz \etal 2017}). Thus, from a space weather perspective, it is important to estimate the arrival time and transit speeds of CMEs as well as orientation of magnetic field in the CMEs near the Earth well in advance to predict the severity of these events (\cc{Gonzalez \etal 1989}; \cc{Srivastava \& Venkatakrishnan 2002}; \cc{Vourlidas \etal 2019}).
The Earth-arriving CME-driven shock compresses the day-side Earth's magnetosphere and causes the storm sudden commencement (SSC) (\cc{Chao \& Lepping 1974}). The horizontal component of Earth's magnetic field, which can be measured by ground-based magnetometers, is found to be increased during SSC (\cc{Dessler \etal 1960}; \cc{Tsunomura 1998}). Furthermore, the sheath region lying between the shock and flux rope get compressed and may also have negative B$_{z}$. It is also well proven that CMEs are responsible for the periodic 11-year variation in the galactic cosmic rays (GCRs) intensity (\cc{Cane 2000}). Moreover, CMEs are found to be responsible for Forbush decreases (FDs) (\cc{Forbush 1937}). Non-recurrent FDs are defined as a sudden shorter-term decrease of the recorded intensity of GCRs when a CME passes Earth. In FDs, the depression in the intensity of GCRs by 3\% to 20\% typically lasts for minutes to hours, while its recovery to normal level takes place in several days. FDs are due to exclusion of GCRs because of their inability to diffuse ``across'' the relatively strong and ordered IMF in the vicinity of interplanetary shock, in the sheath and/or flux-rope region of the CME. The FDs have also been the focus of many studies to examine a possible connection between the GCR flux and Earth’s climate via modulation of cloud cover (\cc{Lam \& Rodger 2002}; \cc{Laken \etal 2009}). The FDs are routinely measured on the surface of Earth using neutron monitors and can be used to detect the arrival of CMEs and their speeds (\cc{Dumbovi{\'c} \etal 2018}).
Keeping the Sun-Earth connection in mind, several studies have been undertaken in the last decades, before and after the launch of \textit{STEREO}, to understand the propagation of CMEs and estimate their arrival times at Earth. The most recent reviews on ICMEs and their arrival times are by \cc{Kilpua \etal 2017}, \cc{Vourlidas \etal 2019}, \cc{Luhmann \etal 2020}, \cc{Temmer \etal 2021} and \cc{Zhang \etal 2021}. Although much progress has been made in this direction, yet the accurate prediction of arrival times of CMEs remains difficult even today. In this review, we highlight several important earlier studies carried out to reach our present understanding of CMEs propagation. We also discuss open questions holding us back from progressing and the path forward for improving the accuracy in CME forecasting in the near future.
\section{Studies on CME Propagation Before \textit{STEREO} era}
\label{prest}
Although our review is focused on heliospheric propagation of CMEs, we would briefly mention a few of the studies on the origin of CMEs. There is a vast literature on the photosheric and coronal properties of source active regions that produces CMEs (\cc{Cliver \& Hudson 2002}; \cc{Kahler 2006}; \cc{Georgoulis \etal 2019}, and references therein). The initiation and early development of CMEs have been studied since the pioneering work on EUV waves by \cc{Dere \etal (1997)} using the observations of the \textit{Extreme-ultraviolet Imaging Telescope} (EIT) onboard \textit{SOHO}. Recently, the availability of high resolution observations from \textit{Extreme UltraViolet Imager} (EUVI) onboard \textit{STEREO} and the \textit{Atmospheric Imaging Assembly} (AIA) onboard \textit{SDO} have further helped in exploring the solar surface signatures of CMEs (\cc{Vr{\v s}nak \& Cliver 2008}; \cc{Liu \& Ofman 2014}, and references therein). Furthermore, the densities, temperatures, ionization states, and Doppler velocities of CMEs have been studied using EUV spectral observations from the \textit{UltraViolet Coronagraph Spectrometer} (UVCS), \textit{Coronal Diagnostic Spectrometer} (CDS), and \textit{Solar Ultraviolet Measurements of Emitted Radiation} (SUMER) instruments onboard \textit{SOHO} and the \textit{Solar Optical Telescope} (SOT), and the \textit{Extreme Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrometer} (EIS) instruments on Hinode (\cc{Raymond 2002}; \cc{Kohl \etal 2006}; \cc{Landi \etal 2010}).
It is also noted that there have been a plethora of multi-wavelength studies on associating CMEs origins with their signatures on the Sun such as streamers blowouts, solar flares, erupting prominences/filaments, coronal dimming, arcade formations, and coronal waves (\cc{Tripathi \etal 2004}; \cc{Burkepile \etal 2004}; \cc{Benz 2008}). These signatures of CMEs origin are primarily observed in wavelengths capable of imaging different layers of the solar atmosphere at varying temperatures and also plasma material of different ionization states. This is unlike observations of CMEs by visible light coronagraphs and heliospheric imagers which observe the angular dependent brightness of Thomson-scattered white-light from the free electrons in CMEs. Importantly, the white-light observations often sample the CMEs at heights different than the height where the signatures of CMEs initiations are observed (\cc{Gopalswamy 2004}; \cc{Webb \& Howard 2012}). Therefore, it is difficult to make a direct association of CMEs and their associated phenomena at the solar surface. In the following, we will focus on the white-light and \textit{in situ} observations of CMEs.
The launch of twin \textit{STEREO} spacecraft in 2006 and their subsequent observations of CMEs from the Sun to the Earth have revolutionized the understanding of propagation of CMEs. However, since the discovery and detection of CME in 1971 from a coronagraph onboard OSO-7 (\cc{Tousey 1973}), thousands of CMEs have been observed from a series of space-based coronagraphs e.g., Apollo Telescope Mount onboard Skylab (\cc{Gosling \etal 1974}), Solwind coronagraph onboard \textit{P78-1} satellite (\cc{Sheeley \etal 1980}), Coronagraph/Polarimeter onboard \textit{Solar Maximum Mission (SMM)} (\cc{MacQueen \etal 1980}), LASCO onboard \textit{SOHO} (\cc{Brueckner \etal 1995}). These observations were complemented by white light data from the ground-based Mauna Loa Solar Observatory (MLSO) K-coronameter which had a FOV from 1.2 \textit{R$_\odot$}-2.9 \textit{R$_\odot$} (\cc{Fisher \etal 1981}) and emission line observations from the coronagraphs at Sacramento Peak, New Mexico (\cc{Demastus \etal 1973}) and Norikura, Japan (\cc{Hirayama \& Nakagomi 1974}).
Although the CMEs were formally discovered in 1971 (\cc{Tousey 1973}), from a survey of literature it is evident that consequences due to CMEs were noticed well before their discovery. For example, CMEs were observed at larger distances from the Sun in radio via interplanetary scintillation (IPS) observations from the 1960s. However, only around the 1980s, the association between IPS and CMEs could be established (\cc{Hewish \etal 1964}; \cc{Houminer \& Hewish 1972}; \cc{Tappin \etal 1983}). Attempts to observe the CMEs in regions in the inner heliosphere from 0.3 AU to 1.0 AU have also been made from the zodiacal light photometers on the twin Helios spacecraft during 1975 to 1983 (\cc{Richter \etal 1982}). However, this attempt of observing the inner heliosphere was with the extremely limited FOV of zodiacal light photometers. Also, heliospheric imagers as \textit{Solar Mass Ejection Imager} (SMEI) (\cc{Eyles \etal 2003}) onboard the \textit{Coriolis} spacecraft launched early in 2003, have observed several CMEs far from the Sun in the heliosphere.
The observations of CMEs in white-light images, kilometric radio observations from space, and metric radio interplanetary scintillation (IPS) observations from the ground have resulted in several studies. In addition to this, \textit{in situ} observations of CMEs have also been made for decades (\cc{Klein \& Burlaga 1982}; \cc{Zurbuchen \& Richardson 2006}; \cc{Richardson \& Cane 2010}). The interplanetary scintillation (IPS) techniques are based on the measurements of the fluctuating intensity level of several distant meter-wavelength radio sources. The observations of CMEs using IPS and the estimation of their parameters from several techniques have been described in earlier works (\cc{Hewish \etal 1964}; \cc{Watanabe \& Kakinuma 1984}; \cc{Manoharan \& Ananthakrishnan 1990}; \cc{Bisi \etal 2008}). In the present review, we will focus on the observations of CMEs in white light imaging and \textit{in situ} observations only.
Once a CME leaves the inner corona and start moving into the interplanetary space filled with ambient solar wind medium, it takes the name of interplanetary CME (ICME) which undergoes different morphological and kinematic evolution throughout its propagation (\cc{Dryer 1994}; \cc{Zhao \& Webb 2003}). ICMEs have been identified in \textit{in situ} observations and it was found that their plasma and magnetic field parameters are different from that of the ambient solar wind medium. Although it is possible to record a CME near the Sun and to identify the same in the \textit{in situ} observations, a one to one association between remote and \textit{in situ} observations of CMEs is not always easy to establish. There may be several factors responsible for this which will be discussed in the following sections. It is understood that fast CMEs often generate large-scale density waves out into space which finally steepens to form collisionless shock waves (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 1998a}). This shock wave is similar to the bow shock formed in front of the Earth's magnetosphere. Following the shock, there is a sheath structure which has signatures of significant heating and compression of the ambient solar wind (\cc{Gopalswamy 2004}; \cc{Manchester \etal 2005}). After the shock and the sheath, the ICME structure is found. In the following sections, we describe the evolution of CMEs as observed from remote imaging and \textit{in situ} observations.
\subsection{Observations of Evolution of CMEs}
The main problem in understanding the evolution of CMEs is our limited knowledge about their physical properties. In addition, remote white-light observations (e.g., coronagraphs and heliospheric imagers) allow tracking the propagation of CMEs, but these observations do not provide information on their magnetic field parameters. Associating the near Earth ICME observed \textit{in situ} by the Advanced Composition Explorer (\textit{ACE}) (\cc{Stone \etal 1998}) and \textit{WIND} (\cc{Ogilvie \etal 1995}) spacecraft with Earth-directed front-side halos CMEs seen in LASCO coronagraph images, several attempts have been made in the past (\cc{Richardson \& Cane 2004}; \cc{Jian \etal 2006}). Such studies have proved to be very difficult because of difficulties in determining the 3D speed of Earth-directed CMEs. Another problem is that an \textit{in situ} spacecraft takes measurements along a certain trajectory through the ICME, therefore it does not provide the global characteristics of CME plasma. \textit{SOHO}/LASCO has detected well over 10$^{4}$ CMEs till date and still continues (\cc{\url{http://cdaw.gsfc.nasa.gov/CME_list/}}) (\cc{Yashiro \etal 2004}). SMEI also observed nearly 400 transients during its 8.5 year lifetime, and it was switched off in September 2011. In the following Section~\cc{\ref{CMEobswl}} and \cc{~\ref{insitu}}, we describe the details of different sets of observations of CMEs.
\subsubsection{Remote Sensing Observations of CMEs in White-light} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{CMEobswl}
In white light images, CMEs are seen due to Thomson scattering of photospheric light from the free electrons of coronal and heliospheric plasma. The intensity of Thomson scattered light has an angular dependence which must be considered for measuring the brightness of CMEs (\cc{Billings 1966}; \cc{Vourlidas \& Howard 2006}; \cc{Howard \& Tappin 2009}). They are faint relative to the background corona, but much more transient, therefore a suitable coronal background subtraction is applied to identify them. The advantage of white light observations over radio, IR or UV observations is that Thomson scattering only depends on the observed electron density and is independent of the wavelength and temperature (\cc{Hundhausen 1993}). Thomson scattering is a special case of the general theory of the scattering of electromagnetic waves by charged particles. Since the wavelength of white-light is smaller than the separation between the charge particles in the corona, and the energy of the white-light photons is lower than the rest mass energy of the particles in the corona, therefore the solar photospheric light gets Thomson scattered by electrons in the corona and solar wind.
The details of Thomson scattering is given in earlier studies (\cc{Minnaert 1930}; \cc{Billings 1966}; \cc{Howard \& Tappin 2009}; \cc{Howard \& DeForest 2012}; \cc{Howard \etal 2013}). These studies have shown that the received intensity of the scattered light by an observer depends on its location relative to the scattering source and incident beam (Figure~\ref{thomson}). If scattered light is decomposed into two components, then for an observer, the intensity of the component seen as transverse to the incident beam is isotropic, while the intensity of the component seen as a parallel to the projected direction of the incident beam (shown with red in Figure~\ref{thomson}) varies as the square of cosine of scattering angle ($\chi$). The scattering angle is between the vector from scattering location to the observer which is along the line of sight and the vector from scattering source to the center of the Sun which is along the incident beam. It means that $\chi$ is the Sun-scattering location-observer angle. Hence, the efficiency of Thomson scattering measured by an observer is minimum at $\chi$ = 90$\arcdeg$, i.e., on Thomson surface (TS). TS is the surface of a sphere with diameter extending from Sun center to the observer, and all the points of closest approach to the Sun of each line of sight lies on the TS. However, TS is the point where incident light and electron density is found to be maximum. The combined effect of all the three factors is that the TS is the locus of points where the scattering intensity is maximized for a fixed radial distance from the Sun. However, a spread of the observed intensity to larger distances from the TS is noted (\cc{Howard \& DeForest 2012}). This spreading is called `Thomson plateau' which is greater at larger distances (elongations) from the Sun, where elongation ($\epsilon$) is the Sun-observer-scattering location angle. The details of TS and its theoretical background is discussed in \cc{Howard \& Tappin (2009)}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.40]{thomson_surface.jpg}
\caption[Thomson scattering geometry]{The scattering and elongation angles for imaging observations in the context of the Thomson scattering geometry. The line of sight (cyan), incident beam (blue), and the component of scattered intensity seen as parallel to the projected direction of the incident beam (red) are displayed.}
\label{thomson}
\end{figure}
It has been shown that the sensitivity of unpolarized heliospheric imagers is not strongly affected by the geometry relative to the TS, and in fact, heliospheric imagers onaboard \textit{STEREO} have observed the CMEs very far from the TS (\cc{Howard \& DeForest 2012}). However, it has also been shown that the polarized brightness measurements of CMEs in the heliosphere, at larger distances from the Sun, are much more localized to the TS than the unpolarized brightness measurements (\cc{Howard \etal 2013}). Conclusively, the observed brightness of a CME can change corresponding to its changing location across the TS and its distance from the Sun, and hence corresponding to observers at different locations. This concept has implications for understanding how the kinematics and morphology of CMEs can appear to be different from observer's perspectives.
\subsubsection{In Situ Observations of CMEs} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{insitu}
Various plasma, magnetic field and compositional parameters of an ICME are measured by \textit{in situ} spacecraft at the instant when it intersects the ICME. The identification of ICME in \textit{in situ data} is not very straightforward and it is based on several signatures which are summarized below.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph*{\textbf{Magnetic field signatures in the plasma:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
ICMEs are identified in \textit{in situ} observations based on the increased magnetic field strength and reduced variability in the magnetic field (\cc{Klein \& Burlaga 1982}). A subset of ICMEs is known as Magnetic Clouds (MCs) which shows additional signatures such as enhanced magnetic field greater than $\approx$ 10 nT, smooth rotation of magnetic field vector by angles greater than $\approx$ 30$\arcdeg$, and plasma $\beta$ (ratio of thermal and magnetic field energies) less than unity (\cc{Lepping \etal 1990}).
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph*{\textbf{Dynamics signatures in the plasma:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
The ICME can be identified \textit{in situ} by its characteristics of expansion during the propagation in the ambient solar wind. Due to expansion, CMEs also show depressed proton temperature in contrast to the ambient solar wind. ICME leading edge, i.e., front has speed greater than its trailing edge and the difference of speeds at boundaries is equal to two times the expansion speed of CME. Hence, a monotonic decrease in the plasma velocity inside an ICME is noticed (\cc{Klein \& Burlaga 1982}). It is also found that the normal solar wind is expected to show an empirical relation between proton temperature and solar wind speed (\cc{Lopez 1987}) as given in Equation~\cc{\ref{eqvswt}}.
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
T_{exp} &= (0.031 V_{sw} - 5.1)^{2} \times 10^{3} , \hspace{4pt} when~V_{sw} < 500~km~s^{-1} \\
T_{exp} &= (0.51 V_{sw} - 142) \times 10^{3}, \hspace{4pt} when~V_{sw} > 500~km~s^{-1}
\end{align}
\label{eqvswt}
\end{subequations}
However, it is found that ICMEs do not show the same ``expected'' proton temperature ($T_{exp}$) as it is for the ambient solar wind which can be determined from Equation~\cc{\ref{eqvswt}} . In general, ICMEs typically have proton temperature T$_{p}$ $<$ 0.5 T$_{exp}$ (\cc{Richardson \& Cane 1995}). It is also noted that in an ICME, the electron temperature (T$_{e}$) is greater than proton temperature (T$_{p}$). It is proposed that the ratio of electron to proton temperature, i.e. T$_{e}$/T$_{p}$ $>$ 2 is a good indicator of an ICME (\cc{Richardson \etal 1997}).
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph*{\textbf{Compositional signatures in the plasma:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
The composition of an ICME is different than the ambient solar wind medium. \textit{In situ} observations have shown that alpha to proton ratio (He$^{+2}$/H) is higher ($>$ 6\%) inside an ICME than its values in the normal solar wind. This suggested that an ICME also contains material from the solar atmosphere below the corona (\cc{Hirshberg \etal 1971}; \cc{Zurbuchen \etal 2003}). It is observed that relative to the solar wind, an ICME shows an enhancement in value of $^{3}$He$^{+2}$/$^{4}$He$^{+2}$, heavy-ion abundances (especially iron) and its enhanced charge states (\cc{Lepri \etal 2001}; \cc{Lepri \& Zurbuchen 2004}). ICME associated plasma with enhanced charge states of iron suggests that CME source is ``hot'' relative to the ambient solar wind. It is also noted that ICME shows relative enhancement of O$^{+7}$/O$^{+6}$ (\cc{Richardson \& Cane 2004}; \cc{Rodriguez \etal 2004}). However, few CMEs have been identified with unusual low ion charge states such as the presence of singly-charged helium abundances well above solar wind values (\cc{Schwenn \etal 1980}; \cc{Burlaga \etal 1998}; \cc{Skoug \etal 1999}). Such low charge states suggest that the plasma may be associated with the cool and dense prominence material (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 1998b}; \cc{Lepri \& Zurbuchen 2010}; \cc{Sharma \& Srivastava 2012}).
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph*{\textbf{Energetic particles signatures in the plasma:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
ICMEs have loops structures rooted at the Sun, therefore the presence of bidirectional beams of suprathermal ($\geq$ 100 eV) electrons (BDEs) is considered as a typical ICME signature (\cc{Gosling \etal 1987}). Sometimes such BDEs are absent when the ICME field lines in the legs of the loops reconnect with open interplanetary magnetic field lines. In addition, the short-term (few days duration) depressions in the galactic cosmic ray intensity and the onset of solar energetic particles are well associated with ICMEs (\cc{Zurbuchen \& Richardson 2006}).
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph*{\textbf{Association with shock and sheath:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
It is understood that some of the fast CMEs generate a forward shock ahead of them. Such shocks are wide and span several tens of degrees in heliospheric longitude, approximately two times the value of the angular width of the driver ICME (\cc{Richardson \& Cane 1993}). In \textit{in situ} observations, a forward shock is identified based on a simultaneous increase in the density, temperature, speed and magnetic field in the plasma. The shock is followed by a sheath region before the ICME/MC. These sheaths are identified as turbulent and compressed regions of solar wind having strong fluctuations in magnetic fields which last for several hours (\cc{Zurbuchen \& Richardson 2006}). The magnetic fields in the compressed sheath region may be deflected out of the ecliptic by draping around the ICME (\cc{McComas \etal 1989}). The compressed and deflected magnetic field in the sheath result in geoeffectiveness. If the pre-shock magnetic field vector in the sheath region makes an angle of 90$^\circ$ with the normal to the shock surface, i.e., for perpendicular shock, then the shock lead to stronger compression of the magnetic field in the sheath than that by parallel shocks. The strongly compressed sheath often give rise to more intense geomagnetic storms (\cc{Jurac \etal 2002}).
Several studies have shown that different ICMEs show different signatures (\cc{Jian \etal 2006}; \cc{Richardson \& Cane 2010}). For example, few ICMEs show signatures of flux ropes while others do not. However, it is still not well understood why a few ICMEs are not observed as flux-ropes in \textit{in situ} data. Similarly, cold filament materiel which is often observed in COR images as a `bright core' following the cavity is rarely observed in \textit{in situ} observations near 1 AU (\cc{Skoug \etal 1999}; \cc{Lepri \& Zurbuchen 2010}).
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{insitutraje.jpg}
\caption[Four possible tracks of an \textit{in situ} spacecraft through a CME]{Left panel shows four possible tracks of an observing spacecraft through a CME with a leading shock. Right panel shows another two more tracks through the CME without a leading shock. Track 1 passes through the shock only and track 2 passes through the shock and the sheath of the CME. Track 3 corresponds to a situation when the CME from the Sun is directed exactly towards the \textit{in situ} spacecraft. In this case, the spacecraft measures the shock, sheath, and the magnetic cloud. Tracks 5 and 6 are similar to 4 and 3, respectively, where there is no shock possibly due to a slow speed CME. Trajectories 4 and 5 will not observe the MC structure. (reproduced from \cc{Gopalswamy 2006a})}
\label{insitutraje}
\end{figure}
It is important to mention here that no CMEs show all the signatures and therefore there is no unique scheme to identify them in \textit{in situ} observations. Also, different signatures may appear for different interval of time and hence, CMEs may have different boundaries in plasma, magnetic field and other signatures. This is possible as different signatures have their origin due to different physical processes. If we identify CMEs based on only a few signatures then they may be falsely identified. Therefore, a practical approach is to identify as many signatures as possible. Such an approach helps for reliable identification of the CMEs in \textit{in situ} observations, however marking of their boundaries may still be ambiguous. \cc{Richardson \& Cane (2010)} have identified approximately 300 CMEs near the Earth during the complete solar cycle 23, i.e., between year 1996 to 2009. However, there are some other lists of CMEs observed near the Earth which have compiled slightly differing number of ICMEs based on slightly different criteria (\cc{Richardson \& Cane 1995}; \cc{Cane \& Richardson 2003}; \cc{Richardson \& Cane 2010}).
Before the \textit{STEREO} era, the biggest limitation of CME study was that most of the \textit{in situ} data analysis was restricted to a single point observation at 1 AU while ICMEs are large 3D structures. The limitation of a single point \textit{in situ} observations is illustrated in Figure~\cc{\ref{insitutraje}}. The figure shows how a single point \textit{in situ} instruments can measure different structures and hence show different signatures of an ICME depending on the trajectory of the spacecraft through an ICME. Such a single point \textit{in situ} spacecraft will also measure the different dynamics of an ICME based on its location within the ICME. Hence, in the absence of information about the part of ICME which is being sampled by the \textit{in situ} spacecraft, it would be difficult to find an association between the speed derived in COR FOV and the one measured \textit{in situ}. Furthermore, since the CMEs evolve during their propagation from the Sun to Earth, making an association between remote observations close to the Sun and \textit{in situ} observations close to the Earth is erroneous. Therefore, multi-point \textit{in situ} observations of an ICME from different viewing perspectives and investigation of the thermodynamic state of CMEs must be carried out.
\subsection{Analysis Methodology for CMEs Kinematics}
Several studies have been carried out to understand the CME kinematics using imaging observations from several space-based instruments (\cc{Schwenn 2006}, and references therein). Among all the space-based instruments dedicated to observing CMEs, the \textit{SOHO}/LASCO launched in 1995 can be considered as the most successful mission in observing thousands of CMEs which led to hundreds of important research papers. \textit{SOHO}/LASCO consists of three nested coronagraphs C1 (no longer operating since June 1998), C2, and C3 that have observed the solar corona from 1.1 \textit{R$_\odot$} to 30 \textit{R$_\odot$}, with overlapping FOVs. Using these observations, several studies were carried out to estimate the source location, mass, kinematics, morphology and arrival times of CMEs (\cc{St. Cyr \etal 2000}; \cc{Xie \etal 2004}; \cc{Schwenn \etal 2005}). Also, to explain the initiation and propagation of CMEs, several theoretical models have been developed (\cc{Chen 2011}, and references therein). These models differ from one another considerably in the involved mechanism of the progenitor, triggering, and the eruption of a CME. Based on the angular width of a CME observed in coronagraphic images, CMEs were classified as halo, symmetric halo, asymmetric halo, partial halo, limb, and narrow CMEs. Furthermore, based on the acceleration profile of a CME, the CMEs were classified as gradual and impulsive CMEs (\cc{Sheeley \etal 1999}; \cc{Srivastava \etal 1999}). Despite the observations of CMEs with extremely low and high speeds, it is believed that all CMEs belong to a dynamical continuum having no difference in the physics of their initiation process (\cc{Crooker 2002}). With the availability of complementary disk observations of solar active regions and prominences, statistical studies on the association of different types of CMEs with flares and prominences have also been carried out in detail (\cc{Kahler 1992}; \cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2003b}).
It is found that a typical CME shows a three-phase kinematic profile: first, a slow rise over tens of minutes, then a rapid acceleration between 1.4 \textit{R$_\odot$}-4.5 \textit{R$_\odot$} during the main phase of a flare, and finally a propagation phase with constant or decreasing speed (\cc{Zhang \& Dere 2006}). These three distinct phases of a CME are shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{CMEpropimg}}. It is noted that after a rapid acceleration phase, the CME accelerates or decelerate slowly in the FOV of coronagraphs (\cc{St. Cyr \etal 2000}; \cc{Yashiro \etal 2004}). The estimated total mass of CMEs range from 10$^{10}$ kg to 10$^{13}$ kg, and the total energy from 10$^{20}$ J to 10$^{26}$ J. The average mass and energy of a CME is 1.4 $\times$ 10$^{12}$ kg and 2.6 $\times$ 10$^{23}$ J, respectively (\cc{Vourlidas \etal 2002b}).
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.7]{CMEprop.jpg}
\caption[Three phase kinematic profile of a CME]{The three different phases of kinematics of a CME and its association with temporal evolution of GOES soft X-ray flux is shown. The initiation, acceleration, and propagation phase of the CME kinematics correspond to the preflare, rise, and decay phase of the associated flare, respectively. (reproduced from \cc{Zhang \& Dere 2006})}
\label{CMEpropimg}
\end{figure}
The source locations of the majority of CMEs are within 25$\arcdeg$ from the solar equator, around the solar minimum, although few CMEs are seen at higher latitudes also (\cc{St. Cyr \etal 2000}). Excluding the partial and full halo CMEs, the apparent angular width of CMEs is found to vary from few degrees to more than 120$\arcdeg$, with an average value of about $\approx$ 50$\arcdeg$ (\cc{Yashiro \etal 2004}). These properties derived from a statistical study will also depend on the sensitivity of the coronagraphs and the selection of the sample of CMEs. It is noted that, in the pre-\textit{STEREO} era, the angular width, speed, and mass of CMEs were often estimated from the 2D coronagraphic images of CMEs. Such estimates are subject to the projection and perspective effects. These studies were based on the plane of sky assumption, i.e., CMEs are propagating perpendicular to the Sun-observer line. Therefore if this assumption of the plane of sky fails, the speed, mass, and energies of CMEs will be underestimated (\cc{Vourlidas \etal 2010}) while the angular width will be severely overestimated (\cc{Burkepile \etal 2004}).
\subsection{Arrival time of CMEs at the Earth}
Realizing the consequences of CMEs on our modern high-tech society, several studies were dedicated at finding a correlation between the intensity of magnetic disturbances on Earth and the characteristics of CMEs estimated near the Sun (\cc{Gosling \etal 1990}; \cc{Srivastava \& Venkatakrishnan 2002}, \cc{2004}). In the context of space weather, understanding the heliospheric evolution of CMEs and predicting their arrival times at the Earth is a major objective of various forecast centers. The prediction of CME/shock arrival time means that forecasters utilize the observables of solar disturbance obtained prior to arrival as inputs to predict whether/when they will arrive. Longer lead time in prediction is yielded if the solar observables are used. The arrival time of CMEs at 1 AU can be related to their characteristics (velocity, acceleration) near the Sun in order to develop the prediction methods for CME’s arrival time. Different kinds of models of CME/shock arrival time prediction have been developed, e.g., empirical models, expansion speed model, drag-based models, physics-based models, and MHD models.
Several studies of evolution of CMEs have been carried out using \textit{SOHO}/LASCO observations, \textit{in situ} observations near the Earth by \textit{ACE} and \textit{WIND} combined with modeling efforts (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2000a}, \cc{2001b}, \cc{2005}; \cc{Yashiro \etal 2004}; \cc{Wood \etal 1999}; \cc{Andrews \etal 1999}). These studies were based on the understanding of the kinematics of CMEs using two-point measurements, one near the Sun up to a distance of 30 \textit{R$_\odot$} using coronagraph (LASCO/C2 and C3) images, and the other near the Earth using \textit{in situ} instruments. Using the LASCO images, one could estimate the projected speeds of CMEs, although we lacked information about the 3D speed and direction of the Earth-directed CMEs. These studies, carried out to calculate the kinematics and the travel time of CMEs from the Sun to the Earth, suffered from a lot of assumptions regarding the geometry and evolution of a CME in the interplanetary medium (\cc{Howard \& Tappin 2009}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal 2010}).
Several models, based on the empirical relationship between measured projected speeds of CMEs and their observed arrival time at 1 AU, have been developed to forecast the CME arrival time at a particular heliocentric distance (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2001a}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \& Gopalswamy 2002}; \cc{Schwenn \etal 2005}). \cc{Vandas \etal} (\cc{1996}) found that the transit time (in hr) to 1 AU for the CME flux rope (cloud/driver) leading edge is T$_{driver}$ = 85-0.014V$_{i}$ for a slow background solar wind speed (say, 361 km s$^{-1}$), and T$_{driver}$ = 42-0.0041V$_{i}$ for a faster background solar wind speed (say, 794 km s$^{-1}$). Here V$_{i}$ (km s$^{-1}$) is the propagation speed of the leading edge of CME at 18 R$_{\odot}$. Then the transit time of the shock preceding the magnetic cloud is T$_{shock}$ = 74 - 0.015V$_{i}$ for slow solar wind and T$_{shock}$ = 43-0.006V$_{i}$ for fast solar wind. It is found that the difference in time between the CME launch on the Sun and the time when the associated geomagnetic storm reaches its peak is about 80 hr (\cc{Brueckner \etal 1998}).
Among the most typical and widely used prediction models are empirical CME arrival (ECA) and empirical shock arrival (ESA) models. ECA model consider that a CME has an average acceleration up to a distance of 0.7 AU-0.95 AU (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2001a}). After the cessation of acceleration, a CME is assumed to move with a constant speed. They found that the average acceleration has a linear relationship with the initial plane-of-sky speed of the CME. The ECA model has been able to predict the arrival time of CMEs within an error of $\pm$ 35 hr with an average error of 11 hr. Later, an empirical shock arrival (ESA) model was able to predict the arrival time of CMEs within an error of approximately $\pm$ 30 hr with an average error of 12 hr (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2005}). The ESA model is a modified version of the ECA model in which a CME is considered to be the driver of magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) shocks. The other assumption is that fast mode MHD shocks are similar to gas dynamic shocks. The gas dynamic piston-shock relationship is thus utilized in this model. Various efforts have been made to derive an empirical formula for CME arrival time, based on the projected speed of a large number of CMEs (\cc{Wang \etal 2002}; \cc{Zhang \etal 2003}; \cc{Srivastava \& Venkatakrishnan 2004}; \cc{Manoharan \etal 2004}).
The empirical models adopt relatively simple equations to fit the relations between the arrival time of the CME disturbance at the Earth and their observables such as initial velocity near the Sun. In the majority of these empirical models, the initial speeds of CMEs were measured from plane of sky LASCO/\textit{SOHO} observations and therefore the measured kinematics are not representative of the true CME motion. To overcome plane-of-sky effects, a study of 57 limb CMEs was made to derive an empirical relationship between their radial and expansion speeds as V$_{rad}$ = 0.88V$_{exp}$ (\cc{Dal Lago \etal 2003}). This result led to the use of lateral expansion speed as a proxy for the radial speed of halo CMEs that could not be measured. Also, in another study of 75 events, an empirical formula for transit time of CMEs to Earth was derived as, T$_{tr}$ = 203 - 20.77 ln(V$_{exp}$) (\cc{Schwenn \etal 2005}). Their results show that the formula can be used for predicting ICME arrivals, with a 95\% error margin of about 24 hr. Such empirical models have inherent difficulties as they are only math-fit of the measured CME speed and arrival time but do not consider the physics of CME evolution through the ambient solar wind.
Furthermore, a few attempts have been made to fit the observed kinematics profiles of CMEs using an appropriate mathematical function (\cc{Gallagher \etal 2003}). These studies, using \textit{SOHO}/LASCO observations, are subject to large uncertainties due to projection effects. To overcome the projection effects, methods such as forward modeling, which approximates a CME as a cone (\cc{Zhao \etal 2002}; \cc{Xie \etal 2004}; \cc{Xue \etal 2005}) and varies the model parameters to best fit the 2D observations, have been used to estimate the CME kinematics. However, this derived kinematics is also subject to several new sources of errors due to the presumed geometry of the CME. Another method known as polarimetric technique, using the ratio of unpolarised to polarised brightness of the Thomson-scattered K-corona, has been applied to estimate the average line of sight distance of CME from the instrument plane of the sky (\cc{Moran \& Davila 2004}). However, the technique of polarization ratio is only applicable up to $\approx$ 5 \textit{R$_{\odot}$} because beyond this the F-corona cannot be considered as unpolarised. Thus, the estimation of 3D kinematics of a CME beyond a few solar radii from the Sun was largely undetermined in the pre-\textit{STEREO} era.
Many studies have also shown that CMEs interact significantly with the ambient solar wind as they propagate in the interplanetary medium, resulting in acceleration of slow CMEs and deceleration of fast CMEs toward the ambient solar wind speed (\cc{Lindsay \etal 1999}; \cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2000a}, \cc{2001a}; \cc{Yashiro \etal 2004}; \cc{Manoharan 2006}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \& \v{Z}ic 2007}). It was shown that CME transit time depends on both the CME take-off speed and the background solar wind speed. The interaction between the solar wind and the CME is understood in terms of a `drag force' (\cc{Cargill \etal 1996}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \& Gopalswamy 2002}). Therefore, the analytical models developed are based on the equation of motion of CMEs where the drag acceleration/deceleration has a quadratic dependence on the relative speed between CME and the background solar wind. It was found that the measured deceleration rates are proportional to the relative speed between CME and the background solar wind, as well as a dimensionless drag coefficient (c$_{d}$) (\cc{Vr\v{s}nak 2001}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \& Gopalswamy 2002}; \cc{Cargill 2004}). Recently, a discussion on the variation of the drag coefficient (c$_{d}$) with heliocentric distance was made (\cc{Subramanian \etal 2012}). They adopt a microphysical prescription for viscosity in the turbulent solar wind to obtain an analytical model for the drag coefficient. Furthermore, a simple yet powerful drag-based model (DBM) is developed which can estimate the Sun-Earth transit time of CMEs and their impact speed at 1 AU (\cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal 2013}). The DBM has also been used widely in the \textit{STEREO} era in several studies as described in Section~\cc{\ref{postst}}
The observations have revealed that the dynamics of CMEs are governed mainly by drag force beyond a certain distance from the Sun. This is perhaps the reason why a few analytical drag-based models (DBM) (\cc{Vr\v{s}nak \& \v{Z}ic 2007}; \cc{Lara \& Borgazzi 2009}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal 2010}) have been used widely in the literature. However, some earlier studies acknowledge the role of Lorentz force even during the propagation phase of a CME (\cc{Kumar \& Rust 1996}; \cc{Subramanian \& Vourlidas 2005}, \cc{2007}; \cc{Subramanian \etal 2014}). In the direction of modeling efforts, a few numerical MHD simulation models (\cc{Odstrcil \etal 2004}; \cc{Manchester \etal 2004}; \cc{Smith \etal 2009}) have been developed and used to predict CME arrival times (\cc{Dryer \etal 2004}; \cc{Feng \etal 2009}; \cc{Smith \etal 2009}). Despite several studies on CME propagation, using observations combined with models, very little is known about the exact nature of the forces governing the propagation of CME.
A physics-based magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) numerical model is the coupled Wang-Sheeley-Arge (WSA) + ENLIL + Cone model (\cc{Odstrcil \etal 2004}) which has often been used to simulate the propagation and evolution of CMEs in interplanetary space and provides a 1-2 day lead time forecasting for major CMEs (\cc{Taktakishvili \etal 2009}; \cc{Pizzo \etal 2011}). WSA is a quasi-steady global solar wind model that uses synoptic magnetograms as inputs to predict ambient solar wind speed and interplanetary magnetic field polarity at Earth (\cc{Wang \& Sheeley 1995}; \cc{Arge \& Pizzo 2000}). The ENLIL model is a time-dependent, 3D ideal MHD model of the solar wind in the heliosphere (\cc{Odstrcil \etal 2002}, \cc{2004}). The cone model assumes a CME as a cone with constant angular width in the heliosphere (\cc{Zhao \etal 2002}; \cc{Xie \etal 2004}). The input of ENLIL at its inner boundary of 21.5 \textit{R}$_{\odot}$ is taken from the output of WSA to get the background solar wind flows and interplanetary magnetic field.
A physics-based prediction model named ``Shock Time of Arrival'' (STOA) model has been developed based on the theory of blast waves from point explosions. This concept was revised by introducing the piston-driven concept (\cc{Dryer 1974}; \cc{Smart \& Shea 1985}). Another such model is the ``Interplanetary Shock Propagation Model'' (ISPM) which is based on a 2.5D MHD parametric study of numerically simulated shocks. The model demonstrates that the organizing parameter for the shock is the net energy released into the solar wind (\cc{Smith \& Dryer 1990}). The ``Hakamada-Akasofu-Fry version 2'' (HAFv.2) model is a ``modified kinematic'' solar wind model that calculates the solar wind speed, density, magnetic field, and dynamic pressure as a function of time and location (\cc{Dryer \etal 2001}, \cc{2004}; \cc{Fry \etal 2001}, \cc{2007}; \cc{Smith \etal 2009}). This model gives a global description of the propagation of multiple and interacting shocks in nonuniform, stream-stream interacting flows of solar wind in the ecliptic plane. The STOA, ISPM, and HAFv.2 models use similar input solar parameters (i.e., the source location of the associated flare, the start time of the metric Type II radio burst, the proxy piston driving time duration, and the background solar wind speed).
We note that some of the aforementioned models are complicated while others are rather simple and easy, however, no significant differences are found between their prediction capabilities of CME arrival time. The predictions yield a root-mean-square error of $\approx$ 12 hr and a mean absolute error of $\approx$ 10 hr, for a large number of CMEs. Many factors are responsible for the limited accuracies of these models, e.g., (1) The inputs parameters (kinematics and morphology) of the model have their own uncertainties. (2) The real-time background solar wind condition into which CME travels is difficult to either observe or simulate from MHD. (3) The change in the kinematics of the CME due to its interaction with other large or small scale solar wind structures. These factors are difficult to be taken into account in a single model. Improvement in the accuracy of these arrival time models requires a better understanding of both the heliospheric evolution of CME and the ambient solar wind medium. Using the observations of CMEs from instruments onboard \textit{STEREO}, the heliospheric evolution can be better understood by imposing some constraints on the models and methods developed based on the observations from \textit{SOHO}/LASCO.
\section{Studies on CME Propagation in \textit{STEREO} Era}
\label{postst}
The twin \textit{STEREO} (\cc{Kaiser \etal 2008}) spacecraft, launched late in 2006, can observe CMEs in the heliosphere using its identical optical, \textit{in situ} particles, fields and radio instruments on each spacecraft. These instruments are in four different measurement packages named as \textit{Sun Earth Connection Coronal and Heliospheric Investigation} (SECCHI) (\cc{Howard \etal 2008}), \textit{In situ Measurements of PArticles and CME Transients} (IMPACT) (\cc{Luhmann \etal 2008}), \textit{PLAsma and SupraThermal Ion Composition} (PLASTIC) (\cc{Galvin \etal 2008}) and S/WAVES. The IMPACT and PLASTIC packages can provide a chance to measure the \textit{in situ} signatures of CMEs at 1 AU from two vantage points. The suite of instruments in SECCHI package consists of two white light coronagraphs (COR1 and COR2), an Extreme Ultra-violet Imager (EUVI) and two white light heliospheric imagers (HI1 and HI2). The SECCHI package have the capability to continuously image a CME from its lift-off in the corona out to 1 AU and beyond.
The twin \textit{STEREO} spacecraft move ahead and behind the Earth in its orbit with their angular separation increasing by 45$\arcdeg$ per year. The \textit{STEREO} mission overcomes a large observational gap between near Sun remote observations and near-Earth \textit{in situ} observations and provides information on the 3D kinematics of CMEs due to multiple viewpoints on the solar corona. Thus, in the \textit{STEREO} era, the three-dimensional 3D aspects of CMEs could be studied for the first time. Such 3D studies on CMEs was not done in pre-\textit{STEREO} era when coronagraphic observations were available only from one location along the Sun-Earth line, as discussed in Section~\cc{\ref{prest}}. Such unique observations led to the development of various 3D reconstruction techniques, e.g., tie-pointing method (\cc{Inhester 2006}), forward modeling (\cc{Thernisien \etal 2009}), etc. Also, several other techniques were developed that are derivatives of the tie-pointing technique: the 3D height-time technique (\cc{Mierla \etal 2008}), local correlation tracking and triangulation (\cc{Mierla \etal 2009}), and triangulation of the center of mass (\cc{Boursier \etal 2009}). These methods have been devised to obtain the 3D heliographic coordinates of CME features in the SECCHI/CORs FOV.
The kinematics of CMEs in 3D over a range of heliocentric distances and their heliospheric interaction have been investigated by exploiting \textit{STEREO}/HI observations (\cc{Davis \etal 2009}; \cc{Temmer \etal 2011}; \cc{Harrison \etal 2012}; \cc{Liu \etal 2012}; \cc{Lugaz \etal 2012}; \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2013}, \cc{2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015b}, \cc{2016}). In an effot to combine observations and model, \cc{Byrne \etal} (\cc{2010}) applied the elliptical tie-pointing technique on the COR and HI observations and determined the angular width and deflection of a CME of 2008 December 12. They used the derived kinematics as inputs in the ENLIL model (\cc{Odstr\v{c}il \& Pizzo 1999}) to predict the arrival time of a CME at the L1 near the Earth.
It is noted that the 3D kinematics of CMEs may change beyond the CORs FOV either due to drag forces acting on them or due to CME-CME interaction in the heliosphere. Also, a CME may be deflected by another CME and by nearby coronal holes during its propagation in the heliosphere (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2009}). To demonstrate the drag forces acting on the CMEs, \cc{Maloney \& Gallagher} (\cc{2010}) estimated 3D kinematics of CMEs in the inner heliosphere exploiting \textit{STEREO} observations and pointed out different forms of drag force for fast and slow CMEs. The aerodynamic drag force acting on different CMEs will be different and its magnitude will change as the CME propagate in the heliosphere. Therefore, the estimation of the CME arrival time using only the 3D speed estimated from the 3D reconstruction method in COR FOV may not be accurate (\cc{Kilpua \etal 2012}).
In the \textit{STEREO} era, in addition to SECCHI imaging suite, each of the \textit{STEREO} carries its IMPACT and PLASTIC suite which can make the \textit{in situ} observations of the ICMEs. The \textit{in situ} observations of ICMEs from \textit{ACE} and \textit{WIND} spacecraft located along the Sun-Earth line, as well as from \textit{STEREO} located off-Sun-Earth line have been made for several cases (\cc{Rodriguez \etal 2011}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2014}). Exploiting the \textit{in situ} observations of CME by twin \textit{STEREO}, \cc{Kilpua \etal} (\cc{2009}) suggested that high latitude CMEs can be guided by the polar coronal fields and they can be observed as ICME close to the ecliptic plane. In another study, \cc{Kilpua \etal} (\cc{2011}) emphasized that an ICME cannot be explained in terms of simple flux ropes models because they are observed as different \textit{in situ} structures at both the \textit{STEREO} spacecraft even when the separation between the spacecraft were only few degrees in longitude. Despite the advantage of multi-point \textit{in situ} observations, it is still unclear whether all CMEs have flux ropes or in other words, whether all interplanetary CMEs are magnetic clouds. Also, it is not well understood how a remotely observed CME evolves into an ICME observed \textit{in situ} in the solar wind.
Two recently launched space missions, \textit{Parker Solar Probe (PSP)} in August 2018 (\cc{Fox \etal 2016}) and \textit{Solar Orbiter (SO)} in February 2020 (\cc{M\"{u}ller \etal 2020}), are devoted to revolutionizing our understanding of the solar activity, the corona, solar wind, the generation, acceleration, and transport of solar energetic particles (SEPs). Both \textit{PSP} and \textit{SO} carry a comprehensive suite of \textit{in-situ} and remote-sensing instrumentation. These spacecraft intend to reach much closer to the Sun and perform detailed \textit{in-situ} measurements of nascent solar wind. \textit{PSP} having varying elliptical orbits around the Sun in the ecliptic plane will approach to within 10 \textit{R}$_{\odot}$ from the center of the Sun by 2025. \textit{SO} having highly elliptical and inclined orbits around the Sun will approach to within 0.28 AU from the center of the Sun by 2025. \textit{SO} having increasing orbital tilt will reach 18$\arcdeg$ in the nominal mission (first in March 2025), 25$\arcdeg$ at the start of the extended mission (first in January 2027), and 33$\arcdeg$ in the extended mission (first in July 2029). The \textit{Solar Orbiter Heliospheric Imager} (SoloHI) (\cc{Howard \etal 2020}), Metis coronagraph (\cc{Antonucci \etal 2020}) and the \textit{Wide-field Imager for Solar Probe} (WISPR) (\cc{Vourlidas \etal 2016}) onboard \textit{PSP} will gather images of both the quasi-steady flow and transient disturbances in the solar wind over a large FOV. The differing orbits of the two spacecraft provide two potential of sight through the corona and accelerating solar wind which is further aided by \textit{SOHO}/LASCO along the Sun-Earth line and by \textit{STEREO-A}. There have been several studies exploiting the remote observations of CMEs by \textit{PSP} and \textit{SO} (\cc{Hess \etal 2020}; \cc{Rouillard \etal 2020}; \cc{Laker \etal 2021}). Also, many studies have been reported utilizing the \textit{in-situ} observations of solar wind by \textit{PSP} and \textit{SO} (\cc{McComas \etal 2019}; \cc{Horbury \etal 2020}; \cc{Lavraud \etal 2020}). These two missions promise to revolutionize our understanding of the Sun-heliosphere system, but the results from these missions are not included in the present review. Instead, we focus on the heritage of the recent \textit{STEREO} era providing unprecedented imaging observations from multiple viewpoints that have led to the development of several algorithms and software tools in the last 15 years. The following section focus on the importance of deriving 3D morphology, kinematics, and arrival times of large-scale solar wind structures.
\subsection{Remote Observations of CMEs in the Heliosphere}
In the following, we will focus the white-light imaging observations from only CORs and HIs onboard \textit{STEREO}.
\subsubsection{SECCHI/COR observations} \hspace{0pt}\\
As mentioned earlier SECCHI has two white-light coronagraphs, COR1 is a Lyot internally occulting refractive coronagraph (\cc{Lyot 1939}) and its field of view (FOV) is from 1.4 \textit{R}$_{\odot}$ to 4.0 \textit{R}$_{\odot}$. The internal occultation enables better spatial resolution closer to the limb. COR1 has a resolution of 7.5$\arcsec$ per pixel with a cadence of 8 min. Another coronagraph, COR2 is an externally occulted Lyot coronagraph similar to LASCO-C2 and C3 coronagraphs onboard SOHO spacecraft with FOV from 2.5 \textit{R}$_{\odot}$ to 15 \textit{R}$_{\odot}$. COR2 observes with a cadence of 15 min and with a resolution of 14.7$\arcsec$ per pixel. The brightness sensitivity of COR1 and COR2 is $\approx$ 10$^{-10}$ B$_\odot$ and 10$^{-12}$ B$_\odot$, respectively. The calibration, operation, mechanical and thermal design of COR1 and COR2 coronagraphs are described in (\cc{Howard \etal 2008}).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.50]{COR2A.eps}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.50]{COR2B.eps} \\
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.50]{HI1A.eps}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.50]{HI1B.eps} \\
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.50]{HI2A.eps}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.50]{HI2B.eps}
\caption[Evolution of the CMEs observed during February 2011 in COR2, HI1 and HI2 images]{Evolution of the CMEs observed in COR2, HI1 and HI2 images from \textit{STEREO-A} (left column) and \textit{B} (right column) is shown. The contours of elongation angle (green) and position angle (blue) are overplotted on the images. The vertical red line in the COR2 images marks the 0$\arcdeg$ position angle contour. The horizontal lines (red) on all panels indicate the position angle of the Earth.}
\label{CMEs_STEREO}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{SECCHI/HI observations} \hspace{0pt}\\
SECCHI/Heliospheric Imagers (HIs) detect photospheric light scattered from free electrons in K-corona and interplanetary dust around the Sun (F-corona) similar to CORs. HI also detects the light from the stars and planets within its FOV. The F-corona is stable on a timescale far longer than the nominal image cadence of 40 min and 120 min for the HI1 and HI2 cameras, respectively. The HI1 and HI2 telescopes have an angular FOV of 20$\arcdeg$ and 70$\arcdeg$ and are directed at solar elongation angles of about 14$\arcdeg$ and $\approx$ 54$\arcdeg$ in the ecliptic plane. The HI-A telescopes are pointed at elongation angles to the east of the Sun, whilst HI-B axes are pointed to the west. HI1 and HI2 observe the heliosphere from 4$\arcdeg$-24$\arcdeg$ and 18.7$\arcdeg$-88.7$\arcdeg$ solar elongation, respectively (\cc{Eyles \etal 2009}). Hence, HI1 and HI2 have an overlap of about 5$\arcdeg$ in their FOVs and therefore permit photometric cross-calibration of the instruments. The HI1 and HI2 are with a resolution of 70$\arcsec$ per pixel and 4$\arcmin$ per pixel, respectively. The brightness sensitivity of HI1 and HI2 is 3 $\times$ 10$^{-15}$ B$_\odot$ and 3 $\times$ 10$^{-16}$ B$_\odot$, respectively (\cc{Eyles \etal 2009}). The images of CMEs observed in the field of view of COR2, HI1, and HI2 are shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{CMEs_STEREO}}. The number of CME ``events'' reported using the HIs onboard \textit{STEREO} is now more than one thousand (\cc{\url{http://www.stereo.rl.ac.uk/HIEventList.html}}), although less than 100 have been discussed so far in the scientific literature (\cc{Harrison \etal 2018}).
It must be emphasized that HI-A and HI-B view from two widely separated spacecraft at similar planetary angles (Earth-Sun-spacecraft), thus providing a stereographic view. Figure~\cc{\ref{FOVsHIsep}}(a) shows the overall FOVs of HI instruments projected onto the ecliptic plane. The two line of sight drawn with arrows from both \textit{STEREO-A} (red) and \textit{STEREO-B} (blue) spacecraft represent the inner and outer edges of FOVs of HI. The region of the heliosphere observed in the common FOV of HI-A and HI-B only will have a stereoscopic view from \textit{STEREO}. It is also clear from this figure that a CME directed towards the Earth can be observed continuously from the Sun to Earth and beyond from both HI-A and HI-B telescopes. In this scenario, a CME directed eastward from the Earth and \textit{STEREO-B} can only be observed in HI-A FOV but not in HI-B FOV. Similarly, a CME directed westward from the Earth and \textit{STEREO-B} will be observed only in HI-B FOV but not in HI-A FOV.
\begin{figure*}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{HIFOVssep_n.pdf}
\caption[Inner and outer edges of HI FOV corresponding to different separation angle of \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{B}]{Examples of locations of the Sun (yellow), Earth (green), \textit{STEREO-A} (red) and \textit{STEREO-B} (blue) are shown corresponding to different separation angles of twin \textit{STEREO}. The arrows from the \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B} locations represent the inner (near the Sun) and outer edges of the HI FOV in a qualitative fashion.}
\label{FOVsHIsep}
\end{figure*}
From Figure~\cc{\ref{FOVsHIsep}}, it can be noted that as the separation (summation of longitude of both \textit{STEREO}) between the \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B} increases with time, the region of the heliosphere observed simultaneously by both HI-A and HI-B also changes. From Figure~\cc{\ref{FOVsHIsep}}(b), it is clear that separation between \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{B} was approximately 175$\arcdeg$ around December 2010, any Earth-directed CMEs during that time cannot be observed near the Sun. They can be observed only a little far from the Sun by both HI-A and HI-B. Therefore, the continuous (Sun to Earth) tracking of CMEs is not possible in this case. Figure~\cc{\ref{FOVsHIsep}}(c) shows that the \textit{STEREO} spacecraft are behind the Sun from the Earth's perspective, i.e., the separation between them is greater than 180$\arcdeg$, HI-A and HI-B will not provide continuous coverage between the Sun and Earth along the ecliptic. Hence, in this scenario also, an Earth-directed CME will not be observed for a significant distance close to the Sun. The other issue of `detectability' of a CME arises when the \textit{STEREO} spacecraft are behind the Sun. In this case, if the CME is directed toward the Earth then it is substantially far-sided for both the \textit{STEREO} spacecraft. Hence, the distance between the CME and \textit{STEREO} increases with time and also as the CME diffuses with time, therefore its detection is difficult but not impossible. Even in such a scenario, some of the Earth-directed CMEs have been detected well in HI FOV (\cc{Liu \etal 2013}). In Figure~\cc{\ref{FOVsHIsep}}(d), the \textit{STEREO} spacecraft are on the other side of the sun with respect to Earth. In this scenario, the Earth does not appear in HI FOV which implies that any CME propagating toward the Earth will not be observed during its journey from the Sun to the Earth. We highlight that the communication with \textit{STEREO-B} got lost around October 2014 and was re-established for a short duration only in August 2016. It has been out of contact since September 2016; therefore, at present, only \textit{STEREO-A} is operating in the absence of \textit{STEREO-B}. Such a loss of \textit{STEREO-B} has limited the operational potential of the overall \textit{STEREO} mission.
\subsection{Analysis and Methodology for CMEs Kinematics using COR2 observations}
\label{anameth}
Various 3D reconstruction methods have been developed which can be used on SECCHI/COR observations, i.e., for a CME feature close to the Sun. These have been reviewed in (\cc{Mierla \etal 2010}). The most widely used 3D reconstruction techniques on the SECCHI/COR observations of CMEs are the tie-pointing method (\cc{Thompson 2009}; \cc{Inhester 2006}) and forward modeling method (\cc{Thernisien \etal 2009}). These methods are often used to estimate the kinematics of CMEs close to the Sun, i.e., before they enter into the HI FOV.
\subsubsection{Tie-point (TP) reconstruction} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{tiepoint}
The tie-pointing method of stereoscopic reconstruction is based on the concept of epipolar geometry. The position of two \textit{STEREO} spacecraft and the point to be triangulated defines a plane called epipolar plane (\cc{Inhester 2006}). Since every epipolar plane is seen head-on from both \textit{STEREO} spacecraft, it is reduced to a line in the respective image projection. This line is called epipolar line. Epipolar lines in each image can easily be determined from the observer's position and the direction of observer's optical axes. Any object which lies on a certain epipolar line in one image must lie on the same epipolar line in the other image. This straight forward geometrical consequence is known as epipolar constraint.
Due to the epipolar constraint, finding the correspondence of an object in the contemporaneous images from both spacecraft reduces to finding out correspondence along the same epipolar lines in both images. Once the correspondence between the pixels is found, the 3D reconstruction is achieved by calculating the line of sight rays corresponding to those pixels and on back tracking them in 3D space. Since the rays are constrained to lie in the same epipolar plane, they intersect at a point on tracking backwards. This procedure is called tie-pointing. The point of intersection of both line of sight gives the 3D coordinates of the identified object or feature in both sets of images. Before implementing the method, the processing of SECCHI/COR2 images and the creation of minimum intensity images and then its subtraction from the sequence of processed COR2 images are carried out as described in earlier studies (\cc{Mierla \etal 2008}; \cc{Srivastava \etal 2009}). This method has a graphical user interface (GUI) in the Interactive Data Language (IDL) software and has been widely used in several studies to estimate the
3D coordinates of a CME's feature (\cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2013}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}).
\subsubsection{Forward modeling method} \hspace{0pt}\\
In the forward modeling method, a specific parametric shape of CME is assumed and iteratively fit until it matches with its actual image. \cc{Thernisien \etal} (\cc{2009}) developed a method assuming a Graduated Cylindrical Shell (GCS) model to match the CME observed by SECCHI/COR2-A and B. The GCS model represents the flux rope structure of CMEs with two shapes; the conical legs and the curved (tubular) fronts (Figure~\cc{\ref{modelGCS}}). The resulting shape is like a ``hollow croissant''. The model also assumes that the GCS structure moves in a self-similar way. In principle, this technique can also be applied to HI images, however, the technique is widely applied to COR2 images. This is because, in COR2 FOV, the flux-rope structure of CMEs is well identified, while it is not fully developed in COR1 FOV and is too faint in the HI FOV.
\begin{figure*}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.60]{GCSmodel.jpg}
\caption[GCS model representation]{The left panel (marked as a) shows the Graduated Cylindrical Shell (GCS) model as seen face-on. The central panel (marked as b) shows the GCS model as seen edge-on. The right panel (marked as c) shows the several positioning parameters of the GCS model. The dash-dotted and the solid line represents the axis and a planar cut through the cylindrical shell, respectively. The $\phi$ and $\theta$ are the longitude and latitude of the axis through the centre of the shell, respectively, and $\gamma$ is the tilt angle around the axis of symmetry of the model. (reproduced from \cc{Thernisien \etal 2009})}
\label{modelGCS}
\end{figure*}
GCS model fitting tool in IDL involves simultaneous adjusting six model parameters so that the resulting GCS flux structure matches well with the observed flux rope structure of the CME (\cc{Thernisien 2011}). These six parameters, including the longitude, latitude, tilt angle of the flux ropes with the height of the legs, half-angle between the legs, and aspect ratio of the curved front are adjusted to match the spatial extent of the CME. These have been discussed in detail in \cc{Thernisien \etal} (\cc{2009}). The best fit six parameters obtained are used to calculate various geometrical dimensions of a CME.
From a space weather perspective, the main advantage of using SECCHI/COR data and the 3D reconstruction methods described above is that it enables estimation of true speed and hence forecasting of the arrival time of CMEs near the Earth with better accuracy. However, information on the deceleration, acceleration or deflection experienced by a CME beyond COR2 FOV cannot be obtained. This may lead to an erroneous arrival time estimation of.
\subsection{Reconstruction methods using COR and HI observations}
\label{Recnsmthd}
It is often observed that when CMEs leave the coronagraphic FOV, the Thomson scattered signal becomes too low to identify a particular feature in both sets of images obtained by \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B}. Therefore, a method of time- elongation map (\textit{J}-map), initially developed by \cc{Sheeley \etal (1999)} for \textit{SOHO}/LASCO images, is used to track a CME feature in the interplanetary medium. This technique has been implemented on \textit{STEREO}/HI images to reveal the outward motion of plasma blobs in the interplanetary medium (\cc{Rouillard \etal 2009}). In the \textit{STEREO} era, the \textit{J}-maps are now considered necessary for the best exploitation of HI observations to track a CME far away from the Sun (\cc{Davies \etal 2009}; \cc{Harrison \etal 2012}). The details on \textit{J}-maps and its utility to derive the kinematics of CMEs are described in the following Sections~\cc{\ref{Jmapsmthd}}, ~\cc{\ref{SinRcnsMthd}}, ~\cc{\ref{SinRcnsMthdFit}} and ~\cc{\ref{TwinRcnsMthd}}.
\subsubsection{Construction of \textit{J}-maps} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{Jmapsmthd}
For tracking CMEs in the heliosphere, \textit{J}-maps, also known as time-elongation maps, have often been constructed using long-term background-subtracted running difference images taken from COR2, HI1, and HI2 on \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B} spacecraft (\cc{Davies \etal 2009}; \cc{Rouillard \etal 2009}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2011}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}). The running difference reveals the changes in electron density between consecutive images. Before computing running differences, the HI image pair is aligned to prevent the stellar contribution in the difference images. This alignment requires precise pointing information of the HI instruments (\cc{Davies \etal 2009}). For this purpose, it is better to use the Level 2 HI data that were corrected for cosmic rays, shutterless readout, saturation effects, flat fields, and instrument offsets from spacecraft pointing. A long-term background image is also subtracted to prepare Level 2 HI data.
To construct \textit{J}-maps, \cc{Mishra \etal (2014)} first calculated the elongation and position angles for each pixel of the difference images from COR and HI and extracted a strip of constant position angle along the position angle of the Earth. They considered the position angle tolerance for the COR2 images as 5$\arcdeg$ and 2.5$\arcdeg$ for both HI1 and HI2. Thereafter, they binned the pixels of the extracted strip over a specific elongation angle bin size, viz., 0.01$\arcdeg$ for COR2 and 0.075$\arcdeg$ for both HI1 and HI2. They also took the resistant mean of all pixels over a position angle tolerance in each bin to represent the intensity at a corresponding elongation angle. The resistant mean stacked as a function of time and elongation will produce a time-elongation map (\textit{J}-map). Following this procedure, a typical \textit{J}-map is shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{JmapMay}} in which the bright curves with positive inclination reveal the propagation of a CME feature.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35,angle=90]{Jmap_May2010.eps}
\caption[\textit{J}-maps using COR2, HI1 and HI2 images]{A typical \textit{J}-map along the ecliptic plane using running difference images of COR2, HI1 and HI2 on \textit{STEREO-A} spacecraft is shown. The Y-axis shows the elongation angles plotted in logarithmic scale while the X-axis shows the time in UT. Two bright tracks starting on 2010 May 23 at 19:00 UT and May 24 at 14:30 UT represent features of two CMEs and can be tracked up to 50$\arcdeg$ elongation angles.}
\label{JmapMay}
\end{figure}
Using \textit{J}-map, one can track CME features in the heliosphere and derive the elongation-time profile. There have been the development of a plethora of 3D reconstruction techniques which use the time-elongtion profile of a CME to estimate its heliospheric kinematics. These reconstuction techniques are based on different assumtions which make them independent of each other to some degree, as described below. These reconstruction techniques have been applied to a series of images from HIs and have provided information on the evolution of CMEs in the heliosphere (\cc{Howard \etal 2007}; \cc{Davies \etal 2012}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}).
\subsubsection{Single spacecraft reconstruction methods} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{SinRcnsMthd}
It is important to emphasize that when CMEs are very far from the Sun, the `linearity' condition which is imposed on the CMEs near the Sun breaks down. In other words, the `linear assumptions' imposed on an observed CME feature in coronagraphic FOV to convert its measured elongation into the distance are no longer valid when the CMEs are far from the Sun. Near the Sun, the plane of sky assumption is used, i.e., the distance of a feature, d =tan$\alpha$, and further for small $\alpha$; d = $\alpha$ can be used. Such assumptions are not valid when the CME is at a large distance from the Sun. However, if the images of the CMEs are taken at large distances from the Sun and across a large FOV then, with proper treatment of Thomson scattering and simplistic assumptions about the geometry and trajectory of CMEs, some 3D parameters of CMEs can be estimated by exploiting the images from a single viewpoint alone. Such single spacecraft reconstruction techniques cannot be applied to images obtained from coronagraphs (CORs) as they observe across a small angular extent and therefore the geometric effects of the CME structure are not detectable. As \textit{STEREO}/HI have large FOV and can observe the CMEs at greater distances from the Sun, several attempts have been made to estimate the 3D kinematics of CMEs using single viewpoint observations from HIs. Such single spacecraft reconstruction methods are described below.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Point-P (PP) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{PP}
The Point-P (PP) method was developed by (\cc{Howard \etal 2006}) to convert the elongation angle to distance from the Sun center. This method was developed soon after the launch of SMEI (\cc{Eyles \etal 2003}), and can measure the elongation angle of a moving feature of a CME. The accuracy of this conversion is constrained by the effects of the Thomson scattering process and the geometry of CMEs, which govern their projection in the images. In this method, to remove the plane of sky approximation especially for HIs, it is assumed that a CME is a wide circular structure centered on the sun and an observer looks and tracks the point where the CME intersects the Thomson surface (\cc{Vourlidas \& Howard 2006}). Under these assumptions derived radial distance (R$_{PP}$) of CME from the Sun center is, R$_{PP}$ = $d_{0}$ $\sin\epsilon$, where $\epsilon$ is the measured elongation of a moving feature and $d_{0}$ is the distance of the observer from the Sun. This method has been used in several earlier studies (\cc{Howard \etal 2007}; \cc{Wood \etal 2009}, \cc{2010}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}). In the case where small (elongation) angle approximation can be applied, the PP method is close to the plane of sky approximation.
However, the concept of Thomson surface has been de-emphasized by showing that the maximum intensity of scattered light per unit density is spread over a broad range of scattering angles which is called Thomson plateau (\cc{Howard \& DeForest 2012}; \cc{Howard \etal 2013}). They concluded that CME features can be observed far from the Thomson surface and that their detectability is governed by the location of the feature relative to the plateau rather than the Thomson surface. The existence of this Thomson plateau and the oversimplified CME geometry assumed in the PP method are likely to lead to significant errors in the estimated kinematics of CMEs.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Fixed-phi (FP) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{FP}
Analyzing LASCO data, \cc{Sheeley \etal} (\cc{1999}) introduced the concept that the time-elongation map shows an apparent acceleration and deceleration of a CME due to imposed projective geometry on it. However, this effect of apparent acceleration/deceleration was not significant in the LASCO FOV which covers narrow elongation range. After the advent of truly wide-angle imaging with SMEI, \cc{Kahler \& Webb (2007)} developed a method to convert elongation to radial distance, by assuming that a CME feature can be considered as a point source moving radially outward in a fixed direction ($\phi_{FP}$) relative to an observer located at a distance $d_{0}$ from the Sun (see Figure~\cc{\ref{Davies2012}}a). Using this concept, elongation ($\epsilon(t)$) variation of a moving CME feature can be converted to distance ($R_{FP}(t)$) from the Sun. With these assumptions, the following expression can be derived \cc{(Kahler \& Webb 2007)}.
\begin{equation}
R_{FP}(t) = \frac{d_{0}\; \sin(\epsilon(t))}{\sin(\epsilon(t)+\phi_{FP})}
\label{FPeqn}
\end{equation}
The fixed radial direction of the propagation of the CME can be determined using the source region of the CME. Also, the initial direction of propagation of a CME can be derived from the 3D reconstruction techniques applicable to COR observations and can be used in Equation~\cc{\ref{FPeqn}}. One major drawback of the FP method is that it does not take into account the finite cross-sectional extent of a CME.
\begin{figure*}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=8.0]{Davies2012.jpg}
\caption[CME feature tracking in FP, HM and SSE model geometry]{The left panel (marked as a) shows a tracked CME features in FP (open black dots) and HM (circles/filled black dots) model geometries. The right panel (marked as b) shows the tracked feature corresponding to the geometry of the SSE model. (reproduced from \cc{Davies \etal 2012})}
\label{Davies2012}
\end{figure*}
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Harmonic mean (HM) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{HM}
To convert elongation angle to radial distance from the center of the Sun, \cc{Lugaz \etal} (\cc{2009}) assumed that a CME can be represented as a self-similarly expanding sphere attached to Sun-center, with its apex travelling in a fixed radial direction. They further assumed that an observer measures the scattered emission from that portion of the sphere where the line of sight intersects tangentially (see Figure~\cc{\ref{Davies2012}}a). Based on these assumptions, they derived the distance (R$_{HM}$) of the apex of the CME from Sun-center as a function of elongation. They found that this distance is the harmonic mean of the distances estimated using the FP and PP methods. Hence, the method is referred to as the HM method. The distance ($R_{HM}$) of the apex of the sphere from the Sun can be estimated by Equation~\cc{\ref{HMeqn}} \cc{(Lugaz \etal 2009)}. In the equation, $\phi_{HM}$ is the radial direction of propagation of CME from the Sun-observer line and $\epsilon$ is elongation angle and $d$ is the distance of the observer from the Sun.
\begin{equation}
R_{HM}(t) = \frac{2d_{0}\; \sin(\epsilon(t))}{1 + \sin(\epsilon(t)+\phi_{HM})}
\label{HMeqn}
\end{equation}
Although the spherical geometry of CMEs is included in the Harmonic mean (HM) method, the assumption of such geometry may not be valid at much larger distances from the Sun because of the possible flattening of the CME front during its interaction with the ambient solar wind. The method has been used by \cc{Mishra \etal}(\cc{2014}) where they show that the HM method (based on a propagation direction retrieved from 3D reconstruction of COR2 data) performs better than PP and FP methods.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Self-similar expansion (SSE) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{SSE}
A Self-Similar Expansion (SSE) method represents the elongation variation as a function of time of a CME viewed from a single vantage point (\cc{Davies \etal 2012}). In this method, a CME considered to have a circular cross section, in the plane corresponding to the position angle (PA) of interest, is not anchored to the Sun and, during its propagation away from the Sun, its radius increases such that it always subtends a fixed angle to the Sun center (see Figure~\cc{\ref{Davies2012}}b). They also showed that the SSE geometry can be characterized by an angular half-width ($\lambda$) and in its extreme forms, the SSE geometry is equivalent to the FP ($\lambda$ = 0$\arcdeg$) and HM methods ($\lambda$ = 90$\arcdeg$). It must be noted that $\lambda$ can also be considered as a parameter related to the curvature of the CME front.The distance ($R_{SSE}$) of a feature using this method at a certain elongation measured from \textit{STEREO-A} or \textit{STEREO-B} can be calculated from the Equation~\cc{\ref{SSEeqn}} (\cc{Davies \etal 2012}).
\begin{equation}
R_{SSE}(t) = \frac{d_{0}\; \sin(\epsilon(t)) (1+\sin(\lambda))}{\sin(\epsilon(t)+ \phi_{SSE}) +\sin(\lambda)}
\label{SSEeqn}
\end{equation}
In all the single spacecraft methods described above, i.e. FP, HM, and SSE, it is assumed that a CME propagates along a fixed radial trajectory (estimated in COR FOV), ignoring real or ``artificial''(see later) heliospheric deflections. Neglecting deflections will induce errors particularly for slow speed CMEs that are more likely to undergo real deflection in the IP medium (\cc{Wang \etal 2004}; \cc{Gui \etal 2011}). This assumption is likely to introduce errors. As a CME moves away from the Sun, not only the direction of propagation but also the geometry plays a role (\cc{Howard 2011}). Such a geometrical effect comes into picture because distances are estimated taking into account the part of the CME which makes a tangent with the line of sight. Therefore, as the CME moves far from the Sun, the observer from a certain location cannot estimate the kinematics of the same part of the leading edge of a CME in subsequent images. This is because of the geometrical effect which produces a situation similar to the deflection of CME and is called `artificial deflection'. This effect leads to an overestimation of the distance of the CME from the FP method which is more severe when the CME approaches longer elongation angles. Finally, the assumption of a circular front in HM and SSE methods may not be valid due to possible flattening of the CME front resulting from its interaction with the structured coronal magnetic field and solar wind ahead of the CME.
\subsubsection{Single spacecraft fitting methods} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{SinRcnsMthdFit}
\paragraph{\textbf{Fixed-phi fitting (FPF) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{FPF}
The original concept of \cc{Sheeley \etal} (\cc{1999}) about deceptive acceleration or deceleration of a CME moving with constant speed in the imager (SMEI $\&$ HI) at large elongation angles from the Sun is used widely to assess the direction of propagation and speed of CME (\cc{Rouillard \etal 2008}; \cc{Sheeley \etal 2008}; \cc{Davis \etal 2009}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2009}, \cc{2010}; \cc{Howard \& Tappin 2009}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2011}). Under the assumption that a CME is traveling at a constant speed, the shape of the observed elongation-time profile of CME will be different for observers at different locations. Solving the Equation~\cc{\ref{FPeqn}} for the elongation ($\epsilon(t)$) with assumption of constant velocity (v$_{FP}$) of CME along the fixed radial direction ($\phi_{FP}$), gives us Equation~\cc{\ref{FPFeqn}} \cc{(M\"{o}stl \etal 2009)}.
\begin{equation}
\epsilon(t) = \arctan \Big(\frac{v_{FP}(t)\; \sin(\phi_{FP})}{d_{0} - v_{FP}(t) \; \cos(\phi_{FP})} \Big)
\label{FPFeqn}
\end{equation}
From this Equation, the launch time of a CME from the Sun center, i.e., t$_{0FP}$ can also be calculated and for this $\epsilon$(t$_{0FP}$) = 0 will be satisfied. One should calculate the launch time of a CME in the corona, i.e., at an elongation corresponding to heights in the corona. However, to make the calculation simpler, one can consider the launch time at the Sun's center (\cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2011}). Theoretical elongation variation obtained from Equation~\cc{\ref{FPFeqn}} can be fitted to match closely with the observed elongation variation for an observed CME by finding the most suitable physically realistic combinations of v$_{FP}$, $\phi_{FP}$ and t$_{0FP}$ values. This approach to find the direction of propagation of a CME and its speed is called the Fixed-Phi-Fitting (FPF) method. This method has been applied to transients like CIRs (\cc{Rouillard \etal 2008}) and also on CMEs (\cc{Davies \etal 2009}; \cc{Rouillard \etal 2009}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}).
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Harmonic mean fitting (HMF) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{HMF}
Based on HM approximation (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2009}) for CMEs, an expression for the variation of elongation angle with time can be obtained (\cc{Lugaz 2010}). Furthermore, following the fitting version of FP method, i.e., Fixed phi fitting (FPF), another new fitting version of HM method (i.e., Harmonic mean fitting) has been developed (\cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2011}). In HMF method, the time-variation of elongation angle ($\epsilon$) for a CME of constant speed (v$_{HM}$) propagating along a fixed radial direction ($\phi_{HM}$) can be written as Equation~\cc{\ref{HMFeqn}} (\cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2011}).
\begin{equation}
\epsilon(t) = \arccos \Big(\frac{-b + a\; \sqrt{a^{2}+b^{2}-1}}{a^{2}+ b^{2}} \Big)
\label{HMFeqn}
\end{equation}
In this equation, $a$ and $b$ are represented as below.
\begin{equation*}
a = \frac{2d_{0}} {v_{HM}t} - \cos(\phi_{HM}) \qquad\text{and}\qquad b = \sin(\phi_{HM})
\end{equation*}
It must be noted that in case of a limb CME, its flank will be observed in HI FOV because of the Thomson scattering surface. The flank of a CME is relatively closer to the Sun than its apex. HMF method accounts for this effect and estimates the propagation direction always farther away from the observer compared to the direction derived by FPF method.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Self-similar expansion fitting (SSEF) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{SSEF}
Following the trend of FPF and HMF methods as described above, \cc{Davies \etal} (\cc{2012}) derived a method to convert the measured elongation of an outward moving feature into distance based on selection of an intermediate geometry for the CMEs. In the fitting version of the SSE method, the time-variation of elongation angle of a CME can be expressed in Equation~\cc{\ref{SSEFeqn}} \cc{(Davies \etal 2012)}.
\begin{equation}
\epsilon(t) = \arccos \Big(\frac{-bc + a\; \sqrt{a^{2}+b^{2}-c^{2}}}{a^{2}+ b^{2}} \Big)
\label{SSEFeqn}
\end{equation}
In this equation, $a$, $b$ and $c$ are represented as below.
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
a = \frac{d_{0}(1+c)} {v_{SSE}t} ~-~ \cos(\phi_{SSE}) \quad\text{;}\quad b = \sin(\phi_{SSE}) \quad\text{;}\quad \\ \text{and}\quad c = \pm\sin(\lambda_{SSE})
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It must be highlighted that FPF and HMF techniques can be used to estimate only the propagation direction, speed and launch time of the CMEs while SSEF can estimate the additional angular half-width ($\lambda_{SSE}$) of CMEs. Thus, implementation of the SSEF technique requires a four-parameter curve fitting procedure with the assumptions that $\phi_{SSE}$, v$_{SSE}$ and $\lambda_{SSE}$ are constant over the complete duration of the time-elongation profile. The $\lambda_{SSE}$ measures the angular extent of the CME in a plane orthogonal to the observer's FOV. If the SSEF is applied to the front, i.e., the apex of CMEs then the positive form of $c$ is used, while for the trailing edge of the CMEs, its negative form is used. Hence, for CMEs propagating in certain directions, identification of the correct form of the equation to use is very important. It has been pointed out that in the case where SSEF can be applied to time-elongation profiles of features at the front and rear of a CME, then their fitted radial speed would differ while other fitted parameters would be the same (\cc{Davies \etal 2012}). In the SSEF method, the uncertainties arising from the degrees of freedom associated with the four-parameter fit could also be solved by putting constraints on the other parameters, like $\phi_{SSE}$, $\lambda_{SSE}$, and v$_{SSE}$ to reduce the number of free parameters in the fit. Again, we must emphasize that FPF and HMF methods are the special cases of SSEF method corresponding to $\lambda$ = 0$\arcdeg$ and $\lambda$ = 90$\arcdeg$, respectively.
In a comparison of performance of fitting methods, it was found that there is a large error in the estimated directions when these methods are applied to slow or decelerating CMEs. This is most likely due to a breakdown in their inherent assumptions of constant speed and direction (\cc{Mishra \etal 2014}). They also show that HMF and SSEF methods predict more accurate arrival time and transit speed at L1 than that by FPF method. The main advantage of using FPF, HMF and SSEF methods is that these fitting methods are simple and quick to apply in real-time (\cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}). In addition, these methods can be used for single spacecraft HI observations, i.e., when any one of \textit{STEREO} spacecraft suffers from a data gap. However, a major disadvantage of these fitting methods is that they assume a constant speed and direction of propagation of the CMEs.
\subsubsection{Multiple spacecraft reconstruction methods} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{TwinRcnsMthd}
Reconstruction methods can be greatly improved by using simultaneous observations from two different viewpoints. The \textit{STEREO}spacecraft pair, until the loss of \textit{STEREO-B} in 2014, has provided an ideal platform for such studies as it provided two identical instrument suites at the two different viewpoints. Several twin spacecraft reconstruction methods have been developed to determine the 3D characteristics of CMEs using the time-elongation profiles of the features of a CME from observations from both \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B} viewpoints. These reconstruction methods utilizing observations of the same CMEs from multiple viewpoints can also be applied on the observations taken from different pairs of wide-angle imagers, e.g., \textit{SOHO}/LASCO and \textit{STEREO}/HI, \textit{SOHO}/LASCO and \textit{SO}/HI, \textit{PSP}/WISPR and \textit{SO}/HI, etc. However, far from the Sun, it is difficult to assume that the same feature of a CME can be observed from different viewpoints or even at different locations in the heliosphere. This increases the complexity of the stereoscopic reconstruction techniques and leads to their inherent limitations. The methods which have been widely used in the literature primarily using observations of heliospheric imagers (HIs) onboard twin \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B} are described below.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Geometric triangulation (GT) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{GTFP}
Based on the concept of triangulation among the two viewpoint of \textit{STEREO} and a CME feature point, a stereoscopic method named as Geometric triangulation (GT) method has been developed (\cc{Liu \etal 2010a}). The GT method assumes that the same feature of a CME can be observed from two different viewpoints and that the difference in measured elongation angles for the tracked feature from \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B} is entirely due to two viewing directions. Using imaging observations and a Sun-centered coordinate system, the elongation angle of a moving feature can be calculated in consecutive images. The details of the Geometric Triangulation (GT) method in an ecliptic plane applicable for a feature propagating between the two spacecraft have been explained in earlier studies (\cc{Liu \etal 2010a,b}). A schematic diagram for the location of the twin spacecraft and the tracked feature is shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{GT}}. Using this geometry, \cc{Liu \etal} (\cc{2010a}) derived the following Equations:
\begin{equation}
d_{A} = \frac{r \sin(\alpha_{A} + \beta_{A})}{\sin\alpha_{A}}
\label{GTeqn1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
d_{B} = \frac{r \sin(\alpha_{B} + \beta_{B})}{\sin\alpha_{B}}
\label{GTeqn2}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\beta_{A}+\beta_{B} = \gamma
\label{GTeqn3}
\end{equation}
\\
In the above Equations, $r$ is the radial distance of the feature from the Sun, $\beta_{A}$ and $\beta_{B}$ are the propagation angles of the feature relative to the Sun-spacecraft line. $d_{A}$ and $d_{B}$ are the distances of the spacecraft from the Sun, and $\gamma$ is the longitudinal separation between the two spacecraft. Once the elongation angles ($\alpha_{A}$ and $\alpha_{B}$) are derived from imaging observations, the above equations can be solved for $\beta_{A}$.
\begin{equation}
\beta_{A} = \arctan \Big(\frac{\sin(\alpha_{A}) \sin(\alpha_{B}+\gamma) - f \sin(\alpha_{A}\sin(\alpha_{B})}
{\sin(\alpha_{A}) \cos(\alpha_{B}+\gamma) + f \cos(\alpha_{A}\sin(\alpha_{B})} \Big)
\label{GTeqn4}
\end{equation}
\\
where $f$ = $d_{B}$/$d_{A}$ ($f$ varies between 1.04 and 1.13 during a full orbit of the \textit{STEREO} spacecraft around the Sun). Using Equation~\cc{\ref{GTeqn4}}, the propagation direction of a CME can be estimated. Once, the propagation direction has been estimated, the distance of the moving CME feature can be estimated using Equation~\cc{\ref{GTeqn1}}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{GT.eps}
\caption[Geometric triangulation for a moving CME feature]{Schematic diagram of geometric triangulation for a CME feature moving in the direction of the arrow between the two spacecraft \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{B}. SE represents the Sun-Earth line and $\alpha$, $\beta$, and $\chi$ denote the elongation, propagation, and scattering angles, respectively. Subscripts A and B represent angles measured from the \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B} viewpoints. (adapted from \cc{Mishra \etal} \cc{2013})}
\label{GT}
\end{figure}
In the GT reconstruction method, the effects of Thomson scattering and the geometry of CMEs are not taken into account. However, for Earth-directed events, both view directions
(line-of-sight AP and BP as shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{GT}}) will be nearly symmetrically located from the Sun-Earth line. Therefore, the scattering angles ($\chi_{A}$ and $\chi_{B}$) for both observers will only be slightly different and the resulting difference in the received scattered light intensity for both observers (\textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B}) will be small. The approximation that both observers view the same part of CME may not be true when Earth-directed CMEs are at a large distance from the Sun (for view directions AX and BY as shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{GT}}) and also near the Sun for very wide or rapidly expanding CMEs. It is also rather unlikely that the same feature of a CME will be tracked in each successive image. In light of the aforementioned points, it is clear that the geometry of the CME should be taken into account in any of the reconstruction methods. However, the breakdown of idealistic assumptions about the geometry can result in new errors in the estimated kinematics.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Tangent to a sphere (TAS) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{TAS}
Following the development of the GT method (\cc{Liu \etal 2010a}), another stereoscopic method named as Tangent to a sphere (TAS) (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2010}) was proposed for the reconstruction of CMEs using HIs observations. The TAS method assumes that the CME has a circular cross-section anchored at the Sun and twin \textit{STEREO} observe the tangent to the circular CME front, in contrast to the assumption made in the GT method that the CME is a point. Hence the observers from two viewing locations of \textit{STEREO} do not observe the same CME feature. Under HM approximation, the measured diameter (i.e., $R_{A}$ and $R_{B}$) of the CME from \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B}, respectively, can be solved for $R_{A}$ = R$_{B}$. The expressions for $R_{A}$ and $R_{B}$ are given in Equations~\cc{\ref{TAS1}} and ~\cc{\ref{TAS2}}, respectively (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2010}).
\begin{equation}
R_{A}= \frac{2d_{A}\; \sin(\alpha_{A})} {1+\sin(\alpha_{A} + \beta_{A} -\phi_{TAS})}
\label{TAS1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
R_{B}= \frac{2d_{B}\; \sin(\alpha_{B})} {1+\sin(\alpha_{B}+ \beta_{B} +\phi_{TAS})}
\label{TAS2}
\end{equation}
In the above Equations~\cc{\ref{TAS1}} and ~\cc{\ref{TAS2}}, the parameters $d$, $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\phi_{TAS}$ are the distance of observer from the Sun, elongation angle, separation angle of observer from the Sun-Earth line, and propagation direction of CME from the Sun-Earth line respectively. The $\phi_{TAS}$ is considered positive in westward direction from Sun-Earth line. The solution of these equations for $\phi_{TAS}$ can be used to estimate the propagation direction of the CMEs. This method to calculate the kinematics of the CME was referred to as tangent-to-a-sphere (TAS) method. This method assumes that measured elongation angle refers to the point where the observers’ line of sight intersects tangentially to the spherical front of the CME.
\vspace*{5pt}
\paragraph{\textbf{Stereoscopic self-similar expansion (SSSE) method:}} \hspace{0pt}\\
\label{SSSEm}
Both GT and TAS methods, as described above, are based on extreme geometrical descriptions of solar wind transients (a point source for GT and an expanding circle attached to the Sun for TAS). Therefore, \cc{Davies \etal} (\cc{2013}) proposed a stereoscopic reconstruction method based on a more generalized SSE geometry, and named it as the Stereoscopic Self-Similar Expansion (SSSE) method. It was shown that the GT and TAS methods can be considered as the limiting cases of the SSSE method. Such a stereoscopic reconstruction with the SSSE method is illustrated in Figure~\cc{\ref{SSSE}}. In this figure, the propagation direction of a CME is shown as $\phi_{A}$ relative to observer \textit{STEREO-A}, $\phi_{B}$ relative to \textit{STEREO-B}, and $\phi_{E}$ relative to Earth (E) and $\gamma$ is the separation angle between both observer located at distances $d_{A}$ and $d_{B}$ from the Sun. At each instance, $\epsilon_{A}$ and $\epsilon_{B}$ is the elongation measured from the line of sight from \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B}, respectively. The SSSE method is special as we can take a reasonable angular extent ($\lambda$) of CME geometry contrary to the extreme geometrical description taken in both GT and TAS methods. The details of the SSSE method and important considerations for implementation of this method have been discussed earlier (\cc{Davies \etal 2013}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}; \cc{Harrison \etal 2017}).
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=6.5]{SSSE.jpg}
\caption[The SSE modeled circular CME]{The SSE modeled circular CME, with a constant $\lambda$ is labeled as (i), (ii) and (iii), show three instances of propagation away from the Sun (S) in the common FOV of two observers. The shaded region with gray color represents the common FOV of \textit{STEREO-A} and \textit{STEREO-B}. Geometry marked with (iv) is outside the common FOV however both observers can observe it while geometry (v) is outside the FOV of \textit{STEREO-B} and therefore can only be observed by \textit{STEREO-A}.
(reproduced from (\cc{Davies \etal 2013})}
\label{SSSE}
\end{figure}
It is also noted that different reconstruction methods, based on different assumptions, often provide different kinematics and arrival time estimates for the CMEs. Therefore, attempts to assess the relative performance of several 3D reconstruction methods, applicable to HI observations, for estimating the arrival time of CMEs, have been made (\cc{Lugaz 2010}; \cc{Howard 2011}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}; \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2015}). \cc{Mishra \etal} (\cc{2014}) shows that the stereoscopic methods (as described in Section~\cc{\ref{TwinRcnsMthd}}) are more accurate than single spacecraft methods (as described in Section~\cc{\ref{SinRcnsMthd}}) for the prediction of CME arrival times and speeds at L1. Irrespective of the characteristics of the CMEs, among the three stereoscopic methods such as GT, TAS, and SSSE as described before, the TAS method gives the best prediction of transit speed and arrival time within 8 hr for fast CMEs and 17 hr for slow or fast decelerating CMEs. It is also found that the HM method (based on a propagation direction retrieved from 3D reconstruction of COR2 data) performs best among the single spacecraft techniques. Independent of the characteristics of the CMEs, \cc{Mishra \etal} (\cc{2014}) have shown that the HMF and SSEF single spacecraft fitting methods perform better than FPF. All three fitting methods give reasonable arrival time predictions for the fast speed CME that undergoes no discernible deceleration. However, for the slow CME and the fast but decelerating CME, the fitting methods are only accurate within 30 hr in terms of their arrival time prediction and yield relatively larger errors (up to hundreds of km s$^{-1}$) in predicted speed.
\subsection{Drag based model for propagation of CMEs}
\label{DBM}
In both the pre- and post-\textit{STEREO} era, the kinematics of the CME near the Sun has been used either as input to the drag based model or the kinematics is extrapolated to find the arrival time of CMEs at Earth (\cc{Cargill 2004}; \cc{Manoharan 2006}; \cc{Davis \etal 2009}; \cc{Byrne \etal 2010}; \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2013}; \cc{Subramanian \etal 2014}). The drag-based model is often used assuming that the Lorentz and gravity forces decrease such that the drag force can largely govern CME dynamics far from the Sun. Although it is not proven that drag is the only force that shapes CME dynamics in the interplanetary medium, the observed deceleration/acceleration of some CMEs has been closely reproduced by considering only the drag force acting between the CME and the ambient solar wind medium (\cc{Lindsay \etal 1999}; \cc{Cargill 2004}; \cc{Manoharan 2006}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal 2009}; \cc{Lara \& Borgazzi 2009}).
In the \textit{STEREO} era, with the formulation of several 3D reconstruction methods, the 3D kinematics of CMEs estimated in COR2 and HI FOV is used to estimate their arrival time at Earth (\cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2013}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015}). In these studies, the drag based model (DBM) of
\cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal}(\cc{2013}) is used to derive the kinematic properties. The DBM is used only for the distance range during which a CME could not be tracked in the \textit{J}-maps constructed from HIs observations.
The DBM model assumes that, after 20 \textit{R}$_\odot$, the dynamics of CMEs is solely governed by the drag force and that the drag acceleration has the form, $a_{d}$ = -$\gamma$ $(v-w)$ $|(v-w)|$, (see, \cc{Cargill \etal 1996}; \cc{Cargill 2004}; \cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal 2010}), where $v$ is the speed of the CME, $w$ is the ambient solar wind speed and $\gamma$ is the drag parameter. The drag parameter is given by $\gamma$ = $\frac{c_{d}A \rho_{w}}{M + M_{v}}$, where c$_{d}$ is the dimensional drag coefficient, $A$ is the cross-sectional area of the CME perpendicular to its propagation direction (which depends on the CME-cone angular width), $\rho_{w}$ is the ambient solar wind density, $M$ is the CME mass, and $M_{v}$ is the virtual CME mass. The latter is written as, $M_{v}$ = $\rho_{w} V/2$, where $V$ is the CME volume. A statistical study has shown that the drag parameter generally lies between 0.2 $\times$ 10$^{-7}$ and 2.0 $\times$ 10$^{-7}$ km$^{-1}$ (\cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal 2013}). They assumed that the mass and angular width of CMEs do not vary beyond 20 \textit{R}$_{\odot}$ and also showed that the solar wind speed lies between 300 and 400 km s$^{-1}$ for slow solar wind conditions. For the case where a CME propagates in high speed solar wind or if a coronal hole is present in the vicinity of the CME source region, the ambient solar wind speed should be chosen to lie between 500 and 600 km s$^{-1}$, along with a lower value of the drag parameter.
The DBM can be run instantly which can provide the prediction of ICME expansion and arrival time at any heliospheric locations in the ecliptic plane. It is shown that using a typical value for solar wind speed, the DBM estimate the CME arrival time with typical errors of only around 12 hrs (\cc{Vr\v{s}nak \etal 2013}). We note that DBM ideally assumes that the CME is propagating into an isotropic ambient solar wind. Considering the fact that a CME has actually a 3D structure spanning over different longitudes and latitudes, it is possible that parts of the CME at different latitudes and longitudes are influenced by solar wind of different speeds. One can expect that the high-speed wind from coronal holes may strongly affect those parts of the CME which are at higher latitudes. It may also be the case that a CME experience solar wind of different speeds during the different segments of their heliospheric journey. Such a scenario can arise in the cases when a fast CME encounters a slow CME that was launched earlier in the same direction. It is possible that the performance of DBM and ,thus typical errors in predicting the arrival time of the different portions of the CMEs can be reduced by improving the drawbacks of the simplified drag-based model.
\subsection{Arrival Time of CMEs at the Earth}
\textit{STEREO} observations have greatly enhanced our ability to continuously track CMEs. This is because of \textit{STEREO's} two viewpoints that allow the 3D reconstruction of CMEs. In an attempt to combine the observed CME kinematics with a model, \cc{Kilpua \etal} (\cc{2012}) estimated the 3D speed of CMEs using coronagraphic observations and used it into the CME travel-time prediction models of \cc{Gopalswamy \etal} (\cc{2000a}, \cc{2001a}). They compared the estimated travel time with the actual travel time of CME from the Sun to \textit{STEREO}, \textit{ACE}, and \textit{WIND} spacecraft. They also compared the estimated travel time with that estimated using the projected CME speed into the models. Their study shows that CME 3D speeds give slightly ($\approx$ 4 hr) better predictions than projected CME speeds. However, in their study, a large average error of 11 hr is noted between the predicted and observed travel times.
The large field of view (FOV) of HIs onboard \textit{STEREO} enables the tracking of CMEs to a much larger distance in the heliosphere. Using \textit{STEREO} observations, several attempts have been made to understand the 3D propagation of CMEs and estimate their arrival time (\cc{Mierla \etal 2009}; \cc{Srivastava \etal 2009}; \cc{Kahler \& Webb 2007}; \cc{Liu \etal 2010a}; \cc{M\"{o}st \etal 2011}; \cc{Davies \etal 2012}, \cc{2013}). In a recent study, a CME was tracked beyond the Earth's distance and was shown that a proper treatment of CME geometry must be performed in estimating CME kinematics, especially when a CME is directed away from the observer (\cc{Liu \etal 2013}). Using different reconstruction methods on HI observations, \cc{M\"{o}st \etal} (\cc{2014}) shows an absolute difference between predicted and observed CME arrival times of 8.1 $\pm$ 6.3 hr. These studies have shown that longer tracking of CMEs using HIs observations is necessary for improved understanding of their evolution in the heliosphere.
To understand the heliospheric evolution of CMEs from the Sun to Earth, the kinematics of several CMEs have been estimated by implementing suitable 3D reconstruction methods to remote sensing observations of CMEs (\cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2013}). These studies suggested that the use of reconstruction methods on HI data combined with DBM gives a better prediction of the CME arrival time than using only 3D speed estimated in COR FOV. Thus, near-Sun 3D speed of CMEs with an assumption that the speed remains constant up to L1, can not accurately predict the arrival time for a majority of CMEs. Sometimes CMEs are observed to erupt in quick succession and, under certain favorable initial conditions, can interact or merge with each other during their propagation in the heliosphere (\cc{Harrison \etal 2012}. Therefore, the interaction of CMEs in the heliosphere is expected to be more frequent near the solar maximum. In the \textit{STEREO} era, one focus of the studies has been to understand the propagation of multiple CMEs following one another from the Sun to Earth and their consequences on hitting the Earth's magnetosphere.
The HI observations have helped to witness several cases of interacting CMEs. Many attempts have been made to understand CME-CME interaction at a range of distances from the Sun using SECCHI/HI observations (\cc{Harrison \etal 2012}; \cc{Temmer \etal 2012}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2012}; \cc{Lugaz \etal 2012}). It has been shown that during the interaction of CMEs, their kinematics may change. Therefore, such interactions complicate the problem of estimating their arrival time, and any space weather prediction scheme estimating the arrival time of interacting CMEs must take their post-interaction kinematics into account. Therefore, it is important to understand the nature of CME-CME collision by measuring the energy and momentum exchange during the collision/interaction of CMEs.
The actual arrival time of remotely tracked CMEs at Earth can be marked using \textit{in situ} observations near 1 AU. The actual arrival time of some geoeffective CMEs can also be inferred by monitoring the geomagnetic perturbations. These actual arrival times can be compared with the arrival times estimated based on the kinematics obtained from reconstruction methods. However, the identification of a CME in \textit{in situ} observations is not straightforward. The difficulty in the identification further increases when the CMEs arrive as structures formed due to interaction or collision of several CMEs (\cc{Burlaga \etal 2001}). As they interact, they experience a change in their plasma, dynamic and magnetic field parameters. Hence, the collision of CMEs may lead to a new type of solar wind structure which is expected to show different \textit{in situ} signatures than the signatures of isolated CMEs. In addition, such new structures might have a different geomagnetic response as compared to isolated CMEs described in Section~\cc{\ref{insitu}}.
In addition, the interaction or collision of successive CMEs can, in some cases, produce an extended period of southward B$_{z}$ and cause strong geomagnetic storms (\cc{Farrugia \etal 2006}). The geomagnetic responses of interacting CMEs have been explored in several studies described in the following Section~\cc{\ref{cme_int}}. In addition, studies have been devoted at understanding the arrival time, \textit{in situ} identification of interacting CMEs at 1 AU, and various plasma processes during the interaction of CMEs that can change the initial identity and properties of CME plasma. In the \textit{STEREO} era, by exploiting the Sun to Earth remote observations of CMEs from twin viewpoints, one expected to have better success in predicting the speed and direction of a CME near Earth. However, from space weather perspectives, without the knowledge about negative B$_{z}$ component of CME, it would remain difficult to predict the intensity of resulting geomagnetic storms well in advance.
\subsection{CME-CME Interaction}
\label{cme_int}
The possibility of CME-CME interaction has been reported much earlier by analyzing \textit{in situ} observations of CMEs by Pioneer 9 spacecraft (\cc{Intriligator 1976}). The compound streams (interaction of CME-CIR or CME-CME) were first inferred by \cc{Burlaga \etal} (\cc{1987}) using observations from \textit{Helios} and \textit{ISEE-3} spacecraft. They showed that such compound streams formed due to interactions have amplified parameters responsible for producing major geomagnetic storms. Using wide field of view coronagraphic observations from LASCO and long-wavelength radio observations, \cc{Gopalswamy \etal} (\cc{2001c}) provided for the first time evidence for CME-CME interaction. \cc{Burlaga \etal} (\cc{2002}) identified a set of successive halo CMEs directed toward the Earth and found that they appeared as complex ejecta near 1 AU (\cc{Burlaga \etal 2001}). They inferred that these CMEs launched successively, merged en route from the Sun to Earth and formed complex ejecta in which the identity of individual CMEs was lost. Thus, these interactions are of great importance from the space weather point of view.
It has also been shown that CME-CME interactions are important as they can result in an extended period of enhanced southward magnetic field which can cause intense geomagnetic storms (\cc{Farrugia \etal 2006}). Such interactions help to understand the collisions between large scale magnetized plasmoids and hence various plasma processes involved. Also, if a shock from a following CME penetrates a preceding CME, it provides a unique opportunity to study the evolution of the shock strength and structure and its effect on preceding CME plasma parameters (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2005}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2012}; \cc{Liu \etal 2012}).
Estimating the accurate kinematics and arrival time of CMEs at Earth is crucial for predicting space weather effects. Since CME-CME interactions are responsible for changing the kinematics of interacting CMEs, such interactions need to be examined in detail. Furthermore, as the subset of CMEs are identified as MCs which are flux-rope structures, the reconnection between magnetic flux ropes can be explored by studying cases of CME-CME interactions (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2001c}; \cc{Wang \etal 2003}). Such reconnection in CME-CME interaction are known to lead to solar energetic particles (SEPs) events (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2002}). \cc{Wang \etal} (\cc{2003}) have shown that a forward shock can cause an intense southward magnetic field of long duration in the preceding MC. Such modifications in the preceding cloud are important for space weather prediction.
It was realized well before the era of wide-angle imaging far from the Sun that CME-CME and CME-shock interactions are important candidates to be studied from physics and space weather prediction point of view. In pre-\textit{STEREO} era, the understanding of involved physical mechanisms in CME-CME or CME-shock interaction was achieved mostly from magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) numerical simulations of the interaction of a shock wave with a magnetic cloud (MC) (\cc{Vandas \etal 1997}; \cc{Vandas \& Odstrcil 2004}; \cc{Xiong \etal 2006}), the interaction of two ejecta (\cc{Gonzalez-Esparza \etal 2004}; \cc{Lugaz \etal 2005}; \cc{Wang \etal 2005}), and the interaction of two MCs (\cc{Xiong \etal 2007}, \cc{2009}). However, only a few attempts could be made to understand the CME-CME interaction using imaging observations near the Sun (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2001c}) and \textit{in situ} observations near the Earth (\cc{Burlaga \etal 2001}).
In the \textit{STEREO} era, the twin spacecraft observations enabled to determine the 3D locations of CMEs features in the heliosphere and hence provide direct evidence of CME-CME interaction using images from Heliospheric Imagers. However, immediately after the launch of \textit{STEREO}, during deep extended solar minimum, not many interacting CMEs were observed. As the solar cycle 24 progressed, CME interaction appeared to be a fairly common phenomenon, in particular around solar maximum.
In \textit{STEREO} era, several cases of interacting CMEs in the inner heliosphere have been extensively studied using observations and numerical simulations to understand the physical processes occurring during CME-CME interaction. For example, the interacting CMEs of 2010 August 1 have been studied by several researchers using primarily the \textit{STEREO}/HI (white light imaging), near-Earth \textit{in situ} and, \textit{STEREO}/Waves radio observations (\cc{Harrison \etal 2012}; \cc{Liu \etal 2012}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2012}; \cc{Temmer \etal 2012}; \cc{Mart\'{i}nez Oliveros \etal 2012}; \cc{Webb \etal 2013}). These studies have shown that CME-CME interaction can lead to change in the properties of CMEs, such as their propagation speed, size, expansion speed, direction of propagation, temperature, internal magnetic field, etc. Therefore, understanding such interactions/collisions of CMEs are important for accurate space weather forecasting. Using \textit{STEREO} imaging observations, several key questions that are not well understood regarding CME interaction have been addressed.
\begin{enumerate}
\item{How do the dynamics of CMEs change after interaction? What is the regime of interaction, \textit{i.e.} elastic, inelastic, or super-elastic? (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2012}; \cc{Shen \etal 2012b}; \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}, \cc{2016}, \cc{2017}).}
\item{What are the consequences of the interaction of CME-shock structure? How does the overtaking shock change the plasma and magnetic field properties of the preceding magnetic cloud? (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2005}, \cc{2012}; \cc{Liu \etal 2012}).}
\item{What are the favorable conditions for the merging of CMEs and the role of magnetic reconnection in it? (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2001c}).}
\item{What is the possibility for the production of a reverse shock at the CME-CME interaction site? (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2005}).}
\item{Do these interacted structures produce different geomagnetic consequences than individual CMEs, on their arrival to magnetosphere? (\cc{Farrugia \etal 2006}).}
\item{What are the favorable conditions for the deflection of CMEs and enhanced radio emission during CME-CME interaction? (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2012}; \cc{Mart\'{i}nez Oliveros \etal 2012}).}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.70]{FigSSSE_CME123.eps}
\caption[Estimates of distance, propagation direction and speed of the 2011 February 13-15 CMEs using SSSE method]{From top to bottom, the panels show the distance, propagation direction and speed (as obtained using SSSE method) of the leading edge (LE) of CME1 (blue), CME2 (black) and CME3 (red). CME1, CME2, and CME3 were launched on 13, 14 and 15 February 2011 respectively. The horizontal dashed line in the top panel marks the heliocentric distance at the L1 point. The dashed horizontal line in the middle panel marks the Sun-Earth line. The speed shown with symbols is estimated from the differentiation of distance points using three-point Lagrange interpolation. The speed shown with the solid line is determined by differentiating the fitted first order polynomial for estimated distance for each 5 hr interval. From the left, the first and second vertical dashed lines mark the start and end of the collision phase, respectively, for the collision of CME3 and CME2. In the top panel, the rightmost vertical dashed line marks the inferred interaction between CME2 and CME1. The vertical solid lines at each data point show the error bars (adapted from \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2014})}.
\label{kin_int_CMEsFeb}
\end{figure}
To understand the interaction of CMEs, a study of \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava} (\cc{2014}) investigated the signatures of 3 interacting CMEs in remote sensng and \textit{in situ} observations. These three CMEs were observed to have launched from the Sun successively on 13, 14, and 15 February 2011. These three CMEs are named as CME1, CME2, and CME3, respectively. Based on the initial 3D speed and direction of these three CMEs in COR2 FOV, it was evident that they may interact in the interplanetary medium. CME3 was found to be the fastest among all three CMEs and shows a strong deceleration in the COR2 FOV because of the preceding CME2 which acted as a barrier. \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava} (\cc{2014}) investigated the kinematics of the CMEs in the heliosphere using stereoscopic methods. They noted that a collision between CME3 and CME2 took place around 24 \textit{R}$_\odot$-28 \textit{R}$_\odot$. As CME1 was faint and could not be tracked up to HI2 FOV in \textit{J}-maps, they inferred, based on the extrapolation of distances, that CME2 caught up with CME1 between 138 \textit{R}$_\odot$ to 157 \textit{R}$_\odot$. The kinematics of these three CMEs before and after their interaction is shown in Figure~\cc{\ref{kin_int_CMEsFeb}}. These CMEs were also studied in detail by \cc{Mari\v{c}i\'{c} \etal} (\cc{2014}) using single spacecraft reconstruction methods.
The study of \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava} (\cc{2014}) identified signatures of collision between CMEs in the kinematics profiles as exchange in their speed. They, under a head-on collision scenario, analysed momentum and energy exchange during the collision phase of CME2 and CME3. They found that collision was close to elastic, as the coefficient of restitution ($e$) was found to be 0.9. However, in another study of the same CMEs, \cc{Mishra \etal} (\cc{2017}) considered an oblique collision scenario for CME2 and CME3, and found a coefficient of restitution ($e$) of 1.65. This probably suggests that assumption of head-on collision scenario underestimates the value of the coefficient of restitution.
The \textit{in situ} observations, arrival time and geomagnetic response of interacting CMEs of 2011 February 13-15 (CME1, CME2 and CME3) were also studied in \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava} (\cc{2014}). They identified three CMEs as three distict regions in \textit{in situ} observations near 1 AU. The \textit{in situ} observations revealed that CME2 is overheated $\approx$ 10$^{6}$ K, perhaps because it is squeezed between CME1 and CME3. CME2, showing a high speed at the front and low speed at its trailing edge, reveal a signature of fast expansion which was interpreted possibly due to magnetic reconnection at the CME's front edge (\cc{Mari\v{c}i\'{c} \etal 2014}). Such signatures of compression and heating due to CME-CME interaction and passage of CME driven shock through the preceding CME have also been reported in earlier studies (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2005}; \cc{Liu \etal 2012}; \cc{Temmer \etal 2012}). \textit{In situ} data also revealed a smaller spatial scale of CME1 and CME2 than CME3. This is possibly due to compression of preceding CMEs by the following CME or shock. There are also other studies on CME-CME interaction which have shown that interacting CMEs appear as complex ejecta in \textit{in situ} observation and each interacting CME may not be identified as a separate entity (\cc{Liu \etal 2014}; \cc{Lugaz \& Farrugia 2014}; \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a},\cc{b}).
\cc{Mishra \etal} (\cc{2016}, \cc{2017}) took into account the propagation and expansion speeds, impact direction, and angular size as well as the masses of the CMEs to understand the CME-CME interaction. They examined for the first time the nature of collision of eight cases of interacting CMEs by carrying out the analysis in 3D scenarios. Among the 8 cases, they showed that the nature of collisions was perfectly inelastic for two cases, inelastic for two cases, elastic for one case, and super-elastic for three cases. The study established that the crucial pre-collision parameters of the CMEs responsible for increasing the probability of a super-elastic collision are, in descending order of priority, their lower approaching speed, expansion speed of the following CME higher than the preceding one, and a longer duration of the collision phase. This important finding is in agreement with the simulation studies (\cc{Shen \etal 2016}). Therefore, it is worth to investigate further the nature of the collision and the processes responsible for magnetic and thermal energy conversion to kinetic energy to make a collision super-elastic.
The observational studies on collision dynamics suffer from uncertainties due to adopted boundary for the start and end of the collision phase (\cc{Mishra \etal 2016}, \cc{2017}). This is because of difficulty in defining the start of collision as the following CME starts to decelerate (due to its interaction with preceding CME) and preceding CME starts to accelerate before (most possibly due to shock driven by following CME) they both are actually observed to merge. Hence, different timing and large time-interval of acceleration of one CME and deceleration of the other, prevent to pinpoint the exact start and end of the collision phase. Furthermore, the total mass of CMEs is used to study their collision dynamics, but as the CME is not a solid body therefore its total mass is not expected to participate in the collision. Keeping in mind the limitations on the study of CME-CME interaction, further work is required to understand the CME-CME interaction by incorporating various plasma processes.
The geomagnetic response of interacting CMEs has also been investigated extensively in several studies (\cc{Farrugia \etal 2006}; \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava} (\cc{2014}); \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}; \cc{Lugaz \& Farrugia 2014}). The study of \cc{Mishra \& Srivastava} (\cc{2014}) does not favor the possibility of strengthening the geomagnetic response as a consequence of the arrival of two or more interacting CMEs at Earth. However, in another study (\cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}), the interaction region (IR), formed due to the collision between two CMEs, is associated with intensified plasma and magnetic field parameters which were responsible for major geomagnetic activity. The \textit{in situ} measurements of interacting CMEs near 1 AU shows that they are accelerated or decelerated during the interaction, compressed and heated.
The arrival times of interacting CMEs at Earth were also estimated based on HIs observations (\cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}). From the arrival time estimates, it was noticed that arrival time estimation of interacting CMEs improves by few (up to 10) hr when the post-collision speeds are used instead of pre-collision speeds. The estimated post-collision kinematics of interacting CMEs is crucial to be combined with drag based model to improve the arrival time estimation of the interacting CMEs. Thus, several studies in the \textit{STEREO} era reveal that tracking of CMEs up to large heliospheric distances is necessary for better understanding the CME-CME interaction and the prediction of their arrival time at the Earth. Thus, CMEs cannot be treated as completely isolated magnetized plasma blobs, especially when they are launched in quick succession. Each preceding CME offers a different background medium to the following CMEs which should also be taken into account while studying the propagation of CMEs. From the survey of literature (\cc{Webb \& Howard 2012}; \cc{Harrison \etal 2017}), it is obvious that the prediction of arrival time of CMEs, especially interacting CMEs, and association between remote and \textit{in situ} observations of CMEs, are challenging even in the era of \textit{STEREO} where CMEs can be imaged continuously from near the Sun to near the Earth.
\section{Summary and Future Directions}
The speed, direction, mass and morphology of a CME at a particular location in the heliosphere can be studied by analyzing remote sensing observations while the temperature, speed, density, magnetic field, composition and charge states of CME plasma/solar wind can be measured from \textit{in situ} observations. By the time a CME reaches the spacecraft hosting the instrumentation for \textit{in situ} measurements, it has already evolved and therefore the plasma parameters are different than measured remotely (\cc{Crooker \& Horbury 2006}). However, if the physics of evolution of a CME is known, then its properties estimated remotely can be extrapolated up to the location of \textit{in situ} spacecraft to make a comparison between both sets of observations with reasonable accuracy. In the absence of a complete understanding of the true nature of the evolution of CMEs, it is often difficult to predict their arrival time to Earth based on their initial characteristics estimated from remote sensing observations made when still near the Sun. The CME characteristics estimated from remote observations suffer from the line of sight integration and projection effects while CME's plasma parameters can be measured along a specific trajectory through the CME by the \textit{in situ} spacecraft (\cc{Webb \& Howard 2012}). The uncertainties in the morphology and kinematics of CMEs due to projection effects, in white light images from a single viewpoint, can be resolved by implementing appropriate 3D reconstruction techniques on the CME images from multiple viewpoints near and far from the Sun. The continuous spatial coverage of CMEs from the Sun to 1 AU distance was possible by the imaging instruments onboard twin \textit{STEREO} spacecraft. One can unambiguously track a CME continuously from its liftoff in the inner corona to almost the Earth by constructing J-maps (i.e., time-elongation maps) from \textit{STEREO}/SECCHI images (\cc{Davies \etal 2009}; \cc{M\"{o}stl \etal 2009}). In the present review, a number of benefits of imaging a CME in the heliosphere from the off-Sun-Earth line have been discussed.
Already before the \textit{STEREO} era, it was inferred that CMEs accelerate or decelerate till they obtain the speed of ambient solar wind medium. However, the analysis of several Earth-directed CMEs using the SECCHI/HI observations have helped witnessing such changes in the CME kinematics. Most of the studies in the \textit{STEREO} era, have shown that determining the 3D speed of CMEs near the Sun and assuming that it remains constant for the remaining distance, i.e., up to 1 AU, is not sufficient to accurately predict the arrival time at Earth of the majority of CMEs (\cc{Harrison \etal 2012}; \cc{Shen \etal 2012b}; \cc{Temmer \etal 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}, \cc{2017}). This is true especially for a fast speed CME traveling in the slow solar wind environment or a slow speed CME traveling in the high speed stream. It is shown that the estimated 3D kinematics of CMEs used as inputs in drag based model (DBM), improve the arrival time prediction of the CMEs at 1 AU. Thus, the role of drag forces, in the dynamics of CMEs, is effective farther out (few tens of solar radii) from the Sun. The studies have also shown that a CME may undergo non-radial longitudinal motion even far from the Sun, specially in the case of CME-CME interaction (\cc{Lugaz \etal 2012}).
The interaction and/or collision of one CME with another CME has been thoroughly investigated in the \textit{STEREO} era (\cc{Harrison \etal 2012}; \cc{Shen \etal 2012b}; \cc{Temmer \etal 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}, \cc{2017}). The studies have concluded that there is a significant exchange of momentum and kinetic energy during the collision of the CMEs. Therefore, post-collision kinematics of CMEs must be used for their improved arrival time prediction at 1 AU. It is also studied that collision/interaction of CMEs have significant effects on the magnetic and plasma parameters of both preceding and following CMEs. The formation of interaction region (IR) at the interface of interacting CMEs is found to be responsible for major geomagnetic activity (\cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}). Therefore, the geomagnetic disturbances due to interacting CMEs need to account for the changes in CMEs parameters resulting from their interaction. Interacting CMEs can be commonly identified in \textit{in situ} observations at 1 AU in the form of multiple-MC events where individual CME can be distinguished, or they appear as a complex ejecta where some of the characteristics of CMEs are lost with shocks propagating inside a previous CME. These structures have different ways to interact with Earth's magnetosphere to give intense geomagnetic storms as compared to an isolated CME. The \textit{in situ} observations at 1 AU shows only the plasma parameters after the CME-CME interaction but not during the collision/interaction duration. The \textit{in situ} data from \textit{Solar Orbiter} and \textit{Parker Solar Probe} can provide the opportunities for measuring the plasma parameters during the interaction process also.
Although HIs have provided the potential to improve the space weather forecasting, some CMEs become too faint to be tracked unambiguously and they impose difficulties in reliably predicting their propagation direction, arrival time, and speed at 1 AU. Furthermore, the specific assumptions in some of the currently used reconstruction methods compromise the estimates of the complex evolution of the kinematics and morphology of CMEs. Such a complex heliospheric evolution of CMEs is due to their interactions with the ambient slow/fast solar wind, CIRs, and other CMEs which result in errors in the predicted arrival time of CMEs at Earth (\cc{Gopalswamy \etal 2009}; \cc{Lugaz \& Farrugia 2014}; \cc{Mishra \etal 2015a}). Thus, it is important to understand the conditions in the background solar wind and the level of preconditioning of interplanetary medium due to another large-scale solar wind structure, for accurate arrival time prediction of CMEs.
Given the limited success in arrival time prediction of CMEs, it is required to make several studies in this direction (\cc{Harrison \etal 2009}, \cc{Mishra \etal 2014}; \cc{Harrison \etal 2017}). In this regard, it can be advantageous to compare the \textit{J}-maps derived from the observations with the synthetic \textit{J}-maps outputs from the MHD models. Using this comparison of real and synthetic \textit{J}-maps, one can identify the difference in CME evolution in simulation and can eventually correct the model results. Morever, the background solar wind simulated by the models using near-Sun conditions should be refined under the monitoring of other large scale heliospheric structures away from the Sun. It is important to point out that the model-run may provide several solutions under the inputs of different CME and background solar wind parameters. The large number (i.e., spread) in the solutions can be reduced to a small number by comparing it with real \textit{J}-maps. A small number of solutions would then be suitable for predicting a reasonably accurate range of CME arrival times (\cc{Harrison \etal 2017}). Thus, the heliospheric observations have the potential to contribute to operational space weather services.
The \textit{STEREO} era has provided opportunity to understand the association between remotely observed CME structures and \textit{in situ} observations. However, the prediction of negative B$_{z}$ at Earth is most important for predicting the occurrence of geomagnetic storms (\cc{Gonzalez \etal 1989}; \cc{Srivastava \& Venkatakrishnan 2002}). Determination of the negative B$_{z}$ component in the CMEs by exploiting the remote sensing observations is far from reality. By examining the neutral line in the source region of a CME, one can attempt to guess the inclination of the flux rope, expected direction of rotation and the portion of flux rope where negative B$_{z}$ may occur (\cc{Yurchyshyn \etal 2005}). Our understanding of the flux rope structure of a CME is very limited and it is still debated whether such flux ropes are formed during the eruption or exist before the eruption (\cc{Chen 2011}).
It is noted that although CME propagation and arrival time are the focus of several studies for long using MHD models and observations, however, the crucial things for space weather prediction for magnetic storms are the direction and intensity of the magnetic field in both the ICMEs and upstream sheath. There are models used to estimate the magnetic field inside the ICMEs arriving at 1 AU; still, such models have not been independently and objectively tested for predictive purposes. There are also quite promising studies using machine learning algorithms to predict geomagnetic storms at 1 AU (\cc{Pricopi \etal 2022}). But again, one should properly test the reliability of such approaches. Thus, further work is required to understand the key issues responsible for space weather near Earth.
The successful exploitation of heliospheric imagery can revolutionize our understanding of the evolution of CMEs. This have made researchers to include instruments similar to HIs on other space missions such as SoloHI (\cc{Howard \etal 2020}) on the \textit{Solar Orbiter (SO)} (\cc{M\"{u}ller \etal 2020}) and the Wide-field Imager for Solar PRobe (WISPR) (\cc{Vourlidas \etal 2016}) on the \textit{Parker Solar Probe (PSP)} (\cc{Fox \etal 2016}). The orbital motion of \textit{STEREO} has allowed heliospheric imaging from different heliospheric locations including their passage through the L4 and L5 Lagrangian points. With the progress of the \textit{STEREO} mission, the separation between the twin spacecraft reached to 180$^{\circ}$) around the beginning of year 2011, and further they continued increasing their separation from the Sun-Earth line. These locations of \textit{STEREO}, behind the Sun from Earth's viewpoint, are less suitable for the heliospheric imaging of the Earth-directed CMEs. This is most importantly because an Earth-directed CME tend to lie outside the Thomson sphere and are poorly visible from these \textit{STEREO} locations behind the Sun (\cc{Howard \& DeForest 2012}). Also, the communications with \textit{STEREO-B} were lost around October 2014 which were re-established only in August 2016, and it has now been out of contact since September 2016. Although \textit{STEREO-A} continues to operate normally, the loss of \textit{STEREO-B} somewhat limited the operational potential of \textit{STEREO} mission. The higher signal-to-noise imaging observations from heliospheric imagers onboard \textit{PSP} and \textit{SO} allow now imaging of the inner and darker cavities instead of traditional tracking of bright fronts of CMEs/ICMEs using \textit{STEREO}. The traditional heliospheric tracking of ICMEs in white-light imaging observations identifies the enhanced density structure, which is the compressed sheath region, whereas the \textit{in situ} observations accurately identify the density-depleted structure with the enhanced magnetic field, which is the magnetic ejecta or the flux-rope. The flux rope structure of ICMEs appears as the darker cavity in the white-light imaging observations and therefore, the tracking of the darker cavity can enable to more accurately connect the remote sensing observations of ICMEs with their \textit{in situ} observations (\cc{Hess \etal 2020}; \cc{Howard \etal 2020}; \cc{Rouillard \etal 2020}). Furthermore, observations from these new missions may change a few of the assumptions on the radial evolution of plasma parameters (i.e., density, magnetic field, etc.) in CMEs and solar wind, and therefore it has the potential to refine the existing propagation models (empirical or MHD) of CMEs.
The \textit{STEREO}/HI observations almost always have been used in conjunction with \textit{SOHO}/LASCO observations to study the heliospheric evolution of CMEs. A similar approach should also be taken for the observations of \textit{PSP}/WISPR, SoloHI and of the Metis coronagraph onboard \textit{SO}. We expect that future studies will provide further insights by coordinated science campaigns with multiple space missions like \textit{SOHO}, \textit{STEREO}, \textit{SDO}, \textit{PSP}, \textit{SO} and so on. The observations of a large number of CMEs at different heliocentric distances from the Sun by \textit{PSP} and \textit{SO} missions, may help in validating the models of CME magnetic field forecasting. In a recent study modeling the evolution of ICMEs, the researchers have observed the plasma parameters of the ICMEs by widely separated five \textit{in situ} spacecraft, \textit{SO}, \textit{BepiColombo}, \textit{PSP}, \textit{Wind}, and \textit{STEREO-A}, in connection with the remote observations of the same ICMEs by coronagraph and heliospheric imager onboard \textit{STEREO-A}/SECCHI and \textit{SOHO}/LASCO (\cc{M{\"o}stl \etal 2022}). Such studies on several cases, possible during the maximum phase of solar cycle 25, can improve understanding of the interplanetary evolution of ICMEs, their magnetic structure, global shape of their flux ropes, and shocks. Further, the \textit{in-situ} monitoring of ICMEs at Venus orbit combined with empirical and/or propagation models may provide early predictions of Earth-bound CMEs. As \textit{PSP} is measuring the regions where the solar wind gets accelerated, it is important to study fast solar wind flow from coronal holes and its impacts on the CMEs evolution. \textit{SO} progressively inclined orbit over the ecliptic will provide new insight onto the polar regions of the Sun and is expected to improve our understanding of the solar wind from coronal holes in the polar regions. Future studies should focus on verifying and evaluating background solar wind models to improve the inputs for CME propagation models. The studies of CMEs and solar wind evolution will be further augmented by the anticipated launches of the ESA \textit{Proba-3} (\cc{Shestov \etal 2021}) satellites in 2022 and the \textit{Polarimeter to UNify the Corona and heliosphere} \textit{(PUNCH)} (\cc{DeForest \etal 2020}) in 2023. The observations from such upcoming missions will be highly complementary to both WISPR onboard \textit{PSP} and SoloHI onboard \textit{SO}.
In light of the discussions made above, it is clear that little progress has been made in accurately estimating the arrival time, arrival speed, size, mass, magnetic field configuration, and field strength of a particular CME at a location in the heliosphere. This is because various observational and modeling limitations partially prevent a more accurate determination of the CME arrival time. Also, our limited understanding of the physics of solar wind in the inner heliosphere and the immense size of the physical system we are dealing with, further prevent accuracy in the current trends of research (\cc{Harrison \etal 2017}). There has been good progress in understanding the dynamics of CMEs under the influence of high speed from coronal holes, other CMEs, and the ambient pre-conditioned medium, but yet we are far from the complete understanding (\cc{Manchester \etal 2017}). We note that the energy budget of CMEs has only been studied for a handful of cases within a few solar radii from the Sun. Also, we do not have a good understanding of the shape, size, and structure of CME’s front and shock which also poses challenges for estimating the accurate arrival time of CMEs. It is still difficult to reliably track the evolution of different CME structures, particularly the magnetic flux rope (MFR). Furthermore, the limited knowledge of the physical parameters in the near corona hinders robust modeling of the initial stages of CME propagation and shock evolution. From the space weather perspective, the magnetic properties of the CMEs are often not reliably estimated near the Sun. Also, the heliospheric evolution of the CME magnetic structure (rotation, compression, deflection) and the erosion of the magnetic field due to reconnection with ambient solar wind magnetic fields pose considerable difficulty in predicting both the magnitude and geometry of the CME magnetic field at 1 AU (\cc{Wang \etal 2018}). Although there have been considerable developments in heliospheric imaging, it has remained extremely difficult to predict the duration of CMEs impacts and their momentum at the Earth.
Despite several limitations to HIs, it seems that there is no better substitute for imaging the vast and crucial distance gap between the Sun and Earth. This is because it is unlikely that MHD modeling would realistically predict the conditions of the ambient medium for estimating the complex evolution of the CMEs. Therefore, monitoring the CMEs during their continuous journey from the Sun to Earth has the potential to reveal the physics of evolution of the CMEs. In the future, we expect that a stationary spacecraft outside the Sun-Earth line (e.g., a space weather mission to the L5 point of the Sun-Earth system is being developed by ESA to be launched in 2027), continuously imaging the heliosphere from a stable platform, can overcome some of the limitations suffered by the \textit{STEREO}. The spacecraft at L4/L5 Lagrange points giving necessary side views of the Sun will observe Earth-directed CMEs with low projection effects. Such spacecraft providing real-time telemetry of good quality data can play a crucial role in achieving a credible space weather prediction. Also, the proposed polar missions, \textit{Solaris Solar Polar Mission}, if approved, would provide unprecedented observations to improve the understanding of magnetic field connectivity and coupling processes between open and closed magnetic field structures in the heliosphere. At present, the valuable heliospheric observations from recent missions are waiting to be explored extensively. The analysis of these unprecedented observations has the potential to improve our understanding of CME propagation and the performance of space weather prediction tools and models.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank the editorial board of the Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy (JoAA) for inviting WM to write this review article. We thank the publisher AAS to grant permission to reproduce some figures from The Astrophysical Journal, and Springer for permitting us to reproduce some figures from the journals of Solar Physics and Space Science Review. We also thank Nandita Srivastava (USO, India) for helpful suggestions. The authors are thankful to the referee for his/her comments which have improved the manuscript.
\vspace{-1em}
\raggedright
\begin{theunbibliography}{}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Andrews}, M.~D., {Wang}, A.-H., \& {Wu}, S.~T. 1999, \solphys, 187, 427,
\dodoi{10.1023/A:1005178630316}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Antiochos}, S.~K. \& {Klimchuk}, J.~A. 1991, \apj, 378, 372,
\dodoi{10.1086/170437}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Antonucci}, E., {Romoli}, M., {Andretta}, V., {et~al.} 2020, \aap, 642, A10,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361/201935338}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Arge}, C.~N., \& {Pizzo}, V.~J. 2000, \jgr, 105, 10465,
\dodoi{10.1029/1999JA000262}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Aschwanden}, M.~J.\ 2002, \ssr, 101, 1,
\dodoi{10.1023/A:1019712124366}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Baker}, D.~N. 2009, Space Weather, 7, 02003,
\dodoi{10.1029/2009SW000465}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Bemporad}, A. \& {Mancuso}, S.\ 2010, \apj, 720, 130,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/720/1/130}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Benz}, A.~O.\ 2008, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 5, 1,
\dodoi{10.12942/lrsp-2008-1}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Biermann}, L. 1951, \zap, 29, 274
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Billings}, D.~E. 1966, {A guide to the solar corona} (Academic Press, New
York), 150
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Bisi}, M.~M., {Jackson}, B.~V., {Hick}, P.~P., {et~al.} 2008, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 113, A00A11,
\dodoi{10.1029/2008JA013222}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Bothmer}, V. \& {Schwenn}, R.\ 1998, Annales Geophysicae, 16, 1,
\dodoi{10.1007/s00585-997-0001-x}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Boursier}, Y., {Lamy}, P., \& {Llebaria}, A. 2009, \solphys, 256, 131,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-009-9358-1}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Brueckner}, G.~E., {Delaboudiniere}, J.-P., {Howard}, R.~A., {et~al.} 1998,
\grl, 25, 3019, \dodoi{10.1029/98GL00704}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Brueckner}, G.~E., {Howard}, R.~A., {Koomen}, M.~J., {et~al.} 1995, \solphys,
162, 357, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00733434}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Burkepile}, J.~T., {Hundhausen}, A.~J., {Stanger}, A.~L., {St.~Cyr}, O.~C., \&
{Seiden}, J.~A. 2004, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 109,
3103, \dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010149}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Burlaga}, L.~F., {Behannon}, K.~W., \& {Klein}, L.~W. 1987, \jgr, 92, 5725,
\dodoi{10.1029/JA092iA06p05725}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Burlaga}, L., {Fitzenreiter}, R., {Lepping}, R., {et~al.} 1998, \jgr, 103,
277, \dodoi{10.1029/97JA02768}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Burlaga}, L.~F., {Plunkett}, S.~P., \& {St.~Cyr}, O.~C. 2002, \jgr, 107, 1266,
\dodoi{10.1029/2001JA000255}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Burlaga}, L.~F., {Skoug}, R.~M., {Smith}, C.~W., {et~al.} 2001, \jgr, 106,
20957, \dodoi{10.1029/2000JA000214}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Byrne}, J.~P., {Maloney}, S.~A., {McAteer}, R.~T.~J., {Refojo}, J.~M., \&
{Gallagher}, P.~T. 2010, Nature Communications, 1, \dodoi{10.1038/ncomms1077}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Cane}, H.~V. 2000, \ssr, 93, 55, \dodoi{10.1023/A:1026532125747}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Cane}, H.~V., \& {Richardson}, I.~G. 2003, Journal of Geophysical Research
(Space Physics), 108, 1156, \dodoi{10.1029/2002JA009817}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Cargill}, P.~J. 2004, \solphys, 221, 135,
\dodoi{10.1023/B:SOLA.0000033366.10725.a2}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Cargill}, P.~J., {Chen}, J., {Spicer}, D.~S., \& {Zalesak}, S.~T. 1996, \jgr,
101, 4855, \dodoi{10.1029/95JA03769}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Chao}, J.~K., \& {Lepping}, R.~P. 1974, in Flare-Produced Shock Waves in the
Corona and in Interplanetary Space, 225
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Chapman}, S., \& {Ferraro}, V.~C.~A. 1931, TeMAE, 36, 171,
\dodoi{10.1029/TE036i003p00171}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Chen}, P.~F. 2011, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 8, 1,
\dodoi{10.12942/lrsp-2011-1}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Cliver}, E.~W. \& {Hudson}, H.~S.\ 2002, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 64, 231, \dodoi{10.1016/S1364-6826(01)00086-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Colaninno}, R.~C., \& {Vourlidas}, A. 2015, \apj, 815, 70,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/815/1/70}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Compagnino}, A., {Romano}, P., \& {Zuccarello}, F. 2017, \solphys, 292, 5,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-016-1029-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Crooker}, N. 2002, EOS Transactions, 83, 24, \dodoi{10.1029/2002EO000018}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Crooker}, N.~U., \& {Horbury}, T.~S. 2006, \ssr, 123, 93,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-006-9014-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dal Lago}, A., {Schwenn}, R., \& {Gonzalez}, W.~D. 2003, Advances in Space
Research, 32, 2637, \dodoi{10.1016/j.asr.2003.03.012}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Davis}, C.~J., {Davies}, J.~A., {Lockwood}, M., {et~al.} 2009, \grl, 36, 8102,
\dodoi{10.1029/2009GL038021}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Davies}, J.~A., {Harrison}, R.~A., {Perry}, C.~H., {et~al.} 2012, \apj, 750,
23, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/23}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Davies}, J.~A., {Harrison}, R.~A., {Rouillard}, A.~P., {et~al.} 2009, \grl,
36, 2102, \dodoi{10.1029/2008GL036182}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Davies}, J.~A., {Perry}, C.~H., {Trines}, R.~M.~G.~M., {et~al.} 2013, \apj,
776, 1, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/777/2/167}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{DeForest}, C.~E., {Killough}, R., {Gibson}, S.~E., et al.\ 2020, AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Delaboudini{\`e}re}, J.-P., {Artzner}, G.~E., {Brunaud}, J., et al.\ 1995, \solphys, 162, 291,
\dodoi{10.1007/BF00733432}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Demastus}, H.~L., {Wagner}, W.~J., \& {Robinson}, R.~D. 1973, \solphys, 31,
449, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00152820}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dere}, K.~P., {Brueckner}, G.~E., {Howard}, R.~A., et al.\ 1997, \solphys, 175, 601,
\dodoi{10.1023/A:1004907307376}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dessler}, A.~J., {Francis}, W.~E., \& {Parker}, E.~N. 1960, \jgr, 65, 2715,
\dodoi{10.1029/JZ065i009p02715}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{D'Huys}, E., {Seaton}, D.~B., {Poedts}, S., et al.\ 2014, \apj, 795, 49,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/49}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dryer}, M. 1974, \ssr, 15, 403, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00178215}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dryer}, M. 1994, \ssr, 67, 363, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00756075}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dryer}, M., {Fry}, C.~D., {Sun}, W., {et~al.} 2001, \solphys, 204, 265,
\dodoi{10.1023/A:1014200719867}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dryer}, M., {Smith}, Z., {Fry}, C.~D., {et~al.} 2004, Space Weather, 2, 9001,
\dodoi{10.1029/2004SW000087}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Duan}, Y., {Shen}, Y., {Chen}, H., et al.\ 2019, \apj, 881, 132,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4357/ab32e9}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dumbovi{\'c}}, M., {Heber}, B., {Vr{\v s}nak}, B., et al.\ 2018, \apj, 860, 71,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4357/aac2de}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Dungey}, J.~W. 1961, \prl, 6, 47, \dodoi{10.1103/PhysRevLett.6.47}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Eddy}, J.~A. 1974, \aap, 34, 235
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Eyles}, C.~J., {Harrison}, R.~A., {Davis}, C.~J., {et~al.} 2009, \solphys,
254, 387, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-008-9299-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Eyles}, C.~J., {Simnett}, G.~M., {Cooke}, M.~P., {et~al.} 2003, \solphys, 217,
319, \dodoi{10.1023/B:SOLA.0000006903.75671.49}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Farrugia}, C.~J., {Jordanova}, V.~K., {Thomsen}, M.~F., {et~al.} 2006, \jgr,
111, 11104, \dodoi{10.1029/2006JA011893}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Feng}, X.~S., {Zhang}, Y., {Sun}, W., {et~al.} 2009, Journal of Geophysical
Research (Space Physics), 114, 1101, \dodoi{10.1029/2008JA013499}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Feynman}, J., \& {Hundhausen}, A.~J. 1994, \jgr, 99, 8451,
\dodoi{10.1029/94JA00202}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Fisher}, R.~R., {Lee}, R.~H., {MacQueen}, R.~M., \& {Poland}, A.~I. 1981, \ao,
20, 1094,
\dodoi{10.1364/AO.20.001094}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Forbes}, T.~G. \& {Isenberg}, P.~A.\ 1991, \apj, 373, 294,
\dodoi{10.1086/170051}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Forbush}, S.~E. 1937, Physical Review, 51, 1108,
\dodoi{10.1103/PhysRev.51.1108.3}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Forsyth}, R.~J., {Bothmer}, V., {Cid}, C., et al.\ 2006, \ssr, 123, 383,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-006-9022-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Fox}, N.~J., {Velli}, M.~C., {Bale}, S.~D., {et~al.} 2016, \ssr, 204, 7,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-015-0211-6}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Fry}, C.~D., {Detman}, T.~R., {Dryer}, M., {et~al.} 2007, Journal of
Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 69, 109,
\dodoi{10.1016/j.jastp.2006.07.024}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Fry}, C.~D., {Sun}, W., {Deehr}, C.~S., {et~al.} 2001, \jgr, 106, 20985,
\dodoi{10.1029/2000JA000220}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gallagher}, P.~T., {Lawrence}, G.~R., \& {Dennis}, B.~R. 2003, \apjl, 588,
L53, \dodoi{10.1086/375504}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Galvin}, A.~B., {Kistler}, L.~M., {Popecki}, M.~A., {et~al.} 2008, \ssr, 136,
437,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-007-9296-x}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Georgoulis}, M.~K., {Nindos}, A., \& {Zhang}, H.\ 2019, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 377, 20180094,
\dodoi{10.1098/rsta.2018.0094}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gilbert}, H.~R., {Serex}, E.~C., {Holzer}, T.~E., et al.\ 2001, \apj, 550, 1093,
\dodoi{10.1086/319816}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gonzalez-Esparza}, A., {Santill{\'a}n}, A., \& {Ferrer}, J. 2004, Annales
Geophysicae, 22, 3741, \dodoi{10.5194/angeo-22-3741-2004}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gonzalez}, W.~D., {Gonzalez}, A.~L.~C., {Tsurutani}, B.~T., {Smith}, E.~J., \&
{Tang}, F. 1989, \jgr, 94, 8835, \dodoi{10.1029/JA094iA07p08835}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gonzalez}, W.~D., {Joselyn}, J.~A., {Kamide}, Y., {et~al.} 1994, \jgr, 99,
5771, \dodoi{10.1029/93JA02867}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N.\ 2004, The Sun and the Heliosphere as an Integrated System, 201,
\dodoi{10.1007/978-1-4020-2831-9$\_$8}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N. 2006a, \ssr, 124, 145,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-006-9102-1}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N. 2006b, Washington DC American Geophysical Union Geophysical
Monograph Series, 165, 207,
\dodoi{10.1029/165GM20}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N.\ 2010, Solar and Stellar Variability: Impact on Earth and Planets, 264, 326,
\dodoi{10.1017/S1743921309992870}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Hanaoka}, Y., {Kosugi}, T., {et~al.} 1998b,
\grl, 25, 2485, \dodoi{10.1029/98GL50757}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Kaiser}, M.~L., {Lepping}, R.~P., {et~al.}
1998a, \jgr, 103, 307, \dodoi{10.1029/97JA02634}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Lara}, A., {Lepping}, R.~P., {et~al.} 2000a, \grl, 27, 145,
\dodoi{10.1029/1999GL003639}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Kaiser}, M.~L., {Thompson}, B.~J., {et~al.}
2000b, \grl, 27, 1427, \dodoi{10.1029/1999GL003665}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Lara}, A., {Manoharan}, P.~K., \& {Howard}, R.~A. 2005,
Advances in Space Research, 36, 2289, \dodoi{10.1016/j.asr.2004.07.014}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Lara}, A., {Yashiro}, S., {Kaiser}, M.~L., \& {Howard},
R.~A. 2001a, \jgr, 106, 29207, \dodoi{10.1029/2001JA000177}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {M{\"a}kel{\"a}}, P., {Xie}, H., {Akiyama}, S., \& {Yashiro},
S. 2009, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 114, 0,
\dodoi{10.1029/2008JA013686}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Miki}{\'c}, Z., {Maia}, D., et al.\ 2006, \ssr, 123, 303,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-006-9020-2}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Shimojo}, M., {Lu}, W., {et~al.} 2003a, \apj,
586, 562, \dodoi{10.1086/367614}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Xie}, H., M{\"a}kel{\"a}, P., et al.\ 2013, Advances in Space Research, 51, 1981,
\dodoi{10.1016/j.asr.2013.01.006}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Yashiro}, S., {Kaiser}, M.~L., {Howard}, R.~A., \&
{Bougeret}, J.-L. 2001b, \jgr, 106, 29219,
\dodoi{10.1029/2001JA000234}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Yashiro}, S., {Michalek}, G., et al.\ 2010, Sun and Geosphere, 5, 7
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Yashiro}, S., {Kaiser}, M.~L., {Howard}, R.~A., \&
{Bougeret}, J.-L. . 2001c, \apjl, 548, L91, \dodoi{10.1086/318939}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Yashiro}, S., {Lara}, A., {et~al.} 2003b, \grl,
30, 8015, \dodoi{10.1029/2002GL016435}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gopalswamy}, N., {Yashiro}, S., {Micha{\l}ek}, G., {et~al.} 2002, \apjl, 572,
L103, \dodoi{10.1086/341601}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gosling}, J.~T. 1993, \jgr, 98, 18937, \dodoi{10.1029/93JA01896}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gosling}, J.~T., {Baker}, D.~N., {Bame}, S.~J., {et~al.} 1987, \jgr, 92, 8519,
\dodoi{10.1029/JA092iA08p08519}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gosling}, J.~T., {Bame}, S.~J., {McComas}, D.~J., \& {Phillips}, J.~L. 1990,
\grl, 17, 901, \dodoi{10.1029/GL017i007p00901}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gosling}, J.~T., {Hildner}, E., {MacQueen}, R.~M., {et~al.} 1974, \jgr, 79,
4581, \dodoi{10.1029/JA079i031p04581}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gringauz}, K.~I., {Bezrokikh}, V.~V., {Ozerov}, V.~D., \& {Rybchinskii}, R.~E.
1960, Soviet Physics Doklady, 5, 361
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Gui}, B., {Shen}, C., {Wang}, Y., {et~al.} 2011, \solphys, 271, 111,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-011-9791-9}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hanaoka}, Y., {Kurokawa}, H., {Enome}, S., {et~al.} 1994, \pasj, 46, 205
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Harrison}, R.~A., {Davies}, J.~A., {Barnes}, D., {et~al.} 2018, \solphys, 293,
77, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-018-1297-2}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Harrison}, R.~A., {Davies}, J.~A., {Biesecker}, D., \& {Gibbs}, M. 2017, Space
Weather, 15, 985, \dodoi{10.1002/2017SW001633}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Harrison}, R.~A., {Davies}, J.~A., {M{\"o}stl}, C., {et~al.} 2012, \apj, 750,
45, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/45}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Harrison}, R.~A., {Davies}, J.~A., {Rouillard}, A.~P., {et~al.} 2009,
\solphys, 256, 219, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-009-9352-7}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hess}, P., {Rouillard}, A.~P., {Kouloumvakos}, A., et al.\ 2020, \apjs, 246, 25,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4365/ab4ff0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hewish}, A., {Scott}, P.~F., \& {Wills}, D. 1964, \nat, 203, 1214,
\dodoi{10.1038/2031214a0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hirayama}, T., \& {Nakagomi}, Y. 1974, \pasj, 26, 53
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hirshberg}, J., {Asbridge}, J.~R., \& {Robbins}, D.~E. 1971, \solphys, 18,
313, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00145946}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Horbury}, T.~S., {Woolley}, T., {Laker}, R., et al.\ 2020, \apjs, 246, 45.
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4365/ab5b15}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Houminer}, Z., \& {Hewish}, A. 1972, \planss, 20, 1703,
\dodoi{10.1016/0032-0633(72)90192-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, R.~A., {Michels}, D.~J., {Sheeley}, Jr., N.~R., \& {Koomen}, M.~J.
1982, \apjl, 263, L101, \dodoi{10.1086/183932}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, R.~A., {Moses}, J.~D., {Vourlidas}, A., {et~al.} 2008, \ssr, 136, 67,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-008-9341-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, R.~A., {Vourlidas}, A., {Colaninno}, R.~C., et al.\ 2020, \aap, 642, A13,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361/201935202}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A. 2011, \jastp, 73, 1242,
\dodoi{10.1016/j.jastp.2010.08.009}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A.\ 2015, \apj, 806, 175,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/175}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A., \& {DeForest}, C.~E. 2012, \apj, 752, 130,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/752/2/130}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A., {DeForest}, C.~E., {Schneck}, U.~G., et al.\ 2017, \apj, 834, 86,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/86}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A., {Fry}, C.~D., {Johnston}, J.~C., \& {Webb}, D.~F. 2007, \apj,
667, 610,
\dodoi{10.1086/519758}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A. \& {Harrison}, R.~A.\ 2013, \solphys, 285, 269,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-012-0217-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A., \& {Tappin}, S.~J. 2009, \ssr, 147, 31,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-009-9542-5}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A., {Tappin}, S.~J., {Odstrcil}, D., \& {DeForest}, C.~E. 2013,
\apj, 765, 45, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/765/1/45}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Howard}, T.~A., {Webb}, D.~F., {Tappin}, S.~J., {Mizuno}, D.~R., \&
{Johnston}, J.~C. 2006, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 111,
4105, \dodoi{10.1029/2005JA011349}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hundhausen}, A. 1999, in The many faces of the sun: a summary of the results
from NASA's Solar Maximum Mission., ed. K.~T. {Strong}, J.~L.~R. {Saba},
B.~M. {Haisch}, \& J.~T. {Schmelz}, 143
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hundhausen}, A.~J. 1993, \jgr, 98, 13177, \dodoi{10.1029/93JA00157}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Hundhausen}, A.~J., {Sawyer}, C.~B., {House}, L., {Illing}, R.~M.~E., \&
{Wagner}, W.~J. 1984, \jgr, 89, 2639, \dodoi{10.1029/JA089iA05p02639}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Illing}, R.~M.~E., \& {Hundhausen}, A.~J. 1985, \jgr, 90, 275,
\dodoi{10.1029/JA090iA01p00275}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Inhester}, B. 2006, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Innes}, D.~E., {Cameron}, R.~H., {Fletcher}, L., et al.\ 2012, \aap, 540, L10,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361/201118530}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Intriligator}, D.~S. 1976, \ssr, 19, 629,
\dodoi{10.1007/BF00210644}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Jian}, L., {Russell}, C.~T., {Luhmann}, J.~G., \& {Skoug}, R.~M. 2006,
\solphys, 239, 393, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-006-0133-2}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Joshi}, N.~C., {Srivastava}, A.~K., {Filippov}, B., et al.\ 2013, \apj, 771, 65,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/771/1/65}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Jurac}, S., {Kasper}, J.~C., {Richardson}, J.~D., \& {Lazarus}, A.~J. 2002,
\grl, 29, 1463, \dodoi{10.1029/2001GL014034}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kahler}, S.~W. 1992, \araa, 30, 113,
\dodoi{10.1146/annurev.aa.30.090192.000553}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kahler}, S.~W.\ 2006, Washington DC American Geophysical Union Geophysical Monograph Series, 165, 21, \dodoi{10.1029/165GM05}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kahler}, S.~W., {Hildner}, E., \& {Van Hollebeke}, M.~A.~I. 1978, \solphys,
57, 429, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00160116}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kahler}, S.~W., \& {Webb}, D.~F. 2007, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space
Physics), 112, 9103, \dodoi{10.1029/2007JA012358}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kaiser}, M.~L., {Kucera}, T.~A., {Davila}, J.~M., {et~al.} 2008, \ssr, 136, 5,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-007-9277-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kilpua}, E.~K.~J., {Jian}, L.~K., {Li}, Y., {Luhmann}, J.~G., \& {Russell},
C.~T. 2011, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 73, 1228,
\dodoi{10.1016/j.jastp.2010.10.012}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kilpua}, E., {Koskinen}, H.~E.~J., \& {Pulkkinen}, T.~I.\ 2017, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 14, 5.
\dodoi{10.1007/s41116-017-0009-6}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kilpua}, E.~K.~J., {Mierla}, M., {Rodriguez}, L., {et~al.} 2012, \solphys,
279, 477, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-012-0005-x}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kilpua}, E.~K.~J., {Pomoell}, J., {Vourlidas}, A., {et~al.} 2009, Annales
Geophysicae, 27, 4491, \dodoi{10.5194/angeo-27-4491-2009}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Klein}, L.~W., \& {Burlaga}, L.~F. 1982, \jgr, 87, 613,
\dodoi{10.1029/JA087iA02p00613}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kohl}, J.~L., {Noci}, G., {Cranmer}, S.~R., et al.\ 2006, \aapr, 13, 31,
\dodoi{10.1007/s00159-005-0026-7}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Kumar}, A., \& {Rust}, D.~M. 1996, \jgr, 101, 15667,
\dodoi{10.1029/96JA00544}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Laken}, B., {Wolfendale}, A., \& {Kniveton}, D.\ 2009, \grl, 36, L23803,
\dodoi{10.1029/2009GL040961}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Laker}, R., {Horbury}, T.~S., {Bale}, S.~D., et al.\ 2021, \aap, 652, A105,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361/202140679}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lam}, M.~M. \& {Rodger}, A.~S.\ 2002, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 64, 41,
\dodoi{10.1016/S1364-6826(01)00092-X}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Landi}, E., {Raymond}, J.~C., {Miralles}, M.~P., et al.\ 2010, \apj, 711, 75,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/711/1/75}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lara}, A., \& {Borgazzi}, A.~I. 2009, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 257, IAU
Symposium, ed. N.~{Gopalswamy} \& D.~F. {Webb}, 287—290
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lavraud}, B., {Fargette}, N., {R{\'e}ville}, V., et al.\ 2020, \apjl, 894, L19,
\dodoi{10.3847/2041-8213/ab8d2d}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lawrance}, M.~B., {Moon}, Y.-J., \& {Shanmugaraju}, A.\ 2020, \solphys, 295, 62, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-020-01623-1}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lemen}, J.~R., {Title}, A.~M., {Akin}, D.~J., et al.\ 2012, \solphys, 275, 17,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lepping}, R.~P., {Burlaga}, L.~F., \& {Jones}, J.~A. 1990, \jgr, 95, 11957,
\dodoi{10.1029/JA095iA08p11957}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lepri}, S.~T., \& {Zurbuchen}, T.~H. 2004, Journal of Geophysical Research
(Space Physics), 109, 1112,
\dodoi{10.1029/2003JA009954}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lepri}, S.~T., \& {Zurbuchen}, T.~H. 2010, \apjl, 723, L22, \dodoi{10.1088/2041-8205/723/1/L22}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lepri}, S.~T., {Zurbuchen}, T.~H., {Fisk}, L.~A., {et~al.} 2001, \jgr, 106,
29231, \dodoi{10.1029/2001JA000014}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lindsay}, G.~M., {Luhmann}, J.~G., {Russell}, C.~T., \& {Gosling}, J.~T. 1999,
\jgr, 104, 12515, \dodoi{10.1029/1999JA900051}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Liu}, Y., {Davies}, J.~A., {Luhmann}, J.~G., {et~al.} 2010a,
\apjl, 710, L82, \dodoi{10.1088/2041-8205/710/1/L82}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Liu}, W. \& {Ofman}, L.\ 2014, \solphys, 289, 3233,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-014-0528-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Liu}, Y., {Thernisien}, A., {Luhmann}, J.~G., {et~al.} 2010b,
\apj, 722, 1762, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1762}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Liu}, Y.~D., {Luhmann}, J.~G., {Lugaz}, N., {et~al.} 2013, \apj, 769, 45,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/45}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Liu}, Y.~D., {Luhmann}, J.~G., {M{\"o}stl}, C., {et~al.} 2012, \apjl, 746,
L15, \dodoi{10.1088/2041-8205/746/2/L15}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Liu}, Y.~D., {Yang}, Z., {Wang}, R., {et~al.} 2014, \apjl, 793, L41,
\dodoi{10.1088/2041-8205/793/2/L41}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lopez}, R.~E. 1987, \jgr, 92, 11189, \dodoi{10.1029/JA092iA10p11189}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lugaz}, N. 2010, \solphys, 267, 411, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-010-9654-9}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lugaz}, N., \& {Farrugia}, C.~J. 2014, \grl, 41, 769,
\dodoi{10.1002/2013GL058789}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lugaz}, N., {Farrugia}, C.~J., {Davies}, J.~A., {et~al.} 2012, \apj, 759, 68,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/759/1/68}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lugaz}, N., {Hernandez-Charpak}, J.~N., {Roussev}, I.~I., {et~al.} 2010, \apj,
715, 493, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/715/1/493}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lugaz}, N., {Manchester}, IV, W.~B., \& {Gombosi}, T.~I. 2005, \apj, 634, 651,
\dodoi{10.1086/491782}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lugaz}, N., {Temmer}, M., {Wang}, Y., et al.\ 2017, \solphys, 292, 64,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-017-1091-6}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lugaz}, N., {Vourlidas}, A., \& {Roussev}, I.~I. 2009, Annales Geophysicae,
27, 3479, \dodoi{10.5194/angeo-27-3479-2009}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Luhmann}, J.~G., {Curtis}, D.~W., {Schroeder}, P., {et~al.} 2008, \ssr, 136,
117, \dodoi{10.1007/s11214-007-9170-x}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Luhmann}, J.~G., {Gopalswamy}, N., {Jian}, L.~K., et al.\ 2020, \solphys, 295, 61,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-020-01624-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lynch}, B.~J., {Masson}, S., {Li}, Y., et al.\ 2016, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 121, 10,677,
\dodoi{10.1002/2016JA023432}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Lyot}, B. 1939, \mnras, 99, 580,
\dodoi{10.1093/mnras/99.8.580}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Ma}, S., {Attrill}, G.~D.~R., {Golub}, L., \& {Lin}, J. 2010, \apj, 722, 289,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/722/1/289}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{MacQueen}, R.~M., {Csoeke-Poeckh}, A., {Hildner}, E., {et~al.} 1980, \solphys,
65, 91, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00151386}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Maloney}, S.~A., \& {Gallagher}, P.~T. 2010, \apjl, 724, L127,
\dodoi{10.1088/2041-8205/724/2/L127}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Manchester}, W.~B., {Gombosi}, T.~I., {Roussev}, I., {et~al.} 2004, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 109, A02107,
\dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010150}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Manchester}, IV, W.~B., {Gombosi}, T.~I., {De Zeeuw}, D.~L., {et~al.} 2005,
\apj, 622, 1225, \dodoi{10.1086/427768}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Manchester}, W., {Kilpua}, E.~K.~J., {Liu}, Y.~D., et al.\ 2017, \ssr, 212, 1159,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-017-0394-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Manoharan}, P.~K. 2006, \solphys, 235, 345, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-006-0100-y}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Manoharan}, P.~K., \& {Ananthakrishnan}, S. 1990, \mnras, 244, 691
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Manoharan}, P.~K., {Gopalswamy}, N., {Yashiro}, S., {et~al.} 2004, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 109, 6109, \dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010300}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mari{\v c}i{\'c}}, D., {Vr{\v s}nak}, B., {Dumbovi{\'c}}, M., {et~al.} 2014,
\solphys, 289, 351, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-013-0314-8}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mart{\'{\i}}nez Oliveros}, J.~C., {Raftery}, C.~L., {Bain}, H.~M., {et~al.}
2012, \apj, 748, 66, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/748/1/66}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{McComas}, D.~J., {Christian}, E.~R., {Cohen}, C.~M.~S., et al.\ 2019, \nat, 576, 223,
\dodoi{10.1038/s41586-019-1811-1}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{McComas}, D.~J., {Gosling}, J.~T., {Bame}, S.~J., {Smith}, E.~J., \& {Cane},
H.~V. 1989, \jgr, 94, 1465, \dodoi{10.1029/JA094iA02p01465}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mierla}, M., {Davila}, J., {Thompson}, W., {et~al.} 2008, \solphys, 252, 385,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-008-9267-8}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mierla}, M., {Inhester}, B., {Marqu{\'e}}, C., {et~al.} 2009, \solphys, 259,
123, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-009-9416-8}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mierla}, M., {Inhester}, B., {Antunes}, A., {et~al.} 2010, Annales
Geophysicae, 28, 203, \dodoi{10.5194/angeo-28-203-2010}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Minnaert}, M. 1930, \zap, 1, 209
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, S.~K., {Singh}, T., {Kayshap}, P., et al.\ 2018a, \apj, 856, 86,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4357/aaae03}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, S.~K., {Singh}, T., {Kayshap}, P., et al.\ 2018b, IAU Symposium, 340, 237, \dodoi{10.1017/S1743921318002028}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, S.~K. \& {Srivastava}, A.~K.\ 2019, \solphys, 294, 169,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-019-1560-1}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., \& {Srivastava}, N. 2013, \apj, 772, 70,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/70}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., \& {Srivastava}, N. 2014, \apj, 794, 64, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/794/1/64}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., \& {Srivastava}, N. 2015, Journal of Space Weather and Space Climate, 5, A20,
\dodoi{10.1051/swsc/2015021}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., {Srivastava}, N., \& {Chakrabarty}, D. 2015a,
\solphys, 290, 527, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-014-0625-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., {Srivastava}, N., \& {Davies}, J.~A. 2014, \apj, 784, 135,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/784/2/135}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., {Srivastava}, N., \& {Singh}, T. 2015b, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 120, 10, \dodoi{10.1002/2015JA021415}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., {Wang}, Y., \& {Srivastava}, N. 2016, \apj, 831, 99,
\dodoi{10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/99}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Mishra}, W., {Wang}, Y., {Srivastava}, N., \& {Shen}, C. 2017, \apjs, 232, 5,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4365/aa8139}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Moran}, T.~G., \& {Davila}, J.~M. 2004, Science, 305, 66,
\dodoi{10.1126/science.1098937}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"o}stl}, C., {Amla}, K., {Hall}, J.~R., {et~al.} 2014, \apj, 787, 119,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/787/2/119}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"o}stl}, C. \& {Davies}, J.~A.\ 2013, \solphys, 285, 411,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-012-9978-8}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"o}stl}, C., {Farrugia}, C.~J., {Kilpua}, E.~K.~J., {et~al.} 2012, \apj,
758, 10, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/758/1/10}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"o}stl}, C., {Farrugia}, C.~J., {Temmer}, M., {et~al.} 2009, \apjl, 705,
L180, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/L180}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"o}stl}, C., {Rollett}, T., {Lugaz}, N., {et~al.} 2011, \apj, 741, 34,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/741/1/34}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"o}stl}, C., {Temmer}, M., {Rollett}, T., {et~al.} 2010, \grl, 37, 24103,
\dodoi{10.1029/2010GL045175}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"o}stl}, C., {Weiss}, A.~J., {Reiss}, M.~A., {et~al.} 2022, \apjl, 924, L6,
\dodoi{10.3847/2041-8213/ac42d0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{M{\"u}ller}, D., {St. Cyr}, O.~C., {Zouganelis}, I., et al.\ 2020, \aap, 642, A1,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361/202038467}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Munro}, R.~H., {Gosling}, J.~T., {Hildner}, E., {et~al.} 1979, \solphys, 61,
201, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00155456}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Nitta}, N.~V. \& {Mulligan}, T.\ 2017, \solphys, 292, 125,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-017-1147-7}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Odstrcil}, D., {Linker}, J.~A., {Lionello}, R., {et~al.} 2002, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 107, 1493, \dodoi{10.1029/2002JA009334}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Odstrcil}, D., {Riley}, P., \& {Zhao}, X.~P. 2004, Journal of Geophysical
Research (Space Physics), 109, 2116, \dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010135}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Odstr{\v c}il}, D., \& {Pizzo}, V.~J. 1999, \jgr, 104, 483,
\dodoi{10.1029/1998JA900019}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Ogilvie}, K.~W., {Chornay}, D.~J., {Fritzenreiter}, R.~J., {et~al.} 1995,
\ssr, 71, 55, \dodoi{10.1007/BF00751326}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Parker}, E.~N. 1958, \apj, 128, 664, \dodoi{10.1086/146579}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Pizzo}, V., {Millward}, G., {Parsons}, A., {et~al.} 2011, Space Weather, 9,
3004, \dodoi{10.1029/2011SW000663}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Priest}, E.~R., \& {Forbes}, T.~G. 2002, \aapr, 10, 313,
\dodoi{10.1007/s001590100013}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Pricopi}, A.-C., {Paraschiv}, A.~R., {Besliu-Ionescu}, D., {et~al.} 2022, \apj, 934, 176,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4357/ac7962}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Ramesh}, R., {Lakshmi}, M.~A., {Kathiravan}, C., et al.\ 2012, \apj, 752, 107,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/752/2/107}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Raymond}, J.~C.\ 2002, From Solar Min to Max: Half a Solar Cycle with SOHO, 508, 421
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Richardson}, I.~G., \& {Cane}, H.~V. 1993, \jgr, 98, 15295,
\dodoi{10.1029/93JA01466}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Richardson}, I.~G., \& {Cane}, H.~V. 1995, \jgr, 100, 23397, \dodoi{10.1029/95JA02684}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Richardson}, I.~G., \& {Cane}, H.~V. 2004, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 109, 9104,
\dodoi{10.1029/2004JA010598}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Richardson}, I.~G., \& {Cane}, H.~V. 2010, \solphys, 264, 189, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-010-9568-6}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Richardson}, I.~G., {Farrugia}, C.~J., \& {Cane}, H.~V. 1997, \jgr, 102, 4691,
\dodoi{10.1029/96JA04001}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Richter}, I., {Leinert}, C., \& {Planck}, B. 1982, \aap, 110, 115
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Riley}, P., {Lionello}, R., {Miki{\'c}}, Z., \& {Linker}, J. 2008, \apj, 672,
1221, \dodoi{10.1086/523893}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Robbrecht}, E., {Patsourakos}, S., \& {Vourlidas}, A. 2009, \apj, 701, 283,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/701/1/283}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Rodriguez}, L., {Mierla}, M., {Zhukov}, A.~N., {West}, M., \& {Kilpua}, E.
2011, \solphys, 270, 561, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-011-9784-8}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Rodriguez}, L., {Woch}, J., {Krupp}, N., {et~al.} 2004, Journal of Geophysical
Research (Space Physics), 109, 1108, \dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010156}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Rouillard}, A.~P., {Davies}, J.~A., {Forsyth}, R.~J., {et~al.} 2008, \grl, 35,
10110, \dodoi{10.1029/2008GL033767}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Rouillard}, A.~P., {Kouloumvakos}, A., {Vourlidas}, A., et al.\ 2020, \apjs, 246, 37,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4365/ab579a}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Rouillard}, A.~P., {Savani}, N.~P., {Davies}, J.~A., {et~al.} 2009, \solphys,
256, 307, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-009-9329-6}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Shen}, C., {Wang}, Y., {Pan}, Z., et al.\ 2014, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 119, 5107,
\dodoi{10.1002/2014JA020001}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Shen}, Y., {Liu}, Y., {Su}, J., et al.\ 2012a, \apj, 745, 164,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/745/2/164}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Schmieder}, B., {van Driel-Gesztelyi}, L., {Aulanier}, G., {et~al.} 2002,
Advances in Space Research, 29, 1451,
\dodoi{10.1016/S0273-1177(02)00211-9}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Schwenn}, R. 2006, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 3, 2,
\dodoi{10.12942/lrsp-2006-2}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Schwenn}, R., {dal Lago}, A., {Huttunen}, E., \& {Gonzalez}, W.~D. 2005,
Annales Geophysicae, 23, 1033, \dodoi{10.5194/angeo-23-1033-2005}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Schwenn}, R., {Rosenbauer}, H., \& {Muehlhaeuser}, K.-H. 1980, \grl, 7, 201,
\dodoi{10.1029/GL007i003p00201}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Sharma}, R., \& {Srivastava}, N. 2012, Journal of Space Weather and Space
Climate, 2, A260000, \dodoi{10.1051/swsc/2012010}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Sheeley}, Jr., N.~R., {Herbst}, A.~D., {Palatchi}, C.~A., {et~al.} 2008, \apj,
675, 853, \dodoi{10.1086/526422}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Sheeley}, Jr., N.~R., {Michels}, D.~J., {Howard}, R.~A., \& {Koomen}, M.~J.
1980, \apjl, 237, L99, \dodoi{10.1086/183243}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Sheeley}, N.~R., {Walters}, J.~H., {Wang}, Y.-M., \& {Howard}, R.~A. 1999,
\jgr, 104, 24739, \dodoi{10.1029/1999JA900308}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Shen}, C., {Wang}, Y., {Wang}, S., {et~al.} 2012b, \nat, 8, 923,
\dodoi{10.1038/nphys2440}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Shen}, F., {Wang}, Y., {Shen}, C., \& {Feng}, X. 2016, Scientific Reports, 6,
19576, \dodoi{10.1038/srep19576}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Shestov}, S.~V., {Zhukov}, A.~N., {Inhester}, B., et al.\ 2021, \aap, 652, A4,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361/202140467}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Skoug}, R.~M., {Bame}, S.~J., {Feldman}, W.~C., {et~al.} 1999, \grl, 26, 161,
\dodoi{10.1029/1998GL900207}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Smart}, D.~F., \& {Shea}, M.~A. 1985, \jgr, 90, 183,
\dodoi{10.1029/JA090iA01p00183}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Smith}, Z., \& {Dryer}, M. 1990, \solphys, 129, 387,
\dodoi{10.1007/BF00159049}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Smith}, Z.~K., {Dryer}, M., {McKenna-Lawlor}, S.~M.~P., {et~al.} 2009, Journal
of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 114, 5106,
\dodoi{10.1029/2008JA013836}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Solanki}, R., {Srivastava}, A.~K., \& {Dwivedi}, B.~N.\ 2020, \solphys, 295, 27,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-020-1594-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Solanki}, R., {Srivastava}, A.~K., {Rao}, Y.~K., et al.\ 2019, \solphys, 294, 68,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-019-1453-3}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Song}, H.~Q., {Cheng}, X., {Chen}, Y., et al.\ 2017, \apj, 848, 21,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4357/aa8d1a}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Song}, H.~Q., {Zhang}, J., {Cheng}, X., et al.\ 2020, \apjl, 901, L21,
\dodoi{10.3847/2041-8213/abb6ec}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Srivastava}, N., {Inhester}, B., {Mierla}, M., \& {Podlipnik}, B. 2009,
\solphys, 259, 213, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-009-9423-9}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Srivastava}, N., {Schwenn}, R., {Inhester}, B., et al.\ 1999, Solar Wind Nine, 471, 115,
\dodoi{10.1063/1.58789}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Srivastava}, N., \& {Venkatakrishnan}, P. 2002, \grl, 29, 1287,
\dodoi{10.1029/2001GL013597}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Srivastava}, N., \& {Venkatakrishnan}, P. 2004, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 109, 10103,
\dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010175}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{St.~Cyr}, O.~C., {Plunkett}, S.~P., {Michels}, D.~J., {et~al.} 2000, \jgr,
105, 18169, \dodoi{10.1029/1999JA000381}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Sterling}, A.~C., \& {Hudson}, H.~S. 1997, \apjl, 491, L55,
\dodoi{10.1086/311043}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Stone}, E.~C., {Frandsen}, A.~M., {Mewaldt}, R.~A., {et~al.} 1998, \ssr, 86,
1, \dodoi{10.1023/A:1005082526237}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Subramanian}, P., {Arunbabu}, K.~P., {Vourlidas}, A., \& {Mauriya}, A. 2014,
\apj, 790, 125, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/790/2/125}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Subramanian}, P., {Lara}, A., \& {Borgazzi}, A. 2012, \grl, 39, 19107,
\dodoi{10.1029/2012GL053625}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Subramanian}, P. \& {Vourlidas}, A.\ 2005, Coronal and Stellar Mass Ejections, 226, 314,
\dodoi{10.1017/S1743921305000797}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Subramanian}, P., \& {Vourlidas}, A. 2007, \aap, 467, 685,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361:20066770}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Taktakishvili}, A., {Kuznetsova}, M., {MacNeice}, P., {et~al.} 2009, Space
Weather, 7, 3004, \dodoi{10.1029/2008SW000448}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Tappin}, S.~J., {Hewish}, A., \& {Gapper}, G.~R. 1983, \planss, 31, 1171,
\dodoi{10.1016/0032-0633(83)90106-X}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Temmer}, M.\ 2021, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 18, 4.
\dodoi{10.1007/s41116-021-00030-3}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Temmer}, M., {Rollett}, T., {M{\"o}stl}, C., {et~al.} 2011, \apj, 743, 101,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/101}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Temmer}, M., {Veronig}, A.~M., {Peinhart}, V., \& {Vr{\v s}nak}, B. 2014,
\apj, 785, 85, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/85}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Temmer}, M., {Vr{\v s}nak}, B., {Rollett}, T., {et~al.} 2012, \apj, 749, 57,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/749/1/57}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Thernisien}, A. 2011, \apjs, 194, 33, \dodoi{10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/33}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Thernisien}, A., {Vourlidas}, A., \& {Howard}, R.~A. 2009, \solphys, 256, 111,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-009-9346-5}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Thompson}, W.~T. 2009, \icarus, 200, 351,
\dodoi{10.1016/j.icarus.2008.12.011}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{T{\"o}r{\"o}k}, T. \& {Kliem}, B.\ 2005, \apjl, 630, L97,
\dodoi{10.1086/462412}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
Tousey, R. 1973, in Space Research XIII, ed. M.~Rycroft \& S.~Runcorn (Berlin:
Akademie-Verlag), 713--730
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Tripathi}, D., {Bothmer}, V., \& {Cremades}, H.\ 2004, \aap, 422, 337,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361:20035815}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Tsunomura}, S.\ 1998, Earth, Planets, and Space, 50, 755,
\dodoi{doi:10.1186/BF03352168}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Tsurutani}, B.~T., {Smith}, E.~J., {Gonzalez}, W.~D., {Tang}, F., \&
{Akasofu}, S.~I. 1988, \jgr, 93, 8519, \dodoi{10.1029/JA093iA08p08519}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vandas}, M., {Fischer}, S., {Dryer}, M., {Smith}, Z., \& {Detman}, T. 1996,
\jgr, 101, 15645, \dodoi{10.1029/96JA00511}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vandas}, M., {Fischer}, S., {Dryer}, M., {et~al.} 1997, \jgr, 102, 22295,
\dodoi{10.1029/97JA01675}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vandas}, M., \& {Odstrcil}, D. 2004, \aap, 415, 755,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361:20031763}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vourlidas}, A., {Buzasi}, D., {Howard}, R.~A., \& {Esfandiari}, E. 2002b, in
ESA Special Publication, Vol. 506, Solar Variability: From Core to Outer
Frontiers, ed. A.~{Wilson}, 91--94
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vourlidas}, A., {Colaninno}, R., {Nieves-Chinchilla}, T., \& {Stenborg}, G.
2011, \apjl, 733, L23, \dodoi{10.1088/2041-8205/733/2/L23}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vourlidas}, A., \& {Howard}, R.~A. 2006, \apj, 642, 1216,
\dodoi{10.1086/501122}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vourlidas}, A., {Howard}, R.~A., {Esfandiari}, E., {et~al.} 2010, \apj, 722,
1522, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1522}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vourlidas}, A., {Howard}, R.~A., {Morrill}, J.~S., et al.\ 2002a, Solar-Terrestrial Magnetic Activity and Space Environment, 14, 201
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vourlidas}, A., {Howard}, R.~A., {Plunkett}, S.~P., {et~al.} 2016, \ssr, 204,
83, \dodoi{10.1007/s11214-014-0114-y}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vourlidas}, A., {Patsourakos}, S., \& {Savani}, N.~P.\ 2019, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 377, 20180096,
\dodoi{10.1098/rsta.2018.0096}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vr{\v s}nak}, B. 2001, \solphys, 202, 173, \dodoi{10.1023/A:1011833114104}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vr{\v s}nak}, B. \& {Cliver}, E.~W.\ 2008, \solphys, 253, 215,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11207-008-9241-5}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vr{\v s}nak}, B., \& {Gopalswamy}, N. 2002, Journal of Geophysical Research
(Space Physics), 107, 1019, \dodoi{10.1029/2001JA000120}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vr{\v s}nak}, B., \& {{\v Z}ic}, T. 2007, \aap, 472, 937,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361:20077499}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vr{\v s}nak}, B., {{\v Z}ic}, T., {Falkenberg}, T.~V., {et~al.} 2010, \aap,
512, A43, \dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361/200913482}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vr{\v{s}}nak}, B., {Vrbanec}, D., {\v{C}}{alogovi}{\'c}, J., et al.\ 2009, Universal Heliophysical Processes, 257, 271,
\dodoi{10.1017/S1743921309029391}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Vr{\v s}nak}, B., {{\v Z}ic}, T., {Vrbanec}, D., {et~al.} 2013, \solphys, 285,
295, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-012-0035-4}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, C., {Richardson}, J.~D., \& {Gosling}, J.~T. 2000, \jgr, 105, 2337,
\dodoi{10.1029/1999JA900436}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, Y., {Shen}, C., {Liu}, R., et al.\ 2018, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 123, 3238,
\dodoi{10.1002/2017JA024971}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, Y., {Shen}, C., {Wang}, S., \& {Ye}, P. 2004, \solphys, 222, 329,
\dodoi{10.1023/B:SOLA.0000043576.21942.aa}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, Y., {Zheng}, H., {Wang}, S., \& {Ye}, P. 2005, \aap, 434, 309,
\dodoi{10.1051/0004-6361:20041423}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, Y.-M., \& {Sheeley}, Jr., N.~R. 1995, \apjl, 447, L143,
\dodoi{10.1086/309578}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, Y.-M., {Sheeley}, N.~R., {Socker}, D.~G., et al.\ 1998, \apj, 508, 899,
\dodoi{10.1086/306450}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, Y.~M., {Ye}, P.~Z., \& {Wang}, S. 2003, Journal of Geophysical Research
(Space Physics), 108, 1370, \dodoi{10.1029/2003JA009850}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wang}, Y.~M., {Ye}, P.~Z., {Wang}, S., {Zhou}, G.~P., \& {Wang}, J.~X. 2002,
Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 107, 1340,
\dodoi{10.1029/2002JA009244}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Watanabe}, T., \& {Kakinuma}, T. 1984, Advances in Space Research, 4, 331,
\dodoi{10.1016/0273-1177(84)90206-0}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Webb}, D.~F., {Cliver}, E.~W., {Crooker}, N.~U., {Cry}, O.~C.~S., \&
{Thompson}, B.~J. 2000, \jgr, 105, 7491, \dodoi{10.1029/1999JA000275}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Webb}, D.~F., \& {Howard}, T.~A. 2012, \lrsp, 9, 3,
\dodoi{10.12942/lrsp-2012-3}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Webb}, D.~F., \& {Hundhausen}, A.~J. 1987, \solphys, 108, 383,
\dodoi{10.1007/BF00214170}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Webb}, D.~F., {M{\"o}stl}, C., {Jackson}, B.~V., {et~al.} 2013, \solphys, 285,
317, \dodoi{10.1007/s11207-013-0260-5}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wiedenbeck}, M.~E., {Bu{\v{c}}{\'\i}k}, R., {Mason}, G.~M., et al.\ 2020, \apjs, 246, 42,
\dodoi{10.3847/1538-4365/ab5963}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wood}, B.~E., {Howard}, R.~A., {Plunkett}, S.~P., \& {Socker}, D.~G. 2009,
\apj, 694, 707, \dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/707}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wood}, B.~E., {Howard}, R.~A., \& {Socker}, D.~G. 2010, \apj, 715, 1524,
\dodoi{10.1088/0004-637X/715/2/1524}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Wood}, B.~E., {Karovska}, M., {Chen}, J., {et~al.} 1999, \apj, 512, 484,
\dodoi{10.1086/306758}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Xie}, H., {Ofman}, L., \& {Lawrence}, G. 2004, \jgr, 109, 3109,
\dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010226}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Xiong}, M., {Zheng}, H., \& {Wang}, S. 2009, Journal of Geophysical Research
(Space Physics), 114, 11101, \dodoi{10.1029/2009JA014079}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Xiong}, M., {Zheng}, H., {Wang}, Y., \& {Wang}, S. 2006, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 111, 11102,
\dodoi{10.1029/2006JA011901}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Xiong}, M., {Zheng}, H., {Wu}, S.~T., {Wang}, Y., \& {Wang}, S. 2007, Journal
of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 112, 11103,
\dodoi{10.1029/2007JA012320}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Xue}, X.~H., {Wang}, C.~B., \& {Dou}, X.~K. 2005, \jgr, 110, 8103,
\dodoi{10.1029/2004JA010698}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Yashiro}, S., {Gopalswamy}, N., {Michalek}, G., et al.\ 2003, Advances in Space Research, 32, 2631,
\dodoi{10.1016/j.asr.2003.03.018}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Yashiro}, S., {Gopalswamy}, N., {Michalek}, G., {et~al.} 2004, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 109, 7105, \dodoi{10.1029/2003JA010282}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Yashiro}, S., {Michalek}, G., {Akiyama}, S., et al.\ 2008, \apj, 673, 1174,
\dodoi{10.1086/524927}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Yurchyshyn}, V., {Hu}, Q., \& {Abramenko}, V. 2005, Space Weather, 3, 8,
\dodoi{10.1029/2004SW000124}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zhang}, J., \& {Dere}, K.~P. 2006, \apj, 649, 1100, \dodoi{10.1086/506903}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zhang}, J., {Dere}, K.~P., {Howard}, R.~A., \& {Bothmer}, V. 2003, \apj, 582,
520, \dodoi{10.1086/344611}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zhang}, J., {Richardson}, I.~G., {Webb}, D.~F., {et~al.} 2007, Journal of
Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 112, 10102,
\dodoi{10.1029/2007JA012321}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zhang}, J., {Temmer}, M., {Gopalswamy}, N., et al.\ 2021, Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 8, 56.
\dodoi{10.1186/s40645-021-00426-7}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zhao}, X.~P., {Plunkett}, S.~P., \& {Liu}, W. 2002, \jgr, 107, 1223,
\dodoi{10.1029/2001JA009143}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zhao}, X.~P., \& {Webb}, D.~F. 2003, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space
Physics), 108, 1234, \dodoi{10.1029/2002JA009606}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zurbuchen}, T.~H., {Fisk}, L.~A., {Lepri}, S.~T., et al.\ 2003, Solar Wind Ten, 679, 604,
\dodoi{10.1063/1.1618667}
\bibitem{latexcompanion}
{Zurbuchen}, T.~H., \& {Richardson}, I.~G. 2006, \ssr, 123, 31,
\dodoi{10.1007/s11214-006-9010-4}
\end{theunbibliography}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Nonlocality is one of the profound notions in quantum mechanics and is often talked in conjunction with incompatibility of observables. Recent developments in quantum information theory have found nonlocality as a useful phenomenon underpinning many advantages afforded by various quantum information processing tasks ~\cite{Brunner2014bell}. Nonlocality can also be considered as a potential quantum resource for information processing, such as in developing quantum protocols to reduce the amount of communication needed in certain computational tasks \cite{Brunner2014bell} and providing secure quantum communications \cite{scarani2001,ekart1991}. Incompatibility, like nonlocality, is not merely of theoretical interest but of practical utility, for example, in order to explore the advantage of entanglement shared by two parties in a cryptography task, each party needs to carry out measurements that are incompatible, in the sense that these cannot be carried out simultaneously by a single measurement device. Incompatibility should not be confused with noncommutativity or the related concept of uncertainty principle. The notion of incompatibility is best understood in terms of compatibility. A collection of quantum measurements is compatible, if it can be simulated by a single common quantum measurement device. If such a single common device cannot be constructed by a given set of quantum measurements, it then enables the set to be used as a quantum resource. This was first noted in \cite{wolf2009measurements} in the context of CHSH inequalities and later in the EPR steering, which is more explicit, when incompatibility appears as a quantum resource. Incompatibility is necessary and sufficient for the violation of the steering inequalities \cite{quintino,ola}.
Thus, both nonlocality and incompatibility can be considered as quantum resources whose understanding is of utmost importance in view of emerging quantum technologies.
The interplay of nonlocality and incompatibility has been a subject matter of various studies. It is well known that any incompatible local measurements, performed by the constituent parties of a system, lead to the violation of Bell inequality provided they share a pure entangled state ~\cite{bell1964einstein,Brunner2014bell}. Absence of either of them (i.e., entanglement and incompatibility) will not allow the system to exhibit nonlocality. It is important to mention here that a notion of quantum nonlocality without entanglement has been proposed in \cite{Bennett1999} which is different from Bell nonloclaity \cite{bell1964einstein} and amounts to the inability of discriminating a set of product states by local operations and classical communication, while mutual orthogonality of the states assures their perfect global descrimination.
Further, for any pair of dicohotomic incompatible observables, there always exists an entangled state which enables the violation of a Bell inequality ~\cite{wolf2009measurements}. The relationship of incompatibility and nonlocality is sensitive to the dimension of system, for example, increasing the dimension beyond two, the incompatible observables do not necessarily lead to the violation of Bell type inequalities implying that the measurement incompatibility can not guarantee nonlocality in general ~\cite{bene2018measurement,hirsch2018quantum}. Here, we probe the interplay between incompatibility and nonlocality in tripartite case by using the well known Mermin and Svetlichny inequality ~\cite{Svetlichny1987}. Svetlichny inequality, unlike Mermin inequality, is a genuine measure of nonlocality that assume nonlocal correlations between two parties which are locally related to a the third party and is known to provide a suitable measure to detect tripartite nonlocality for W and GHZ class of states\cite{Rungta2010}.
The extent to which a system can exhibit nonlocal correlations is also sensitive to its interaction with the ambient environment. Such interaction is usually accompanied with a depletion of various quantum features like coherence, entanglement and nonlocality. The reduced dynamics of the system in such cases is given by completely positive and trace preserving maps, also known as quantum channels. On the other hand, the action of conjugate channels on projective measurements turns them into unsharp POVMs which may be biased, in general. In light of the above discussion, a study of the open system effects on the interplay of nonlocality and incompatibility naturally leads to the notions nonlocality and incompatibility breaking quantum channels ~\cite{pal2015non, heinosaari2016invitation}.
A nonlocality breaking channel (NBC) can be defined as a channel which when applied to a system (or part of it) leads to a state which is local \cite{pal2015non}, while as incompatibility breaking channel (IBC) is the one that turns incompatible observables into compatible ones \cite{heinosaari2015incompatibility}. An IBC that renders any set of $n$ incompatible observables compatible would be denoted by $n-\mathbf{IBC}$. The notion of NBC has been introduced in a similar spirit of well-studied entanglement breaking channel \cite{horodecki10}. Every entanglement breaking channel is nonlocality breaking but the converse is not true. As an example, the qubit depolarising channel $ \mathcal{E}\big(\rho\big) :=p\big(\rho\big)+(1-p)\mathbf{I}/2$ is CHSH nonlocality breaking for all $\frac{1}{3} \leq p \leq \frac{1}{2}$, but not entanglement breaking \cite{pal2015non}. Hence, based on this classification, nonlocality and entanglement emerge as different resources.
Recently, the equivalence of the steerability breaking channels and the incompatibility breaking channels was reported in \cite{huanyu2022} and CHSH nonlocality breaking channels were shown to be a strict subset of the steerability breaking channels. The connection between Bell nonlocality and incompatibility of two observable is well understood, however, the question of the equivalence between NBC ~\cite {pal2015non} and IBC ~\cite {heinosaari2015incompatibility} is rarely discussed. This motivates us to explore the relation between CHSH nonlocality breaking channels (CHSH-NBC) and $2-\mathbf{IBC}$, such that the action of one may be replaced by the other. The tripartite nonlocality has much more richer and complex structure and less is known about its synergy with incompatibility as compared to its bipartite counterpart. Mermin inequality assumes local-realistic correlations among all the three qubits; hence a violation would be a signature of the tripartite nonlocality shared among the qubits. However, biseparable states were shown to also violate the Mermin inequality \cite{Collins2022, scarani2001}. This motivated Svetlichny to introduce the notion of genuine tripartite nonlocality \cite{Svetlichny1987} and provided a set of inequalities sufficient to witness it. We make use of these notions of \emph{absolute} and \emph{genuine} nonlocality to figure out the ranges of state and channels parameters in which NBC and $2-\mathbf{IBC}$ coexist.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~ \ref{Preliminaries}, we revisit some basic notions and definitions used in this work. Section~\ref{sec:results} is devoted to results and their discussion, where we prove an equivalence between NBCs and $2-\mathbf{IBC}$s in CHSH scenario in the special case of unital channels. This is followed by an analysis of these notions in tripartite scenario, where we identify the state and channel parameters in which NBCs and 2-IBCs co-exist. Conclusion is made in Sec.~\ref{sec:Concl}.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{Preliminaries}
In this section, we discuss the notion of incompatibility in the context of observables and quantum channels and look at specific cases of bipartite and tripartite scenarios.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ c c }
Abbreviation & Full Form \\ \hline\hline
NBC & Nonlocality-breaking Channel\\ \hline
IBC & Incompatibility-braking Channel \\ \hline
$n$-IBC & IBC for $n$ Observables \\ \hline
GHZ & Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger \\ \hline
SI & Svetlichny inequality \\ \hline
MI & Mermin inequality \\ \hline
CPTP & Completely positive and trace preserving \\ \hline
CHSH & Clauser--Horne--Shimony--Holt \\
\hline
S-NBC & Svetlichny nonlocality breaking channel \\ \hline
M-NBC & Mermin nonlocality breaking channel \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Abbreviations used in the article and their full forms.}
\end{table}
\subsection{Incompatibility}
\textit{Incompatibility of observables}: A finite collection of observables $A_1, \dots, A_n$ associated with the respective outcome spaces $\Omega_{A_1}, \dots, \Omega_{A_n}$, is said to be \textit{compatible} (or \textit{jointly measurable}) if there exists a \textit{joint observable} $G$, defined over the product outcome space $\Omega_{A_1} \times \cdots \times \Omega_{A_n}$, such that for all $X_1 \subset \Omega_{A_1}, \dots, X_n \subset \Omega_{A_n} $, the following marginal relations hold \cite{pbusch}
\begin{align}
\sum_{a_i, i=1,\dots,n; i \ne k} G(a_1, \dots, a_n) = A_k (a_k)
\end{align}
The notion of the incompatibility of observables can be illustrated by a simple example of Pauli matrices $\sigma_x$ and $\sigma_z$ which are non-commuting and can not be measured jointly. However, consider the unsharp observables $S_x(\pm)= \frac{1}{2}(\mathbf{I} \pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \sigma_x)$, and $S_z(\pm) = \frac{1}{2}(\mathbf{I} \pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \sigma_z)$, with $\mathbf{I}$ being the $2 \times 2$ identity matrix. The joint observable $G(i,j) = \frac{1}{4} (\mathbf{I} + \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}} \sigma_x + \frac{j}{\sqrt{2}} \sigma_z)$ with $i,j = \pm 1$, jointly determines the probabilities of generalized measurements $S_x$ and $S_z$, since later can be obtained as marginals $S_x(\pm) = \sum_{j} G(\pm, j)$, and $S_z(\pm) = \sum_{i} G(i,\pm)$.\bigskip
\textit{Incompatibility breaking quantum channel:}
A quantum channel (QC), in Schrodinger picture, is a completely positive trace preserving (CPTP) map $\mathcal{E}:\mathcal{L}({\mathcal{H^A}}) \rightarrow {\mathcal{L}}({\mathcal{H^B}})$, where ${\mathcal{L}}({\mathcal{H}^i})$ is the set of bounded linear operators on Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}^i$ ($i=A, B$).
One may write the operator sum representation~\cite{nielsenchuangbook}
\begin{align}
\label{Cha}
\rho^\prime =\mathcal{E}\big(\rho\big) =\sum_{j=1}^{n}K_j\rho K_j^\dagger
\end{align}
where $K_i$ are known as Kraus operators satisfying the completeness relation $\sum_j K^\dag_j K_j=\id$. The QCs which map the identity
operator to itself, i.e., $\mathcal{E}(\id)=\id$, are known as unital QCs. A quantum channel $\mathcal{E}$ in Schrodinger picture acting on quantum state $\rho$ can be thought of as \textit{conjugate} channel $\mathcal{E}^*$ acting on observable $A$ through the following duality relation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SHpictures}
\Tr \left[ \mathcal{E}(\rho) A \right] = \Tr \left[\rho~ \mathcal{E}^*(A) \right].
\end{equation}
\begin{definition}
A quantum channel $\mathcal{E} $ is said to be \textit{incompatibility breaking} if the outputs $\mathcal{E}^*(A_1), \dots, \mathcal{E}^*(A_n)$ are compatible for any choice of input observables $A_1, \dots, A_n$ $(n\geq2)$.
\end{definition}
If a channel $\mathcal{E}$ breaks the incompatibility of every class of $n$ observables, it is said to be ${n-\mathbf{IBC}}$. For example, a channel would be $2-\mathbf{IBC}$ if it breaks the incompatibility of a pair of observables. As an example, the white noise mixing channel $\mathcal{W}_{\eta}$ is described as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Wt}
\rho^\prime = \mathcal{W}_{\eta} [\rho] = \eta \rho + (1-\eta) \frac{\mathbf{I}}{d}.
\end{equation}
Here, $\eta$ is the channel parameter, $d$ is the dimension of the underlying Hilbert space. This channel is $n$\textit{-incompatibility breaking} for all $ 0 \le \eta \le \frac{n+d}{n(d+1)}$. With $d=2$, $\mathcal{W}_{\eta}$ is $2-\mathbf{IBC}$ and $3-\mathbf{IBC}$ for $\eta\le 0.66$ and $\eta \le 0.55$, respectively \cite{heinosaari2015incompatibility}.\bigskip
\textit{Incompatibility of generalized spin-observables}: Consider a spin observable $A = \hat{a} \cdot \vec{\sigma}$ with projectors $P_{\pm} (\vec{a}) = \frac{1}{2}(\mathbf{I} \pm A)$, with $|\vec{a}|=1$. In presence of a noise channel $\mathcal{E}$, these projectors are mapped to the \textit{noise induced} POVM $P_\pm (\vec{\alpha})$, by the transformation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:observable}
A \xrightarrow[ ]{\mathcal{E}^*} A^{(x, \eta)}= x \mathbf{I} + \eta \hat{a} \cdot \vec{\sigma}.
\end{equation}
Here, $x$ and $\eta$ characterize the bias and sharpness such that un-biased projective measurements correspond to $x=0$ and $\eta = 1$. Two biased-unsharp observables $A^{(x, \eta)}$ and $B^{(y, \xi)}$ are jointly measurable if \cite{Yu2010, Heinosaari2020}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:IBxeta}
\left(1- S(x, \eta)^2 - S(y, \xi)^2 \right) \left( 1 - \frac{\eta^2 }{S(x, \eta)^2} - \frac{\xi^2 }{S(y, \xi)^2} \right) \le \left( \vec{\eta} \cdot \vec{\xi} - xy\right),
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
S(p,q) = \frac{1}{2} \left( \sqrt{\left(1+p\right)^2 - q^2} + \sqrt{\left(1-p\right)^2 - q^2} \right).
\end{equation}
For unbiased observables $A^{(0,\eta)}$ and $B^{(0,\xi)}$, the necessary and sufficient condition for compatibility simplifies to following
\begin{align}\label{eq:coplanar}
|\vec{\eta} + \vec{\xi}| + |\vec{\eta} - \vec{\xi}| \le 2,
\end{align}
with $\vec{\eta} = \eta \hat{a}$ and $\vec{\xi} = \xi \hat{b}$.
When both the observables are subjected to identical noise channel i.e., $\xi = \eta$ and $\vec{\eta}$ and $\vec{\xi}$ are perpendicular, then the pair-wise joint measurability condition Eq. (\ref{eq:coplanar}) becomes
\begin{equation}\label{pjm}
\eta\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}.
\end{equation}
This provides the condition for the incompatibility breaking of two observables and the corresponding (unital) channel is called as incompatibility breaking channel ($2-\mathbf{IBC}$).
\subsection{Nonlocality}
\subsubsection{Bipartite nonlocality: CHSH inequality}
Consider the scenario of two spatially separated qubits with observables $\hat{A}_i=\sum_{k=1}^{3}{\hat{a_{ik}}} \cdot {\hat{\sigma_k}}$ and $\hat{B}_j=\sum_{l=1}^{3}{\hat{b_{jl}}} \cdot {\hat{\sigma_l}}$ acting on each qubit respectively, where $\hat{a_{ik}}$, $\hat{b_{jl}}$ are unit vectors in $\mathcal{R}^3$, $i,j=1,2$ and the $\hat{\sigma}_i$'s are spin projection operators. The Bell operator associated with the CHSH inequality has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{Bell-op}
\hat{\mathcal{B}} = \hat{A}_1\otimes(\hat{B}_1 + \hat{B}_2) + \hat{A}_2\otimes(\hat{B}_1-\hat{B}_2),
\end{equation}
Then the Bell-CHSH inequality, for any state $\rho $ is
\begin{equation}
\label{bell-ineq}
\Trace\left[\rho ~\hat{\mathcal{B}}(\hat{A}_{1},~\hat{A}_{2},~\hat{ B}_{1},~\hat{B}_{2}) \right] \leq 2.
\end{equation}
where the observables on Alice/Bob side are pair-wise compatible. The violation of above inequality (\ref{bell-ineq}) is sufficient to justify the nonlocality of quantum state.
Since incompatible observables acting on entangled particles enable nonlocality, thus incompatibility is necessary for violation of (\ref{bell-ineq}). \bigskip
The essence of Eq. (\ref{eq:SHpictures}) is that the effect of noise as decoherence of the nonlocal resource $\rho$, can be interpreted as distortion of Alice's local measurement resource (incompatibility). This fact was exploited by Pal and Ghosh \cite{pal2015non} to introduce the notion of CHSH-NBC defined below.
\begin{definition}
Any channel $ \mathcal{E}:\mathcal{E}({\mathcal{H}}^i) \rightarrow {\mathcal{E}}({\mathcal{H}}^i)$ is said to be $\mathbf{NBC}$ if applying on one side of (arbitrary) bipartite state $\rho_{AB}$, it produces a state $\rho'_{AB}= (\id \otimes \mathcal{E}) (\rho_{AB})$ which satisfies the Bell-CHSH inequality (\ref{bell-ineq}).
\end{definition}
This means that for any value of positive operator-valued measures (POVMs) $\{\pi_{a|x}^{A}\}$ and
$\{\pi_{b|y}^{B}\}$ on subsystems A and B, respectively, there exist conditional distributions $P(a|x,\lambda)$ and $P(b|y,\lambda)$ and shared variable $\lambda$, such that
\begin{eqnarray}
\Tr\left[( \pi_{a|x}^{A}\otimes\pi_{b|y}^{B} )\sigma^{AB} \right]=\int d\lambda ~p(\lambda) ~P(a|x,\lambda) ~P(b|y,\lambda).
\end{eqnarray}
The violation of the Bell inequalities in the measurement statistics $P(ab|xy,\lambda)=tr[( \pi_{a|x}^{A}\otimes\pi_{b|y}^{B} )\sigma^{AB}]$ indicates that $\sigma^{AB}$ is not a local state. A unital channel is particularly important as it breaks the nonlocality for any state when it does so for maximally entangled states \cite{pal2015non}.\bigskip
\subsubsection{Tripartite nonlocality: Svelitchny inequality}
In a tripartite Bell scenario, with Alice, Bob, and Charlie performing measurements $A$, $B$ and $C$ having outcome $a$, $b$ and $c$ respectively, if the joint correlations can be written as
\begin{align}\label{eq:local}
P(abc|ABC) &= \sum_{l} c_l P_{l}(a|A)P_{l}(b|B) P_{l}(c|C)
\end{align}
with $0 \le c_l \le 1$ and $\sum_l c_l =1$, then they are local \cite{Mermin1990,Brunner2014bell}.
Svetlichny \cite{Svetlichny1987} proposed the \textit{hybrid} local nonlocal form of probability correlations
\begin{align}\label{eq:hybrid}
P(abc|ABC) &= \sum_{l} c_l P_{l}(ab|AB) P_{l}(c|C) + \sum_{m} c_l P_{m}(ac|AC) P_{m}(b|B) \nonumber \\& + \sum_{n} c_l P_{n}(bc|C) P_{n}(a|A),
\end{align}
with $0 \le c_l, c_m, c_n \le 1$ and $\sum_l c_l + \sum_m c_m + \sum_n c_n =1$.
The quantum version involves triplets of particles subjected to independent dichotomic measurements with operators $\hat{A}_1, ~\hat{A}_2$ for Alice, $\hat{B}_1, ~\hat{B}_2$ for Bob and $\hat{C}_1,~\hat{C}_2$ for Charlie, with each measurement resulting in outcome $\pm 1$.
One defines the Mermin operator \cite{Mermin1990} as
\begin{equation}
\hat{M} = \hat{A}_1 \otimes \hat{B}_1 \otimes \hat{C}_2 + \hat{A}_1 \otimes \hat{B}_2 \otimes \hat{C}_1 + \hat{A}_2 \otimes \hat{B}_1 \otimes \hat{C}_1 - \hat{A}_2 \otimes \hat{B}_2 \otimes \hat{C}_2.
\end{equation}
Similarly, the Svetlitchny operator is defined as \cite{Svetlichny1987,Cereceda2002}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:SvetDef}
\hat{S} &=&\hat{A}_1\otimes\big[(\hat{B}_1 + \hat{B}_2)\otimes \hat{C}_1 +(\hat{B}_1 - \hat{B}_2)\otimes \hat{C}_2\big]\nonumber\\
&+& \hat{A}_2 \otimes\big[(\hat{B}_1 - \hat{B}_2)\otimes \hat{C}_1 -(\hat{B}_1 + \hat{B}_2)\otimes \hat{C}_2\big].
\end{eqnarray}
The respective average values of these operators are classically upper bounded in the form of the Mermin and Svetlichny inequalities written as
\begin{equation}
|\langle \hat{M} \rangle | \le 2, \qquad |\langle \hat{S} \rangle | \le 4.
\end{equation}
The maximum quantum bounds are known to be $2\sqrt{2}$ and $4\sqrt{2}$ for $|\langle \hat{M} \rangle |$ and $|\langle \hat{S} \rangle |$, respectively, and can be attained by say GHZ state \cite{Mitchell2004}. Several approaches have been adopted to find the maximum quantum value of the Svetlichny operator \cite{SGhose2009,Su2018}. Recently, \cite{Siddiqui2019,li2017tight} have analytically found the tight upper bound of the Mermin and Svetlichny operator as given below.
\begin{definition}\label{def:SIQmax}
For any three qubit quantum state $\rho$, the maximum quantum value of the Svelichny operator is bounded as {\rm \cite{li2017tight,Siddiqui2019} }
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{sveq}
\max |\langle \hat{M} \rangle_\rho| \leq 2\sqrt{2} \lambda_1, \qquad \max |\langle \hat{S} \rangle_\rho| \leq 4\lambda_1,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\langle\hat{M }\rangle_\rho=\Trace[\hat{M}\rho]$, $\langle\hat{ S }\rangle_\rho=\Trace[\hat{S}\rho]$ and $\lambda_1$ is the maximum singular value of the matrix $M=(M_{j,ik})$, with $M=(M_{ijk}=\Trace[\rho(\sigma_i\otimes\sigma_j\otimes\sigma_k)]$, $i,j,k=1,2,3$.
\end{definition}
We refer the reader to \cite{Siddiqui2019,li2017tight} for the class of states that saturate above inequalities. We make use of above mentioned bounds to study the nonlocality breaking property of (unital) channels acting on one (or more) parties in tripartite scenario.
\section{Results and discussion}\label{sec:results}
In what follows, we will make use of the fact that every qubit channel $\mathcal{E}$ can be represented in the Pauli basis $\{ \sigma_0, \sigma_1, \sigma_2, \sigma_3 \}$, where $\sigma_0 = \mathbf{I}$, by a unique $4\times 4$ matrix $\mathbb{M}_{\mathcal{E}} =[1, \bm{0}; \textbf{t}, \textbf{T}]$ \cite{Ruskai2002,jn2021}. Here $\textbf{T} = {\rm diag.}[\eta_1, \eta_2, \eta_3]$ is a real diagonal matrix and $\bm{0} = (0~0 ~0)$ and $\textbf{t} = (t_1~t_2~t_2)^T$ are row and column vectors, respectively. For $\mathcal{E}$ to be unital i.e., $\mathcal{E}(\mathbf{I}) = \mathbf{I}$, we must have $\textbf{t} = (0~0 ~0)^T$. The conjugate map $\mathcal{E}^\dagger$ is characterized by $\mathbb{M}^\dagger_{\mathcal{E}} = [1, \textbf{t}^T; \bm{0}^T , \textbf{T}]$, such that the action on a state $\rho = \frac{1}{2}(\mathbf{I} + \textbf{w} \cdot \bm{\sigma})$, is the given by
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{M}_{\mathcal{E}} : \mathbf{I} \rightarrow \mathbf{I} + \textbf{t}\cdot \bm{\sigma}, \quad \sigma_j \rightarrow \eta_j \sigma_j, \label{eq:Map} \\
&\mathbb{M}^\dagger_{\mathcal{E}} : \mathbf{I} \rightarrow \mathbf{I}, \quad \sigma_j \rightarrow t_j \mathbf{I} + \eta_j \sigma_j. \label{eq:ConjMap}
\end{align}
\subsection{Equivalance of CHSH nonlocality breaking and incompatibility breaking channels}
Our first result establishes an \textit{equivalence} of the CHSH nonlocality breaking (unital) channel acting on one party, with its \textit{dual} being an incompatibility breaking channel -- in the context of $2-\mathbf{IBC}$s. The result can be summarized by the following two theorems:
\begin{theorem}
If the conjugate of a qubit channel $\mathcal{E}$ is $2-\mathbf{IBC}$ , then the channel itself is CHSH-NBC.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the Bell-CHSH inequality given in (\ref{bell-ineq}), such that $[A_{1}, A_{2}] \ne 0$ and $[B_{1}, B_{2}] \ne 0$, i.e., the operators $A_1, A_2$ and $B_1, B_2$ are incompatible in \textit{conjunction}. Let $\mathcal{E}^\dagger $ be the conjugate channel that is $2-\mathbf{IBC}$. Then the action of this channel on Alice's side makes $A_1$ and $A_2$ compatible, i.e., $[A_{1}, A_{2}]=0$. Therefore, the Bell-CHSH inequality is not violated, and we have
\begin{equation}
\Trace\left[\rho \mathcal{B}\left(\mathcal{E}^\dagger[A_1],\mathcal{E}^\dagger[A_2], B_{1},B_{2}\right) \right]\leq 2.
\end{equation}
Or,
\begin{align}
& \Trace\left[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger[A_1] \otimes B_{1} \right]+\Trace \left[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger[A_2] \otimes B_{1} \right] \nonumber \\& +\Trace \left[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger[A_1] \otimes B_{2} \right]-\Trace \left[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger[A_2] \otimes B_{2} \right]\leq 2.
\end{align}
This can be viewed in the Schr{\"o}dinger picture as
\begin{align}
&\Trace\left[(\mathcal{E} \otimes \id)[\rho] A_1 \otimes B_{1} \right]+\Trace\left[(\mathcal{E} \otimes \id)[\rho] A_2 \otimes B_{1} \right] \nonumber \\& + \Trace\left[(\mathcal{E} \otimes \id)[\rho] A_1 \otimes B_{2} \right]-\Trace\left[(\mathcal{E} \otimes \id)[\rho] A_2 \otimes B_{2} \right]\leq 2,
\end{align}
which tells us that the CHSH inequality is satisfied even when operators $A_1, A_2$ and $B_1, B_2$ are incompatible in \textit{conjunction}. Therefore, the action of $\mathcal{E}$ (to be precise of $\mathcal{E} \otimes \id$) on state $\rho$ is solely responsible for non-violation of the CHSH inequality. We conclude that $\mathcal{E}$ is CHSH-NBC.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
If a qubit channel $\mathcal{E}$ is CHSH-NBC, then its conjugate is $2-\mathbf{IBC}$, provided the channel is unital.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Here we start with incompatible operators associated with the respective subsystems, $[A_1,A_2] \ne 0$ and $[B_1,B_2] \ne 0$ and assume that the channel $\mathcal{E}$ acting on Alice's side does not allow for the violation of CHSH inequality, that is
\begin{equation}
\Trace\left[\left( \mathcal{E} \otimes \id \right) [\rho] \mathcal{B}\left( A_{1},A_{2}, B_{1}, B_{2} \right) \right]\leq 2.
\end{equation}
In other word, looking from the measurement point of view, in Heisenberg picture, we have
\begin{align}
&\Trace\left[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger [A_{1}]\otimes B_1 \right]+\Trace\left[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger[A_{1}]\otimes B_2 \right]\nonumber \\&+\Trace\left[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger [A_{2}]\otimes B_1 \right]-\Trace[\rho \mathcal{E}^\dagger [A_{2}] \otimes B_2]\leq 2
\end{align}
The constraint of $\mathcal{E}^\dagger$ being unital assures that the map $\mathcal{E}$ is trace preserving. The above inequality holds for arbitrary state $\rho$ which can even be an entangled state. Thus the non-violation of CHSH inequality is coming from the action of $\mathcal{E}^\dagger $ on the operators $A_1$ and $A_2$, making them compatible, $\left[ \mathcal{E}^\dagger [A_1], \mathcal{E}^\dagger [A_2] \right] =0$. We conclude that $(\mathcal{E}^\dagger \otimes \id)$ is incompatibility breaking.
\end{proof}
In order to verify the above results, let us consider the CHSH inequality (\ref{bell-ineq}),
such that the local observables are subject to some biased noise characterized by $(x_a, \eta_a)$ and $(x_b, \eta_b)$. As a result, the observables are modified as $A_k = \mathbf{I} x_a + \eta_a \hat{a}_k \cdot \vec{ \sigma}_k$, $B_k = \mathbf{I} x_b + \eta_b \hat{b}_k \cdot \vec{\sigma}_k$, $k=1,2$. Averaging with respect to singlet-state, the CHSH inequality is satisfied if
\begin{align}
2 x_a x_b+ \eta_a \eta_b \left| \cos\theta_{11} + \cos\theta_{12} + \cos\theta_{21} - \cos \theta_{22} \right| \le 2.
\end{align}
The modulus term has maximum value of $2 \sqrt{2}$ for $\theta_{ab} = \theta_{a^\prime b} = \theta_{ab^\prime} = \theta$ and $\theta_{a^\prime b^\prime} = 3 \theta$ with $\theta = \pi/4$. The above inequality becomes \cite{KAR199512}
\begin{equation}
\eta_a \eta_b \le \frac{1 - x_a x_b}{\sqrt{2}}.
\end{equation}
It follows that if the noise is unbiased on \textit{either side} i.e., $x_a=0$ or $x_b=0$, the incompatibility breaking condition is reduced to
\begin{equation}
\eta_a \eta_b \le \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}.
\end{equation}
Further, if this unbiased noise is acting only on side (say on $A$) of the bipartite system, then $\eta_b = 1$, and we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:CHSHnlb}
\eta_a \le \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}.
\end{equation}
Having seen the impact of noise on the violation of CHSH inequality, we now look at the incompatibility breaking condition for observables $A_1$, $A_2$ subjected to same noise. As a result we have $A_1^{(x_a, \eta_a)}$ and $A_2^{(x_a, \eta_a)}$ as biased and unsharp observables. Using inequality (\ref{eq:IBxeta}), the incompatibility condition for these observables reads
\begin{equation}
\eta_a \le \frac{1 - x_a^2}{\sqrt{2}}.
\end{equation}
This coincides with the NB condition (\ref{eq:CHSHnlb}) only if $x_a = 0$. Using the result from \cite{jn2021} that the biased observables are generated from the conjugate of non-unital channels, one finds that the condition for nonlocality breaking and incompatibility breaking agree as long as the dynamics is unital. \bigskip
\subsection{Nonlocality and incompatibility breaking channels in tripartite scenario}
In tripartite scenario, the aforesaid relation between nonlocality and incompatibility does not hold in general. In this section, we therefore first obtain the NLB condition for some well known tripartite states and then identify the range of channel parameter where NLB agrees with the $2-\mathbf{IBC}$ condition. Let us first introduce the definition of the absolute and genuine tripartite NBC as
\begin{definition}
For any three qubit state $\rho_{ABC}$, a given qubit channel $\mathcal{E}$ is said to be absolute or genuine \textit{nonlocality breaking} if acting any qubit, it gives a state (say) $\rho'_{ABC}=(\mathcal{E}\otimes I \otimes I)(\rho_{ABC})$, which satisfies Mermin inequality $\langle \hat{M} \rangle_{\rho'_{ABC}}\leq 2$ or Svetlichny inequality $\langle \hat{S} \rangle_{\rho'_{ABC}}\leq 4$.
\end{definition}
In terms of the largest singular value in Def. \ref{def:SIQmax}, the Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocality breaking conditions are respectively given as
\begin{equation}
\eta_M \le \frac{1}{\sqrt{2} \lambda_{max} }, \qquad \eta_S \le \frac{1}{\lambda_{max}}.
\end{equation}
We now consider some well known tripartite quantum states in which one party is subjected to a noisy evolution, and use Def. \ref{def:SIQmax} to obtain the conditions on noise parameter for breaking the Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocaity.\bigskip
\textbf{Example 1.} Our first example is the generalized Greenberger, Horne and Zeilinger (GHZ) state \cite{Dur2000,GHZ2007}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:GHZ}
|\psi_{GHZ} \rangle = \alpha | 000 \rangle + \beta |111 \rangle.
\end{equation}
The entanglement in this state is completely destroyed when any of the three qubits is traced out, i.e., $\Tr_k\left[ |\psi_{GHZ} \rangle \langle \psi_{GHZ}| \right] = \mathbf{I}/2$, with $k=A,B,C$. Let us assume a unital noise channel $\mathcal{E}$ acting on one qubit (say the first one) according to Eq. (\ref{eq:Map}). This can be achieved by expressing $|\psi_{GHZ} \rangle $ in Pauli basis and invoking $\sigma_i \rightarrow \eta \sigma_i$ ($i=x,y,z$, $0 \le \eta \le 1)$ at first qubit
\begin{align}
&\left(\mathcal{E} \otimes \mathbf{I} \otimes \mathbf{I} \right) \left[|\psi_{GHZ} \rangle \langle \psi_{GHZ} | \right] \nonumber \\& =
\frac{1}{8}
\Big[ \mathbf{I} \otimes \mathbf{I} \otimes \mathbf{I} + \mathbf{I} \otimes \sigma_3 \otimes \sigma_3 +\eta( \sigma_3 \otimes \mathbf{I} \otimes\sigma_3)\nonumber\\&
+ (\alpha^2 -\beta^2)(\eta\sigma_3 \otimes \mathbf{I} \otimes \mathbf{I} + \mathbf{I} \otimes \sigma_3 \otimes \mathbf{I}\nonumber\\&
+\mathbf{I} \otimes \mathbf{I} \otimes \sigma_3 +\eta \sigma_3 \otimes \sigma_3 \otimes \sigma_3) + 2\alpha\beta\eta (\sigma_1 \otimes \sigma_1\otimes \sigma_1\nonumber\\&
-\sigma_1 \otimes \sigma_2 \otimes \sigma_2 -\sigma_2 \otimes \sigma_1 \otimes \sigma_2 -\sigma_2 \otimes \sigma_2 \otimes \sigma_1) \Big]
\end{align}
The matrix $M_{j, ik}$ in Def. \ref{def:SIQmax} turns out to be
\begin{align}
M_{j,ik} =
\small \begin{pmatrix}
2\eta \alpha\beta & 0 & 0 & 0 & -2\eta \alpha\beta & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & -2\eta \alpha\beta & 0 & -2\eta \alpha\beta & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \eta(\alpha^2-\beta^2)
\end{pmatrix}.\nonumber\\
\end{align}
\normalsize
This has singular values $2\sqrt{2}\eta\alpha\beta$, $2\sqrt{2}\eta\alpha\beta$, and $\eta \left| \alpha^2 - \beta^2 \right|$.
Thus the condition for the channel to be Mermin and Svetlichny NLB is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:ghzNB1}
\eta_M \leq \frac{1}{4\alpha\beta}, \qquad \eta_S \leq \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}\alpha\beta}.
\end{eqnarray}
\textbf{Example 2.}
Next, we consider the well known generalized W-state given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Wstate}
|\psi\rangle=\alpha |100\rangle + \beta |010\rangle + \gamma |001\rangle,
\end{equation}
with $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$ real and $\alpha^2 + \beta^2 + \gamma^2 =1$. This state is special in the sense that if one qubit is lost, the state of remaining two qubits is still entangled, unlike the GHZ state. The matrix $M_{j, ik}$ in Def.\ref{def:SIQmax} corresponding to unital noise acting on first qubit of the state is given by
\begin{align}
M_{j,ik}=
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & \eta \omega & 0 & 0 & 0 & \eta \omega & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \eta \omega &0 & \eta \omega & 0\\
\eta \omega^\prime & 0 & 0 & 0 &\eta \omega^\prime & 0 & 0 & 0 & \eta(2\alpha\gamma-\beta^2)
\end{pmatrix},\nonumber
\end{align}
with $\omega = \alpha\beta+\beta\gamma$, $\omega^\prime = (\alpha^2+\gamma^2)$.
The largest singular value turns out to be $\lambda = \eta \sqrt{1 + 8 \beta^2 \gamma^2 }$. Now $\beta^2 + \gamma^2 = 1- \alpha^2 = k$ (say), so that $\beta^2 \gamma^2 = \beta^2 (k - \beta^2)$. This quantity attains the maximum $k^2/4$ at $\beta^2 = k/2$, leading to $\lambda_{max} = \eta \sqrt{1 + 2 k^2 }$. The Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocality breaking conditions then read
\begin{equation}\label{eq:etaW}
\eta_M \le \frac{1}{\sqrt{2} \sqrt{1 + 2k^2}}, \qquad \eta_S \le \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 + 2k^2}}.
\end{equation}
The singular values attain maximum at $k=2/3$, i.e., $\alpha = \beta = \gamma = 1/\sqrt{3}$. Under this condition and for $\eta_S$ approximately in the range $ [0.707-0.91] $, the channel is S-NBC but not $2-\mathbf{IBC}$. Note that in bipartite case, a unital channel is CHSH-NBC for all $\eta\leq 1/\sqrt{2}$ ~ \cite{pal2015non}. Thus in the range $\eta\approx 0.707-0.91 $, it is S-NBC but not CHSH-NBC.\bigskip
\textbf{Example 3.} We next consider the three-qubit partially entangled set of maximal slice (MS) states \cite{Carteret2000,liu2016controlled}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Slice}
|\psi_{MS}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \bigg[|000\rangle+|11 \bigg(\alpha|0\rangle+ \beta|1\rangle \bigg) \bigg],
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are real with $\alpha^2 + \beta^2= 1$. The matrix $M_{j,ik}$ corresponding to Eq. (\ref{eq:Slice}) after the action of unital noise on the first qubit is given by
\begin{align}
&M_{j,ik}&=
\begin{pmatrix}
\eta\beta & 0 & \eta\alpha & 0 &-\eta\beta &0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & -\eta\beta & 0 & -\eta\beta & 0 & -\eta\alpha &0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \eta\alpha\beta & 0 & \eta(\frac{1+\alpha^2-\beta^2}{2})
\end{pmatrix}\nonumber
\end{align}
with three singular values $\lambda_1=\eta\sqrt{\frac{1}{4} \left(\alpha ^2-\beta ^2+1\right)^2+ (\alpha \beta )^2}$ and two equal singular values $\lambda_2= \lambda_3=\eta\sqrt{(\alpha^2+2\beta^2)}$ respectively, leading to the condition for Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocality breaking as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Slice1}
\eta_M \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2(\alpha^2+2\beta^2)}}, \qquad \eta_S \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{(\alpha^2+2\beta^2)}}.
\end{eqnarray}
\bigskip
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=55mm]{2DGHZ.png} \\
\includegraphics[width=55mm]{2DWstate2.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=55mm]{2DmaxSlice.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=55mm]{2DGHZmix.png}
\caption{(Color online): Region below the dashed (red) and solid (black) curve in (a), (b), (c), and (d) corresponds to Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocality breaking conditions given by Ineqs. (\ref{eq:ghzNB1}), (\ref{eq:etaW}), (\ref{eq:Slice1}), and (\ref{eq:etaGHZmix}), respectively. The pairwise incompatibility breaking condition (\ref{pjm}) pertains to all points below the horizontal dashed line.}
\label{fig:eta}
\end{figure}
\bigskip
\textbf{Example 4.} Consider the quantum state \cite{Augusiak2015}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:GHZmixed}
\sigma_{GHZ} =p|GHZ\rangle\langle GHZ|+(1-p) I_2 \otimes \tilde{I}.
\end{equation}
Here, $ |GHZ\rangle\langle = (|000\rangle + |111\rangle)/\sqrt{2}$, and $\tilde{I} = diag.(1, 0, 0, 1)$, is diagonal matrix, and $0\leq p \leq 1$. In fact, $\tilde{I} = |\Phi^{+} \rangle \langle \Phi^{+}| + |\Phi^{-} \rangle \langle \Phi^{-}|$, where $ \Phi^{\pm}$ are Bell states, is a separable state, and it tells us that $\sigma_{GHZ}$ has with probability $p$ the GHZ state and with probability $(1-p)$ the first qubit is left in mixed state and second and third qubit are in separable state $\tilde{I}$. The corresponding $M_{j,ik}$ matrix with a unital noise acting on one qubit is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{j,ik} =
\begin{pmatrix}
p\eta & 0 & 0 & 0 & -p\eta & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & -p\eta & 0 & -p\eta & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with singular values $\lambda_1=\lambda_2=\sqrt{2}\eta p$. Thus the condition for the channel to be Mermin and Svetlichny NBC becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:etaGHZmix}
\eta_M \leq \frac{1}{2 p}, \qquad \eta_S \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}p}.
\end{eqnarray}
The conditions for Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocality breaking channel given by Ineqs. (\ref{eq:ghzNB1}), (\ref{eq:Wstate}), (\ref{eq:Slice1}), and (\ref{eq:etaGHZmix}) obtained by the application of a unital quantum channel to one party of a tripartite system, are depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:eta}. All the points below solid (black) and dashed (red) curve correspond to nonlocality breaking channel, while as the points below the horizontal dashed line, $\eta=1/\sqrt{2}$, pertain to pairwise incompatibility breaking. In all the four examples, Fig.~ \ref{fig:eta} (a)-(d), the minimum value of $\eta_S$ for which SI is violated is $1/\sqrt{2}$, suggesting that \emph{genuine} nonlocal correlations can not be established if at least one pair of observable is compatible. The converse is not true, since there exist regions (above the horizontal dashed line and below the solid (black) curve) of Svetlichny nonlocality breaking even when the channel is not $2-\mathbf{IBC}$. Thus, these examples illustrate that \textit{corresponding to $2-\mathbf{IBC}$ the conjugate channels are definitely S-NLB; however, the conjugate of S-NLB channels may not necessarily be a $2-\mathbf{IBC}$}. However, in the context of Mermin nonlocality, even the first statement does not hold, that is, \textit{existence of a $2-\mathbf{IBC}$ does not necessarily gaurentee a conjugate channel that is M-NLB.} Also, the minimum $\eta_M$ (that is maximum noise) for which a channel is M-NLB is always less by a factor of $1/\sqrt{2}$ than the minimum noise below which that channel is S-NLB.
It is worth pointing out here to Fig.~ \ref{fig:eta} (c) which illustrates that if a (unital) channel breaks the Svetlichny nonlocality for GHZ state (which in fact violates the SI maximally) then it also does so for the mixture (\ref{eq:GHZmixed}) for $1/\sqrt{2}< p < 1$. This is unlike the bipartite scenario where a unital channel that breaks the CHSH nonlocality for the maximally entangled states is guaranteed to do so for all other states \cite{pal2015non}. Summarizing, it is clear from the above examples, that existence of M-NBC or S-NBC does not guarantee the existence of a conjugate $2$-IBC, unlike CHSH scenario. In particular, with the (unital) noise acting on one party of the $W$-state: $|\psi\rangle=(|100\rangle + |010\rangle + |001\rangle$)/$\sqrt{3}$, there exists a range of the channel parameter $\eta \in (1/\sqrt{2},3/\sqrt{17})$, where the channel is S-NBC but not CHSH NBC as depicted in the Fig. ~\ref{figsinbc}. Thus the Bell-CHSH inequality seems to be more suitable for a study of the incompatibility of observables than the multi-partite Bell-type inequalities.\bigskip
Note that instead of one party, if two or all the three parties are subjected to noise, the conditions (\ref{eq:ghzNB1}), (\ref{eq:etaW}), (\ref{eq:Slice1}), and (\ref{eq:etaGHZmix}), become
\begin{equation}\label{eq:etaN}
\eta_M \le \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\lambda_{max}}\right)^{1/n}, \qquad \eta_S \le \left( \frac{1}{\lambda_{max}}\right)^{1/n},
\end{equation}
where $n$ corresponds to the number of qubits subjected to noise. Since $1/\lambda_{max} < (1/\lambda_{max})^{1/2} < (1/\lambda_{max})^{1/3}$ (with $\lambda_{max} > 1$), the solid (black) and dashed (red) curves in Fig. \ref{fig:eta} (a)-(d), are shifted up, thereby decreasing the region of nonlocality with increase in $n$.\bigskip
\textit{General three qubit state subjected to general unital noise:}
The (unital) noise acting on a single party considered in the above analysis involving tripartite system assumes identical effect on $\sigma_x$, $\sigma_y$ and $\sigma_z$ corresponding to that party, in the sense that $\sigma_k \rightarrow \eta \sigma_k$ for all $k = x, y, z$. A more general transformation would take the particular party's $\sigma_k \rightarrow \eta_k \sigma_k$, with $\sqrt{\eta_x^2 + \eta_y^2 + \eta_z^2} = \eta$, and $0 \le \eta \le 1$, such that
\begin{equation}
\Phi\left( \frac{ \id + \vec{r} \cdot \vec{\sigma}}{2}\right) = \frac{\id + (\textbf{T}\vec{r}) \cdot \vec{\sigma}}{2},
\end{equation}
where $\textbf{T} = {\rm diag.} [\eta_x, \eta_y, \eta_z]$, is a real diagonal matrix. The map $\Phi$ is completely positive for \cite{king2001minimal}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:CP}
\left| \eta_x \pm \eta_y \right| \le \left| 1 \pm \eta_z \right|,
\end{equation}
which is a set of four inequalities and defines a tetrahedron in $\eta_{x} -\eta_{y} -\eta_{z}$ space. Under such a transformation, the singular values for the GHZ in (\ref{eq:GHZ}) and W state in (\ref{eq:Wstate}) are respectively given by
\begin{align}
& \left( 2\sqrt{2} \alpha \beta \eta_x, 2\sqrt{2} \alpha \beta \eta_y, \left| \alpha^2 - \beta^2 \right| \eta_z \right), \\ {\rm and}~~\nonumber \\
& \left( 2 \alpha \sqrt{\beta^2 + \gamma^2} \eta_x, 2 \alpha \sqrt{\beta^2 + \gamma^2} \eta_y, \sqrt{1 + 8 \beta^2 \gamma^2} \eta_z\right).
\end{align}
with the three singular values depending linearly on the respective noise parameters. Depending on which singular value is the largest, one can draw similar conclusions about nonlocality and incompatibility breaking properties of the noise channel as in case with uniform noise action. However, for a general three qubit input state, the dependence of the singular values on noise parameters tuns out to be complicated leading to different conclusions regarding the nonlocality breaking property of such channel. Let us consider the general situation where one would like to make a statement about the limiting noise beyond which no Mermin/Svetlichny nonlocal correlations can be established \emph{irrespective} of the state chosen. In this direction, we make use of the canonical five term decomposition of three qubit state \cite{acin2001three}
\begin{equation}
\ket{\psi} = \lambda_0 \ket{000} + \lambda_1 e^{i\phi} \ket{100} + \lambda_2 \ket{101} + \lambda_3 \ket{110} + \lambda_4 \ket{111},
\end{equation}
with $\lambda_i, \phi $ real parameters and $\sum_i \left| \lambda_i \right|^{2}= 1$ and $0 < \phi < \pi$. In Pauli basis, one may denote the density matrix corresponding to $\ket{\psi}$ as $|\psi\rangle \langle \psi | \left[ \sigma_i \otimes \sigma_j \otimes \sigma_k\right]$ with Pauli matrices $\sigma_i$ $i=x,y,z$. If a unital noise acts on one party (say the first) of such a state, we would have
\begin{align}\label{eq:SVAcin}
|\psi\rangle \langle \psi | \left[\sigma_i \otimes \sigma_j \otimes \sigma_k \right] \rightarrow |\psi\rangle \langle \psi | \left[ \eta_i \sigma_i \otimes \sigma_j \otimes \sigma_k \right].
\end{align}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=60mm]{SNBC} \\
\caption{(Color online): Depicting the range of channel parameter $\eta \in (\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}},\frac{3}{\sqrt{17}})$ in which it is S-NBC (for $W$-state) but not CHSH-NBC.}
\label{figsinbc}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=60mm]{sv1.jpg}\\ \vspace{4mm}
\includegraphics[width=60mm]{sv2.jpg}\\ \vspace{4mm}
\includegraphics[width=60mm]{sv3.jpg}
\caption{(Color online) Singular values corresponding to a sample of five million randomly generated states of the form $(\ref{eq:SVAcin})$.}
\label{fig:SV}
\end{figure}
We can now check the nonlocality breaking properties of such a general noise channel using Def. \ref{def:SIQmax} based on singular values of matrix $M$. For the above state, the singular values calculated according to Def. \ref{def:SIQmax}, are plotted in Fig. \ref{fig:SV} with respect to $\eta = \sqrt{\eta_x^2 + \eta_y^2 + \eta_z^2}$. The simulation makes use of a sample of five million randomly generated states and the corresponding noise parameters $\eta_i$ subjected to $0\le \sqrt{\eta_x^2 + \eta_y^2 + \eta_z^2} \le 1$ and also satisfying the CP condition (\ref{eq:CP}). According to the condition (\ref{sveq}), the Mermin (Svetlichny) nonlocal correlations are established only if the largest singular value is greater than $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$ (for Mermin) and $1$ (for Svetlichny). In Fig. \ref{fig:SV} the three singular values $\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \lambda_3$ are depicted with respect to parameter $\eta$. One finds that below a minimum $\eta_M$, and $ \eta_S$, the singular values do not exceed $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$ and $1$, respectively. These values turn out to be $(\eta_M, \eta_S) = (0.090,0.128)$ for $\lambda_1$, $(\eta_M, \eta_S) = (0.182, 0.259)$ for $\lambda_2$ and $(\eta_M, \eta_S) = (0.300,0.409)$ for $\lambda_3$, and one may conclude that no Mermin (Svetlichny) no-local correlations are supported by the unital noise channel if the noise parameter is below $0.090 ~(0.128)$, irrespective of the input state.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:Concl}
This work is devoted to a study of the interplay between nonlocality breaking and incompatibility breaking power of noisy (unital) quantum qubit channels. The action of quantum channels on projective measurements transforms them into noisy POVMs, characterized in particular by unsharpness parameters. As a consequence, noise tends to increase the compatibility of observers that are otherwise incompatible. In fact, pairwise incompatibility breaking is assured if the channel parameter is less than or equal to $1/\sqrt{2}$. To be specific, we consider bipartite and tripartite scenarios, with CHSH nonlocality in the former and Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocality in the later case. The degree of incompatibility breaking directly depends on the unsharpness parameters. Here, we showed that in Bell CHSH scenario, if the conjugate of a channel is incompatibility breaking then the channel is itself nonlocality breaking and the converse holds provided the channel is unital. In tripartite scenario, however, such an equivalence between nonlocality breaking and incompatibility breaking does not exist. We then consider various examples of three qubit states and identify the state parameters for which the equivalence of nonlocality breaking corroborates with the pairwise incompatibility. In particular, it is illustrated that the conjugate of incompatiblity breaking channels are nonlocality breaking, however, the nonlocality breaking channels do not guarantee the existence of conjugate channels that are incompatibility breaking. This may be viewed as a useful feature of the Bell-CHSH inequality when it comes to the study incompatibility of observables. Further, from randomly generated three qubit states subjected to general unital channels, we conclude that no Mermin (Svetlichny) nonlocal correlations are supported for $\eta_M <0.090$ ($\eta_S < 0.128$).
The channel activation of nonlocality in CHSH scenario has been studied in \cite{Zhang2020}. A future extension of this work could be the study of activation of Mermin and Svetlichny nonlocality under more general noise models and with general three qubit input state. This also invites for a detailed analysis on the hierarchy of nonlocality-breaking, stearability-breaking and entanglement-breaking quantum channels in the tripartite scenario. \bigskip
\section*{Acknowledgment}
Authors thank Guruprasad Kar for the initial motivation of the work. SK acknowledges Yeong-Cherng Liang for the fruitful comments and the support from the Ministry of Science and Technology Tai-wan (Grant no. 109-2811-M-006 -513). JN’s work was supported by the Foundation for Polish Science within the “Quantum Optical Technologies” project carried out within the International Research Agendas programme cofinanced by the European Union under the European Regional Development Fund. AKP acknowledges the support from the research grant DST/ICPS/QuEST/2019/4.
|
\section{Introduction}
Computerized quantitative analysis of medical images is emerging as a promising approach in radiological practice and healthcare research \cite{imageanalysis1, radiomics1, radiomics2, radiomicsctcovid}. These methods extract measurements quantifying various aspects of the image that include basic intensity statistics as well as more complicated metrics quantifying spatial intensity heterogeneity. Extracted measurements are then used as image biomarkers in predicting relevant outcomes. In recent years, numerous researchers demonstrated the capability of this approach for diagnosis, stratification, and prognosis \cite{radiomics3, radiomics4}. Moreover, since the extraction of measurements as well as the prediction stage are all algorithmic, quantitative analysis is an efficient approach that can complement radiologists' visual interpretation and analysis.
Advanced artificial intelligence techniques \cite{mlbook1 }, such as deep learning, take the quantitative analysis approach one step further \cite{radiodeep,mrideep}. They remove the need to engineer measurements to extract from images for a given task. Instead, they optimize their parameters to extract task-optimal measurements and predict based on them. In the respective language, quantitative measurements are called ``features''. While the optimization requires large number of data samples, i.e., training samples, if such large datasets exist, deep learning algorithms can provide substantial accuracy gains \cite{deeplcancer}.
An important limitation of the quantitative analysis approach is its sensitivity to variations in scanning conditions \cite{radiomics_lim}. While the methods aim to extract measurements characterising the underlying tissue composition and microstructure, they are indeed measurements taken from the image, which is merely a representation of the tissue. Critically, image characteristics heavily rely on the acquisition details, e.g., resolution, radiation dose, noise, reconstruction algorithm. Depending on the properties of the algorithm and the measurement, the extracted quantities can be highly sensitive to variations in the image acquisition parameters \cite{variability1, variability2, ctvariabily}. This sensitivity inhibits the generalisation capabilities of such measurements. If acquisition details are not perfectly matched, two different images, even of the same tissue, will yield different measurements. A number of studies have reported the impact on CT radiomics analysis caused by the variability of acquisition parameters and post-process variables \cite{analct1,analct2, analct3, analct4}. Any algorithm or analysis based on these measurements will therefore not be reliable for use with unseen scanners.
The ideal way to study the sensitivity of measurements is to perform test-retest studies \cite{teststudies}. This would comprise of imaging a group of subjects imaged under different acquisition details. To study sensitivity of a measurement, values extracted from corresponding images would be compared. When new measurements or new algorithms to extract measurements are proposed, they would be studied the same way. As this is not feasible for various imaging modalities, such as Computed Tomography (CT) due to the radiation exposure of patients in these studies, anthropomorphic printed phantoms have been proposed for CT variability studies \cite{printedphantom1, printedphantom2, printedphantom3}.
Phantom studies have been successfully used for various imaging modalities. Especially for CT, advances in 3D printing technologies allow printing volumetric patient images using materials with attenuation properties comparable to human tissue. Recent work reported variability studies using such phantoms \cite{oscar1, phantomandvariabiliy,phantomprinting}.
While phantoms make it possible to study variability without imaging cohorts, they still require acquiring and imaging phantoms. This can be costly as well as resource and time consuming. In this work, we study whether sensitivity analysis using advanced in-silico CT simulators can yield similar results to real phantom imaging studies. To this end, a CT-scan simulator environment was set up using the publicly available \cite{astra1, astra2} ASTRA toolbox (www.astra-toolbox.com). Using a high-dose CT-image as input, the simulator outputs raw projections, which can be manipulated accordingly. For example, stationary and uncorrelated noise can be added. Additionally, the simulator allows for some freedom in geometrical parameters such as the number of projections, slice thickness, and distances. The CT-image can be reconstructed with a variety of algorithm choices, e.g. filtered back-projection and simultaneous iterative reconstruction technique.
The method is compared with an empirical anthropomorphic phantom variability study published in \cite{oscar1}. In this unique setup, the simulated phantom study is performed using the same original image from which the anthropomorphic phantom was printed and the study in~\cite{oscar1} conducted. In a sense, this can be viewed as the theoretical replication. The simulator environment was implemented to reconstruct images at different noise levels, reconstruction algorithms, and number of projections. To mimic repetition and introduce variability, each simulation parameter set was repeated via a variation of the Poisson noise random seed. For the simulated images, radiomics features were extracted and analysed. As the same source image is used for both the empirical phantom study and this work, direct comparison of the results of sensitivity analyses is possible.
The next section describes the CT simulator environment method including a brief introduction of the anthropomorphic phantom and the phantom study. In the results section a comprehensive validation and comparison of the simulator with respect to the phantom study is presented. Furthermore, a stability and discriminative power analysis and discussions can be found in the same section. The paper is summarised in the conclusions section.
\section{Method}
First, we introduce the details of the novel anthropomorphic phantom created for the tandem phantom study~\cite{oscar1}. A high dose CT-scan of this phantom is used as the simulator input. Second, the extracted radiomics features, the principal component analysis and the simulator environment are described in detail.
\subsection{Anthropomorphic phantom and phantom CT acquisitions}
Here, we provide brief details of the anthropomorphic phantom study presented in~\cite{oscar1} for completeness. For further details, we refer the reader to the original publication.
A realistic radio-opaque three-dimensional phantom was designed from real patient CT data. Namely, the compilation of a half-mirrored lung including a tumor and an abdominal liver section with a metastasis from a colon carcinoma~\cite{oscar1}. The phantom was manufactured via stacking sheets of printed aqueous potassium iodide solution on paper \cite{phantom1}. The lung tumor section is a replication of a publicly available patient data set for radiomics phantoms, from the Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative \cite{biometrics}. The lung section was neither used in this work nor the tandem phantom CT study. Tissue equivalent attenuation at a defined energy spectrum was calibrated at 120 kVp. The contrast resolution of the printing technique in the phantom goes from -100 to 1000 Hounsfield units (HU). Overall, no structures can be represented whose HU is below this paper-induced threshold. To test the contrast resolution, a circular intensity ramp was printed in the phantom running through an HU range of 0 to 1000. A reliable resolution of 2 HU difference was achieved. Consequently the abdominal region was adequately depicted for a quantitative analysis within the printed HU range.
The phantom was imaged with a Siemens SOMATOM Definition Edge CT scanner (SSDE). To define the acquisition and image reconstruction parameters, a survey of clinical CT protocols was performed including 9 radiological institutes.
All the CT scans in that study were acquired with the same acquisition
parameters, which resulted in an approximate CT dose index of 10mGy. Namely, a tube voltage of 120 kVp, a helical pitch factor of 1.0, a 0.5 second rotation time, and a tube current time product of 147 mAs. No automatic tube current modulation was used.
Typical reconstruction parameter settings for clinical protocols in thoracic and abdominal oncology were varied for the phantom study as follows: Reconstruction algorithm, iterative reconstruction (IR) or filtered back projection (FBP); reconstruction kernel, 2 standard soft tissue kernels per algorithm; slice thickness in millimeter, 1, 1.5, 2, 3; and slice spacing in millimeter, 0.75, 1, and 2. Series reconstructed with an IR algorithm used an ADMIRE (advanced modeled iterative reconstruction) at strength level 3. In total, 8 groups of parameter variations were selected for the phantom study to assess their impact on classic radiomics features. Initially, 20 repetition scans were performed without re-positioning of the phantom, followed by 10 repetitions with re-positioning between each measurement.
Therefore, 30 distinct acquisitions were performed for each of 8 parameter variation groups.
In the abdominal section six 3D regions of interest (ROIs) were manually annotated by a board-certified radiologist using a thin-section phantom series with 2 mm slice thickness and 1 mm spacing. The ROIs were annotated conservatively, well within the margins, thus no cross-check step of the annotations was performed by other radiologists. A polygonal outline was used on all slices individually to define the ROIs. The six ROI binary masks were stored in a 3D volume NIfTI format. Two normal liver tissue regions, two cysts, a hemangioma, and a liver metastasis from a colon carcinoma were included during the annotation process, regions can be found in Figure \ref{fig:rois}. Further details of the annotated regions and the 8 variation groups can be found in Jimenez-del-Toro et al. \cite{oscar1}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{rois_image.pdf}
\caption{Annotated regions of interest on the anthropomorphic phantom.}
\label{fig:rois}
\end{figure}
A multi-center phantom CT study was also carried out with 13 different scanners at selected locations in Switzerland. The scanners used were two Siemens SOMATOM Definition Edge, two Siemens SOMATOM Definition Flash, a Siemens SOMATOM Edge Plus, a Siemens SOMATOM X.Cite, a Philips Brilliance iCT, a GE BrightSpeed S, a Philips Brilliance CT 64, a GE Revolution Evo, a GE Revolution Apex, a Canon Aquilion Prime SP and a Canon Aquilion CXL. The same protocol was implemented (as closely as possible) in all acquisitions. A tube voltage of 120 kVp, a helical pitch factor of 1.0 and a 0.5 second rotation time were used. The tube current time product was adjusted accordingly to achieve the required dose of 10mGy. The IR reconstruction algorithm was used with slice thicknesses 2 or 2.5 millimeter and slice spacing 1 or 1.25 millimeter.
\subsection{Radiomics feature extraction and principal component analysis}\label{sec:features}
From both the simulated and phantom CT scans, a total of 86 radiomics features were extracted in 3D from the manually segmented ROIs using the open source Pyradiomics python toolkit \cite{biometrics}. Definitions for the radiomics features are available in the Pyradiomics documentation online (https://pyradiomics.readthedocs.io/en/latest/features.html). The 86 features extracted include 18 first-order statistics, 22 grey level co-occurrence matrices, 14 grey level dependence matrices, 16 grey level run length matrices and 16 grey level size zone matrices, as described briefly in the Appendix \ref{app:radiomicsdef}. Radiomics features parameters were set to their default values. More specifically, no filter was applied to the input image and a fixed bin width of 25 was used for the discretisation of the image grey level. Fixed bin size discretisation is defined such that a new bin is assigned for every intensity
interval within the bin width starting at the lowest occurring intensity.
Additionally, no normalization, no spatial resampling, no resegmentation were performed and no HU cutoffs were used within the ROIs for the extraction. The distance between the center voxel and the neighbor, for which angles should be generated, was set to one pixel. Furthermore, for the first order radiomics the voxel array shift parameter was set to zero, for the grey level co-occurrence matrices the co-occurrences was assessed in two directions per angle, which results in a symmetrical matrix and for the grey level dependence matrices no cutoff value for dependence was set, i.e. a neighbouring voxel was always considered independent.
For the phantom CT acquisitions, an analysis was carried out via the principal component analysis (PCA). The first two principal components of the 86 radiomics features from all 240 phantom CT acquisitions are shown in Figures \ref{fig:pcasirt} and \ref{fig:pcafbp} with black markers. The ROIs can be separated into 4 distinct tissue classes, i.e. normal liver tissue, cyst, hemangioma, and liver metastasis. The differences between the four ROI classes (inter-class variation) are larger than all CT parameter variations (intra-class variation). ROIs from the normal liver tissue class are closer in the feature space than those from the other classes. All four classes remain linearly separable despite the CT parameter variations.
Furthermore, the Wilcoxon statistic $W$ was used to assess the stability and discriminative power of isolated radiomics features \cite{oscar1}. We set a threshold of $W$ < 1 to indicate a stable comparison. The top 10 ranked features of the phantom CT acquisitions are shown on the right-hand of the appendix Table \ref{tab:topfeatures}.
\subsection{CT simulator}
The simulator environment was implemented to reconstruct images at different noise levels, with different reconstruction algorithms, and number of projections. Each simulation parameter set was repeated ten times for different noise random seeds to approximate repeated scans. For the simulated images, feature values were extracted and analysed. Specific features are explained in detail in Section~\ref{sec:features}.
The ASTRA toolbox CT-scan and reconstruction simulator \cite{astra1} was employed for the purpose of this study. The simulator is based on simple geometric principles for the creation of projection data (sinograms). These sinograms can then be manipulated to mimic more realistic scenarios, for example through adding Poisson noise. Subsequently, the processed images are passed to the reconstruction algorithm. To match the simulator to the phantom acquisitions, a helical scanning sequence of pitch one was realised by explicitly specifying a sequence of helical projection vectors. These explicit projection vectors define the scanning frequency, i.e. the total number of projections.
A conical beam is utilized and the target and detector are placed at 500mm and 1000mm respectively to approximate the real scanner geometry. A flat square detector of 512 by 512 of continuous pixels (1mm) was implemented for simplicity. The number of detector pixels is higher than for a clinical CT scanner (approximately 1000 by 64) but is nevertheless compensated by an equivalent decrease in the scanning frequency, making the simulations simultaneously efficient and realistic.
Random uncorrelated noise is added at the projection level by sampling from a Poisson distribution,
\begin{equation*}
f(k; \lambda)=\frac{\lambda^k e^{-\lambda}}{k!},
\end{equation*}
where, $f(k; \lambda)$ describes the probability of k occurrences and $\lambda$ is both the expectation and the variance of the distribution. A background intensity $I_0$ is used to define the noise level i.e. at each pixel of the projection images:
\begin{align*}
I_{sampled} \sim f(\lambda=I_0 e^{-I_{image}}), \\
I_{final}= -\log(I_{sampled}/I_0).
\end{align*}
$I_{image}, I_{sampled}, I_{final}$ represent the initial image, sampled and final intensities respectively. Therefore the background intensity is inversely related to the Poisson noise. Here we denote the added noise level $I_0^{-1}$ as $A$. The noise is added using the ``add\_noise\_to\_sino'' function in the ASTRA toolbox.
To calibrate an appropriate noise level $A$ the average pixel-wise variance $\sigma^2$ is calculated for a range of $A$s and compared to the $\sigma^2$ of the phantom CT acquisitions, see Figure \ref{fig:noise}. The average $\sigma^2$ of the low dose (1 mGy) and high dose (10 mGy) acquisitions are plotted as the horizontal lines. An approximate linear relation is observed between $\sigma^2$ and $A$ as seen from the linear fit. The crossing points between the horizontal line limits and the fitted line serve as a guide for a realistic $A$ parameter range. In the simulation study, noise levels close to the 10 mGy were used as this was the dose level used in the tandem phantom study.
The reconstructions are performed with the simultaneous iterative "SIRT" and filtered back-projection "FBP" 3D algorithms as implemented in the ASTRA toolbox. Specifically the "$SIRT3DCUDA$" with 500 iterations and "$FDKCUDA$" were used, the reconstruction kernels are fixed by the simulator and the slice thickness is the same as the pixel resolution, i.e. 1 mm. Furthermore, a distinct numerical random seed is used for the Poisson noise, to imitate repetitions as performed for the phantom CT acquisitions \cite{oscar1}. The method is very efficient numerically, as total computational time on a modern GPU is in the order of minutes per complete reconstruction.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{all3.png}
\caption{Axial views of anthropomorphic radio-opaque phantom. Left, original input. Middle, filtered back-projection reconstruction, right, iterative reconstruction, both obtained by the CT simulator. }
\label{fig:scans}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{sirt_sigma.pdf}
\caption{Average pixel-wise variance of the iterative method simulated image plotted against the arbitrary noise measure. Black and grey lines denote the average variance of the high dose and low dose acquisitions.}
\label{fig:noise}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
\hline
Parameter & range & optimal \\
\hline
Noise level ($\sigma^2/$pixel in HU$^2$) & 2.5$\times10^{-3}$ - 2.8$\times10^{-3}$ & 2.5$\times10^{-3}$ \\
\hline
Number of Projections & 150-450 & 450 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:parameters} Parameter choice for the simulation environment.}
\end{table}
\section{Results and Discussion}
Pilot simulations are carried out with the optimal set of parameters as seen in Table \ref{tab:parameters}, i.e. minimum noise and maximum number of projections for ten repetitions. First, the procedure is verified qualitatively by visual inspection of the reconstructions with optimal parameter choice, axial snapshots can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:scans}. Both reconstruction methods are sufficiently successful. The iterative reconstruction has low noise and no artifacts are visible. The FBP method is marginally noisier and exhibits some minor artifacts, these differences are expected as theoretically the iterative method is superior, albeit more computationally expensive.
Additionally, the Wilcoxon statistic $W$ is employed to analyze the stability and discriminative power of the radiomics features as extracted from the simulated CTs. To this end, a study is carried out to mimic the phantom CT acquisitions. Namely the simulations are separated into 8 distinct groups with different projection number and reconstruction algorithms, see Table \ref{tab:simgroups}. Within each group, repetitions are achieved via a different Poisson noise random seed. Across the study, the same noise level was added at the projection stage. The ROIs are separated into 4 distinct tissue classes, i.e. normal liver tissue, cyst, hemangioma, and liver metastasis. The analysis aims to quantify stability and discriminative power of features across parameter groups using the class definitions.
The result is depicted in Figure \ref{fig:stability}. The stability (intra-class variation) percentage is calculated from a pairwise comparison among the 8 parameter variation groups. This process is repeated for all available tissue classes, while all other CT parameters are kept constant. Expressly, for each feature from each class,
$W$ is calculated in-between the groups. To this end, a threshold of correlation is predetermined for $W$ at $1$. I.e. the repetitions within the two tested groups in question follow the same distribution if $W < 1 $ and the pairwise comparison is considered successful. The percentage is calculated as the total fraction of the successful pairwise comparisons for each feature. The discriminative power (inter-class variation) is calculated via pairwise comparison in-between tissue classes for each feature and group. In contrast to stability, here a successful comparison is achieved if $W > 1$. Again the percentage represents the fraction of successful comparisons.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
\hline
Group & Reconstruction & Projections \\
\hline
1 & SIRT & 150 \\
2 & SIRT & 200 \\
3 & SIRT & 250 \\
4 & SIRT & 300 \\
5 & FBP & 150 \\
6 & FBP & 200 \\
7 & FBP & 250 \\
8 & FBP & 300 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:simgroups} Parameter choice for the stability and discriminative power study. For all simulations, the noise level was set to $A=0.0001$, i.e equivalent to approximately 10mGy dose, and 10 different random seeds were used to achieve repetitions within the group.}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{wilcoxon.pdf}
\caption{Percentage stability of features as intra-class comparison and discriminative power inter-class comparison.}
\label{fig:stability}
\end{figure}
The results show that although the majority of radiomics features had low stability for CT parameter variations, as has been previously shown in other studies \cite{radiomicsunstable1,radiomicsunstable2, radiomicsunstable3, radiomicsunstable4}, the discriminative power is high in the task of differentiating in-between the tissue classes. This relation is again observed in the phantom study that is mimicked \cite{oscar1}. The top ten features across each axis selected by the simulation environment, i.e., virtual phantom, and the phantom CT acquisitions are compared in Table \ref{tab:topfeatures}. To demonstrate the ability of the simulation environment to predict stable features, an overlap of the best scoring features relative the phantom CT acquisitions is plotted in Figure \ref{fig:overlap}. The $x$-axis represents an ascending percentage of features that are considered as the highest scoring group (e.g. $10\%=$ top 9 out of 86 features) and the $y$-axis the percentage within that group that overlaps with the top features seen in the phantom study, http://links.lww.com/RLI/A632. For both stability and discriminate power, the overlap is consistently high, i.e., not in a linear relationship as expected for non-correlated lists.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{overlap.pdf}
\caption{Overlap of highest scoring features between simulation and phantom CT acquisitions plotted against ascending percentage that are considered highest scoring. Plotted for the stability and discriminative power alike. The grey area represents un- or negatively-correlated overlap between the two methods.}
\label{fig:overlap}
\end{figure}
Furthermore, the radiomics features of the simulator are compared to the empirical phantom acquisitions in Figure \ref{fig:pcasirt} in a variability analysis. To this end, the principal components are calculated to investigate the similarity and variability of the radiomics, and we use the parameter range as shown in Table \ref{tab:parameters}. As seen from Figure \ref{fig:pcasirt}, the simulation radiomics variability is in agreement with the empirical results. It should be noted here that the study was carried out in a semi-blind methodology, i.e. after matching all the possible parameters to reality, the best possible values were used to create the optimal reconstruction. Afterwards, an appropriate noise level was chosen using Figure \ref{fig:noise} for the purpose of this variability study.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{reno_sirt_pca.png}
\caption{Principal component analysis. The black markers indicate the empirical phantom study data of the region of interest with the same shape as the colored markers. The colored markers indicate the equivalent result of the simulator with iterative reconstruction and the parameter range shown in Table \ref{tab:parameters}. The average value and variability of the two principal components are closely matched. }
\label{fig:pcasirt}
\end{figure}
The filtered back-projection method creates an inferior reconstruction as seen in Figures \ref{fig:scans} and \ref{fig:pcafbp}. There is a larger discrepancy between empirical distributions and distributions obtained through the simulation.
Nevertheless, when the PCs are plotted the results indicate that the variance is well within the experimental result. There is a lateral shifting of the first PC. The variability is well captured by the simulator for all six ROIs.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{reno_fbp_pca.png}
\caption{FBP principal component analysis. The black markers indicate the empirical phantom study data of the region of interest with the same shape as the colored markers. The colored markers indicate the equivalent result of the simulator with the filtered back-projection reconstruction and the parameter range shown in Table \ref{tab:parameters}. The average value and variability of the two principal components are matched up to a shift of the first principal component. }
\label{fig:pcafbp}
\end{figure}
Furthermore, the radiomics features of the simulator are compared to the multi-center empirical phantom acquisitions in Figure \ref{fig:pcamulti} with a PCA variability analysis. In the simulator the projection number is fixed to 200 and 250 and the noise range extended to 2.5$\times10^{-3}$ - 2.9$\times10^{-3}$ ($\sigma^2/$pixel in HU$^2$). This parameter range mimics the fixed slice reconstruction thickness and the extended noise range was used to realise the unknown differences inherent in a multi-center study.
As seen from Figure \ref{fig:pcamulti}, the simulation radiomics variability is in agreement with the empirical results.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{multi_sirt.png}
\caption{Multi-center principal component analysis. The black markers indicate the multi-center empirical phantom study data of the region of interest with the same shape as the colored markers. The colored markers indicate the equivalent result of the simulator with iterative reconstruction.}
\label{fig:pcamulti}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Discussion}
Experimental comparison showed striking similarity between sensitivity analyses carried out with the anthropomorphic phantom and the CT simulator. Despite the approximations, the CT simulator was able to generate images with very similar characteristics, as quantified by the features studied here, to real images of the phantom. This is essentially a model whose parameters can be changed to match those observed in phantom studies. This similarity opens different avenues for further investigation and practical opportunities. For example, studies with multi-centre, multi-vendor data sets \cite{learningml} can be effortlessly scaled up and automated.
First, the results suggest that sensitivity analysis for new features or new ways to extract features can be initially performed with a CT simulator. This would substantially reduce the efforts and costs required to study generalization properties of new radiomics features, radiomics analyses and image-based learning techniques to new acquisition settings. This is crucial since this generalization ends up being one of the most notorious obstacles in front of translating new quantitative image analysis technologies to clinical practice.
While hand-crafted features' stability can in theory still be quantified with phantom studies, this approach remains very limited when it comes to assessing stability of advanced algorithms that extract features in a data-driven way, e.g., neural networks. Phantom studies yield very limited number of images and this inhibits using them for assessing stability of neural network-based feature extraction methods. The simulation study we showed here is a direct solution to this issue. The approach can use any CT image as a "phantom", therefore yields a large number of images to perform accurate stability analysis of such advanced algorithms.
Second, training of learning-based methods can be modified to encourage robustness to variations of imaging characteristics during training. For instance, through extensive data augmentation one can gain robustness to variations in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) acquisitions of the same contrast \cite{deep2}. As the CT simulator can generate images realistic enough to yield similar sensitivity analyses as an empirical phantom study, one can imagine using such simulators for training of highly robust deep leaning models.
The CT simulator we used here did not consider various details of the acquisition due to simplifications of the system's physical model. Our experiments with more complete models, such as Geant4 \cite{geant4}, showed that using such models is challenging due to the difficulty in replicating a given scan and computation time. Making more accurate simulators more user friendly and faster may improve the quality of the sensitivity analyses. In addition, a possible extension of this work can be the application of an automatic segmentation method. Allowing for automated and accurate determination of ROIs, especially useful for the segmentation of liver tissue regions.
\section{Conclusions}
Based on the astratoolbox we have created an environment to reproduce artificial variability on an initial CT-image. The environment was verified to replicate the diversification observed from empirical acquisitions via a principal component analysis, both for intra- and inter-scanner analyses. The methodology and simulational tool can accelerate the creation and testing of stable and discriminative radiomics features. More crucially, this tool can generate realistically variable CT-image datasets for training highly robust deep learning models.
|
\section{introduction}
Optimization problems play crucial role in many fields of science, engineering and industry. Generally, a task can be evaluated by a real-valued function $L({x})$ (named cost function), where ${x}$ are the parameters used to identify the solution. Therefore, the key to solve the problem optimally is searching the parameters $x$ minimizing the function $L({x})$. It is a big challenge to find the global minima of the cost function $L({x})$ when it is complicated.
Various numerical methods have been introduced to solve the optimization problems. Among which, the gradient descent (GD) method(also known as steepest descent method), is a widely used technique for its simplicity and high efficiency. In the GD method, the parameters are updated according to the gradient, reads
\begin{equation}\label{equ::GM}
x_{t+1}=x_{t} - \eta \partial_x L
\end{equation}
where $\eta$ is the searching step at iteration $t$. Generally, numerical methods, which reach global minima by iterative updates of parameters according to local information, suffer two main problems: the local minima and the slow convergence. The stochastic methods are introduced to help the method to jump out the local minima\cite{Adam2014}. On the other hand, the convergence has been improved by more sophisticated methods like Conjugate Gradient(CG) method\cite{CG0,CG1,CG}, Adam method\cite{Adam2014}, Natural Gradient Descent(NGD) method\cite{Amari1998NGD,Martens2020GD}.
Let's take another perspective to view the gradient descent: Let $X$ be the parameter space which form a manifold with a flat metric $G_{ij}(x)=\delta_{ij}$. $L(x)$ is viewed as a scalar field defined on $X$. It's easy to see that $-\partial_x L$ is the direction in which we can obtain largest decrease of cost function for fixed small step length, where the distance is defined by the flat metric. Following this idea, the NGD replace the flat metric on the parameter manifold $X$ by a generally non-flat metric $G$, in order to improve the convergence. The optimization variables update with the iteration
\begin{equation}\label{equ::NG}
{ x}_{t+1}={ x}_{t} - \eta G^{-1}\frac{\partial L({ x})}{\partial { x}}.
\end{equation}
The most common application of NGD is the optimizations of statistical models, where the Fisher information(FI) matrix \cite{Amari1998NGD,Martens2020GD}is used as the metric. Fisher information(FI) matrix for parameterized probability distribution $p(x,s)$ is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{metric::FI}
G^{FI}_{i,j}(x)=\sum_sp(x,s)\frac{\partial \log p(x,s)}{\partial x^i}\frac{\partial \log p(x,s)}{\partial x^j}
\end{equation}
where $x$ is the parameter and $s$ is the random variable.
NGD has gained more and more attentions in recent years by showing its outstanding performance in convergence on a variety areas of researches such as Variational Quantum Algorithms(VQA)\cite{Wecker2015,Broers2021,Haug2021,Yao2022},Variational Quantum Eigensolver(VQE)\cite{Wierichs2020,Li2017,Gidi2022,Koczor2019}. The NGD has also been used in solving quantum many-body problems\cite{Liang2021} where the model can be transformed to a statistical one, and the metric is called Fubini-Study metric tensor\cite{Stokes2020,Koczor2019}. In the field of variational Monte Carlo method in neural network\cite{Shi2019,Nagy2019}, NGD (also called Stochastic Reconfiguration\cite{Sorella1998,Park2020,Park2000}) method is also widely used, and the FI matrix is called S matrix. Although the NGD has shown its efficiency in various realm, there comes a question whether the FI matrix is the only choice for the metric in the NGD? Could we find a better one? Moreover, there are many optimization problems which can not be transformed into statistical models naturally. How can we find the proper metric used in NGD in such problems?
In this paper, we generalize natural gradient descent method by proposing a systematic method to find out a class of well-performed metrics on a broader class of cost functions. Firstly, we introduce a reference space that is highly relevant to the cost function, such that a good metric is easy to choose on the reference space. Then the metric on the parameter space used in NGD can be chosen as the induced metric from the good metric on the reference space. Our method is benchmarked on several examples and is proved to converge faster than GD and CG method. The results also showed that out metrics have better performance than the Fisher information matrix even on some statistical models.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We first discuss the motivation and effectiveness of our algorithm by capturing the geometry of the optimization landscape in sec.(\ref{section::theory}). Our algorithm is explained in detail in sec.(\ref{section::algorithm}). Then we show some examples in the sec.(\ref{section::Numerical}). In the first example in subsection.(\ref{subsection::LSM}), our algorithm is applied to the least square problem, which is common in the realm of the deep learning and the statistics. In this example, we found at least 4 distinctive metrics for the NGD and all of them work with high efficiency. In the second example, our algorithm is applied to a classical spin model of Heisenberg model. The FI matrix fails in the third example in subsection.(\ref{subsection::eig}), while our method can provide a workable metric of high quality. We will give a summary in sec.(\ref{section::conclusion}).
\section{theory}\label{section::theory}
In this section, we explain our motivation in determining the metric in manifold $X$ by introducing a reference manifold $Y$. We also try to analysis the effectiveness of our method.
Firstly we follow the line in Ref.\onlinecite{Amari1998NGD} to give a brief introduction to the natural gradient descent method. Consider a cost function $L:X\rightarrow \mathbb R$, where $X$ is the parameters space. For every point $x\in X$, we define a metric $G_X(x)$ at $x$. Starting from some initial parameters $x_{0}\in X$, we search for $x_{min}\in X$ to make $L(x)$ minimal. At parameter $x_t\in X$, the strategy to descent $L(x)$ is to perform a line search in the direction $dx_t$ (which is dependent of the parameter $x_{t}$)
\begin{equation}
x_{t+1}=x_t+\eta dx_t \label{eqn:evolve_x},
\end{equation}
where $dx_t$ is the direction in which we obtain the maximal descent of $L(x)$ by performing an update with fixed step size $|dx|=(G_{X,ij}dx^idx^j)^{1/2}$. $dx_t$ can be determined by the following fomula
\begin{align}
dx_t&=-\frac 1\epsilon\underset{dx}\max [L(x_t+dx)] \quad dx\in TX(x_t),|dx|=\epsilon\\
&=-\frac 1\epsilon\underset{dx}\max [dx^i\frac{\partial L}{\partial x^i}]\quad dx\in TX(x_t),|dx|=\epsilon
\end{align}
where $TX(x_t)$ is the tangent space at $x_t$. The constraint is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:constraint_x}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,0) ellipse [x radius=2, y radius=1];
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (1.95,0);
\filldraw (0,0) circle [radius=0.3mm];
\node[below] at (0,0) {$x$};
\node[above] at (1,0) {$dx$};
\node at (2,1.1) {$|dx|=\epsilon$};
\node at (0,-1.5) {$X$};\
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The constraint in determining the gradient direction at $x\in X$.}\label{fig:constraint_x}
\end{figure}
The minimization can be done using Laplacian multiplier method, and the solution $dx_t$ is given by\cite{Amari1998NGD}
\begin{equation}
dx_t=-G_{X}^{-1}(x_t)\partial_x L \label{eqn:dir_x}
\end{equation}
up to a positive normalizing factor.
However, $dx_t$ only gives a direction that $L(x)$ decrease fast locally. There's no guarantee that the direction $dx_t$ obtained this way is the optimal at global scale. It's clear to see that at each point $x\in X$, the globally best evolution direction is $\overrightarrow{x,x_{min}}$, where $x_{min}$ is the global minimum. This can be used to judge the global effectiveness of a direction (and the metric). We define a good metric $G_X$ for the cost function $L(x)$ as one that satisfies
\begin{equation}
dx=-G_X^{-1}\partial_x L(x)\sim \overrightarrow{x,x_{min}}\label{eqn:criterion_y}
\end{equation}
However natural gradient descent method bears an issue that a good metric $G_X$ is often hard to find due to the complexity of $L(x)$. At present, we can only write metric for some special types of problem such as statistical model optimization and quantum eigensolver, based on case-specific study.
In this work, we propose a systematic method to provide metric of good quality for a class of cost functions: one that can be re-written as $L(x)=\bar L(f(x))$, where $f:X\rightarrow Y$ is a map from parameter manifold $X$ to a reference manifold $Y$ (which is also a Riemannian manifold), such that the following conditions are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\bar L(y)$ is a relatively simple function such as a polynomial function
or a function whose well-performed metric is known. Therefore we can find a good metric $G_Y$ in $Y$ manifold for the cost function $\bar L(y)$.
\item $f$ is a relatively surjective map especially when the cost function $L(x)$ is small.
\item Let $x_{min}\in X$ be the minimum of $L$, and $y_{min}\in X$ be the minimum of $\bar L$. Then $f(x_{min})$ is close to $y_{min}$.
\end{enumerate}
Such class of cost functions include the ansatz-type problems, where we often need to optimize a simple cost function $\bar L(p)$ over a space $P$ of physical meaningful quantities. However, due to high-dimensionality of $p\in P$, the elements in $P$ is simplified by some ansatz $f:A\rightarrow P$, which has strong expressibility when $\bar L(p)$ is small. Due to high complexity of $f$, a direct choice of metric for function $\bar L(f(a))$ is often of poor quality. For ansatz-type problems, we may use $P$ as reference space and $A$ as parameter space. The requirements above are commonly satisfied.
Given a metric $G_Y$ in $Y$ manifold, we'll show that define $G^f_X$ by the metric induced by $f$
\begin{equation}
G^f_{X,ij}(x)=\frac{\partial y^\alpha}{\partial x^i}G_{Y,\alpha\beta}(f(x))\frac{\partial y^\beta}{\partial x^j} \label{eqn:GX}
\end{equation}
is a good metric for the cost function L(x)
At fixed point $x\in X$ and $y=f(x)\in Y$, $f$ induce a linear map $f_* :dx\mapsto dy$ defined by
\begin{equation}
dy^\alpha=\frac{\partial y^\alpha}{\partial x^i}dx^i ,
\end{equation}
which maps a tangent vector $dx$ at $x$ to a tangent vector $dy$ at $y$. Given a line search direction $dx$ determined by Eq.\ref{eqn:dir_x}, as proved in Append.\ref{section::app1}, it is mapped to an update in reference manifold in the direction $dy=f_* (dx)\propto P_{\im f_*}G_Y^{-1}\partial_y\bar L$, where $P_{\im f_*}$ is the projection operator from the tangent space at $y$ to the image of $f_*$ with respect to the metric $G_Y$. The process is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:relation_dy_simp}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw [use Hobby shortcut] (-1.5,-1) .. (0,0) .. (1.5,-1);
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (1,0);
\filldraw (0,0) circle [radius=0.3mm];
\node[below] at (0,0) {$x$};
\node[above] at (0.8,0) {$dx$};
\node at (0,-1) {$X$};
\draw[->] (0,-1.4) -- (0,-2.3);
\node[right] at (0,-1.8) {$f$};
\begin{scope}[yshift=-5cm]
\draw (0,0) ellipse [x radius=3, y radius=2.5];
\draw [use Hobby shortcut] (-1.5,-1) .. (0,0) .. (1.5,-1);
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (1,0);
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (1,0.8);
\draw[densely dashed] (1,0.8) -- (1,0);
\draw (-2.5,-0.5) -- (1.6,-0.5) -- (2.6,1) -- (-1.5,1) -- cycle;
\draw[->,use Hobby shortcut] (1.02,0.8) .. (1.2,0.4) .. (1.02,0);
\filldraw (0,0) circle [radius=0.3mm];
\node[below] at (0,0) {$y$};
\node[above] at (0.8,0) {$dy$};
\node[right] at (1.2,0.4) {$P_{\im f_*}$};
\node[below right] at (-1.5,1) {$\im f_*$};
\node at (0,-1) {$f(X)$};
\node[above] at (-2,1) {$Y$};
\node[above] at (0.6,0.5) {$d\tilde y$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The relation between $dy=f_*(dx)$ and $d\tilde y =G_Y^{-1}\partial_y\bar L$.}\label{fig:relation_dy_simp}
\end{figure}
It's easy to see that $G^f_X$ is a good metric in $X$ manifold iff
\begin{equation}
dy=-P_{\im f_*}G_Y^{-1}\partial_y \bar L(y)\sim \overrightarrow{y,f(x_{min})}\label{eqn:criterion_y2}
\end{equation}
This is likely true if the three conditions we required are satisfied, because
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $G_Y$ is a good metric in $Y$ manifold, then $-G_Y^{-1}\partial_y \bar L(y)\sim \overrightarrow{y,y_{min}}$.
\item If $f$ is a relatively surjective map especially when the cost function is small, then $-P_{\im f_*}G_Y^{-1}\partial_y \bar L(y)\sim -G_Y^{-1}\partial_y \bar L(y)$.
\item If $f(x_{min})$ is close to $y_{min}$, then $\overrightarrow{y,f(x_{min})}\sim\overrightarrow{y,y_{min}}$.
\end{enumerate}
The benefits of this process is that we don't need to find the metric in the parameter manifold directly, whose quality is severely impacted by the complexity of original cost function $L$. In stead, the complexity is included in the transformation $f$, and has relatively little impact on the quality of the final metric we choose.
\section{Algorithm}\label{section::algorithm}
In this section, we explain the steps of our algorithm in detail. The algorithm is shown schematically in Fig. \ref{fig:algorithm}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[every node/.style={align=center,rounded corners=3pt,inner xsep=10pt,inner ysep=5pt,draw},->,>={Stealth[round]},shorten >=1pt,thick,node distance=0.8cm]
\node (1) at (0,0) {Determine the reference space $Y$\\ and the transformation function $f:X\rightarrow Y$};
\node (2) [below= of 1] {Determine the metric of reference manifold $Y$};
\node (3) [below= of 2] {Determine the metric of parameter manifold $X$};
\node (4) [below= of 3] {Perform natural gradient descent\\ according to the metric in $X$};
\path (1) edge (2);
\path (2) edge (3);
\path (3) edge (4);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The scheme of the algorithm.}\label{fig:algorithm}
\end{figure}
The first and critical step of our method is to determine the reference manifold $Y$ and the transformation $f:X\rightarrow Y$, such that $L(x)=\bar L(f(x))$, where $\bar L:Y\mapsto \mathbb R$ is a relatively simple function. This calls for experience and understanding of the problem. As we have stated, our method is very suited for the ansatz-type cost function.
Once this is done, we need to determine the metric $G_Y$ in the reference manifold. The most simple choice of $G_Y$ is the Euclidean metric
\begin{equation}
G^{I}_{Y,ij}=\delta_{i,j}
\end{equation}
Another metric taken into consideration in the paper is the Hessian matrix,
\begin{equation}
G^{H}_{Y,ij}=\frac{\partial^2 \bar L({ Y})}{\partial Y_i \partial Y_j}+\epsilon\cdot\delta_{i,j} .
\end{equation}
where the $\epsilon$ is a real number to the ensure the positive-definiteness of the metric $G^{H}_Y$. In our numerical test, $\epsilon=|\epsilon_{H}|+0.1$, where $\epsilon_{H}$ is the minimal eigen-value of the Hessian matrix. The roughly value of $\epsilon_{H}$ can be easily obtained by other methods such as gradient descent.
Once we have a metric for the reference manifold, we obtain the metric $G_X$ in parameter manifold through the conversion of coordinates by Eq.(\ref{eqn:GX}). Then $dx=G^{-1}\frac{\partial L({ x})}{\partial { x}}$ is calculated by solving a linear equation
\begin{equation}\label{equ::NGD_direction}
G \cdot dx = \frac{\partial L({ x})}{\partial { x}} .
\end{equation}
It could be solve easily by the CG method, where the computation cost is only the operation of matrix times vector.
Finally we can determine the update of the parameter by line search in this direction using Eq.(\ref{eqn:evolve_x}).
\section{ Numerical Experiments} \label{section::Numerical}
In this section, we will give examples to clarify our method in capturing the geometry of the optimization landscape. The first example we are going to show is about a least square method(LSM). The cost function of LSM is widely used for the trainning of the deeping learning ansatz. In this example we could find at least 4 metrics for NGD from 3 reference manifolds and all of them have out-standing convergence speed comparing to the CG method and the gradient descent. The second example is the classical spin model. And then follows by a model where NG using fisher information matrix has no advantage over gradient descent, but our method give another metric with excellent results.
We have adopted the line search in the optimizations with the searching directions being normalized.
\subsection{ Least square model} \label{subsection::LSM}
The first example we are going to show is a least square model.
As an example, we study a one-dimensional quantum anti-ferromagnetic Heisenberg model\cite{Altlandbook}. The Hamiltonian reads
\begin{equation}
H=\sum_i \sigma_i^x\sigma_i^x + \sigma_i^y\sigma_i^y + \sigma_i^z\sigma_i^z
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_i^\alpha (\alpha=x,y,z)$ is Pauli matrices. Since the Hamiltonian is real, the ground state of this model can be found in real Hilbert space.
Suppose that the system is in its ground state which is a pure state. We can measure the reduced density matrices of all pair of nearby sites. However, the state is not ideally isolated form the environment, and the state is actually mixed with some noise. Therefore the measured results are actually reduced density matrices corresponding to some mixed states. Now from the measured data, we use the following optimization method to rebuild the noise-free data. This method could be used for the purifications of the noisy quantum circuits.
Suppose the system is noise-free, the pure ground state reads
\begin{equation}\label{equ::MPS}
|\Psi\rangle=\frac{1}{Z}\sum_{\bf s} W_{\bf s}|{\bf s}\rangle ,
\end{equation}
where $|{\bf s}\rangle=|s_1,s_2,\cdots,s_L\rangle$ are the physical bases of the Hilbert space, $W_{\bf s}$ are coefficients the and $Z^2=\sum_{\bf s} |W_{\bf s}|^2$ is the normalization coefficient. And the reduced density matrix for site $i$ and site $i+1$ is
\begin{equation}
(D_{i,i+1})_{s_is_{i+1}s'_is'_{i+1}}=\frac{\sum_{s_1,\dots,s_{i-1},s_{i+2},s_L}W_{\bf s}W_{\tilde{\bf s}}}{Z^2}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\bf s}=s_1,\dots,s'_i,s'_{i+1},\dots,s_n$.
Let $\widetilde{D}_{i,i+1}$ be the measured reduced density matrices for site $i$ and site $i+1$, we search the $D_{i,i+1}({ x})$ to minimize the cost function of
\begin{equation}\label{equ::LSM}
L({ x})=\frac{1}{L} \sum_{i=1}^{L-1} (D_{i,i+1}({ x}) - \widetilde{D}_{i,i+1})^2
\end{equation}
However, the dimension of the Hilbert space is $2^L$. It grows exponentially with the system size. When the system size $L>30$, we can not store and manipulate the exact quantum state in the computer. Here we approximate the quantum state by matrix product state(MPS)\cite{Garcia2006,SCHOLLWOCK201196,Roman2014IntroTNS,Verstraete2008,Orus19}, which is an ansatz to express quantum states with low entanglement. The number of the parameters in the MPS is $\sim 2LD^2$ , which grows polynomially with the system size $L$, where $D$ is the bond dimension of the tensors in the MPS that affection the accuracy of this approximation. In MPS representation, the amplitude $W^{\rm MPS}_{\bf s}$ is of the form
\begin{equation}
W^{\rm MPS}_{\bf s}=\sum_{a_1,\dots,a_{L-1}}A^{[1]}_{s_1a_1}A^{[2]}_{s_2a_1a_2}\cdots A^{[L-1]}_{s_{L-1}a_{L-2}a_{L-1}}A^{[L]}_{s_La_{L-1}}
\end{equation}
where $A$s are tensors whose elements are free variables(denoted by $ x$), and $a_i$ is summed form 1 to $D$. This can be expressed by diagrams \cite{Orus19} in Fig.\ref{pic::MPS}(a). And the graph representations of the density matrix $D_{i,i+1}({ x})$ is shown in Fig.\ref{pic::MPS}(b).
\begin{figure} [htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pic/MPS.pdf}
\caption{(a) The graphical representations of MPS. (b) The reduced density matrix $D_{i,i+1}$ for MPS, here $i=3$}\label{pic::MPS}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We apply our optimization method in this problem. There're many available choices of reference space in this problem. As the first choice, we set $Y_i=D_{i,i+1}({ x})$ as the reference space. The cost function on reference space is $L({ Y})=\frac{1}{L} \sum_{i=1}^{L-1} (Y_i - \widetilde{D}_{i,i+1})^2$,
which has a quadratic form. Note that here $Y_i$ are the independent variables in the reference manifold. The identity matrix could be a good choice for the metric in the reference manifold. Then from the Eq.(\ref{eqn:GX}), the metric in the cost function is
\begin{equation}\label{metric::LSM_D}
G^D_{i,j}=\sum_{k} \frac{\partial D_{k,k+1}}{\partial x_i}\frac{\partial D_{k,k+1}}{\partial x_j},
\end{equation}
The second reference space we selected is the Hilbert space, where the independent variables are $Y_{\bf s}=\frac{W^{\rm MPS}(S)}{Z}$. The cost function on reference space becomes a quartic form: $L({ Y})=\frac{1}{L} \sum_{i}^{L-1} (\sum_{s_1,s_2,\cdots,s_{i-1},s_{i+2},\cdots}Y_{\bf s}Y_{\tilde{\bf s}} - \widetilde{D}_{i,i+1})^2$. For comparison, we test two metrics in this reference manifold, which are the identity matrix and the Hessian matrix. The metrics in the parameter manifold are
\begin{eqnarray}
G^I_{i,j}({ X})&=&\sum_{s} \frac{\partial Y_s}{\partial x_i}\frac{\partial Y_s}{\partial x_j} \label{metric::LSM_IH1} \\
G^H_{i,j}({ X})&=&\sum_{s,s'} \frac{\partial Y_s}{\partial x_i}(\frac{\partial^2 L({ Y})}{\partial Y_s \partial Y_{s'}}+\epsilon\delta_{s,s'})\frac{\partial Y_{s'}}{\partial x_j} \label{metric::LSM_IH2}
\end{eqnarray}
The third reference manifold is the space of the tensor network state, that is $Y_{\bf s}= W^{\rm MPS}({\bf s})$. As the discussion before, we select the identity matrix as the metric in the reference manifold. The metric in original cost function is
\begin{equation}\label{metric::LSM_S}
G^W_{i,j}=\sum_{s} \frac{\partial W^{\rm MPS}(s)}{\partial x_i}\frac{\partial W^{\rm MPS}(s)}{\partial x_j},
\end{equation}
On a system of size $L=40$, we mimic noise-impacted reduced density matrix (the input data) by the reduced density matrices from a pure ground state of the Heisenberg model, with random numbers in $ (-0.1,0.1)$ added to every elements. Then we rebuild the pure-state reduced density matrices by a MPS of $D=5$. We optimize the cost function Eq.(\ref{equ::LSM}) with Gradient descent(Eq.(\ref{equ::GM})), CG method and the Natural gradient descent method(Eq.(\ref{equ::NG})) with the metrics define from Eq.(\ref{metric::LSM_D}), Eq.(\ref{metric::LSM_IH1}), Eq.(\ref{metric::LSM_IH2}) and Eq.(\ref{metric::LSM_S}) respectively.
The numerical results are shown in Fig.\ref{pic::LSM}, where all the optimizations are terminated when trapped into the local minimums. As shown in Fig.\ref{pic::LSM}, the CG method has better performance than the gradient descent. While all the NGD with the metrics we found are much better than the CG method and the gradient descent both in convergence speed and the final values of the cost function. It seems that the NGD methods can more easily escape from the local minimum than others. We list all the reference manifolds we use in Tab.\ref{tab:LSM}.
\begin{figure} [tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{pic/Purification.pdf}
\caption{The cost function in Eq.(\ref{equ::LSM}) vs optimization step. We have plot the process of the gradient descent(black line), the CG method(red line) and the NGD with the metrics we find. The label ``Density" with green color is the metric Eq.(\ref{metric::LSM_D}) from the reference manifold of the density matrix. The one ``Hilbert-identity" and the ``Hilbert-Hessian" are the metrics of Eq.(\ref{metric::LSM_IH1},\ref{metric::LSM_IH2}) which are extracted form the Hilbert space of the quantum system. The label ``MPS" is the metric of Eq.(\ref{metric::LSM_S}), which is from the tensor network state. All of our methods are better then the Gradient descent and the CG method both in the convergence speed and the final value.}\label{pic::LSM}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*} [t]
\caption{ We list the reference manifolds we used for the cost function Eq.(\ref{equ::LSM}).}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c }
\hline
reference manifold & transformation & cost function \\
\hline
\hline
reduced density matrices & $Y_i=D_{i,i+1}(x)$ & quadratic form \\
Hilbert space & $Y_s=\frac{W(S)}{Z}$ & quartic form \\
tensor network space & $Y_s=W(S)$ & elementary function \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:LSM}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Classical spin model}\label{subsection::spin}
The next numerical experiment is the classical spin model\cite{Onsager1944,Wu1982,Joyce1967}. The classical spin model is important for two reasons. On one hand the classical spin model can be used to describe (thermal) phase transitions at high temperature, where the quantum fluctuations are not important. On the other hand, the classical spin model is the quantum spin model in large S limit\cite{Yang1952,Wu1982,Kosterlitz_1973}. It may give us information of quantum results in some senses. In this example, we only focus on the comparisons of the performance of the optimization algorithms.
We test our method on 2D classical Heisenberg model. The model reads,
\begin{equation}\label{equ::spin}
L( {\vec{S}_i})=\frac{1}{N} \sum_{\langle i,j\rangle} \frac{\vec{S}_i}{|S_i|}\cdot\frac{\vec{S}_j}{|S_j|} ,
\end{equation}
where $\vec{S}_i=(S_{i,x},S_{i,y},S_{i,z})$ is a classical spin defined at the $i$-th node, and $|S_i|=\sqrt{S_{i,x}^2 + S_{i,y}^2 + S_{i,z}^2}$ is the length of the spin. The $\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}$ denotes the summations over all the nearest-neighbor pairs.
To apply our optimization method, we choose $\vec{Y}_i= \frac{\vec{S}_i}{|S_i|}$ as the reference variables and the Eq.(\ref{equ::spin}) become $L( {\vec{Y}_i})=\frac{1}{N} \sum_{\langle i,j\rangle} \vec{Y}_i\cdot\vec{Y}_j $, which is quadratic form. The Hessian matrix would be a good choice as the metric, that is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{matrix::Spin}
G^{spin}_{i,j}({ X})&=&\sum_{s,s'} \frac{\partial Y_s}{\partial x_i}(\frac{\partial^2 L({ Y})}{\partial Y_s \partial Y_{s'}}+\epsilon\delta_{s,s'})\frac{\partial Y_{s'}}{\partial x_j}
\end{eqnarray}
The numerical results are shown in Fig.\ref{pic::Spin}, where we have tested the Heisenberg model of size $50\times50$ with the Gradient descent, CG method and the NGD with Eq.(\ref{matrix::Spin}) as the metric. Our method has better performance both in convergence speed and final accuracy.
\begin{figure} [tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{pic/Spin.pdf}
\caption{The cost function in Eq.(\ref{equ::spin}) vs optimization step. The relative error is defined as $|(L(\vec{S}_i)-L_{min})/L_{min}|$, where $L_{min}$ is the exact ground state(antiferromagnetic state) energe of Eq.(\ref{equ::Hamiltonian}). Three methods are show for the comparison. They are gradient descent of black line, CG method of red line and the NGD with the matrix we found in the green line. Our method is better then the Gradient descent and the CG method in both the convergence speed and the final value. }\label{pic::Spin}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Minimal eigen-value of a given matrix}\label{subsection::eig}
Next we are going to show an example in which the well-known FI matrix exists but has no advantage over gradient descent. Fortunately we could find another metric instead through our strategy.
Given a real random matrix(not positive definite) $H$ , we use the optimization methods to find its minimal eigen-value. The cost function is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{equ::Hamiltonian}
L( { x})=\frac{\sum_{i,j} x_iH_{i,j}x_j}{\sum_i x_i^2}
\end{equation}
The FI is calculated through Eq.(\ref{metric::FI}), where the probability in this model is $\rho_i=x_i/Z$ with $Z=\sqrt{\sum_i x_i^2}$. It can be easily proof that the NGD with FI as the metric is identical to the gradient descent in this example.
On the other hand, our strategy can give a metric that work much better that the gradient descent. Here we selected the normalized vector $Y_i=x_i/Z$ as the reference manifold. The cost function on reference space becomes a quadratic function, whose Hessian matrix could be used as the metric. Performing the Eq.(\ref{eqn:GX}), we have
\begin{equation}\label{matrix::Hamiltonian}
G^{eig}_{i,j}=\sum_{k,l} \frac{\partial Y_k}{\partial x_i}(H_{k,l}+\epsilon\delta_{k,l})\frac{\partial Y_l}{\partial x_j}
\end{equation}
The numerical results are shown in Fig.\ref{pic::eig}, where we have tested a $1000\times1000$ random matrix with the Gradient descent(NGD with FI as metric), CG method and the NGD with Eq.(\ref{matrix::Hamiltonian}) as the metric. In this test the CG method is much better than the gradient descent and reached the accuracy of $10^{-12}$ after 125 steps. Our method could reach high accuracy with much fewer steps.
\begin{figure} [tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{pic/eig.pdf}
\caption{The cost function in Eq.(\ref{equ::Hamiltonian}) vs optimization step. The relative error is defined as $|(L(x)-L_{min})/L_{min}|$, where $L_{min}$ is the exact minimal eigen-value of Eq.(\ref{equ::Hamiltonian}). In the example the search direction from the NGD with FI matrix Eq.(\ref{metric::FI}) are exact the same as that from gradient descent. Three methods are show for the comparison. They are gradient descent in black color, CG method in red line and the NGD with the matrix we found in the green. Here we show that the FI matrix may not be the best choice as the metric for the NGD and our method could find another one to take its place. }\label{pic::eig}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{ conclusion} \label{section::conclusion}
We put forward a strategy to determine the the geometry of the optimization landscape used in the natural gradient descent method by looking for a suitable reference manifold to simplify the cost function.
The critical step of our method is to determine the reference manifold $Y$. This can be done by looking for a transformation $f:X\rightarrow Y$ as the discussion in sec.(\ref{section::theory}). For the ansatz-type problems, the most simple way to do so is to use the physical space as the reference manifold. We have shown how to do this in several examples. In our examples, more than one metrics have been found. And all the metrics we found have out-standing performance in the natural gradient descent method even in the case where the Fisher information matrix fails. This proves that our method is more universal than traditional NGD using only Fisher information matrix.
We remark that the purpose of this work is to give more insight into the NGD. We have learnt that the metrics of high quality can be determined by the cost function and are not unique. This will give us much more freedom in choosing metrics in the applications of NGD.
\section{Acknowledgement:}
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 12104433)
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Cone Conjecture}
To understand the geometry of a smooth projective variety $X$, studying the Mori cone of curves $\NE(X)$ and its dual, the nef cone $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$, is central, especially from the viewpoint of the minimal model program (MMP).
An important part of the relationship between the Mori cone and the MMP is
captured by
the Cone Theorem and the Contraction Theorem.
These theorems assert that the $K_X$-negative part
of the Mori cone of a smooth projective variety $X$ is rational polyhedral away from the $K_X$-trivial hyperplane,
and the extremal rays of the $K_X$-negative part
correspond to some morphisms from $X$, involved in the MMP.
In particular, when $X$ is a Fano variety (namely, $-K_X$ is ample),
the cone $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ is a rational polyhedral cone,
and its extremal rays are generated by semiample classes.
In general, however, it is difficult to describe the whole Mori cone,
or dually the whole nef cone, even under the slightly weaker
assumption that $-K_X$ is semiample.
For instance, if $X$ is the blowup of $\PP^2$ at the base points of
a general pencil of cubic curves in $\PP^2$, then $-K_X$ is semiample but $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ is not rational polyhedral.
When $X$ is $K$-trivial,
we expect nevertheless that some essential parts of the nef cone of $X$ are rational polyhedral, up to the action of $\mathrm{Aut}(X)$. A precise statement, known as the Cone Conjecture, was first formulated by Morrison \cite{Mo93} and Kawamata \cite{Ka97}.
It was later generalized by Totaro~\cite{To10}
to klt Calabi--Yau pairs $(X,\Delta)$
(see Section~\ref{ssec-kltCY}),
thus including much more examples,
already in dimension $2$.
In this work, we study the Cone Conjecture for the nef cones of certain Calabi--Yau pairs.
Let us recall the statement of the Cone Conjecture for nef cones
formulated by Totaro in~\cite[Conjecture 2.1]{To10} (in the absolute situation).
For a pair $(X, \Delta)$, we define
$$\mathrm{Aut}(X,\Delta) \mathrel{:=} \Set{ f \in \mathrm{Aut}(X) | f(\mathrm{supp}(\Delta)) = \mathrm{supp}(\Delta) }.$$
We also define the \textit{nef effective cone}
$\Nefe(X)$ as
\[ \Nefe(X) := \mathrm{Nef}(X)\cap \Eff(X), \]
where $\Eff(X)$ is the effective cone of $X$.
\begin{conjecture}[Kawamata--Morrison--Totaro Cone Conjecture]\label{cone} Let $(X, \Delta)$ be a klt Calabi--Yau pair.
There exists a rational polyhedral cone $\Pi$ in $\Nefe(X)$ which is a fundamental domain for the action of $\mathrm{Aut}(X, \Delta)$ on $\Nefe(X)$, in the sense that
\[ \Nefe(X) =\bigcup_{g\in\mathrm{Aut}(X, \Delta)}g^{\ast}\Pi, \]
and $\Pi^{\circ} \cap (g^{\ast}\Pi)^{\circ} = \varnothing$ unless $g^{\ast} = \mathrm{id}$.
\end{conjecture}
An important prediction of
the Cone Conjecture to the Minimal Model Program is that
the number of $\mathrm{Aut}(X, \Delta)$-equivalence classes of faces of the nef effective cone $\Nefe(X)$ corresponding to birational contractions or fiber space structures is finite (see e.g.~\cite[p.243]{To10}).
There is also a birational version of Conjecture \ref{cone}, involving the action of pseudo-automorphisms on the movable cone (see e.g.~\cite[Conjecture 2.1.(2)]{To10}), which we will not study here.
Thanks to the fundamental work of Looijenga~\cite{Lo14},
it is natural and well-known to divide Conjecture~\ref{cone}
into two parts as follows (see Corollary~\ref{cor-equivconj}). Let $\Nefp(X)$ denote the convex hull of
\[ \mathrm{Nef}(X)\cap N^1(X)_{\QQ},\]
where $N^1(X)_{\QQ}$ is the rational N\'eron--Severi space of $X$.
\begin{conjecture}\label{conep}
Let $(X, \Delta)$ be a klt Calabi--Yau pair.
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exists a rational polyhedral cone in $\Nefp(X)$ which is a fundamental domain for the action of $\mathrm{Aut}(X, \Delta)$ on $\Nefp(X)$.
\item
We have
$$\Nefp(X) = \Nefe(X).$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{conjecture}
Let us note that in
Conjecture \ref{conep}.(2), the inclusion $\Nefe(X) \subset \Nefp(X)$ is known in general (see \cite[Lemma 5.1]{LZ22}), while the reverse is still wide open even in dimension $3$.
\subsection{Nef cones of fiber products}
The starting point of this work is a decomposition theorem for the nef cone of a fiber product over a curve.
It begins with the following general question.
Let $W_1$ and $W_2$ be smooth projective varieties and let
$\phi_1 : W_1 \to B$ and $\phi_2 : W_2 \to B$ be
surjective morphisms with connected fibers
over a smooth base $B$.
Assume that
the fiber product $W \mathrel{:=} W_1 \times_B W_2$ is smooth.
\begin{ques}\label{que-decompNef}
Let $p_i : W \to W_i$ be the projection.
When do we have
\begin{equation}\label{decomp-Nef}
p_1^* \mathrm{Nef}(W_1) + p_2^* \mathrm{Nef}(W_2) = \mathrm{Nef}(W)?
\end{equation}
\end{ques}
As the nef cone $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ of a smooth projective variety $X$
spans the whole space $N^1(X)_\RR$
of numerical classes of $\RR$-divisors,
such a decomposition exists only if
\begin{equation}\label{decomp-N1}
p_1^*N^1(W_1)_{\RR} + p_2^*N^1(W_2)_{\RR} = N^1(W)_{\RR}.
\end{equation}
We may then ask which fiber products satisfying the decomposition~\eqref{decomp-N1} also have the decomposition~\eqref{decomp-Nef}.
When $B$ is a point,
it follows from the projection formula that~\eqref{decomp-N1} implies~\eqref{decomp-Nef}.
When $B$ is $\PP^1$ and the varieties $W_i$ are certain rational elliptic surfaces, the decomposition~\eqref{decomp-Nef}
was proven in~\cite[Proposition 3.1]{GM93}.
We show that the implication~\eqref{decomp-N1} $\Rightarrow$~\eqref{decomp-Nef}
continues to hold for an arbitrary
fiber product over a curve.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm-nefdec} For $i=1,2$, let $\phi_i : W_i \to B$ be a surjective morphism with connected fibers from a smooth projective variety to a smooth projective curve $B$. Assume that
\begin{enumerate}
\item the variety $W=W_1 \times_B W_2$ is smooth;
\item we have $$p_1^*N^1(W_1)_{\RR}+p_2^*N^1(W_2)_{\RR}=N^1(W)_{\RR}.$$
\end{enumerate}
Then
$$p_1^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_1) + p_2^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_2)=\mathrm{Nef}(W).$$
As a consequence, we also have
$ p_1^*\Amp(W_1) + p_2^*\Amp(W_2)=\Amp(W)$.
\end{theorem}
In Examples~\ref{ex-nondecomp} and~\ref{ex-nondecompbis},
we construct explicit examples of
fiber products over bases of dimension at least 2 that fail the implication ~\eqref{decomp-N1} $\Rightarrow$~\eqref{decomp-Nef}.
Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec}
has the following corollary.
\begin{cor}\label{cor-extr}
In the setting of Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec},
$E \in \mathrm{Nef}(W_i)$ is extremal if and only if $p_i^*E \in \mathrm{Nef}(W)$ is extremal.
As a consequence,
$\mathrm{Nef}(W)$ is rational polyhedral
if and only if both $\mathrm{Nef}(W_1)$
and $\mathrm{Nef}(W_2)$ are rational polyhedral.
\end{cor}
It provides a way of
constructing fiber products (over curves) whose nef cones are not rational polyhedral.
\subsection{Cone Conjecture for Schoen varieties}
Among the strict Calabi--Yau manifolds (see Definition \ref{def-cymfd}) whose nef cones are
known to be non rational polyhedral,
to our knowledge, the Cone Conjecture is known so far for
only two special cases.
One of them is the desingularized Horrocks--Mumford quintics, studied by Borcea in \cite{Bo91} (see also \cite{Fr01}); the other is the fiber product of two general rational elliptic surfaces with sections over $\PP^1$ constructed by Schoen in \cite{Sc88}, and investigated by Namikawa and Grassi--Morrison~\cite{Na91,GM93}.
Both examples are of dimension three.
The main goal of this paper is to
prove the Cone Conjecture for
higher dimensional generalizations
of Schoen's Calabi--Yau threefolds.
These are
a certain type of fiber products over $\PP^1$ as in Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec},
which we call {\it Schoen varieties}.
Let us first summarize the construction of Schoen varieties;
we refer to Subsections \ref{subsec-Wconstr} and \ref{subsec-Xconstr} for more details.
Let $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ be Fano manifolds of dimension at least two.
For $i = 1,2$,
let $D_i$ be an ample and globally generated divisor on $Z_i$ such that $-(K_{Z_i}+D_i)$ is globally generated.
Let $W_i \subset \PP^1\times Z_i$ be a general member in the linear system $|\OO_{\PP^1}(1)\boxtimes\OO_{Z_i}(D_i)|$. We have a fibration $\phi_i: W_i \to \PP^1$. Consider the fiber product over $\PP^1$:
\[ \phi: X:= W_1 \times_{\PP^1} W_2 \to \PP^1. \]
Such a smooth projective variety $X$ is called a {\it Schoen variety}
under an extra assumption (see the second paragraph of Subsection \ref{subsec-Xconstr}).
It follows from the construction that $-K_X$ is globally generated,
so $X$ has many effective $\QQ$-divisors $\Delta$ which are $\QQ$-linearly equivalent to $-K_X$.
Any such $\Delta$ forms a Calabi--Yau pair $(X,\Delta)$, that we call a {\it Schoen pair}.
We prove the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{main}
Let $(X,\Delta)$ be a Schoen pair.
Then there exists a rational polyhedral fundamental domain for the action of $\mathrm{Aut}(X, \Delta)$ on $\Nefe(X) =\Nefp(X) = \mathrm{Nef}(X)$.
\end{theorem}
Note that, by Corollary \ref{cor-extr},
the cone $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ is not rational polyhedral
as long as one of $\mathrm{Nef}(W_1)$ and $\mathrm{Nef}(W_2)$ is not.
This is the case when there exists $i$ such that $Z_i = \PP^2$ and
$D_i=-K_{Z_i}$ (in which case $W_i$ is a rational elliptic surface).
In particular, our construction provides
the first series of strict Calabi--Yau manifolds, and also
Calabi--Yau pairs in arbitrary dimension,
for which
the Cone Conjecture holds and whose nef cones are not rational polyhedral (see
Example \ref{ex-infinite}).
We also note that $X$ is a complete intersection of two hypersurfaces, which are nef but not ample, in the Fano manifold $\PP^1\times Z_1 \times Z_2$.
That the cone $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ may admit infinitely many faces resonates with Theorem \ref{kol} below.
As well-known corollaries of the Cone Conjecture,
we also obtain the finite presentation of the group of components $\pi_0\mathrm{Aut}(X)$ and the finiteness of real structures on $X$ up to equivalence; see Corollary~\ref{cor_finite}.
\subsection{Relation to other work}
\subsubsection{Cone Conjecture}
We refer to~\cite{LOP18} and the references therein
for a survey of the Cone Conjecture without the boundary (namely with $\Delta = 0$).
As for the Cone Conjecture for Calabi--Yau pairs,
the $2$-dimensional case was proven by Totaro~\cite{To10}.
Kopper proved the Cone Conjecture for Calabi--Yau pairs arising from Hilbert schemes of points on certain rational elliptic surfaces in \cite{Ko20}. In this case, the nef cone may admit infinitely many faces, while the dimensions of these varieties are always even.
See also~\cite{FHS21, LZ22} for some recent results.
\subsubsection{Cone Conjectures for varieties with rational polyhedral nef cones}
One way of proving the Cone Conjecture
for a smooth projective variety $X$ is to show that $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ is a rational polyhedral cone
and that $\mathrm{Nef}(X) = \Nefe(X)$ (see e.g.~\cite[Proposition 6.5]{La13}).
This is the case when $X$ is a smooth anticanonical hypersurface in a Fano manifold $Y$
with $\dim Y \ge 4$~\cite[Proposition 3.5]{BI09} (based on~\cite{Ko91} due to Koll\'ar).
\begin{theorem}\label{kol} Let $D$ be a smooth anticanonical hypersurface in a Fano manifold $Y$ of dimension at least $4$. Then the natural restriction map $\mathrm{Nef}(D)\to\mathrm{Nef}(Y)$ is an isomorphism. In particular, $\mathrm{Nef}(D)$ is a rational polyhedral cone which is generated by classes of semi-ample divisors.
\end{theorem}
See~\cite{PS12b, CPS14, CPS19}, due to Coskun and Prendergast-Smith, for other examples of varieties $X$
whose nef cones are rational polyhedral
with $\mathrm{Nef}(X) = \Nefe(X)$.
\subsubsection{Fiber product constructions}
Constructing Calabi--Yau threefolds as
fiber products of two general rational elliptic surfaces with sections over $\PP^1$ was
first considered and investigated by Schoen~\cite{Sc88}.
It recently came back to light as Suzuki considered a certain higher-dimensional generalization of Schoen's construction and studied its arithmetic properties in \cite{Su21}. Similar ideas are also involved in
Sano's constructions of non-K\"{a}hler Calabi--Yau manifolds with arbitrarily large second Betti number in \cite{Sa21}.
\subsubsection{Cone conjecture for movable cones}
We have already mentioned the Cone Conjecture for movable cones~\cite[Conjecture 2.1.(2)]{To10}. In particular, it predicts
that a Calabi--Yau variety has only
finitely many minimal models up to isomorphisms; see~\cite{Mo96, Ka97, To10, LOP18} for more details. This conjecture was verified for some cases. In \cite{CO15}, Cantat and Oguiso produced the first series of strict Calabi--Yau manifolds in arbitrary dimension whose movable cones are not rational polyhedral and for which the Cone Conjecture for movable cones holds. We refer to \cite{Wa22} and references therein for more examples.
In \cite{Na91} Namikawa showed that for a certain Schoen threefold (which is a Calabi--Yau threefold), the number of its minimal models up to isomorphism is finite. It would be interesting to investigate a similar problem in arbitrary dimension.
\subsection{Structure of the paper}
Section~\ref{prel} is devoted to some preliminary and fundamental results.
We will prove Theorem \ref{thm-nefdec} in Section \ref{dec}.
After constructing Schoen varieties and Schoen pairs in Section~\ref{cons},
we will prove Theorem \ref{main} in Section~\ref{prof}.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Professors Keiji Oguiso and Burt Totaro for their suggestions and encouragement.
The first author would like to thank JSPS Summer Program for providing the opportunity to visit the third author in Tokyo, where this paper was written. The third author would like to thank Department of Mathematics at National University of Singapore, Professor De-Qi Zhang and Doctor Jia Jia for warm hospitality.
The second author is supported by
the Ministry of Education Yushan Young Scholar Fellowship (NTU-110VV006)
and the National Science and Technology Council
(110-2628-M-002-006-).
The third author is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 21J10242.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{prel}
We work over the field $\CC$ of complex numbers throughout this paper. For basics of birational geometry, we refer to ~\cite{KM98}.
\subsection{Notation}\label{ssec-notation} We start with some notations. Let $X$ be a normal projective variety.
We write $N^1(X)$ for the free abelian group generated by the classes of Cartier divisors modulo numerical equivalence.
Inside the vector space $N^1(X)_{\RR}:=N^1(X)\otimes \RR$, we denote by $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ the \textit{nef cone}, i.e., the closure of the ample cone $\Amp(X)$, and by $\Eff(X)$ the \textit{effective cone}. The \textit{nef effective cone} $\Nefe(X)$ is defined as
\[ \Nefe(X) := \mathrm{Nef}(X)\cap \Eff(X). \]
Let $\Nefp(X)$ denote the convex hull of
\[ \mathrm{Nef}(X)\cap N^1(X)_{\QQ}, \]
where $N^1(X)_{\QQ}:=N^1(X)\otimes \QQ$. We denote by $N_1(X)$ the group of $1$-cycles modulo numerical equivalence. The intersection product defines a perfect pairing between two vector spaces $N^1(X)_{\RR}$ and $N_1(X)_{\RR}$. Under this pairing, the nef cone $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ is dual to the \textit{Mori cone} $\NE(X)$,
which is the closure of the convex cone of effective $1$-cycles in $N_1(X)_{\RR}$.
The group of automorphisms of $X$ is denoted by $\mathrm{Aut}(X)$, and acts on $N^1(X)$ by pullback. This action
\[ \rho: \mathrm{Aut}(X) \to \mathrm{GL}(N^1(X))
\]
linearly extends to $N^1(X)_{\RR}$, preserving the cones $\Nefe(X)$ and $\Nefp(X)$. The connected component of the identity in $\mathrm{Aut}(X)$ is a normal subgroup $\mathrm{Aut}^0(X)$, which acts trivially on $N^1(X)$ \cite[Lemma 2.8]{Br18}.
\subsection{Klt Calabi--Yau pairs}\label{ssec-kltCY}
A \textit{pair} is the data $(X, \Delta)$ of a normal projective variety $X$ together with an effective $\RR$-divisor $\Delta$ on $X$ such that $K_X + \Delta$ is $\RR$-Cartier.
\begin{definition}\label{def-cypair} Following \cite{To10}, we say that a pair $(X, \Delta)$ is \textit{Calabi--Yau} if $X$ is $\QQ$-factorial and $K_X + \Delta$ is numerically trivial.
\end{definition}
Let us briefly recall the definition of a klt pair.
For any pair $(X,\Delta)$ and any birational morphism $\mu : \ti{X} \to X$, there exists a unique $\RR$-divisor $\ti{\Delta}$ on $\ti{X}$ such that $$K_{\ti{X}} + \ti{\Delta} = \mu^*(K_X + \Delta) \ \text{ and }\ \mu_*\ti{\Delta} = \Delta.$$
A pair $(X, \Delta)$ is called \textit{klt} (short for \textit{Kawamata log terminal}),
if
for any birational morphism $\mu : (\ti{X},\ti{\Delta}) \to (X,\Delta)$ as above,
each irreducible component of $\ti{\Delta}$ has coefficient
less than one.
It suffices to check this property for one resolution $\ti{X}$ of $X$ where $\ti{\Delta}$ has simple normal crossings.
\begin{definition}\label{def-cymfd}
Let $X$ be a smooth projective variety. We say that $X$ is a {\it Calabi--Yau manifold}
if the canonical line bundle $K_X$ is trivial and $h^i(X,\OO_X)=0$ for any $0<i<\dim X$. If in addition, $X$ is simply-connected, it is called a {\it strict Calabi--Yau manifold}.
\end{definition}
\subsection{Looijenga's result}
We will use the following crucial result in this paper.
\begin{proposition}\label{pro-looij}
Let $X$ be a normal projective variety
and let $H \le \mathrm{Aut}(X)$ be a subgroup.
Assume that there is a rational polyhedral cone $\Pi\subset \Nefp(X)$ such that
$\Amp(X)\subset H \cdot\Pi.$ Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item $H\cdot \Pi = \Nefp(X)$, and the $H$-action on $\Nefp(X)$ has a rational polyhedral fundamental domain.
\item The group $\rho(H)$ is finitely presented.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
Such a result and related statements are well-known to experts.
We include a proof
for the sake of completeness.
It relies on the
fundamental results due to Looijenga~\cite[Proposition 4.1, Application 4.14, and Corollary 4.15]{Lo14}, which we extract and formulate here as Lemma~\ref{looij}.
Recall that a cone $C \subset N_{\RR}$ in a finite dimensional $\RR$-vector space $N_{\RR}$ is called {\it strict} if its closure $\overline{C} \subset N_{\RR}$
contains no line.
\begin{lemma}\label{looij}
Let $N$ be a finitely generated free $\ZZ$-module, and let $C$ be a strict convex open cone in the $\RR$-vector space $N_{\RR}:= N\otimes \RR$.
Let $C^{+}$ be the convex hull of $\overline{C} \cap N_{\QQ}$.
Let $(C^\vee)^\circ \subset N_{\RR}^\vee$ be the interior of the dual cone of $C$.
Let $\Gamma$ be a subgroup of $\mathrm{GL}(N)$ which preserves the cone $C$. Suppose that:
\begin{itemize}
\item there is a rational polyhedral cone $\Pi \subset C^+$ such that $C \subset \Gamma\cdot\Pi$;
\item there exists an element $\xi \in (C^\vee)^\circ \cap N_{\QQ}^\vee$ whose stabilizer in
$\Gamma$ (with respect to the dual action
$\Gamma \circlearrowleft N_{\QQ}^\vee$) is trivial.
\end{itemize}
Then $\Gamma \cdot \Pi = C^+$
and the $\Gamma$-action on $C^{+}$ has
a rational polyhedral fundamental domain.
Moreover, the group $\Gamma$ is finitely presented.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lem}\label{lem-trivstab}
There exists an ample class $\eta \in N^1(X)$ such that
for every $g \in \mathrm{Aut}(X)$,
we have $g^*\eta = \eta$ if and only if
$g^*$ acts trivially on $N^1(X)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Our proof is inspired by the argument
of \cite[Proposition 6.5]{La13}.
Let $\Gamma \mathrel{:=} \rho(\mathrm{Aut}(X)) \subset \mathrm{GL}(N^1(X))$
and for every $\theta \in N^1(X)$,
let $\Gamma_{\theta}$ be the stabilizer of $\theta$
of the $\Gamma$-action on $N^1(X)$.
It suffices to find
an ample class $\eta \in N^1(X)$ such that
$\Gamma_\eta$ is trivial.
By Fujiki--Liebermann's theorem~\cite[Theorem 2.10]{Br18}, the action of $\Gamma$ on $C\cap N$ has finite stabilizers.
Take an element $\theta\in C \cap N_{\QQ}$
such that the order of the stabilizer $\Gamma_{\theta}$ is minimal.
Since the $\Gamma$-action on $N_{\RR}$ preserves $N$,
we can find an open neighborhood $U\subset C$ of $\theta$, such that $\gamma U \cap U = \varnothing$ for every $\gamma \notin \Gamma_{\theta}$. Thus, for every $\theta' \in U\cap N_{\QQ}$, we have $\Gamma_{\theta'} \subset \Gamma_{\theta}$, which then implies $\Gamma_{\theta'} = \Gamma_{\theta}$ by the minimality of $\Gamma_{\theta}$. It follows that every $\gamma\in\Gamma_{\theta}$ satisfies $\gamma|_{U\cap N_{\QQ}} = \mathrm{id}_{U\cap N_{\QQ}}$, and since $\gamma$ acts linearly, necessarily $\gamma = \mathrm{id}$. This proves that $\theta\in C \cap N_{\QQ}$ has trivial stabilizer, and so do some positive multiple $\eta \in C \cap N$ of $\theta$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{pro-looij}]
In Lemma \ref{looij}, now set $N=N^1(X)$, $C=\Amp(X)$, and $\Gamma=\rho(H)$.
By Lemma \ref{looij}, it suffices to
construct an element $\xi\in (C^{\vee})^{\circ} \cap N^{\vee}_{\QQ}$ with trivial stabilizer with respect to the induced $\Gamma$-action.
For every $\theta \in N$,
let $\Gamma_{\theta}$ be the stabilizer of $\theta$
of the $\Gamma$-action on $N$.
Choose any $\xi \in (C^\vee)^\circ$.
Since $\xi(x) > 0$ for any $x \in \overline{C} \backslash \{0\}$, the subset
$$\Set{x \in \overline{C} | \xi(x) \le r} \subset V$$
is bounded, so compact for any $r > 0$.
Since $ C \cap N$ is discrete, among
$$\Sigma \mathrel{:=} \Set{\eta \in C \cap N | \Gamma_{\eta} \text{ is trivial}},$$
which is nonempty by Lemma~\ref{lem-trivstab},
there are only finitely many $\eta\in\Sigma$ minimizing $\xi|_{\Sigma}$.
Again, as $C \cap N$ is discrete, we can perturb $\xi$ and obtain $\xi_0 \in (C^\vee)^\circ \cap N^\vee_{\QQ}$ such that there is a unique $\eta\in\Sigma$ minimizing $\xi_0|_{\Sigma}$.
As $\Sigma$ is $\Gamma$-invariant, we have
$$(\gamma \xi_0)(\eta) = \xi_0(\gamma \eta) > \xi_0(\eta)$$
for every $\gamma \notin \Gamma_{\eta}$.
Since $\eta\in\Sigma$, the stabilizer $\Gamma_{\eta}$ is trivial,
so the stabilizer of $\xi_0$ in $\Gamma$ is trivial as well.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor-equivconj}
Conjecture~\ref{cone} and Conjecture~\ref{conep} are equivalent.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that Conjecture~\ref{conep} implies
Conjecture~\ref{cone}.
Now assume Conjecture~\ref{cone}.
Let $\Pi$ be a rational polyhedral fundamental domain for the action of $\mathrm{Aut}(X,\Delta)$ on $\Nefe(X)$. Then $\Pi \subset \Nefp(X)$. By Proposition \ref{pro-looij}.(1),
$$\Nefe(X) = \mathrm{Aut}(X,\Delta) \cdot \Pi = \Nefp(X).$$
So Conjecture~\ref{conep} holds.
\end{proof}
\section{The nef cone of a fiber product over a curve}\label{dec}
We now prove Theorem \ref{thm-nefdec} about the decomposition of the nef cone.
For $i=1,2$, recall that $\phi_i : W_i \to B$ is a surjective morphism with connected fibers from a smooth projective variety to a smooth projective curve $B$.
We consider the fiber product
\[ \xymatrix@=1.5em{ & W = W_1 \times_{B} W_2 \ar[dl]^{p_1} \ar[dd]_{p} \ar[dr]_{p_2} \\
W_1 \ar[dr]_{\phi_1} & & W_2 \ . \ar[dl]^{\phi_2} \\
& B } \]
and work under the following assumptions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the variety $W = W_1 \times_{B} W_2$ is smooth;
\item for every $D \in N^1(W)_{\RR}$, there exist $D_1 \in N^1(W_1)_{\RR}$ and $D_2 \in N^1(W_2)_{\RR}$ such that \[ D = p_1^*D_1 + p_2^*D_2. \]
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-nefdec}.]
Let $D \in \mathrm{Nef}(W)$ and let
$$D = p_1^*D_1 + p_2^*D_2 \in N^1(W)_{\RR}$$
be a decomposition as in (2).
First, note the following simple fact.
\begin{lem}\label{lem-vert}
Let $C_i \subset W_i$ be an irreducible curve.
If $\phi_i(C_i)$ is a point, then $ D_i \cdot C_i \ge 0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We may only consider $i = 1$. Choose any point $s \in \phi_2^{-1}(\phi_1(C_1))$ and let
$\ti{C_1} \mathrel{:=} C_1 \times_{B} \{s\} \subset W.$
We have
$$0 \le D \cdot \ti{C_1} = (p_1^*D_1 + p_2^*D_2) \cdot \ti{C_1}
= D_1 \cdot p_{1*}\ti{C_1} + D_2 \cdot p_{2*}\ti{C_1} = D_1 \cdot C_1.$$
This proves the assertion.
\end{proof}
We use this fact to prove the following two lemmas.
\begin{lem}\label{lem-nef}
Either $D_1$ or $D_2$ is nef.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Assume by contradiction that both $D_1$ and $D_2$ are not nef.
Then for each $i$, there exists an irreducible curve $C_i \subset W_i$
such that $D_i \cdot C_i < 0$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem-vert},
we have $\phi_i(C_i) = B$, so $\ti{C} \mathrel{:=} C_1 \times_{B} C_2$ is a curve.
Let $\beta_1,\beta_2 \in \ZZ_{>0}$
be such that $p_{i*}\ti{C} = \beta_i C_i$.
Then
$$0 > \beta_1 D_1 \cdot C_1 + \beta_2 D_2 \cdot C_2 = (p_1^*D_1 + p_2^*D_2) \cdot \ti{C} = D \cdot \ti{C} \ge 0,$$
which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
Now we fix a point $b \in B$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem-fib}
For $i=1,2$, there exists $N_i \in \RR$ such that the divisor $D_i + n \phi_i^*b$ is nef if $n\ge N_i$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We may only consider the case when $i=2$.
\noindent Let $C_1 \subset W_1$ be an irreducible curve such that $\phi_1(C_1) = B$.
Define
$$D_1' \mathrel{:=} D_1 - N_2 \phi_1^*b \ \ \text{ and } \ \ D_2' \mathrel{:=} D_2 + N_2 \phi_2^*b$$
where
$$N_2 \mathrel{:=} \frac{D_1 \cdot C_1}{ \deg (C_1 \xto{\phi_1} B)}.$$
By construction, we have
$$D'_1 \cdot C_1 = 0\mbox{ and }D = p_1^*D_1' + p_2^*D_2'.$$
Let us show that $D_2'$ is nef. Let $C_2 \subset W_2$ be an irreducible curve.
If $\phi_2(C_2)$ is a point, then $D'_2 \cdot C_2 \ge 0$ by Lemma~\ref{lem-vert}.
Suppose now that $\phi_2(C_2) = B$.
Set $\ti{C} \mathrel{:=} C_1 \times_{B} C_2$ and define $\beta_1,\beta_2 \in \ZZ_{>0}$
such that $p_{i*}\ti{C} = \beta_i C_i$.
We have
\begin{align*}
\beta_2 D'_2 \cdot C_2
&= \beta_1 D'_1 \cdot C_1 + \beta_2 D'_2 \cdot C_2 \\
&= (p_1^*D'_1 + p_2^*D'_2) \cdot \ti{C}\\
&= D \cdot \ti{C} \ge 0.
\end{align*}
This shows that
$D'_2$ is nef.
Hence, for $n\ge N_2$, the divisor
$$D_2+n\phi_2^*b = D'_2+(n - N_2)\phi_2^*b$$
is nef.
\end{proof}
We can now resume the proof of Theorem \ref{thm-nefdec}. For any $t \in \RR$, let
$$D_1(t) \mathrel{:=} D_1 - t \phi_1^*b \ \ \text{ and } \ \ D_2(t) \mathrel{:=} D_2 + t \phi_2^*b.$$
By Lemma~\ref{lem-fib}, there exist
$$I_1 = ]-\infty,-N_{1,\mathrm{min}}] \ \ \text{ and } \ \ I_2 = [N_{2,\mathrm{min}}, +\infty[$$
such that $D_i(t)$ is nef if and only if $t \in I_i$.
Since we have
$$ D = p_1^*D_1(t) + p_2^*D_2(t),$$
Lemma~\ref{lem-nef} shows that either $D_1(t)$ or $D_2(t)$ is nef, namely, $I_1 \cup I_2 = \RR$.
Thus, $I_1 \cap I_2$ is non-empty. As both
$D_1(t)$ and $D_2(t)$ are nef whenever $t \in I_1 \cap I_2$,
this gives a desired decomposition.
The last statement about the decomposition of the ample cone follows from~\cite[Corollary 6.6.2]{MR0274683}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} In the setup of Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec}, we also have the decomposition of the relative nef cone
\[ \mathrm{Nef}(W/B) = p_1^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_1/B) + p_2^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_2/B)
\]
by the projection formula -- this is exactly Lemma \ref{lem-vert}.
\end{remark}
Now we prove Corollary~\ref{cor-extr}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary~\ref{cor-extr}]
We may assume $i=1$.
First assume that $p_1^*E$ is extremal. Let $E = F + F'$ be a decomposition with
$F, F' \in \mathrm{Nef}(W_1)$. Then $p_1^*E = p_1^*F + p_1^*F'$ with $p_1^*F, p_1^*F' \in \mathrm{Nef}(W)$, and thus, $p_1^*F$ and $p_1^*F'$ are proportional by assumption. Since $p_1^* : N^1(W_1)_{\RR} \to N^1(W)_{\RR}$ is injective, $F$ and $F'$ are proportional as well. This shows that $E$ is extremal.
Next assume that $E \in \mathrm{Nef}(W_1)$ is extremal.
Let $p_1^*E = D + D'$ be a decomposition with
$D,D' \in \mathrm{Nef}(W)$. Up to adding terms to $D'$, we can assume that $D$ is extremal.
By Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec}, we can write
$$D = p_1^*D_1 + p_2^*D_2, \ \text{ and } \
D'= p_1^*D'_1 + p_2^*D'_2$$
with $D_i,D'_i \in \mathrm{Nef}(W_i)$.
As $D$ is extremal, the divisors $D$, $p_1^*D_1$ and $p_2^* D_2$ are proportional. Moreover
$p_1^*(E-D_1-D_1')=p_2^*(D_2 + D'_2) \in \mathrm{Nef}(W)$.
Hence, by the projection formula, $E-D_1-D_1'$ is nef. But $E$ is extremal in the cone $\mathrm{Nef}(W_1)$, so $E$, $D_1$, and $D_1'$ are proportional. In particular, $p_1^*E, p_1^*D_1, p_1^*D'_1$ and $p_2^*D_2$ are all proportional, which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
Now we construct
fiber products
showing that Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec}
fails in general when $\dim B \ge 2$.
First we construct such examples
of fiber products over a surface.
\begin{example}\label{ex-nondecomp}
Take $S:=\PP^2$, and take four points $P_1$, $P_2$, $P_3$, $P_4$ in $S$ so that no three of them lie on a line. Let $\ell_1$ be the line through $P_1$, $P_2$, and let $\ell_2$ be the line through $P_3$, $P_4$.
Take
$$
W_1:=\mathrm{Bl}_{P_{1}, P_{2}}(S) \ \
\text{ and } \ \ W_2:=\mathrm{Bl}_{P_{3}, P_{4}}(S).$$ As the blown-up points are distinct, $W:=W_1\times_{S} W_2$ is isomorphic to $\mathrm{Bl}_{P_1,P_2,P_3,P_4}(S)$, which is smooth. Moreover, the decomposition of the Picard group
$$\mathrm{Pic}(W)=p_1^*\mathrm{Pic}(W_1)+p_2^*\mathrm{Pic}(W_2)$$
clearly holds.
Denote by $\ell_1'$ and $\ell_2'$ the strict transforms of $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$ in $W_1$ and $W_2$ respectively. Then $\ell_i'$ is an effective non-nef divisor on $W_i$ as $(\ell_i')^2=-1$.
Let $$D:=p_1^*\ell_1'+p_2^*\ell_2'.$$
We show that $D$ is nef;
this also shows that Lemma~\ref{lem-nef} fails when $\dim B \ge 2$.
As $D$ is effective, it is enough to check that its intersections with its components are all non-negative. By symmetry, it is enough to compute $$D\cdot p_1^*\ell_1'=(\ell_1')^2+\ell_2'\cdot \phi_2^*\ell_1=-1+1=0.$$
So $D$ is nef, and has vanishing intersection with the curves $p_1^*\ell_1'$ and $p_2^*\ell_2'$.
Now assume by contradiction that $D$ has another decomposition $D=p_1^*D_1+p_2^*D_2$ with $D_i \in \mathrm{Nef}(W_i)$. Then
we have
$$p_1^*(\ell'_1 - D_1)
= p_2^*(D_2 - \ell'_2).$$
As $p_1^*N^1(W_1)_{\RR} \cap p_2^*N^1(W_2)_{\RR}$ clearly has dimension one, it
equals $\RR[p^*\ell]$,
where $p : W \to S$ is the blow up, and $\ell$ is a line passing through none of $P_1$, $P_2$, $P_3$, $P_4$ in $S$.
It follows that
$$p_1^*(\ell'_1 - D_1)
= p_2^*(D_2 - \ell'_2) = c p^*\ell$$
for some $c \in \RR$.
Since
$$p_1^*D_1\cdot p_i^*\ell_i'+p_2^*D_2\cdot p_i^*\ell_i'=D\cdot p_i^*\ell'_i = 0,$$
and both $p_1^*D_1$ and $p_2^*D_2$ are nef,
we have $p_i^*D_i\cdot p_i^*\ell_i'=0$.
Thus
$$-1 = p_1^*\ell_1' \cdot p_1^*(\ell'_1 - D_1)
= c p_1^*\ell_1' \cdot p^*\ell = c$$
and similarly,
$$1 = p_2^*\ell_2' \cdot p_2^*(D_2 - \ell'_2)
= c p_2^*\ell_2' \cdot p^*\ell = c,$$
which is a contradiction.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{ex-nondecompbis}
As for examples of fiber products
over a base of higher dimension,
we continue with the notations of Example~\ref{ex-nondecomp}, and
introduce
$$W \times T = (W_1 \times T)
\times_{(S \times T)} (W_2 \times T)$$
where $T$ is an arbitrary smooth projective variety. As in Example~\ref{ex-nondecomp}, $W,W_1$ and $W_2$ are rationally connected, hence have trivial irregularity, so that
$$N^1(Z \times T)_{\RR} = p_Z^*N^1(Z)_{\RR}\oplus p_T^*N^1(T)_{\RR},$$
for $Z=W,W_1$ or $W_2$.
This implies that
$$N^1(W \times T)_{\RR} =
(p_1 \times \id_T)^*N^1(W_1 \times T)_{\RR} +
(p_2 \times \id_T)^*N^1(W_2 \times T)_{\RR}.$$
Note that by the projection formula,
$$\mathrm{Nef}(Z \times T) = p_Z^*\mathrm{Nef}(Z)\oplus p_T^*\mathrm{Nef}(T),$$
for $Z=W,W_1$ or $W_2$. So, if we assume by contradiction that
$$\mathrm{Nef}(W\times T)=(p_1\times\mathrm{id}_T)^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_1\times T)+(p_2\times\mathrm{id}_T)^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_2\times T),$$
we get $\mathrm{Nef}(W)=p_1^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_1)+p_2^*\mathrm{Nef}(W_2)$, which contradicts
Example~\ref{ex-nondecomp}.
\end{example}
For a morphism $\pi:X\to Y$, we define $$\mathrm{Aut}(X/Y)=\{g\in\mathrm{Aut}(X)\mid \pi\circ g = \pi\}.$$
We have
the following corollary of Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec}.
\begin{cor}\label{cor-H1H2} For $i=1,2$, let $\phi_i : W_i \to B$ be a surjective morphism with connected fibers from a smooth projective variety to a smooth projective curve $B$. Assume that
\begin{enumerate}
\item the variety $W=W_1 \times_{B} W_2$ is smooth;
\item it holds $$p_1^*N^1(W_1)_{\RR}+p_2^*N^1(W_2)_{\RR}=N^1(W)_{\RR},$$ where $p_i$ denotes the projection from $W$ onto $W_i$.
\end{enumerate}
\noindent For $i=1,2$, let $H_i \le \mathrm{Aut}(W_i/B)$ be a subgroup. Let $H \le \mathrm{Aut}(W)$ be a subgroup containing $H_1\times H_2$. Assume that
there exists a rational polyhedral cone
$\Pi_i \subset \mathrm{Nef}^{+}(W_i)$
such that $H_i \cdot \Pi_i \supset \Amp(W_i)$.
Then $\mathrm{Nef}^+(W)$ admits a rational polyhedral fundamental domain for the $H$-action.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Pi$ be the convex hull of $p_1^*\Pi_1 + p_2^*\Pi_2$. Then $\Pi$ is a rational polyhedral cone contained in $\mathrm{Nef}^+(W)$. Moreover,
\[ \Amp(W) \subset(H_1 \times H_2) \cdot \Pi \subset H \cdot \Pi
\]
as $p_1^*\Amp(W_1) + p_2^*\Amp(W_2)=\Amp(W)$ by Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec}. The existence of a rational polyhedral fundamental domain then follows from Proposition~\ref{pro-looij}.(1).
\end{proof}
\section{Construction of Schoen varieties}\label{cons}
Schoen varieties will be constructed as a fiber product
of two fibrations over $\PP^1$.
Let us first construct these fibrations.
\subsection{The factor $W$ with a fibration over $\PP^1$}\label{subsec-Wconstr}
The construction relies on a pencil of ample hypersurfaces in a Fano manifold.
Let $Z$ be a Fano manifold of dimension at least $2$, and let $D$ be an ample divisor in $Z$ such that
both $\mathcal{O}_Z(D)$ and $\mathcal{O}_Z(-K_Z - D)$ are globally generated.
Note that
$\mathcal{O}_Z(-K_Z)$ is then globally generated as well.
\begin{example}
Take any toric Fano manifold $Z$ of dimension at least $2$.
Since nef line bundles on a projective toric manifold are globally generated,
any decomposition $-K_Z = D + D'$ as the sum of
an ample divisor $D$ and a nef divisor $D'$ yields a pair $(Z,D)$ satisfying the above condition.
\end{example}
Let $W \subset \PP^1\times Z$ be a general member of
the ample and basepoint-free linear system $|\OO_{\PP^1}(1)\boxtimes\OO_{Z}(D)|$.
We have a fibration $\phi : W \to \PP^1$ via the first projection, and the second projection $\varepsilon : W \to Z$
is the blow-up of $Z$
along the smooth subvariety $Y$ of codimension two cut out by the members of the pencil in $|D|$ defined by $W$.
Since $Z$ is Fano, $W$ is rationally connected.
By construction, the rational curve $\varepsilon^{-1}(y) \simeq\PP^1$ for any $y \in Y$
is a section of $\phi : W \to \PP^1$.
Note that
\begin{equation}\label{acd}
\OO_W(-K_{W}) = \left(\OO_{\PP^1}(1)\boxtimes \OO_{Z}(-K_Z - D)\right)|_{W}
\end{equation}
by the adjunction formula.
So $\OO_W(-K_W)$
is globally generated;
in particular, it is nef and effective.
The following lemma describes
$W$ when $\dim W = 2$. Recall that a smooth projective surface $S$ is called \textit{weak del Pezzo} if its anticanonical divisor $-K_S$ is nef and big.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-dimZ2} If $\dim W = 2$, then either $D \in |-K_Z|$ and $W \xrightarrow{\phi} \PP^1$ is a rational elliptic surface with $-K_W$ globally generated, or $W$ is a weak del Pezzo surface.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $W$ is rationally connected and $\dim W = 2$, we know that $W$ is rational.
If $D \in |-K_Z|$,
then $\mathcal{O}_W(-K_{W}) = \phi^*\mathcal{O}_{\PP^1}(1)$.
So $-K_W$ is globally generated and
$W$ is a rational elliptic surface.
Suppose that $D \notin |-K_Z|$.
As $-K_Z - D$ is effective and $-K_Z$ and $D$ are ample, we have
$-K_Z(-K_Z - D) > 0$ and $D(-K_Z - D) > 0$, and thus,
$$K_Z^2 > -K_Z\cdot D > D^2. $$
As $W$ is the blowup of $Z$ at $(D^2)$ points,
we have $K_W^2 = K_Z^2 - D^2 > 0$.
Since $-K_W$ is nef,
$W$ is
a weak del Pezzo surface.
\end{proof}
The nef cone of $W$ constructed as above has the following properties.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop-lef}
We have
$$\Nefe(W) = \Nefp(W) = \mathrm{Nef}(W).$$
Moreover, if $\dim W \geq 3$, or if
$W$ is a weak del Pezzo surface, then the cone $\mathrm{Nef}(W)$ is rational polyhedral, spanned by classes of semiample divisors.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We start with the last statement, which is a corollary of some known results.
If $W$ is a weak del Pezzo surface,
then $W$ is log Fano (see e.g.~\cite[Proposition 2.6]{Mass}).
Hence by the Cone Theorem \cite[Theorem 3.7]{KM98}, its nef cone is a rational polyhedral cone spanned by classes of semiample divisors.
Assume that $\dim W \geq 3$.
Since $\PP^1 \times Z$ is a smooth Fano variety of dimension $\ge 4$,
and $W \subset \PP^1 \times Z$ is a smooth ample divisor such that
$$\mathcal{O}_{\PP^1 \times Z}(-K_{\PP^1 \times Z} - W) = \mathcal{O}_Z(-K_Z - D) \boxtimes \mathcal{O}_{\PP^1}(1)$$
is nef, by~\cite[Proposition 3.5]{BI09} (based on~\cite[Appendix]{Ko91})
we have $$j_*: \NE(W) \eto \NE(\PP^1 \times Z)$$
where $j : W \hookrightarrow \PP^1 \times Z$ is the inclusion.
As the nef cone is dual to the Mori cone, we have
$$j^*: \mathrm{Nef}(\PP^1 \times Z) \eto \mathrm{Nef}(W).$$
Since $\mathrm{Nef}(\PP^1 \times Z)$ is rational polyhedral and spanned by classes of semiample divisors, so is $\mathrm{Nef}(W)$.
Now we prove the first statement.
Since it holds in particular if $\mathrm{Nef}(W)$
is rational polyhedral spanned by classes of semiample divisors,
by the last statement of Proposition~\ref{prop-lef}
and Lemma~\ref{lem-dimZ2} it remains to study the case where $W$ is a rational elliptic surface. Clearly $\Nefe(W)$ and $\Nefp(W)$ are subcones of $\mathrm{Nef}(W)$. Moreover, $\Nefp(W)\subset\Nefe(W)$ by~\cite[Lemma 4.2]{To10},
so we only need to show that
$\mathrm{Nef}(W) = \Nefp(W)$.
This follows from~\cite[Corollary 3.3.(c)]{Nikulin}
that
as a cone,
$\NE(W)$ is generated by curve classes,
and that $\mathrm{Nef}(W)$ is dual to $\NE(W)$.
\end{proof}
Finally, note that if $D \in |-K_Z|$, then by (\ref{acd}), a general fiber of $\phi : W\to\PP^1$ is a smooth $K$-trivial variety. If $W$ has dimension 2, it must be an elliptic curve. In general, we can say the following.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-CYfiber}
If $D \in |-K_Z|$,
then a general fiber $F$ of $\phi:W\to\PP^1$ is a Calabi--Yau manifold, that is, $\omega_F \simeq \mathcal{O}_F$ and $h^i(F,\OO_F)=0$ for $0<i<\dim F$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $D \in |-K_Z|$, we have $\mathcal{O}_W(F) \simeq \mathcal{O}_W(-K_W)$ by~\eqref{acd}.
So by adjunction, $\omega_F \simeq \mathcal{O}_F$, and also we have the exact sequence
$$0\to \omega_W \to\OO_W\to \OO_F \to 0.$$
Since $W$ is rationally connected,
we have
$$h^{\dim W - i}(W,\omega_W) = h^i(W,\OO_W)=0$$
for $i \ge 1$.
Hence $h^i(F,\OO_F)=0$ whenever $1 \le i \le \dim W - 2 = \dim F - 1 $.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The fiber product $X=W_1{\times}_{\PP^1} W_2$}\label{subsec-Xconstr}
We are ready to generalize Schoen's construction and obtain Calabi--Yau pairs in arbitrary dimension.
For $i = 1, 2$, let $Z_i, D_i, W_i$ be as in \S\ref{subsec-Wconstr}. We denote by $\phi_i:W_i\to \PP^1$ the associated fibration, and recall that it has a section.
Denoting by $S_i$ the images of the singular fibers of $\phi_i$ in $\PP^1$, we assume $S_1\cap S_2=\varnothing$. Moreover, if $\phi_1: W_1 \to \PP^1$ and $\phi_2: W_2 \to \PP^1$ are two rational elliptic surfaces with sections, we require that
the elliptic curves
$\phi_1^{-1}(t)$ and $\phi_2^{-1}(t)$
are non-isogenous for a general point $t \in \PP^1$.
We consider the fiber product over $\PP^1$
\[ \xymatrix@=1.5em{ & X = W_1 \times_{\PP^1} W_2 \ar[dl]_{p_1} \ar[dd]_{\phi} \ar[dr]^{p_2} \\
W_1 \ar[dr]_{\phi_1} & & W_2 \ . \ar[dl]^{\phi_2} \\
& \PP^1 } \]
As $S_1\cap S_2=\varnothing$, the variety $X$ is smooth.
One can also regard $X$ as a complete intersection in $\PP^1 \times Z_1 \times Z_2$ of two hypersurfaces in the linear systems
\[ |\OO_{\PP^1}(1)\boxtimes\OO_{Z_1}(D_1)\boxtimes \OO_{Z_2}| \ \ \mathrm{and} \ \ |\OO_{\PP^1}(1)\boxtimes\OO_{Z_1}\boxtimes \OO_{Z_2}(D_2)|, \]
respectively.
In particular,
\begin{equation}\label{-KX}
\mathcal{O}_X(-K_X) = \left(\OO_{\PP^1}\boxtimes\OO_{Z_1}(-K_{Z_1} - D_1) \boxtimes \OO_{Z_2}(-K_{Z_2} - D_2)\right)|_X
\end{equation}
is globally generated. In particular, $-K_X$ is effective.
\begin{definition}\label{def_sch}
The smooth projective variety $X$ constructed above is called a \textit{Schoen variety}.
A pair $(X, \Delta)$ is called a \textit{Schoen pair} if $\Delta$ is an effective $\QQ$-divisor such that $K_X + \Delta \sim_{\QQ} 0$.
\end{definition}
As $-K_X$ is effective,
any Schoen variety $X$ underlies a Schoen pair $(X, \Delta)$.
By definition, any Schoen pair $(X, \Delta)$ is Calabi--Yau in the sense of Definition \ref{def-cypair}. Moreover, there exists a positive integer $m$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq_sp}
\Delta = \Delta_{m,X}=\frac{1}{m}\Delta'_{m,X}, \ \text{ where } \,\Delta'_{m,X}\in|-mK_X|.
\end{equation}
Note that the pair $(X, \Delta)$ is klt if $m \ge 2$ and $\Delta'_{m,X}\in|-mK_X|$ is general.
\begin{lemma}\label{su2.1}
Any Schoen variety $X$ is simply connected.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The proof is similar to \cite[Lemma 1]{Sc86} and \cite[Lemma 2.1]{Su21}.
Let $U \subset \PP^1$ be the open subset over which the morphism $\phi: X \to \PP^1$ is smooth and set $V := \phi^{-1}(U)$. The natural map $\phi|_V : V \to U$ is topologically locally trivial with a fiber, say $F$. Since both $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$ have sections, $\phi: X \to \PP^1$ also admits a section $\sigma : \PP^1 \to X$. Consider the commutative diagram
\[ \xymatrix{
1 \ar[r]^{} &\pi_1(F) \ar[r]^{} & \pi_1(V) \ar@{>>}[d]_{} \ar@{>>}@<-3pt>[r]^{} & \pi_1(U) \ar@{>}[d]^{} \ar@/_/[l]_{{\sigma_{U}}_*} \ar[r]^{} & 1\\
& & \pi_1(X) \ar@{>>}@<-3pt>[r]^{} & \pi_1(\PP^1). \ar@/_/[l]_{{\sigma}_*} }
\]
Here the first row is exact by the homotopy long exact sequence. By a diagram chase and the fact that $\pi_1(\PP^1)$ is trivial, it is enough to check that the image of $\pi_1(F)$ in $\pi_1(X)$ is trivial. Write $F = F_1 \times F_2$, where $F_i$ is a general fiber of $\phi_i: W_i \to \PP^1$ for $i = 1,2$.
Since
$\pi_1(F) = \pi_1(F_1) \times \pi_1(F_2)$,
it is enough to show that the image of $\pi_1(F_i)$ in $\pi_1(X)$ is trivial, which we prove for $i = 1$.
A section of $\phi_{2} : W_2 \to \PP^1$ gives rise to a section
$s$ of $p_1: X \to W_1$.
By construction, the homomorphism $\pi_1(F_1) \to \pi_1(X)$ is induced by
$F_1 \hookrightarrow W_1 \xto{s} X$,
thus factors through $\pi_1(W_1)$.
Since it is rationally connected, $W_1$ is simply-connected, and hence the image of $\pi_1(F_1)$ in $\pi_1(X)$ is trivial.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}\label{su2.1bis}
Suppose that $D_i \in |-K_{Z_i}|$ for both $i = 1,2$.
Then the Schoen variety $X$ is a strict Calabi--Yau manifold (see Definition~\ref{def-cymfd}).
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
First of all,~\eqref{-KX} shows that
$K_X$ is trivial.
Since $X$ is simply-connected by Lemma \ref{su2.1}, it remains to show that $h^p(X,\OO_X)=0$ for $0 < p <\dim X$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem-Riw}
Let $g : \mathscr{X} \to \mathscr{Y}$ be a surjective morphism
between smooth projective varieties.
Assume that a general fiber $F$ of $g$ is
a Calabi--Yau manifold and that $\omega_{\mathscr{X}}=\OO_{\mathscr{X}}$.
Then for every integer $i > 0$, we have
\begin{equation*}
R^ig_*\OO_{\mathscr{X}} =
\begin{cases}
\omega_\mathscr{Y}, \text{ if } i = \dim \mathscr{X} - \dim \mathscr{Y}, \\
0, \text{ \ \ otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Set
$r \mathrel{:=} \dim \mathscr{X} - \dim \mathscr{Y}$.
Since $R^qg_*\omega_{\mathscr{X}}=R^qg_*\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{X}}$ is reflexive
by~\cite[Theorem 2.1.(i)]{KollDirIm} and~\cite[Corollary 3.9]{KollDirIm2},
and since $H^q(F,\mathcal{O}_F) = 0$ for all $0 < q < r$
and $\dim H^q(F,\mathcal{O}_F) = 1$ for $q = 0$ or $r$,
we have
\begin{equation*}
R^qg_*\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{X}} =
\begin{cases}
\text{an invertible sheaf,\, if } q = 0 \text{ or } r,\\
0, \text{ otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
By Grothendieck--Verdier duality ~\cite[Theorem 3.34]{HuybrechtsFM}, we have
$$Rg_* \omega_{\mathscr{X}} \simeq R\mathcal{H}om(Rg_*\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{X}},\omega_{\mathscr{Y}}[-r]).$$
The Grothendieck spectral sequence then gives
$$E_2^{p,-q} \mathrel{:=} \mathcal{E}xt^p(R^qg_*\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{X}}, \omega_{\mathscr{Y}}) \Rightarrow R^{p-q + r}g_* \omega_{\mathscr{X}}.$$
(See e.g.~\cite[Example 2.70.ii)]{HuybrechtsFM}.)
So $E_2^{p,-q} \ne 0$ only if $(p,q) = (0,0)$ or $(0,r)$,
and Lemma~\ref{lem-Riw} follows.
\end{proof}
Let $w_i \mathrel{:=} \dim W_i$.
Since a general fiber of $p_2$, i.e. of $\phi_1$,
is a Calabi--Yau manifold by Lemma \ref{lem-CYfiber},
we can apply Lemma~\ref{lem-Riw} to
$p_2 : X \to W_2$
and obtain
\begin{equation*}
R^j{p_2}_*\omega_{X} =
\begin{cases}
\mathcal{O}_{W_2}, \text{ if } j = 0, \\
\omega_{W_2}, \, \text{ if } j = \dim w_1 - 1, \\
0, \text{\ \ \,\quad otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
It follows from~\cite[Corollary 3.2]{KollDirIm2} that
$$h^p(X,\omega_X)=h^p(W_2,\OO_{W_2})+h^{p-w_1+1}(W_2,\omega_{W_2})$$ for all $0\le p\le \dim X$.
Since $W_2$ is rationally connected, this is zero unless $p=0$ or
$w_1+w_2-1 = \dim X$.
\end{proof}
\section{Application to the Cone Conjecture}\label{prof}
In this section, we prove Theorem \ref{main}.
We have defined Schoen pairs $(X,\Delta_{m,X})$ in Section \ref{cons}, arising from fiber products
\[ \xymatrix@=1.5em{ & X = W_1 \times_{\PP^1} W_2 \ar[dl]_{p_1} \ar[dd]_{\phi} \ar[dr]^{p_2} \\
W_1 \ar[dr]_{\phi_1} & & W_2 \ . \ar[dl]^{\phi_2} \\
& \PP^1 } \]
\begin{lemma}\label{na1.1} Any line bundle $L$ on a Schoen variety $X$ can be written $L = p_1^{\ast}L_1\otimes p_2^{\ast}L_2$, where $L_i$ is a line bundle on $W_i$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $p \in \PP^1$ be a general point and let
$F_i \mathrel{:=} \phi_i^{-1}(p) \subset W_i$.
\begin{claim}\label{claim-isoprod}
The map
$$\Psi : \mathrm{Pic}(F_1) \times \mathrm{Pic}(F_2) \to \mathrm{Pic}(F_1 \times F_2)$$
defined by $\Psi(L,M) = L \boxtimes M$ is an isomorphism.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
First suppose that
either $W_1$ or $W_2$ is not a rational elliptic surface.
Since $H^1(F_i,\mathcal{O}_{F_i}) = 0$ for at least one $i \in \{1, 2\}$, Claim~\ref{claim-isoprod} follows
from~\cite[Exercise III.12.6]{HarBook}.
Assume now that $W_1$ and $W_2$ are rational elliptic surfaces. Then $F_1$ and $F_2$ are elliptic curves,
and we have a short exact sequence of abelian groups~\cite[Theorem 11.5.1]{MR2062673}
$$0 \to \mathrm{Pic}(F_1) \times \mathrm{Pic}(F_2) \xto{\Psi} \mathrm{Pic}(F_1 \times F_2) \to \mathrm{Hom}(F_1,F_2) \to 0$$
where $\mathrm{Hom}(F_1,F_2)$ is the group of homomorphisms
of group varieties $F_1 \to F_2$.
Since $p \in \PP^1$ is general,
the elliptic curves $F_1$ and $F_2$ are non-isogenous
by our definition of Schoen varieties.
Thus $\mathrm{Hom}(F_1,F_2) = 0$,
which proves Claim~\ref{claim-isoprod}.
\end{proof}
Let $L$ be a line bundle on $X$.
Claim~\ref{claim-isoprod} implies that
$$L_{|\phi^{-1}(p)} \simeq L_{|F_1 \times \{u\}} \boxtimes L_{|\{v\} \times F_2},$$
for any points $ u \in F_2$ and $v \in F_1$.
For each $i = 1,2$, we choose a section $s_i : \PP^1 \to W_i$
and let $\sigma_i : W_i \to X$ be the induced section:
$$\sigma_1(w_1) \mathrel{:=} (w_1,s_2(\phi_1(w_1))) \in W_1 \times_{\PP^1} W_2,$$
and similarly for $\sigma_2$.
We have
\begin{align*}
L_{|\phi^{-1}(p)}
& \simeq
L_{|F_1 \times \{s_1(p)\}} \boxtimes L_{|\{s_2(p)\} \times F_2} \\
& \simeq (\sigma_1^*L)_{|F_1} \boxtimes (\sigma_2^*L)_{|F_2} \\
& \simeq (p^*_1\sigma_1^*L \otimes p^*_2\sigma_2^*L)_{|\phi^{-1}(p)}.
\end{align*}
Since $p \in \PP^1$ is general,
by~\cite[Exercise III.12.4]{HarBook}
$$L \simeq p^*_1\sigma_1^*L \otimes p^*_2\sigma_2^*L\otimes \mathcal{O}_X(D)$$
for some divisor $D$ whose support is contained in
a finite union of fibers of $\phi : X \to \PP^1$.
Since the subsets $S_1$, $S_2$ parametrizing singular fibers of $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$
respectively
are disjoint, the subsets paramatrizing reducible fibers are disjoint as well. Hence, an irreducible component $R$ of a fiber of $\phi$ is of the form $p_i^*R'$ where $R'$ is a multiple of an irreducible component
of a fiber of $\phi_i : W_i \to \PP^1$.
Applied to the irreducible components of $D$, that yields that
$$\mathrm{Pic}(W_1) \times \mathrm{Pic}(W_2) \xto{p_1^* \otimes p_2^*} \mathrm{Pic}(X)$$
is surjective.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-nefdec2} For every $D \in \mathrm{Nef}(X)$, one can write $D = p_1^*D_1 + p_2^*D_2$, where $D_i \in \mathrm{Nef}(W_i)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lem-nefdec2} follows from Lemma~\ref{na1.1}, which by $\RR$-linearity, yields the decomposition at the level of $N^1(W)_{\RR}$, and Theorem~\ref{thm-nefdec}.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[$=$ Theorem \ref{main}]\label{main2} Let $(X,\Delta)$ be a Schoen pair. Then
$$\mathrm{Nef}(X)=\Nefp(X)=\Nefe(X),$$
and moreover, there exists a rational polyhedral fundamental domain for the action of $\mathrm{Aut}(X, \Delta)$ on $\Nefe(X)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since $\mathrm{Nef}(W_i)=\Nefp(W_i) = \Nefe(W_i)$ by Proposition \ref{prop-lef},
we have, by Theorem \ref{thm-nefdec} and Lemma \ref{lem-nefdec2}, $\mathrm{Nef}(X)=p_1^*\Nefp(W_1)+p_2^*\Nefp(W_2)\subset\Nefp(X)$, so $\mathrm{Nef}(X)=\Nefp(X)$. Similarly, we have $\mathrm{Nef}(X)=\Nefe(X)$. This proves the first assertion.
Define the subgroups $H_i \le \mathrm{Aut}(W_i)$ by
$$H_i =
\begin{cases}
\mathrm{Aut}(W_i/\PP^1), \, \text{ if } W_i
\text{ is a rational elliptic surface,} \\
\{\mathrm{id}_{W_i}\}, \, \text{ otherwise. }
\end{cases}
$$
Then there exists a rational polyhedral cone
$\Pi_i \subset \mathrm{Nef}^{+}(W_i)$ such that
$H_i \cdot \Pi_i$ contains $\Amp(W_i)$.
Indeed, the case where
$W_i$ is a rational elliptic surface with $-K_{W_i}$ semiample follows from
\cite[Theorem 8.2]{To08},
and the other cases follow from
Proposition~\ref{prop-lef}.
We want to show that $H_1\times H_2\le\mathrm{Aut}(X,\Delta)$.
Note that there exists a positive integer $m$ such that
$$\Delta = \Delta_{m,X}=\frac{1}{m}\Delta'_{m,X}$$
for some $\Delta'_{m,X}\in|-mK_X|$.
We now claim that $H_1 \times H_2 \le \mathrm{Aut}(X,\Delta'_{m,X})$. Indeed, if neither $W_1$ nor $W_2$ is a
rational elliptic surface, then $H_1 \times H_2$ is trivial by definition.
If both $W_1$ and $W_2$ are rational elliptic surfaces, then $\Delta'_{m,X}=0$ and clearly, $H_1\times H_2\le\mathrm{Aut}(X)$. Finally, if one of the $W_i$, say $W_1$, is a rational elliptic surface, and the other, say $W_2$, is not,
then $\mathcal{O}_X(-K_X) \simeq p_2^*\mathcal{O}_{W_2}(-K_{Z_2} - D_2)$.
Since $p_2$ is proper surjective with connected fibers,
the pullback $p_2^*$ induces an isomorphism
$$H^0(X, p_2^*\OO_{W_2}(-m(K_{Z_2}+D_2))) \simeq
H^0(W_2, \OO_{W_2}(-m(K_{Z_2}+D_2))).$$
So $\Delta'_{m,X}=p_2^*\Delta'_{m,W_2}$,
for some divisor $\Delta'_{m,W_2}\in |\OO_{W_2}(-m(K_{Z_2}+D_2))|$.
Since $H_2 = \{ \mathrm{id}_{W_2}\}$ in this case,
it follows that $\Delta'_{m,X}$ is invariant under $H_1 \times H_2$. This proves the claim.
It then follows from Corollary~\ref{cor-H1H2}
that $\Nefe(X) = \Nefp(X)$ has
a rational polyhedral fundamental domain
$\Pi$ for the $\mathrm{Aut}(X,\Delta)$-action.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In \cite{GM93}, the authors verified the Cone Conjecture for a strict Calabi--Yau threefold $X = W_1 \times_{\PP^1} W_2$, where both $W_i$ are rational elliptic surfaces with section, each of whose singular fibers is an irreducible rational curve with a node, and two generic fibers are non-isogenous.
Our proof bypasses the identification shown by Namikawa \cite[Proposition 2.2 and Corollary 2.3]{Na91}
\[ \mathrm{Aut}(X)\cong \mathrm{Aut}(W_1)\times \mathrm{Aut}(W_2), \]
an identification that was crucial in \cite{GM93} due to the lack of Looijenga's result (Lemma \ref{looij}) at that time.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}\label{ex-infinite}
Assume that $\dim Z_1 = 2$ and $W_1$ is a general rational elliptic surface obtained by a pencil of cubic curves in $\PP^2$. Then $\mathrm{Nef}(W_1)$ admits infinitely many faces, and so does $\mathrm{Nef}(X)$ by Lemma~\ref{na1.1} and Corollary \ref{cor-extr}. If in addition $D_2 \in |-K_{Z_2}|$, then the Schoen variety $X$ is a strict Calabi--Yau manifold by Proposition \ref{su2.1bis}.
\end{example}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_finite} Let $X$ be a Schoen variety. Then $\pi_0 \mathrm{Aut}(X)$ is finitely presented and there are at most finitely many real structures on $X$ up to equivalence.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The linear action $\rho: \mathrm{Aut}(X) \to \mathrm{GL}(N^1(X))$ induces and factorizes through an action $$\overline{\rho}: \pi_0\mathrm{Aut}(X) \to \mathrm{GL}(N^1(X)).$$
We let $\mathrm{Aut}^{\ast}(X) = \rho (\mathrm{Aut}(X)) = \overline{\rho}(\pi_0\mathrm{Aut}(X))$.
Choose an effective $\QQ$-divisor $\Delta$ on $X$ such that $(X,\Delta)$ is a Schoen pair.
By Theorem~\ref{main}, there exists a rational polyhedral cone $\Pi \subset \Nefp(X)$ such that
$$\Amp(X)\subset \mathrm{Aut}(X,\Delta)\cdot \Pi\subset\mathrm{Aut}^{\ast}(X)\cdot \Pi.$$
It follows from Proposition~\ref{pro-looij} that there is a rational polyhedral fundamental domain for the $\mathrm{Aut}^{\ast}(X)$-action on $\Nefp(X)$ and the group $\mathrm{Aut}^{\ast}(X)$ is finitely presented.
Since $\mathrm{Ker} (\overline{\rho})$ is finite by
Fujiki--Liebermann's theorem~\cite[Corollary 2.11]{Br18},
the first claim follows from \cite[Corollary 10.2]{Jo97}.
The second statement follows from
Theorem~\ref{thm-realstr} below.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[{\cite[Theorem 1.5]{DGLOWY}}]\label{thm-realstr} Let $V$ be a smooth complex projective variety. Assume that there exists a rational polyhedral fundamental domain for the action of $\mathrm{Aut}(V)$ on $\Nefp(V)$. Then the set of non-isomorphic real structures of $V$ is finite.
\end{theorem}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
A global behavior of a small data solution to a nonlinear dispersive equation has drawn attentions of many authors. It might result in the finite or infinite time linear decay bound, or the linear or modified scattering. The goal of this paper is to find a dispersive decay bound of a small data solution to the Kawahara equation:\begin{equation}
u_t-u_{5x}=uu_x.\tag{KW}\label{eq:KW}\end{equation}
We also consider the case of the modified Kawahara equation \begin{equation*}
u_t-u_{5x}=cu^2u_x,
\tag{mKW}\label{eq:mKW}
\end{equation*} with $c=\pm 1,$ which is the special case of the fifth-order KdV equation \begin{equation}\tag{5KdV}\label{eq:5KdV}
u_t-u_{5x}=c_1uu_{3x}+c_2u_xu_{2x}+c_3u^2u_x.
\end{equation}
The equation \eqref{eq:KW} arises from the study of capillary waves on a shallow layer and magneto-sound propagation in
plasmas; see \cite{kawahara1972oscillatory}.
The local and global Cauchy problems of the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations such as \eqref{eq:KW}, \eqref{eq:mKW}, \eqref{eq:5KdV} have been extensively studied. Kenig, Ponce, and Vega \cite{kenig1994higher, kenig1994hierarchy} proved the local well-posedness (LWP) of the general class of dispersive equations \[\partial_tu+\partial_x^{2j+1}u+P(u,\partial_xu,\cdots,\partial_x^{2j}u)=0\] where $P$ is a polynomial without constant or linear terms, on the space $H^s(\mathbb{R})\cap L^2(|x|^mdx)$ with $s,m$ being a sufficiently large positive integer. Kwon \cite{kwon2008fifth} proved LWP of \eqref{eq:5KdV} in $H^s$ with $s>5/2$ without the weighted $L^2$ structure. Kenig and Pilod \cite{kenig2012well} proved the global well-posedness (GWP) of the equations \eqref{eq:5KdV} with $c_2=2c_1$ and \eqref{eq:KW} in $H^s$ with $s\geq 2.$ Very recently, Bringmann et al. \cite{bringmann2019global} proved GWP in $H^{-1}(\mathbb{R})$ of \eqref{eq:5KdV} with $c_1=10,\;c_2=20,\;c_3=30$.
\\
When it comes to \eqref{eq:KW}, Cui, Deng, and Tao \cite{cui2006global} proved LWP in $H^s$ with $s>-1$ and GWP in $L^2$. This result is later refined by Wang, Cui, and Deng \cite{wang2007global} down to the regularity $s\geq -\frac{7}{5}$ for LWP and $s>-\frac{1}{2}$ for GWP. Chen et al. \cite{chen2009low} proved LWP of both \eqref{eq:KW} and \eqref{eq:mKW}, with the regularity being $s>-\frac{7}{4}$ for \eqref{eq:KW} and $s\geq -\frac{1}{4}$ for \eqref{eq:mKW}. Chen and Guo \cite{chen2011globalwell} extended the LWP result to $s\geq -\frac{7}{4}$ and also proved GWP for the same regularity. Kato \cite{kato2013global} proved LWP for $s\geq -2$ and GWP for $s\geq -\frac{38}{21}.$ He also proved that the LWP threshold is optimal by proving ill-posedness for $s<-2.$
Also, the small data global analysis of nonlinear dispersive equations has been spotlighted for a long time. For instance, Deift and Zhou \cite{deift1993steepest} proved the small data asymptotics of mKdV first, taking advantage of the complete integrability of the equation. Hayashi and Naumkin \cite{hayashi2001modified, hayashi2006final, hayashi1999large} proved the similar result without using the complete integrability, which helped them extend the result for nonlinearities with time-dependent coefficients. However, their results required an initial data to have zero mean. \cite{cazenave2003semilinear} introduces some classical scattering results for defocusing NLS, together with asymptotic completeness. It also mentions that the one-dimensional cubic NLS \[iu_t+u_{xx}=\lambda|u|^2u,\quad \lambda=\pm1\tag{3NLS}\label{eq:3NLS}\] does not show a linear scattering. Rather, the modified scattering results for \eqref{eq:3NLS} and similar types of equations are proved by many authors with different settings. Ifrim and Tataru \cite{ifrim2015global} proved the global dynamics of \eqref{eq:3NLS} by testing the wave packets. Adopting this idea of Ifrim and Tataru, Harrop-Griffiths \cite{harrop2016long} proved the modified scattering and asymptotic completeness results for the mKdV equation. The work of Harrop-Griffiths is meaningful in that it requires neither the integrability of the equation, nor the zero mean of the initial datum. Okamoto \cite{okamoto2018long} later proved the global behavior of solutions to the fifth-order mKdV type equation, without proving asymptotic completeness, using the same idea as above. Okamoto later proved \cite{okamoto2019asymptotic} the asymptotic behavior of solutions to the higher order KdV-type equation with critical nonliearity. Here the nonlinearity is said to be critical in the sense that the small data solution shows the modified scattering behavior at that order of nonlinearity.
Unlike the mKdV-type equations, the global dynamics of KdV-type equations have not been studied so much. The main difficulty of the global analysis of KdV-type equations is that the nonlinearities are less perturbative than those of the equations on the mKdV hierarchy; the nonlinearities of mKdV-type equations are cubic, whereas those of KdV-type equations are quadratic. The first result regarding the nonlinear dispersive equation with a quadratic nonlinearity is due to \cite{ifrim2017well}, which discovered that the solution to the Benjamin-Ono equation \[u_t+Hu_{xx}=uu_x\] has linear dispersive decay bound in an almost global time scale $|t|\sim e^{\frac{c}{\epsilon}}$ where $\epsilon$ is the size of an initial datum. A global result for KdV equation is discovered fairly recently, by Ifrim et al., \cite{ifrim2019dispersive} which stated that the linear dispersive decay bound may break down beyond the quartic time scale $|t|\sim \epsilon^{-3}$ where $\epsilon$ is the size of an initial datum. They proved that the result is optimal, i.e. the time scale cannot be extended further, using the inverse scattering theory. No other meaningful results are known about the global dynamics of KdV-type equations. The main goal of this paper is to show the first result regarding the global behavior of the fifth-order dispersive equations with quadratic nonlinearities, whose byproduct is the small data global behavior of \eqref{eq:mKW}.
\subsection{Main result}
First we state the main result of this paper:
\begin{thm}
Consider the Cauchy problem \begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}u_t-u_{5x}=\pm u^mu_x,\\u(0,x)=u_0(x),\end{cases}\quad m=1,2.
\end{equation*} Suppose that the initial datum $u_0$ satisfies \begin{equation*}
\Vert u_0\Vert_{\dot{B}^{-\frac{1}{2}}_{2,\infty}}+\Vert xu_0\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\leq\epsilon\ll 1,
\end{equation*} then we have the following pointwise bound \[|\partial_x^k u(t,x)|\lesssim\epsilon t^{-\frac{1}{8}-\frac{k}{4}}\langle x\rangle^{-\frac{3}{8}+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=0,1,2,3\] provided $|t|\ll \epsilon^{-\frac{5}{5-2m}}.$\\ Moreover, in the elliptic region $\{x\gg t^{\frac{1}{5}}\},$ we have a better bound \[|\partial_x^k u(t,x)|\lesssim\epsilon t^{-\frac{k}{4}}\langle x\rangle^{-1+\frac{k}{4}}\log(t^{-\frac{1}{5}}\langle x\rangle),\quad k=0,1,2,3\] when $|t|\ll \epsilon^{-\frac{5}{5-2m}}.$
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}Note that the case $m=1$ corresponds to \eqref{eq:KW}, and $m=2$ to \eqref{eq:mKW}.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
The time scale in \eqref{eq:KW} is worse than that in the KdV equation, which is even worse than that in the Benjamin-Ono equation. This can be deduced heuristically as follows: The group velocity of the fifth-order linear equation is given as $\omega(\xi)=-5\xi^4$, so the high frequency part of the solution travels much faster towards to the negative $x$-axis than in the second or third-order equations. However, the possible emergence of nonlinear ``bulk", such as solitons and dispersive shocks, inturrupts such linear dispersive decay. The faster the linear part travels, the earlier the nonlinear bulk emerges.
\\The time scale in \eqref{eq:mKW} is better than that of the KdV and \eqref{eq:KW}. This is because the nonlinearity becomes cubic, making it more perturbative. However, such time scale is worse than that of the mKdV equation, as the mKdV equation has modified scattering and global dispersive decay bound; see \cite{harrop2016long}. Such discrepancy arises from the same heuristics used in the comparision between \eqref{eq:KW}, KdV, and Benjamin-Ono equations. One may also compare this result with \cite{okamoto2018long} or \cite{okamoto2019asymptotic}, in which case the nonlinearities become more perturbative than \eqref{eq:mKW}.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
The two norms used in the main result are inspired from \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}. As seen in the later analysis, the $\dot{B}^{-\frac{1}{2}}_{2,\infty}$ norm helps properly control the low frequency, and the growth of the high frequency norms is slow enough that it does not disrupt our analysis. The $\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}$ norm exactly does the opposite. It does the control of the high frequency, and guarantees the mild growth of the low frequency part.
\end{rmk}
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{Definitions and Notations}
Let $1\leq p<\infty.$ $L^p(X)$ be the set of measurable function on $X$ with the norm $\Vert f\Vert_{L^p(X)}=\left(\int_X|f|^pd\mu\right)^{1/p}$ on the measure space $(X,\mu).$
If $p=\infty,$ then $\Vert f\Vert_{L^\infty(X)}=\inf\{M>0:|f(x)|\leq M \;\;\text{a.e.}\}$. If $X=\mathbb{R}$ and $\mu$ is the Lebesgue measure, then we write $L^p(X)=L^p$ for simplicity, in either case $p<\infty$ or $p=\infty.$
We use the time-dependent Japanese bracket $\langle x\rangle=(x^2+t^{\frac{2}{5}})^{\frac{1}{2}}.$ In some of the following sections, we adapt the time scale to $t=1$ by a proper scaling, and in this case $\langle x\rangle=(x^2+1)^{\frac{1}{2}}.$
We define the spatial Fourier transform of $f\in \mathcal{S}(\mathbb{R})$, the space of all Schwarz functions on $\mathbb{R}$, by \[\hat{f}(\xi)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{\mathbb{R}}f(x)e^{-ix\xi}dx,\]and its inverse transform by \[{f}^\vee(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{\mathbb{R}}f(\xi)e^{ix\xi}d\xi.\] Both transforms can be extended to $\mathcal{S}'(\mathbb{R})$, the space of tempered distributions, by duality.
Let $u_{kx}(x):=\partial_x^ku(x)=\left((i\xi)^k\hat{u}(\xi)\right)^\vee$ be the $k$-th order partial derivative of $u$ with respect to the spatial variable $x$. Also let $|D|^s$ be the homogeneous fractional derivative of order $s\in\mathbb{R}$ whose symbol is $|\xi|^s$. Note that $|D|^s=H\partial_x$, where $H$ is the Hilbert transform defined by the Fourier symbol $-i\mathrm{sgn}(\xi).$
Let $A,B$ be two nonnegative quantities. If there exists $C>0$ such that $A\leq CB,$ then we denote by $A\lesssim B.$ If $A$ need not be nonnegative and $|A|\lesssim B,$ then we denote $A=O(B).$ If $A\lesssim B$ and $B\lesssim A,$ then we denote $A\sim B.$ If the implied constant $C$ depends on some parameters $a,b,c,\cdots,$ then we denote $A\lesssim_{a,b,c,\cdots}B,$ $A=O_{a,b,c,\cdots}(B),$ $A\sim_{a,b,c,\cdots}B$ respectively.
Let $\Psi\in\mathcal{S}(\mathbb{R})$ with $\psi=\widehat{\Psi}$ is even, supported on $[-2,2]$, and $\psi=1$ on $[-1,1].$ Also let $\psi_{\leq N}(\xi)=\psi(\frac{\xi}{N})$ and $\Psi_{\leq N}=(\psi_{\leq N})^\vee$ for $N>0.$ Then define the Littlewood-Paley projection of $f\in\mathcal{S}'(\mathbb{R})$ by $P_{\leq N}f(x)=(\Psi_{\leq N}\ast f)(x),$ $P_N=P_{\leq N}-P_{\leq N/2}.$ Also define $P_{<N}:=P_{\leq N}-P_N$, $P_{\geq N}=1-P_{<N},$ $P_{>N}=1-P_{\leq N}.$ By a slight abuse of notation, we denote a Fourier multiplier whose symbol is supported on $\{|\xi|\sim N\}$ by $P_N.$ In particular, if $N=2^j\in 2^{\mathbb{Z}},$ then we denote $P_N:=P_j$ and similarly for $P_{\leq N},$ $P_{<N},$ $P_{>N},$ $P_{\geq N}.$
Now define Sobolev and Besov spaces. For $s\in\mathbb{R}$ and $1<p<\infty$, the inhomogeneous Sobolev space $W^{s,p}$ and its homogeneous counterpart $\dot{W}^{s,p}$ are defined as the subspace of $\mathcal{S}'(\mathbb{R})$ under the norm \[\Vert f\Vert_{W^{s,p}}=\left\Vert \left((1+\xi^2)^{s/2}\hat{f}\right)^\vee\right\Vert_{L^p},\quad \Vert f\Vert_{\dot{W}^{s,p}}=\left\Vert \left(|\xi|^s\hat{f}\right)^\vee\right\Vert_{L^p},\]respectively. Recall the Littlewood-Paley inequality \[\Vert f\Vert_{W^{s,p}}\sim_{s,p}\Vert P_{\leq 0}f\Vert_{L^p}+ \bigg\Vert\big(\sum_{j\geq 1}2^{2js}|P_{j}f |^2\big)^{1/2}\bigg\Vert_{L^p}\] and its homogeneous counterpart \[\Vert f\Vert_{\dot{W}^{s,p}}\sim_{s,p}\bigg\Vert\big(\sum_{j\in\mathbb{Z}}2^{2js}|P_{j}f |^2\big)^{1/2}\bigg\Vert_{L^p}.\]
Motivated by the above Littlewood-Paley inequalities, we define the inhomogeneous and homogeneous Besov spaces, denoted as $B_{s,q}^p$ and $\dot{B}_{s,q}^p$, respectively, is defined as the subspace of $\mathcal{S}'(\mathbb{R})$ under the norm \[\Vert f\Vert_{B_{p,q}^s}=\big(\Vert P_{\leq 1}f\Vert_{L^p}^q+\sum_{j\geq 1}2^{qjs}\Vert P_{j}f\Vert_{L^p}^q\big)^{1/q},\]\[\Vert f\Vert_{\dot{B}_{p,q}^s}=\big(\sum_{j\in\mathbb{Z}}2^{qjs}\Vert P_{j}f\Vert_{L^p}^q\big)^{1/q},\] with $1\leq q<\infty$ and the natural modification for $q=\infty.$
\subsection{Useful theorems}
In this subsection, some of the theorems are presented for the later use. I omit the proofs here, since the proofs can be found in many literatures.
\begin{thm}[Bernstein's inequality] Let $1\leq p\leq q\leq\infty$ and $s\in\mathbb{R}.$ Then one has \begin{align}&\Vert P_Nf\Vert_{L^q}\lesssim_{p,q}N^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\Vert P_Nf\Vert_{L^p},\\&\Vert |D|^s P_Nf\Vert_{L^p}\lesssim N^s \Vert P_Nf\Vert_{L^p}.\end{align}
(2.1) still holds when $P_N$ is replaced by $P_{\leq N}.$ Also, if $s> 0,$ then (2.2) holds when $P_N$ is replaced by $P_{\leq N},$ and if $s<0,$ then (2.2) holds when $P_N$ is replaced by $P_{\geq N}.$
\end{thm} In particular, a notable case of Bernstein's inequality is (2.1) with $q=\infty$ and $p=2$, namely $\Vert P_Nf\Vert_{L^\infty}\lesssim N^{\frac{1}{2}}\Vert P_Nf\Vert_{L^2}.$
\\
Also we have the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality, a refined version of the Sobolev embedding:
\begin{thm}[Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality] Let $1<p<q\leq\infty$ and $s>0$ be such that \[\frac{1}{q}=\frac{1}{p}-\frac{\theta s}{d}\] for some $0<\theta<1.$ Then for any $u\in W^{s,p}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ we have \[\Vert u\Vert_{L^q(\mathbb{R}^d)}\lesssim_{d,p,q,s}\Vert u\Vert_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)}^{1-\theta}\Vert u\Vert_{\dot{W}^{s,p}(\mathbb{R}^d)}^\theta.\]
\end{thm}
For the proof, see for example \cite{tao2006nonlinear}.
Throughout the paper, a special case of Theorem 2.2, namely \[
\Vert u\Vert_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim\Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^{1/2}\Vert u\Vert_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{R})}^{1/2},
\]
will be used frequently.
Let $M$ be the one-dimensional Hardy-Littlewood maximal operator defined as \[Mf(x)=\sup_{r>0}\frac{1}{2r}\int_{x-r}^{x+r}|f(y)|dy.\] Then we have following pointwise bound by \cite{fujiwara2000remarks} :\begin{lem}
Let $f$ be a function whose Fourier support is in the annulus $|\xi|\sim R.$ Then for any $x\in\mathbb{R}$ and $s\in\mathbb{R},$\[\left||D|^sf(x)\right|\lesssim_s R^sMf(x).\]Moreover, if $f$ is not necessarily frequency-localized, then\[\left||D|^sP_Nf(x)\right|\lesssim N^s Mf(x).\] In both cases, if $s$ is an integer, then replacing $|D|$ by $\partial_x$ is acceptable. Also, if $s\geq 0$, then the annulus $|\xi|\sim R$ can be replaced by the disk $|\xi|\lesssim R.$
\end{lem}
\begin{rmk}
The above lemma implies that a polynomially decaying pointwise bound is stable under the frequency restriction, since if $g_s(x)=\langle x\rangle^{-s}$ for $s\geq 0,$ then $Mg_s(x)\lesssim_s g_s(x).$ Thus, we can apply the bootstrap bounds of $u$ appearing in the later sections freely to the frequency-localized pieces of $u$.
\end{rmk}
\begin{lem}[Interpolating pointwise bounds] Let $0<s<1$. Then one has \[\left||D|^su(x)\right|\lesssim (Mu(x))^{1-s}(M\partial_xu(x))^s.\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This is a special case of the theorem in Section 12.3.2 of \cite{mazya2011sobolev}.
\end{proof}
Note that, combining Lemma 2.5 and Remark 2.4, if $|u(x)|\leq A\langle x\rangle^{-\alpha}$ and $|\partial_xu(x)|\leq\langle x\rangle^{-\beta}$ for some $\alpha,\beta\geq 0$ and $A,B>0$, then $||D|^{\frac{1}{2}}u(x)|\lesssim \sqrt{AB}\langle x\rangle^{-\frac{\alpha+\beta}{2}}$. This kind of estimate will be used in the proof of Proposition 4.1.
\section{Linear Analysis}
First we consider the decay estimate of the solution of linear fifth-order KdV equation \begin{equation}
u_t-u_{5x}=0.\tag{Lin}\label{eq:Lin}
\end{equation}
We introduce the time-dependent linear operator $L(t):=x+5t\partial_x^4,$ so that if $u$ solves \eqref{eq:Lin} with initial datum $u_0$ then $Lu$ also solves the same equation with initial datum $xu_0.$
\\
Now we state the basic decay bound for the solution of \eqref{eq:Lin}, which is given as below:\begin{prop}\label{prop:lineq} Let $u$ be a solution of \eqref{eq:Lin} with initial datum $u_0\in L^1$. Then $u$ satisfies the uniform decay bound \[\Vert u(t)\Vert_{L^\infty}\lesssim t^{-1/5}\Vert u_0\Vert_{L^1}.\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Solving the equation via spatial Fourier transform gives \[u(t,x)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\int_{\mathbb{R}}e^{i\xi^5 t+i\xi(x-y)}u_0(y)dyd\xi.\] We change coordinates $\xi\mapsto t^{-1/5}\eta$ so that \[u(t,x)=t^{-1/5}\int_{\mathbb{R}}\int_{\mathbb{R}}e^{i\eta^5+i\eta t^{-1/5}(x-y)}u_0(y)dyd\eta=t^{-1/5}A(t^{-1/5}x)\ast u_0(x),\] where $A(x)$ is an oscillatory integral \[A(x):=\int_{\mathbb{R}}e^{i\eta^5+i\eta x}d\eta.\] Then $A$ is bounded by standard stationary phase argument. Now the result follows from Young's inequality.
\end{proof}
To obtain a more refined version of the above estimate, we need the following lemma due to \cite{durugo2014higher} and \cite{fujii2007higher}:
\begin{lem}
$A(x)$ in the proof of Proposition 3.1 satisfy the following asymptotic bound:\[A(x)\lesssim \langle x\rangle^{-3/8}e^{-Cx_+^{5/4}},\] where $C$ is an appropriate positive constant.
\end{lem}
From the above lemma, it follows that solutions with initial datum $u_0$ satisfying $\Vert u_0\Vert_{L^1}\leq 1$ and $\mathrm{supp}u_0$ bounded has the following decay bound for $t\gtrsim 1:$\[|u(t,x)|\lesssim t^{-1/8}\langle x\rangle^{-3/8}e^{-Cx_+^{5/4}t^{-1/4}},\quad |u_x(t,x)|\lesssim t^{-3/8}\langle x\rangle^{-1/8}e^{-C'x_+^{5/4}t^{-1/4}}\]
Now we aim to relax the compact support assumption to a decay estimate, in the similar way with \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}. Our goal of this section is to prove the following proposition:
\begin{prop}\label{prop:linbd}
Let $t>0$. Assume that a function $u$ satisfies:\begin{equation}\label{301}\Vert u\Vert_{\dot{B}_{2,\infty}^{-1/2}}+\Vert L(t)u\Vert_{\dot{H}^{1/2}}\leq 1.\end{equation} Then it also satisfies the bound \begin{equation}\label{302}t^{\frac{1}{8}+\frac{k}{4}}\langle x\rangle^{\frac{3}{8}-\frac{k}{4}}|\partial_x^k u|\lesssim 1\end{equation} for $k=0,1,2,3.$ Moreover, in the elliptic region $E=\{x\gg t^{\frac{1}{5}}\}$ we have the better bound\begin{equation}\label{303}t^{\frac{k}{4}}\langle x\rangle^{1-\frac{k}{4}}|\partial_x^ku(x)|\lesssim \log(t^{-\frac{1}{5}}\langle x\rangle).\end{equation}
\end{prop}
This is an analogous result of the Lemma 2.2 in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}. The only difference with it is the linear operator $L(t),$ where $L(t)=x-3t\partial_x^2$ in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive} and $L(t)=x+5t\partial_x^4$ here.
\
The steps of the proof will basically follow the idea of \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}. First we may rescale to $t=1$ since $\Vert u\Vert_{\dot{B}_{2,\infty}^{-1/2}}+\Vert L(t)u\Vert_{\dot{H}^{1/2}}$ is invariant under the scaling $u(\lambda^5,x)\mapsto \lambda u(\lambda^5,\lambda x).$ Also we will split the real line into the self-similar region $S=\{|x|\lesssim 1\}$ (would be $=\{|x|\lesssim t^{1/5}\}$ in general), the elliptic region $E=\{x\gg 1\}$ (would be $=\{x\gg t^{1/5}\}$ in general), and the hyperbolic region $H=\{-x\gg 1\}.$ Also we split the elliptic and hyperbolic regions into dyadic components, namely $A_R=\{\langle x\rangle\sim R\gg 1\}$ and $A_1=\{\langle x\rangle\lesssim 1\}=S$, $A_R^H=A_R\cap H$, $A_R^E=A_R\cap E$ for $R\gg 1.$ Therefore the proof is reduced to showing that \begin{equation}\label{304}\Vert\partial_x^k u\Vert_{L^\infty(A_R)}\lesssim R^{-\frac{3}{8}+\frac{k}{4}}\end{equation} for each $R\geq 1$ and $k=0,1,2,3$ (and the corresponding counterpart for the elliptic region).
\subsection{Localized bounds of a linear solution}
Now we present the following low frequency bound, which is the same as in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}: \begin{lem}\label{lem:lowf1}
If (\ref{301}) holds, we have \begin{equation}\label{305}\Vert Lu\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{1/2}.\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{rmk}
The reason why we call \eqref{305} as a low frequency bound is that the suppressed low frequency factors in $\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}$ norm become dominant in the $L^2$ norm. Such low frequency bound turns out to be worse than the high frequency bound, but it is still acceptable thanks to the good low frequency bound of $u$ due to the $\dot{B}^{-\frac{1}{2}}_{2,\infty}$ norm.
\end{rmk}
\begin{proof}
The proof is almost identical to the case of \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}, but I present the details here to clarify the ideas.
First we split $u$ at some frequency cut-off $M$, where $M$ is to be chosen later:\[u=u_{<M}+u_{\geq M}.\] Then the Besov bound from (\ref{301}) tells that $\Vert u_{M}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim M^{1/2}.$ Hence \[\Vert u_{<M}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\leq\sum_{N<M}\Vert u_N\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim \sum_{N<M}N^{1/2}\sim M^{1/2}\]where the sum runs over all dyadic numbers $<M.$ Therefore one has \begin{equation}\label{306}\Vert Lu_{<M}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\leq \Vert xu_{<M}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}+\Vert \partial_x^4u_{<M}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim RM^{1/2}+M^{9/2}.\end{equation}
On the other hand, \[Lu_{\geq M}=P_{\geq M}Lu+[L,P_{\geq M}]u=P_{\geq M}Lu+[x,P_{\geq M}]u,\] where the last equality follows since $[\partial_x^4,P_{\geq M}]=0$ (note that any two Fourier multipliers commute). Now we can estimate \[\Vert P_{\geq M}Lu\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\leq \Vert (1-\psi(\xi/M))\widehat{Lu}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim M^{-1/2}\Vert Lu\Vert_{\dot{H}^{1/2}(\mathbb{R})}\leq M^{-1/2},\] with $\psi$ being a bump function supported in $|\xi|\lesssim 1.$ Also we have \[\Vert[x,P_{\geq M}]u\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\leq \Vert M^{-1}\psi'(\xi/M)\hat{u}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim M^{-1/2}\] by (\ref{301}). This gives \begin{equation}\label{307}\Vert Lu_{\geq M}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim M^{-1/2}.\end{equation}
Now we are going to optimize the bound, compromising between (\ref{306}) and (\ref{307}) by choosing the appropriate $M$. Note that the bound in (\ref{306}) becomes smaller if $M$ is small and the same holds for the bound in (\ref{307}) if $M$ is large. Hence the bound is optimized when the two bounds are comparable. If $RM^{1/2}\sim M^{-1/2},$ then $M\sim R^{-1},$ and the resulting bound becomes $R^{1/2}.$ Also if $M^{9/2}\sim M^{-1/2}$, then $M\sim 1,$ so the resulting bound becomes $R$, and the former is better, so we choose $M=R^{-1}.$ Hence (\ref{305}) follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk} The above argument works in both cases $R=1$ and $R>1.$\end{rmk}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:hif}
If (\ref{301}) holds, we have \begin{equation}\label{308}\Vert \partial_x^ku\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{\frac{1}{8}+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=0,1,2,3,4.\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{rmk}
In \eqref{308}, one more derivative corresponds to the additional $R^{\frac{1}{4}}$ factor. This can be deduced heuristically from the fact that the fifth-order Airy function \[A(t,x)=\int_{\mathbb{R}}e^{itx+i\xi^5t}d\xi\] is concentrated near $(|x|/t)^{\frac{1}{4}}$ with $x<0,$ as the principle of stationary phase implies.
\end{rmk}
\begin{proof}
Again we split $u=u_{<M}+\sum_{\lambda\geq M}u_{\lambda}$ and choose $M$ later as before. The bound on $u_{<M}$ follows by:\begin{equation}\label{309}\Vert \partial_x^ku_{<M}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim M^k\Vert u_{<M}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim M^{k+\frac{1}{2}}\end{equation} where the last inequality follows from (\ref{301}). Now consider the high frequency bound. The bound of $Lu_{\lambda}$ can be computed in the same way with $Lu_{\geq M}$ in Lemma 3.4, and the bound of $u_\lambda$ directly follows from (\ref{301}) so that \begin{subequations}\begin{equation}\label{310a}\Vert Lu_{\lambda}\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim\lambda^{-1/2},\end{equation} \begin{equation}\label{310b}\Vert u_{\lambda}\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim\lambda^{1/2},\end{equation}\begin{equation}\label{310c} \Vert u_{\lambda,x}\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \lambda^{3/2}.\end{equation}\end{subequations}Now integrating by parts gives \begin{align*}
\int \chi_Ru_{\lambda,2x}^2dx=\frac{1}{5}\int \chi_Ru_\lambda Lu_\lambda - \frac{1}{5}\int \chi_Rxu_\lambda^2+\int (\chi_R''u_{\lambda,2x}+2\chi_R'u_{\lambda,3x})u_\lambda.
\end{align*} The first integral can be estimated via Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, which yields the bound 1 by (\ref{310a}) and (\ref{310b}), and the bound of the second integral follows directly from (\ref{310b}), which yields $R\lambda.$ To bound the third integral, we integrate by parts again to obtain:\begin{align*}
\int (\chi_R''u_{\lambda,2x}+2\chi_R'u_{\lambda,3x})u_\lambda=-\frac{1}{2}\int \chi_R^{(4)}u_\lambda^2+2\int \chi_R''u_{\lambda,x}^2.
\end{align*} Hence the third integral is bounded by $R^{-4}\lambda+R^{-2}\lambda^3$ due to (\ref{310b}), (\ref{310c}), and the fact $\Vert \partial_x^k \chi_R\Vert_{L^\infty}=O_{k,\chi}(R^{-k}).$ This gives the preliminary bound \begin{equation}\label{311}\Vert u_{\lambda,2x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim 1+R^{1/2}\lambda^{1/2}+R^{-1}\lambda^{3/2}:=N.\end{equation}
Repeating the similar steps for the integral $\int \chi_Ru_{\lambda,3x}^2dx$ one gets the similar bound:\begin{equation}\label{311a}
\Vert u_{\lambda,3x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{-1}N+\lambda^{1/4}N^{1/2}+R^{1/2}\lambda^{1/4}N^{1/2}:=N'.
\end{equation}
Now we are going to refine (\ref{310b}) and (\ref{310c}) using (\ref{311}) and (\ref{311a}) so that the bound becomes summable with respect to $\lambda.$ To do so we decompose \[\chi_Ru_\lambda=\partial_{x,\lambda}^{-2}(\chi_Ru_{\lambda,2x})-[\partial_{x,\lambda}^{-2},\chi_R]u_{\lambda,2x},\] where the antiderivative $\partial_{x,\lambda}^{-2}$ is localized at frequency $\lambda,$ namely having the symbol $-\xi^{-2}\varphi(\xi/\lambda)$ with $\varphi$ being a bump function supported on the annulus $|\xi|\sim 1.$ Let $\psi$ be the Fourier inversion of $-\xi^{-2}\varphi(\xi),$ so that $\psi\in\mathcal{S}(\mathbb{R}).$ Then the inversion of $-\xi^{-2}\varphi(\xi/\lambda)$ becomes $\lambda^{-1}\psi(\lambda x).$ Then one has \begin{align*}
\Vert [\partial_{x,\lambda}^{-2},\chi_R]u_{\lambda,2x}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}&=\lambda^{-1}\left\Vert\int \psi(\lambda(x-y))(\chi_R(y)-\chi_R(x))u_{\lambda,2x}(y)dy\right\Vert_{L^2_x(\mathbb{R})}\\&\lesssim\lambda^{-1}\Vert |\psi(\lambda\cdot)|\ast |u_{\lambda,2x}|\Vert_{L^2_x}\leq \lambda^{-2}\Vert \psi\Vert_{L_x^1}\Vert u_{\lambda,2x}\Vert_{L_x^2}\\&\lesssim \lambda^{-2}N.
\end{align*} Also \[\Vert \partial_{x,\lambda}^{-2}(\chi_Ru_{\lambda,2x})\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim \lambda^{-2}\Vert u_{\lambda,2x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \lambda^{-2}N.\] This yields a local bound for $u_\lambda$:\begin{equation}\label{313}\Vert u_\lambda\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \lambda^{-2}N.\end{equation}
Now summing up (\ref{313}) on the frequency range $\lambda\geq M$ gives\begin{equation}\label{314}
\Vert u_{\geq M}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim
M^{-2}+R^{1/2}M^{-3/2}+R^{-1}M^{-1/2}.\end{equation}
Repeating the same argument above to the decomposition \begin{equation}\label{315}\chi_Ru_{\lambda,x}=\partial^{-2}_{x,\lambda}(\chi_Ru_{\lambda,3x})-[\partial^{-2}_{x,\lambda},\chi_R]u_{\lambda,3x}\end{equation} we also get the refined local bound for $u_{\lambda,x}$:\begin{equation}\label{316}\Vert u_{\lambda,x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \lambda^{-2}N',\end{equation} so that \begin{equation}\label{317}
\Vert \partial_xu_{\geq M}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{-1}M^{-2}+R^{-2}M^{-\frac{1}{2}}+R^{\frac{1}{2}}M^{-\frac{7}{4}}+R^{\frac{3}{4}}M^{-\frac{3}{2}}+M^{-1}.
\end{equation}
Now we want to optimize the bounds (\ref{309}), (\ref{314}), (\ref{317}) by making them comparable. It turns out that $M=R^{1/4}$ is the case with the best bound, so that $M^{-2}N\sim R^{1/8}.$ This gives \begin{subequations}\begin{equation}\label{318a}\Vert u\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{1/8},\end{equation}\begin{equation}\label{318b}\quad \Vert u_{x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{3/8},\end{equation}\begin{equation}\label{318c}\quad \Vert u_{2x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{5/8}.\end{equation}\end{subequations}
Here the bound (\ref{318c}) follows from integration by parts below with (\ref{305}), (\ref{318a}), and (\ref{318b}):
\begin{align*}
\int \chi_Ru_{2x}^2dx=\frac{1}{5}\int \chi_Ru Lu - \frac{1}{5}\int \chi_Rxu^2+\int (\chi_R''u_{2x}+2\chi_R'u_{3x})u.
\end{align*}
Using the bound (\ref{305}) and (\ref{318a}) easily gives that \begin{equation}\label{319}\Vert u_{4x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim R^{9/8}.\end{equation} Finally, it remains to find the bound of $\Vert u_{3x}\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}.$ This can be done easily by integration by parts:\[\int \chi_Ru_{3x}^2=-\int\chi_R'u_{3x}u_{2x}-\int\chi_Ru_{4x}u_{2x}=\frac{1}{2}\int\chi_R''u_{2x}^2-\int\chi_Ru_{4x}u_{2x}\]so the bound follows from (\ref{318c}) and (\ref{319}).
\end{proof}
\subsection{Pointwise estimation on each region}\label{sec:302}
Let $v:=\chi_Ru.$ For notational convenience, we are going to restrict the norm to the region $A_R,$ so we will write $L^2(A_R)$ simply as $L^2.$ Then $v$ solves an equation of the form \[(x+5\partial_x^4)v=f\] in $A_R,$ where we control \begin{equation}\label{320}\Vert \partial_x^kv\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim R^{\frac{1}{8}+\frac{k}{4}},\quad 0\leq k\leq 4\end{equation} by (\ref{308}), and \begin{equation}\label{321}\Vert f\Vert_{\dot{H}^{1/2}}\lesssim 1,\quad \Vert f\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim R^{\frac{1}{2}}\end{equation} which follows by (\ref{301}), (\ref{305}).
Now we turn to the pointwise estimate in each region. In the case of self-similar region, the result follows directly from Sobolev embedding (note that in this region just $\lesssim 1$ bound is enough, since $R=1$). Hence we concentrate on elliptic and hyperbolic regions.
First we see the elliptic region, namely $x\sim R,$ which seems to be easier to deal with than the hyperbolic region. Split $f=f_{lo}+f_{hi},$ where the frequency scale is $R^{1/4}.$ Here the operator $L=x+5\partial_x^4$ is elliptic, so the leading part will then be $x^{-1}f_{lo}.$ Then let $v_1:=v-x^{-1}f_{lo}$ be the remainder, which solves \[Lv_1=f_1:=f_{hi}-5\partial_x^4(x^{-1}f_{lo}).\]
By (2) one has \[\Vert f_{hi}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim R^{-1/8}\Vert f\Vert_{\dot{H}^{1/2}}\lesssim R^{-1/8},\]\begin{align*}\Vert \partial_x^4 (x^{-1}f_{lo})\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim &R^{-5}\Vert f_{lo}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}+R^{-4}\Vert \partial_xf_{lo}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}+R^{-3}\Vert \partial_x^2f_{lo}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\\+&R^{-2}\Vert \partial_x^3f_{lo}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}+R^{-1}\Vert \partial_x^4f_{lo}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\\\lesssim& R^{-9/2}+R^{-31/8}+R^{-21/8}+R^{-11/8}+R^{-1/8}\\\lesssim &R^{-1/8},\end{align*} where for $k\geq 1$, \[\Vert \partial_x^k f_{lo}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim R^{\frac{k}{4}-\frac{1}{8}}\Vert f_{lo}\Vert_{\dot{H}^{1/2}}\lesssim R^{\frac{k}{4}-\frac{1}{8}},\] which yield \[\Vert f_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim R^{\frac{k}{4}-\frac{1}{8}}.\]
Hence we may integrate by parts in the following identity \[\int_{\mathbb{R}}v_1Lv_1dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}}f_1v_1dx\] and arrive at \[\int_{\mathbb{R}}x |v_1|^2 dx +5\int_{\mathbb{R}}|\partial_x^2v_1|^2dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}}f_1v_1dx.\]
Then by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality,\[R\Vert v_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2+5\Vert \partial_x^2v_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2\lesssim \Vert f_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\Vert v_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\leq \delta R\Vert v_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2+\frac{4}{\delta R}\Vert f_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2\] for any $\delta>0,$ so letting $\delta>0$ sufficiently small gives \[R\Vert v_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2+5\Vert \partial_x^2v_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2\lesssim R^{-1}\Vert f_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2.\] Thus, using the bound on $f_1,$ we arrive at \[\Vert \partial_x^kv_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim R^{-\frac{9}{8}+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=0,2,\] and using the $v_1$ equation shows that this bound also holds for $k=4,$ and by interpolation it still holds for $k=1,3.$ To sum up, we have\[\Vert \partial_x^kv_1\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim R^{-\frac{9}{8}+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=0,1,2,3,4.\]
Finally, by Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality, one has \[|\partial_x^k v_1|\lesssim R^{-1+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=0,1,2,3,\] which is exactly as needed.
Now we need to get the bound of $x^{-1}f_{lo}.$ Proceeding as above, one has \[\Vert \partial_x^k(x^{-1}f_{lo})\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})} \lesssim R^{-\frac{9}{8}+\frac{k}{4}}\] for $k=1,2,3,4.$ Hence again Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality gives \[\Vert x^{-1}f_{lo}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim R^{-1+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=1,2,3.\] For $k=0$, we decompose $f_{lo}$ further as \[f_{lo}=f_{<R^{-1}}+\sum_{R^{-1}\leq \lambda \leq R^{1/4}}f_\lambda.\] Then Bernstein's inequality and Littlewood-Paley characterization of Sobolev norms give \begin{align*}
\Vert f_{<R^{-1}}\Vert_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R})}&\lesssim R^{-1/2}\Vert f_{<R^{-1}}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\lesssim 1,\\\sum_{R^{-1}\leq \lambda \leq R^{1/4}}\Vert f_{\lambda}\Vert_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R})}&\lesssim \sum_{R^{-1}\leq \lambda \leq R^{1/4}}\lambda^{1/2}\Vert f_{\lambda}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\\&\lesssim (\log R)^{1/2}\Big(\sum_{R^{-1}\leq \lambda \leq R^{1/4}}\lambda\Vert f_{\lambda}\Vert_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}^2 \Big)^{1/2}\\&\lesssim (\log R)^{1/2}\Vert f\Vert_{\dot{H}^{1/2}}\lesssim (\log R)^{1/2}.
\end{align*}
where the inequality used in the penultimate line is just an elementary inequality \[\sum_{k=1}^n a_k\leq (n\sum_{k=1}^n a_k^2)^{1/2}.\] Hence one has \begin{equation}\label{322}\Vert x^{-1}f_{lo}\Vert_{L^\infty}\lesssim R^{-1}(\log R)^{1/2},\end{equation} which is exactly needed.
Finally we turn to the hyperbolic region. As in the third-order case, $f$ might be worse at lower frequency (below $R^{\frac{1}{4}}$) than higher frequencies, due to the weight $|\xi|^{1/2}.$ Hence we proceed by splitting $f$ to low and high frequencies:\[f=\widetilde{\chi}_Rf_{\leq R^{1/4}}+\widetilde{\chi}_Rf_{> R^{1/4}}:=f_{lo}+f_{hi},\] where $\tilde{\chi}_R$ is smooth, supported on $|x|\sim R,$ and $\tilde{\chi}_R\chi_R=\chi_R$.
Then we may use an energy estimate,\[\frac{d}{dx}(-x|v|^2+5|v_{xx}|^2-10v_xv_{3x}+2f_{lo}v)=-|v|^2-2f_{hi}v_x+2f_{lo,x}v\leq -2fv_x+2f_{lo,x},\] and integrating both sides gives \begin{equation}\label{323'}-x|v|^2+5|v_{xx}|^2-10v_xv_{3x}\lesssim \Vert f_{hi}\Vert_{L^2}\Vert v_x\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert f_{lo,x}\Vert_{L^2}\Vert v\Vert_{L^2}+|f_{lo}v|\end{equation} whenever $x\in A_R^H$, so the term $|f_{lo}v|$ can be controlled via (\ref{322}) and the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality \[\Vert v\Vert_{L^\infty}\lesssim \Vert v\Vert_{L^2}^{\frac{1}{2}}\Vert v_x\Vert_{L^2}^{\frac{1}{2}}\lesssim R^{\frac{1}{4}},\] and the other terms can be bounded by (\ref{320}) and (\ref{321}). This finally gives \begin{equation}\label{323}-x|v|^2+5|v_{xx}|^2-10v_xv_{3x}\lesssim R^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}.\end{equation}Now we have a task to deal with the extra $v_xv_{3x}$ term, which was absent in the third-order case. The problem is that, we should control the pointwise bound of $v_xv_{3x}$, either.
Now try a similar estimate as follows:\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{dx}&(-x|v_x|^2+5|v_{3x}|^2+2xvv_{xx}+2f_{lo}v_{2x})\leq 2vv_{xx}+2f_{hi}v_{3x}-2f_{lo,x}v_{2x}\\\lesssim &|x|^{-\frac{1}{2}}(-x|v|^2+5|v_{xx}|^2)+|f_{hi}v_{3x}|+|f_{lo,x}v_{2x}|\\\lesssim& R^{-\frac{1}{2}}(R^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}+10v_xv_{3x})+|f_{hi}v_{3x}|+|f_{lo,x}v_{2x}|,
\end{align*} and integrating both sides, together with Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives \begin{align*}
&-x|v_x|^2+5|v_{3x}|^2+2xvv_{xx}\\\lesssim& R^{\frac{3}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}+R^{-\frac{1}{2}}\Vert v_x\Vert_{L^2}\cdot \Vert v_{3x}\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert f_{hi}\Vert_{L^2}\Vert v_{3x}\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert f_{lo,x}\Vert_{L^2}\Vert v_{2x}\Vert_{L^2}+|f_{lo}v_{2x}|\\\lesssim& R^{\frac{3}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}+|f_{lo}v_{2x}|
\end{align*} for $x\in A_R^H$. Here the term $|f_{lo}v_{2x}|$ can be treated in the same way as above, so one has \begin{equation}\label{324}-x|v_x|^2+5|v_{3x}|^2+2xvv_{xx}\lesssim R^{\frac{3}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}.\end{equation}
Now we obtained the system of two inequalities:\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}\label{325a}-x|v|^2+5|v_{xx}|^2-10v_xv_{3x}
\leq CR^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}},\end{equation}\begin{equation}\label{325b}-x|v_x|^2+5|v_{3x}|^2+2xvv_{xx}\leq CR^{\frac{3}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}.\end{equation}
\end{subequations} From (\ref{325a}) and (\ref{325b}) we have \begin{align*}
-x|v|^2+5|v_{xx}|^2 \leq& CR^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}+10v_xv_{3x}\leq CR^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}+\sqrt{\frac{5}{-x}}(-xv_x^2+5v_{3x}^2)\\\leq&CR^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{2}}+2\sqrt{-5x}vv_{2x},
\end{align*} so that \begin{equation}\label{326a}|\sqrt{-x}v-\sqrt{5}v_{2x}|\lesssim R^{\frac{1}{8}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{4}}\end{equation} and in the same way one can show \begin{equation}\label{326b}|\sqrt{-x}v_x-\sqrt{5}v_{3x}|\lesssim R^{\frac{3}{8}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{4}}.\end{equation}
Now it remains to show that \begin{equation}\label{lastgoal}\Vert \partial_x^kv\Vert_{L^\infty(A_R)}\lesssim R^{-\frac{3}{8}+\frac{k}{4}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{4}},\quad k=0,1,2,3.\end{equation} To deduce a contradiction, suppose that $\Vert v\Vert_{L^\infty(A_R)}\not\lesssim R^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{4}}$. Then there exists a sequence $\{R_n\}\uparrow\infty$ as $n\to\infty$ such that $\Vert v\Vert_{L^\infty(A_{R_n})}\geq 2^n R_n^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}.$ Then by \eqref{326a} it turns out that $\Vert v_{2x}\Vert_{L^\infty(A_{R_n})}\gtrsim 2^n R_n^{\frac{1}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}$ whenever $n$ is large enough. Also by \eqref{325a} and \eqref{326b} one may show that $\Vert v_{x}\Vert_{L^\infty(A_{R_n})}\gtrsim 2^n R_n^{-\frac{1}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}$ and $\Vert v_{3x}\Vert_{L^\infty(A_{R_n})}\gtrsim 2^n R_n^{\frac{3}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}$ again for $n$ large enough. Now define the set $B_n:=\{x:|v(x)|\geq 2^{n-1}R_n^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}\}.$ Here $v$ is assumed to be differentiable sufficiently many times, so by taking a connected component we may assume that $B_n=[a_n,b_n]$, where $a_n$ and $b_n$ are the first left and right points where $v(a_n)=v(b_n)=2^{n-1}R_n^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}.$ Note that $-\infty<a_n$ and $b_n<\infty$ because $v$ is compactly supported.
Now observe by (\ref{325a}) one has
\begin{equation}\label{327}
v_xv_{3x}\geq \frac{1}{10}\left(-x|v|^2+5|v_{2x}|^2-CR_n^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right)\gtrsim 2^{2(n-1)} R_n^{\frac{1}{4}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{2}}
\end{equation} whenever $x\in B_{n}$ with $n$ large enough.
Similarly, by (\ref{325b}) one also has \begin{equation}\label{326}
\begin{split}
vv_{2x}&\geq \frac{1}{-2x}\left(-x|v_x|^2+5|v_{3x}|^2-CR_n^{\frac{3}{4}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right)\\&\geq \frac{1}{-2x}\left(2\sqrt{-5x}v_xv_{3x}-CR_n^{\frac{3}{4}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right)\gtrsim 2^{2(n-1)}R_n^{-\frac{1}{4}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{2}}
\end{split}
\end{equation} under the same assumption above. (\ref{326}) shows that for sufficiently large $n$, $v$ and $v_{2x}$ always have the same sign on $B_n$, and the similar statement holds for $v_x$ and $v_{3x}.$
First we may assume that $v>0$ on $B_n$ (otherwise we may replace $v$ by $-v$). Then $v\geq 2^{n-1}R_n^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}$ and it is strictly convex on $B_n$ since $v_{2x}>0$. Also by definition $v(a_n)=v(b_n)=2^{n-1}R_n^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}$. However, this is a contradiction because strict convexity means $v(ta_n+(1-t)b_n)<tv(a_n)+(1-t)v(b_n)=2^{n-1}R_n^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R_n)^{\frac{1}{4}}$ on $B_n.$ Hence it follows that $\Vert v\Vert_{L^\infty}\lesssim R^{-\frac{3}{8}}(\log R)^{\frac{1}{4}}$. This proves (\ref{lastgoal}), and plugging (\ref{lastgoal}) into the right hand side of the inequality (\ref{323'}) gives \begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}-x|v|^2+5|v_{xx}|^2-10v_xv_{3x}
\lesssim R^{\frac{1}{4}},\end{equation}\begin{equation}-x|v_x|^2+5|v_{3x}|^2+2xvv_{xx}\lesssim R^{\frac{3}{4}}.\end{equation}
\end{subequations} and repeating the same argument removes the logarithm from \eqref{lastgoal}, and the Proposition 3.3 is proved.
\begin{rmk}\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item The overview of the linear analysis is similar to that of \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}. However, since we have to deal with the higher order equation, there are some additional steps which was not in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}. More specifically, in \eqref{325a} and \eqref{325b} we had to control the cross terms which did not appear in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}. This is one of the main obstacles we have to pay attention, since such cross terms may become more and more complicated as the order of the linear equation becomes higher, making the linear analysis more and more difficult.
\item A notable advantage of the argument is that it does not depend on the fact that $u$ is a solution of \eqref{eq:Lin}. Thus, as one can see in the last section, the same argument can be applied to the nonlinear case after a slight modification.
\end{enumerate}
\end{rmk}
\section{Outline of the nonlinear analysis}
Let $u$ be a solution to \eqref{eq:KW} with the smallness assumption of the initial datum \begin{equation}\label{small}\Vert u_0\Vert_{\dot{B}_{2,\infty}^{-\frac{1}{2}}}+\Vert xu_0\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\leq \epsilon\ll 1.\end{equation} Motivated from Proposition 3.3, we are going to make bootstrap assumptions \begin{equation}\label{bootstrap}
|u_{kx}(x,t)|\leq M\epsilon t^{-\frac{1}{8}-\frac{k}{4}}\langle x\rangle^{\frac{k}{4}-\frac{3}{8}},\quad k=0,1,2,3,
\end{equation} where $M$ is a large universal constant, independent of $\epsilon,$ to be chosen later, and $\epsilon\ll 1$ is small depending on $M$.
The overall process for nonlinear estimates is similar with that in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}, sometimes being simpler. More precisely, the process may include energy estimates for both nonlinear and linearized equations, uniform Sobolev bounds for $L^{NL}u$ for some nonlinear operator $L^{NL},$ and finally the nonlinear dispersive bounds.
Let us explain the overall strategies of this paper. Mainly we focus on the case of \eqref{eq:KW}, since the case of \eqref{eq:mKW} is entirely similar. The case of \eqref{eq:mKW} is briefly discussed in the appendix.
\\
Basically we are going to follow the argument of \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}, but the case becomes much simpler, thanks to the higher dispersive effect on high frequencies.
\\
To prove our main result, Theorem 1.1, we are going to split the proof into few steps. Below is the list of the propositions to be proved.
\begin{prop}
Let $u$ be a solution to \eqref{eq:KW} with the smallness assumption of the initial datum \eqref{small} together with the bootstrap bound \eqref{bootstrap}. Then one has \[\Vert u(t)\Vert_{\dot{B}_{2,\infty}^{-\frac{1}{2}}}\lesssim\epsilon\] for the time scale $|t|\ll_M\epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}.$
\end{prop}
Since the proof of Proposition 4.1 is very short, we give the proof right here.\\A direct energy estimate gives
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{dt}\int (P_\lambda u)^2 =\frac{1}{2}\int P_\lambda u\cdot\partial_xP_{\lambda}(u^2)\lesssim \Vert P_\lambda u\Vert_{L^2}\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}\Vert |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(u^2)\Vert_{L^2}.
\end{align*} Also we may find the bound of $\Vert |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(u^2)\Vert_{L^2}$ as follows: From $|u^2|\leq M^2\epsilon^2 t^{-\frac{1}{4}}\langle x\rangle^{-\frac{3}{4}}$, $|\partial_x(u^2)|\leq M^2\epsilon^2 t^{-\frac{1}{2}}\langle x\rangle^{-\frac{1}{2}}$, and Lemma 2.5 one has $||D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(u^2)|\lesssim M^2\epsilon^2 t^{-\frac{3}{8}} \langle x\rangle^{-\frac{5}{8}}$, so that \begin{align*}\Vert |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(u^2)\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim &M^2\epsilon^2 t^{-\frac{3}{8}}\left(\int (x^2+t^{\frac{2}{5}})^{-\frac{5}{8}}dx\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}= M^2\epsilon^2 t^{-\frac{3}{8}}\left(\int (y^2+1)^{-\frac{5}{4}}t^{-\frac{1}{4}}t^{\frac{1}{5}}dy\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\\\lesssim& M^2\epsilon^2 t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\end{align*} where the change of variables $x:=t^{\frac{1}{5}}y$ is used. Hence it should be the case that \[\Vert P_\lambda u\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \Vert P_\lambda u_0\Vert_{L^2}+\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}M^2\epsilon^2t^{\frac{3}{5}}\lesssim \epsilon\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}\] under the assumption of the time bound $M^2\epsilon t^{\frac{3}{5}}\leq 1$.\footnote{This is why the time scale for \eqref{eq:KW} in Theorem 1.1 is restricted to $|t|\ll \epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}$.} Therefore, we get the desired bound \[\Vert u(t)\Vert_{\dot{B}^{-\frac{1}{2}}_{2,\infty}}\lesssim\epsilon,\quad t\ll_M\epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}.\]
\begin{rmk} The reason why the direct energy estimate of the Besov bound for \eqref{eq:KW} is possible is that it has a better spatial decay of the solution that it is directly square integrable. One may see that the above argument does not work for \eqref{eq:5KdV} unless $c_1=c_2=0$\footnote{The case $c_1=c_2=0$ is merely \eqref{eq:mKW}, where we can apply the same argument as discussed in the appendix.} due to more derivatives in the nonlinearity and thus having worse spatial decay. It is also not applicable to the KdV equation for the same reason, which is why Ifrim et al. \cite{ifrim2019dispersive} used the small data $H^{-1}$ conservation law of KdV equation, which is aided from the complete integrability.\end{rmk}
\begin{prop} Let $u$ be a solution to \eqref{eq:KW} which satisfies the smallness assumption \eqref{small} for the initial data, as well as the bootstrap assumption \eqref{bootstrap}. Then the linearized equation \begin{equation}
z_t-z_{5x}=uz_x\tag{LinKW}\label{eq:LinKW}
\end{equation} is well-posed in $\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}$ with uniform bounds \[\Vert z(t)\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\sim \Vert z(0)\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}},\quad t\ll_M\epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}.\]\end{prop}
The proof of Proposition 4.3 will be discussed in the Section 5. Using Proposition 4.3, one may prove the following proposition:
\begin{prop}
Let $u$ be a solution to \eqref{eq:KW} satisfying the smallness assumption \eqref{small} and the bootstrap assumption \eqref{bootstrap}. Then $L^{NL}u:=xu+5tu_{4x}+\frac{5}{2}tu^2$ satisfies the bound \[\Vert L^{NL}u(t)\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\lesssim \epsilon,\quad |t|\ll_M \epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}.\]
\end{prop} Proposition 4.4 will be proved in the Section 6.\\
Let me explain the relations between the above propositions and our main theorem. First, gathering the results from the above propositions, we conclude the following: Under the smallness assumption \eqref{small}, we have the bound \begin{equation}\label{NL}\Vert u(t)\Vert_{\dot{B}_{2,\infty}^{-\frac{1}{2}}}+\Vert L^{NL}u(t)\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\lesssim \epsilon,\quad |t|\ll_M\epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}.\end{equation} Under the bound \eqref{NL}, we may apply the same argument as in the Section 3, with some additional procedures to control the nonlinear terms. This will be done in the following subsection. Finally, in the Appendix, we briefly sketch the proof of our main result in the case of \eqref{eq:mKW}.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem 1.1}
In this section, we finish the proof of our main theorem, Theorem 1.1, assuming that the Propositions 4.1, 4.3, and 4.4 are true.
For the sake of simplicity, we are going to rescale the problem to $t=1.$ Namely, given the equation \[xu+5tu_{4x}+\frac{5}{2}tu^2=f,\quad f=L^{NL}u\]let $\tilde{u}(x)=t^{\frac{4}{5}}u(t,xt^{\frac{1}{5}}),\quad \tilde{f}(x)=t^{\frac{3}{5}}f(t,xt^{\frac{1}{5}}).$ Then a direct calculation gives that $\tilde{u}$ and $\tilde{f}$ solve the same equation with $t=1,$ so that \begin{equation}\label{701}(x+5\partial_x^4)\tilde{u}+\frac{5}{2}\tilde{u}^2=\tilde{f}.\end{equation} Such scaling also gives the new bounds as follows:\begin{equation}\label{702}\Vert \tilde{u}\Vert_{\dot{B}_{2,\infty}^{-\frac{1}{2}}}\lesssim\tilde{\epsilon}:=\epsilon t^{\frac{3}{5}}\ll 1,\quad |\partial_x^k\tilde{u}(x)|\lesssim M\tilde{\epsilon}\langle x\rangle^{-\frac{3}{8}+\frac{k}{4}},\;k=0,1,2,3,\end{equation} where $\langle x\rangle=(x^2+1)^{\frac{1}{2}}$ does not depend on $t$ and \begin{equation}\label{703}\Vert \tilde{f}\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\lesssim \tilde{\epsilon},\end{equation}
and moreover, the rescaled time bound assumption \begin{equation}\label{rescaled} M^2\tilde{\epsilon}\leq 1.\end{equation}
For notational convenience, we are going to drop the tilde notation. Then the proof is reduced to showing that \[\Vert \partial_x^ku\Vert_{L^\infty(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon R^{-\frac{3}{8}+\frac{k}{4}}\] and the corresponding counterpart for the elliptic region $A_R\cap E.$
\\
Now most of the procedures are the same with the linear analysis, so I am going to skip most of the details, except the necessary nonlinear analysis.
\begin{lem}
Under the assumptions of (\ref{701}), (\ref{702}), (\ref{703}), and (\ref{rescaled}), we have \begin{equation}\label{704} \Vert f\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon R^{\frac{1}{2}}.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As in the proof of Lemma 3.4, we split $u$ at the frequency cutoff $R^{-1}$ and compute:
\[f=P_{>R^{-1}}f+P_{<R^{-1}}Lu+P_{<R^{-1}}(u^2).\footnote{Here I intentionally dropped any insignificant constant coefficients.}\]The first two terms can be estimated in the same way as Lemma 3.4. For the last term, the pointwise bootstrap bound \eqref{702} and Lemma 2.3 gives \[|P_{<R^{-1}}(u^2)|\lesssim M^2\epsilon^2 R^{-\frac{3}{4}},\]so that \[\Vert P_{<R^{-1}}(u^2)\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim M^2\epsilon^2 R^{-\frac{1}{4}},\] and using the time bound \eqref{rescaled}, the desired bound \eqref{704} is obtained.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
Under the assumptions of (\ref{701}), (\ref{702}), (\ref{703}), and (\ref{rescaled}), we have \begin{equation}\label{705}
\Vert \partial_x^ku\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon R^{\frac{1}{8}+\frac{k}{4}}.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The low frequency case $\lambda\leq R^{\frac{1}{4}}$ can be dealt with in the same way in the linear case, so we focus on the high frequency case, $\lambda> R^{\frac{1}{4}}$. Again we split as \[Lu_\lambda=P_\lambda L^{NL}u+\lambda^{-1}u_{\lambda}-P_\lambda(u^2),\] and the first two terms can be estimated in the same way as in the linear case, so we again focus on the nonlinear terms. Using (\ref{702}) and Lemma 2.3 gives \[\Vert P_\lambda(u^2)\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon R^{-\frac{1}{4}}\] and \[\Vert \partial_xP_\lambda(u^2)\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon R^{\frac{1}{4}},\] so that \[\Vert P_\lambda(u^2)\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon \lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}.\]Now the argument is completed as in the linear case.
\end{proof}
Now we may localize the solution $u$ to the dyadic regions $|x|\sim R.$ Let $v:=\chi_Ru,$ then $v$ solves the equation \begin{equation}\label{706}(x+5\partial_x^4)v+\frac{5}{2}uv=g,\end{equation}with the bounds
\begin{equation}\label{707}
\Vert \partial_x^k v\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon R^{\frac{1}{8}+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=0,1,2,3,4,
\end{equation}and \begin{equation}\label{708}
\Vert g\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\lesssim \epsilon,\quad \Vert g\Vert_{L^2(A_R)}\lesssim \epsilon R^{\frac{1}{2}}.
\end{equation}
As in the linear case, we consider three different regions; self-similar, elliptic, and hyperbolic.
The self-similar region is entirely similar to the linear case, so we omit the details.
The elliptic region is also almost similar, but there is a subtle difference due to the presence of nonlinearity. More precisely, we again split $g=g_{lo}+g_{hi},$ where the frequency scale is $R^{\frac{1}{4}}.$ Moreover, letting $v_1:=v-x^{-1}g_{lo}$ and \[\tilde{L}^{NL}v_1=(x+5\partial_x^4)v_1+uv_1=g_{hi}-5\partial_x^4(x^{-1}g_{lo}):=g_1.\]The estimation of $g_1$ is the same as in the linear case, yielding the $\epsilon R^{-\frac{1}{8}}$ bound. The only difference is the estimation of integrals. To be more specific, we start from the equality \[\int_{\mathbb{R}}v_1 \tilde{L}^{NL}v_1dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}}g_1v_1dx\] and integrating by parts gives \[\int_{\mathbb{R}}x|v_1|^2 dx+5\int_{\mathbb{R}}|\partial_x^2v_1|^2dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}}g_1v_1dx+\int_{\mathbb{R}}uv_1^2dx\]
The first integral on the right is routine, so we focus on the second integral including nonlinearity. A direct calculation gives \[\int_{\mathbb{R}}uv_1^2dx=O(M\epsilon R^{-\frac{3}{8}})\Vert v_1\Vert_{L^2}^2,\]so this bound can be absorbed into the left hand side provided $R$ is large enough. Note that by the time bound \eqref{rescaled} and the assumption $M\gg 1,$ the choice of $R$ is independent of $M$. Thus one may conclude \[\Vert v_1\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \epsilon R^{-\frac{9}{8}},\quad \Vert\partial_x^2 v_1\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \epsilon R^{-\frac{5}{8}}.\]
Now the same process as in the linear case gives the extra bounds \[\Vert \partial_x^4v_1\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \epsilon R^{-\frac{1}{8}},\quad \Vert \partial_xv_1\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \epsilon R^{-\frac{7}{8}},\quad \Vert \partial_x^3v_1\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \epsilon R^{-\frac{3}{8}}.\]
Hence Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality gives \[|\partial_x^k v_1|\lesssim\epsilon R^{-1+\frac{k}{4}},\quad k=0,1,2,3.\]
The pointwise bound of $x^{-1}g_{lo}$ can be obtained in the same way as in the linear analysis, so we omit the details.
Lastly, let us turn to the hyperbolic region. Again we do a spatial energy estimate to obtain \[\frac{d}{dx}(-x|v|^2+5|v_{2x}|^2-10v_xv_{3x}+2g_{lo}v)=-|v|^2+5uvv_x-2v_xg_{hi}+2g_{lo,x}v.\] Now integrating both sides and using H\"older's inequality gives \begin{align*}-x|v|^2+5|v_{2x}|^2-10v_xv_{3x}&\lesssim \Vert v_x\Vert_{L^2}\Vert g_{hi}\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert g_{lo,x}\Vert_{L^2}\Vert v\Vert_{L^2}+\sup_{x\in A_R^H}|g_{lo}v|+\int |uvv_x| dx\\&\lesssim \epsilon^2 R^{\frac{1}{4}}+M\epsilon^3 R^{\frac{1}{8}}\lesssim \epsilon^2 R^{\frac{1}{4}}.\end{align*}
A similar calculation gives \[-x|v_x|^2+5|v_{3x}|^2+2xvv_{2x}\lesssim \epsilon^2 R^{\frac{3}{4}},\]and the rest is now the same with the linear case. This completes the proof of the main theorem.
\begin{rmk}
Here one may see that when estimating on the hyperbolic region, one may estimate the nonlinear interaction term $uvv_x$ directly, unlike in the KdV case where one has to split the nonlinear interaction term and send some pieces to the left hand side. This difference is again due to the better spatial decay of our bootstrap bound \eqref{bootstrap} than in the case of KdV equation.
\end{rmk}
\vspace{10mm}
\section{Bounds for linearized equation}
In this section, we give the proof of Proposition 4.3.
\\Note that \eqref{eq:KW} enjoys scaling symmetry $u(t,x)\mapsto \lambda^4 u(\lambda^5t,\lambda x),$ which is critical in $\dot{H}^{-\frac{7}{2}}$ in the sense that the scaling preserves $\dot{H}^{-\frac{7}{2}}$ norm. The scaling vector field which generates the symmetry is given as $\mathcal{S}=5t\partial_t+x\partial_x+4.$
Define $\Lambda=\partial_x^{-1}\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{L}=\partial_t-\partial_x^5.$ Then by the commutator relation \[[\mathcal{L},\mathcal{S}]=5\mathcal{L},\quad [\mathcal{S},\partial_x]=-\partial_x\] one has \begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}(\Lambda u)&=\partial_x^{-1}(\mathcal{S}+5)\mathcal{L}u=u\partial_x\Lambda u.
\end{align*} Hence, $z=\Lambda u$ solves the linearized equation \[z_t-z_{5x}=uz_x.\] However, the function $z=xu+u_{4x}+\frac{5}{2}u^2+3\partial_x^{-1}u$ contains the inverse derivative of $u$, which can cause problem if $u$ is not mean-zero. Hence, we rather remove the $\partial_x^{-1}u$ term and work with the function \[w:=L^{NL}u:=xu+u_{4x}+\frac{5}{2}u^2,\] which solves the inhomogeneous linearized equation \[w_t+w_{5x}=uw_x-\frac{3}{2}u^2.\]
Now we are going to prove Proposition 4.3.
\\
Let $y=|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}z,$ then $y$ satisfies the equation \[y_t-y_{5x}=-|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(uH|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y).\] A direct calculation and frequency analysis as in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive} gives \[\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int y^2 = -\int |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y\cdot uH|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y=O(M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}})\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2-\int |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\cdot u_{hi}H|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\] in the time scale $M^2\epsilon t^{\frac{3}{5}}\leq 1.$ Here $y_{hi}:=P_{\gtrsim t^{-\frac{1}{5}}}y$ means a piece of $y$ frequency-localized in the scale $|\xi|\gtrsim t^{-\frac{1}{5}}.$
Hence, we shall try a normal form analysis to cancel the high frequency term, following the idea in \cite{hunter2015long}. Let $\tilde{u}=u+B(u,u)$ where $B$ is a symmetric bilinear Fourier multiplier. We want to find $B$ such that $\tilde{u}_t-\tilde{u}_{5x}$ consists of cubic or higher order terms of $u$. A direct calculation gives that \[\tilde{u}_t-\tilde{u}_{5x}=uu_x+B(u_{5x},u)+B(u,u_{5x})-\partial_x^5B(u,u)+h.o.t.,\]where $h.o.t.$ denotes the cubic or higher order terms of $u$. Here our goal is to cancel out $uu_x+B(u_{5x},u)+B(u,u_{5x})-\partial_x^5B(u,u).$ It turns out that the formal normal form is given as $\frac{1}{10}B(\partial_x^{-1}u,\partial_x^{-1}u)$ with the symbol of $B$ being $\hat{B}(\xi,\eta)=\frac{1}{\xi^2+\xi\eta+\eta^2}.$ However, this can cause problems on the low frequency region, so we truncate the low frequency part and get $\frac{1}{10}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi}).$ Now linearizing the normal form gives the normal form correction of \eqref{eq:LinKW} as $\frac{1}{10}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},\partial_x^{-1}z_{hi}).$ Then plugging $y=|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}z$ gives $\frac{1}{10}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},\partial_x^{-1}|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}).$ Let $\tilde{z}=z+\frac{1}{10}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},\partial_x^{-1}z_{hi}).$ Then observe that \begin{align*}\Vert \tilde{z}\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}&=\Vert y+|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}\frac{1}{10}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},\partial_x^{-1}|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\Vert_{L^2}^2\\=&\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2+\frac{1}{5}\langle |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y,B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},\partial_x^{-1}|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\rangle+\Vert \frac{1}{10}|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},\partial_x^{-1}|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\Vert_{L^2}^2.\end{align*}Here the last term is quartic, so it becomes more perturbative, and we do not include this into the corrected energy term. Hence the energy correction term is given as \[E'[y]=\frac{1}{10}\int |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
\partial_x^{-1}|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}).\] This corrected energy plays the desired role itself, but a more symmetric form would be convenient, so shifting $|D|^{-1}$ from the rightmost $y_{hi}$ to the leftmost one gives
\[E'[y]=\frac{1}{10}\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\]First check that $E[y]:=\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2+E'[y]\sim \Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2.$ This directly follows from:\[|E'[y]|\lesssim t^{\frac{1}{10}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}t^{\frac{2}{5}}t^{\frac{1}{5}}\Vert u\Vert_{L^\infty}t^{\frac{1}{10}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}\leq M\epsilon t^{\frac{3}{5}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2\leq \frac{1}{M}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2,\]so by letting $M$ sufficiently large, we conclude $E[y]\sim \Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2.$ Now a direct calculation gives\footnote{Here I intentionally dropped any insignificant constant multiplications.} \begin{align*}
&\frac{d}{dt}E'[y]\\=&D_1+D_2+D_3+\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}\partial_x^5y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\\+&\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{4}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})+\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}\partial_x^5y_{hi})\\=&D_1+D_2+D_3-\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\partial_x^5B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\\+&\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{4}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})+\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{4}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}\partial_x^5y_{hi})
\\=&D_1+D_2+D_3+\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi} \partial_x(u_{hi} |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})=D_1+D_2+D_3+\int H|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi} \cdot u_{hi} |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}
\end{align*} where the penultimate equality follows from the symbol calculation \[\frac{(\xi+\eta)^5-\xi^5-\eta^5}{\xi^2+\xi\eta+\eta^2}=5\xi\eta(\xi+\eta).\] Hence the last integral cancels out the ``bad" term of $\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int y^2$, and the other terms($D_1$, $D_2$, $D_3$) are perturbative, as demonstrated below:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $D_1$ arises from the time derivative of the frequency scale truncation, i.e. $\partial_t P_{hi}.$ Namely, $\partial_t(1-\varphi(t^{\frac{1}{5}}\xi))=-\frac{1}{5}t^{-\frac{4}{5}}\xi\varphi'(t^{\frac{1}{5}}\xi)=-t^{-1}\psi(t^{\frac{1}{5}}\xi)$ where $\psi(\eta)=\frac{1}{5}\eta \varphi'(\eta)$ is the Littlewood-Paley projection on the frequency scale $\sim 1.$ Thus the bound for $D_1$ is given as \begin{align*}
&\left|\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}(\partial_t P_{hi})y\cdot B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\right|\lesssim t^{-\frac{9}{10}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}\Vert B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\Vert_{L^2}\\\lesssim&t^{-\frac{9}{10}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}t^{\frac{2}{5}}\Vert\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi}\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2.
\end{align*}
The rest terms, i.e. $\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\cdot B(\partial_x^{-1}(\partial_t P_{hi})u,
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})$ and \\$\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\cdot B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}(\partial_t P_{hi})y)$ can be estimated in a similar fashion.
\item $D_2$ consists of the nonlinarity of $u$ from \eqref{eq:KW}:\begin{align*}
\left|\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B((u^2)_{hi},
H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\right|\lesssim t^{\frac{1}{10}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}t^{\frac{2}{5}}\Vert u^2\Vert_{L^\infty}t^{\frac{1}{10}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2} \leq M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}.
\end{align*}
\item $D_3$ consists of the linearized counterpart of $D_2$:
\begin{align*}
&\left|\int (uH|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y)_{hi}\cdot B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\right|\\=&\left|\int Hy\cdot |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(uP_{hi} B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\right)\right|\lesssim\Vert y\Vert_{L^2} \Vert|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(uP_{hi} B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\right)\Vert_{L^2}^2.
\end{align*} Now the Kato-Ponce commutator estimate (see, for example, \cite{kenig1993well}) \[\Vert |D|^s(fg)-(|D|^sf)g \Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \Vert f\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert |D|^sg\Vert_{L^2},\quad 0<s<1, \] gives\[\Vert |D|^s(fg)\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \Vert |D|^s(fg)-(|D|^sf)g\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert (|D|^sf)g\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim \Vert f\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert |D|^sg\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert |D|^sf\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert g\Vert_{L^2},\]so that\begin{align*}
&\Vert|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(uP_{hi} B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\right)\Vert_{L^2}\\\lesssim& \Vert|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}u\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert P_{hi} B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\Vert_{L^2}+\Vert u\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert |D|^{\frac{1}{2}}P_{hi} B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi})\Vert_{L^2}\\\lesssim& M\epsilon t^{-\frac{3}{10}}\cdot t^{\frac{2}{5}}\Vert\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi}\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\Vert_{L^2}+M\epsilon t^{-\frac{1}{5}}\cdot t^{\frac{3}{10}}\Vert\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi}\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}\Vert_{L^2}\\\lesssim&M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}.
\end{align*} Hence we obtain the bound $M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2$. The other term $\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},
H(u|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y)_{hi})$ can be treated similarly after decomposing $(u|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}y)_{hi}=\partial_x(uH|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y)_{hi}-(u_xH|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}y)_{hi}$. One may handle the former term by noting that the bilinear map $(u,v)\mapsto B(u,v_x)$ has symbol $\frac{i\eta}{\xi^2+\xi\eta+\eta^2}$, so that $\Vert B(u,v_x)\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim t^{\frac{1}{5}}\Vert u\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert v\Vert_{L^2},$ provided $u$ and $v$ are frequency supported at the scale $\gtrsim t^{-\frac{1}{5}}.$
\\
Hence, we conclude that, if we let the corrected energy $E[y]=\frac{1}{2}\int y^2 + E'[y],$ then \[\frac{d}{dt}E[y]\lesssim M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert y\Vert_{L^2}^2\sim M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}} E[y].\] Hence Gronwall's inequality gives \[E[y]\leq e^{CM\epsilon t^{\frac{3}{5}}}E[y_0]\lesssim E[y_0]\] in the time scale $t\ll_M \epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}.$ This completes the proof of Proposition 4.3.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{rmk}\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item The above analysis also works when the right hand side of \eqref{eq:LinKW} is $u^k w_x$ with $k\geq 1,$ with $u_{hi}$ being replaced by $(u^k)_{hi}.$ Namely, we may consider $u^k$ as a single component, which makes no difference of the details. The only difference is the valid time scale of the analysis. For instance, if $k=2,$ which corresponds to the case of \eqref{eq:5KdV} with quadratic terms gone, the time scale becomes $\epsilon^{-5}.$
\item The analysis in this section is almost identical to that in \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}, since the KdV and Kawahara equation share the same form of nonlinear terms and their linearized counterparts, on which the overall analysis mainly depends. The linear part only affects the form of the corrected energy.
\end{enumerate}\end{rmk}
\section{Sobolev bound of $L^{NL}u$}
In this section, we are going to prove Proposition 4.4. Unlike the \cite{ifrim2019dispersive}, we do not have to dive into a complicated normal form analysis, since we have a better bootstrap bound for $u$. Namely, we already proved that $\Vert u^2\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}\lesssim M^2\epsilon^2t^{-\frac{2}{5}}$ in the Proposition 4.1. Then it remains to see that the $\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}$ bound of the inhomogeneous term is perturbative enough that the result of Proposition 4.3 is still valid to $L^{NL}u.$ Of course, the answer is affirmative, which is merely the Proposition 4.4.\\
Let $z:=|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}L^{NL}u.$ Then $z$ solves the equation \[z_t-z_{5x}=-|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(uH|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}z-\frac{3}{2}u^2).\] Hence one has:
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{dt}E[z]=&-\frac{3}{2}\int z|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(u^2)- \frac{3}{10}\int (u^2)_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}z_{hi})\\ -&\frac{3}{10}\int |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}z_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H(u^2)_{hi})+O(M\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}})\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}^2,
\end{align*}
where $E[\cdot]$ is the corrected energy defined in the Section 5. Here most of the steps are identical to the Section 5, so it only remains to estimate the integrals including the inhomogeneous term. Namely, \begin{align*}&\left|\int z|D|^{\frac{1}{2}}(u^2)\right|\lesssim M^2\epsilon^2t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim M^2\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}^2+M^2\epsilon^3t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\lesssim M^2\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}^2+\epsilon^2 t^{-1},\\&\left|\int (u^2)_{hi}B(\partial_x^{-1}u_{hi},H|D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}z_{hi})\right|\\\lesssim &\Vert u^2\Vert_{\dot{H}^{\frac{1}{2}}}t^{\frac{2}{5}}\Vert \partial_x^{-1}u_{hi}\Vert_{L^\infty}\Vert |D|^{-\frac{1}{2}}z_{hi}\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim M^3\epsilon^3 t^{\frac{1}{10}}\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}\lesssim M^2\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}^2+M^4\epsilon^5 t^{\frac{3}{5}}\\\lesssim&M^2\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}^2+\epsilon^2 t^{-\frac{6}{5}},\end{align*}
and the rest terms can be estimated similarly.
To sum up, one obtains the bound
\[\frac{d}{dt}E[z]\lesssim M^2\epsilon t^{-\frac{2}{5}}\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}^2+\epsilon^2 t^{-1}.\]
Hence Gr\"onwall's inequality gives \[\Vert z\Vert_{L^2}^2\lesssim \epsilon^2 e^{CM^2\epsilon t^{\frac{3}{5}}}\lesssim\epsilon^2\] in the time scale $|t|\ll\epsilon^{-\frac{5}{3}}.$ This completes the proof of Proposition 4.4.
\section{Appendix: The case of modified Kawahara equation} In this appendix, we sketch the proof of the case $m=2$, namely \eqref{eq:mKW}, of the Theorem 1.1.\\First, when it comes to the Subsection 4.1, one may rescale the equation \[xu+5tu_{4x}+\frac{5}{3}tu^3=f,\quad f=L^{NL}u\] to \[x\tilde{u}+5\tilde{u}_{4x}+\frac{5}{3}\tilde{u}^3=\tilde{f}\] by letting $\tilde{u}(x)=t^{\frac{2}{5}}u(t,xt^{\frac{1}{5}})$ and $\tilde{f}(x)=t^{\frac{1}{5}}f(t,xt^{\frac{1}{5}})$. Also the localized equation becomes \[(x+5\partial_x^4)v+\frac{5}{3}u^2v=g\] with $v$ and $g$ satisfying the same bounds as in the Subsection 4.1. In these settings, all the same steps work properly.\\Moreover, one may easily see that the argument in the Section 5 does work to prove Proposition 4.1 in the case of \eqref{eq:mKW}, under the time bound assumption $M^{\frac{3}{2}}\epsilon t^{\frac{1}{5}}\leq 1.$ Here is the step where the time scale restriction $|t|\ll \epsilon^{-5}$ is needed.\\Secondly, as mentioned in the remark at the end of the Section 5, one may prove the same bound from Proposition 4.3 with the same argument. Here we have a subtly different setting, and I state here for convenience.\\The equation \eqref{eq:mKW} enjoys the scaling symmetry $u(t,x)\mapsto \lambda^2u(\lambda^5t,\lambda x)$, so the scaling vector field is given as $\mathcal{S}=5t\partial_t+x\partial_x+2,$ and one may see that if $u$ solves \eqref{eq:mKW}, then $\Lambda u:=\partial_x^{-1}\mathcal{S}u=xu+5tu_{4x}+\frac{5}{3}tu^3+\partial_x^{-1}u$ solves the linearized equation \[w_t-w_{5x}=u^2w_x.\] Now the rest of the arguments are the same as in the Section 5.
The Section 6 is again similar. In this case $L^{NL}u=xu+5tu_{4x}+\frac{5}{3}tu^3=\Lambda u-\partial_x^{-1}u$ solves the inhomogeneous equation \[z_t-z_{5x}=u^2z_x+\frac{2}{3}u^3,\] and the energy estimate of the inhomogeneous equation is now routine. Note that the sign of $c$ of \eqref{eq:mKW} does not play any role in the entire steps of the proof.
\section{Conclusion}
We have discussed how long does a small data solution to Kawahara and modified Kawahara equation shows a linear dispersive decay bound. The result shows the tendency of change of the time scale where the linear dispersive decay bound holds depending on the linear and nonlinear part of the equation. More specifically, for the Kawahara equation, which has the same nonlinearity as KdV equation and a higher order of the linear part, the time scale of linear dispersive decay bound is possibly shorter than that of KdV equation. On the other hand, for the modified Kawahara equation, which has a higher order nonlinearity than KdV and Kawahara equations, has a longer time scale of such decay bound. However, unlike the KdV equation, we still do not know whether the time bounds found in this article is optimal due to the non-integrability of the equations, which should be found in a future work.
\section*{Declarations}
\noindent\\\small{\textbf{Acknowledgements}\\The author appreciate Soonsik Kwon for helpful discussions and encouragement to this work.}
\\\small{\textbf{Funding statement}\\The author is partially supported by NRF-2019R1A5A1028324 and NRF-2018R1D1A1A0908335.}
\\\small{\textbf{Availability of data and materials}\\Not applicable.}
\\\textbf{Competing interests}\\The author declares that he does not have any competing interests.\\
\textbf{Author's contributions}\\The single author contributed and reviewed the work solely.
\printbibliography
\end{document} |
\section{Introduction}
Deep neural networks work perfectly when trained on large data sets. These, however, are rarely available in real-world settings. Hence, approaches able to learn from small amounts of data are needed. In particular, Few-Shot learning models can easily adapt to previously unseen tasks based on a few labeled samples. Among Few-Shot learning approaches, one of the most popular and elegant is Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning (MAML)~\cite{finn2017model}. The main idea behind this method is to produce universal weights which can be rapidly updated to solve new small tasks.
However, limited data sets lead to two main problems. Firstly, the method tends to overfit training data, preventing us from using deep architectures with large numbers of weights. Secondly, it lacks good quantification of uncertainty, e.g., the model does not know how reliable its predictions are.
Both problems can be addressed by employing Bayesian Neural Networks (BNNs)~\citep{mackay1992practical,jospin2022hands}, which in place of point-wise estimates, learn distributions. BNNs may rely on the same network structure as the classic NNs. Still, their parameters (i.e., network's weights) have assumed prior distributions, which later are updated to posterior distributions when training data is observed. The Bayesian treatment allows for obtaining uncertain information principally and prevents over-fitting.
Bayesian modification has also been previously proposed for MAML. Bayesian MAML~\citep{yoon2018bayesian} or Amortized bayesian meta-learning \citep{ravi2018amortized}, FO-MAML~\citep{nichol2018first}, MLAP-M~\citep{amit2018meta}, Meta-Mixture~\citep{jerfel2019reconciling} learn distributions for the common universal weights, which are then updated to per-task local weights distributions.
Although BNNs help these methods to regularize training and quantify uncertainty, they still suffer from the same shortages as the classic MAML, as well as from additional challenges coming from solving a harder modeling and optimization task (due to increased dimensionality and complexity of a variational objective).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\qquad \qquad MAML \qquad \qquad BayesianMAML \qquad \qquad BayesHMAML{} \\
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node[inner sep=0pt] (russell) at (0,0)
{\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{img/all_mamls.png} };
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (-7.0, 1.5) { $\theta$};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (-5.5, -3.3) { $\theta'_i$};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (2.0, 1.5) { $ q(\theta|\psi) $};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (1.5, -3.3) { $ q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i(\theta,\psi) )$};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (10.0, 1.5) { $\theta$};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (9.5, -3.3) { $ q(\theta'_i|H(\mathcal{S}_i,\theta))$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Visualization of MAML, BayesianMAML and BayesHMAML{}. For the classic MAML, we have universal weights $\theta$ which are then adjusted to $\theta'_i$ for individual tasks. For BayesianMAML, the posterior distributions for individual small tasks $q(\theta'|\lambda_i(\theta,\phi))$ are obtained in a few gradient-based updates from the universal distribution $q(\theta|\psi)$. For BayesHMAML{}, we learn the universal weights analogically as for MAML, but then, a hypernetwork $H(\mathcal{S}_i,\theta)$ produces parameters of the Bayesian posteriors. Such an approach enables significantly larger updates in the adaptation phase.
}
\label{fig:teaser}
\end{figure}
The previous Bayesian modifications of MAML (see the middle plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:teaser}), similar to the original MAML, rely on gradient-based updates. Weights specialized for small tasks are obtained by taking a fixed number of gradient steps from the common universal weights. Such the procedure binds tightly all the tasks by an overly rigid structure of possible solutions. The same effect is observed for the methods using the Bayesian approach, despite them acting on distributions instead of individual weights. All the specialized weight distributions must stay within a distance of a few gradient updates.
Additionally, as proposed for example by \citet{ravi2018amortized} the universal distribution is usually employed as a prior for the per-task specializations, amplifying the above problem by furthermore limiting how the final weights for the small tasks may look like. Although such a hierarchical structure is not uncommon (see for example the work by \citep{amit2018meta}), it noticeably complicates the variational objective and the optimized loss surface. We argue that for practical problems with limited datasets, the benefits from the usage of the hierarchical model are outweighed by the optimization challenges.
A~natural way to allow a more flexible structure of solutions and to enable better adaptations of weights is to employ non-gradient-based updates, for example, by using hypernetworks. Hypernetworks, introduced by \citet{ha2016hypernetworks}, are neural models, separate from a main model, which generate weights for it. In our paper, we propose to use a hypernetwork to adapt specialized per-task distributions starting from the universal weights. In particular, besides the main network, we have a side hypernetwork responsible for modeling Bayesian posteriors for individual tasks. Similar to the previous approaches, the final posterior is obtained by updating the universal weights, but otherwise, we propose multiple modifications. For instance, we avoid the aforementioned hierarchical structure by modeling the universal weights in a point-wise manner. Then, by using the hypernetwork in our amortization scheme, we also can allow arbitrary variances for the specialized distributions while at the same time remaining robust against overfitting. In our model, variances for the per-task weights are regularized by using the common hypernetwork. Hence, the distribution of the universal weights does not need to be used as a common prior and we achieve a simpler optimization objective. A schematic illustration of the approach, we present on the right-most plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:teaser}.
Our contributions can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We introduce BayesHMAML{}\footnote{We make our implementation available at \url{https://github.com/gmum/few-shot-hypernets-public}.}, a novel Bayesian approach to the Few-Shot learning problem, which
directly produces posterior distributions of weights specialized for small tasks by aggregating information from support sets and common universal weights.
\item BayesHMAML{} handles universal weights and their updates in a new way: in the adaptation procedure, it transforms the classical neural network into its Bayesian counterpart.
\item Compared to the previous Bayesian modifications to MAML, BayesHMAML{} by employing hypernetworks achieves significantly more flexible weight updates.
\item To the best of our knowledge, the proposed solution is the first approach using the Hypernetwork paradigm for Bayesian Few-Shot learning.
\end{itemize}
\section{Background}
In this section, we introduce all the notions necessary for understanding our method.
First, we start by presenting background and notations for Few-Shot learning. Then we describe how the MAML algorithm works. Finally, we introduce general idea of Hypernetworks dedicated for MAML updates.
\paragraph{The terminology}
describing the Few-Shot learning setup is dispersive due to the colliding definitions used in the literature.
Here, we use the nomenclature derived from the Meta-Learning literature, which is the most prevalent at the time of writing.
Let $\mathcal{S} = \{ (\mathbf{x}_l, \mathbf{y}_l) \}_{l=1}^L$ be a support-set containing input-output pairs, with $L$ examples with the equal class distribution. In the \textit{one-shot} scenario, each class is represented by a single example, and $L=K$, where $K$ is the number of the considered classes in the given task. Whereas, for \textit{Few-Shot} scenarios, each class usually has from $2$ to $5$ representatives in the support set $\mathcal{S}$.
Let $\mathcal{Q} = \{ (\mathbf{x}_m, \mathbf{y}_m) \}_{m=1}^M$ be a query-set (sometimes referred to in the literature as a target-set), with $M$ examples, where $M$ is typically one order of magnitude greater than $K$. For clarity of notation, the support and query sets are grouped in a task $\mathcal{T} = \{\mathcal{S}, \mathcal{Q} \}$. During the training stage, the models for Few-Shot applications are fed by randomly selected examples from training set $\mathcal{D} = \{\mathcal{T}_n\}^N_{n=1}$, defined as a collection of such tasks.
During the inference stage, we consider task $\mathcal{T}_{*} = \{\mathcal{S}_{*}, \mathcal{X}_{*}\}$, where $\mathcal{S}_{*}$ is a support set with the known class values for a given task, and $\mathcal{X}_{*}$ is a set of query (unlabeled) inputs. The goal is to predict the class labels for query inputs $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{X}_*$, assuming support set $\mathcal{S}_{*}$ and using the model trained on $\mathcal{D}$.
\paragraph{Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning (MAML)}~\citep{finn2017model}
is one of the current standard algorithms for Few-Shot learning, which learns the parameters of a model so that it can adapt to a new task in a few gradient steps.
We consider a model represented by a parametrized function $f_{\theta}$ with parameters $\theta$. In practice, the architecture consists of a future extractor (backbone) $E(\cdot)$ and one fully connected layer. The universal weights $\theta= (\theta^{E}, \theta^{H})$ include $\theta^{E}$ for feature extractor and $\theta^{H}$ for classification head.
In adaptation to a new task $\mathcal{T}_i =\{\mathcal{S}_i, \mathcal{Q}_i \} $, all model’s parameters $\theta$ are updated to $\theta'_i$. Such an update is modeled by one or more gradient descent updates on task $T_i$. In the simplest case of one gradient update, the parameters are updated as follows:
$$
\theta'_i = \theta - \alpha \nabla_{\theta} \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}_i} (f_{\theta})
$$
where the step size $\alpha$ is a hyperparameter and the loss function for a set of observations $\mathcal{Z}$ is defined as $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{Z}}$ for the few shot scenario is represented as a simple cross-entropy:
$$
\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{Z}} (f_{\theta}) = \!\!\!\!\!\! \sum_{(\mathbf{x}_{i,l}, \mathbf{y}_{i,l}) \in \mathcal{Z}} \sum_{k=1}^K - y_{i,l}^k \log{f_{\theta, k} (\mathbf{x}_{i,j})},
\label{eq:loss}
$$
where $f_{\theta, k} (\mathbf{x}_{i,j})$ denotes $k$-th output of the model $f_{\theta}$, for a given input $\mathbf{x}_{i,l}$, and $\mathbf{y}_{i,l}$ is corresponding class in one-hot coding. For simplicity of notation, we will consider one gradient update for the rest of this section, but using multiple gradient updates is a straightforward extension.
The meta-optimization across tasks is performed via stochastic gradient descent (SGD):
$$
\theta \leftarrow \theta - \beta \nabla_{\theta} \sum_{\mathcal{T}_i \sim p(T)} \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}_i} (f_{\theta'_i})
$$
where $\beta$ is the meta step size, see Fig.~\ref{fig:teaser}.
\paragraph{ HyperMAML } \citep{przewikezlikowski2022hypermaml} is a generalization of the MAML algorithm which uses hypernetwork paradigm to model non-gradient based updates.
We aim at predicting the class distribution $p(\mathbf{y}|\textbf{x}_q, \mathcal{S})$, assuming given single query example $\mathbf{x}_q$, and the set of support examples $\mathcal{S}$.
Analogically to MAML we consider a model represented by a parameterized function $f_{\theta}$ with parameters $\theta$. When adapting to a new task $T_i$, the model’s parameters $\theta$ become $\theta'_i$. In HyperMAML, contrary to MAML, the updated parameter vector $\theta'_i$ is computed using Hypernetwork. In practice, Hypernetwork is a neural network that consists of feature extractor $E(\cdot)$, that transforms support set to low-dimensional representation and fully connected layers which aggregate such lower reprehension. Before aggregation, we add true labels and predictions given by universal weights. Hypernetwork produces an update for universal weights
$$
\theta'_i = \theta + H_{\phi}( S_i, f_{\theta}(S_i) ).
$$
Analogically to MAML universal weights $\theta= (\theta_{E}, \theta_{H})$ consist of $\theta_{E}$ from feature extractor and $\theta_{H}$ from classification head.
But in HyperMAML we produce updates only for $\theta_{H}$:
$$
\theta'_i = (\theta'^{E}_i, \theta'^{H}_i) = (\theta'^{E}_i, \theta'^{H}_i + H_{\phi}( S_i, f_{\theta}(S_i) ).
$$
The meta-optimization across tasks is performed via stochastic gradient descent (SGD) such that the model parameters $\theta$ are updated as follows:
$$
\theta \leftarrow \theta - \beta \nabla_{\theta} \sum_{\mathcal{T}_i \sim p(T)} \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}_i} (f_{\theta'_i})
$$
where $\beta$ is the meta step size.
\section{Bayesian perspective on MAML}
In this section, we present BayesHMAML{} -- a Bayesian extension of the classical MAML and discuss its use for Few-Shot learning.
A generic predictive model $p(y|f_{\theta'}(x))$ with latent weights $\theta'$ can be trained in a point-wise manner as explained above, which however may lead to over-fitting and takes into account only aleatoric uncertainty, entirely overlooking model uncertainty. The most straightforward Bayesian treatment for such a model is to pose priors for the model parameters and learn their posteriors. In particular, for MAML one needs to learn posterior distributions for both $\theta$ and $\theta'$. However, the observed data $\mathcal{D}$ depends directly only on $\theta'$ (by $p(y|f_{\theta'}(x))$) and on $\theta$ only through $\theta'$. This naturally hints towards a hierarchical Bayesian model: $\theta \rightarrow \theta'_i \rightarrow \mathcal{T}_i$, which indeed was previously proposed by \citet{ravi2018amortized} and later studied by \citet{chen2022bayesian}. Since $f_{\theta'}(x)$ is an arbitrary neural network, posterior inference for such a model is intractable. Hence, the variational inference along with reparametrization gradients (i.e., Bayes by backpropagation~\citep{blundell2015weight}) is typically used and the following objective (evidence lower bound) maximized w.r.t variational parameters $\lambda_i$ and $\psi$:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{D}} = \mathbb{E}_{q(\theta|\psi)} \left[ \underbrace{ \sum_i^N \mathbb{E}_{q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i)} \left[ \log p(\mathcal{T}_i|\theta'_i) - KL\left( q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i)|p(\theta'_i|\theta) \right) \right] }_{\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}_i}} \right] - KL(q(\theta|\psi)|p(\theta))
\end{align*}
where $q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i)$ and $q(\theta|\psi)$ are respectively per-task posterior approximation and approximate posterior for the universal weights. They are tied together by the prior $p(\theta'_i|\theta)$.
The above formulation raises a few challenges. Due to potentially large number of tasks $\mathcal{T}$ and their limited size (few data points per task) it is hard to choose the prior $p(\theta'_i|\theta)$, which would not dominate learning $q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i)$ for individual tasks and yet sufficiently modulate $q(\theta|\psi)$. The problem becomes even more prominent with an increasing number of tasks with the parameters $\lambda_i$ learned separately for each of the tasks. A solution is amortized inference~\citep{kingma2014auto} where instead of learning a separate $\lambda_i$ for each task, $q(\theta'_i|\cdot)$ is conditioned on data.
\citet{ravi2018amortized} proposed a strategy inspired once again by the standard MAML, e.g., they used $q(\theta'_i| \lambda_i) = SGD(\mathcal{T}_i, \theta)$, where $SGD$ denotes a few steps of optimization with the gradient $\nabla_{\lambda_i} \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}_i}$, starting from the distribution for the universal parameters $\theta$. From an implementation perspective, the difference is rather minor: instead of moving $\theta$ to $\theta'_i$ for MAML, for Amortized Bayesian MAML one now transforms parameters controlling the distribution for $\theta$ into parameters controlling the distribution for $\theta'_i$. On the other hand, gradient-based optimization of the objective $\mathcal{L}_\mathcal{D}$ w.r.t jointly $\psi$ and $\lambda_i$ poses a strong risk of finding a local optimum and suboptimal solutions, especially when the variational parameters include the hard-to-fit distribution variances. Finally, the prior $p(\theta'_i|\theta)$ as specified in the original work, prevents $q(\theta'_i|\cdot)$ to diverge significantly from $q(\theta|\cdot)$ which may often impose a too strong regularization.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\vspace{-1.0cm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.4]
\node[inner sep=0pt] (russell) at (0,0)
{\includegraphics[width=0.50\columnwidth]{img/BayesianHyperMAML_arch3.png} };
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (-1.1,-0.7) {\scriptsize $H_{\phi}( \mathcal{S})$};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (-5.5,3.0) { \footnotesize Support Set};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (8.2,4.5) {\footnotesize Query Set};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (3.7,1.5) {\footnotesize $ \mu $};
\node[text width=2.5cm] at (3.7,-3.1) {\footnotesize $ \sigma $};
\node[text width=2.5cm,rotate=90] at (2.95,0.5) {\tiny $ \mathcal{N}(\mu(\mathcal{S}),\sigma(\mathcal{S})) $};
\node[text width=2.5cm,rotate=0] at (7.45,-0.7) {\footnotesize $ \theta $};
\node[text width=2.5cm,rotate=90] at (7.1,-0.1) {\tiny $ \theta' \!\!\! \sim \!\! \mathcal{N}(\theta \!\!+\!\! \mu(\mathcal{S}),\!\sigma(\mathcal{S})) $};
\node[text width=2.5cm,rotate=0] at (9.1,-4.7) {\footnotesize $ f_{\theta'} (\textbf{x}_q)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{Schematic of our BayesHMAML{} model. Instead of updating the weights with gradient descent, we use Hypernetwork to aggregate information from the support set and production parameters for the probability distribution $\mathcal{N}( \mu(\mathcal{S}),\sigma(\mathcal{S}))$ dedicated to a specific task. We move such distribution by using universal weights $\theta$ to obtain final task specific distribution $\mathcal{N}(\theta \!\!+\!\! \mu(\mathcal{S}),\sigma(\mathcal{S})) $.
Finally, we sample $\theta'$ and use a cost function containing cross-entropy and Kullback–Leibler regularization.
In BayesHMAML{}, we have universal weight and Bayesian updates. Such an approach allows production to model significantly significant updates in the adaptation phase.
}
\label{fig:architecture}
\end{figure}
\subsection{BayesHMAML{}: Bayesian Hypernetwork for Few-Shot learning}
In this work, we propose an alternative approach that alleviates the problems of the previous attempts at Bayesian MAML. In particular, the posterior $q(\theta|\cdot)$ for the universal parameters serves no purpose beyond regularizing per-task posterior approximations (via the prior $p(\theta'_i|\theta)$ and by providing initialization for the SGD updates) but as explained above may complicate the optimization task. For example, \citet{ravi2018amortized} hinted toward considering simple distributions (e.g. delta distributions, which however could be overly limiting for $q(\theta'_i|\cdot)$). Hence, in our method, we learn $\theta$ in a point-wise manner instead. In particular, we don't learn variance for the universal parameters $\theta$, but we learn them for individual $\theta'_i$ independently. Furthermore, we remove the coupling prior between $\theta$ and $\theta'_i$ and propose a basic non-hierarchical prior $p(\theta'_i)$ instead. All these modifications simplify the optimization landscape and, taken together along with our Hypernetwork-based adjustment strategy~(details below) should enable better optima for our objective:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}^{our}_D = \sum_i^N \mathbb{E}_{q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i(\theta, \mathcal{S}_i))} \left[ \log p(\mathcal{T}_i|\theta'_i) - \gamma \cdot KL\left( q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i(\theta, \mathcal{S}_i))|p(\theta'_i) \right) \right]
\end{align*}
In practice, we use the standard normal priors for the weights of the neural network $f$, i.e., $p(\theta'_i) = \mathcal{N}(\theta'_i| 0, \mathbb{I})$, and the hyperparameter $\gamma$ allows controlling impact of the priors and compensating for model mispecification.
The key component of BayesHMAML{} is however our amortization scheme, e.g., implementation details of $q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i(\theta, \mathcal{S}_i))$, see~Fig.~\ref{fig:architecture}. In particular, we propose $q(\theta'_i|\lambda_i(\theta, \mathcal{S}_i)) = \mathcal{N}(\theta'_i | \theta+\mu_i(\mathcal{S}_i), \sigma_i(\mathcal{S}_i))$, where $\mu_i(\mathcal{S}_i)$ and $\sigma_i(\mathcal{S}_i)$ are outputs of a hypernetwork $H_\phi$. Parameters of the posterior approximation $q(\theta'_i|\cdot)$ are constructed by combining the point-wise learned universal parameters $\theta$ and outputs of the hypernetwork (for the mean of the distribution) or just directly from the hypernetwork outputs (for the variance/standard deviation parameter). Optimization of $\mathcal{L}^{our}_D$ is performed w.r.t to $\theta$ and hypernetwork weights $\phi$, which have fixed sizes and do not grow with the number of tasks $N$. Hence, BayesHMAML{} scales well. Also, hypernetworks can provide flexible adjustments and BayesHMAML{} better than the previous methods adapt for individual tasks.
Optimization details are presented in Algorithm~\ref{algorithm:HyperMAML}. We use learning with minibatches and applied an annealing scheme for the hyperparameter $\gamma$~\citep{bowman2016generating}.
For a batch of meta-task, our hypernetwork aggregates information from the support set and produces parameters of probability distribution dedicated to a specific task
$
(\mu(\mathcal{S}_i) , \sigma(\mathcal{S}_i)) = H_{\phi}( S_i, f_{\theta}(S_i) ).
$
In Bayesian training, we sample weights from updated distributions
$
\theta_i' \sim \mathcal{N}(\theta + \mu(S_i), \sigma(S_i)).
$
For simplicity of notation, we will consider one sample for the rest of this section, but in practice, we use multiple samples. The number of samples is a hyperparameter.
The meta-optimization across tasks is obtained by minimization of cross-entropy loss and Kullback–Leibler regularization:
$$
\mathcal{L}^{our}_{\mathcal{T}} = \sum_{\mathcal{T}_i \sim p(\mathcal{T})} \left[ \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}_i}(f_{ \theta_i'})
- \gamma KL[ \mathcal{N} (\theta + \mu(\mathcal{S}_i), \sigma(\mathcal{S}_i)), \mathcal{N} (0, \mathbb{I}) ] \right],
$$
where parameter $\gamma$ changes from zero to fixed constant during training. The final value of $\gamma$ is also a hyperparameter of the model.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{ BayesHMAML{} }
\label{alg_overview}
\textbf{Require:} $p(\mathcal{T})$: distribution over tasks \\
\textbf{Require:} $\alpha$, $\gamma$: step size hyper parameters
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\While{ not done }
\State Sample task $\mathcal{T}_i \sim p(\mathcal{T})$
\For{each $\mathcal{T}_i$ }
\State Compute probability distribution of adapted parameters:
\State $
(\mu(\mathcal{S}_i) , \sigma(\mathcal{S}_i)) = H_{\phi}( S_i, f_{\theta}(S_i) )
$
\State Sample
$
\theta_i' \sim \mathcal{N}(\theta + \mu(S_i), \sigma(S_i))
$
\EndFor
\State Update
\State $
\theta \leftarrow \theta - \beta \nabla_{\theta} \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}}
$
\State $
\phi \leftarrow \phi - \beta \nabla_{\phi}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}}
$
\State where
$
\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}} = \sum_{\mathcal{T}_i \sim p(\mathcal{T})} \left[ \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{T}_i}(f_{ \theta_i'})
- \gamma KL[ \mathcal{N} (\theta + \mu(\mathcal{S}_i), \sigma(\mathcal{S}_i)), \mathcal{N} (0, \mathbb{I}) ] \right]
$
\EndWhile
\end{algorithmic}
\label{algorithm:HyperMAML}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Related Work}
The problem of Meta-Learning and Few-Shot learning \citep{hospedales2020metalearning,schmidhuber1992fast} is currently one of the most important topics in deep learning, with the abundance of methods emerging as a result. They can be roughly categorized into three groups:
Model-based methods, Metric-based methods, Optimization-based methods. In all these groups, we can find methods that use Hypernetworks and Bayesian models. We briefly describe such approaches. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first approach that uses the Hypernetwork paradigm for bayesian few-shot learning. In the end, we concentrate on Bayesian models proposed for few-shot learning models.
\paragraph{Model-based methods} aim to adapt to novel tasks quickly by utilizing mechanisms such as memory \citep{ravi2016optimization,santoro2016meta,mishra2018simple,zhen2020learning}, Gaussian Processes \citep{rasmussen2003gaussian,patacchiola2020bayesian, wang2021learning,sendera2021non}, or generating fast weights based on the support set with set-to-set architectures \citep{qiao2017fewshot,bauer2017discriminative, han2018learning,zhmoginov2022hypertransformer}. Other approaches maintain a set of weight templates and, based on those, generate target weights quickly through gradient-based optimization such as.
The fast weights approaches can be interpreted as using Hypernetworks \citep{ha2016hypernetworks} -- models which learn to generate the parameters of neural networks performing the designated tasks.
\paragraph{Metric-based methods} learn a transformation to a feature space where the distance between examples from the same class is small. The earliest examples of such methods are Matching Networks \citep{vinyals2016matching} and Prototypical Networks \citep{snell2017prototypical}. Subsequent works show that metric-based approaches can be improved by techniques such as learnable metric functions \citep{sung2018learning}, conditioning the model on tasks \citep{oreshkin2018tadam} or predicting the parameters of the kernel function to be calculated between support and query data with Hypernetworks \citep{sendera2022hypershot}.
\paragraph{Optimization-based methods}
such as MetaOptNet \citep{lee2019meta} is based on the idea of an optimization process over the support set within the Meta-Learning framework. Arguably, the most popular of this family of methods is Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning (MAML) \citep{finn2017model}. In literature, we have various techniques for stabilizing its training and improving performance, such as Multi-Step Loss Optimization \citep{antioniou2018howto}, or using the Bayesian variant of MAML \citep{yoon2018bayesian}.
Due to a need for calculating second-order derivatives when computing the gradient of the meta-training loss, training the classical MAML introduces a significant computational overhead. The authors show that in practice, the second-order derivatives can be omitted at the cost of small gradient estimation error and minimally reduced accuracy of the model \citep{finn2017model, nichol2018first}. Methods such as iMAML and Sign-MAML propose to solve this issue with implicit gradients or Sign-SGD optimization \citep{rajeswaran2019meta, fan2021signmaml}.
The optimization process can also be improved by training the base initialization \citep{munkhdalai2017meta,li2017metasgd,rajasegaran2020pamela}.
In \citep{przewikezlikowski2022hypermaml} propose a generalization of the MAML algorithm, which uses hypernetwork paradigm to model non-gradient based updates.
\paragraph{ Bayesian approaches} Classical MAML-based algorithms have problems with over-fitting. To solve a such problem we can use the Bayesian model \citep{ravi2018amortized,yoon2018bayesian,grant2018recasting,jerfel2019reconciling,nguyen2020uncertainty}.
In practice, the Bayesian model contains two levels of probability distribution on weights. We have Bayesian universal weights, which are updated for different tasks \cite{grant2018recasting}. Its leads to a hierarchical Bayes formulation. Bayesian networks perform better
in few-shot settings and reduce
over-fitting. Several variants of the hierarchical Bayes model have been proposed based on different Bayesian inference methods \citep{finn2018probabilistic,yoon2018bayesian,gordon2018meta,nguyen2020uncertainty}.
Another branch of probabilistic methods is represented by PAC-Bayes based method \citep{chen2022bayesian,amit2018meta,rothfuss2021pacoh,ding2021bridging,farid2021generalization}. In the PAC-Bayes framework, we use the Gibbs error when sampling priors. But still, we have a double level of Bayesian networks.
In the paper, we propose BayesHMAML{}, which uses probability distribution only for weight dedicated for small tasks. Thanks to such a solution, we produce significantly larger updates.
\section{Experiments}
In the typical Few-Shot learning setting, making a valuable and fair comparison between proposed models is often complicated because of the significant differences in architectures and implementations of known methods. To limit the influence of the deeper backbone (feature extractor) architectures, we follow the unified procedure proposed by \cite{chen2019closer}\footnote{We shall release the code with our experiments after the end of the review period.}.
In all the reported experiments, the tasks consist of 5 classes (5-way) and 1 or 5 support examples (1 or 5-shot). Unless indicated otherwise, all compared models use a known and widely utilized backbone consisting of four convolutional layers (each consisting of a 2D convolution, a batch-norm layer, and a ReLU non-linearity; each layer consists of 64 channels) and have been trained from scratch \cite{chen2019closer}. In all experiments, the query set of each task consists of 16 samples for each class (80 in total). We split the data sets into the standard train, validation, and test class subsets, used commonly in the literature \cite{ravi2016optimization, chen2019closer, patacchiola2020bayesian}. We report the performance of BayesHMAML{} averaged over three training runs for each setting. We provide the additional training details in the Appendix.
We report the performance of two variants of BayesHMAML{}:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{BayesHMAML{}} - Bayesian models generated by the hypernetworks for each task.
\item \textbf{BayesHMAML{} + adaptation} - Bayesian models generated by hypernetworks adapted to the support examples of each task with a few training steps.
\end{itemize}
In the case of \textbf{BayesHMAML{} + adaptation}, we tune a copy of the hypernetwork on the support set separately for each validation task. This way, we ensure that our model does not take unfair advantage of the validation tasks. In the case of hypernetwork-based approaches, such adaptation is a common strategy introduced by \cite{sendera2022hypershot}.
\subsection{Classification}\label{sec:classification}
First, we consider a classical Few-Shot learning scenario.
We benchmark the performance of the BayesHMAML{} and other methods on two challenging and widely considered data sets: Caltech-USCD Birds (\textbf{CUB}) and \textbf{mini-ImageNet}. The following experiments are in the most popular setting, 5-way, with five random classes. We compare BayesHMAML{} to a vast pool of state-of-the-art algorithms in the tasks of 1-shot and 5-shot classification.
In $\textbf{CUB}$, we have the second score in 1-shot and 5-shot. In the case of $\textbf{mini-ImageNet}$ we have comparable results to other methods.
It should be highlighted that we obtained the best score in the area of Bayesian and the MAML-based method.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\caption{The classification accuracy results for the inference tasks on $\textbf{CUB}$ and $\textbf{mini-ImageNet}$ data sets in the $1$-shot and $5$-shot settings. The highest results are in bold and the second-highest in italic (the larger, the better). }
\label{tab:conv45shotcubminiimagenet}
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace*{5mm}}cccc}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{CUB}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{mini-ImageNet}} \\
\textbf{Method} & 1-shot & 5-shot & 1-shot & 5-shot \\
\midrule
\textbf{ML-LSTM} \cite{ravi2016optimization} & -- & -- & $43.44 \pm 0.77$ & $60.60 \pm 0.71$ \\
\textbf{LLAMA} \cite{grant2018recasting} & -- & -- &$49.40 \pm 1.83$ \\
\textbf{VERSA} \cite{gordon2018meta} & -- & -- & $48.53 \pm 1.84$ & $67.37 \pm 0.86$ \\
\textbf{Amortized VI} \cite{gordon2018meta} & -- & -- & $44.13 \pm 1.78$ & $55.68 \pm 0.91$ \\
\textbf{Meta-Mixture} \cite{jerfel2019reconciling} & -- & -- & $49.60 \pm 1.50$ & $64.60 \pm 0.92$ \\
\textbf{Feature Transfer} \cite{zhuang2020comprehensive} & $46.19 \pm 0.64$ & $68.40 \pm 0.79$ & $39.51 \pm 0.23$ & $60.51 \pm 0.55$ \\
\textbf{Baseline++} \cite{chen2019closer} & $61.75 \pm 0.95$ & $78.51 \pm 0.59$ & $47.15 \pm 0.49$ & $66.18 \pm 0.18$ \\
\textbf{ProtoNet} \cite{snell2017prototypical} & $52.52 \pm 1.90$ & $75.93 \pm 0.46$ & $44.19 \pm 1.30$ & $64.07 \pm 0.65$ \\
\textbf{RelationNet} \cite{sung2018learning} & $62.52 \pm 0.34$ & $78.22 \pm 0.07$ & $48.76 \pm 0.17$ & $64.20 \pm 0.28$ \\
\textbf{DKT + BNCosSim} \cite{patacchiola2020bayesian} & $62.96 \pm 0.62$ & $77.76 \pm 0.62$ & $49.73 \pm 0.07$ & $64.00 \pm 0.09$ \\
\textbf{VAMPIRE} \cite{nguyen2020uncertainty}& -- & -- & $51.54 \pm 0.74$ & $64.31 \pm 0.74$ \\
\textbf{ABML} \cite{ravi2018amortized} & $49.57 \pm 0.42$ & $68.94 \pm 0.16$ & $45.00 \pm 0.60$ & -- \\
\textbf{FO-MAML} \cite{nichol2018first} & -- & -- & $48.70 \pm 1.84$ & $63.11 \pm 0.92$ \\
\textbf{Reptile} \cite{nichol2018first} & -- & -- & $49.97 \pm 0.32$ & $65.99 \pm 0.58$ \\
\textbf{HyperShot} \cite{sendera2022hypershot} & $65.27 \pm 0.24$ & $79.80 \pm 0.16$ & $52.42 \pm 0.46$ & $68.78 \pm 0.29$ \\
\textbf{HyperShot+ adaptation} \cite{sendera2022hypershot} & $66.13 \pm 0.26$& $80.07 \pm 0.22 $ & $53.18 \pm 0.45$ & $69.62 \pm 0.2$ \\
\textbf{FEAT} \cite{han2018learning} & $\mathbf{68.87 \pm 0.22}$ & $\mathbf{82.90 \pm 0.15}$ & $\mathbf{55.15 \pm 0.20}$ & $\mathbf{71.61 \pm 0.16}$ \\
\textbf{MAML} \cite{finn2017model} & $56.11 \pm 0.69$ & $74.84 \pm 0.62$ & $45.39 \pm 0.49$ & $61.58 \pm 0.53$ \\
\textbf{MAML++} \cite{antioniou2018howto} & -- & -- & $52.15 \pm 0.26 $ & $68.32 \pm 0.44 $\\
\textbf{iMAML-HF} \cite{rajeswaran2019meta} & -- & -- & $49.30 \pm 1.88$ & --\\
\textbf{SignMAML} \cite{fan2021signmaml} & -- & -- & $42.90 \pm 1.50$ & $60.70 \pm 0.70$ \\
\textbf{Bayesian MAML} \cite{yoon2018bayesian} & $55.93 \pm 0.71$ & & $53.80 \pm 1.46$ & $64.23 \pm 0.69$ \\
\textbf{Unicorn-MAML} \cite{ye2021unicorn} & -- & -- & $54.89$ & --\\
\textbf{Meta-SGD} \cite{li2017metasgd} & -- & -- & $50.47 \pm 1.87$ & $64.03 \pm 0.94$ \\
\textbf{PAMELA} \cite{rajasegaran2020pamela} & -- & -- & $53.50 \pm 0.89$ & $\mathit{70.51 \pm 0.67}$ \\
\textbf{HyperMAML} \cite{przewikezlikowski2022hypermaml} & $66.11 \pm 0.28$ & $ 78.89 \pm 0.19 $ & $ 51.84 \pm 0.57 $ & $ 66.29 \pm 0.43 $ \\
\midrule
\textbf{BayesHMAML{}} & $ 66.57 \pm 0.47 $ & $ 79.86 \pm 0.31 $ & $ 52.54 \pm 0.46 $ & $ 67.39 \pm 0.35 $ \\
\textbf{BayesHMAML{} + adaptation} & $ \mathit{66.92 \pm 0.38 }$ & $ \mathit{80.47 \pm 0.38} $ & $ 52.69 \pm 0.38 $ & $ 68.24 \pm 0.47 $ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\begin{table}[h!]
\scriptsize
\caption{The classification accuracy results for the inference tasks on cross-domain tasks (\textbf{Omniglot}$\rightarrow$\textbf{EMNIST} and \textbf{mini-ImageNet}$\rightarrow$\textbf{CUB}) data sets in the $1$-shot and $5$-shot setting. The highest results are bold and second-highest in italic (the larger, the better). }
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\toprule
\textbf{} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Omniglot}$\rightarrow$\textbf{EMNIST}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{mini-ImageNet}$\rightarrow$\textbf{CUB}} \\
{\textbf{Method}} & \textbf{1-shot}& \textbf{5-shot} & \textbf{1-shot} & \textbf{5-shot} \\
\midrule
{\textbf{Feature Transfer}} \cite{zhuang2020comprehensive} & 64.22 $\pm$ {1.24} & 86.10 $\pm$ {0.84} & 32.77 $\pm$ {0.35} & 50.34 $\pm$ {0.27}\\
{\textbf{Baseline$++$}} \cite{chen2019closer} & 56.84 $\pm$ {0.91} & 80.01 $\pm$ {0.92} & 39.19 $\pm$ {0.12} & ${ 57.31 \pm 0.11 }$ \\
{\textbf{ProtoNet}} \cite{snell2017prototypical} & 72.04 $\pm$ {0.82} & 87.22 $\pm$ {1.01} & 33.27 $\pm$ {1.09} & 52.16 $\pm$ {0.17} \\
{\textbf{RelationNet}} \cite{sung2018learning} & 75.62 $\pm$ {1.00} & 87.84 $\pm$ {0.27} & 37.13 $\pm$ {0.20} & 51.76 $\pm$ {1.48}\\
{\textbf{DKT}} \cite{patacchiola2020bayesian} & 75.40 $\pm$ {1.10} & $\mathit{ 90.30 \pm 0.49}$ & $\mathbf{40.14 \pm {0.18}}$ & 56.40 $\pm$ {1.34} \\
\textbf{HyperShot } \cite{sendera2022hypershot} & ${78.06 \pm 0.24}$ & $89.04 \pm 0.18 $ & $39.09 \pm 0.28$ & $\mathit{57.77 \pm 0.33}$ \\
\textbf{HyperShot + adaptation} \cite{sendera2022hypershot} & $80.65 \pm 0.30$ & $\mathbf{90.81 \pm 0.16}$ & $\mathit{40.03 \pm 0.41 }$ & $\mathbf{58.86 \pm 0.38}$ \\
\textbf{OVE PG GP + Cosine (ML)} \cite{snell2020bayesian} & $68.43 \pm 0.67 $ & $86.22 \pm 0.20 $ & $39.66 \pm 0.18$ & $55.71 \pm 0.31$ \\
\textbf{OVE PG GP + Cosine (PL)} \cite{snell2020bayesian} & $ 77.00 \pm 0.50 $ & $87.52 \pm 0.19 $ & $37.49 \pm 0.11$ & $57.23 \pm 0.31$ \\
{\textbf{MAML}} \cite{finn2017model} & 74.81 $\pm$ {0.25} & 83.54 $\pm$ {1.79} & 34.01 $\pm$ {1.25} &48.83 $\pm$ {0.62} \\
\textbf{Bayesian MAML} \cite{yoon2018bayesian} & $63.94 \pm 0.47$ & $65.26 \pm 0.30 $ & $33.52 \pm 0.36 $ & $51.35 \pm 0.16$ \\
\textbf{HyperMAML} \cite{przewikezlikowski2022hypermaml} & $ 79.07 \pm 1.09 $ & $ {89.22 \pm 0.78}$ & $ 36.32 \pm 0.61 $ & $ 49.43 \pm 0.14 $ \\
\midrule
\textbf{BayesHMAML{}} & $ \mathit{80.95 \pm 0.46} $ & $ 89.21 \pm 0.27 $ & $ 36.90 \pm 0.34 $ & $ 49.24 \pm 0.38 $ \\
\textbf{BayesHMAML{} + adaptation} & $\mathbf{81.05 \pm 0.47} $ & $ 89.76 \pm 0.26 $ & $ 37.23 \pm 0.44 $ & $ 50.79 \pm 0.59 $ \\
\bottomrule
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:crossdomain_accuracy}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=2.2cm]{img/u1.png}
\includegraphics[height=2.2cm]{img/u2.png}
\includegraphics[height=2.2cm]{img/u3.png}\\
\includegraphics[height=2.2cm]{img/u4.png}
\includegraphics[height=2.2cm]{img/u5.png}
\end{center}
\caption{We train BayesHMAML{} on cross-domain adaptation setting \textbf{Omniglot}$\rightarrow$\textbf{EMNIST}. Then we sample one thousand different weights from the distribution dedicated to the support set. We present predictions of BayesHMAML{} in three cases: for an element from the support set, an element from the query set, and an element from \textbf{EMNIST} but from classes that were not sampled for the support set. As we can see for elements from support and query sets, our model always gives a similar prediction. We have high uncertainty in the case of elements from out of distribution.}
\label{fig:uncertainty}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cross-domain adaptation}\label{sec:cross_domain}
In the cross-domain adaptation setting, the model is evaluated on tasks from a different distribution than the one on which it had been trained. Therefore, such a task is more challenging than standard classification and is a plausible indicator of a model’s ability to generalize. To benchmark the performance of BayesHMAML{} in cross-domain adaptation, we combine two data sets so that the training fold is drawn from the first data set and validation and the testing fold -- from another.
We report the results in Table \ref{tab:crossdomain_accuracy}. In the task of 1-shot \textbf{Omniglot}$\rightarrow$\textbf{EMNIST} classification, BayesHMAML{} achieves the best result. In the $5$-shot \textbf{Omniglot}$\rightarrow$\textbf{EMNIST} classification task BayesHMAML{} yields comparable results to baseline methods. In \textbf{mini-ImageNet}$\rightarrow$\textbf{CUB} classification, our method performs comparably to baseline methods such as MAML, ProtoNet and Matching Net.
Again we obtained the best score in the area of Bayesian and the MAML-based method.
\subsection{Ablation studies: uncertainty}\label{sec:uncertainty}
One of the most important advantages of a Bayesian Neural network is the natural uncertainty of the model. To visualize it, we train BayesHMAML{} on cross-domain adaptation setting \textbf{Omniglot}$\rightarrow$\textbf{EMNIST}.
We sample testing tasks from \textbf{EMNIST} during the evaluation. Then we sample one thousand different weights from the distribution dedicated to our support set.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:uncertainty} we present predictions of BayesHMAML{} in three cases: for an element from the support set, an element from the query set, and an element out of the distribution of the support set (element from \textbf{EMNIST} but from classes which was not sampled for support set). As we can see, our model always gives a similar prediction for elements from support and query sets. In the case of elements from out of distribution, we have high uncertainty.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this work, we introduced BayesHMAML{} -- a novel Bayesian Meta-Learning algorithm strongly motivated by MAML.
In BayesHMAML{}, we have universal weight trained analogically to MAML in a point-wise manner and Bayesian updates. Such an approach allows for significantly larger updates in the adaptation phase.
Our experiments show that BayesHMAML{} outperforms all Bayesian and MAML-based methods in several standard Few-Shot learning benchmarks and in most cases achieves results better or comparable to various other state-of-the-art methods. What is crucial, BayesHMAML{} can be used to estimate uncertainty of the prediction effectively, enabling possible applications in critical areas of deep learning, such as medical diagnosis or autonomous driving.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Model and Methods}
In the model Hamiltonian \cite{fisher,bray_adv,onuki} $H = -J\sum_{\langle ij \rangle} S_i S_j$, $S_i = \pm 1$ and $J\,(>0)$
is the interaction strength between nearest neighbors. The spin values $\pm1$ correspond to up and down orientations of the atomic magnets.
We study this model via Monte Carlo (MC) simulations \cite{binder_heer,landau,frenkel}, in space dimension $d=2$, on a square lattice. The value of $T_c$
for this system \cite{binder_heer} is $\simeq 2.27 J/k_B$, where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant.
Following quenches to a $T_l$, the MC simulations were performed by employing the Glauber dynamics \cite{binder_heer,glauber}.
In this method a trial move is performed by flipping a randomly chosen spin. This does not conserve \cite{bray_adv} the system-integrated order parameter and the dynamics
corresponds to ordering in a uniaxial ferromagnet. $L^2$ such moves, $L$ being the
linear dimension of a square simulation box, in units of the lattice constant $a$, make a single MC step (MCS). This is the unit of our time (t).
In the vicinity of $T_c$, the divergence in the relaxation time makes the preparation of initial configurations time taking. To avoid this, we used
the Wolff algorithm \cite{wolff}, where, instead of a single spin flip, a randomly selected cluster is flipped. Initial configurations prepared at different
values of $T_s$, via this method, are quenched to several values of $T_l$.
We have applied periodic boundary conditions in both directions. Unless otherwise mentioned, presented results are averaged over 100000 independent initial configurations. All results
are for $L = 256 a$. In the following we set, for the sake of convenience, $J$, $k_B$ and $a$ to unity.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig1.eps}
\caption{\label{fig1}(a)-(b) Typical equilibrium configurations are shown from two starting temperatures, $T_s$. Each of the configurations has 50:50 proportion
of up and down spins. The locations of the up spins are marked. (c) Plots of equilibrium probability distributions for
magnetisation are shown from the $T_s$ values for which the snapshots are presented. These results were obtained by exploiting the composition fluctuations in the
simulations via the Wolff algorithm. The continuous lines are Gaussian fits.
(d) $S(k)$, the structure factor, is plotted versus the wave number $k$, for 50:50 equilibrium configurations. These results are also presented from the same
two $T_s$ values as mentioned above. Inset: Plots of $1/S(k)$ versus $k^2$. Here the continuous lines represent linear behavior.}
\end{figure}
In Figs. \ref{fig1}(a) and (b) we show typical equilibrium snapshots from two values of $T_s$, each having critical, i.e., 50:50 proportion of
up and down spins. The difference in the extent of spatial correlations between the two
temperatures is easily identifiable from these pictures. Such critical enhancements \cite{fisher} are demonstrated quantitatively in parts (c) and (d) of this figure.
In Fig. \ref{fig1}(c) we show the probability distributions for order-parameter ($m$) fluctuation \cite{landau,skd_horbach}. The width is much higher for the
temperature that is closer to $T_c$, implying enhanced susceptibility \cite{fisher,landau,skd_horbach}. In Fig. \ref{fig1}(d) we have presented
the structure function \cite{fisher}, $S(k)$, versus $k$, the latter being the wave number, for the same two temperatures.
This structure function is related to the spatial fluctuation in the concentration field when the overall composition is fixed at the critical value \cite{hansen,skd_horbach,skd_horbach2}.
In the $k \rightarrow 0$ limit, stronger enhancement in $S(k)$, for $T_s$ closer to $T_c$, is again related to higher susceptibility. In the inset of this
frame we show $1/S(k)$ as a function of $k^2$, in a small $k$ regime. Linear appearances are consistent with the Ornstein-Zernike \cite{fisher,hansen} behavior.
Steeper slope for smaller $T_s$ signifies an enhancement \cite{fisher,skd_horbach2} in $\xi$ with the approach to $T_c$. With such temperature dependent initial configurations,
we study the {\it{equilibration}} dynamics following quenches to various $T_l$ below $T_c$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig2.eps}
\caption{\label{fig2} (a) Average domain lengths, following quenches to $T_l = 0$,
from different values of $T_s$, are plotted
versus time. (b) Same as (a). Here we have enlarged plots for three of the
considered $T_s$ values. The broken frame is adopted to bring clarity on the differences among
early as well as late time data sets. (c)-(e) Two-point equal time correlation functions,
from different $T_s$, as used in (b), for three different times, are plotted versus $r/\ell$,
for quenches to $T_l = 0$. See text for details.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig3.eps}
\caption{\label{fig3} Energy per spin, $E$, is plotted as a function of time. Results from several different choices of $T_s$ are shown.
In each of these cases the systems were quenched to $T_l = 0$. The frame has been broken to bring clarity in both early time and late time
trends in the data sets.}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) we present plots for the growth of average domain length ($\ell$), following quenches of initial configurations prepared
at different values of $T_s$. In each of these cases the value of $T_l$ was set at zero. These lengths were calculated from the first moment of the
domain size distribution function \cite{majumder_skd}, size of {\it{a domain}} being estimated
as the distance between two successive interfaces, while scanning along
different Cartesian directions.
It is clearly seen in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) that there exist crossings among curves and for
a lower value of $T_s$ the late time average domain lengths are smaller than those for a
higher $T_s$. This suggests that the systems starting from higher $T_s$ are relaxing faster.
A requirement for the validity of the above discussed picture, on the growths of lengths,
is the existence of the self-similar property among
the evolving domains \cite{bray_adv}, for different $T_s$, at any given instant of time
within
the relevant period. This feature should get reflected
in the {\it{simple}} scaling property \cite{bray_adv}, $C(r,T_s) \equiv \tilde{C} (r/\ell)$,
of the two-point equal time correlation function,
$C(r,T_s) = \langle S_i S_j \rangle - \langle S_i \rangle \langle S_j \rangle$. Here $r$ is
the scalar distance between the points $i$ and $j$, while
$\tilde{C} (x)$ is a master function that should be independent of $T_s$.
We intend to demonstrate the validity of the above mentioned
scaling property for times below, equal to, and greater than the crossing times.
For this purpose in Fig. \ref{fig2}(b) we have shown enlarged plots for a subset of
$T_s$ values considered in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) [broken frames are used to bring
clarity in both early and late time data sets]. From this figure it appears that the
crossings among these length data sets occur around $t = 1300$. Thus, we have shown the
scaling plots for the correlation functions, in
parts (c), (d) and (e) of Fig. \ref{fig2}, for $t = 1100$, $1300$ and $1500$.
In each of the cases good collapse of data can be observed.
This fact states that comparisons among length data from different $T_s$ are meaningful.
Here it is worth mentioning that the initial configurations
with large enough spatial
correlation is fractal in nature \cite{fisher}. In that case
the scaling at early enough times should follow the
form \cite{fisher,vicsek,midya_skd,paul_skd}
$C(r,T_s) \equiv r^{d-d_f}\tilde{C}(r/\ell)$, where $d_f$ is the fractal dimension.
This is consistent with the Ornstein-Zernike form \cite{fisher,hansen} $r^{-p}e^{-r/\xi}$.
However, the observation of good data collapse for $d_f = d$ implies that the
fractal features practically disappeared well before the crossing times.
In the following we present results on energy decay. This is an
alternative route for the confirmation of ME \cite{baity_pnas}.
In Fig. \ref{fig3} we show the time dependence of $E$, energy per spin, during evolutions for different $T_s$ values, again by fixing $T_l$ to zero. Like in the first frame of Fig. \ref{fig2},
there exist crossings here as well. Systems with higher $T_s$, i.e., larger starting energy, are approaching new equilibrium faster. This, indeed, is the
basic essence of ME. The crossings are very systematic. This is owing to extremely good statistics. A better quantitative information on the trend of crossings is demonstrated in Fig. \ref{fig4}.
Here we have plotted the crossing times, $t_{c,l}$, of energy curves for different values of $T_s$, following quenches to a $T_l$,
with that for a reference value $T_s^r = 2.35$. We have shown results for $T_l = 0$ and $0.6 T_c$.
Each of these data sets conveys the message that energy plots for higher
values of $T_s$ are crossing the reference plot earlier. This indirectly implies that there exists crossing between any chosen pair of curves.
This required feature is present in the plots for both the values of $T_l$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Plots of crossing times, $t_{c,l}$, versus $T_s$, of energy curves for different $T_s$ values with that of a lower reference starting temperature, viz.,
$T_s^r = 2.35$. We have shown data for two values of $T_l$, viz., $T_l =0$ and $T_l = 0.6 T_c$.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
A comparison between the two plots in Fig. \ref{fig4} suggests that with the increase
of $T_l$ crossing between curves for two different $T_s$ values has become delayed.
This may imply that the crossing time will diverge with the approach of $T_l$ towards $T_c$. A comprehensive exercise related to that is shown in
Fig. \ref{fig5}(a).
Here $t_{c,l}$ represent the crossing times between the energy curves for $T_s = 2.5$ and $2.6$, following quenches to different $T_l$.
The trend is consistent with the above anticipated singularity and points to a possibility that
a phase transition is necessary to observe the ME, i.e., $T_s$ and $T_l$ should lie on two sides of the critical point. However, for a concrete statement on the latter
independent studies are needed by fixing $T_s$ and $T_l$ on the same sides of $T_c$.
To further ascertain the effects of critical fluctuations at $T_l$, on the magnitude of ME, we present additional results in Fig. \ref{fig5}(b).
Given the debates on the topic, while good statistics is a necessity, it is also essential to demonstrate that there exists no bias in the presented results due to the averaging over a
specific set of initial configurations. Keeping that in mind we have calculated the Pearson correlation
coefficient \cite{pearson},
$r_{t_{c,l}T_l} = \sum_{l=1}^n x_l y_l /\sqrt{\sum_{l=1}^n x_l^2} \sqrt{\sum_{l=1}^n y_l^2}$.
Here $x_l$ and $y_l$ are, respectively, $t_{c,l}-\overline{t}_{c}$ and $T_l - \overline{T}$, with $\overline{t}_{c}$ and $\overline{T}$ being averages of crossing times and quench temperatures
for a sample of size $n$ ($=6$ here). We have calculated this coefficient by using $t_{c,l}$ versus $T_l$ data that were obtained by averaging over increasing number ($N$) of initial configurations.
The $r_{t_{c,l}T_l}$ versus $N$ plot in Fig. \ref{fig5} (b) clearly conveys the message that the correlation between $t_{c,l}$ and $T_l$ is positive, thereby discarding the possibility of
aforementioned biasness unambiguously.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig5.eps}
\caption{(a) Plot of $t_{c,l}$, as a function of $T_c - T_l$,
for crossings between energy curves from two $T_s$ values, viz., $2.5$ and $2.6$. The data set is presented after averaging over 200000 independent
initial realizations.
(b) Pearson correlation coefficient, $r_{t_{c,l}T_l}$, is shown with the variation of $N$, the number of initial configurations used in the averaging.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
We have studied kinetics of phase transitions \cite{bray_adv} in the two-dimensional nearest neighbour Ising model \cite{fisher}, via Monte Carlo simulations \cite{binder_heer},
using Glauber spin-flip dynamics \cite{glauber}. This mimics the ordering dynamics in uniaxial ferromagnets.
The objective has been to investigate the presence of Mpemba effect \cite{mpemba}.
For this purpose we have prepared
initial configurations at various starting temperatures $T_s$, lying between $T_c$ and $\infty$. These configurations, with 50:50 compositions
of up and down spins, were quenched to various final temperatures $T_l$ ($<T_c$). We observe that systems with higher $T_s$ tend to approach the
equilibrium at a $T_l$ faster than the ones with lower $T_s$. This is the basic fact of Mpemba effect \cite{mpemba}.
While Mpemba effect itself is a counter-intuitive phenomena, observation of it in a simple system that is considered here is even more
surprizing. Note that the model has no glassy ingredient.
We have presented results for multiple values of $T_l$. In each of the cases, the effect is clearly
identifiable.
We have also shown that as $T_l$ increases towards $T_c$, the
crossing time between energy curves for a pair of starting temperatures increases.
This may imply that a phase transition is necessary for the observation of
ME. However, further studies are necessary to arrive at such a conclusion.
Despite no in-built glassy feature, the model has been recognized
\cite{nv_sc_skd,redner,cugliandolo} to exhibit unusual structure and slow dynamics
at $T_l = 0$, particularly in $d=3$. Such behavior may be considered to be a reason behind our striking observation. Nevertheless, interestingly, the effect
is also observed for much higher values of $T_l$ and in $d=2$. Our results suggest that it persists at least till $T_l$ is less than $T_c$. This work, thus, we expect to inspire further
novel investigations, experimental as well as theoretical, with simple systems, providing path towards better understanding of the Mpemba effect.
In this work we have considered initial configurations with 50:50
compositions of up and down spins. It is equally important to study the case of
asymmetric starting compositions. In this case also variation of the correlation length
in the starting configurations can be realized with the change in temperature. Thus, the
effect may be observed for non-zero initial magnetization as well. Our preliminary
studies support this expectation. Nevertheless, more thorough
studies are needed. Here we have considered the Glauber dynamics \cite{glauber} for
which the order parameter does not remain conserved over time.
It will be interesting to extend the investigation to the
conserved order-parameter dynamics via the implementation of Kawasaki exchange
kinetics \cite{landau}. A systematic study of this, however, can be time taking.
Note that in the case of Kawasaki kinetics, due to significantly slower
growth \cite{majumder_skd} the crossings may occur at much later times.
\section*{Author contributions}
SKD conceived the project, designed the problem, supervised the work and wrote
the manuscript. NV wrote the computer codes, carried out the work and contributed
to the preparation of the manuscript.
\section*{Conflicts of interest}
There are no conflicts to declare.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
SKD acknowledges encouraging remarks from or discussions with K. Binder, C.N.R. Rao, M. Zannetti, R. Pandit, C. Dasgupta, P. Chaudhuri, S. Sastry, J.K. Bhattacharjee, K. Sengupta and
J. Horbach. The authors received partial
financial support from Science and Engineering Research
Board, India, via Grant No. MTR/2019/001585. They are thankful to a Supercomputing
facility at JNCASR.
|
\section{Introduction}
\textbf{Motivation:}
The recent emergence of Automatic Speaker Verification (ASV) systems in high-security-required fields like AloT, Voice Assistant, and multimedia forensic leads to an increasing concern for its security risks \cite{gomez2020joint,aljasem2021secure,tak2022automatic}. ASV systems utilize the distance between the extracted features of test speech and those of pre-collected reference speech to determine the speaker. However, the attackers could hide the real identity of a speaker through automatic voice disguise (AVD). In particular, a classic AVD technique termed pitch scaling \cite{laroche2002time} is extensively applied in various commercial software due to its excellent balance of effectiveness and efficiency, posing a great threat to the security of ASV.
\textbf{Prior works and limitaion:}
Early works \cite{6638211,liang2017recognition,wang2018revealing} typically estimate the approximate range of pitch shifting rather than the precise degree of disguise, rendering them incapable of accurately restoring the pitch-shifted voice. Later, Pilia et al. propose a method achieving more accurate estimation results than previous work \cite{9648389}. However, the model can only deal with time-domain pitch scaling. Recently, L. Zheng et al. propose a state-of-the-art method for detecting and restoring pitch-shifted voice \cite{9198912}. This method utilizes an ASV system to achieve the estimation of disguising parameters and the restoration of disguised voice, which is capable of reliably working on various pitch scaling algorithms. However, this method still has two limitations: (1) due to the dependency on the ASV system, it cannot be adaptive to the situation without reference audio; and (2) it uses pitch scaling algorithms to achieve restoration, which doubles the artifacts introduced during disguising, decreasing the restoration quality.
\textbf{Our approach:}
In this paper, we propose a \emph{Pitch-Shifted Voice Restoration Framework} (PSVRF) for estimating disguising parameters in the absence of reference and restoring pitch-shifted voice in high quality. Specifically, PSVRF consists of three contributing components: (1) Estimator, which predicts the disguising parameter through the log Mel filterbank (fbank) features of disguised voice without any reference; (2) Feature Reconstruction Network (FRN), which reconstructs the fbank features of original voice in high quality through fbank features of pitch-shifted voice and the predicted parameter; and (3) a neural vocoder, which converts the reconstructed features into waveforms, achieving end-to-end pitch-shifted voice restoration. The experiments conducted on AISHELL-1 and AISHELL-3 with various pitch scaling algorithms demonstrate that PSVRF overpasses the state-of-the-art reference-based restoration method in not only the accuracy of estimation but also the quality of restoration.
\section{Background}
\subsection{Pitch Scaling}
Pitch scaling techniques can be mainlly divided into two categories: frequency-domain (FD) disguise and time-domain (TD) disguise. FD disguise is usually operated by expanding or compressing the spectrum while keeping the content of the voice unchanged. TD disguise can be realized by adjusting the sampling rate, which changes the fundamental frequency of speech signal and hence the pitch. FD disguise and TD disguise can be formulated into a unified form as follows \cite{9198912}:
\begin{equation}\label{Equ 1}
\begin{aligned}
p_s=2^{\alpha/12}p_o,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $p_o$ and $p_s$ represent the original pitch and scaled pitch. $\alpha$ is the semitone, i.e., the diguising parameter, which describes the degree of disgusie.
\subsection{Self-supervied audio spectrogram transformer}
Audio sepctrogram transformer (AST) is the state-of-the-art purely attention-based model for audio tasks \cite{gong2021ast}. Recently, K. He et al. propose Masked AutoEncoder (MAE) for a large-scale self-supervised pre-train \cite{he2022masked}, which can obviously enhance the performance of the purely attention-based model in vision. Specifically, it masks numerous patches of the inputs and then utilizes the model to reconstruct the masked inputs. Later, Y. Gong et al. introduce the pre-train strategy proposed in MAE into AST and propose the Self-supervied audio spectrogram transformer (Ssast) \cite{gong2022ssast}, which makes two efficient improvements: (1) a frame-level masking strategy, which is more efficient than patch-level masking; (2) Joint Discriminative and Generative Masked Spectrogram Patch Modeling.
\section{Methodology}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.49]{fig1}
\captionsetup{font={small}}
\caption{Overview of PSVRF, which includes Estimator, Feature Reconstruction Network (FRN) composed of a generator and the associated Joint Conditional-Unconditional Multi-scale Discriminator (JCU-MSD), and a neural vocoder.
}
\label{Fig. 1}
\end{figure*}
\iffalse
PSVRF aims to reconstruct the original voice through only a single disguised speech. It is obvious in Equ 1 that the disgusing parameter $\alpha$ can be uniquely determined by the pair of scaled speech and original speech. Therefore, PSVRF can be formulated as follows:
\begin{align}\label{Equ 2}
P(\omega_r\,|\,\omega_s) &= P(\omega_r\,|\,x_r)\,P(x_r,\,\hat{\alpha}\,|\,x_s)\,P(x_s\,|\,\omega_s),\nonumber\\
&= \underbrace{P(\omega_r\,|\,x_r)}_{\rm Vocoder}\,\underbrace{P(x_r\,|\,x_s,\,\hat{\alpha})}_{\rm FRN}\,\underbrace{P(\hat{\alpha}\,|\,x_s)}_{\rm Estimator}\,P(x_s\,|\,\omega_s),
\end{align}
where the $\omega_s$ and $\omega_r$ represent the pitch-scaled speech and the restoration, respectively. $x_s$ and $x_r$ separately represent the 128-dimensional fbank features of pitch-scaled speech and restorated speech, which are computed with a 25ms Hanning window every 10ms. $\hat{\alpha}$ is the estimation of disguising parameter.
Eq. \eqref{Equ 2} reveals that PSVRF converts the scaled speech waveform $\omega_s$ into the fbank features $x_s$. Then the estimaitor utilizes the fbank features $x_s$ to estimate the disgusing parameters $\hat{\alpha}$. Later, FRN is applied to fit a mapping from the $\hat{\alpha}$ and the fbank features $x_s$ to the reconstructed fbank features $x_r$. Finally, a neural vocoder is employed for translate the reconstructed fbank features $x_r$ into the waveform of restorated speech $\omega_r$.
\fi
The architecture and objective functions of PSVRF are shown in Fig. 1, which consists of three main components: Estimator, Feature Restoration Network (FRN), and a pre-trained Nerual Vocoder, achieving the restoration of pitch-shifted voice end-to-end. We detail these components in \textbf{3.1} to \textbf{3.3}.
\subsection{Estimator}
Estimator is similar to the AST, which is composed of a linear projection and a transformer encoder. Specifically, each fbank feature is partitioned into 16$\times$16 patches, which are flattened into 1D 768-dimensional patch embeddings and fed into the linear projection. Then, the transformer encoder accepts the output of the linear projection plus the position embedding as the inputs. The transformer encoder has an embedding dimension of 768, 12 layers, and 12 heads, which are the same as those in the original AST \cite{gong2021ast}. During fine-tuning and inference, an average pooling followed by a fully connected layer is applied to yield the estimation of the disgusing parameter
Notably, Estimator is pre-trained as Ssast in Voxceleb \cite{nagrani2017voxceleb} and Voxceleb2 \cite{chung2018voxceleb2} with 400 epochs and fine-tuned in a supervised mode using MAE loss.
\subsection{Feature Reconstruction Network}
\textbf{Generator}: We specially design a model termed Feature Reconstruction Network (FRN)
for high-quality restoration. To be specific, FRN is a type of Generator Adversarial Network (GAN) \cite{goodfellow2020generative}, which is composed of a generator $G$ and the associated discriminator $D_\phi$. As shown in Fig.\;2 (a), $G$ is mainly composed of 20 residual blocks with a hidden dimension of 256, which is introduced in WaveNet \cite{oord2016wavenet}. Differently, we make the model non-causal and set the dilation rate to 1 since the inputs are spectrograms instead of waveforms.
\textbf{Discriminator}: Multi-scaled discriminators (MSD) \cite{kong2020hifi} and Joint Conditional Unconditional discriminators (JCUD) \cite{liu2022diffgan} have been proven as the most efficient models in audio synthetic tasks. Inspired of them, we propose a Joint Conditional Unconditional Multi-scale discriminator (JCU-MSD), i.e., $D_\phi$, which is shown in Fig. 1 (b).
\textbf{Objective function}: Adversarial loss $\mathcal{L}_{adv}$, spectrogarm reconstruction loss $\mathcal{L}_{spec}$, and feature matching loss $\mathcal{L}_{fm}$ are applied to constrain the generator. $\mathcal{L}_{adv}$ is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{adv} = \mathbb{E}_{x\sim x_o}[D_\phi(x,\hat{\alpha})^2] + \mathbb{E}_{x\sim G}[(D_\phi(x,\hat{\alpha})-1)^2],
\end{equation}
where $x_o$ is fbank feature of orginal speech. $\hat\alpha$ is estimated disguising parameters. $\mathcal{L}_{spec}$ is measured by L2 distances between the real spectrogram and its reconstructed counterpart, which can be formulated as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{spec}=||x_o-G(x_s, \hat{\alpha})||_2,
\end{equation}
where $x_s$ is fbank feature of digusied speech. $\mathcal{L}_{fm}$ is computed by summing L1 distances between every discriminator feature maps of real and generated samples, which is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{fm}=\sum\nolimits_{i=0}^{N}||D^i_{\phi}(x_o,\hat{\alpha})-D^i_{\phi}(G(x_s,\hat{\alpha}),\hat{\alpha})||_1,
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the total number of hidden layers in the JCU-MSD. Finally, the total loss of PSVRF is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{total} = \mathcal{L}_{adv}+\mathcal{L}_{spec}+\lambda_{fm}\mathcal{L}_{fm},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{fm}$ is a scaled scalar equal to 0.5 in this work. $G$ aims to minimize $\mathcal{L}_{total}$ while the objective of $D$ is oppsite to $G$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\captionsetup{font={small}}
\subfigure[Generator]{
\begin{minipage}[b]{1\linewidth}
\centering
\vspace{0.2cm}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{PJ3_G}
\end{minipage}
}
\subfigure[JCU-MSD]{
\begin{minipage}[b]{1\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{PJ3_D
\end{minipage}
}
\caption{Detailed structure of the generator and JCU-MSD, where Conv$1\times1$ represents an one-dimensional (1D) convolutional operation with kernel size 1.}
\end{figure}\label{Fig. 2}
\subsection{Neural Vocoder}
We use the state-of-the-art neural vocoder termed DiffWave \cite{kong2020diffwave} to transform the reconstructed fbank features into the restorated waveform. This vocoder is pretrained in Voxceleb \cite{nagrani2017voxceleb} and Voxceleb2 \cite{chung2018voxceleb2} with $10^6$ steps and directly applied in PSVRF. Differently, the dimension of the input spectorgrams is set to 128 instead of 80 in this work.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Implement details}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\tiny
\caption{Datasets composition}
\label{Table 1}
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.34}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1.33mm}{
\begin{tabular}{l|llll}
\bottomrule
& \textbf{Dataset} & \textbf{\# Speakers} & \textbf{\# Utterances} & \textbf{$\alpha$ Range} \\
\hline
${\rm T1}$ & ${\rm AISHELL\mbox{-}3\, train}$ & $138\, {\rm female} \;/\; 36\,{\rm male}$ & $63262$ & $\mathcal{U}(-8, 8)$ \\
\cline{2-2}
\multirow{2}{*}{${\rm T2}$} & ${\rm AISHELL\mbox{-}1 \,train}$ & \multirow{2}{*}{$356 \,{\rm female} \;/ \;158 \,{\rm male}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$123471$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\mathcal{U}(-8, 8)$} \\
& ${\rm AISHELL\mbox{-}3\, train}$ & & &\\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{${\rm A_1\,Unseen}$} & ${\rm AISHELL\mbox{-}1\, test}$ & \multirow{2}{*}{$35\, {\rm female}\;/\; 25\, {\rm male}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$651 \times 33$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$[-8, 8, 0.5]$}\\
& ${\rm AISHELL\mbox{-}1 \,dev}$ & & &\\
\cline{2-2}
${\rm A_3\,Seen}$ & ${\rm AISHELL\mbox{-}3\, test}$ & $134\, {\rm female}\;/\; 36\, {\rm male}$ & $270\times33$ & $[-8, 8, 0.5]$\\
${\rm A_3\,Unseen}$ & ${\rm AISHELL\mbox{-}3\, test}$ & $38\, {\rm female}\;/\; 6\, {\rm male}$ & $480 \times33$ & $[-8, 8, 0.5]$\\
\toprule
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\end{table}
{\setlength{\parindent}{0cm}
\textbf{Dataset and processing}: We utilize two multi-speaker mandarin datasets, AISHEEL-1 \cite{bu2017aishell} and AISHELL-3 \cite{shi2020aishell}, to synthesize the training and testing sets, which are shown in TABLE \ref{Table 1}. To be specific, original training sets of AISHELL-1 and AISHELL-3 are used to construct two different scale datasets for training PSVRF, i.e., ${\rm T1}$ and ${\rm T2}$. Then, original testing and validation sets of AISHEEL-1 and AISHELL-3 are divided into two categories based on the visibility of contained speakers, which are used to build three testing sets. Each testing set is shuffled and divided into 33 subsets, and each subset is disguised using not only FD algorithms such as Phase Vocoder and FD-PSOLA but also TD algorithms such as TD-PSOLA and WSOLA. The disguising parameter $\alpha$ increases from -8 to 8 with a step of 0.5, yielding the ${\rm A_1\,Unseen}$, ${\rm A_3\,Seen}$, and ${\rm A_3\,Unseen}$. In addition, three types of commercial software with excellent disguising effects, i.e., Audacity, Audition, and iZotope, are used to simulate more challenging and practical application scenarios. %
}
\textbf{Training setup}: The pitch-scaling algorithm applied in training phase is Phase Vocoder implemented by \texttt{librosa} \cite{mcfee2015librosa}, where the disguising parameter $\alpha$ follows a uniform distribution $\mathcal{U}(-8, 8)$. In Estimator the time dimension of the input is fixed to 500. In feature transform, the sample rate is 16kHz, fft points are 1024, the window length is 1024, and the hop length is 256. The Adam optimizer \cite{kingma2014adam} with a fixed learning rate of $1\times10^{-4}$ is applied to train PSVRF. The batch size is 32, and epochs are equal to 400. The experiments are implemented with $2\times$ NVIDIA A100 40GB.
\subsection{Evaluation of estimation accuracy}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\tiny
\caption{MAE of estimated $\alpha$, \textcolor{red}{red} is the smallest, \textcolor{blue}{blue} is the second. (${\rm PSVRF_{T1}}$ / ${\rm PSVRF_{T2}}$ / L. Zheng \cite{9198912})}
\label{Table 2}
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.38}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1.5mm}{
\begin{tabular}{l|ccc|l}
\bottomrule
\textbf{Implementation} & $\bm{{\rm A_1\,Unseen}}$ & $\bm{{\rm A_3\,Seen}}$ & $\bm{{\rm A_3\,Unseen}}$ & \textbf{Algorithm} \\
\hline
librosa \cite{mcfee2015librosa} & 0.691 / \textcolor{red}{0.188} / \textcolor{blue}{0.675} & \textcolor{blue}{0.324} / \textcolor{red}{0.319} / 1.020 & \textcolor{blue}{0.385} / \textcolor{red}{0.356} / 0.890 & Phase Vocoder \\
MATLAB$^{*}$ & 0.698 / \textcolor{red}{0.213} / \textcolor{blue}{0.590} & \textcolor{blue}{0.448} / \textcolor{red}{0.417} / 0.979 & \textcolor{blue}{0.515} / \textcolor{red}{0.460} / 0.848 & Phase Vocoder \\
RTISI \cite{zhu2007real} & 0.771 / \textcolor{red}{0.661} / \textcolor{blue}{0.684} & 0.961 / \textcolor{red}{0.929} / \textcolor{blue}{0.939} & 0.982 / \textcolor{red}{0.946} / \textcolor{blue}{0.952} & FD-PSOLA \\
PRAAT & 0.717 / \textcolor{red}{0.616} / \textcolor{blue}{0.619} & 0.932 / \textcolor{red}{0.912} / \textcolor{blue}{0.919} & 0.968 / \textcolor{blue}{0.933} / \textcolor{red}{0.930} & TD-PSOLA \\
SoundTouch \cite{timmurphy.org} & 0.753 / \textcolor{red}{0.543} / \textcolor{blue}{0.607} & 1.249 / \textcolor{blue}{1.161}/ \textcolor{red}{0.880} & 1.251 / \textcolor{blue}{1.162} / \textcolor{red}{0.929} & WSOLA \\
\hline
Audacity 3.1.3 & 0.784 / \textcolor{blue}{0.754} / \textcolor{red}{0.631} & 1.317 / \textcolor{blue}{1.173} / \textcolor{red}{1.091} & 1.393 / \textcolor{blue}{1.198} / \textcolor{red}{0.932} & UNKNOWN \\
Audition 2022 & 0.767 / \textcolor{red}{0.402} / \textcolor{blue}{0.586} & 1.112 / \textcolor{blue}{1.076} / \textcolor{red}{0.927} & 1.272 / \textcolor{blue}{1.202} / \textcolor{red}{0.956} & UNKNOWN \\
iZotope RX9 & 0.828 / \textcolor{red}{0.476} / \textcolor{blue}{0.575} & 1.445 / \textcolor{blue}{1.311} / \textcolor{red}{0.983} & 1.644 / \textcolor{blue}{1.465} / \textcolor{red}{0.974} & UNKNOWN \\
\toprule
\end{tabular}}
\begin{tablenotes}
\tiny
\item[1] * shiftPitch function.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{center}
\end{table}
{\setlength{\parindent}{0cm}
\textbf{Evaluation}:
We evaluate the performance of the Estimator in PSVRF trained with T1 / T2 and that of the baseline \cite{9198912} in ${\rm A_1\,Unseen}$, ${\rm A_3\,Seen}$, and ${\rm A_3\,Unseen}$ with the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) between the predicted $\alpha$ and the ground truth, which is recoreded in TABLE \ref{Table 2}.} In addition, we investigate the relationship between the estimation deviation i.e.,$\hat{\alpha}-\alpha$, of ${\rm PSVRF_{T2}}$ and the disgusing parameters $\alpha$ applied in ${\rm A_1\,Unseen}$, which is shown in Fig. 2.
\textbf{Results}:
From TABLE \ref{Table 2}, we can find that although only the Phase Vocoder implemented by librosa is used to yield the training data, PSVRF can still precisely estimate the disguising parameters from different pitch scaling algorithms. In addition, a larger scale dataset can further boost the performance and generalization ability of PSVRF. It is noteworthy that PSVRF does not require any reference while it still achieves competitive results compared to the reference-based method. Fig. 3 reveals that the estimation of negative $\alpha$ is more accurate than that of the positive, which is consistent with the conclusion in \cite{liang2017recognition,wang2018revealing} that lowing pitch is easier to detect than raising pitch. Besides, the tiny $\alpha$ is prone to be estimatied as zero, resulting a linear deviation in the neighbourhood of zero.
\textbf{Discussion}:
There are two explanations of how Estimator works: (1) the esitimator learns a mapping from the artifacts introduced by pitch-scaling algorithms to $\alpha$; (2) Estimator learns a manifold which is composed of the original voice and its pitch-shifted counterpart, and mappings testing samples to the learned manifold for generalization. The results in Table 2 reveal that Estimator can be generalized to various disguising algorithms. However, the artifacts introduced by different algorithms are usually different. In addition, more speakers' information can boost the performance of PSVRF. Therefore, we believe explanation (2) may be more correct, which will be further studied in our future work.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\hspace{-2mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{fig3}
\captionsetup{font={small}}
\caption{Box-plot of the estimation deviation under various disguising parameters. The idea results should be always zeros.}
\label{Fig. 3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Evaluation of restoration quality}
\textbf{Evaluation}:
We apply a typical ASV model termed ECAPA-TDNN \cite{desplanques2020ecapa} as an effective tool to evaluate the restoration quality of PSVRF and the baseline. Specifically, we qualitatively evaluate the improvement provided by different methods for the ASV model when faced with pitch-shifted samples from ${\rm A_1\,Unseen}$, which is shown in Fig. 4. In addition, we provide a visual comparison of the restoration obtained by different methods to further explain the advantage of PSVRF, which is shown in Fig. 5.
\textbf{Results}:
Fig.\;4 reveals that both the baseline and PSVRF can clearly enhance the performance of ASV when faced with pitch-shifted voice, while PSVRF provides higher restoration quality, which is reflected in the lower ERR of ASV. The main reason is that pitch-shifting algorithms will introduce artifacts during the disguising phase, and the baseline utilizes the pitch scaling algorithm to achieve the restoration, doubling the unpleasant artifacts and degrading the quality of restored speech. Differently, FRN in PSVRF is specifically designed to fit a mapping from fbank features of disguised speech to fbank features of original speech, which restores the pitch and removes the artifacts.
This issue is further indicated in Fig.\;5, where these two methods can both reconstruct the fundamental frequency, i.e., the pitch, of the original speech exactly, but PSVRF can reconstruct more clear formant and high-frequency information, resulting in the more realistic timbre.
\textbf{Discussion}:
Notably, the performance of PSVRF will obviously decline under tiny $\alpha$, which is similar to or even worse than that of the baseline. The main reason is the estimation deviation of tiny $\alpha$, which is mentioned in 4.2.
\begin{figure}[t]
\captionsetup{font={small}}
\iffalse
\begin{minipage}{1\linewidth}
\centering
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=2cm,angle=90]{ASV_FRR_sub}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\end{minipage}
\fi
\begin{minipage}{1\linewidth}
\centering
\hspace{-5mm}
\includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{asv_err2
\end{minipage}
\caption{ERR of the ASV model when faced with the pitch-shifted / restorated samples from different subsets of ${\rm A_1\,Unseen}$.}
\end{figure} \label{Fig. 4}
\begin{figure}[t]
\captionsetup{font={small}}
\subfigure[Original speech \quad]{
\begin{minipage}{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\hspace{-5mm}
\includegraphics[width=3.7cm]{fig4_a}
\end{minipage}
}
\subfigure[Pitch-shifted speech ($\alpha$=7.648) \quad]{
\begin{minipage}{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=3.7cm]{fig4_b}
\end{minipage}
}
\subfigure[Restoration of L. Zheng \cite{9198912} \quad]{
\begin{minipage}{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\hspace{-5mm}
\includegraphics[width=3.7cm]{fig4_c}
\end{minipage}
}
\subfigure[Restoration of PSVRF \quad]{
\begin{minipage}{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=3.7cm]{fig4_d}
\end{minipage}
}
\caption{Waveforms and spectrograms of an example utterance in ${\rm A_1\,Unseen}$.}
\end{figure} \label{Fig. 5}
\section{CONCLUSION}
We propose a no-reference method termed \emph{PSVRF} to estimate the disguising parameters of pitch scaling and restore pitch-shifted voice into original revsions, which has great significance for the security of ASV. The experiments reveal that even compared with the reference-based baseline, PSVRF still obtains competitive results in both the estimation accuracy and the restoration quality. Furthermore, as a no-reference method, PSVRF can directly make existing ASV applications more resistant to pitch scaling without additional modifications. Future work would be investigating the improvement of PSVRF when faced with tiny disguising parameters.
\vfill\pagebreak
|
\section{Introduction.}\label{intro}
\section{Introduction}
Portfolio management is strategic decision-making or strategic planning to forecast how firms should spend their scare engineering, operation resources, and marketing resources to maximize their objective functions which is categorized as resource allocation problems.
It focuses on having the right balance between number of projects and available resources or capabilities~\cite{cooper1999new}.
However, an organization must optimize its product diversity to increase revenues~\cite{lancaster1990economics}.
There are two methods for a business to succeed new products: \textit{doing projects right}, and \textit{doing the right projects}~\cite{cooper2000new}.
Hence, an important decision-making for the firms is to offer the \textit{right} product variety to the target market instead of creating various products in relation to anticipate all needs of customers~\cite{jiao2007heuristic}.
Portfolio management has been extensively studied with different approaches.
A linear programming method is applied for {R}\&{D} project selection~\cite{jackson1983decision}.
Financial models and financial indexes, probabilistic financial models, options pricing theory,
strategic approaches, scoring models and checklists,
analytical hierarchy approaches,
behavioral approaches,
mapping approaches or bubble diagrams are different methods for selecting a new portfolio~\cite{cooper1999new}.
While there are several approaches allowing companies to increase R\&D productivity, their implementations impose new challenges for product portfolio management. In~\cite{cooper2020new}, new solutions are proposed to deal with these emerging challenges. The problem of product portfolio optimization is analyzed by population dynamic approach in which
company's product portfolio is considered as a product population~\cite{wang2021collaborative}. The authors analyze the product population’s growth balance by the logistic model.
It also considers how the product population’s scale and structure can be continuously optimized in a way that balances enterprise output, product synergy, and resource allocation.
The conjoint-based approach to optimal product portfolio problem ends in integer optimization problems which are NP-hard problems~\cite{nair1995near}.
For instance, the problem of designing a new product line in order to maximize its surplus which is determined based on customer preference is NP-hard~\cite{kohli1989optimal}.
In~\cite{belloni2008optimizing}, efficient methods have been devised for the customer preference perspective.
Furthermore, product portfolio decisions have been examined with a focus on the engineering implications, the cost and complexity of actions among multiple products~\cite{simpson2004product}.
Furthermore, Jiao and Zhang~\cite{jiao2005product} investigated product portfolio management with the view of customer-engineering interaction and established a
maximizing shared-surplus model for PPM problem in the absent of competition view point where the detail of produce design has been included.
They formulate the problem as an integer programming which is an NP-hard problem and also a heuristic genetic algorithm is applied to solve the relaxed version of the integer linear programming problem.
However, diverse analyses have been applied to examine PPM problems.
One of them is the concept of Nash equilibrium has been employed to model competitive reactions in produce design
\cite{choi1993game} and product line design \cite{kuzmanovic2012approach}.
The new entrant firm into a competitive market has been
studied in~\cite{choi1990product,steiner2010stackelberg,liu2015stackelberg}.
The new entrant firm has more resources and pre-experience on the rivals' behavior.
Hence, it is can be expected to become a leader against the other firms in the market~\cite{choi1990product}.
The Stackelberg (leader-followers) game has been applied to find out an optimal for a single product design~\cite{steiner2010stackelberg} and product portfolio~\cite{liu2015stackelberg}.
The objective of~\cite{liu2015stackelberg} is to maximize the expected
shared surplus of the new market entrant.
Steiner formulates optimal product design problem based on the perspective of a
profit-maximizing new entrant (the leader) who wants to launch a brand onto an
existing product market and acts with foresight by anticipating price-design reactions
of the incumbent firms (the Nash followers)~\cite{steiner2010stackelberg}
while Liu et al.'s concern is to maximize the expected shared surplus of the new market entrant.
The competitive interactions of two firms to find an optimal product portfolio has been modeled by a non-cooperative complete information game~\cite{sadeghi2011game}. In this game, utility functions for firms are determined based on the customer-engineering interaction model which is proposed in~\cite{jiao2005product} and Nash equilibrium of this
game is calculated for just one numerical example where two firms with four different products compete in a market with 3 segments.
Product line design as an instance of PPM problem has been studied with the game theoretical approach. In~\cite{liu2017product}, the competitive interactions of firms to design product line has been formulated with the Stackelberg model and for an industrial case of cell phones and the analysis of finding an equilibrium of this model has been implemented.
Moreover, the competition environment between two firms from the viewpoint of the product cost and customer satisfaction has been modeled by a Bayesian game~\cite{yang2019configuration}.
John Nash introduced a solution concept for strategic-form games, called a Nash Equilibrium (NE)~\cite{nash1951non}.
He proved that every finite strategic-form game has a mixed strategy equilibrium. He presented
two existence proofs: the first one was based on Kakutani’s Fixed Point Theorem~\cite{nash1950equilibrium}, and the
second one was based on Brouwer’s Fixed Point Theorem~\cite{nash1951non}.
C. Papadimitriou~\cite{papadimitriou1994complexity} proposed the complexity class PPAD (Polynomial Parity Argument in a Directed graph) which is the class of all search problems that can be polynomially reduced to the END OF THE LINE problem:
given two circuits $S$ and $P$, each with $n$ input bits and $n$ output bits, such that
$P(0^n)=0^n=S(0^n)$, find an input $x \in {\{0,1\}}^n$ such that
$P(S(x))\neq x$ or $S(P(x)) \neq x \neq 0^n$.
PPAD class contains several important problems that are suspected to be hard~\cite{daskalakis2009complexity}.
Moreover, it is shown that finding a NE for a finite strategic-form game is PPAD-complete~\cite{daskalakis2009complexity}.
In this paper, we study an $n$-agent game which is a generalization of 2-agent game was developed in~\cite{sadeghi2011game}
to model a competitive market with different segments for product portfolio management.
The self-interest of each firm is to maximize its total expected shared surplus which is formulated in~\cite{jiao2005product}.
Luxury brands in which the central point of such markets concentrates on the rich consumers is one example of a single market segmentation.
In~\cite{sadeghi2011game}, an example of two firm who compete in a single market segmentation has been examined. We analyze the process of finding a mixed Nash equilibrium for these game in a single market segmentation when all strategies in NE are inner points of strategy spaces which we call it an \textit{interior Nash equilibrium}.
This paper is organized as follows.
In Section~\ref{Problem Description}, the PPM problem in competitive environment is formulated with an $n$-agent game. An analysis for finding an interior Nash equilibrium for a single market segmentation is presented in Section~\ref{NEAnalysis}.
Finally, the conclusion are presented in Section \ref{conclusion} with a number of areas for future works.
\section{The Model} \label{Problem Description}
Suppose that $Z$ is a potential product set for a market which has multiple market segments, represented by $\{G_j : 1\leq j \leq m\}$ such that each segment $G_j$ contains homogeneous customers with total demand $Q_j$. We enumerate the product set $Z$ with $\{1,\ldots, \rho\}$ where $\rho =|Z|$.
Assume $n$ firms, $I=\{1,\ldots,n\}$, compete in the market.
Let $Z_i \subseteq Z$ be the set of products which are technically possible for firm $i\in I$.
Thus, a product portfolio for firm $i$ is a subset of $\varLambda_i \subseteq Z_i$ such that $\varLambda_i \ne \varnothing$. Hence, the pure strategy set for firm $i \in I$ which we denote it by $S_i$ is a set of non-empty subsets of $Z_i$. Consequently, a mixed strategy for this firm is a distribution on $S_i$.
Suppose that $\hat\sigma_i : S_i\to [0, 1]$ is a mixed strategy for firm $i$. We show that it induces a distribution $\sigma_i$ on $Z_i$. Let
\[\sigma_i(p) = \sum_{\varLambda\in S_i\atop p\in \varLambda} \frac{\hat\sigma_i(\varLambda)}{|\varLambda|}.
\]
As each $\varLambda\in S_i$ appears as many times as its elements, it follows that
$\sum_{p\in Z_i} \sigma_i(p) = 1,$
which in turn shows that $\sigma_i$ is a distribution on $Z_i$. On the other hand, if $\sigma_i$ is a distribution on $Z_i$ and $\varLambda\in S_i$, we may define
\[\hat\sigma_i(\varLambda) = \sum_{p\in\varLambda} \dfrac{\sigma_i(p)}{|\{\varGamma\in S_i : p\in\varGamma\}|},\]
which gives a distribution on $S_i$.
Every product has certain engineering costs; so different firms may have different production costs due to different technologies. Thus, we denote the price of product $p \in Z$ produced by firm $i\in I$ in $G_j$, $1 \leq j \leq m$ by $\beta_{ijp}$.
Assume, for firm $i$, customer preference for product $p\in Z_i$ in $G_j$ is represented by respective utility, $u_{ijp}$.
Now, we model the competition among $n$ firms as a game $G$ and call it a PPM game.
\begin{definition}
A PPM game $G$ is a game in strategic form with the following structure
\begin{enumerate}
\item The set of firms, $I=\{1, \ldots , n \}$.
\item The set of $m$ market segments $G_j$ where $ 1 \leq j \leq m$.
\item Firm $i$'s strategy space
$$\varSigma_i=\big\{(\sigma_{i1},\ldots, \sigma_{i\rho})\in [0,1]^{\rho}\hspace{.1cm}:
\hspace{.1cm} \sum_{p=1}^{\rho } \sigma_{ip}=1, \hspace{.1cm} p\notin Z_i \Rightarrow \sigma_{ip}=0\big\}.$$
\item Firm $i$'s payoff for the strategy profile $(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})\in \varSigma_i \times \varSigma_{-i}$ is
$$u_i(\sigma_i,\sigma_{-i})=\sum_{j=1}^{m} \sum_{p=1}^{\rho} \beta_{ijp} \cdot Q_j \cdot \frac{\exp(u_{ijp})\cdot \sigma_{ip} }{\sum_{r=1}^{n}\sum_{q=1}^{\rho}\exp(u_{rjq})\cdot \sigma_{rq}\vphantom{A^{l^l}}} \cdot \sigma_{ip}.$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
For convenience, let $e_{ijp}=\exp(u_{ijp})$ for each $i \in I$, $1 \leq j \leq m$ and $1 \leq p \leq \rho$.
\begin{remark}
Let $(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})\in \varSigma_i \times \varSigma_{-i}$.
By the multinomial logit (MNL) model~\cite{mcfadden1977application},
the probability that a customer chooses product $p$ produced by firm $i$ in the segment market $G_j$ is equal to
$$P_{ijp}(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})
=\frac{e_{ijp}\cdot \sigma_{ip} }{\sum_{r=1}^{n}\sum_{q=1}^{\rho} e_{rjq}\cdot \sigma_{rq}}.
$$
for $i \in I$, $1\leq j \leq m$ and $1\leq p\leq \rho$.
\end{remark}
\section{Equilibrium Analysis}\label{NEAnalysis}
John Nash introduced a solution concept for strategic games which is called Nash Equilibrium~\cite{nash1951non}.
He proved that every finite strategic-form game has a mixed strategy equilibrium. He presented
two existence proofs: the first one was based on Kakutani’s Fixed Point Theorem~\cite{nash1950equilibrium}, and the
second one was based on Brouwer’s Fixed Point Theorem~\cite{nash1951non}. Since a PPM game is a finite game, it has a mixed Nash equilibrium. In this section, we explain how to find it when it is in $(0, 1)^{n\rho}$.
Nash stated that a rational agent will only play the strategy which is a best response to the strategies actually taken by its opponents. To formalize the statement, let
\[\varDelta(S_i) = \{\sigma : \mbox{$\sigma$ is a distribution on $S_i$}\},\]
where $S_i$ is a strategy set for agent $i$.
The best response of agent $i$ in a strategic-form game $G$ is a correspondence $BR_i : \varDelta(S_{-i}) \to \varDelta(S_i)$ given by
$$BR_i(\sigma_{-i})=\mathop{\mbox{arg max}}_{\sigma_i \in S_i} u_i(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})$$ for each $i$.
Clearly, strategy profile $(\sigma_1, \ldots, \sigma_n) \in \prod_{i=1}^{n}\varDelta(S_i)$ is a Nash equilibrium if and only if $\sigma_i \in BR_i(\sigma_{-i})$ for each agent $i$.
Let $G$ be a PPM game, and suppose that \(\sigma^*\) is a Nash equilibrium. Then \(\sigma^*_i\) is a constrained (local-) maximum for \(u_i(\sigma_i, \sigma^*_{-i})\) subject to \(\sum_{p=1}^\rho \sigma_{ip} = 1\) for each \(1\leq i\leq n\); so if \(\sigma^*\) is an interior point of \([0,1]^{n\rho}\) then we may use the Lagrange multipliers method to find a subset of \(\mathbb{R}\) that must include \(\sigma^*\). To set things up, we first define
\[g_i(\sigma_i)=\sum_{p=1}^\rho \sigma_{ip} - 1, \quad 1\leq i\leq n.\]
Then
\[\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial\sigma_i}(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_{-i}^*) \ \big\|\ \frac{\partial g_i}{\partial\sigma_i}(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_{-i}^*), \quad 1\leq i\leq n\]
where
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial \sigma_i}(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})&=
\begin{bmatrix}
\dfrac{\partial u_i}{\partial \sigma_{i1}}(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i}), \ldots, \dfrac{\partial u_i}{\partial \sigma_{i\rho}}(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})
\end{bmatrix}, \\
\frac{\partial g_i}{\partial \sigma_i}(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})&=
\begin{bmatrix}
\dfrac{\partial g_i}{\partial \sigma_{i1}}(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i}), \ldots, \dfrac{\partial g_i}{\partial \sigma_{i\rho}}(\sigma_i, \sigma_{-i})
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{align*}
Hence, there are constants \(\lambda_1,\ldots,\lambda_n\in\mathbb{R}\) such that
\[\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial\sigma_i}(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_{-i}^*) = \lambda_i\frac{\partial g_i}{\partial\sigma_i}(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_{-i}^*), \quad 1\leq i\leq n.\]
As \(\frac{\partial g_i}{\partial\sigma_i} = [1,\ldots,1]\), it follows that
\[\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial\sigma_{is}}(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_{-i}^*) = \frac{\partial u_i}{\partial\sigma_{it}}(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_{-i}^*), \quad 1\leq i\leq n, \ 1\leq s,t\leq \rho.\]
Doing some calculations we get
\[\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial\sigma_{is}}(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_{-i}^*) = \sum_{j=1}^m \dfrac{2\beta_{ijs} Q_j e_{ijs} \sigma^*_{is}\left(\sum_{p=1}^\rho \sum_{r=1}^n e_{rjp}\sigma^*_{rp}\right)-\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{ijp} Q_j e_{ijp} e_{ijs} {\sigma^*_{ip}}^2}{\left(\sum_{p=1}^\rho \sum_{r=1}^n e_{rjp}\sigma^*_{rp}\right)^2}.\]
From now on, we consider the case \(m=1\); so for all \(1\leq s,t\leq \rho\) we must have
\begin{align*}
2\beta_{i1s} Q_1 e_{i1s} \sigma^*_{is}\left(\sum_{p=1}^\rho \sum_{r=1}^n e_{r1p}\sigma^*_{rp}\right) &-\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{i1p} Q_1 e_{ip} e_{i1s} {\sigma^*_{ip}}^2 \\
& = 2\beta_{i1t} Q_j e_{i1t} \sigma^*_{it}\left(\sum_{p=1}^\rho \sum_{r=1}^n e_{r1p}\sigma^*_{rp}\right)-\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{i1p} Q_1 e_{i1p} e_{i1t} {\sigma^*_{ip}}^2.
\end{align*}
Doing some manipulations, we get
\[(e_{i1s}-e_{i1t})\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{i1p} e_{i1p} {\sigma^*_{ip}}^2 = 2(\beta_{i1s} e_{i1s} \sigma^*_{is} - \beta_{i1t} e_{i1t} \sigma^*_{it}) \sum_{p=1}^\rho \sum_{r=1}^n e_{r1p}\sigma^*_{rp}\]
or
\[\frac{\beta_{i1s} e_{i1s} \sigma^*_{is} - \beta_{i1t} e_{i1t} \sigma^*_{it}}{e_{i1s}-e_{i1t}}
=\frac{\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{i1p} e_{i1p} {\sigma^*_{ip}}^2}{2\sum_{p=1}^\rho \sum_{r=1}^n e_{r1p}\sigma^*_{rp}}.\]
As the right hand side does not depend on \(s\) or \(t\), we denote it by \(k_i(\sigma^*)\) and rewrite the above equation as
\[\sigma^*_{is} = \frac{e_{i1s} - e_{i1t}}{\beta_{i1s} e_{i1s}} k_i(\sigma^*) + \frac{\beta_{i1t} e_{i1t}}{\beta_{i1s} e_{i1s}} \sigma^*_{it},\quad 1\leq s,t\leq \rho.\]
Summing on \(s\) from \(1\) to \(\rho\) gives
\[1 = k_i(\sigma^*)\left(\sum_{p = 1}^\rho \frac{e_{i1p} - e_{i1t}}{\beta_{i1p} e_{i1p}}\right) + \sigma^*_{it}\left(\sum_{p = 1}^\rho \frac{\beta_{i1t} e_{i1t}}{\beta_{i1s} e_{i1s}}\right).\]
Setting
\[E_{it} = \sum_{p = 1}^\rho \frac{e_{i1p} - e_{i1t}}{\beta_{i1p} e_{i1p}},\quad B_{it} = \sum_{p = 1}^\rho \frac{\beta_{i1t} e_{i1t}}{\beta_{i1s} e_{i1s}}\]
we may write
\[k_i(\sigma^*) = \frac{1 - \sigma_{it} B_{it}}{E_{it}}\]
and hence
\[\frac{1 - \sigma^*_{is} B_{is}}{E_{is}} = \frac{1 - \sigma^*_{it} B_{it}}{E_{it}},\quad 1\leq s,t\leq \rho.\]
It follows that
\[\sigma^*_{is} = \frac{E_{it} - E_{is}}{E_{it} B_{is}} + \frac{E_{is} B_{it}}{E_{it} B_{is}} \sigma^*_{it}.\]
So we may write each \(\sigma^*_{is}\) in terms of \(\sigma^*_{i1}\) and appropriate constants.
To write the relations in a more compact form, let
\[a_{is} = \frac{E_{i1} - E_{is}}{E_{i1} B_{is}}, \qquad b_{is} = \frac{E_{is} B_{i1}}{E_{i1} B_{is}},\]
hence we may write $\sigma^*_{is} = a_{is} + b_{is}\sigma^*_{i1}$ and
\begin{align*}
\sum_{r=1}^n \sum_{p=1}^\rho e_{r1p} \sigma^*_{rp} &
=\sum_{r=1}^n \sum_{p=1}^\rho \big(a_{rp} e_{r1p} + b_{rp} e_{r1p} \sigma^*_{r1}\big) \\
&
=\left(\sum_{r=1}^n \sum_{p=1}^\rho a_{rp} e_{r1p}\right)
+
\sum_{r=1}^n \left(\sum_{p=1}^\rho b_{rp} e_{r1p}\right) \sigma^*_{r1} \\
& = a + \sum_{r=1}^n b_r\sigma^*_{r1},
\end{align*}
where
\[a = \sum_{r=1}^n \sum_{p=1}^\rho a_{rp} e_{r1p},\qquad b_r = \sum_{p=1}^\rho b_{rp} e_{r1p}, \quad 1\leq r\leq n,\]
so
\begin{align*}
u_i(\sigma^*_i, \sigma^*_{-i}) &= \frac{\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{i1p} Q_1 e_{i1p} {\sigma^*_{ip}}^2}{a + \sum_{r=1}^n b_r\sigma^*_{r1}} \\
&= \frac{\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{i1p} Q_1 e_{i1p} (a_{ip} + b_{ip}\sigma^*_{i1})^2}{a + \sum_{r=1}^n b_r\sigma^*_{r1}}.
\end{align*}
Now, for each $i\in I$, we define function $v_i$ from $[0, 1]^n$ to $\mathbb{R}$ by
\[
v_i(\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_n) = \frac{\sum_{p=1}^\rho \beta_{i1p} Q_1 e_{i1p} (a_{ip} + b_{ip}\tau_i)^2}{a + \sum_{r=1}^n b_r\tau_r}.
\]
Since $(\sigma^*_{11}, \ldots, \sigma^*_{n1})$ locally maximizes $u_i$, we may find it with usual techniques for maximizing $v_i$. As each $\sigma^*_{is}$ can be expressed in terms of $\sigma^*_{i1}$, this gives the whole point $\sigma^*$.
\section{Conclusion}\label{conclusion}
This research captures the competition among firms in a market where firms have to decide on which subset of products to produce with differentiated
products. The object for the firms is to maximize their expected shared surplus. The competition among firms is modeled by a non-cooperative game, called PPM game, where the utilities of agents is measured by their expected shared surplus.
The Lagrange multipliers method is used to compute an interior Nash equilibrium (if there exist any) for a single market segmentation.
Future studies can focus on analyzing Nash equilibrium to predict strategic behavior of firms in more general markets with different markets. The solution concept of $\varepsilon$-Nash equilibrium provides the permission of the unilateral deviation of $\varepsilon$ value which may be useful for using Lagrange multipliers method for finding a mixed Nash equilibrium of a PPM game in which supports of some mixed strategies in equilibrium are singletons.
\ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was partly established during the first author's sabbatical visit at Maastricht University. The authors wish to express their gratitude to Professor Dries Vermeulen, who without his support and guidance this study would not have been possible.
\bibliographystyle{informs2014}
|
\section{Introduction}
Explicit or implicit regularization is a key component for achieving better performance in deep learning.
For instance, adding some regularization on the local sharpness of the loss surface is one common approach to enable the trained model to achieve better performance \citep{hochreiter1997flat,foret2020sharpness,jastrzebski2021}. In the related literature, some recent studies have empirically reported that gradient regularization (GR), i.e., adding penalty of the gradient norm to the original loss, makes the training dynamics reach flat minima and leads to better generalization performance \citep{barrett2020implicit,smith2021origin,zhao22i}. Using only the information of the first-order gradient seems a simple and computationally friendly idea.
Because the first-order gradient is used to optimize the original loss, using its norm is seemingly easier to use than other sharpness penalties based on second-order information such as the Hessian and Fisher information \citep{hochreiter1997flat,jastrzebski2021}.
Despite its simplicity, our understanding of GR has been limited so far in the following ways. First, we need to consider the fact that GR must compute {\it the gradient of the gradient} with respect to the parameter. This type of computation has been investigated in a slightly different context: input-Jacobian regularization, that is, penalizing the gradient with respect to the input dimension to increase robustness against input noise \citep{drucker1992improving,hoffman2019robust}. Some studies proposed the use of double backpropagation (DB) as an efficient algorithm for computing the gradient of the gradient for input-Jacobian regularization, whereas others proposed the use of finite-difference computation \citep{peebles2020hessian,finlay2020scaleable}.
Second, theoretical understanding of GR has been limited. Although empirical studies have confirmed that the GR causes the gradient dynamics to eventually converge to better minima with higher performance, the previous work provides no concrete theoretical evaluation for this result. Third, it remains unclear whether the GR has any potential connection to other regularization methods. Because the finite difference is composed of both gradient ascent and descent steps by definition, we are reminded of some learning algorithms for exploring flat minima such as sharpness-aware minimization (SAM) \citep{foret2020sharpness} and the flooding method \citep{ishida2020we}, which are also composed of ascent and descent steps. Clarifying these points would help to deepen our understanding on efficient regularization methods for deep learning.
In this work, we reveal that GR works efficiently with
a finite-difference computation. This approach has a lower computational cost, and surprisingly achieves better generalization performance than the other computation methods.
We present three main contributions to deepen our understanding of GR:
\begin{itemize}
\item We demonstrate some advantages to using the finite-difference computation. We give a brief estimation of the computational costs of finite difference and DB in a deep neural network and show that the finite difference is more efficient than DB (Section \ref{Sec3_2fin}).
We find that a so-called forward finite difference leads to better generalization than a backward one and DB (Section \ref{Sec3_3}).
Learning with forward finite-difference GR requires two gradients of the loss function, gradient ascent and descent. A relatively large ascent step improves the generalization.
\item We give a theoretical analysis of the performance improvement obtained by GR.
we analyze the selection of global minima in a diagonal linear network (DLN), which is a theoretically solvable model. We prove that GR has an implicit bias for selecting desirable solutions in the so-called rich regime \citep{woodworth2020kernel} which would potentially lead to better generalization (Section \ref{Sec4_2f}). This implicit bias is strengthened when we use forward finite-difference GR with an increasing ascent step size. In contrast, it is weaken for a backward finite difference, i.e., a negative ascent step.
\item Finite-difference GR is also closely related to other learning methods composed of both gradient ascent and descent, that is, SAM and the flooding method.
In particular, we reveal that the flooding method performs finite-difference GR in an implicit way (Section \ref{Sec5_2}).
\end{itemize}
Thus, this work gives a comprehensive perspective on GR for both practical and theoretical understanding.
\section{Related Work}
\citet{barrett2020implicit} and \citet{smith2021origin} investigated explicit and implicit GR in deep learning. They found that the discrete-time update of the usual gradient descent implicitly regularizes the gradient norm when its dynamics are mapped to the continual-time counterpart. This is referred to as implicit GR.
They also investigated explicit GR, i.e., adding a GR term explicitly to the original loss, and reported that it improved generalization performance even further.
\citet{barrett2020implicit} characterized GR as the slope of the loss surface and showed that a low GR (gentle slope) prefers flat regions of the surface.
Recently, \citet{zhao22i} independently proposed a similar but different gradient norm regularization, that is, explicitly adding a non-squared L2 norm of the gradient to the original loss.
They used a forward finite-difference computation, but its superiority to other computation methods remains unconfirmed.
The implementation of GR has not been discussed in much detail in the literature. In general, to compute the gradient of the gradient,
there are two well-known computational methods: DB and finite difference.
Some previous studies applied DB to the regularization of an information matrix \citep{jastrzebski2021} and input-Jacobian regularization, i.e., adding the L2 norm of the derivative with respect to the input dimension \citep{drucker1992improving,hoffman2019robust}. Others have used the finite-difference computation for Hessian regularization \citep{peebles2020hessian} and
input-Jacobian regularization \citep{finlay2020scaleable}.
Here, we apply the finite-difference computation to GR and present some evidence that the finite-difference computation outperforms DB computation with respect to computational costs and generalization performance.
In Section 4, we give a theoretical analysis of learning with GR in {\it diagonal linear networks} (DLNs) \citep{woodworth2020kernel}.
The characteristic property of this solvable model
is that we can evaluate the implicit bias of learning algorithms \citep{nacson2022implicit,pesme2021implicit}. Our analysis includes the analysis of SAM in DLN as a special case \citep{andriushchenko2022towards}. In contrast to previous work, we evaluate another lower-order term, and this enables us to show that forward finite-difference GR selects global minima in the so-called rich regime.
\section{Gradient Regularization}
\label{sec3}
We consider GR \citep{barrett2020implicit,smith2021origin}, wherein the squared L2 norm of the gradient is explicitly added to the original loss $\mathcal{L}(\theta)$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathcal{L}}(\theta) = \mathcal{L}(\theta) + \frac{\gamma}{2} R(\theta), \ \ R(\theta) = \|\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta) \|^2, \label{eq20:0324}
\end{equation}
where $\| \cdot\|$ denotes the Euclidean norm and $\gamma>0$ is a constant regularization coefficient.
We abbreviate the derivative with respect to the parameters $\nabla_\theta$ by $\nabla$. Its gradient descent is given by
\begin{equation}
\theta_{t+1} =\theta_t - \eta \nabla \tilde{\mathcal{L}}(\theta_t) \ \ \label{eq2}
\end{equation}
for time step $t=0,1,...$ and learning rate $\eta>0$. While previous studies have reported that explicitly adding a GR term empirically improves generalization performance, its algorithms and implementations have not been discussed in much detail.
\subsection{Algorithms}
\noindent
To optimize the loss function with GR (\ref{eq20:0324}) using a gradient method, we need to compute the gradient of the gradient, i.e., $\nabla R(\theta)$.
As is well studied in input-Jacobian regularization \citep{drucker1992improving,hoffman2019robust,finlay2020scaleable}, there are two main approaches to computing the gradient of the gradient.
\noindent
{\bf Finite difference: }
The finite-difference method approximates a derivative by a finite step. In the case of GR, we have
$\nabla R(\theta_t)/2 = (\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta') -\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t))/\varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)$
with $\theta'= \theta_t + \varepsilon \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)$ for a constant $\varepsilon>0$.
The final term is expressed in Landau notation and is neglected in the computation. We update the GR term by
\begin{equation}
\Delta R_F(\varepsilon) = \frac{\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t + \varepsilon \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)) -\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)}{\varepsilon} \quad (\text{F-GR}). \label{eq18:0428}
\end{equation}
We refer to this gradient as {\it Forward finite-difference GR (F-GR)}. Because the gradient $\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)$ is computed for the original loss, the finite difference (\ref{eq18:0428}) requires only one additional gradient computation $\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta')$. The order of the computation time is only double that of the usual gradient descent.
The finite-difference method also has a backward computation:
\begin{equation}
\Delta R_B(\varepsilon) = \frac{\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)- \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t - \varepsilon \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)) }{\varepsilon} \quad (\text{B-GR}). \label{eq18:0428B}
\end{equation}
If we allow a negative step size, $\Delta R_B$ corresponds to $\Delta R_F$ through $\Delta R_B (\varepsilon)= \Delta R_F (-\varepsilon)$.
For a sufficiently small $\varepsilon$, both finite-difference GRs yield the same original gradient $\nabla R(\theta)$ if we can neglect any numerical instability caused by the limit.
The finite-difference method has been used in the literature for the optimization of neural networks, especially for Hessian-based techniques \citep{bishop2006pattern,peebles2020hessian}. When we need a more precise $\nabla R$, we can use a higher-order approximation, e.g., the centered
finite difference, but this requires additional gradient computations, and hence we focus on the first-order finite difference.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.98\textwidth]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{Finite-difference computation is more efficient than DB computation in wall time. (a) Wall time required for learning with GR in one epoch. For the ResNet, we used ResNet-$\{18,34,50,101,152\}$.
(b)Training dynamics in ResNet-18 on CIFAR-10. Learning with F-GR is much faster in wall time.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
{\bf Double Backpropagation: } The other approach is to apply the automatic differentiation directly to the GR term, i.e., $\nabla R$. For example, its PyTorch implementation is quite straightforward, as shown in Section \ref{secDB} of the Appendices. This approach is referred to as DB, which was originally developed for input-Jacobian regularization \citep{drucker1992improving}.
We explain more details on the DB computation and its computational graph in Section \ref{Sec3_2fin}.
DB, in effect, corresponds to computing the following Hessian-vector product:
\begin{equation}
\Delta R_{DB} = H(\theta_t) \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t), \label{eq5:0918}
\end{equation}
where $H(\theta)=\nabla \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta)$.
The following representation may give us an intuition about the difference between the finite difference and DB alternatives.
From the mean value theorem, F-GR is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\Delta R_F(\varepsilon) = \frac{1}{\varepsilon}\int_0^\varepsilon ds H(\theta_t+ s \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t) ) \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t). \label{eq6:0918}
\end{equation}
We can interpret the finite difference as taking an average of the curvature (Hessian) along the line of gradient update. For $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$, this reduces to $ \Delta R_{DB}$.
Note that the difference among these algorithms appears in non-linear models. For a naive linear model $X \theta$, the squared error loss has a constant Hessian $XX^\top$. Therefore, all of $\Delta R$ have the same update. We analyze
a simple network model with non-linearity on the parameters in Section \ref{sec4_fin} and reveal the difference of implicit biases.
\subsection{Computational Cost}
\label{Sec3_2fin}
We clarify the computational efficiencies of each algorithm of GR in deep networks.
First, we give a rough estimation of the computational cost by counting the number of matrix multiplication required to compute $\nabla \tilde{\mathcal{L}}$. Consider an $L$-layer fully connected neural network with a linear output layer: $A_{l}=\phi (U_{l})$, $U_{l}= W_{l} A_{l-1}$ for $l=1,...,L$. Note that $A_l$ denotes a batch of activation and $W_{l} A_{l-1}$ requires a matrix multiplication.
We denote the element-wise activation function as $\phi(\cdot)$ and weight matrix as $W_{l}$. For simplicity, we neglect the bias terms.
The number of matrix multiplications required to compute $\nabla \tilde{\mathcal{L}}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
N_{mul} \sim 6L \ (\text{for F-GR}), \ \ 9L \ (\text{for DB}), \label{eq7:0926}
\end{equation}
where $\sim$ hides an uninteresting constant shift independent of the depth.
One can evaluate $N_{mul}$ straightforwardly from the computational graph (Figure 2), originally developed for the DB computation of input-Jacobian regularization \citep{drucker1992improving}. In brief, the original gradient $\nabla \mathcal{L}$, that is,
the backpropagation on the forward pass $\{A_0 \rightarrow A_1 \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow A_L \}$, requires $3L$ matrix multiplications: $L$ for the forward pass, $L$ for backward pass $B_{l} = \phi'(U_{l}) \circ (W_{l+1}^\top B_{l+1})$, and $L$ for gradient $G_l:=\partial \mathcal{L}/\partial W_l = B_l A_{l-1}^\top$.
Because F-GR is composed of both gradient ascent and descent steps, we eventually need $6L$. In contrast, for learning using the DB of GR, we need $3L$ for $\nabla \mathcal{L}$ and additional $6L$ for the GR term. The GR term requires a forward pass of composed of $A_l$, $B_l$, and $G_l$ obtained in the gradient computation of $\nabla \mathcal{L}$. Note that the upper part $\{A_0 \rightarrow A_1 \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow B_L \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow B_1 \}$ is well known as the DB of input-Jacobian regularization. As pointed out in \citet{drucker1992improving}, the computation of $\nabla B_{1}$ is equivalent to treating the upper part of the graph as the forward pass and applying backpropagation. It requires $2L$ multiplications. In our GR case, we have additional $L$ multiplications due to $G_l$. Because the backward pass doubles the number of required multiplications, we eventually need $2 \times (2L+L)=6L$ multiplication.
Further details are given in Section \ref{secDB}.
The results of numerical experiments shown in Figure \ref{fig1} confirm the superiority of finite-difference GR in typical experimental settings. We trained deep neural networks using an NVIDIA A100 GPU for this experiment. All experiments were implemented by PyTorch. We summarize the pseudo code and implementation of GR and present the detailed settings of all experiments in Section C.
Figure 1(a) shows the wall time required for one epoch of training with stochastic gradient descent (SGD) and the objective function (\ref{eq20:0324}). We trained various multi-layer perceptrons (MLPs) and residual neural networks (ResNets) with different depths.
The wall time increased almost linearly as the depth increased. The slope of the line is different for F-GR and DB, and F-GR was faster. This observation is consistent with the number of multiplications (\ref{eq7:0926}). In particular, in ResNet, one of the most typical deep neural networks, learning with finite-difference GR was more than twice as fast as learning with DB. Figure 1(b) confirms that F-GR has fast convergence in ResNet-18 on CIFAR-10. In Figure \ref{figS1}, we also show the convergence measured by the training loss and time steps. All of them showed better convergence for the finite difference.
Note that the finite difference is also better to use from the perspective of memory efficiency. This is because DB requires all of the $\{A_l,B_l,G_l\}$ to be retained for the forward pass, which occupies more memory.
It is also noteworthy that in general, it is difficult for theory to completely predict the realistic computational time required because it could heavily depend on the hardware and the implementation framework and does not necessarily correlate well with
the number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) \citep{dehghani2021efficiency}.
Our result suggests that at least the number of matrix multiplication explains well the superiority of the finite-difference approach in typical settings.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-15pt}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{DAG_ver10.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Computational graph of DB. Each node with an incoming solid arrow requires one matrix multiplication for the forward pass.}
\vspace{-5pt}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig3_all.pdf}
\caption{Grid search on learning with different GR algorithms shows the superiority of F-GR and that a relatively large $\varepsilon$ achieves a high test accuracy.
The color bar shows the average test accuracy over 5 trials. Gray dashed lines indicate $\gamma = \varepsilon$.}
\vspace{-5pt}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Generalization performance}
\label{Sec3_3}
Here, we show that the superiority of finite-difference computation over DB also appears in the eventual performance of trained models.
Figure \ref{fig3} shows the test accuracy of a 4-layer MLP and ResNet-18 trained by using SGD with GR on CIFAR-10. We trained the models in an exhaustive manner with various values for $\gamma$ and $\varepsilon$ for each algorithm of the GR.
For learning with F-GR, the model achieved the highest accuracy on relatively large ascent steps ($\varepsilon \sim 0.1$). In contrast, learning with B-GR showed a rapid decrease of the performance as the step size $\varepsilon$ increased.
The highest average test accuracy of F-GR was better than those of B-GR and DB. The best test accuracy was
$(\text{F-GR},\text{B-GR},\text{DB})=(58.8,58.6,57.9)$ for MLP and $(87.4,86.6,86.6)$ for ResNet-18. We also confirmed that the same tendencies appeared in the grid search of ResNet-34 on CIFAR-100 (Figure S.2). Moreover, we confirmed that F-GR performed better than B-GR and DB in a more realistic training of a wide residual network (WRN-28-10) on CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 with/without data augmentation (Table \ref{tabS1}).
It is noteworthy that the best accuracy of F-GR was obtained close to the line of $\gamma = \varepsilon$. This line is closely related to SAM algorithm. We explain more details in Section \ref{Sec5_1}. We also observed that when the ascent step was too small (e.g., $\varepsilon \lesssim 10^{-4}$),
numerical instability sometime appeared in the calculation of the finite difference $\Delta R$.
Overall, the experiments suggest that F-GR with a large ascent step is better to use for achieving higher generalization performance.
\section{Theoretical analysis of implicit bias}
\label{sec4_fin}
Although previous work and our experiments in Section \ref{Sec3_3} indicate improvements of prediction performance caused by GR, theoretical understanding of this phenomenon remains limited. Because the gradient norm itself eventually becomes zero after the model achieves a zero training loss, it seems challenging to distinguish the generalization capacity by simply observing the value of the gradient norm after training. In addition, our experiments clarified that the performance also depends on the choice of the algorithm and revealed that the situation is complicated. To attack this problem, we consider a solvable model and reveal that GR methods actually contribute to the selection of global minima and the eventual performance.
\subsection{Diagonal Linear Network}
A DLN is a solvable model proposed by \citet{woodworth2020kernel}. It is a linear transformation of input $x \in \mathbb{R}^d$ defined as $\langle \beta, x \rangle$ where $\beta$ is parameterized by
$\beta = w_+^2 -w_-^2$ with $w=(w_+,w_-) \in \mathbb{R}^{2d}$. Here, the square of the vector is an element-wise square operation. Suppose we have $n$ training samples $(x_i,y_i)$ ($i=1,...,n$).
The training loss is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}(w)=\frac{1}{4 n} \sum_{i=1}^n\left(\left\langle w_{+}^2-w_{-}^2, x_i\right\rangle-y_i\right)^2. \label{eq8:0927}
\end{equation}
Consider continual-time training dynamics $dw/dt = -\nabla \mathcal{L}$. We set an initialization $w_{+}(t=0)=w_{-}(t=0)=\alpha_0$ whose entries are non-zero. We define a data matrix $X$ whose $i$-th row is given by $x_i$.
\citet{woodworth2020kernel} found that interpolation solutions of usual gradient descent are given by
\begin{equation}
\beta_{\infty}(\alpha)=\underset{\beta \in \mathbb{R}^d \text { s.t. } X \beta=y}{\arg \min } \phi_\alpha(\beta)
\end{equation}
with $\alpha = \alpha_0$.
The potential function $\phi_\alpha$ is given by $\phi_\alpha(\beta)=\sum_{i=1}^d \alpha_i^2 q\left(\beta_i / \alpha_i^2\right)$ with $q(z)=2-\sqrt{4+z^2}+z \operatorname{arcsinh}(z / 2)$.
For a larger scale of initialization $\alpha$, this potential function becomes closer to L2 regularization as $\alpha_i^2 q(\beta/\alpha_i^2) \sim |\beta|^2$, which corresponds to the L2 min-norm solution of the lazy regime \citep{chizat2019lazy}. In contrast,
for a smaller scale of initialization $\alpha$, it becomes closer to L1 regularization as $\alpha_i^2 q(\beta/\alpha_i^2) \sim |\beta|$. In this way, we can observe a one-parameter interpolation between L1 and L2 implicit biases.
Deep neural networks in practice acquire rich features depending on data structure and are believed to be beyond the lazy regime. Thus, obtaining an L1 solution by setting small $\alpha$ is referred to as the {\it rich regime} and desirable. Previous work has revealed that effective values of $\alpha$ decreases by
a larger learning rate in the discrete update \citep{nacson2022implicit}, SGD \citep{pesme2021implicit}, and SAM update \citep{andriushchenko2022towards}. These learning methods have an implicit bias that chooses the L1 sparse solution in the rich regime.
\subsection{Implicit Bias of GR}
\label{Sec4_2f}
Now,
consider gradient descent with F-GR $dw/dt = - \nabla \mathcal{L}(w) - \gamma \Delta R_F(w).$
We find that the GR has implicit bias for the rich regime, and moreover, the strength of the bias depends on the ascent step size.
\begin{thm}
Assume that (i) the gradient dynamics converges to the interpolation solution satisfying $X\beta=y$, (ii) L2 norm of the parameter $\|w(t)\|$ has a constant upper independent of $\gamma$ and $\varepsilon$, (iii) for sufficiently small $\gamma$ and $\varepsilon$, the integral of the training loss, i.e., $\int_0^\infty \mathcal{L}(s) ds$, has a constant upper (lower, respectively) bound $\overline{R}$ ($\underline{R}$) independent of $\gamma$ and $\varepsilon$. Then, for sufficiently small $\gamma$ and $\varepsilon$, interpolation solutions are given by $\beta_{\infty}(\alpha_{F\text{-}GR})$ with
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{F\text{-}GR} \leq \alpha_0 \circ \exp(- \gamma \varepsilon c^* + \mathcal{O}(\gamma^2) + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2) ). \label{eq10:0927}
\end{equation}
The exponent $c^*$ is a non-negative constant vector given by
\begin{equation}
c^*=\frac{1}{2n^2}(X^\top (X\beta(t=0)-y))^2. \label{eq5:0901}
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
Note that the inequality is element-wise. The proof is given in Section \ref{SecA1}. Technically speaking,
learning with F-GR requires to evaluate a novel $c^*$ term, which has not appeared in the analyses of previous studies.
The assumptions seem rational in the following sense. First, assumption (i) is common in the previous studies on DLNs. Second, \citet{nacson2022implicit} recently reported that
we can obtain interpolation solutions with a smaller parameter norm $\|w(t)\|$ using the discrete update with a larger learning rate. Because the interpolation solutions of gradient descent are also those of our learning with GR, assumption (ii) seems rational.
Assumption (iii) requires that the convergence speed of the dynamics is not decreased too much by adding the GR term.
As a side note, we can replace assumption (iii) with the positive definiteness of a certain matrix (assumption \ref{As32}). This is seemingly rather technical, but related to a sufficient condition that the dynamics converge to the global minima. See Section \ref{SecA2} for details.
This theorem reveals that GR has an implicit bias to select the L1 solution, that is, the rich regime because $\alpha$ is always smaller than $\alpha_0$. As the ascent step increases, we have an exponentially smaller upper bound and the implicit bias to L1 solution will become stronger.
We confirm this dependence of solutions on the ascent step in numerical experiments (Figure 4).
As in previous work, we trained DLNs on the synthetic data of a sparse regression problem, where $x_i \sim \mathcal{N}(\mu 1,\sigma^2 I)$ and $y_i \sim \mathcal{N}\left(\left\langle \beta^*, x_i\right \rangle, 0.01\right)$, and where $\beta^*$ is $k^*$-sparse with non-zero entries equal to $1/\sqrt{k^*}$ ($d=100$ and $n=50$).
Following \cite{nacson2022implicit}, we chose $\mu=\sigma^2=5$, where the parameter norm $a(t)$ is suppressed and assumption (ii) ix expected to hold. As the ascent step increases, models trained by F-GR obtain sparser solutions (Figure 4(a)) and better generalization performance (Figure 4(b)). The dashed lines show the results of gradient descent without GR. This result is consistent with our experiments of in more realistic settings (Figure 3) where a relatively large $\varepsilon$ achieves the best performance. In Figure 4(c), we also present the largest eigenvalue of the Hessian (\ref{S47:0928}), computed after training. As the ascent step size increases, F-GR chooses flatter minima. This is also consistent with empirical observations in previous studies on GR.
Note that B-GR can potentially make the bound looser as the step size $\varepsilon$ increases since B-GR is equivalent to F-GR with $-\varepsilon$. Actually, we can immediately find a lower bound $\alpha_{B\text{-}GR} \gtrsim C \circ \exp(\gamma \varepsilon c^*)$ for a positive constant vector $C$, as is remarked in Section \ref{SecA1}.
The results of numerical experiments on DLNs shown in Figure \ref{figS3} confirm that learning with F-GR achieved better generalization performance than B-GR.
While Theorem 4.1 gives us insight into the finite-difference GR, the upper bound converges to $\alpha_0$ for the DB limit ($\varepsilon \rightarrow 0^+$) and becomes meaningless.
Fortunately, we can construct an upper bound applicable to the DB limit.
\begin{prop}
Under the same assumptions as in Theorem 4.1, for sufficiently small $\varepsilon$ and $\gamma$,
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{F\text{-}GR} \leq \alpha_0 \circ \exp (-\gamma c +\mathcal{O}(\gamma^2)+ \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2) ), \label{eq12:0929}
\end{equation}
where the exponent $c$ is a non-negative variable given by $c = n^{-2} \int_0^\infty (X^\top (X\beta(s)-y))^2 ds$.
\end{prop}
Its derivation is given in Section \ref{Sec_A3}.
One can regard this proposition as a minor extension of Theorem 1 in \citet{andriushchenko2022towards}, which has investigated $\gamma = \varepsilon$. This setting has a special meaning as we mention in Section \ref{Sec5_1}.
From the proposition, one can see that the DB limit still has the implicit bias to select the rich regime. This is consistent with the numerical experiments in Figure 4 where the limit of small $\varepsilon$ achieves slightly better and sparser solutions than GD without GR. Although the bound (\ref{eq12:0929}) is informative, it is difficult to evaluate a concrete value of $c$. As a side note, we can make a bound of the average over entries, that is, $ \sum_{i=1}^d c_i/d \geq (4n/d) \lambda_{min}(XX^\top) \underbar{R}$. See Section \ref{Sec_A3} for details.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig4_fin.pdf}
\caption{Results of training of DLNs using gradient descent with F-GR ($\gamma=0.02$). (a) L1 norm of the solutions, (b) test loss, and (c) the largest eigenvalue of the Hessian of the training loss. }
\vspace{-5pt}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\section{GR in gradient-ascent-and-descent learning}
We have revealed that learning with finite-difference GR, F-GR in particular, improves performance.
We recall that the GR is composed of both gradient ascent and descent steps. This computation makes the GR essentially related to two other learning methods similarly composed of both gradient ascent and descent steps:
the SAM algorithm and the flooding method.
\subsection{Connection with SAM}
\label{Sec5_1}
The SAM algorithm was derived from the minimization of a surrogate loss $\max_{\|\varepsilon \| \leq \rho} \mathcal{L}(\theta+ \varepsilon)$ for a fixed $\rho>0$, and has achieved the highest performance in various models \citep{foret2020sharpness}. After some heuristic approximations,
its update rule reduces to iterative gradient ascent and descent steps: $\theta_{t+1}=\theta_t - \eta \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta')$ with $\theta' = \theta_t + \varepsilon_t \nabla \mathcal{L} (\theta_t) $ and $ \varepsilon_t =\rho/\|\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)\|$.
Under a specific condition, the SAM update can be seen as gradient descent with F-GR. Let us consider time-dependent regularization coefficient $\gamma_t$ and ascent step $\varepsilon_t$. Then, for $\gamma_t = \varepsilon_t$, the gradient descent with F-GR becomes equivalent to the SAM update:
\begin{equation}
\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta) + \frac{\gamma_t}{\varepsilon_t} ( \nabla\mathcal{L}(\theta') - \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta) ) = \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta').
\end{equation}
A similar equivalence has been pointed out in \citet{zhao22i} which supposes a non-squared gradient norm and $ \varepsilon_t =\rho/\|\nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)\|$ naturally appears.
Let us focus on the SAM update without the gradient normalization for simplicity, that is, $\varepsilon_t = \rho$.
This simplified SAM update was analyzed on DLNs in \citet{andriushchenko2022towards}. We can recover the SAM case by setting a sufficiently small $\gamma = \varepsilon$ in Proposition 4.2. Although it will be curious to identify any optimal setting of ($\gamma, \varepsilon$), our analysis is limited to the range of the first-order Taylor expansion and characterizing any optimal setting seems beyond the scope of our analysis. In Figure 3, we empirically observed the optimal setting for generalization was very close to or just on the line $\gamma = \varepsilon$. In contrast, our Figures 4, \ref{figS3} and the previous study \citet{zhao22i} demonstrated that the optimal setting was not necessarily on $\gamma = \varepsilon$, and thus combining the ascent and descent steps would be still promising.
\subsection{Flooding performs GR in an implicit way}
\label{Sec5_2}
The flooding method \citep{ishida2020we} is another learning algorithm composed of both gradient ascent and descent steps.
Its update rule is given by
\begin{align}
\theta_{t+1} = \theta_t - \eta \mathrm{Sign}(\mathcal{L}-b) \nabla \mathcal{L}
\end{align}
for a constant $b>0$, referred to as the flood level. When the training loss becomes lower than flood level $b$, the sign of the gradient is flipped and the parameter is updated by gradient ascent. Therefore, the flooding causes the training dynamics to continue to wander around $\mathcal{L}(\theta) \sim b$, and its gradient continues to take a non-zero value.
This would seem a kind of early stopping, but previous work empirically demonstrates that flooding performs better than naive early stopping and finds flat minima.
For simplicity, let us focus on the gradient descent for a full batch. The following theorem clarifies a hidden mechanism of flooding.
\begin{thm}
Consider the time step $t$ satisfying $L(\theta_{t})<b$ and $L(\theta_{t+1})>b$. Then, the flooding update from $\theta_t$ to $\theta_{t+2}$ is equivalent to the gradient of the F-GR with $\varepsilon=\gamma=\eta$:
\begin{align}
\theta_{t+2} &= \theta_t - \eta^2 \frac{ \nabla \mathcal{L}( \theta_t + \eta \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)) - \nabla \mathcal{L}(\theta_t)}{\eta}.
\end{align}
Similarly, at time steps $L(\theta_{t})>b$ and $L(\theta_{t+1})<b$, the flooding update is equivalent to the gradient of the B-GR.
\end{thm}
Although its derivation is quite straightforward (see Section \ref{Sec_B}), this essential connection between finite-difference GR and flooding has been missed in the literature.
\citet{ishida2020we} conjectured that flooding causes a random walk on the loss surface and this would contribute to the search for flat minima in some ways. Our result implies that the dynamics of flooding are not necessarily random and it can actively search the loss surface in a direction that decreases the GR. This is consistent with the observations that the usual gradient descent with GR finds flat minima \citep{barrett2020implicit,zhao22i}.
Note that the ascent step is given by the learning rate $\eta$, and $\eta$ is usually decayed in the training.
This implies that because the ascent step size is relatively small, the implicit B-GR in the flooding update would not make the generalization performance much worse.
Figure \ref{fig6} empirically confirms that the gradient norm $R(\theta)$ is decreased by the flooding method. To obtain the results in this figure, we trained ResNet-18 on CIFAR-10 by using flooding.
Figure 5(a) shows that at the beginning of the training, the training loss decreases in the usual way because the loss is far above flood level $b$. Around the 10th epoch, the loss value becomes sufficiently close to the flood level for the decrease in the loss to slow. Then, the flooding update becomes dominant in the dynamics the gradient norm begins to decrease. Figure 5(b) demonstrates that the gradient norm of the trained model decreases as the initial learning rate increases. This is consistent with Theorem 5.1 because the theorem claims that the larger learning rate induces the larger regularization coefficient of the GR $\gamma=\eta$. In contrast, naive SGD training without flooding always reaches an almost zero gradient norm regardless of the learning rate. Thus, the change in the gradient norm depending on the learning rate is specific to flooding and implies that it implicitly performs GR.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.82\textwidth]{Fig6.pdf}
\caption{Flooding decreases the gradient norm, as expected by theory. (a) Training dynamics of flooding with $b=0.05$. (b) Test accuracy and gradient norm after the training. }
\vspace{-5pt}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
This work presented novel practical and theoretical insights into GR. The finite-difference computation is effective in the sense of both reducing computational cost and improving performance. Theoretical analysis supports the empirical observation that
the forward difference computation has an implicit bias that chooses potentially better minima depending on the size of the ascent step.
Because deep learning requires large-scale models, it would be reasonable to use learning methods only composed of first-order descent or ascent gradients. The current work suggests that the F-GR is a promising direction for further investigation and could be extended for our understanding and practical usage of gradient-based regularization.
We suggest several potentially interesting research directions.
From a broader perspective, we may regard finite-difference GR, SAM, and flooding as a single learning framework composed of iterative gradient ascent and descent steps. It would be interesting to investigate if there is optimal combination of these steps for further improving performance. As our experiments suggest, only using the gradient descent or ascent does not necessarily achieve the best performance, and a combination of them seems to be the best approach. Similar results were empirically observed in other gradient-based regularization techniques \citep{zhao22i,zhuang2022surrogate}. Related to the combination between the gradient descent and ascent,
although we fixed the ascent step size as a constant, a step size decay or any scheduling could enhance the performance further. For instance, \citet{zhuang2022surrogate} used a time-step dependent ascent step to achieve high prediction performance for SAM. These advanced topics could be interesting for developing further efficient algorithms or regularization methods.
It will also be interesting to explore any theoretical clarification beyond the scope of DLNs. Although a series of analyses in DLNs enable us to explore the implicit bias for selecting global minima, it assumes global convergence and avoids an explicit evaluation of convergence dynamics.
Thus, it would be informative to explore the convergence rate or escape from local minima in other solvable models or a more general formulation if possible.
Constructing generalization bounds would also be an interesting direction. Some theoretical work has proved that regularizing first-order derivatives of the network output control the generalization capacity \citep{ma2021linear}, and such derivatives are included in the gradient norm as a part.
We expect that the current work will serve as a foundation for further developing and understanding regularization methods in deep learning.
|
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem1} }
Every first-order formula is logically equivalent to some formula in prenex normal form. In our study, we are interested in the case where there is only one variable $x$ which is not restricted by any quantifier. For convenience, we denote the free variable $x$ as $y_0$ and other restricted variables are denoted as $y_1, y_2,\cdots,y_T$. We assume its prenex normal form has the following formulation.
\begin{align}\label{genePNFapp}
P(x) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[ \left(\overset{\bar{M}} {\underset{\bar{m}=1}{\wedge}} \hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}}(y_{i(m,\bar{m})})\right)\wedge \left(\overset{M^\prime} {\underset{m^\prime=1}{\wedge}} \hat{W}^m_{m^\prime}(y_{n(m,m^\prime)},y_{j(m,m^\prime)})\right)\wedge Q^m\right]
\end{align}
Each $\hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}}$ is some unary predicate and each $\hat{W}^m_{m^\prime}$ is some binary predicate \textbf{but not tautology}.$Q^m$ is some propositional constant. $i(m,\bar{m}),n(m,m^\prime)$ and $j(m,m^\prime)$are three index mapping functions, which map $(m,\bar{m})$ or $(m,{m}^\prime)$ to some value in $\{0, 1, 2, \cdot,T\}$. This means
$y_{i(m,\bar{m})},y_{n(m,m^\prime)},y_{j(m,m^\prime)}\in \{y_0, y_1,...,y_T\}$. Moreover, we assume $n(m,m^\prime) < j(m,m^\prime)$.
\subsubsection{Transformation}
\begin{definition}[\textbf{Transformation A}]
Transformation A is defined as the transformation from \ref{genePNFapp} to \ref{PNFafterapp}.
\end{definition}
\begin{itemize}
\item[Step 1] For each $m$, if there exists $\{\bar{m}_1, \bar{m}_2, \cdots, \bar{m}_q\}$ such that
$i(m,\bar{m}_1)=i(m,\bar{m}_2)=\cdots=i(m,\bar{m}_q)=t$, we conduct the conjunction on the corresponding $\hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}_1},\hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}_2},\cdots, \hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}_q}$ and derive the following new predicate $P^m_{t}$
\begin{align}\label{step1}
P^m_{t}(y_t)=\hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}_1}(y_t)\wedge \hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}_2}(y_t)\wedge\cdots\wedge \hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}_q}(y_t)
\end{align}
Then the \ref{genePNFapp} can be transformed into the following formulation
\begin{align}\label{step1}
P(x) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in \widetilde{\mathcal{N}}_m}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{M\prime} {\underset{m\prime=1}{\wedge}} \hat{W}^m_{m^\prime}(y_{n(m,m^\prime)},y_{j(m,m^\prime)})\right)\wedge Q^m\right],
\end{align}
where $\widetilde{\mathcal{N}}^m$ is the set of indices and $\widetilde{\mathcal{N}}^m \subset \{1,2,\cdots, T\}$
\item[Step 2] For each $m$, if there exists $(m^\prime_1, m^\prime_2, \cdots, m^\prime_q)$ such that $n(m,m^\prime_1)=n(m,m^\prime_2)=\cdots=n(m,m^\prime_q)=t_c$ and $j(m,m^\prime_1)=j(m,m^\prime_2)=\cdots=j(m,m^\prime_q)=t_p$, we conduct the conjunction on the corresponding $\hat{W}^m_{m^\prime_1}, \hat{W}^m_{m^\prime_2},\cdots, \hat{W}^m_{m^\prime_q}$ and derive the following new predicate $W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}$
\begin{align}
W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})=\hat{W}^m_{m^\prime_1}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\wedge \hat{W}^m_{m^\prime_2}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\wedge \cdots \wedge \hat{W}^m_{m^\prime_q}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})
\end{align}
After this transformation, \ref{step1} has the following formulation
\begin{align}\label{PNFmiddleapp}
P(x) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in \widetilde{\mathcal{N}}^m}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_x)\in \hat{\mathcal{E}}^m}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m\right],
\end{align}
where $\hat{\mathcal{E}}^m$ is the set of index pairs $(t_p,t_c)$.
\item[Step 3] We will move to a further discussion on the set $\hat{\mathcal{E}}^m$. We can consider $(t_p,t_c)$ as an edge which connects node $t_p$ and node $t_c$, we denote the set of all the nodes which appear in the edge set $\hat{\mathcal{E}}^m$ is $\hat{\mathcal{N}}^m$.
If the index "0", which corresponds to the free variable $y_0$, is not included in $\hat{\mathcal{N}}^m$, we need to add an edge $(0,t_{min})$ to the $\hat{\mathcal{E}}^m$, where $t_{min}$ is the smallest index in $\hat{\mathcal{N}}^m$.
For all the nodes $\{t_1, t_2, t_3, \cdots, t_s\}$ which are in $\widetilde{\mathcal{N}}^m$ but not in $\hat{\mathcal{N}}^m\cup \{0\}$, we need to add the edges $\{(0,t_1), (0,t_2), (0,t_3), \cdots, (0,t_s)\}$
to $\hat{\mathcal{E}}^m$. We can derive the following edge set and node set
\begin{align*}
{\widetilde{\mathcal{E}}^m}&=\hat{\mathcal{E}}^m\cup \{(0,t_{min})\}\cup \{(0,t_1), (0,t_2), (0,t_3), \cdots, (0,t_s)\}\\
{\mathcal{N}^m}&=\hat{\mathcal{N}}^m \cup\{0\}\cup \{t_1, t_2, t_3, \cdots, t_s\}
\end{align*}
After this, we introduce the third step of \textbf{Transformation A}. We can derive the following formulation which is logical equivalent to \ref{PNFmiddleapp}.
\begin{align}\label{PNFafterapp}
P(x) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}}\left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in {\mathcal{N}^m}}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in \widetilde{\mathcal{E}}^m}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m \right]
\end{align}
where $W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}\equiv 1$ for all the $(t_p,t_c)\in {\widetilde{\mathcal{E}}^m} \backslash \hat{\mathcal{E}}^m$ and $P^m_{t}\equiv 1 $ for all $t \in {\mathcal{N}^m} \backslash \hat{\mathcal{N}}^m$
\end{itemize}
\textbf{Transformation A} : Transformation from \ref{genePNFapp} to \ref{PNFafterapp} preserves the \textbf{Logically Equivalence}.
With these node set ${\mathcal{N}}^m$ and edge set ${\widetilde{\mathcal{E}}}^m$, we can derive a graph $\widetilde{G}^m=({\mathcal{N}}^m,{\widetilde{\mathcal{E}}}^m)$ for each $m$. If each graph ${G}^m$ is composed of several trees, we say the predicate is \textbf{Tree-structured}.
\begin{definition}[\textbf{Transformation B}]
Transformation B is defined as the following transformation from \ref{PNFafterapp} to \ref{PNFafterfoetapp}.
\end{definition}
For each $m$, the graph derived with ${\mathcal{N}^m}$ and ${{\mathcal{E}}^m}$ is composed of several trees. Since $\{0\}\subset \mathcal{N}^m$, $0$ is always one of the root nodes. We denote the the other root nodes of the these trees as $\{{r_1},{r_2},\cdots,{r_{v_m}}\}\subset \mathcal{N}^m \subset \{1,2,\cdots,N\}$. We need to add the edges $\{(0,r_1), (0,r_2), (0,r_3), \cdots, (0,r_{v_m})\}$ to ${\mathcal{E}}^m$ and derive the new edge set for each $m$.
\begin{align*}
{{\mathcal{E}}^m}=\widetilde{\mathcal{E}}^m \cup \{(0,r_1), (0,r_2),\cdots, (0,r_{v_m})\}
\end{align*}
Then we can derive the following formulation.
\begin{align}\label{PNFafterfoetapp}
P(y_0) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in {\mathcal{N}^m}}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {{\mathcal{E}}^m}}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m\right]
\end{align}
where $W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}\equiv 1$ for all the $(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}^m} \backslash \widetilde{\mathcal{E}}^m$.
Thereafter, the trees mentioned above can be combined together as one tree. That means the graph $G^m(\mathcal{N}^m,\mathcal{N}^m)$ will be a tree.
\subsection{{Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem2} }}
\textbf{The Simple Case}
We start from a simple case where
\begin{align}
\mathcal{E}^1=\mathcal{E}^2=\cdots=\mathcal{E}^{M} \triangleq \mathcal{E}.
\end{align}
And for each $(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}^m}$
\begin{align*}
W^1_{(t_p,t_c)}\equiv W^2_{(t_p,t_c)} \equiv \cdots \equiv W^{M}_{(t_p,t_c)}\triangleq W_{(t_p,t_c)}
\end{align*}
In this case, all the trees share the same structure and the corresponding $W^i_{(t_p,t_c)}$ in each tree are the same. Then it is easy to verify that
\begin{align}
\mathcal{N}^1=\mathcal{N}^2=\cdots=\mathcal{N}^{M} \triangleq \mathcal{N}.
\end{align}
We first derive a partition on $\mathcal{N}$ through the following operation.
Assuming there are $H$ leaf nodes, the first group is the set of all the leaf nodes. We denote this set as $\mathcal{N}_1$ and each leaf node as $t(1,h)$ where $1 \leq h \leq H$.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{N}_1=\{t(1,h)|1\leq h\leq H\}\subset \{1,2,\cdots,T\}
\end{align*}
Furthermore, we also denote the parent node which connects to the leaf node as $s(1,h)$ where $1 \leq h \leq H$ and the set of these parent nodes as $\mathcal{S}_1$. \textbf{Here we abuse the definition of set since there might be duplicate elements in $\mathcal{S}_1$.}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{S}_1=\{s(1,h)|1\leq h\leq H\}\subset \{1,2,\cdots,T\}\backslash \mathcal{N}_1
\end{align}
The set of all the edges which connect the leaf nodes and their own father nodes is denoted as $\mathcal{E}_1$.
\begin{align}
\mathcal{E}_1=\{(s(1,h),t(1,h)|1\leq h\leq H\}\subset \mathcal{E}.
\end{align}
Then we eliminate all the leaf nodes $t(1,h)$ in $\mathcal{N}_1$. We assume there are $H_2$ leaf nodes thereafter. The second group $\mathcal{N}_2$ is the set of all the leaf nodes $t(2,h)$ where $1 \leq h \leq H_2$. The second group $\mathcal{S}_2$ is the set of all the parent nodes $s(2,h)$ which connects to the leaf node $t(2,h)$. The second group $\mathcal{E}_2$ is set of all the edges which connect them.
\begin{align}
&\mathcal{N}_2=\{t(2,h)|1\leq h\leq H_2\}\subset \{1,2,\cdots,T\}\backslash \mathcal{N}_1\\
&\mathcal{S}_2=\{s(2,h)|1\leq h\leq H_2\}\subset \{1,2,\cdots,T\}\backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_2)\\
& \mathcal{E}_2=\{(s(2,h),t(2,h)|1\leq h\leq H_2\}\subset \mathcal{E}\backslash\mathcal{E}_1
\end{align}
Iteratively, after we eliminate all the leaf nodes $t(l-1,j)$ in the $(l-1)$-th set $\mathcal{N}_{l-1}$, we assume there are $h_{l}$ leaf nodes thereafter. The $l$-th group $\mathcal{N}_l$ is the set of all the leaf nodes $t(l,j)$ where $1 \leq j \leq h_1$. The $l$-th group $\mathcal{S}_l$ is the set of all the parent nodes $s(l,j)$ which connects to the leaf node $t(l,j)$. The $l$-th group $\mathcal{E}_l$ is set of all the edges which connect them.
\begin{align}
&\mathcal{N}_l=\{t(l,h)|1\leq h\leq H_l\}\subset \{1,2,\cdots,T\}\backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_2\cup \cdots \cup\mathcal{N}_{l-1}) \\
&\mathcal{S}_l=\{s(l,h)|1\leq h\leq H_2\}\subset \{1,2,\cdots,T\}\backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_2\cup \cdots \cup\mathcal{N}_l )\\
& \mathcal{E}_l=\{(s(l,h),t(l,h))|1\leq h\leq H_2\}\subset \mathcal{E}\backslash(\mathcal{E}_1\cup\mathcal{E}_2 \cdots \cup\mathcal{E}_{l-1})
\end{align}
Since the depth of the tree is $L$, there are $L$ groups $\{\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{N}_2,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_L\}$. According to the definition of each $N_l$, if $l_1 \neq l_2$, we have
\begin{align*}
&\mathcal{N}=\mathcal{N}_1 \cup \mathcal{N}_2 \cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}_L \\
&\mathcal{N}_{l_1} \cap \mathcal{N}_{l_2} = \emptyset
\end{align*}
Hence, $\{\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{N}_2,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_L\}$ is a partition of $\mathcal{N}$. Similarly, $\{\mathcal{E}_1,\mathcal{E}_2,\cdots,\mathcal{E}_{L-1}\}$ is a partition of $\mathcal{E}$.
\begin{align}\label{tragetFOET}
P(y_0) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_7\overset{2} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in {\mathcal{N}^m}}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {{\mathcal{E}}^m}}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m\right]
\end{align}
,where
\begin{align*}
&\mathcal{N}=\mathcal{N}^1=\mathcal{N}^2=\{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7\}\\
&\mathcal{E}=\mathcal{E}^1=\mathcal{E}^2=\{(0,1),(0,2),(0,3),(1,4),(1,5),(2,6),(5,7)\}
\end{align*}
According to the discussion above we have the following groups.
\begin{align*}
&\mathcal{N}_1=\{4,7,6,3\}, \mathcal{S}_1=\{1,5,2,0\},
\mathcal{E}_1=\{(1,4),(5,7),(2,6),(0,3)\}\\
&\mathcal{N}_2=\{5,2\},
\mathcal{S}_2=\{1,0\},\mathcal{E}_2=\{(1,5),(0,2)\}\\
&\mathcal{N}_3=\{1\},\mathcal{S}_2=\{0\},\mathcal{E}_2=\{(0,1)\}\\
& \mathcal{N}_4=\{0\}
\end{align*}
Our target is
\begin{align}\label{PNFtarget}
P(y_0) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_T \overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in {\mathcal{N}}}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}}}{\wedge}} W_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m\right]
\end{align}
\textbf{The First Layer}
Similar to the proof for toy case, the first layer eliminate all the leaf nodes in $\mathcal{N}_1$. There are $H$ heads.
For the $h$-th head in the first layer, the value matrix will represent the set of predicates $\mathcal{V}_{t(1,h)}=\{P^{1}_{t(1,h)},P^{2}_{t(1,h)},\cdots,P^{M}_{t(1,h)}\}$.
Then the $k$-th head will learn the join operation between $W_{(s(1,h),t(1,h))}$ and $\mathcal{V}_{t(1,h)}$ and derive a new set $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,h}$.
\begin{align*}
\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,h}=\{\bar{P}^{1}_{1,h},\bar{P}^{2}_{1,h},...,\bar{P}^{M}_{1,H})\}
\end{align*}
where for all $m\in \{1,2,\cdots, M\}$
\begin{align}
\bar{P}^{(m)}_{1,h}(x)=\exists y W_{(s(1,h),t(1,h))}(x,y)\wedge {P}^{m}_{t(1,h)}(y)
\end{align}
We have $H$ heads and we can derive $H$ sets $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,1},\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,2}, \cdots, \bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,H}$.
Since there is a skip connection, the inputs to the FFN block in first layer includes not only the $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,1},\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,2}, \cdots, \bar{\mathcal{V}}_{1,H}$, but also the ${\mathcal{V}}_{t}=\{{P}^{(1)}_{t},{P}^{(2)}_{t},\cdots,{P}^{(M)}_{t}\}$ for each $t \in \mathcal{N}\backslash \mathcal{N}_1$.
For each $t\in \mathcal{N} \backslash \mathcal{N}_1$, there are two cases.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Case 1}: there are several indices $\{s(1,k_1),s(1,k_2),\cdots,s(1,k_a)\}\subset \mathcal{S}_1$ which represent the same index as $t$.
\item \textbf{Case 2}: there are no indices which represent the same index as $t$.
\end{itemize}
We can derive the following set
\begin{align}
{\mathcal{V}}_{1,t}=\{{P}^{1}_{1,t},{P}^{2}_{1,t},\cdots,{P}^{M}_{1,t}\}
\end{align}
, where for all $m\in \{1,2,\cdots, M\}$,
\begin{align}\label{new1V}
{P}^{m}_{1,t}(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{rcl}
{P}^{m}_{t}(x)\wedge \bar{P}^{m}_{1,k_{1}}(x) \wedge \cdots \wedge \bar{P}^{m}_{1,k_{t}}(x) & & \text{Case 1}\\
{P}^{m}_{t}(x) & & \text{Case 2}
\end{array} \right.
\end{align}
the restricted variables ${y_n}$ where $n\in \mathcal{N}_1$, the target \ref{PNFtargetapp} will be transformed into the following formulation which preserves the logical equivalence.
\begin{align}\label{PNFtarget1}
P(y_0) = \overset{} {\underset{n\in \mathcal{N} \backslash \mathcal{N}_1, n\neq 0}{\exists}} y_n \overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in \mathcal{N} \backslash \mathcal{N}_1}{\wedge}} P^m_{1,t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}\backslash \mathcal{E}_1}}{\wedge}} W_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m)\right]
\end{align}
, where $P^m_{1,t}$ is defined in \ref{new1V}.
\textbf{The Second Layer}
The second layer eliminate all the leaf nodes in $\mathcal{N}_2$. There are $H_2$ heads.
For the $h$-th head in the first layer, the value matrix will represent the set of predicates $\mathcal{V}_{1,t(2,h)}=\{P^{1}_{1,t(2,h)},P^{2}_{1,t(2,h)},\cdots,P^{M}_{1,t(2,h)}\}$. Then the $h$-th head will learn the join operation between $W_{(s(2,h),t(2,h))}$ and $\mathcal{V}_{t(2,h)}$ and derive a new set $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,h}$.
\begin{align*}
\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,h}=\{\bar{P}^{1}_{2,h},\bar{P}^{2}_{2,h},...,\bar{P}^{M}_{2,h})\}
\end{align*}
where for all $m\in \{1,2,\cdots, M\}$
\begin{align}
\bar{P}^{m}_{2,h}(x)=\exists y W_{(s(2,h),t(2,h))}(x,y)\wedge {P}^{m}_{1,t(2,h)}(y)
\end{align}
We have $H_2$ heads and we can derive $H_2$ sets $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,1},\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,2}, \cdots, \bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,H_2}$.
Since there is a skip connection, the inputs to the FFN block in first layer includes not only the $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,1},\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,2}, \cdots, \bar{\mathcal{V}}_{2,H_2}$, but also the ${\mathcal{V}}_{1,t}=\{{P}^{(1)}_{1,t},{P}^{(2)}_{1,t},\cdots,{P}^{(M)}_{1,t}\}$ for each $t \in \mathcal{N}\backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \mathcal{N}_2)$.
For each $t\in \mathcal{N} \backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \mathcal{N}_2)$, there are two cases.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Case 1}: there are several indices $\{s(2,k_1),s(2,k_2),\cdots,s(2,k_a)\}\subset \mathcal{S}_2$ which represent the same index as $t$.
\item \textbf{Case 2}: there are no indices which represent the same index as $t$.
\end{itemize}
We can derive the following set
\begin{align}
{\mathcal{V}}_{2,t}=\{{P}^{1}_{2,t},{P}^{2}_{2,t},\cdots,{P}^{M}_{2,t}\}
\end{align}
, where for all $m\in \{1,2,\cdots, M\}$,
\begin{align}\label{new1V2}
{P}^{m}_{2,t}(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{rcl}
{P}^{m}_{t}(x)\wedge \bar{P}^{m}_{2,k_{1}}(x) \wedge \cdots \wedge \bar{P}^{m}_{2,k_{t}}(x) & & \text{Case 1}\\
{P}^{m}_{1,t}(x) & & \text{Case 2}
\end{array} \right.
\end{align}
If we eliminate the restricted variables ${y_n}$ where $n\in \mathcal{N}_2$ in our target \ref{PNFtarget1}, the target \ref{PNFtarget1} will be transformed into the following formulation which preserves the logical equivalence.
\begin{align}\label{PNFtarget2}
P(y_0) = \overset{} {\underset{n\in \mathcal{N} \backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \mathcal{N}_2), n\neq 0}{\exists}} y_n \overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in \mathcal{N} \backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \mathcal{N}_2)}{\wedge}} P^m_{1,t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}\backslash (\mathcal{E}_1\cup \mathcal{E}_2)}}{\wedge}} W_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m)\right]
\end{align}
, where $P^m_{2,t}$ is defined in \ref{new1V2}.
\textbf{The $l$-th Layer}
Iteratively, in the $l$-th layer, we eliminate all the leaf nodes in $\mathcal{N}_l$. There are $H_l$ heads.
For the $h$-th head in the first layer, the value matrix will represent the set of predicates $\mathcal{V}_{l-1,t(l,h)}=\{P^{1}_{l-1,t(l,h)},P^{2}_{l-1,t(l,h)},\cdots,P^{M}_{1,t(l-1,h)}\}$. Then the $h$-th head will learn the join operation between $W_{(s(l,h),t(l,h))}$ and $\mathcal{V}_{l-1,t(l,h)}$ and derive a new set $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,h}$.
\begin{align*}
\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,h}=\{\bar{P}^{1}_{l,h},\bar{P}^{2}_{l,h},...,\bar{P}^{M}_{l,h})\}
\end{align*}
where for all $m\in \{1,2,\cdots, M\}$
\begin{align}
P^{m}_{l,h}(x)=\exists y W_{(s(l,h),t(l,h))}(x,y)\wedge {P}^{m}_{t(l,h)}(y)
\end{align}
We have $H_l$ heads and we can derive $H_l$ sets $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,1},\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,2}, \cdots, \bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,H_l}$.
Since there is a skip connection, the inputs to the FFN block in first layer includes not only the $\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,1},\bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,2}, \cdots, \bar{\mathcal{V}}_{l,H_l}$, but also the ${\mathcal{V}}_{l-1,t}=\{{P}^{(1)}_{l-1,t},{P}^{(2)}_{l-1,t},\cdots,{P}^{(M)}_{l-1,t}\}$ for each $t \in \mathcal{N}\backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \mathcal{N}_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}_{l-1} \cup \mathcal{N}_{l})$.
For each $t\in \mathcal{N} \backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \mathcal{N}_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}_{l-1}\cup \mathcal{N}_{l})$,
there are two cases.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Case 1}: there are several indices $\{s(l,k_1),s(l,k_2),\cdots,s(l,k_a)\}\subset \mathcal{S}_l$ which represent the same index as $t$.
\item \textbf{Case 2}: there are no indices which represent the same index as $t$.
\end{itemize}
We can derive the following set
\begin{align}
{\mathcal{V}}_{l,t}=\{{P}^{1}_{l,t},{P}^{2}_{l,t},\cdots,{P}^{M}_{l,t}\}
\end{align}
, where for all $m\in \{1,2,\cdots, M\}$,
\begin{align}\label{new1Vl}
{P}^{m}_{l,t}(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{rcl}
{P}^{m}_{l,t}(x)\wedge \bar{P}^{m}_{l,k_{1}}(x) \wedge \cdots \wedge \bar{P}^{m}_{l,k_{t}}(x) & & \text{Case 1}\\
{P}^{m}_{l-1,t}(x) & & \text{Case 2}
\end{array} \right.
\end{align}
If we eliminate the restricted variables ${y_n}$ where $n\in \mathcal{N}_l$, the target will be transformed into the following formulation which preserves the logical equivalence.
\begin{align}\label{PNFtargetl}
P(y_0) = \overset{} {\underset{n\in\mathcal{N} \backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}_{l-1}\cup \mathcal{N}_{l}), n\neq 0}{\exists}} y_n \overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \Bigg[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in \mathcal{N} \backslash (\mathcal{N}_1\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}_{l-1}\cup \mathcal{N}_{l})}{\wedge}} P^m_{l-1,t}(y_t)\right)\wedge \nonumber \\
\left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}\backslash (\mathcal{E}_1\cup \mathcal{E}_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{E}_l)}}{\wedge}} W_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m \Bigg],
\end{align} where $P^m_{l-1,t}(y_t)$ is defined in \ref{new1Vl}.
\textbf{The Last layer ($(L-1)$-th layer)}
After the self-attention block of last layer, we have eliminated all the variables except the root variable $y_0$.
The function of FFN in last layer is a little different than that in the general $l$-th layer. After deriving
\begin{align}
{\mathcal{V}}_{L-1,t}=\{{P}^{1}_{L-1,0},{P}^{2}_{K-1,0},\cdots,{P}^{M}_{L-1,0}\},
\end{align}
our target \ref{PNFtargetl} can be transformed into
\begin{align*}
p(y_0)=({P}^{1}_{L-1,0}(y_{0})\wedge Q^1) \vee ({P}^{2}_{L-1,0}(y_{0})\wedge Q^2) \vee \cdots \vee ({P}^{M}_{L-1,0}(y_{0})\wedge Q^M)
\end{align*}
Then the FFN in the last layer can compute the result of our target function.
\textbf{General Case}
Our target is
\begin{align}\label{genePNFtarget}
P(y_0) = \exists y_1, \exists y_2, ..., \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} (\overset{} {\underset{t\in {\mathcal{N}^m}}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\wedge \overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}^m}}{\wedge}} W^i_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\wedge Q_m)
\end{align}
For each $\mathcal{N}^m$, we can derive the following partition in the same way as the simple case.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{N}^m=\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2 \cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}^m_{L^m}
\end{align*}
, where $\mathcal{N}^m_j =\{t^m{(j,1)},t^m{(j,2)},\cdots, t^m{(j,h_j^m)}\}$ is the set of leaf nodes.
Then we can derive the following group for $j\in \{1,2,\cdots, L_{max}\}$. \textbf{Here we abuse the definition of set since there might be duplicate elements in $\mathcal{N}_j$.}
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{N}_j=\mathcal{N}^1_j \cup \mathcal{N}^2_j \cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}^M_j
\end{align*}
, where $\mathcal{N}^m_j=\emptyset$ for $L^m<j\leq L_{max}$.
Similarly, we can also derive the $\mathcal{S}^m_j$ for each $m$, which is the set of parent nodes which is connected to the leaf nodes in $\mathcal{N}^m_j$.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{S}^m_j =\{s^m{(j,1)},s^m{(j,2)},\cdots, s^m{(j,h_j^m)}\}
\end{align*}
Then we can derive the following group for $j\in \{1,2,\cdots, L_{max}\}$. \textbf{Here we abuse the definition of set since there might be duplicate elements in $\mathcal{S}_j$.}
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{S}_j=\mathcal{S}^1_j \cup \mathcal{S}^2_j \cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{NS}^M_j
\end{align*}
, where $\mathcal{S}^m_j=\emptyset$ for $L^m<j\leq L_{max}$.
As for each edge set $\mathcal{E}^m$, we can derive the following partition in the same way as the simple case.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}^m=\mathcal{E}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{E}^m_2 \cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{E}^m_{L^m}
\end{align*}
And
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}^m_j =\{(s^m{(j,1)},t^m{(j,1)}),(s^m{(j,2)},t^m{(j,2)}),\cdots, (s^m{(j,h_1^m)},t^m{(j,h_1^m)})\}
\end{align*}
is the set of leaf nodes.
Then we can derive the following group for $j\in \{1,2,\cdots ,L_{max}\}$.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}_j=\mathcal{E}^1_j \cup \mathcal{E}^2_j \cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{E}^M_j
\end{align*}
, where $\mathcal{E}^m_j=\emptyset$ for $L^m<j\leq L_{max}$.
\textbf{The First Layer}
Similar to the proof for the simple cases, the first layer eliminate all the leaf nodes in $\mathcal{N}_1$. There are $h^1_1+h^2_1+\cdots+h^M_1$ heads.
For the $k$-th head in the first layer, where $h^1_1+...+h^{m_k-1}_1<k\leq h^1_1+...+h^{m_k}_1$, it will eliminate the $k$-th node in $\mathcal{N}_1$. We denote that node as $z(1,k)$ and its parent node in $\mathcal{S}_1$ as $r(1,k)$. The value matrix will include the predicate $P^{m_k}_{z(1,k)}$.
Then the $k$-th head will learn the join operation between $W^{m_k}_{(r(1,k),z(1,k))}$ and $P^{{m_k}}_{z(1,k)}$ and derive a new predicate $\bar{P}^{m_k}_{1,k}$.
\begin{align*}
\bar{P}^{m_k}_{1,k}(x)=\exists y W^{m_k}_{(r(1,k),z(1,k))}(x,y) \wedge P^{{m_k}}_{z(1,k)}(y)
\end{align*}
We have $h^1_1+h^2_1+\cdots+h^M_1$ heads so we can have $h^1_1+h^2_1+\cdots+h^M_1$ predicates $\{\bar{P}^{m_k}_{1,k}\}^{h^1_1+h^2_1+\cdots+h^M_1}_{k=1}$ mentioned above.
Since there is a skip connection, the inputs to the FFN block in first layer includes not only the $\{\bar{P}^{m_k}_{1,k}\}^{h^1_1+h^2_1+\cdots+h^M_1}_{k=1}$, but also the $\{P^m_{t}\}$ for each $t \in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash \mathcal{N}^m_1$ and $1 \leq m\leq M$.
For each $1 \leq m\leq M$ and $t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash \mathcal{N}^m_1$, if there are several indices $\{r(1,k_1),r(1,k_2),\cdots,r(1,k_a)\}\subset \mathcal{S}^m_1$ which represent the same index as $t$ and $m_{k_1}=m_{k_2}=\cdots=m$, we can derive the following predicate
\begin{align}\label{genenew1V}
{P}^{m}_{1,t}(x)={P}^{m}_{t}(x)\wedge P^{m_{k_{1}}}_{1,k_{1}}(x) \wedge \cdots \wedge P^{m_{k_{t}}}_{1,k_{t}}(x).
\end{align}
For each $m$ and $t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash \mathcal{N}^m_1$, if there are no indices in $\mathcal{S}^m_1$ which represents the same index as $t$, we can derive the following predicate
\begin{align} \label{genenew2V}
{P}^{m}_{1,t}(x)={P}^{m}_{t}(x)
\end{align}
If we eliminate the restricted variables ${y_n}$ where $n\in \mathcal{N}^m_1$, the target \ref{genePNFtarget} will be transformed into the following formulation which preserves the logical equivalence.
\begin{align}\label{genePNFtarget1}
P(y_0) = \overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} ({\underset{n\in \mathcal{N^m} \backslash \mathcal{N^m}_1, n\neq 0}{\exists}} y_n {\underset{t\in \mathcal{N^m} \backslash \mathcal{N^m}_1}{\wedge}} P^m_{1,t}(y_t)\wedge \overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E^m}\backslash \mathcal{E^m}_1}}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\wedge Q)
\end{align}
, where $P^m_{1,t}$ is defined in \ref{genenew1V} and \ref{genenew2V}.
\textbf{The Second Layer}
Similar to the proof for the simple cases, the second layer eliminate all the leaf nodes in $\mathcal{N}_2$. There are $h^1_2+h^2_2+\cdots+h^M_2$ heads.
For the $k$-th head in the second layer, where $h^1_2+...+h^{m_k-1}_2<k\leq h^1_2+...+h^{m_k}_2$, it will eliminate the $k$-th node in $\mathcal{N}_2$. We denote that node as $z(2,k)$ and its parent node in $\mathcal{S}_2$ as $r(2,k)$. The value matrix will include the predicate $P^{m_k}_{z(2,k)}$.
Then the $k$-th head will learn the join operation between $W^{m_k}_{(r(2,k),z(2,k))}$ and $P^{{m_k}}_{z(2,k)}$ and derive a new predicate $\bar{P}^{m_k}_{2,k}$.
\begin{align*}
\bar{P}^{m_k}_{2,k}(x)=\exists y W^{m_k}_{(r(2,k),z(2,k))}(x,y) \wedge P^{{m_k}}_{z(2,k)}(y)
\end{align*}
We have $h^1_2+h^2_2+\cdots+h^M_2$ heads so we can have $h^1_2+h^2_2+\cdots+h^M_2$ predicates $\{\bar{P}^{m_k}_{2,k}\}^{h^1_2+h^2_2+\cdots+h^M_2}_{k=1}$ mentioned above.
Since there is a skip connection, the inputs to the FFN block in first layer includes not only the $\{\bar{P}^{m_k}_{2,k}\}^{h^1_2+h^2_2+\cdots+h^M_2}_{k=1}$, but also the $\{P^m_{1,t}\}$ for each $t \in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash (\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2)$ and $1 \leq m\leq M$.
For each $1 \leq m\leq M$ and $t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash (\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2)$, if there are several indices $\{r(2,k_1),r(2,k_2),\cdots,r(2,k_a)\}\subset \mathcal{S}^m_2$ which represent the same index as $t$ and $m_{k_1}=m_{k_2}=\cdots=m_{k_a}=m$, we can derive the following predicate
\begin{align}\label{genenew1Vl}
{P}^{m}_{2,t}(x)={P}^{m}_{1,t}(x)\wedge \bar{P}^{m_{k_{1}}}_{2,k_{1}}(x) \wedge \cdots \wedge \bar{P}^{m_{k_{t}}}_{2,k_{t}}(x).
\end{align}
For each $m$ and $t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash \mathcal{N}^m_1$, if there are no indices in $\mathcal{S}^m_1$ which represents the same index as $t$, we can derive the following predicate
\begin{align} \label{genenew2Vl}
{P}^{m}_{2,t}(x)=\bar{P}^{m}_{1,t}(x)
\end{align}
If we eliminate the restricted variables ${y_n}$ where $n \in \mathcal{N}^m_2$, the target \ref{genePNFtarget1} will be transformed into the following formulation which preserves the logical equivalence.
\begin{align}\label{genePNFtarget2}
P(y_0) = \overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} ({\underset{n\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash (\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2), n\neq 0}{\exists}} y_n {\underset{t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash \mathcal{N}^m_1}{\wedge}} P^m_{2,t}(y_t)\nonumber \\
\wedge \overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}^m\backslash (\mathcal{E}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{E}^m_2)}}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\wedge Q)
\end{align}
, where $P^m_{1,t}$ is defined in \ref{genenew1Vl} and \ref{genenew2Vl}.
\textbf{The $l$-th Layer}
Similar to the proof for the simple cases, the $l$-th layer eliminate all the leaf nodes in $\mathcal{N}_l$. There are $h^1_l+h^2_l+\cdots+h^M_l$ heads.
For the $k$-th head in the $l$-th layer, where $h^1_l+...+h^{m_k-1}_l<k\leq h^1_l+...+h^{m_k}_l$, it will eliminate the $k$-th node in $\mathcal{N}_l$. We denote that node as $z(l,k)$ and its parent node in $\mathcal{S}_l$ as $r(l,k)$. The value matrix will include the predicate $P^{m_k}_{z(l,k)}$.
Then the $k$-th head will learn the join operation between $W^{m_k}_{(r(l,k),z(l,k))}$ and $P^{{m_k}}_{z(l,k)}$ and derive a new predicate $\bar{P}^{m_k}_{l,k}$.
\begin{align*}
\bar{P}^{m_k}_{l,k}(x)=\exists y W^{m_k}_{(r(l,k),z(l,k))}(x,y) \wedge P^{{m_k}}_{z(l,k)}(y)
\end{align*}
We have $h^1_l+h^2_l+\cdots+h^M_l$ heads so we can have $h^1_l+h^2_l+\cdots+h^M_l$ predicates $\{\bar{P}^{m_k}_{l,k}\}^{h^1_l+h^2_l+\cdots+h^M_l}_{k=1}$ mentioned above.
Since there is a skip connection, the inputs to the FFN block in first layer includes not only the $\{\bar{P}^{m_k}_{l,k}\}^{h^1_l+h^2_l+\cdots+h^M_l}_{k=1}$, but also the $\{P^m_{l-1,t}\}$ for each $t \in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash (\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}^m_{l})$ and $1 \leq m\leq M$.
For each $1 \leq m\leq M$ and $t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash (\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}^m_{l})$, if there are several indices $\{r(l,k_1),r(l,k_2),\cdots,r(l,k_a)\}\subset \mathcal{S}^m_l$ which represent the same index as $t$ and $m_{k_1}=m_{k_2}=\cdots=m_{k_a}=m$, we can derive the following predicate
\begin{align}\label{genenew1V2}
{P}^{m}_{l,t}(x)={P}^{m}_{l-1,t}(x)\wedge \bar{P}^{m_{k_{1}}}_{l,k_{1}}(x) \wedge \cdots \wedge \bar{P}^{m_{k_{t}}}_{l,k_{t}}(x).
\end{align}
For each $m$ and $t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash \mathcal{N}^m_1$, if there are no indices in $\mathcal{S}^m_1$ which represents the same index as $t$, we can derive the following predicate
\begin{align} \label{genenew2V2}
{P}^{m}_{l,t}(x)=\bar{P}^{m}_{l-1,t}(x)
\end{align}
If we eliminate the restricted variables ${y_n}$ where $n \in \mathcal{N}^m_l$, the target \ref{genePNFtarget1} will be transformed into the following formulation which preserves the logical equivalence.
\begin{align}\label{genePNFtarget2}
P(y_0) = \overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} ({\underset{n\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash (\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}^m_{l}), n\neq 0}{\exists}} y_n {\underset{t\in \mathcal{N}^m \backslash (\mathcal{N}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{N}^m_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{N}^m_{l})}{\wedge}} P^m_{l,t}(y_t)\nonumber \\
\wedge \overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {\mathcal{E}^m\backslash (\mathcal{E}^m_1 \cup \mathcal{E}^m_2\cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{E}^m_{l})}}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\wedge Q)
\end{align}
, where $P^m_{1,t}$ is defined in \ref{genenew1Vl} and \ref{genenew2Vl}.
\textbf{The Last layer ($(L-1)$-th layer)}
After the self-attention block of last layer, we have eliminated all the variables except the root variable $y_0$.
The function of FFN in last layer is a little different than that in the general $l$-th layer. After deriving
\begin{align}
{P}^{m}_{L-1,0}(y_0)
\end{align} for $1\leq m \leq M$
, our target \ref{PNFtargetl} can be transformed into
\begin{align*}
p(y_0)={P}^{1}_{L-1,0}(y_{0}) \vee {P}^{2}_{L-1,0}(y_{0}) \vee \cdots \vee {P}^{M}_{L-1,0}(y_{0})
\end{align*}
Then the FFN in the last layer can compute the result of our target.
\section{Discussion}
Our work provides a novel understanding of the multi-head attention from the logical reasoning view. Based on the previous work on semantic parsing such as dependency tree and lambda dependency-based compositional semantics \cite{reddy2016transforming,liang2013lambda}, most sentences can be represented in logical forms which have similar tree structure as the example in Eq \ref{PNFexample}. Hence, our work provides a novel explanation why the multi-head attention achieves great success in recent development of NLP from a new perspective. Furthermore, the logic reasoning view also provides us with some suggestions on how to improve the design of transformers. Since logical expressions of most sentences in NLP have tree structures similar to the example in Eq \ref{PNFexample} shown in Figure \ref{tree-examplel}, the number of join operations decreases as we proceed the calculation. This means the amount of the heads could decrease as the layer become less close to the inputs. This provides us with a new insight on how to compress the multi-head attention blocks in transformers. Besides, it is worth noting that the skip connection is also heavily utilized in the transformers. Our work provide a new interpretation for the use of skip-connection in transformers which is different from its original motivation in residual learning. Moreover, the assumption \ref{assumption} also provides us with a potential way to augment the transformer with some external knowledge. We could incorporate some additional commonsense knowledge into the self-attention block to boost the logical reasoning as well as the inference of transformer.
Our work has lots of interesting future directions. One is to design some more efficient neural operators for the join operations, which could be valuable for both improving logical reasoning and multi-head attention in transformers. Another important direction is to enhance the expressiveness capacity of our model. We hope it could handle the logical predicates which do not have the tree structures. Besides, how to enable our model to process the logical predicates which depicts the relationship between three or more variables is also very challenging but interesting.
\section{Conclusion}
We identify a key operation \textit{i.e.} join operation for logical reasoning, which guides us to propose a new interpretable neural network for this task. We also prove its logical expressiveness. Interestingly, we find the multi-head attention mudules can be understood as a neural operator for join operation. Our work provides a new understanding of the multi-head attention mechanism in transformers and sheds light on how to improve the recent pretrained models which adopt the multi-head attention mudules.
\section{Introduction}
Developing logical system which can naturally process symbolic rules is one of the important tasks for AI since it is a foundational model which has wide applications in language understanding and reasoning. Traditional models such as Inductive logic programming (ILP) \cite{muggleton1991inductive,muggleton1996stochastic} can learn some logical rules from a collection of positive and negative examples. However, the exponentially large searching space of the logical rules limits the scalability of tradition ILP. Considering that deep neural networks have achieved great success in many applications such as image classification, machine translation, speech recognition due to its powerful expressiveness, the question that comes naturally to us is whether we can leverage the great expressiveness power of DNNs to design the next generation logical system. Several previous attempts \cite{dong2019neural,barcelo2020logical} have been made in this direction. However, most of them are heuristic and lack clear interpretability. Developing interpretable neural architectures that are capable of logic reasoning has become increasingly important.
Another trend in the most recent development of AI models is the wide use of multi-head attention mechanism\cite{vaswani2017attention}. Nowadays the multi-head attention has become a critical part for many foundational language and vision models, such as Bert \cite{Devlin2019BERTPO} and ViT \cite{dosovitskiy2020image}. Multiple paralleled attention heads strengthen the expressive power of a model since they can capture diverse information from different representation subspaces at different positions, which derives multiple latent features depicting the input data from different perspectives.
In our work, to develop a more interpretable neural architecture for logical reasoning, we identify a key operation for the calculation of a logic predicate. We name it as \textit{join operation}. Based on this important operation, we can convert the calculation of a logic predicate into a process of conducting the join operations recursively. We also notice that this process requires skip-connection operations pass the necessary intermediate outcomes. Based on the above observations, we design a new framework which contains several kinds of neural operators with different functions to fulfill our goal of implementing this recursive process with neural networks. We adopt the same skip-connection operation as ResNet. Interesting, for the join operator which conducts the key part of our calculation, we have found a strong connection between its operation and the mechanism of the multi-head attention. Hence, we think the widely adopted multi-head attention module can be understood as a special neural operator that implements the union bound of the join operator in probabilistic predicate space. This finding not only provides us with a good module for our logical reasoning network, but also inspires us to understand the popular multi-head attention module in a different way, which explains its great success in language understanding. Our findings suggest several potential directions for the improvement of the transformer \cite{vaswani2017attention}, which sheds light on the design of the large pretrained language models \cite{Devlin2019BERTPO,dosovitskiy2020image} in the future.
\section{Join-Chain Network}
We adopt the following example to introduce our method.
\begin{align}\label{PNFexample}
P(x) &= \exists y_1 \exists y_2 \exists y_{3} \exists y_{4} \left[\overset{4} {\underset{t=1}{\wedge}} P_{t}(y_t)\wedge P_0(x)\wedge W_{(0,1)}(x,y_1)\right. \\
&\left.\wedge W_{(0,2)}(x,y_2)\wedge W_{(1,3)}(y_1,y_3) \wedge W_{(1,4)}(y_1,y_4)\right]. \nonumber
\end{align}
$P(x)$ is a first-order logic predicate. To derive the value of $P(x)$ for a given $x$, we can divide the calculation into the following three steps.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Step 1}: We first calculate the $P_{3,1}(y_1)=\exists y_3 W_{(1,3)}(y_1,y_3) \wedge P_3(y_3)$ and $P_{4,1}(y_1)= \exists y_3 W_{(1,4)}(y_1,y_4) \wedge P_4(y_4)$.
\item \textbf{Step 2}: We denote the $P_{new,1} (y_1)\triangleq P_1(y_1)\wedge P_{3,1}(y_1) \wedge P_{4,1}(y_1)$. In this step, we calculate the $P_{1,0}(x) \triangleq \exists y_1 W_{(0,1)}(x,y_1) \wedge P_{new,1} (y_1)$ and $P_{2,0}(x) \triangleq \exists y_2 W_{(0,2)}(x,y_2) \wedge P_2 (y_2)$.
\item \textbf{Step 3}: As for the final step, we need to calculate the value of $P_{1,0}(x) \wedge P_{2,0}(x)$. It is obvious that $P(x)=P_{1,0}(x) \wedge P_{2,0}(x)$
\end{itemize}
Based on the above steps, we find a key operation for the calculation of $P(x)$ and name it as the \textbf{join operation}.
\begin{align*}
\textit{join operation: } P(x)= \exists yW(x, y) P(y)
\end{align*}
We can transform the calculation of $P(x)$ in Eq \ref{PNFexample} as a recursion process of the {join operations}. Hence, it is necessary to include a module in our network to calculate the join operation. Since we need to conduct the calculation of join operation in a recursive way with multiple steps, our network should have multiple layers. Besides, there are multiple join operations to conduct in each step, we need to include several join operation modules in each layer. It is worth noting that some unary predicates such as $P_2 (y_1)$ and $P_2 (y_2)$ are not used in Step 1 but thereafter used in Step 2. Hence we believe a skip connection is also necessary for our network. Based on these observations, to conduct the calculation following our steps, we design a new network which is named as the \textbf{join-chain network}. We visualize its skeleton in the Figure \ref{joinchainFig}.
As shown in the Figure \ref{joinchainFig}, the join operators will conduct the join operations on the inputs to each layer. The skip connection in each layer preserves the inputs for future use. The aggregation after the join operators will aggregate the inputs from the skip-connection and the results of join operators. This reflects the process that we need to conduct $\wedge$ operations after the join operations in each step. At the end of our framework, we adopt a feed-forward neural layer (FFN), which is designed for our last step mentioned above.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\scalebox{0.8}{
\begin{tikzpicture} \label{ExTree}
[thick,scale=0.5, every node/.style={scale=6}]
\centering
\node {$x$}
child {node {$y_1$}
child {node {$y_3$}
}
child {node {$y_4$}}
}
child [missing] {}
child [missing] {}
child { node {$y_2$}
}
;
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{The tree structure of example in Eq \ref{PNFexample}}
\label{tree-examplel}
\end{figure}
For the example in Eq \ref{PNFexample} mentioned above, if we consider the set $\mathcal{N}=\{x,y_1, y_2, y_3, y_4\}$ as the node set and the index pairs set $\{(0,1),(0,2), (1,3),(1,4)\}$ as the edge set $\mathcal{E}$. We can draw the graph $\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{E})$ in figure \ref{tree-examplel} and it is easy to find that the graph $\mathcal{G}$ is a tree. As proved in the following section, our framework can calculate the predicates which could be visualized as a graph of tree-structured. Based on the previous research, we can derive the dependency tree for every sentence. If we translate the dependency tree into a logical forms, most sentence can be represented by a logic predicate \cite{reddy2016transforming} which has a tree structure similar to the example in Figure \ref{tree-examplel}. Hence our framework has very wide applications in NLP tasks.
\section{Logical expressiveness}
Every first-order formula is logically equivalent to some formula in prenex normal form. In our study, we are interested in the case where there is only one variable $x$ which is not restricted by any quantifier. For convenience, we denote the free variable $x$ as $y_0$ and other restricted variables are denoted as $y_1, y_2,\cdots,y_T$. We assume its prenex normal form has the following formulation Eq \ref{genePNF}.
\begin{align}\label{genePNF}
P(x)= \exists y_1 \exists y_2 ... \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[ \left(\overset{\bar{M}} {\underset{\bar{m}=1}{\wedge}} \hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}}(y_{i(m,\bar{m})})\right)\right.\\
\left.\wedge \left(\overset{M^\prime} {\underset{m^\prime=1}{\wedge}} \hat{W}^m_{m^\prime}(y_{n(m,m^\prime)},y_{j(m,m^\prime)})\right)\wedge Q^m\right] \nonumber
\end{align}
Each $\hat{P}^m_{\bar{m}}$ is a unary predicate and each $\hat{W}^m_{m^\prime}$ is a binary predicate. $Q^m$ is some {propositional constant}. $i(m,\bar{m}),n(m,m^\prime)$ and $j(m,m^\prime)$ are three index mapping functions, which map $(m,\bar{m})$ or $(m,{m}^\prime)$ to some values in $\{0, 1, 2, \cdot,T\}$. This means
$y_{i(m,\bar{m})},y_{n(m,m^\prime)},y_{j(m,m^\prime)}\in \{y_0, y_1,...,y_T\}$. Moreover, we assume $n(m,m^\prime) < j(m,m^\prime)$. \\
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem1}
For every predicate $P(x)$ in \ref{genePNF}, there exists a $P(y_0)$ which has the following formulation and is logically equivalent to the $P(x)$.
\begin{align}\label{PNFafterfoet}
P(y_0) = \exists y_1 \exists y_2 ... \exists y_T\overset{M} {\underset{m=1}{\vee}} \left[\left(\overset{} {\underset{t\in {\mathcal{N}^m}}{\wedge}} P^m_{t}(y_t)\right)\right. \\ \nonumber
\left.\wedge \left(\overset{} {\underset{(t_p,t_c)\in {{\mathcal{E}}^m}}{\wedge}} W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\right)\wedge Q^m\right],
\end{align}
where each ${\mathcal{N}^m} \subset \{0,1,2,\cdots, T\}$ is set of indices and $0 \in {\mathcal{N}^m} $. ${\mathcal{E}}^m$ is set of index pairs. Each ${\mathcal{N}}^m$ and ${\mathcal{E}}^m$ can form a graph $\mathcal{G}^m=({\mathcal{N}^m},{\mathcal{E}}^m)$.
\end{theorem}
Then we provide the following definitions and assumption to show the logical expressiveness of our join chain network.
\\
\begin{definition}[$\mathbf{\mathcal{FOET}(\mathcal{I}_1,\mathcal{I}_2)}$]
$\mathcal{FOET}(\mathcal{I}_1,\mathcal{I}_2)$ is the set of all the predicates $P(y_0)$ which can be transformed into the formulations in \ref{PNFafterfoet} and satisfy the following requirements.
\begin{itemize}
\item Each $W^m_{(t_p,t_c)}(y_{t_p},y_{t_c})\in \mathcal{I}_2$ and ${P}^m_{t}(y_t)= P^m_{j_1}(y_t) \wedge P^m_{j_2}(y_t)\wedge \cdots \wedge P^m_{j_{t}}(y_t)$, where $\{ P^m_{j_1}, P^m_{j_2}, \cdots, P^m_{j_t}\} \subset \mathcal{I}_1$.
\item Each graph $\mathcal{G}^m=(\mathcal{N}^m,\mathcal{E}^m)$ is a tree.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Each graph $\mathcal{G}^m=(\mathcal{N}^m,\mathcal{E}^m), m\in \{1,2,\cdots,M\}$ is a tree. We denote the height for each tree as $L^1, L^2, \cdots, L^{M}$ respectively and $L_{max}=\max\{L^1, L^2, \cdots, L^{M}\}$. We denote the number of leaf nodes of each tree as $H^1, H^2, \cdots, H^{M}$ respectively and $H_{sum}=H^1+ H^2+ \cdots+ H^{M}$. We define the \textbf{height} of the predicate as $L=L_{max}$ and the \textbf{width} of the predicate as $H=H_{sum}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[${\mathcal{FOET}_{\{\bar{L},\bar{H}\}}(\mathcal{I}_1,\mathcal{I}_2)}$]$\mathcal{FOET}_{\{\bar{L},\bar{H}\}}(\mathcal{I}_1,\mathcal{I}_2)$ is the set of the predicates $P(x)\in \mathcal{FOET}$ with height $L\leq \bar{L}$ and width $H\leq \bar{H}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{assumption}\label{assumption}
For any $W \in \mathcal{I}_2$, there exists some function $f$, such that $W=f(I_s)$, where $I_s \subset \mathcal{I}_1$.\\
\end{assumption}
Now we can provide the theorem to show the logical expressiveness.\\
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem2}
Under the assumption \ref{assumption}, a join-chain network with the $\bar{H}$-head and $\bar{L}$-layer self-attention block can express all the predicates in ${\mathcal{FOET}_{\{\bar{L},\bar{H}\}}(\mathcal{I}_1,\mathcal{I}_2)}$ if the input to the join-chain network is $\mathcal{I}_1$. \\
\end{theorem}
We look back at the example in Eq \ref{PNFexample} to understand the definitions and theorem. There is one tree \textit{i.e.} M=1. The node set of the graph is $\mathcal{N}=\{0,1,2,4\}$. The edge set of the graph $\mathcal{E}$ is $\{(0,1),(0,2),(1,3),(1,4)\}$. The graph $(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{E})$ is a tree visualized in the Figure \ref{tree-examplel}. The height of the $P(y_0)$ is 2. The width is 3 since there are 3 leaf nodes \textit{i.e.} $y_3$, $y_4$ and $y_2$. According to the theorem \ref{theorem2}, $P(x)$ can be expressed by the join-chain network with 3 heads and 2 layers.
\section{rethink multi-head attention as join operation}
To design the join operator with differentiable learning capability, we study various neural operators for approximating the symbolic join operations. Interestingly, we find that the widely adopted multi-head attention mechanism can be understood as a join operator.
First, we denote the domain of all the predicates, including all the binary predicates $W(x,y)$ and unary predicates $P(y)$, as $\{x_1, x_1, x_3, ..., x_S\}$, which means $x, y \in \{x_1, x_2, x_3, ..., x_S\}$. Then in the multi-head attention mechanism, the core part is the product between the self-attention matrix $\mathbf{A}$ and the value tensor $\mathbf{V}$, \begin{align}\label{self-attention}
\mathbf{Z}=\mathbf{A} \mathbf{V}
\end{align}
If we want to calculate the the join operation between $W(x,y)$ and $P(y)$, we know
\begin{align}
\exists y W(x,y)\wedge P(y)=\overset{S} {\underset{s=1}{\vee}} W(x,x_s)\wedge P(x_s)
\end{align}
Then, if the multiplication can be understood as the conjunction operation $\wedge$ and the addition as the disjunction $\vee$, we can consider the value tensor V as $[P(x_1), P(x_2),..., P(x_S)]$ and self-attention matrix $A$ as $\{W(x_s, x_{s\prime})\}$. Based on this, the $s$-th element $z_s$ in the tensor $Z$ is the value of $\exists y W(x_s,y)\wedge P(y)$. Hence the tensor $Z$ will the join operation between $W(x,y)$ and $P(y)$. Generally speaking, the self-attention matrix $A$ learns all the values of the binary predicate $W(x,y)$, and the value tensor $V$ learns all the values of the unary predicate $P(y)$. For each head of attention mechanism in each layer, the self-attention matrix $\mathbf{A}$ learns a binary predicate $W(x,y)$. Hence, the amount of the leaf nodes in the Figure \ref{tree-examplel} reflects the importance of multiple heads for self-attention.
|
\section{Inference of EBCC}
According to the generative process and graphical model, we have:
\begin{align*}
p(\pi, V, \tau, Z, G, Y \mid a_\pi, \alpha, \beta)
&= p(\pi \mid a_\pi)p(V\mid \beta)\cdot p(\tau\mid \alpha)p(Z\mid \tau)p(G\mid\pi, Z)p(Y\mid Z,G,V) \\
&\propto \prod_{k=1}^K\prod_{m=1}^M\pi_{km}^{a_\pi -1} \cdot \prod_{j=1}^L\prod_{k=1}^K\prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{l=1}^K v_{jkml}^{\beta_{kl}-1} \cdot \\
&\ \ \ \prod_{k=1}^K\tau_k^{\alpha_k-1} \cdot \prod_{i=1}^N\tau_{z_i}\cdot\prod_{i=1}^N\pi_{z_i g_i}\cdot\prod_{i=1}^N\prod_{j\in\mathcal{W}_i} v_{jz_ig_iy_{ij}}.
\end{align*}
To find the most likely $Z$ given the LF labels $Y$ and all hyperparameters, EBCC use fully Bayesian inference algorithm, and adopt a mean-field variational approach to find a distribution $q$ that approximates $p(\pi, V, \tau, Z, G, Y \mid a_\pi, \alpha, \beta)$:
\begin{align*}
\operatorname{argmax}_Z p(Z\mid Y, a_\pi, \alpha, \beta)
&=\operatorname{argmax}_Z\sum_G \int p(Z\mid Y, a_\pi, \alpha, \beta)d\tau d\pi dV \\
&\approx \operatorname{argmax}_Z\sum_G\int q(\tau, Z, G, \pi, V)d\tau d\pi dV \\
&=\operatorname{argmax}_Zq(Z).
\end{align*}
And $q$ can be factorized as
\begin{align*}
\label{eq:qebcc}
q(\tau, Z, G, \pi, V)
&= q(\tau)q(Z, G)q(\pi)q(V) \\
&= \operatorname{Dir}(\tau\mid\nu)\cdot \prod_{i=1}^N q(z_i,g_i)\cdot\prod_{k=1}^K\operatorname{Dir}(\pi_k\mid\eta_k)\cdot\prod_{k=1}^K\prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{j=1}^L\operatorname{Dir}(v_{kmj}\mid\mu_{kmj}).
\end{align*}
So, the ELBO is
\begin{align*}
&\mathbb{E}_q\left[\log p(\tau, Z, G, Y, \pi, V\mid a_\pi, \alpha, \beta) - \log q(\tau, Z, G, \pi, V)\right] \\
&= \sum_{k=1}^K(\nu_k-1)\mathbb{E}_q[\log\tau_k] + \sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M(\eta_{km}-1)\mathbb{E}_q[\log\pi_{km}] + \sum_{j=1}^L\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{l=1}^K(\mu_{jkml}-1)\mathbb{E}_q[\log v_{jkml}] \\
&-\log B(\alpha)-K\log B(a_\pi\textbf{1}_M)-WM\sum_{k=1}^K\log B(\beta) + H(\operatorname{Dir}(\tau\mid\nu))+\sum_{i=1}^N H(q(z_i, g_i)) \\
&+\sum_{k=1}^K H(\operatorname{Dir}(\pi_k\mid\eta_k)) + \sum_{j=1}^L\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M H(\operatorname{Dir}(v_{jkm}\mid\mu_{jkm}))
\end{align*}
\subsection{Update rule for $q(Z, G)$ and $q(Z)$}
To get the optimal solution for $q(Z, G)$, we need to find the exponential family form of its posterior. According to the PGM, we have
\begin{align*}
\log q(z_i = k, g_i = m)
&=\mathbb{E}_{\tau, \pi, V}\left[ p(z_i\mid \tau) \cdot p(g_i\mid\pi_k, z_i) \cdot p(y_{ij} \mid z_i,g_i,v_{jkm}) \right] \\
&\propto \mathbb{E}_{\tau, \pi, V}\left[ \log(\tau_{k}) + \log(\pi_{km}) + \log(v_{jkm}) \right],
\end{align*}
where the natural parameter $\eta = \mathbb{E}_{\tau, \pi, V}\left[ \log(\tau_{k}) + \log(\pi_{km}) + \log(v_{jkm}) \right]$. According to the inverse parameter mapping for categorical distribution with base measure $h(x)=1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\rho_{ikm}
&= e^\eta \\
&= \exp\Big\{ \mathbb{E}_\tau [\log\tau_k] + \mathbb{E}_\pi[\log\pi_{km}] + \mathbb{E}_V[\log v_{jkm}] \Big\} \\
&=\exp\left\{ \Psi(\nu_k)-\Psi\left(\sum_{k=1}^K\nu_k\right) + \Psi(\eta_{km}) - \Psi\left(\sum_{m=1}^M\eta_{km}\right) + \Psi(\mu_{jkml}) - \Psi\left(\sum_{l=1}^K\mu_{jkml}\right) \right\}.
\end{align*}
Note that for $\theta \sim \operatorname{Dir}(\alpha_1, \cdots, \alpha_k)$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{E}[\log(\theta_k)\mid\alpha] = \Psi(\alpha_k) - \Psi\left(\sum_{i=1}^N\alpha_i\right),
\end{equation*}
where $\Psi(\cdot)$ is the digamma function. Since $\rho_{ikm}=q(z_i=k, g_i=m)$, we can also easily get
\begin{equation*}
q(z_i=k) = \sum_{m=1}^M q(z_i=k, g_i=m) = \sum_{m=1}^M\rho_{ikm}
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Update rule for $q(\tau)$}
\label{sec:nu}
To get the optimal solution for $q(\tau)$, we need to find the exponential family form of its posterior. According to the PGM, we have
\begin{align*}
\log q(\tau_k)
&= \mathbb{E}_Z\left[ \log \left(p(\tau_k)\cdot \prod_{i=1}^N p(z_i=k\mid\tau_k) \right) \right] \\
&= (\alpha_{k} - 1)\log\tau_k + \sum_{i=1}^N \mathbb{E}_Z\left[q(z_i=k)\right]\log\tau_k ,
\end{align*}
where the natural parameter $\eta=\alpha_k-1 + \sum_{i=1}^N q(z_i=k)$ and $\gamma_{ik} = q(z_i=k)$. According to the inverse parameter mapping for Dirichlet distribution with base measure $h(x)=1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\nu_k
&= 1 + (\alpha_k - 1) + \sum_{i=1}^N \mathbb{E}_Z\left[q(z_i=k)\right] \\
&= \alpha_k + \sum_{i=1}^N \gamma_{ik}
\end{align*}
\subsection{Update rule for $q(\pi)$}
\label{sec:eta}
To get the optimal solution for $q(\pi)$, we need to find the exponential family form of its posterior. According to the PGM, we have
\begin{align*}
\log q(\pi_{km})
&= \mathbb{E}_{Z, G}\left[\log\left( p(\pi_{km})\cdot \prod_{i=1}^N p(g_i=m \mid \pi_{km}, z_i=k) \right)\right] \\
&= (a_\pi - 1)\log\pi_{km} + \sum_{i=1}^N \mathbb{E}_{Z, G}\left[q(z_i = k, g_i = m)\right]\log\pi_{km} ,
\end{align*}
where the natural parameter $\eta=a_\pi - 1 + \sum_{i=1}^N q(z_i=k, g_i=m)$ and $\rho_{ikm} = q(z_i=k, g_i=m)$. According to the inverse parameter mapping for Dirichlet distribution with base measure $h(x)=1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\eta_{km}
&= 1 + (a_\pi - 1) + \sum_{i=1}^N \mathbb{E}_{Z, G}\left[q(z_i = k, g_i = m)\right] \\
&= a_\pi + \sum_{i=1}^N \rho_{ikm}
\end{align*}
\subsection{Update rule for $q(v)$}
To get the optimal solution for $q(v)$, we need to find the exponential family form of its posterior. According to the PGM, we have
\begin{align*}
\log q(v_{jkml})
&= \mathbb{E}_{Z, G}\left[ \log\left( p(v_{jkml})\cdot \prod_{i\in\mathcal{N}_j} p( y_{ij} \mid v_{jkml}, g_i=m, z_i=k) \right) \right] \\
&= \mathbb{E}_{Z, G}\left[ (\beta_{kl} - 1)\log v_{jkml} + \sum_{i\in\mathcal{N}_j} q(g_i=m, z_i=k)\cdot\delta(y_{ij}, 1)\log v_{jkml} \right] \\
\end{align*}
where the natural parameter $\eta=(\beta_{kl} - 1) + \sum_{i\in\mathcal{N}_j} q(g_i=m, z_i=k)\cdot\delta(y_{ij}, 1)$ and $\rho_{ikm} = q(z_i=k, g_i=m)$. According to the inverse parameter mapping for Dirichlet distribution with base measure $h(x)=1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\mu_{jkml}
&= 1 + (\beta_{kl} - 1) + \sum_{i\in\mathcal{N}_j} q(g_i=m, z_i=k)\cdot\delta(y_{ij}, 1) \\
&= \beta_{kl} + \sum_{i\in\mathcal{N}_j} \rho_{ikm}\cdot\delta(y_{ij}, 1)
\end{align*}
\section{Inference of FABLE\xspace}
We integrate Gaussian process into the EBCC as FABLE\xspace with 3 auxiliary variables: $\lambda, \Upsilon, \Omega$. According to the PGM in Fig.~\ref{fig:gpebcc}, we can decompose the prior as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:gpebcc}
p({\bm\lambda}, \Omega, \Upsilon, F, \Pi, V, G, Z, T, Y)\notag
&= p({\bm\lambda})p(\Upsilon\mid{\bm \lambda})p(\Omega\mid\Upsilon)p(F)p(\Pi\mid\Upsilon, \Omega, F)\cdot \notag\\
&\ \ \ \ p(V)p(\tau)p(Z\mid \tau)p(G\mid\Pi, Z)p(Y\mid Z,G,V)
\end{align}
According to Eq.~\ref{eq:gpebcc}, which is based on EBCC, we only need to change the inference process of the variational distribution of mixture coefficient $q(\pi)$ with three more auxiliary variables. The new variational prior $q$ can be factorised as
\begin{equation}
q({\bm\lambda}, \Omega, \Upsilon, F, \Pi, V, G, Z, T)=q({\bm\lambda})q(\Omega, \Upsilon)q(F)q(\Pi)q(V)q(G, Z)q(T),
\end{equation}
where the inference processes of $q(V), q(T)$ are identical to EBCC.
\subsection{Update rule for $q(\Omega,\Upsilon)$}
\label{apdx:omega and upsilon}
To get the optimal solution for $q(\Omega,\Upsilon)$, we need to find the exponential family form of its posterior. According to the PGM of FABLE\xspace, we have
\begin{align*}
\log q(\Omega, \Upsilon)
&=\mathbb{E}_{\Pi, F, {\bm\lambda}}\left[\log\prod_{i=1}^N\prod_{k=1}^K\prod_{m=1}^M p(\pi_{ikm}\mid f_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm}, \omega_{ikm})p(\omega_{ikm}\mid\upsilon_{ikm})p(\upsilon_{ikm}\mid\lambda_{i})\right] \\
&=\mathbb{E}_{\Pi,F,{\bm\lambda}}\Bigg[ \log \prod_{i=1}^N\prod_{k=1}^K\prod_{m=1}^M 2^{-(\pi_{ikm}+\upsilon_{ikm})}\exp\left\{ \frac{(\pi_{ikm}-\upsilon_{ikm})\sum_{i=1}^N f_{ikm}}{2} - \frac{(\sum_{i=1}^N f_{ikm})^2}{2}\omega_{ikm} \right\}\cdot \\
&\ \ \ \ \operatorname{PG}(\omega_{ikm}\mid\upsilon_{ikm},0)\frac{\lambda_i^{\upsilon_{ikm}}\exp(-\lambda_i)}{\upsilon_{ikm}!} \Bigg] \\
&=\mathbb{E}_{\Pi,F,{\bm\lambda}}\Bigg[ \sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M\Bigg\{ -(\pi_{ikm}+\upsilon_{ikm})\log 2 + \frac{(\pi_{ikm}-\upsilon_{ikm})\sum_{i=1}^N f_{ikm}}{2} - \frac{(\sum_{i=1}^N f_{ikm})^2}{2}\omega_{ikm} \\
&\ \ \ \ +\log\operatorname{PG}(\omega_{ikm}\mid\upsilon_{nk}, 0) + \upsilon_{ikm}[\psi(\alpha_i)-\psi(\beta_i)]-\log\upsilon_{ikm}!\Bigg\}\Bigg] \\
&=\sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M\Bigg\{ -(\mathbb{E}_{\Pi}[\pi_{ikm}] + \upsilon_{ikm})\log2 - \upsilon_{ikm}\frac{\mathbb{E}_F[\sum_{i=1}^N f_{ikm}]}{2} - \omega_{ikm}\frac{\mathbb{E}_F[ (\sum_{i=1}^N f_{ikm})^2]}{2} \\
& \ \ \ \ +\log\operatorname{PG}(\omega_{ikm}\mid\upsilon_{ikm},0) + \upsilon_{ikm}[\psi(\alpha_i)-\log\beta_i]-\log\upsilon_{ikm}! \Bigg\}
\end{align*}
which implies that $q(\omega_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm})$ follows the distribution given below:
\begin{align*}
q(\omega_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm})
&\propto\left(\exp(-\frac{\widehat{m_{ikm}}}{2})\right)^{\upsilon_{ikm}}\exp\left(-\frac{(\mean f_{ikm})^2}{2}\omega_{ikm}\right)\operatorname{PG}(\omega_{ikm}\mid\upsilon_{ikm},0)\left(\frac{\exp(\psi(\alpha_i))}{\beta_i}\right)^{\upsilon_{ikm}}\frac{1}{\upsilon_{ikm}!} \\
&\propto\left\{\exp\left(-\frac{(\mean f_{ikm})^2}{2}\omega_{ikm}\right)\operatorname{PG}(\omega_{ikm}\mid\upsilon_{ikm},0)\operatorname{cosh}^{\upsilon_{ikm}}\left(-\frac{(\mean f_{ikm})^2}{2}\right)\right\} \\
&\propto\operatorname{PG}(\omega_{ikm}\mid\upsilon_{ikm}, c_{ikm})\operatorname{Po}(\upsilon_{ikm}\mid\gamma_{ikm}),
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align}
c_{ikm} &= \mean f_{ikm}=\sqrt{\widehat{m_{ikm}}^2 + \widehat{\Sigma_k}(i,i)} \label{eq:c}\\
\gamma_{ikm} &= \frac{\exp(\psi(a_i))\exp(-\frac{\widehat{m_{ikm}}}{2})}{\beta_i\operatorname{cosh}(\frac{\mean f_{ikm}}{2})} \label{eq:gamma}
\end{align}
\subsection{Update rule for $q(\lambda)$}
\begin{align*}
\log q({\bm\lambda})
&=\mathbb{E}_\Upsilon[\log p({\bm\upsilon\mid\lambda})p({\bm\lambda})] \\
&=\sum_{i=1}^N\left[\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M\gamma_{ikm}\log\lambda_i-K\lambda_i\right]
\end{align*}
where computation of $\gamma_{ikm}$ is given by Eq.~\ref{eq:gamma}. This implies that $q(\lambda_i)\sim\operatorname{Ga}(\lambda_i\mid a_i,b_i)$ where
\begin{align}
a_i &= \sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M\gamma_{ikm} + 1 \\
b_i &= K
\end{align}
\subsection{New update rule for $q(\Pi)$}
\begin{align*}
\log q(\Pi)
&= \mathbb{E}_{F,\Upsilon, \Omega, Z, G}\left[ \log\prod_{i=1}^N\prod_{k=1}^K\prod_{m=1}^M p(\pi_{ikm}\mid f_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm}, \omega_{ikm}) p(g_i=m\mid\pi_{ikm}, z_i) \right] \\
&= \mathbb{E}_{F,\Upsilon, \Omega, Z, G}\Bigg[\sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M - (\pi_{ikm}+\upsilon_{ikm})\log2 + \frac{(\pi_{ikm}-\upsilon_{ikm})f_{ikm}}{2}-\frac{(f_{ikm})^2}{2}\omega_{ikm} \\
& \ \ \ \ + q(z_i=k, g_i=m)\log\pi_{ikm} \Bigg] \\
&= \sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{m=1}^M \mathbb{E}_{Z, G}[q(z_i=k, g_i=m)]\log\pi_{ikm}-(\log2)\pi_{ikm} + \frac{\mathbb{E}_F[f_{ikm}]}{2}\pi_{ikm} + \operatorname{Const},
\end{align*}
which implies that $q(\pi_{ikm})$ follows the distribution given below:
\begin{align*}
q(\pi_{ikm})
&\propto \pi_{ikm}^{\rho_{ikm}}\cdot e^{ -(\log2 - \frac{\hat{m}_{km}}{2})\pi_{ikm}} \\
&\propto \operatorname{Ga}(\pi_{ikm}\mid \phi_{ikm}, \xi_{ikm}),
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
\phi_{ikm} &= \rho_{ikm} + 1 \\
\xi_{ikm} &= \log2-\frac{\hat{m}_{ikm}}{2}
\end{align*}
\subsection{Update rule for $q(F)$}
\begin{align*}
\log q(F)
&= \mathbb{E}_{\Pi, \Upsilon, \Omega}\left[ \log\prod_{i=1}^N\prod_{k=1}^K p(\pi_{ikm}\mid f_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm}, \omega_{ikm})p(f_{ikm}) \right] \\
&=\mathbb{E}_{\Pi, \Upsilon, \Omega}\left[\log\prod_{k=1}^K\mathcal{N}(f_{ikm}\mid\frac{{\pi}_{km}-{\bm\upsilon}_{km}}{2}, \operatorname{diag}({\bm\omega}_{km})^{-1})\mathcal{N}(f_{ikm}\mid{\bm 0}, \Sigma_{km})\right]
\end{align*}
which implies that $q({\bm f}^{(k, m)})\sim\mathcal{N}({\bm f}^{(k, m)}\mid\hat{\bm m}_k, \hat{\Sigma}_k)$ where
\begin{align}
\hat{\bm m}_{km} &= \frac{1}{2}\hat{\bm\Sigma}_{km}(\bm{\phi}_{km}/\bm{\xi}_{km}-\mathbb{E}[{\bm \upsilon_{km}}]) \\
\hat{\bm \Sigma}_{km} &= ({\bm\Sigma}_{km}^{-1}+\operatorname{diag}(\mathbb{E}[\hat{\bm \omega}_{km}]))^{-1}.
\end{align}
Note that $\mathbb{E}[{\bm \upsilon_{km}}]={\bm \gamma}_{km}, \mathbb{E}_{q(\omega_{km}, \upsilon_{km})}[\omega_{km}]=\frac{\mathbb{E}[{\bm \pi_{ikm}}]+{\bm \gamma_{km}}}{2{\bm c_{km}}}\tanh\frac{{\bm c_{km}}}{2}$.
\section{INTRODUCTION}
The deployment of machine learning models typically relies on large-scale labeled data to regularly train and evaluate the models.
To collect labels, practitioners have increasingly resorted to Programmatic Weak Supervision (PWS)~\citep{ratner2016data, zhang2022survey}, a paradigm in which labels are generated cheaply and efficiently.
Specifically, in PWS, users develop weak supervision sources abstracted as simple programs called \emph{labeling functions (LFs)}, rather than make individual annotations.
These LFs could efficiently produce noisy votes on the true label or abstain from voting based on external knowledge bases, heuristic rules, \etc.
To infer the true labels, various \emph{statistical label models}~\citep{ratner2016data, ratner2019training, fu2020fast} are developed to aggregate the labels output by LFs.
One of the major technical challenges in PWS is how to infer the true labels given the noisy and potentially conflict labels of multiple LFs.
While being diverse in assumptions and modeling techniques, existing statistic label models typically rely solely on the LFs' labels~\citep{ratner2016data, bach2017learning, varma2017inferring, cachay2021dependency}. In this paper, we argue that incorporating instance features into a statistical label model has significant potential to improve the inferred truth.
Intuitively, statistical label models aim to recover the pattern of correlation between the LF labels and the ground truth; it is natural to assume that similar instants would share a similar pattern and therefore the instance features could be indicative of the pattern of each instant.
When ignoring the instance features, statistical label models have to assume that the patterns or the LF correctness is instant-independent, which is unlikely to be true for real-world dataset.
To attack this problem, we propose FABLE\xspace (Feature-Aware laBeL modEl), which exploits the instance features to help identify the correlation pattern of instants. We build FABLE\xspace upon a recent model named EBCC~\citep{li2019exploiting}, which is a mixture model where each mixture component is a popular Bayesian extension to the DS model~\citep{dawid1979maximum} and aims to capture one sort of LF and true label correlation. To incorporate instance features, we propose to make the mixture coefficients a categorical distribution explicitly depending on instance features. In particular, a predictive Gaussian process (GP) is adopted to learn the distribution of mixture coefficients, connecting the correlation patterns with instance features.
However, the categorical distribution of mixture coefficients is non-conjugate to the Gaussian prior, hindering the usage of efficient Bayesian inference algorithm, \eg, variational inference. To overcome this, we introduce a number of auxiliary variables to augment the likelihood function to achieve the desired conjugate representation of our model. Note that there are a couple of recently proposed neural network-based models~\citep{ren2020denoising, ruhling2021end} that also leverage instance features, but via neural network. We include them as baselines for comparison and highlight that these neural network-based models typically require gold validation set for hyperparameter tuning and early stopping to be performant with comparison to a statistical model like FABLE\xspace.
We conduct extensive experiments on synthetic dataset with varying size and 11 benchmark datasets. Compared with state-of-the-art baselines, FABLE\xspace achieves the highest averaged performance and ranking.
More importantly, to help understand when FABLE\xspace works well and verify our arguments, we measure the correlation of instance features and the LF correctness, \ie, Corr(X, LFs).
Then, we calculate the Pearson’s correlation coefficient between Corr(X, LFs) and the gain of FABLE\xspace over EBCC on synthetic dataset, which is 0.496 with $p$-value $<0.01$, indicating that leveraging instance feature is more beneficial when the LF correctness indeed depends on the features.
\section{RELATED WORKS}
In PWS, researches have developed a bunch of statistical label model.
\citet{ratner2016data} models the joint distribution between LF and ground truth labels to describe the distribution in terms of pre-defined factor functions.
\citet{ratner2019training} models the distribution via a Markov network and recover the parameters via a matrix completion-style approach, while \citet{fu2020fast} models the distribution via a binary Ising model and recover the parameters by triplet methods. There are other statistical models designed for extended PWS setting~\citep{shin2021universalizing} or for extended definition of LFs, \eg, partial labeling functions~\citep{yu2022learning}, indirect labeling functions~\citep{zhang2021creating}, and positive-only labeling functions~\citep{zhang2022binary}.
Besides the statistical label models, researchers have recently proposed neural network-based models to leverage instance features~\citep{ren2020denoising, ruhling2021end}, while in this work, we aim to incorporate instance features into a pure statistical model.
Prior to PWS, statistical models for label aggregation were separately developed in the field of crowdsourcing.
\citet{dawid1979maximum} used a confusion matrix parameter to generative model LF labels conditioned on the item's true annotation, for clinical diagnostics.
\citet{kim2012ibcc} formulated a Bayesian generalization with Dirichlet priors and inference by Gibbs sampling, while \citet{li2019exploiting} incorporate the subtypes as mixture correlation and decoupled the confusion matrix, which make the Bayesian generation process become a mixture model.
Their analysis of inferred worker confusion matrix clustering is a natural precursor to modelling worker correlation.
\section{PRELIMINARIES}
In this section, we first introduce the setup and notation of the programmatic weak supervision (PWS), then discuss two representative Bayesian models that can be used in PWS. We also discuss the multi-class Gaussian process classification, which is related to our proposed method.
\subsection{Notation}
Let $X=\{\vec{x}_1,...,\vec{x}_N\}$ denote a training set with $N$ featured data samples.
Assume that there are $L$ labeling functions (LFs) $\vec{y}_i=[y_{i1},...,y_{iL}]$ with $j\in[L]$, each of which classifies $N$ each sample into one of $K$ categories or abstain (outputting $-1$).
Let $z_i$ be the latent true label of the sample $i$, $y_{ij}$ the label that LF $j$ assigns to the item $i$, $Y_i$ the set of LFs who have labelled the item $i$.
\subsection{Bayesian Classifier Combination (BCC) Models}
\paragraph{Independent BCC.}
The iBCC~\citep{kim2012ibcc} model is a directed graphical model and a popular extension to David-Skene (DS)~\citep{dawid1979maximum} model by making a conditional independence assumption between LFs.
The iBCC model assumes that given the true label $z_i$ of $x_i$, LF labels to $x_i$ are generated independently by different LFs,
\begin{equation}
p(y_{i1},...,y_{iL}\mid z_i) = \prod_{j=1}^L p(y_{ij}\mid z_i).
\label{eq:ibcc}
\end{equation}
This was referred as the LF's conditional independence assumption.
However, the underlying independence assumptions prevent the model from capturing correlations between labels from different LF.
\paragraph{Enhanced BCC.}
The EBCC model~\citep{li2019exploiting} is an extension of iBCC, which import $M$ subtypes to capture the correlation between LFs and aggregated the captured correlation by tensor rank decomposition.
The joint distribution of observing the outputs of multiple LFs can be approximated by a linear combination of more rank-1 tensors, known also as tensor rank decomposition~(\cite{hitchcock1927expression}), i.e.,
\begin{equation}
p(y_{1},...,y_{L}\mid z=k)\approx\sum_{m=1}^M \vec{\pi}_{km} \vec{v}_{1km}\otimes\cdots\otimes \vec{v}_{Lkm},
\label{eq:tensor_decom}
\end{equation}
where $\otimes$ is the tensor product.
EBCC interpreted the tensor decomposition as a mixture model, where $\vec{v}_{1km}\otimes\cdots\otimes \vec{v}_{Lkm}$ are mixture component shared by all the data samples, and $\pi_{km}$ is the mixture coefficient.
This comes out that
\begin{equation*}
p(y_1,...,y_L\mid z) = \sum_{m=1}^M p(g=m\mid z)\prod_{j=1}^L p(y_j\mid z, g=m)
\end{equation*}
here $g$ is an auxiliary latent variable used for indexing mixture components.
All the mixture components are the result of categorical distribution governed by parameter $\beta_k$ where $\beta_{kk}=a$ and $\beta_{kk'}=b$, which is equivalent to assuming that every LF has correctly labelled $a$ items under every class, and has to make all kinds of mistakes $b$ times.
The $M$ components under class $k$ can be seen as $M$ subtypes, each of which can be used to explain the correlation between LF labels given class $k$~\citep{li2019exploiting}.
\subsection{Multi-class Gaussian Process Classification}
The multi-class Gaussian process (GP) classification model consists of a latent GP prior for each class $\vec{f}=(f_{i1},...,f_{iK})$, where $f_i\sim\operatorname{GP}(m, \Sigma)$, $m$ is the mean over samples, $\Sigma$ is the kernel function.
The conditional distribution is modeled by a categorical likelihood,
\begin{equation}
p(y_i=k\mid x_i, \vec{f}_i) = h^{(k)}(\vec{f}_i(x_i)),
\end{equation}
where $h^{(k)}(\cdot)$ is a function that maps the real vector of the $\operatorname{GP}$ values to a probability vector.
For $h(\cdot)$, the most common way to form a categorical likelihood is through the softmax transformation
\begin{equation}
p(y_i=k\mid\vec{f}_i)=\frac{\exp(f_{ik})}{\sum_{k=1}^K\exp(f_{ik})}
\end{equation}
where $f_{ik}$ denotes the $f^k(x_i)$ and for clarity, we omit the conditioning on $x_i$.
\section{METHODS}
In this section, we introduce the proposed FABLE\xspace model. In a nutshell, it connects the mixture coefficients of the EBCC model with the instance features via a predictive Gaussian process (GP). Then, we introduce a bunch of auxiliary variables to handle the non-conjugation in the model to ensure efficient variational inference. Finally, we present the generative process, joint distribution, and the inference process of the FABLE\xspace model.
\subsection{Leveraging instance features via mixture coefficient}
In this work, we aim to explicitly incorporate instance features into a statistical label model built upon EBCC.
To attack this problem, we leverage the Gaussian process (GP) classification.
Specifically, we model the mixture coefficients of EBCC as the output of a GP classifier, which inputs the instance features.
We generate $N\times K\times M$ functions for each data, class, and subtypes, and take the logistic-softmax distribution for each subtype and class to acquire the mixture coefficient for each data.
In particular, we rewrite the Equation~\ref{eq:tensor_decom} as
\begin{align}
&p(y_{i1},...,y_{iL}\mid z_i=k)\notag \\
=& \sum_{m=1}^M \pi_{ikm}\left[\vec{v}_{1km}\otimes\cdots\otimes \vec{v}_{Lkm}\right] \notag \\
\approx&\sum_{m=1}^M h_{\text{softmax}}^{(k,m)}(\sigma(\vec{f}_i)) \left[\vec{v}_{1km}\otimes\cdots\otimes \vec{v}_{Lkm}\right]\notag,
\label{eq:gp-ebcc}
\end{align}
where $\sigma(\cdot)$ is sigmoid function and $\pi_{ikm} = p(g_i=m\mid z_i)$.
$f_i$ is GP's latent functions for sample $x_i$ with $f_{i} = f(\vec{x}_i)$ and $f_{i}\sim\operatorname{GP}(m_{i}, \Sigma)$.
We will soon discuss the details and advantages of our usage of GP classifier in the sequel.
\subsection{Handling the Non-conjugate Prior}
Given the proposed model, we would like to infer the true labels via the standard mean field variational inference process following prior work~\citep{li2019exploiting}.
However, a key challenge that prevents us from performing variational inference is that as a categorical likelihood function, softmax is non-conjugate to the Gaussian prior, so the variational posterior $q(f_{ikm})$ cannot be derived analytically.
Inspired by \cite{polson2013bayesian, galy2020multi}, we propose to solve the non-conjugate mapping function in the complete data likelihood by introducing a number of auxiliary latent variables such that the augmented complete data likelihood falls into the exponential family, which is conjugate to the Gaussian prior.
In the following section we (1) decouple the GP latent variables $f_{ikm}$ in the denominator by introducing of a set of auxiliary $\lambda$-variables and the logistic-softmax function, (2) simplify the model likelihood by introducing Poisson random variables, and (3) use a Pólya-Gamma representation of the sigmoid function to achieve the desired conjugate representation of our model.
\paragraph{Decouple GP latent variables.}
Following \citet{galy2020multi}, we first replace the softmax likelihood with the logistic-softmax likelihood,
\begin{equation}
\pi_{ikm}=h_{\text{softmax}}^{(k,m)}(\sigma(\vec{f}_i)) =\frac{\sigma(f_{ikm})}{\sum_{j=1}^K\sum_{n=1}^M\sigma(f_{ijn})},
\label{eq:likelihood}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma(z)=(1+\exp(-z))^{-1}$ is the logistic function.
To remedy the intractable normalizer term $\sum_{j=1}^K\sum_{n=1}^M\sigma(f_{ijn})$, we use the integral identity $\frac{1}{x}=\int_0^\infty e^{-\lambda x}d\lambda$ and express the likelihood (\ref{eq:likelihood}) as
\begin{align}
&h_{\text{softmax}}^{(k,m)}(\sigma(\vec{f}_i)) \notag \\
=&\sigma(f_{ikm})\int_0^\infty \exp\left(-\lambda_i \sum_{j=1}^K\sum_{n=1}^M \sigma(f_{ijn})\right)d\lambda_i.
\end{align}
By interpreting $\lambda_i$ as an additional latent variable, we obtain the augmented likelihood
{\small
\begin{align}
p(\pi_{ikm}\mid f_{ikm}, \lambda_i)=\sigma(f_{ikm})\prod_{j=1}^K\prod_{n=1}^M \exp(-\lambda_i\sigma(f_{ijn})),
\label{eq:incrop_lambda}
\end{align}
}
here we impose the improper prior $p(\lambda_i)\propto\mathds{1}_{[0,\infty]}, \forall i\in[1,N]$.
The improper prior is not problematic since it leads to a proper complete conditional distribution, as we will see at the end of the section.
\paragraph{Poisson augmentation}
By leveraging the moment generation function of the Poisson distribution $\operatorname{Po}(\lambda)$
\begin{equation*}
\exp(\lambda(z-1)) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}z^n\operatorname{Po}(z\mid\lambda).
\end{equation*}
Using $z=\sigma(-f)$, we rewrite the exponential factors as,
\begin{align*}
\exp(\lambda_i \sigma(f_{ikm})) =& \exp(\lambda_i(\sigma(f_{ikm}) - 1)) \\
=& \sum_{j=1}^K\sum_{n=1}^M(\sigma(-f_{ijn}))^{\upsilon_{ijn}}\operatorname{Po}(\upsilon_{ijn}\mid\lambda_i),
\end{align*}
which leads to the augmented likelihood
\begin{align}
p(\pi_{ikm}&\mid f_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm}, \lambda_i) \notag\\
&=\sigma(f_{ikm})\cdot\prod_{j=1}^K\prod_{n=1}^M(\sigma(-f_{ijn}))^{\upsilon_{ijn}},
\label{eq:poisson argum}
\end{align}
where $\upsilon_{ikm}\sim \operatorname{Po}(\lambda_i)$.
\paragraph{Complete with Pólya-Gamma}
In the last step, we aim for a Gaussian representation of the sigmoid function.
The Pólya-Gamma representation allows us for rewriting the sigmoid function as a scale mixture of Gaussian,
\begin{equation}
\sigma(z)^n = \int_0^\infty 2^{-n}\exp\left(\frac{\upsilon z}{2}-\frac{z^2}{2}\omega\right)\operatorname{PG}(\omega\mid \upsilon,0)
\end{equation}
where $\operatorname{PG}(\omega\mid\upsilon, b)$ is a Pólya-Gamma distribution.
By applying this augmentation to Equation~\ref{eq:poisson argum} we obtain
\begin{align}
p(\pi_{ikm}&\mid f_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm}, \omega_{ikm})\notag \\
&=\frac{2^{-(\pi_{ikm}+\upsilon_{ikm})}\exp\left\{ \frac{(\pi_{ikm}-\upsilon_{ikm}) f_{ikm}}{2}\right\}}{\exp\left\{\frac{(f_{ikm})^2}{2}\omega_{ikm}\right\}},
\end{align}
where $\omega_{ikm}\sim\operatorname{PG}(\omega_{ikm}\mid \upsilon_{ikm},0)$ are Pólya-Gamma variables.
Finally, the complete conditions of the GPs' $f_{ikm}$ are
\begin{align}
&p(f_{ikm}\mid \pi_{ikm}, \omega_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm}) \notag\\ =&\mathcal{N}\left(f_{ikm}\mid\frac{1}{2}\hat{\Sigma}_{km}\left(\mathbb{E}[\pi_{ikm}]-\mathbb{E}[\upsilon_{ikm}]\right), \hat{\Sigma}_{km}\right),
\end{align}
where $\hat{\Sigma}_{km} = ({\Sigma}_{km}^{-1}+\operatorname{diag}(\mathbb{E}[\omega_{ikm}]))^{-1}$.
For the conditional distribution, $\lambda_i$ we have
\begin{equation}
p(\lambda_i\mid \vec{\upsilon}_i) = \operatorname{Ga}\left(1+\sum_{j=1}^K\sum_{n=1}^M \gamma_{ijn} + 1, K\right),
\end{equation}
where $\operatorname{Ga}(\cdot| a, b)$ indicated a gamma distribution with parameter $a$ and $b$. $\gamma_{ijn}$ is the parameter of the joint distribution of $p(\omega_{ikm}, \upsilon_{ikm})$, detailed in Appendix~\ref{apdx:omega and upsilon}.
In summary, by integrating three auxiliary random variable $\lambda_i, \upsilon_{ikm}, \omega_{ikm}$, we successfully turn the posterior of $f_{ikm}$ from non-conjugate softmax to exponential family form, the Gaussian distribution, which is easy to infer by adopting variational inference with $q(f_{ikm})\sim \mathcal{N}(\hat{m}, \hat{\Sigma})$.
\subsection{The Generative Process and Joint Distribution}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig/PGM2.png}
\caption{The probabilistic graphical model of FABLE\xspace.}
\label{fig:gpebcc}
\end{figure}
Here, we summarize the generative process of the proposed model. We use the GP latent functions $F$ and the corresponding auxiliary variables $\Omega$ and $\Upsilon$ to generate the mixture coefficient $\Pi$.
There are $K\times M$ subtypes in total, and we assume the item $i$ belongs to the $g_i$-th subtype of the class, $z_i$ as in EBCC. The proposed model is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:gpebcc} and its generative process is:
\begin{algorithmic}
\\
\State 1. for $i$ in $1...N$
\State \quad\quad $\lambda_i\sim\operatorname{Ga}(a_i, b_i)$
\State \quad\quad for $k$ in $1...K$
\State \quad\quad\quad $\vec{\upsilon}_{ik}\sim\operatorname{Po}(\lambda_i)$
\State \quad\quad\quad $\vec{\omega}_{ik}\sim\operatorname{PG}(\vec{\upsilon}_{ik}, 0)$
\State \quad\quad\quad $\vec{f}_{ik}\sim\mathcal{N}(\vec{m}_{ik}, \Sigma_{k})$
\State \quad\quad\quad $\vec{\pi}_{ik}\sim\operatorname{Ga}(\vec{\phi}_{ik}, \vec{\xi}_{ik})$ \\
\State 2. for $k$ in $1...K$
\State \quad\quad for $m$ in $1...M$, for $j$ in $1...L$
\State \quad\quad\quad $\vec{v}_{jkm}\sim\operatorname{Dir}(\vec{\beta}_k)$ \\
\State 3. $\vec{\tau}\sim\operatorname{Dir}(\vec{\alpha})$ \\
\State 4. for $i$ in $1...N$
\State \quad\quad $z_i\sim\operatorname{Cat}(\vec{\tau})$
\State \quad\quad $g_i\sim\operatorname{Cat}(\vec{\pi}_{z_i})$
\State \quad\quad for $j\in\mathcal{L}_i$
\State \quad\quad\quad $y_{ij}\sim\operatorname{Cat}(\vec{v}_{jz_ig_i})$
\end{algorithmic}
Following the generative process, the joint distribution is
\begin{align}
\label{eq:gpebcc}
&p({\bm\lambda}, \Omega, \Upsilon, F, \Pi, V, G, Z, T, Y)\notag \\
= &p({\bm\lambda})p(\Upsilon\mid{\bm \lambda})p(\Omega\mid\Upsilon)p(F)p(\Pi\mid\Upsilon, \Omega, F)\cdot \notag\\
&p(V)p(T)p(Z\mid T)p(G\mid\Pi, Z)p(Y\mid Z,G,V).
\end{align}
\subsection{The Inference Algorithm}
The goal of the inference is to find the most likely $Z$ (true labels) given the LF labels $Y$, data features $X$ and all hyperparameters,
\begin{equation*}
\argmax_Z p(Z\mid Y, \alpha, a_i, b_i, \vec{m}_{ik}, \Sigma_{km}, \vec{\beta}_k),
\end{equation*}
which is intractable to solve directly.
Therefore, we adopt a mean-field variational approach that seeks a distribution $q$ that approximates $p({\bm\lambda}, \Omega, \Upsilon, F, \Pi, V, G, Z, T\mid Y, \alpha, a_i, b_i, \vec{m}_{ik}, \Sigma_{km}, \vec{\beta}_k)$, where $q$ is assumed to be factorized as
{\scriptsize
\begin{align*}
&q({\bm\lambda}, \Omega, \Upsilon, F, \Pi, V, G, Z, T) \\
=&q({\bm\lambda})q(\Omega, \Upsilon)q(F)q(\Pi)q(V)q(G, Z)q(T) \\
=&\prod_i\operatorname{Ga}(\lambda_i\mid a_i,b_i)\cdot\prod_k\operatorname{PG}(\vec{\omega}_{ik}\mid\vec{\upsilon}_{ik}, \vec{c}_{ik})\operatorname{Po}(\vec{\upsilon}_{ik}\mid\vec{\gamma}_{ik}) \\
&\mathcal{N}(\hat{m}_{ik}, \hat{\Sigma}_{ik})\operatorname{Ga}(\vec{\pi}_{ik}\mid\vec{\phi}_{ik},\vec{\xi}_{ik})\cdot
\prod_k\prod_m\prod_j\operatorname{Dir}(\vec{v}_{kmj}\mid\vec{\mu}_{kmj})\cdot \\
&\prod_i q(g_i, z_i)\cdot \operatorname{Dir}(\vec{\tau}\mid\vec{\nu}).
\end{align*}}
Since the joint distribution is fully factorized in $q$, it is easy to solve $\argmax_Z q(Z)$ by finding $k$ that maximizes every individual $q(z_i=k)$, i.e. $\Tilde{z}_i=\argmax_k q(z_i=k)$.
Let $\rho_{ikm}=q(z_i=k, g_i=m)$, then follow the standard mean-field variational Bayes steps, we can derive the update rules shown below
\begin{align*}
\rho_{ikm} &= e^{\mathbb{E}_q [\log\tau_k] +\mathbb{E}_q[\log\pi_{ikm}]+\sum_{j\in\mathcal{L}_i}\mathbb{E}_q[\log v_{kmjy_{ij}}]} \\
q(z_i=k) &= \sum_m\rho_{ikm} \\
\mu_{kmj} &= \beta_{kl} + \sum_{i\in\mathcal{N}_j}\rho_{ikm}\mathds{1}[y_{ij}=l]\\
\nu_k &= \alpha_k + \sum_i q(z_i=k) \\
\phi_{ikm} &= \rho_{ikm}+1 \\
\xi_{ikm} &= \log2 - \frac{\hat{m}_{ikm}}{2} \\
\hat{\Sigma}_{km} &= (\Sigma_{km}^{-1}+\operatorname{diag}(\mathbb{E}[\omega_{ikm}]))^{-1} \\
\hat{m}_{ikm} &= \frac{1}{2}\hat{\Sigma}_{km}(\phi_{ikm}/\xi_{ikm}-\mathbb{E}[\upsilon_{ikm}]) \\
c_{ikm} &= \sqrt{\hat{m}_{ikm}^2 + \hat{\Sigma}_{km}(i,i)} \\
\gamma_{ikm} &= \frac{\exp(\phi(a_i)-\frac{\hat{m}_{ikm}}{2})}{\beta_i\operatorname{cosh}(\frac{c_{ikm}}{2})} \\
a_i &= \sum_k\sum_m\gamma_{ikm} + 1 \\
b_i &= K
\end{align*}
The expectations are calculated as follows
\begin{align*}
&\mathbb{E}_q[\log\tau_k] = \psi(\nu_k)-\psi(\sum_k\nu_k)\\
&\mathbb{E}_q[\log\pi_{ikm}] = \psi(\phi_{ikm}) - \log(\xi_{ikm}) \\
&\mathbb{E}_q[\log v_{jkml}] = \psi(\mu_{jkml}) - \psi(\sum_l\mu_{jkml}).
\end{align*}
While updating $\hat{\Sigma}_{ikm}$ through variational inference, one has to calculate the inverse of $(\Sigma_{km}^{-1} + \operatorname{diag}(\mathbb{E}[\omega_{ikm}]))$, a $N\times N$ matrix, $K\times M$ times every inference step, which could be prohibitively slow for large-scale dataset.
To address this issue, we adopt the Lanczos algorithm~\citep{golub2013matrix} to acquire a low-rank approximation of $(\Sigma_{km}^{-1} + \operatorname{diag}(\mathbb{E}[\omega_{ikm}]))^{-1}$ and achieve at least 10 times acceleration.
Briefly, the Lanczos algorithm factories a symmetric matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ as $QTQ^\top$, where $T\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ is symmetric tridiagonal and $Q\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ is orthonormal by using a probe vector $\textbf{b}$ and computes an orthogonal basis of the Krylov subspace $\mathcal{K}(A, \textbf{b})$
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{K}(A, \textbf{b})=\text{span}\{\textbf{b}, A\textbf{b}, A^2\textbf{b},...,A^{n-1}\textbf{\textbf{b}}\}
\end{equation*}
Applying Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization to these vectors produces the columns of $Q, [\textbf{b}/\|\textbf{b}\|, \textbf{q}_2, \textbf{q}_3,...,\textbf{q}_n]$ (here $\|\textbf{b}\|$ is the Euclidean norm of $\textbf{b}$). The orthogonalization coefficients are collected into $T$. Because $A$ is symmetric, each vector needs only be orthogonalized against the two preceding vectors, which results in the tridigonal structure of $T$~\citep{golub2013matrix}. The orthogonalized vectors and coefficients are computed in an iterative manner. $k$ iterations produce the first $k$ orthogonal vectors of $Q_k=[\textbf{q}_1,...,\textbf{q}_k]\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times k}$ and their corresponding coefficients $T_k\in\mathbb{R}^{k\times k}$. These $k$ iterations require only $O(k)$ matrix vector multiplies with the original matrix A.
\section{EXPERIMENT}
\subsection{Implementation Details}
\paragraph{Initialization.}
FABLE\xspace has 5 parameters, $q(z_i=k), \vec{\rho}_{ik}, \hat{\Sigma}_{km}, \hat{m}_{ikm}$, and $a_i$ to be initialized.
For $q(z_i=k)$, our initialization is similar to EBCC: we first initialize $q(z_i=k)$ by majority voting, i.e. $q(z_i = k) = \frac{1}{|L_i|}\sum_{j\in L_i} 1[y_{ij}=k]$, then multiply it with a random vector drawn from $\operatorname{Dir}(1_M)$ to initialize $\vec{\rho}_{ik}$.
We calculate the pair-wise cosine similarity of the input features to initialize $\hat{\Sigma}_{km}$.
Finally, we initialize $\hat{m}_{ikm}, a_i$ with an uninformative prior $\text{Uniform}(0,1)$.
\paragraph{Hyperparameter settings.}
FABLE\xspace has 5 hyperparameters, $\beta_{kk}, \beta_{kk'}$ for initializing $\vec{\mu}_{jkm}$, $\vec{\alpha}$ for initializing $\vec{\tau}$ and the number of subtype $M$.
We set $\beta_{kk}=N\times M \times C$, $\beta_{kk'}=1$, $k\neq k'$, where $C$ is the number of correct labels that LFs gave in each subtype and class. We set $C=1000$ to encode that we believe LFs are better than random guessing.
Following EBCC, we set $\alpha_k=\sum_i q(z_i=k)^{(0)}$ where $q(z_i=k)^{(0)}$ is the MV initialization for $q(z_i=k)$ because MV can provide a reliable estimate of the class portion in the dataset.
For the number of subtypes, we set $M = 3$.
The key reason of we give a small number of subtypes is that subtypes are learned to capture correlation patterns and a large $M$ increase the number of parameters, increasing the risk of overfitting.
\subsection{Compared Methods}
We compare our method FABLE\xspace against existing label models implemented in the WRENCH benchmark~\citep{zhang2021wrench} as well as iBCC and EBCC.
For all the baselines, we use the default parameter without hyperparameter tuning because we do not assume a gold validation set.
We list the involved baselines as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Majority Voting (MV)}. The predicted label of each data point is the most common label given by LFs.
\item \textbf{Data Programming (DP)}~\citep{ratner2016data}. DP models the distribution $p(Y, Z)$ as a factor graph. It can describe the distribution in terms of pre-defined factor functions, which reflects the dependency of any subset of random variables. The log-likelihood is optimized by SGD where the gradient is estimated by Gibbs sampling, similarly to contrastive divergence~\citep{salakhutdinov2010efficient}.
\item \textbf{MeTaL}~\citep{ratner2019training}. MeTal models the distribution via a Markov Network and recover the parameters via a matrix completion-style approach. The latest version of the popular Snorkel system\footnote{\url{https://github.com/snorkel-team/snorkel}} adopts MeTaL as its default label aggregation method.
\item \textbf{FlyingSquid (FS)}~\citep{fu2020fast}. FS models the distribution as a binary Ising model, and a Triplet Method is used to recover the parameters. Notably, FS is designed for binary classification and the author suggested applying a one-versus-all reduction repeatedly to apply the core algorithm.
\item \textbf{Dawid and Skene's model (DS)}~\citep{dawid1979maximum}. DS models the confusion matrix of each worker regarding the ground truth labels. This method is widely used in crowdsourcing and is the recommended method for classification tasks in a benchmark on crowdsourcing~\citep{zheng2017truth}.
\item \textbf{Independent BCC (iBCC)}~\citep{kim2012ibcc}. iBCC models the relation between workers' annotation and the ground true label by worker independent assumption, and the relation can be solved by Gibbs sampling, mean-filed variational Bayes and expectation propagation.
\item \textbf{Enhanced BCC (EBCC)}~\citep{li2019exploiting}. Based on iBCC, EBCC models the latent correlation between workers by adding subtypes that have significant potential to improve truth inference.
\item \textbf{Denoise}~\citep{ren2020denoising}. \textit{Denoise} adopts an attention network to aggregate over weak labels, and use a neural classifier to leverage the data features.
These two components are jointly trained in an end-to-end manner.
\item \textbf{WeaSEL}~\citep{ruhling2021end}. WeaSEL shares similar model architecture as Denoise with a new objective to optimize the two components jointly.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Synthetic Dataset}
In this section, we use synthetic datasets to show that leveraging instance features makes a statistical label model robust to the dataset size, and to answer the question of when is leveraging instance features helpful in improving the performance of label aggregation?
\paragraph{Leveraging instance features makes a statistical label model robust to the dataset size.}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\hspace{-8mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/covered_syn.png}
\caption{An example of decision space of each LF in the synthetic dataset.}
\label{fig:covered_syn}
\end{figure}
The authors of EBCC showed that the performance of EBCC drops dramatically when the size of synthetic dataset increases, and they hypothesized that it is an optimization problem and EBCC gets stuck on bad local optima~\citep{li2019exploiting}. We argue that a statistical label model leveraging instance features like FABLE\xspace does might suffer less from bad local optima because it introduces a strong yet realistic inductive bias: similar data tend to have similar correlation pattern, which serves as an implicit constraint and potentially avoid bad local optima.
To confirm our hypothesis, we generated synthetic datasets consisting of 4 classes, \ie, $\{C_1, C_2, C_3, C_4\}$, with different dataset sizes, \ie, $\{1, 5, 10, 15, 20\}\times10^3$, for evaluation. Data feature $\vec{x}_i$ in each class are sampled from 4 different Gaussian distributions with 2 independent features $x_{i1}, x_{i2}$, and $\mathcal{X}^{C_j}$ denotes the set of synthetic data belonging to the class $C_j$.
Then, we generate 8 \emph{unipolar} LFs, $\vec{y}=[y_{(C_1,1)}, y_{(C_1,2)}, ..., y_{(C_4,1)}, y_{(C_4,2)}]$ with 2 for each class.
Specifically, a LF $y_{(C_j, k)}$ assign label $C_j$ or abstention ($-1$) to an individual data point based on the $k$-th dimension of the data feature.
For a data point $x_i$, the output of a LF $y_{(C_j, k)}$ is:
\begin{equation*}
y_{(C_j, k)}=\left\{
\begin{aligned}
C_j, & \ \text{if} \ \ \mu^{C_j}_{k} - \sigma_k^{C_j} <x_{ik}< \mu^{C_j}_{k} + \sigma_k^{C_j}\\
-1, & \ \text{otherwise}
\end{aligned},
\right.
\end{equation*}
where $-1$ means the LF abstaining from voting, and $\mu^{C_j}$ and $\sigma^{C_j}$ indicate the mean and standard deviation respectively of generated data points $x\in\mathcal{X}^{C_j}$. We use subscript $k$ to indicate the value of the $k$-th dimension value of $\mu^{C_j}$ or $\sigma^{C_j}$.
We provide an example of the generated synthetic data and LFs as in Figure.~\ref{fig:covered_syn}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig/perform_syn.png}
\caption{Performance comparison on synthetic dataset, the results are average over 100 runs on each dataset.}
\label{fig:perf_syn}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\hspace{-8mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/relation_syn.png}
\caption{Relation between feature-LF correlation and performance gap between EBCC and FABLE\xspace on synthetic dataset.}
\label{fig:rela_syn}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\caption{Dataset statistics}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c|ccccccccccc}
\toprule\hline
Dataset & IMDB & Youtube & SMS & CDR & Yelp & Commercial & Tennis & TREC & SemEval & ChemProt & AG News \\ \hline\hline
Metric & F1 & F1 & F1 & F1 & F1 &F1 & F1 & Acc & Acc & Acc & Acc \\ \hline
\#Class & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 6 & 9 & 10 & 4 \\ \hline
\#LF & 5 & 10 & 73 & 33 & 8 & 4 & 4 & 68 & 164 & 26 & 9 \\ \hline
\#Data & 25,000 & 1,956 & 5,571 & 14,023 & 38,000 & 81,105 & 20,256 & 2,965 & 2,641 & 16,075 & 120,000\\ \hline\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\label{tab:datasets}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\caption{Comparison among different methods on benchmark dataset. \best{Red} and \secbest{blue} indicate the best and the second-best result of each method.}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c | ccccccccc | c}
\toprule\hline
Dataset & MV & DS & DP & FS & MeTaL & iBCC & EBCC & WeaSEL & Denoise & FABLE\xspace \\ \hline\hline
IMDB & 72.19 & 70.32 & 72.26 & 72.45 & 72.10 & 66.74 & \secbest{74.18} & 67.99 & \best{83.61} & 73.96 \\ \hline
Youtube & 80.74 & 81.62 & 74.90 & 78.83 & 76.63 & 73.83 & \secbest{86.57} & 0.00 & 83.79 & \best{88.56} \\ \hline
SMS & 32.80 & 43.58 & 32.79 & 30.05 & 32.27 & 48.41 & 48.41 & 0.00 & \best{87.40} & \secbest{48.81} \\ \hline
CDR & \secbest{63.16} & 53.64 & 53.37 & \best{64.81} & 43.28 & 9.59 & 23.89 & 0.00 & 61.72 & 62.15 \\ \hline
Yelp & \secbest{73.42} & 71.93 & 73.13 & \best{73.95} & 69.97 & 68.59 & 72.87 & 66.67 & 66.67 & 72.50 \\ \hline
Commercial & 84.23 & \best{88.31} & 76.43 & 80.86 & 78.61 & 76.83 & 76.43 & 0.00 & \secbest{87.66} & 86.62 \\ \hline
Tennis & \secbest{83.82} & 83.56 & \best{84.29} & 83.31 & 83.62 & 83.64 & 83.67 & 77.32 & 19.71 & 83.63 \\ \hline
TREC & 52.35 & 47.18 & \best{55.07} & 48.32 & 41.94 & 41.91 & 46.94 & 27.60 & 46.17 & \secbest{53.20} \\ \hline
SemEval & \best{78.35} & 73.53 & 73.53 & 11.20 & 72.69 & 73.53 & 73.53 & 30.19 & 67.12 & \secbest{74.32} \\ \hline
ChemProt & 47.96 & 38.82 & 45.71 & 46.25 & \best{49.76} & 31.84 & 33.80 & 31.84 & 45.54 & \secbest{48.35} \\ \hline
AG News & 63.85 & \secbest{63.95} & 63.56 & 63.63 & \best{64.15} & 25.00 & 55.94 & 25.00 & 50.49 & 62.74 \\ \hline\hline
Avg. Perf. & \secbest{66.63} & 65.13 & 64.26 & 59.42 & 61.62 & 54.54 & 61.48 & 46.66 & 63.63 &\best{68.55} \\\hline
Avg. Rank & \secbest{3.36} & 4.72 & 4.63 & 5.09 & 5.90 & 7.09 & 4.72 & 9.45 & 5.36 &\best{3.09} \\
\hline\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\label{tab:mainres}
\end{table*}
All results are reported in Figure.~\ref{fig:perf_syn}, solid lines show the averaged accuracy of 100 runs. We compare FABLE\xspace against MV, IBCC, and EBCC to show the advantages of leveraging instance features.
From the results, we can see that the performance of MV is quite stable because the MV method does not involve any learnable parameter.
In addition, the performance of previous BCC models (iBCC, EBCC) drop dramatically when the dataset size increases, and the EBCC decreases much slower than iBCC, which is aligned with the findings of EBCC paper.
Finally, our proposed method FABLE\xspace is consistently better than MV and more importantly, it is as stable as MV, which confirms our hypothesis that the regulation effect of leveraging instance features could avoid bad local optima compared to other BCC models without instance features.
\paragraph{When are instance features useful?}
\label{sec:lf_corr}
We are curious about when the instance features are useful and could lead to better performance of label aggregation. We hypothesize that the superiority of leveraging instance features is positively correlated to the correlation between instance features and the correctness of LFs. We formally define such a correlation as follows:
\begin{equation}
\text{Corr}(X, \text{LFs}) = \frac{1}{L}\sum_{j=1}^L \text{dCor}(X_j, R_j),
\end{equation}
where $X_j\in\{\vec{x_i}\mid y_{ij}\neq -1, i\in [N]\}$, $R_j=\{\mathds{1}[y_{ij}=z_i]\mid y_{ij}\neq -1, i\in [N]\}$, and $\text{dCor}(\cdot, \cdot)$ is the distance correlation. Such a correlation could reflect the level of instance features being indicative of the correlation patterns a BCC model tend to capture because the correlation pattern is indeed an instantiation of confusion matrix of true label $z$ and LF label $y$ and the correctness of LF, \ie, $\mathds{1}[y_{ij}=z_i]$ can be treated as a simplified version of such a confusion matrix.
To verify the above claim, we fix the dataset size to be $1,000$ and modify the generative process of synthetic dataset by introducing a hyperparameter $\psi$ to generate different LFs.
Specifically, each $y_{(C_j, k)}$ now annotates data according to
\begin{equation*}
y_{(C_j, k)}=\left\{
\begin{aligned}
C_j, & \ \text{if} \ \ \mu^{C_j}_{k} - \psi\sigma_k^{C_j} <x_{ik}< \mu^{C_j}_{k} + \psi\sigma_k^{C_j}\\
-1, & \ \text{otherwise}
\end{aligned}.
\right.
\end{equation*}
To generate a synthetic dataset, we randomly sample eight $\psi\sim\text{Uniform}(1,3)$, one for each LF. We generate 50 synthetic datasets in this way and calculate the performance gain of FABLE\xspace over EBCC as $\Delta$ Metric because we would like to see how the correlation $\text{Corr}(X, \text{LFs})$ affects the superiority of leveraging instance features (Note that the FABLE\xspace can be seen as EBCC with instance features incorporated).
The result in Figure~\ref{fig:rela_syn} shows that the performance gap between FABLE\xspace and EBCC is positively related to the correlation $\text{Corr}(X, \text{LFs})$.
The inset line is generated by linear regression over all recorded results.
To further prove our hypothesis, we calculate the Pearson's correlation coefficient $r$ between $\text{Corr}(X, \text{LFs})$ and $\Delta$ Metric.
The $r=0.469$ with $p$-value $< 0.01$, which implies that there exists a positive relationship between the performance gain of leveraging instance features and the correlation $\text{Corr}(X, \text{LFs})$ with high confidence.
This finding provides practitioners with some insights of when to incorporate instance features in a statistical model: that is, if the correlation between LFs and true label (in other words, the confusion matrix) is highly dependent on the instance feature, then it is beneficial to incorporate instance features as FABLE\xspace does.
\subsection{Benchmark Datasets}
We conduct experiments on eleven classification datasets across diverse domains (\eg, income/sentiment/span/relation/question/topic classification tasks) from the WRENCH benchmark~\citep{zhang2021wrench}.
The WRENCH benchmark splits each dataset into training/validation/test sets, while we follow \cite{li2019exploiting} to adopt a transductive setting, \ie, we perform model learning and evaluation on the whole dataset without any ground truth label.
The detail of all benchmark datasets are listed in Table.~\ref{tab:datasets}.
In the case of text dataset, we use RoBERTa~\citep{liu2019roberta} to extract features following \cite{zhang2021wrench}, while for other datasets, we use the original features coupled with each dataset.
\paragraph{Results.}
We report the performance comparison over 11 datasets as well as each method's averaged score of evaluation metrics and averaged ranking over datasets in Table~\ref{tab:mainres}.
FABLE\xspace achieves the highest average performance and ranking, outperforming all the baselines.
On most datasets, FABLE\xspace is either the best or second-best method.
And the majority voting is the second-best method in average due to its simplicity and the heterogeneity of the WRENCH benchmark~\citep{zhang2021wrench}.
We identified two failure cases of EBCC, namely, CDR and ChemProt, where EBCC performs much lower than FABLE\xspace.
After examining the learned parameters of EBCC on CDR, we found that it learns a highly skewed distribution of $\eta_{km}$, which is used for generating the mixture coefficient for EBCC.
In particular, one of the values of $\eta_{km}$ is much higher than others, which indicates that EBCC failed to capture the multiple distinct correlation patterns between the LFs and true label.
It may be caused by the fact that in CDR, two of the LFs have much higher coverage (portion of non-abstention votes) than the others and such high-coverage LFs might have more complex and instant-dependent correlation patterns than low-coverage ones as they cover more diverse instants, but as an instant-independent model, EBCC may not be able to identify the multi-modal instant-dependent correlation patterns.
In contrast, FABLE\xspace parameterizes the mixture coefficient using instance features, enabling it to capture the complex instant-dependent patterns.
And for the case of ChemProt, we had a similar observation.
Additionally, We compare FABLE\xspace with two neural network-based methods: WeaSEL and Denoise, which also leverage instance features.
The results show that neural network-based methods under-perform FABLE\xspace in most cases.
The key reason could be that although they use sophisticated neural networks to incorporate instance feature and introduce extra parameters, they highly rely on a gold validation set for hyperparameter tuning and early stopping~\citep{zhang2021wrench}, which is unavailable in our setup as we do not assume any gold labeled data.
\section{CONCLUSION}
In this work, we developed a statistical label model for label aggregation in Programmatic Weak Supervision with the goal of leveraging instance features in statistical modeling.
Built upon a recent mixture model called EBCC, our model, FABLE\xspace (Feature-Aware laBeL modEl), achieves this goal by introducing a predictive Gaussian process to output the mixture coefficient based on instance features.
The efficacy of FABLE\xspace is demonstrated in extensive experiments on synthetic datasets.
We also showed that the performance gain of FABLE\xspace over EBCC is positively related to the level of instance features being indicative of correlation patterns between the LFs' votes and the true label.
We compared FABLE\xspace with 7 baselines on 11 benchmark datasets from various domains, and FABLE\xspace achieves the best averaged performance.
\paragraph{Social impact.} All the dataset we used are public available and does not involve any human object. We do not foresee any negative social impact of our work. Our study aims to advance the field of Programmatic Weak Supervision, which can reduce human efforts in collecting training labels when developing ML models. Thus, we believe that our work has positive social impact by making the development of ML model easier.
\paragraph{Limitations.} Our proposed method involves a predictive Gaussian process which could be inefficient to scale up for large dataset compared with simple method like majority voting. However, the rich literature of accelerating Gaussian process could inspire future improvement on our method regarding the scalability.
\subsubsection*{\bibname}}
\usepackage[colorlinks=true, allcolors=blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{url}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amsthm}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{amsmath, bm}
\usepackage{amsbsy}
\usepackage{dsfont}
\usepackage{algpseudocode}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{caption}
\usepackage{subcaption}
\usepackage{adjustbox}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}[theorem]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\renewcommand\qedsymbol{QED}
\newcommand*\mean[1]{\bar{#1}}
\def \mathcal{N} {\mathcal{N}}
\def \operatorname{GP} {\operatorname{GP}}
\def \operatorname{PG} {\operatorname{PG}}
\def \operatorname{cosh} {\operatorname{cosh}}
\def \operatorname{Po} {\operatorname{Po}}
\def \operatorname{diag} {\operatorname{diag}}
\def \operatorname{Const} {\operatorname{Const}}
\def \operatorname{Ga} {\operatorname{Ga}}
\def \operatorname{Cat} {\operatorname{Cat}}
\def \operatorname{Dir} {\operatorname{Dir}}
\newcommand{FABLE\xspace}{FABLE\xspace}
\newcommand\JY[1]{\textcolor{red}{JY: #1} }
\newcommand\best[1]{\textcolor{red}{#1}}
\newcommand\secbest[1]{\textcolor{blue}{#1}}
\input{math_commands.tex}
\runningtitle{Leveraging Instance Features for Label Aggregation in Programmatic Weak Supervision}
\begin{document}
\twocolumn[
\aistatstitle{Leveraging Instance Features for Label Aggregation \\in Programmatic Weak Supervision}
\aistatsauthor{ Jieyu Zhang* \And Linxin Song* \And Alexander Ratner }
\aistatsaddress{ University of Washington \And Waseda University \And University of Washington }
]
\begin{abstract}
Programmatic Weak Supervision (PWS) has emerged as a widespread paradigm to synthesize training labels efficiently. The core component of PWS is the \emph{label model}, which infers true labels by aggregating the outputs of multiple noisy supervision sources abstracted as \emph{labeling functions (LFs)}. Existing statistical label models typically rely only on the outputs of LF, ignoring the instance features when modeling the underlying generative process. In this paper, we attempt to incorporate the instance features into a statistical label model via the proposed FABLE\xspace.
In particular, it is built on a mixture of Bayesian label models, each corresponding to a global pattern of correlation, and the coefficients of the mixture components are predicted by a Gaussian Process classifier based on instance features.
We adopt an auxiliary variable-based variational inference algorithm to tackle the non-conjugate issue between the Gaussian Process and Bayesian label models.
Extensive empirical comparison on eleven benchmark datasets sees FABLE\xspace achieving the highest averaged performance across nine baselines.
Our implementation of FABLE\xspace can be found in \url{https://github.com/JieyuZ2/wrench/blob/main/wrench/labelmodel/fable.py}.
\end{abstract}
\input{1_intro}
\input{2_bg}
\input{3_pre}
\input{4_method}
\input{5_exp}
\input{6_conclusion}
\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
\subsubsection*{\bibname}}
\begin{document}
\onecolumn
\aistatstitle{Instructions for Paper Submissions to AISTATS 2023: \\
Supplementary Materials}
\section{FORMATTING INSTRUCTIONS}
To prepare a supplementary pdf file, we ask the authors to use \texttt{aistats2023.sty} as a style file and to follow the same formatting instructions as in the main paper.
The only difference is that the supplementary material must be in a \emph{single-column} format.
You can use \texttt{supplement.tex} in our starter pack as a starting point, or append the supplementary content to the main paper and split the final PDF into two separate files.
Note that reviewers are under no obligation to examine your supplementary material.
\section{MISSING PROOFS}
The supplementary materials may contain detailed proofs of the results that are missing in the main paper.
\subsection{Proof of Lemma 3}
\textit{In this section, we present the detailed proof of Lemma 3 and then [ ... ]}
\section{ADDITIONAL EXPERIMENTS}
If you have additional experimental results, you may include them in the supplementary materials.
\subsection{The Effect of Regularization Parameter}
\textit{Our algorithm depends on the regularization parameter $\lambda$. Figure 1 below illustrates the effect of this parameter on the performance of our algorithm. As we can see, [ ... ]}
\vfill
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Baryon-antibaryon asymmetry in the universe has been one of the most intriguing mysteries in Nature. With the partial lifetime of proton confirmed to beyond $10^{34}$ years~\cite{Super-Kamiokande:2018apg}, it is impossible for simple baron number violating New Physics models to exist at $\mathcal{O}(1 TeV)$. On the other hand, next order effects like neutron-antineuron ($n-\bar{n}$) oscillations, $nn \rightarrow \bar{\nu}\bar{\nu}$, Hydrogen-antiHydrogen ($H-\bar{H}$) oscillations, or double proton annihilation ($pp \rightarrow e^+e^+$), which violate baryon number by two units, have been interesting due to the much lower New Physics scale. Such rare processes that violate these accidental symmetries of Standard Model (SM) have been very powerful probes to explore physics beyond Standard Model. Thus, if detected, it would be of fundamental importance in particle physics and cosmology. In an effective field theory, since both scalar and vector operators lead to $\Delta B=1$ and $\Delta B=2$ processes, it is not possible to predict observable $\Delta B=2$ processes without suppressing $\Delta B=1$ with discrete symmetries and additional quantum numbers. The solution to these problems might lie in some dynamical process which generate unobservable baryon number violating currents on Earth, but could have had significant contribution to baryogengesis in the evolution of the Universe.
Though baryon and lepton numbers are considered to be accidental symmetries of Standard Model at classical level, quantum effects break them non-perturbatively \cite{tHooft:1976rip} to $U(1)_{B-L}$. There is no {\it a priori} reason for these symmetries to be preserved in beyond Standard Model scenarios. Nevertheless, to describe New Physics with minimal SM like gauge structure and representations, it is suggestive to keep the $U(1)_{B-L}$ symmetry to be intact. With the proton decay suppressed, various New Physics models~\cite{Mohapatra:1980qe, Mohapatra:1980de, Mohapatra:1996pu, Pasupathy:1982qr,Rao:1982gt, MOHAPATRA19891,Arnold:2012sd,Berezhiani:2015afa,Berezhiani:2020vbe,Arun:2022eqs,Thomas:2022hyj} can accommodate baryon number violation by two units. These processes are highly sensitive to New Physics at an intermediate energy scale $\sim \mathcal{O}(1-100 TeV)$. The strongest constraint on this intermediate scale arise from neutron-antineutron oscillation $\sim 500 TeV$~\cite{Arnold:2012sd}, in four-dimensions. On the other hand, embedding the model in six-dimensions with nested warping~\cite{Thomas:2022hyj} has proven to substantially relax this constraint to $\sim 3 TeV$. More interestingly, though $n-\bar{n}$ oscillation is usually understood to be baryon number violating by two units, with a suitably extended Higgs sector~\cite{PhysRevLett.49.7} that spontaneously break global $B-L$ symmetry, this process also violates the lepton number. With the neutrino mass $m_\nu \lesssim 10^{-1} eV$, this model accommodates a much relaxed New Physics scales $\sim 1 TeV$.
With the identification of 11 possible candidates with an expected background of $9.3\pm2.7$ events at Super-Kamiokande~\cite{Super-Kamiokande:2020bov}, 0.37 megaton-year exposure, and the prospect of observing the neutron-antineutron oscillation at Hyper-Kamiokande~\cite{Hyper-Kamiokande:2018ofw} and HIBEAM/NNBAR~\cite{Addazi:2020nlz} with much improved sensitivity, has reignited the interest in $\Delta B=2$ processes. Moreover, the predictions of Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation and proton-proton annihilation ($pp\rightarrow e^+e^+$)~\cite{PhysRevD.18.1602} are other possible signatures of the New Physics. At the quark-level, $H-\bar{H}/pp\rightarrow e^+e^+$ is given by the dimension-12 operator,
\begin{equation}
C_{H-\bar{H}}(uud)^2(\bar{e}^c e) \ .
\label{eq:HHquark}
\end{equation}
Since proton and neutron as isospin partners, the above operator can be generalized for neutron-antineutron oscillation as well, along with a lepton number breaking Higgs triplet field.
At the scale of the measurement ($\sim 2 GeV$), it is convenient to construct hadron-level effective field theory as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{O}_{ppee} &=& \displaystyle \frac{1}{\Lambda_{ppee}^2}\Big(\bar{p}^c \Gamma_p p\Big)\Big(\bar{e}^c \Gamma_e e \Big) \nonumber \\
\text{where} \ \ \Gamma_{p,e} &=& \displaystyle (1,i \gamma^5,\gamma^\mu \gamma^5) \ .
\label{ppeeops}
\end{eqnarray}
The quark-level effective operator could then be compared with the low-energy effective field theory operator made up of leptons and hadrons as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Lambda_{ppee} (0.22 m_p)^3 = 1/\sqrt{C_{H-\bar{H}}} \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used $\langle 0| uud|p\rangle = \sqrt{2 m_p} \beta_H$, with the hadronic parameter $\beta_H = 0.014 GeV^3$ determined by lattice methods~\cite{JLQCD:1999dld}.
With large densities of atomic Hydrogen present at the interstellar medium (ISM), the search for $\Delta B=2, \ \Delta L =2$ process in the oscillation-induced diffused $\gamma-$rays survey, by Fermi LAT, constraints the upper-limit of the oscillation matrix element to $\delta = 2 \langle p e^-|H|\bar{p}e^+\rangle \lesssim 6 \times 10^{-17} s^{-1} $~\cite{Grossman:2018rdg}. On the other hand, search for $pp\rightarrow e^+e^+$ (proton annihilation rate in oxygen nuclei), at Super-Kamiokande~\cite{Super-Kamiokande:2018apg}, places a much stronger upper-bound of $\delta \lesssim 10^{-21}s^{-1}$. This limit constraints the scale of New Physics to be $\gtrsim 2 TeV$.
In $4k+2$ dimensions, the above analysis is very different. The operator in Eq.\ref{eq:HHquark} does not remain invariant under $4k+2$-dimensional Lorentz transformation. This is because the charge conjugation operator in $4k$ and $4k+2$ dimensions behave very differently. In even dimensions, it is understood that the Lorentz group is reducible, that is, there exists a chiral projection operator. While in $4k-$dimensions (eg: 4D), the charge conjugation operator transform the chirality of the Weyl spinor, its acting upon, to the other irreducible representation, in $4k+2$-dimensions, they do not. The chirality remains preserved under the action of the charge conjugation operator. Thus, it is not straight forward to realize a $4k-$dimensional model by compactifying $4k+2$-dimensions, in the presence of currents with charge conjugate fields. In this article, we discuss the correct manner to address the baryon number violating operators in $4k+2-$dimensions, in particular in six-dimensions. We conduct a model independent effective field theory analysis with scalar, vector and mixed operators, generated through the interactions of scalar and vector bilinear of spinor fields that transform under the full $4k+2-$dimensional Lorentz symmetry. An interesting scenario arises with operators constituting of scalar bilinear, where, the KK-1 modes are present at the lowest order, upon compactification. This property lead to baryon number violating decays of Kaluza Klein (KK) towers.
Note that in generic $d-$dimensions, the gauge boson has $d-2$ polarizations. After compactification, a combination of $d-4$ broken polarization in the KK-spectrum becomes the `spineless adjoint scalar field'. One such combination is ``eaten'' by the KK towers to become massive, while other combinations survive. In six dimensions, the surviving combination of the broken polarizations of hypercharge gauge boson forms the `spinless adjoint scalar', which, with the degeneracy of the KK-mode masses lifted at 1-loop~\cite{Cheng:2002iz,Ponton:2005kx}, becomes the lightest stable particle and thus the Dark Matter (DM)~\cite{Dobrescu:2007ec}. Current limit on the relic density from WMAP data~\cite{WMAP:2010qai} constraints the mass of the adjoint scalar to be $\lesssim 2 TeV$~\cite{Belanger:2010yx}, but it could be pushed up in space-time with warping and orthogonal branes with localised matter~\cite{Arun:2018yhg}.
With the spineless adjoint scalar becoming the Dark Matter candidate, its interactions with the KK-1 fermion can influence the scalar operators leading to Dark Matter assisted baryon number violating currents. The vector operator, on the other hand, do not exhibit such behavior, rather, they generate baryon number violating processes which are not influenced by the Dark Matter. The operators influenced by the Dark Matter, in $4k+2-$dimensions, predict large baryon number violation near superdense Dark Matter clumps~\cite{PhysRevD.81.103529,PhysRevD.81.103530}. This can also explain the absence of any observation yet at the terrestrial experiments. Moreover, this operator also provides an interesting annihilation channel for the Dark Matter.
Four dimensional models that predict Dark Matter influenced baryon number violation~\cite{Davoudiasl:2010am, Davoudiasl:2011fj, Blinov:2012hq, Huang:2013xfa}, usually need asymmetric Dark Matter carrying a net antibaryon number which can describe both dark and baryonic matter origin through a unified phylogenesis mechanism. These antibaryonic dark matter can cause induced nucleon decay with $\sim 1 GeV$ meson in the final sate. This can provide a novel signature in the the terrestrial nucleon decay experiments. Models with hidden MeV Dark Matter~\cite{Kile:2009nn} can also predict possible signatures at nuclear experiments. There exists constraints on these processes from Dark Matter relic density and supernova cooling. On the other hand, process of the type, $\bar{f}p \rightarrow e^+ n$, where $f$ is a Majorana spinor, is ruled out by Super-Kamiokande up to the scale $\sim 100 TeV$.
Coming back to $4k+2-$dimensions, in particular in six-dimensions, the anomaly cancellation along with the residual rotational symmetry that survives the orbifolding ensures proton stability~\cite{Appelquist:2001mj} naturally. The six-dimensional construction also boasts a rich phenomenology~\cite{Freitas:2007rh,Dobrescu:2007xf,Cacciapaglia:2011hx,Choudhury:2011jk}, along with providing a viable cold dark matter candidate~\cite{Dobrescu:2007ec,Cacciapaglia:2009pa}. Moreover, the analogue of Witten anomaly cancellation, in this geometry, predicts the number of chiral generations~\cite{Dobrescu:2001ae} that is observed in nature and some of the 6D constructions can lead to small cosmological constant~\cite{Rubakov:1983bz} naturally. For the analysis in this paper, we construct possible $\Delta B=1$ and $\Delta B=2$ operators, assuming $B-L$ conservation for simplicity, that are admissible in the $T^2/Z_2$ orbifold. Since the discussion on neutrino mass generation and lepton number breaking is beyond the scope of this paper, we will postpone the discussion of neutron-antineutron oscillation generated through spontaneously broken lepton number. Instead, here, we discuss the influence of Dark Matter in proton decay, double proton annihilation producing same sign dilepton states and Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation in a model independent effective field theory analysis. We also discuss the proton decay constraint in this geometry, and show that the lower bound on the vector operator becomes $\gtrsim 10^6 TeV$. On the other hand, the scalar operator generates proton decay at 1-loop, thus relaxing the constraint on the scale of New Physics to $\gtrsim300 TeV$ for the Wilson Coefficient of $\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$. This can be relaxed further, if we assume weaker Wilson Coefficient. The mixed operators, with scalar and vector bilinear interactions, are not well constrained by any terrestrial measurements. Nevertheless, the signature for these processes are striking. It predicts same sign, highly collimated, dileptons to be produced with the Dark Matter-nucelon interaction in the detector. This is a highly distinctive track in a calorimeter and water Cherenkov detector. Thus though the processes are suppressed from Dark Matter density on Earth, they can provide a handle in distinguishing $4k+2-$dimensions from $4k$. Moreover, near superdense Dark Matter clumps, they can contribute significantly.
This article is organized as follows. In the next section and its subsection, we will derive some of the relevant properties of the Lorentz group in $4k+2-$dimensions and in particular in six-dimensions.
In sec.\ref{sec:BNVops}, we discuss the possible baryon number violating operators and in sec.\ref{sec:Aprotondecay}, we discuss the proton decay and assisted proton decay the operator. Moreover, the $\Delta B=2=\Delta L$, is discussed in sec.\ref{sec:B2L2}. In this section we also derive limits on these operators from various processes like $pp \rightarrow e^+e^+$, $DM+p \rightarrow DM +\bar{p}+e^++e^+$ and Dark Matter initiated Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation. And we conclude our analysis in sec.\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Clifford algebra in $4k+2-$dimensions}
\label{sec:clifford}
In a general d-dimensional vector space, with the basis generated by $\Gamma^M$, over the field of complex numbers, the Clifford algebra is given by~\cite{Alvarez-Gaume:1985zzv,Freund:1986ws},
\begin{equation}
\{\Gamma_M,\Gamma_N \} = 2 \eta_{MN} \ ,
\label{eq:clifford4k2}
\end{equation}
where $\eta_{MN} = diag(-1,+1,+1,+1,...,d-1 \text{ times})$ and $M,N = (0,1,2,3,...,d-1)$. When $d$ is even, the Clifford algebra falls apart into two simple sets, whose representations we call Weyl spinors.
Moreover, with a real representation of the Clifford algebra it is possible to impose a real condition on spinors without contradicting the Dirac equations. Such real representations are called Majorana spinors. This reality condition is possible in any dimensions provided $(d-2) mod 8 = 0,1,2$. Thus, among even dimensions, six and eight dimensions do not support Majorana spinors. Then, the simplest and natural extension to 4-dimensional SM with Majorana neutrino would require one to consider 10-dimensions.
The Lorentz group generators in this geometry becomes,
\begin{equation}
\Sigma^{MN} = -\frac{i}{2}[\Gamma^M,\Gamma^N] \ .
\label{eq:4k2lorentzgens}
\end{equation}
In any even dimensions, the Lorentz symmetry also supports an extra Gamma matrix that anticommutes with all the other $\Gamma^M$ as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma^{4k+3} = \alpha \Gamma^0\Gamma^1\Gamma^2....\Gamma^{4k+1} \ ,
\label{eq:gammachiral}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha = 1$ in $4k+2-$dimensions, chosen such that $\Big(\Gamma^{4k+3}\Big)^2=1$.
Using this, we can define a chiral projection operator $P_{\pm} = \frac{1}{2}(1\pm \Gamma^{4k+3})$, such that every Dirac fermion ($\psi$) can be projected into two irreducible Weyl representations ($\psi_{\pm}$) by,
\begin{equation}
\psi_{\pm} = P_{\pm} \psi \ .
\label{eq:weylcond}
\end{equation}
We name the chiralities in $4k+2$-dimensions to be positive and negative to distinguish from the chiralities in $4k$-dimensions where they are called left and right.
Since we are interested in $\Delta B=2$ processes, we need to define the charge conjugation in six-dimensions and Weyl-Majorana nature of the interaction terms.
For the $\Gamma^M$ given in Eq.\ref{eq:gamma}, there exists similarity transformation that relates them to $-\Gamma^{M*}$. Given this transformation, we can define a charge conjugation operator that acts on the fermion field as,
\begin{equation}
\psi^c = C \psi \equiv (C \Gamma^0) \psi^* ,
\end{equation}
such that the $\psi$ and $\psi^c$ have the same Lorentz transformation, satisfying $[C\Gamma^0,\Sigma^{MN}]=0$.
Moreover, the transformation of the Gamma matrix under this operator is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma^{M} &=& \displaystyle - (C \Gamma^0) \Gamma^{M*} (C \Gamma^0)^{-1} \nonumber \\
&=& \displaystyle -C (\Gamma^M)^T C^{-1} \ .
\label{eq:CCOgamma}
\end{eqnarray}
Now, using this identity, from Eq.\ref{eq:gammachiral}, we get $[C \Gamma^0, \Gamma^{4k+3}] = 0$ in $4k+2-$dimensions. Unlike in four-dimensions, since the charge conjugation operator $(C \Gamma^0)$ commutes with $\Gamma^{4k+3}$, the charge conjugate fermion representation in six-dimensions must satisfy the same Weyl condition as the original spinor field did. Due to this, the charge conjugation operator do not flip chirality in $4k+2$ dimensions.
For illustrating the arguments above, we will work in six-dimensions and describe the relevant Lorentz symmetry properties below.
\subsection{Fermions in six-dimensions}
In six-dimensions, the spin-half representation of Lorentz group is defined by six $8 \times 8$ $\Gamma-$matrices that satisfy the relation in Eq.\ref{eq:clifford4k2}. In particular, we choose to work in the representation of the algebra defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma^\mu = \gamma^\mu \otimes \sigma^1 &,& \displaystyle \Gamma^4 = \gamma^5 \otimes \sigma^1 \ , \Gamma^5 = \mathds{1}\otimes \sigma^2 \ .
\label{eq:gamma}
\end{eqnarray}
In the above relations, $\gamma^\mu$ denotes the four-dimensional Dirac matrices and $\Gamma^7$ ($\gamma^5$) the chirality projection operator six (four)-dimensions.
Moreover, the Lorentz algebra for the spinor field is generated by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Sigma_{\mu \nu} = \frac{i}{2}[\Gamma_\mu, \Gamma_\nu] &,& \displaystyle \Sigma_{\mu 4} = \frac{i}{2}[\Gamma_\mu, \Gamma_4] \ \nonumber \\
\Sigma_{\mu 5} = \frac{i}{2}[\Gamma_\mu, \Gamma_5] &,& \displaystyle \Sigma_{4 5} = \frac{i}{2}[\Gamma_4, \Gamma_5] \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
with spinors transforming as $\Psi \rightarrow e^{\frac{i}{4} \Sigma_{MN} \theta^{MN}} \Psi$. Like in all even dimensions, Lorentz group in six-dimension admits irreducible chiral representations $\Psi_{\pm} = \frac{1}{2}(1 \pm \Gamma^7) \Psi$, where the chiral projection operator is given by,
\begin{equation}
\Gamma^7 = \Gamma^0\Gamma^1\Gamma^2\Gamma^3\Gamma^4\Gamma^5 = \mathds{1}\otimes \sigma^3 \ .
\label{eq:gamma}
\end{equation}
Using Eq.\ref{eq:CCOgamma}, along with the gamma matrices given in Eq.\ref{eq:gamma}, the charge conjugation operator $C$ can be seen to anti-commute with $\Gamma^0,\Gamma^2, \Gamma^4$ and commute with $\Gamma^1,\Gamma^3,\Gamma^5$. Therefor the charge conjugation operator becomes,
\begin{eqnarray}
C &=& \displaystyle i\Gamma^4\Gamma^2\Gamma^0 \nonumber \\
&=& \displaystyle \gamma^5\gamma^2\gamma^0 \otimes \sigma^2 \ .
\label{eq:chargeconjop}
\end{eqnarray}
It is easy to see that this charge conjugation operator satisfies the relation $[C\Gamma^0, \Gamma^7]=0$. Thus, in six-dimensions, the Majorana spinors must satisfy the Weyl condition as well.
With the chirality projection operator defined as $P_{\pm} = \frac{1}{2}\Big(1 \pm \Gamma^7 \Big)$, we can define doublet and singlet fermions according to the positive or negative chiralities along with assignment of SM quantum numbers to these chiral fermions. But, this becomes non-trivial due to the presence of gauge anomalies. And though the non-vanishing reducible anomalies, $[SU(2)_W]^4$, $[SU(2)_W]^2[SU(3)_c]^2$, $[SU(2)_W]^2[U(1)]_Y^2$ and $[SU(3)_c]^2[U(1)]_Y^2$ are manageable via Green-Schwarz mechanism, the irreducible $[SU(3)_c]^3 U(1)_Y$ and mixed gauge-gravitational anomalies vanish only with the chiral assignment of the form $\mathcal{Q}_+$, $\mathcal{U}_-$, $\mathcal{D}_-$ for quarks and $L_{\pm}$, $\mathcal{E}_{\mp}$, $\mathcal{N}_{\mp}$ for leptons. On orbifolding, the $T^2$ is identified with the condition $(x_4,x_5) \rightarrow -(x_4,x_5)$, under which the fermions transform as $\Psi_{\pm} \rightarrow \Psi'_{\pm}= \pm \Sigma^{45} \Psi_{\pm}$.
Thus, upon orbifolding, each of the six-dimensional fermions reduce to $\Psi_\pm = \Psi_{\pm l}+\Psi_{\pm r}$, where $l$ and $r$ are four-dimensional chiralities given by the $P_{l/r} = \frac{1}{2}(1\pm\gamma^5)$ operator. The $\Psi_{+l}$ and $\Psi_{-r}$ modes are even while $\Psi_{+r}$ and $\Psi_{-l}$ are odd under this orbifold projection operator.
The odd wave-functions are projected out from lowest energy spectrum, leaving behind $q_{+l}, u_{-r}, d_{-r}$ and $\ell_{+ l}, e_{- r}, \nu_{- r}$ zero modes for quarks and leptons. The six-dimensional Lorentz symmetry breaking to four-dimensions break $\Sigma_{\mu 4}$ and $\Sigma_{\mu 5}$ generators, while the $\Sigma_{45}$ generator is preserved. Thus, on compactification, not all the generators of six-dimensional Lorentz symmetry are broken, instead, there exists a residual $U(1)_{45} = e^{i \Sigma^{45} \theta_{45}}$ symmetry for the space, where $\theta_{45}$ is arbitrary rotation in $(x_4,x_5)$ plane. This residual symmetry is broken to its discrete subgroups on orbifolding. The $T^2/Z_2$ orbifold on a rectangle, in general, is now invariant under a rotation through $\pi$, thus preserving the $Z_2$ subgroup of $U(1)_{45}$. Whereas, a square $T^2/Z_2$ posses a $Z_4$ symmetry since it is invariant under $\pi/2$ rotations. Under this generator, $\Sigma_{45}$, the fermions $\Psi_{\pm l}$ are charged $\pm 1/2$ and $\Psi_{\pm r}$ are charged $\mp 1/2$. Hence, for fermions, the square $T^2/Z_2$ posses a the four-dimensional space-time symmetry $SO(3,1) \otimes Z_8$, where $Z_8$ is the subgroup of $U(1)_{45}$ to which it gets broken~\cite{Appelquist:2001mj}. All the operators on the square $T^2/Z_2$ orbifold must then preserve the $Z_8$ quantum charge.
In the next section, we study the baryon number violating operators in six dimensions compactified on a torus with $T^2/Z_2$ orbifold. Like in four-dimensions, it is non-trivial to suppress proton decay and allow $\Delta B=2$ processes, if both are assumed to share a common origin. Nevertheless, we will show that the left over rotational symmetry along with $B-L$ symmetry would automatically prohibit proton decay in this geometry while still allowing $\Delta B=2=\Delta L$ processes.
\section{Baryon number violating operators}
\label{sec:BNVops}
Baryon number violation is usually discussed in a Grand Unified framework. Due to the power law running of couplings constants in extra-dimensions \cite{Bhattacharyya:2006ym, Arun:2016ela}, the unification scale becomes $\sim \mathcal{O}(10^{3} TeV)$. This could in general be in contradiction with the proton decay constraints. Hence, it is important to understand the possible Lorentz invariant baryon number violating operators the geometry can support. In this section, we discuss the model independent baryon number violating operators in $4k+2$ dimensions. Though we work with six-dimensions to illustrate our arguments, the operators and results can be generalised to any $4k+2$-dimensions with relative ease.
Given that each quark carries $1/3$ baryon number, the operator mediating baryon number violation should in general carry $3\Delta B$ quarks. Including lepton number violation as well, a total of $3 \Delta B \pm \Delta L$ number of fermions are involved in the process. On compactifying the six-dimensions on $T^2$ the Lorentz generators $\Sigma^{\mu \nu}$ and $\Sigma^{45}$ remains unbroken. Apart from the 4-dimensional Lorentz symmetry, the geometry also exhibits a new rotational symmetry generated by $\Sigma^{45}$. Now, orbifolding on a square $T^2/Z_2$, the rotation symmetry gets broke to a $Z_4$ symmetry in the $x_4-x_5$ plane~\cite{Appelquist:2001mj}. This property of the space-time, then, requires all the BNV and LNV operators in the geometry to obey the selection rule,
\begin{equation}
\frac{3}{2} \Delta B \pm \frac{1}{2}\Delta L = 0 \ mod \ 4 \ .
\label{eq:squaresr}
\end{equation}
The above relation, makes sure that the proton remains stable, on a square $T^2/Z_2$ with $B-L$ conservation. Nevertheless, on a rectangular $T^ 2/Z_2$ orbifold the symmetry group becomes $Z_2$, and the geometric protection against proton decay is absent. In which case, the UV-complete model must include proton stability. Orbifolding on a square $T^2/Z_2$ not only prohibits proton decay but is also the natural setting since it maximising the casimir energy~\cite{Appelquist:2001mj}.
Other orbifolds, like $T^2/Z_3$, on the other hand, makes sure that proton decay along with all $\Delta B=2, \ \Delta L=2$ process are prohibitted. Except for $\Delta B=2$ processes like neutron-antineutron oscillation. Thus the geometry plays a crucial role in determining the allowed operators. To keep the discussion simple, we chose $T^2/Z_2$ orbifold.
With the six-dimensional charge conjugation operator defined in Eq.\ref{eq:chargeconjop}, the Lorentz invariant scalar, vector and mixed operators that lead to baryon and lepton number violations are given in Table.\ref{tab:ops}. Indeed, the $C_1^S$ Wilson Coefficient is generated by scalar diquark and leptoquark mediation, whereas, $C_1^V$ and $C_2^V$ are generated by vector leptoquarks and diquarks. Moreover, the construction of $C_2^L$ ($C_2^Q$) requires scalar (vector) diquark and vector (scalar) leptoquark. To comply with the model independent nature of our analysis, the origin of these interactions are not discussed further here, but a few possible models are given in the Appendix \ref{sec:A1}. Moreover, there could be other operators that contribute to the $\cancel{\text{B}}$ process, but for brevity, we will consider only the relevant ones. The analysis could be extended to other operators with relative ease.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
& & \\
6D Lorentz symmetry & $\Delta B=1=\Delta L$ & $\Delta B=2 =\Delta L$ \\ [1ex]
\hline
& & \\
Scalar & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^4}C^S_1(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\mathcal{U}_-) (\mathcal{E}^T_-C \mathcal{Q}_+)$ & \\ [2ex]
\hline
& & \\
Vector & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^4}C^V_1(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M \mathcal{Q}_+) (\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma_M L_+)$ & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^{14}}C^V_2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M \mathcal{Q}_+)^2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^N L_+)^2$ \\ [2ex]
\hline
& & \\
Mixed & & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^{14}}C^L_2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\mathcal{U}_-)^2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M L_+)^2$ \\[1ex]
& & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^{14}}C^Q_2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\mathcal{E}_-)^2 (\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M \mathcal{Q}_+)^2$ \\[2ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{6D Lorentz invariant operators and their Wilson Coefficients for $\Delta B=1= \Delta L$ and $\Delta B=2 = \Delta L$ processes. The six-dimensional cut-off is denoted by $\Lambda_6$.}
\label{tab:ops}
\end{table}
After orbifolding, the six-dimensional fermion field can be Fourier decomposed in terms of infinite tower of Kaluza Klein (KK) four-dimensional fields as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi_{\pm}(x^{\mu},x^4,x^5) &=& \displaystyle \frac{1}{R} \sum_{n,m}\Big(\psi_{\pm l}^{(n,m)}(x^\mu) f_{\pm l}(x_4,x_5) \nonumber \\
&+& \displaystyle \psi_{\pm r}^{(n,m)}(x^\mu) f_{\pm r}(x_4,x_5) \Big) \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $(n,m)$ denotes KK-numbers in the $(x_4,x_5)$-direction and $f_{\pm l/r}$ are the wave profiles of the fermions in the extra-dimension. Depending on the orbifold boundary condition, $f_{\pm l/r}$ could be even or odd as given in Appendix.\ref{sec:AKK}. Using the bilinear expansions given in Appendix.\ref{section:A2}, the relevant operators in Table.\ref{tab:ops} can be decomposed in its Fourier series and the dominant contribution is given in Table.\ref{tab:4dops}. For simplicity, we have kept only the zero mode terms in doublet fermions in the 4D operators. The rest of the contribution could be derived easily using the bilinear expansion given in Appendix.\ref{section:A2}, but will not add any substantial physics information.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
& & \\
4D Lorentz & $\Delta B=1=\Delta L$ & $\Delta B=2=\Delta L$ \\
[1ex]
symmetry & & \\[1ex]
\hline
& & \\
Scalar & $ \frac{1}{\Lambda_6^4 R^2}C^S_1(q^{T}_{+l}C\mathcal{U}_{-l}^{(1,0)})(\mathcal{E}_{-l}^{T(1,0)}C q_{+l})$ & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^{14} R^{6}}C^V_2(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5}q_{+l})^2 (q^T_{+l}C\Gamma_{4,5}\ell_{+l})^2 $ \\[1ex]
& $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^4 R^2}C^V_1(q^{T}_{+l}C\Gamma^{4,5}q_{+l})(q^{T}_{+l}C\Gamma_{4,5} \ell_{+l})$ & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^{14} R^{6}}C^Q_2(q^T_{+l}C\mathcal{E}^{(1,0)}_{-l})^2 (q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5}q_{+l})^2 $ \\[1ex]
& & $\frac{1}{\Lambda_6^{14} R^{6}}C^L_2(q^T_{+l}C\mathcal{U}^{(1,0)}_{-l})^2(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5}\ell_{+l})^2 $ \\[2ex] \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The list of dominant four-dimensional Lorentz invariant operators that are generated from Table.\ref{tab:ops}, on compactification. The extra dimension is compactified on radius R. }
\label{tab:4dops}
\end{table}
Interestingly, in Table.\ref{tab:4dops} there are only operators generated from scalar bilinear though we started with both scalars and vectors in six-dimensions. The vector operators that generate $\Delta B=1=\Delta L$, in 4D, consists of at least two KK-1 fermions. This contribution is subdominant to the one from the Wilson Coeffcient $C_1^V$. Same arguments hold for $\Delta B=2=\Delta L$ as well. Hence, to the leading order, there are only scalar operators in 4-dimensions. This would mean that, in a UV complete setup, the contribution for such operators arise from the mediation of adjoint scalars in six-dimensions.
We will analyse the phenomenology of these operators in the next section.
\section{(Assisted) Proton decay}
\label{sec:Aprotondecay}
The Lagrangian corresponding to the scalar and vector operators, in Table.\ref{tab:ops}, that contribute to $\Delta B=1=\Delta L$ process can be written as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{O}_{10}&=& \displaystyle \frac{C^S_1}{\Lambda_6^{4}}(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C \mathcal{U}_-)(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C \mathcal{E}_-) +
\frac{C^V_1}{\Lambda_6^{4}}(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C\Gamma^{M} \mathcal{Q}_+)(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C\Gamma_{M} \mathcal{L}_+) \ .
\label{eq:peops}
\end{eqnarray}
After orbifolding and integrating out the extra-dimensions, this becomes, to the first order in KK-modes,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{O}_{10}&=& \displaystyle \frac{C^S_1}{\Lambda_6^{4}R^2}(q^T_{+l}C \mathcal{U}^{(1,0)}_{-l})(\mathcal{E}^{T(1,0)}_{-l}C q_{+l} ) + \frac{C^V_1}{\Lambda_6^{4}R^2}(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5} q_{+l})(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma_{4,5} \ell_{+l}) \ .
\label{eq:peo4d}
\end{eqnarray}
Fierz transforming the Eq.\ref{eq:peo4d}, the first term gets identified with the $\mathcal{O}_d^{(2)}$ and the second term with the $\mathcal{O}_d^{(3)}$ in \cite{Claudson:1981gh,JLQCD:1999dld}. The expansion of the second term in Eq.\ref{eq:peops}, on compactification, do generate operators with 4D vector bilinears, but, such vector currents must consist of at least one KK-1 fermion. Thus we consider only the leading order contribution coming from the adjoint scalar contribution as shown in Eq.\ref{eq:peo4d}. This term generates proton decay at tree-level, as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:pe}. Also, though the Fourier expansion in the KK modes will generate other operators, for brevity, we consider only the operators with left handed doublet fermion in their zero-mode.
In flat six-dimensions with bulk SM, the collider data from Higgs decay to diphoton, $WW$, $ZZ$ constraints the lower limit of compactification radius to $M_{KK}=R^{-1} \gtrsim 2 TeV$~\cite{Appelquist:2000nn,Kakuda:2013kba,Garcia-Jimenez:2017ezn}. Then, from proton decay constraint, the bound on the Wilson coefficient, $C_1^V/(\Lambda_6^4 R^2)$, becomes, $ \Lambda_6 \gtrsim 10^{6} TeV$, for a compactification mass scale of $R^{-1} = 2 TeV$ and $C_1^V \sim \mathcal{O}(1)$. This result, on the other hand, is much higher than the coupling constant unification scale in six-dimensions. Thus, if the 6-dimensional vector operator is generated in a UV complete New Physics, the unifications scale has to be pushed to $10^6 TeV$, in-order to avoid large hierarchy. This invariably means that we require new additional fields that modify the slopes of the coupling constant evolution.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\vspace {-1cm}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=8cm]{pe.eps}
\vspace {-1cm}
\caption{This figure shows the process $p \rightarrow e^+ + \pi^0$ generated by the vector operator in Eq.\ref{eq:peo4d}.}
\label{fig:pe}
\end{figure}
The first term in Eq.\ref{eq:peo4d} is an interesting consequence of the $4k+2$ Lorentz symmetry. This scalar operator generates exotic baryon number violating current, where KK-1 partner of the right-handed up quark decays to two SM quarks and a lepton KK-1 mode. Such decays are allowed due to the $\sim 20 GeV$ mass split~\cite{Cheng:2002iz, Ponton:2005kx, Dobrescu:2007ec} between the KK-1 modes of up quark and the lepton coming from 1-loop mass corrections. With the KK-1 lepton decaying to the adjoint scalar, via the interactions given in Eq.\ref{eq:DMqint} and Eq.\ref{eq:DMeint} (in the Appendix.\ref{section:A4}), such decays have important consequences in the baryon-antibaryon asymmetry of the universe. Nevertheless, to identify and place limits on the Wilson Coefficients of this operator we study their contribution to the proton decay process.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.4\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{peVV.eps}
\vspace {-3cm}
\caption{}
\label{fig:peVV}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.4\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{peloop.eps}
\vspace {-3cm}
\caption{}
\label{fig:peloop}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace {0cm}
\caption{Figure (a) shows the process $DM + p \rightarrow DM + e^+ + \pi^0$ generated through the scalar operator in Eq.\ref{eq:peo4d}. The stable spinless adjoint scalar field, $V_B^{(1,0)}$, is the Dark Matter candidate. Figure (b) shows the process $p \rightarrow e^+ + \pi^0$ generated at 1-loop.}
\label{fig:AND}
\end{figure}
This 6D scalar operator generates proton decay assisted by the Dark Matter candidate, $V^{(1,0)}_B$, as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:peVV}. With the adjoint scalar interactions, the first term in Eq.\ref{eq:peo4d} becomes,
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{AND} \mathcal{O}_{AND} &=& \displaystyle Y_u Y_e g^2 \frac{C^S_1}{\Lambda_6^{4}R^2}\frac{1}{M_{KK}^2}(q^T_{+l}C u_{-r})(e^T_{-r}C q_{+l}) V_B^{(1,0)} V_B^{(1,0)} \ ,
\label{eq:AND}
\end{eqnarray}
where $g$ is the coupling for the KK-1 hypercharge spinless adjoint scalar field and $Y_u=4/3$, $Y_e=-2$. With SM like interactions, the hyper charge coupling is given by $g^2 = \frac{4 M_z^2 Sin\theta_W^2}{ v^2} \simeq 0.14 $. This operator, in the early epochs of the universe, also provides new annihilation channel for the Dark Matter.
The effective rate for the assisted nucleon decay (AND) in presence of DM can be written as,
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{AND} = n_{DM} (\sigma v)_{AND} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $n_{DM}$ is the Dark Matter density and $(\sigma v)_{AND}$ is the cross section for the assisted proton decay process. Using Eq.\ref{eq:AND}, the assisted proton decay cross section can be computed as,
\begin{equation}
(\sigma v)_{AND} \sim \frac{1}{16 \pi} \Big| \frac{ Y_u Y_e g^2 C_1^S}{\Lambda_6^4} \Big|^2 m_p^6 \ .
\end{equation}
The lifetime of this process is then given by,
\begin{equation}
\tau_{AND} = \frac{1}{\Gamma_{AND}} = \frac{M_{KK}}{\rho_{DM} (\sigma v)_{AND}} \ ,
\label{eq:ANDlifetime}
\end{equation}
where, the number density of DM has been replaced with the mass density $\rho_{DM} = M_{KK} n_{DM} = 0.3 GeV/cm^3$. Using this scale of the operator, $\Lambda_6 \sim 300 TeV$, the time period for the assisted proton decay, given in Eq.\ref{eq:ANDlifetime} and assuming $C_1^S \sim 1$, can be computed to be $\tau_{AND} \gg 1.4 \times 10^{34} years$, satisfying the constraint from Super-Kamiokande~\cite{Super-Kamiokande:2018apg}. The rareness of the Dark Matter density on Earth results in the assisted nucleon decay time period much beyond the observational sensitivity of terrestrial experiments. Nevertheless, note that, this process produces a striking signature with highly collimated pion and positron Cherenkov rings. Also, unlike the previous scenario with vector operator, here, the proton decay can be much more enhanced near large Dark Matter densities like center of the galaxy cluster. And since the process conserves the Dark Matter number density, this will play a major role in the baryogenesis near very heavy astrophysical objects.
At 1-loop, as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:peloop}, this operator do contribute to the direct proton decay. The effective operator in Eq.\ref{eq:AND} for the process, after integrating out the loop, becomes,
\begin{equation}
C_{p\rightarrow e} \mathcal{O}_d^{(2)} = Y_u Y_e g^2\frac{C^S_1}{\Lambda_6^4 R^2} \Big(\frac{M_s}{M_{KK}}\Big)^4 (\bar{d}^c_{+l} u_{+l})(\bar{u}^c_{-r}e_{-r}) \ ,
\label{eq:protondecayVVloop}
\end{equation}
where $M_s$ is the loop momentum and the Wilson Coefficient for the decay could be read off as,
\begin{equation}
C_{p \rightarrow e} = Y_u Y_e g^2\frac{C_1^S}{16 \pi^2\Lambda_6^4 R^2} \Big(\frac{M_s}{M_{KK}}\Big)^4 \ .
\end{equation}
After matching the quark level operator in Eq.\ref{eq:protondecayVVloop} with the nucleon decay matrix element using $\chi PT$~\cite{JLQCD:1999dld}, the hadronic operator generates the decay width,
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{p\rightarrow e} = \frac{1}{2 \times 10^{34}} \Big|\frac{C_{p \rightarrow e}}{(3 \times 10^{15} GeV)^{-2}}\Big|^2 \ .
\label{eq:ptoe}
\end{equation}
Then, from the above relation, assuming $C^S_1 =1$ and $M_s = m_p$, the New Physics that contributes to the proton decay can be constrained to be $\gtrsim 270 TeV$. Thus the proton decay constraint, generated by the scalar operator lies within the unification scale of the couplings. This scale can be relaxed to $\sim 30 TeV$, which is within the reach of possible future 100 TeV hadron collider~\cite{Mangano:2017tke} if we accommodate smaller Wilson Coefficient ($C_1^S \sim 10^{-4}$).
\section{(Assisted) $\Delta B=2$, $\Delta L=2$ process}
\label{sec:B2L2}
Even though imposing $B-L$ conservation on six-dimensions orbifolded on square $T^2/Z_2$ forbids the proton decay operator exactly, $\Delta B=2, \ \Delta L = 2$ processes can still be allowed by the selection rule in Eq.\ref{eq:squaresr}. Such $SO(5,1)$ invariant operators contains $6$ quarks and $2$ leptons and is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{O}_{20}&=& \displaystyle \frac{C^V_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}}(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C \Gamma^M \mathcal{Q}_+)^2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C\Gamma^N L_+)^2 \nonumber \\
&+& \displaystyle \frac{C^L_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}}(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C \mathcal{U}_-)^2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C\Gamma^N L_+)^2 + \frac{C^Q_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}}(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C \mathcal{E}_-)^2(\mathcal{Q}^T_+ C\Gamma^N \mathcal{Q}_+)^2 \ ,
\label{eq:6dHHops}
\end{eqnarray}
where the operator in the first line is generated by vector current interactions, while operators in the second line contains contributions of both scalar and vector currents.
After orbifolding and integrating out the extra-dimensions, we get,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{O}_{20} &=& \displaystyle \frac{C^V_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}R^6}(q^T_{+l} C \Gamma^{4,5} q_{+l})^2(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5} \ell_{+l})^2 \nonumber \\
&+& \displaystyle \frac{C^L_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}R^6}(q^T_{+l} C \mathcal{U}^{(1,0)}_{-l})^2(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5} \ell_{+l})^2 \nonumber \\
&+& \displaystyle \frac{C^Q_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}R^6}(q^T_{+l} C \mathcal{E}^{(1,0)}_{-l})^2(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5} q_{+l})^2 \ .
\label{eq:4dHHops}
\end{eqnarray}
As mentioned before, we have again neglected the higher order effects arising in the operators. Note that only the first term in the above relation is a pure SM contribution. This operator generates the process $pp \rightarrow e^+e^+$/Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation directly as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:ppee}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\vspace {-1cm}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=6cm]{ppee.eps}
\vspace {-1cm}
\caption{This figure shows the process $p+ p \rightarrow e^+ + e^+$ generated by the first term in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops}. }
\label{fig:ppee}
\end{figure}
Whereas, the operator in the second line, along with the Dark Matter interaction term given in Eq.\ref{eq:DMqint} in the Appendix.\ref{section:A4}, generates the assisted nucleon nucleon annihilation (ANNA) given by the Lagrangian,
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{ANNA}\mathcal{O}_{ANNA}
&=& \displaystyle Y_u^2 g^2 \frac{C^L_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}R^6 M_{KK}^2}(q^T_{+l} C \mathcal{U}^{(1,0)}_{-r})^2(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5} \ell_{+l})^2V_{B}^{(1,0)}V_{B}^{(1,0)} \ .
\label{eq:ANNA}
\end{eqnarray}
This interaction generates $DM+p + DM + p \rightarrow e^+ + e^+$, $DM + p \rightarrow DM + \bar{p} + e^+ + e^+$ and assisted Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:HHVV}. The process $DM+p + DM + p \rightarrow e^+ + e^+$ is highly suppressed due to the negligible probability of two Dark Matter particles colliding with the same or near by nucleus on Earth. Nevertheless, this processes along with $DM + p \rightarrow DM + \bar{p} + e^+ + e^+$ can play a dominant role near Dark Matter clumps. These processes can be interesting to study in the context of the observed positron excess in cosmic rays~\cite{PAMELA:2008gwm, Delahaye:2008ua, Fermi-LAT:2011baq, PAMELA:2013jtv, PAMELA:2013vxg, DeSarkar:2019tjy}. Though very interesting, since it will be a digression from the current discussion, we will not study them further here.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\vspace {-1cm}
\includegraphics[width=10cm,height=8cm]{HHVV.eps}
\vspace {-1cm}
\caption{This figure shows the processes $DM +p + DM + p \rightarrow e^+ + e^+$ and $DM + p \rightarrow DM + \bar{p} + e^+ + e^+$ generated by the second term, along with its interaction with $V_B^{(1,0)}$, given in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops}.}
\label{fig:HHVV}
\end{figure}
The third operator in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops}, along with the adjoint scalar inteaction with the lepton bilinear given in Eq.\ref{eq:DMeint} (in Appendix.\ref{section:A4}), the Lagrangian becomes,
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{DMee}\mathcal{O}_{DMee}
&=& \displaystyle Y_e^2 g^2\frac{C^Q_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}R^6 M_{KK}^2}(q^T_{+l} C \mathcal{E}_{-r}^{(1,0)})^2(q^T_{+l} C\Gamma^{4,5} q_{+l})^2V_{B}^{(1,0)}V_{B}^{(1,0)} \ .
\label{eq:DMee}
\end{eqnarray}
This term generates processes like $DM+(p+e^-) \rightarrow DM+(\bar{p}+ e^+)$ and $p+p \rightarrow DM+DM + e^{+} + e^{+}$ as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:ppeeVV}. The first one is Dark Matter assisted Hydrogen oscillation, while the second one leads baryon number and lepton number violation at high energy proton proton collisions.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\vspace {-1cm}
\includegraphics[width=10cm,height=8cm]{ppeeVV.eps}
\vspace {-1cm}
\caption{This figure shows the processes $DM+(p+e^-) \rightarrow DM+(\bar{p}+ e^+)$ and $p+p \rightarrow DM+DM + e^{+} + e^{+}$ generated by the third term, along with its interaction with $V_B^{(1,0)}$, given in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops}.}
\label{fig:ppeeVV}
\end{figure}
Though terrestrial low-energy experiments are not sensitive to these processes, the new Physics mediators can be produced on-shell at high energy proton proton collision experiments which can be identified by looking for 4 jets + same sign dilepton + missing energy signature.
\subsection{$p+p \rightarrow e^+ + e^+$}
The first term in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops}, is the operator that violate baryon and lepton number by two units, discussed regularly in literature. In a $4k+2$ dimensional model, it is evident that they are generated by integrating out the spinless adjoint scalars mediators. From 4-dimensional point of view, these are scalar bilinears. This differences become crucial, in the context of a full UV-complete model. That is, proton decay or double proton annihilation cannot be generated if the six-dimensional model does not contain vector bosons that violate baryon and lepton number. Since they are gauge bosons with weak couplings, the Wilson Coefficient generated through their interaction will also be naturally weak.
Instead of going into such details, assuming non-vanishing $C_2^V$, we can see that this term generates processes like Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation and $p + p \rightarrow \ell^+ + \ell^+$, where $\ell^+ = (e^+,\mu^+)$. It is also crucial to note that Dark Matter do not influence these processes shown in Fig.\ref{fig:ppee}. For the proton proton annihilation process, the hadron-level effective operator becomes,
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\Lambda_{ppee}}(\bar{p}^c \gamma^5p)(\bar{e}^c \gamma^5 e) \ .
\label{eq:ppee}
\end{equation}
At Super-Kamiokande, this term is constrained by studying the process ${}^{16} O \rightarrow {}^{14}C + \ell^+ + \ell^+$, with same-sign dilepton back-to-back Cherenkov rings with no hadrons. With a fiducial mass of 22.5 kilotons containing $\sim 10^{34}$ nucleons, the time period of the decay per oxygen nucleus is constrained to $T_{pp\rightarrow e^+ e^+} = 4.2 \times 10^{33} years$~\cite{Super-Kamiokande:2018apg}.
Comparing Eq.\ref{eq:ppee} with the first term in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops}, and using the well known nuclear matrix element, we get,
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\Lambda_{ppee}^2} = \frac{C_2^V}{\Lambda_6^{14} R^6} *(0.22 m_p)^6 \ .
\end{equation}
The bound on the hadronic effective operator in Eq.\ref{eq:ppee} then becomes $\Lambda_{ppee} \gtrsim 2.3 \times 10^{15} GeV$. Assuming $C_2^V \sim \mathcal{O}(1)$ and $R^{-1} = 2 TeV$, the lower bound on New Physics mass scale, then, becomes $\Lambda_{6} \gtrsim 2.1 TeV$.
Whereas, the process $p e \rightarrow \bar{p} e^+$, obtained by Fierz transforming the relation in Eq.\ref{eq:ppee} can lead to Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation, studied by measuring the $\gamma$ rays from the annihilation of antiHydrogen at the interstellar medium~\cite{Grossman:2018rdg}, and annihilation of proton in a nucleus with an electron in the inner shell of oxygen at Super-Kamiokande~\cite{Super-Kamiokande:2018apg}. Among all these distinct measurements, $pp\rightarrow \ell^+ \ell^+$ sets the most stringent constraint on the effective operator thus requiring the New Physics to be heavier than $\sim 2 TeV$.
\subsection{$DM+ p \rightarrow DM+ \bar{p}+ e^+ + e^+$}
More interestingly, the second and third terms in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops} generates baryon number violating exotic operators with higher KK-modes of fermions. In particular, the operator arising from second term, shown in Fig.\ref{fig:HHVV}, leads to processes in which Dark Matter interacts with the proton legs. The most constraining of these processes would be the one in which a Dark Matter scatters with one proton producing same sign dileptons, an anti-proton ($\bar{p}$) and Dark Matter at rest ($ DM+ p \rightarrow DM+ \bar{p} + e^+ + e^+$). With the $\bar{p}$ annihilating with a another proton, the results of $p+p\rightarrow e^+ + e^+$ could be directly recasted here. Since this is initiated by a heavy Dark Matter, the dileptons that are produced will be highly energetic. They could be observed at Super-Kamiokande through two collinear Cherenkov rings. This would be a striking signature of the Dark Matter assisted baryon number violating processes. Since in $4k$ dimensions such assisted processes are not present, hence, if found, this process can immediately distinguish $4k$ and $4k+2$ extra-dimension scenarios. To analyse this, lets write the hadron-level operator,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{O}_{VVppee} &=& \displaystyle \frac{1}{(\Lambda_{VVppee})^4}(\bar{p}^c p)(\bar{e}^c e) V_B^{(1,0)} V_B^{(1,0)} \ ,
\label{eq:VpVpee}
\end{eqnarray}
where, comparing with Eq.\ref{eq:ANNA}, we get,
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{(\Lambda_{VVppee})^4} &=& \displaystyle g^2 \frac{1}{R^6}\frac{C^L_{2}}{\Lambda_6^{14}} \frac{1}{M_{KK}^2}(0.22 m_p)^6 \ .
\end{eqnarray}
The effective decay width for the nucleon, then, becomes,
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{ANNA} = n_{DM} (\sigma v)_{ANNA} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $n_{DM}$ is the Dark Matter density and $(\sigma v)_{ANNA} \sim \frac{1}{16 \pi} \Big| \frac{1}{(\Lambda_{VVppee})^4} \Big|^2 m_p^6 $ is the cross section for the assisted double nucleon decay process given by the operator in Eq.\ref{eq:VpVpee}. The lifetime of this process is then given by,
\begin{equation}
\tau_{ANNA} = \frac{1}{\Gamma_{ANNA}} = \frac{M_{KK}}{\rho_{DM} (\sigma v)_{ANNA}} \ .
\end{equation}
In the above equation, we have replaced the number density of DM with the mass density $\rho_{DM} = M_{KK} n_{DM} = 0.3 GeV cm^{-3}$. For Dark Matter of mass $M_{KK}=2 TeV$, from galactic center, with speed $\sim 100 km/s$, colliding with an ${}^{16}O$ atom in the experiment, the average transfer momentum could be computed to be $P_t = m_{V} v \sim 600 MeV$. In this process, $DM + p \rightarrow DM + \bar{p} + e^+ + e^+ $, since $m_e \ll P_t < m_p \ll m_V$, we can safely assume that the DM and anti-proton are produced at rest. Thus, for all practical considerations, this is a $2 \rightarrow 2$ process with proton in the incoming leg at rest in the Lab frame.
Using the limit on double proton decay time period $\tau_{pp\rightarrow e^+e^+} \gtrsim 4.2 \times 10^{33} years $ ~\cite{Super-Kamiokande:2018apg}, we get,
\begin{equation}
\tau_{ANNA} = 5 \times 10^{33} years \Big( \frac{\Lambda_{VVppee}}{ 300 GeV} \Big)^8 \ .
\end{equation}
This is a very weak limit for the New Physics model, thus terrestrial experiments are not very sensitive to the the assisted nucleon nucleon decay yet. On the other hand, the clean and unique signal for this event is very interesting, in case a Dark Matter interacts in the upcoming Hyper-Kamiokande~\cite{Hyper-Kamiokande:2018ofw} experiment. The constraint on this operator is weak due to the rarity of Dark Matter density on Earth, whereas, in primordial Superdense cosmological dark matter clumps~\cite{PhysRevD.81.103529,PhysRevD.81.103530} with large gravitating mass, this may not be the case. Such assisted double nucleon decays can be a very large source of baryon number violation in cosmology.
The processes such as assisted Hydrogen oscillation ($ DM (p e) \rightarrow DM (\bar{p} e^+)$), could also be searched for at the interstellar medium by Fermi-Lat and can give complementary measurements for the operator. Along with a $CP$ violation, could lead to baryogenesis at the centre of primordial cosmological dark matter clumps~\cite{PhysRevD.81.103529,PhysRevD.81.103530}.
\subsection{$(DM+e) + p \rightarrow (DM+ e^+) + \bar{p} $}
The third term in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops} generates baryon number violating process in which the Dark Matter interacts with the lepton legs. Hence, baryon number violation is kinematically prohibited in low-energy experiments.
Instead, we probe the operator in collider experiments. Such processes could be constrained by the CMS~\cite{CMS:2017tec} study where they consider finals states with two same sign leptons, two or more hadronic jets and missing energy. The results are based on an integrated luminosity corresponding to $35.9 fb^{-1}$ in $13 TeV$ center of mass proton proton collision. On the other hand, since the operator is at mass dimension-10, it is highly suppressed and moreover, at high energy collider, the patrons will probe the insides of the effective operator. Though the best constraint on this operator might arise from the collider experiments, this will not be a model independent result.
Whereas, $(DM+e) + p \rightarrow (DM+ e^+) + \bar{p} $, or DM assisted Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation can be a better probe to study this operator. The relevant constraint emanates from the non-obeservation of Hydrogen-antiHydrogen annihilation $\gamma-$rays from Inter Stellar Medium (ISM) surveyed by Fermi LAT. Note that, all the three operators in Eq.\ref{eq:4dHHops} contribute to this process, but, $C_2^V$ and $C_2^L$ are highly constrained from Super-Kamiokande double proton annihilation analysis.
We consider the scenario where the Hydrogen atoms, in its ground state, is influenced by Dark Matter. Then the oscillation Hamiltonian,
\begin{equation}
H_{osc} = \frac{1}{\Lambda_{AH\bar{H}}^4} (\bar{p}^c e )(\bar{p}^c e)V_{B}^{(1,0)}V_{B}^{(1,0)} \ ,
\end{equation}
generates small amounts of antiHydrogen. Since the conversion is enabled by Dark Matter number density ($n_{DM}$) in the ISM, the rate of antiHydrogen production is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{osc} = \frac{1}{\Gamma_{osc}}= \frac{1}{n_{DM} (\sigma v)_{osc}} \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where, $(\sigma v)_{osc} = \frac{1}{16 \pi} \Big(\frac{m_p^6}{\Lambda_{AH\bar{H}}^8}\Big) \ ,$
is the cross section for the process.
Then, the rate of assisted Hydrogen oscillation could be computed by studying the production rate of $\gamma$ rays due to the annihilation of the antiHydrogen with Hydrogen~\cite{PhysRevD.18.1602}. For a New Physics, presumably at $\Lambda_{AH\bar{H}}$ of $\mathcal{O}(1 TeV)$, the width of the process could be computed to be $\Gamma_{osc} \sim 7 \times 10^{-44} s^{-1}$. Thus, the constrain placed by the analysis of $\gamma$ ray data from Fermi LAT in the range $100 MeV - 9.05 GeV$~\cite{Grossman:2018rdg} does not constraint this operator. More reliable bound can be obtained from 14 TeV or 100 TeV LHC, but that requires a UV complete model. Nevertheless, this process also depends on the Dark Matter density. Thus, galaxy cluster centers can be a good source of assisted Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillation.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
The phenomenology in $4k+2-$dimensions, in particular six-dimensions is very interesting. The vanishing of Witten anomaly in six-dimensions, arising from the non-trivial winding of the spacetime on $S^3$ given by $\pi_6(SU(2)_W) = Z_{12}$, correctly predicting the number of fermions charged under $SU(2)_w$ gauge group. In 10-dimensions, this becomes $\pi_{10}(SU(2)_W) = Z_{15}$, which predicts one triplet fermion along with other SM fermions. The gauge bosons in dimensions $d \geq 6$ also exhibit interesting properties. In uncompactified geometry, these gauge bosons have $d-2$ polarization vectors. Upon compactification, $d-4$ of them break and one combination among them is ``eaten'' by the KK modes making them heavy. The rest of the broken polarizations become the spineless adjoint scalar fields and are present in KK spectrum with mass $\geq 1/R $, where $R\sim \mathcal{O}(1 TeV^{-1})$ is the compactification radius. In general, due to mass corrections, at 1-loop, the degeneracy among all the lightest KK masses are broken leading to a mass hierarchy with spineless adjoint scalar of the hypercharge gauge bosons being the lightest. Along with the KK-partiy conservation, this KK-1 scalar becomes the Dark Matter candidate. The relic density constraint places a stringent bound of $\lesssim 3 TeV$ on the compactificaitons scale, assuming that the adjoint scalar makes up the entire Dark Matter density.
The spinor properties in $4k+2-$dimension are very different from $4k-$dimension. Its consequence can be interesting in the context baryon number and lepton number violating currents. In $4k+2$ dimensions, the charge conjugation operator commutes with the chiral projection operator, thus keeping the chirality unchanged under charge conjugation of the fermion. This prohibits Majorana type interaction Lagrangian to generate BNV and LNV in this geometry. In this paper, we discussed a model independent effective field theory analysis of such operators. The relevant operators are given in Table.\ref{tab:ops} and Table.\ref{tab:4dops}. For simplicity and transparency of understanding, we explicitly work out them in six-dimensions, but the arguments can be generalised to any $4k+2-$dimensions with relative ease. And the summary of our analysis, with the lower bounds on the scalae of New Physics is given in Table.\ref{tab:bound}.
We show that the proton decay data from Super-Kamiokande constraints the vector operator stringently to $\gtrsim 10^6 TeV$. This result is theoretically unpleasant since the charge unification scale in extra-dimension is much lower ($\mathcal{O}(10^{3} TeV)$) owing to the power law running of the gauge couplings. Whereas, the scalar operator that induce proton decay, at 1-loop, is constrained to scale $\sim 300 TeV$, assuming Wilson Coefficient of order unity. Through the coupling of Dark Matter with the fermion bilinear, this scalar operator also introduces DM assisted proton decay with striking signature. This process can be identified in the water Cherenkov detector with collimated rings corresponding to a positron and a pion. The lower bound on the New Physics can be brought within the reach of 100TeV collider, if the Wilson Coefficient is assumed to be $C^S_1 \lesssim 10^{-3}$. The upcoming Hyper-Kamiokande experiment, with its better sensitivity to the proton decay process, will constrain the decay time period to $\tau_{p\rightarrow e} \gtrsim 1.2 \times 10^{35} years$. Which will place a stricter bound on the scale of New Physics by a factor $\mathcal{O}(10)$. This scalar operator also induces, with the degeneracy in the KK masses lifted by 1-loop corrections, decay of KK-1 quark to SM fermions and Dark Matter.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
& &\\
Process& $\Lambda_6$ & Wilson Coefficient\\[1ex] \hline
& &\\
Proton decay& $\gtrsim 10^6 TeV$ & $C_1^V$ \\[1ex] \hline
& &\\
(1-loop Assisted) Proton decay& $\gtrsim 300 TeV$ & $C_1^S$ \\[1ex] \hline
& &\\
$p+p\rightarrow e^++e^+$ & $\gtrsim 2.1 TeV $ & $C_2^V$\\[1ex] \hline
& &\\
$DM+ p \rightarrow DM+ \bar{p}+ e^+ + e^+$ & no constraint & $C_2^L$\\[1ex] \hline
& &\\
$(DM+ e) + p \rightarrow (DM+ e^+) + \bar{p}$ & no constraint & $C_2^Q$\\[1ex] \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Bounds from terrestrial experiments on the New Physics scale $\Lambda_6$ from baryon number and lepton number violating observables. We have assumed compactification scale to be $R^{-1} = 2 TeV$ and Wilson Coefficients $\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$.}
\label{tab:bound}
\end{table}
If the extra-dimension is orbifolded on square $T^2/Z^2$ orbifold, $\Delta B=1 =\Delta L$ processes will be prohibited and the baryon number violation arises from $\Delta B=2$, $\Delta L=2$ processes.
Among this, proton-proton annihilation to produce same sign dilepton has been searched for and are discussed widely in literature. In our paper, this baryon number violating channel is generated by the vector operator $C_2^V$. With the current constraint on the time period of this process from Super-Kamiokande, the lower limit on the New Physics scale becomes $\gtrsim 2.1 TeV$.
Other operators, $C_2^L$ and $C_2^Q$, are interesting in the context of baryon number violation from KK-fermions. These exotic operators have two same type KK-1 fermion in its external legs and they provide an annihilation channel for the KK-1 fermions to SM fermions. With a CP asymmetry in the KK-1 annihilation, these processes can be helpful in baryogenesis. At terrestrial experiments, these operators can generate double proton annihilation under the influence of Dark Matter. With KK-1 up quarks in the external legs, the $C^L_2$ operator, contribute to the Dark Matter assisted $DM+p\rightarrow DM+\bar{p}+e^++e^+$ process. This provides an unique signature with same sign dilepton Cherenkov rings and missing energy at Hyper-Kamiokande.
On the other hand, the operator $C_2^Q$, with its KK-1 leptons in the final leg, do not contribute to these low energy terrestrial processes. Instead, they generate DM assisted Hydrogen-antiHydrogen oscillations. The process can be searched for, at Fermi-Lat, by studying the $\gamma$ rays from Inter Stellar Medium (ISM) emanating from the annihilation of antiHydrogen thus produced with the Hydrogen in the medium. Both these operators are not constrained by the respective searches. A more reliable bound can be obtained from $14 TeV$ and $100 TeV$ LHC, but that requires a model dependent mechanism.
Though these processes are very weak to be detected on Earth, because of the rarity of Dark Matter, their contribution in superdense Dark Matter clumps and galaxy cluster centers can be very significant. The baryon number and lepton number violation can, probably, be much larger than the usual baryon number violating processes searched for at the terrestrial experiments without Dark Matter interaction. These processes also provide an annihilation channel for Dark Matter to SM quarks and leptons.
\acknowledgments
M.T.A. acknowledges the financial support of DST through INSPIRE Faculty grant
DST/INSPIRE/04/2019/002507.
\section{Appendix}
\label{appendix:a}
\subsection{Models}
\label{sec:A1}
Unlike four-dimensions, six-dimensional space-time support complex conjugate spinors that satisfies the same Weyl condition of the original spinor. Thus the interactions of Leptoquarks and Diquarks in six-dimensions will be different from in four-dimensions. Below, we briefly introduce the Leptoquark \cite{Dorsner:2016wpm} and Diquark \cite{Sahin:2009dca} interactions that generate the operators given in Table\ref{tab:ops}.
\subsubsection*{Scalar LeptoQuark and Scalar Diquark}
The Lagrangian for the singlet LeptoQuark $S_2$ ($\bar{3},2,\frac{5}{3})$ and singlet Diquark $DQ_2$($\bar{3},2,-\frac{5}{3} $) interactions with the fermions given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}_S &=& y^{(+-)}\bar{\mathcal{Q}^C}_{+} S_2 \mathcal{E}_{-}+z^{(-+)}\bar{\mathcal{U}^C}_{-} (DQ_2) \mathcal{Q}_{+}+ h.c.,
\end{eqnarray}
where $y^{(+-)}$ and $z^{(-+)}$ are complex $3\times 3$ Yukawa coupling matrices.
\subsubsection*{Vector LeptoQuark and Scalar Diquark}
The interaction of the vector LeptoQuark and scalar Diquark with the fermions given as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}_{SV}&=& z^{(-+)}\bar{\mathcal{U}^C}_{-} (DQ_2) \mathcal{Q}_{+} + w^{(++)}\bar{\mathcal{Q}^{C}}_{+} \Gamma^M V_{3 M}L_{+} +h.c.,
\end{eqnarray}
where the $V_{3 M}$ is the vector triplet LeptoQuark and the $DQ_{2}$ is the scalar Diquark doublet.
\subsubsection*{Scalar LeptoQuark and Vector Diquark}
The coupling of the scalar LeptoQuark and vector Diquark with the fermions is:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}_{VS}&=& y^{(+-)}\bar{\mathcal{Q}^C}_{+} S_2 \mathcal{E}_{-} + x^{(++)}\bar{\mathcal{Q}^C}^{a}_{+} \Gamma^M \epsilon^{ab} DQ_{3 M} \mathcal{Q}^{b}_{+} + h.c.,
\end{eqnarray}
\subsubsection*{Vector LeptoQuark and Vector Diquark}
The interaction becomes,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}_{VV}&=&x^{(++)}\bar{\mathcal{Q}^C}^{a}_{+} \Gamma^M \epsilon^{ab} DQ_{3 M} \mathcal{Q}^{b}_{+} + w^{(++)}\bar{\mathcal{Q}^{C}}_{+} \Gamma^M V_{3 M}L_{+}+h.c.,
\end{eqnarray}
where the $V_{3M}$,$DQ_{3M}$ are the triplet vector Leptoquark and Diquark.
\subsection{KK-decompositions of SM fermions}
\label{sec:AKK}
The KK decomposition of the fermion fields are given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{Q}_{+} (x^\mu,x_a) & = & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{(2\pi
R)}\left\{q_{+l}(x^\mu) + \sqrt{2} \sum_{m,n} \right.
\left[P_L \mathcal{Q}_{+l}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \cos\left( \frac{1}{R}(j_1 x_4 +
j_2 x_5) \right) \right. \nonumber \\ [0.5em] && + \left.\left.
P_R \mathcal{Q}_{+r}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \sin\left( \frac{1}{R}(j_1 x_4
+ j_2 x_5) \right)\right] \right\} ~,
\nonumber \\ [1em]
\mathcal{U}_{-} (x^\mu,x_a) & = & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{(2\pi R)}
\left\{ u_{-r}(x^\mu) + \sqrt{2} \sum_{m,n}\right. \left[ P_R \mathcal{U}_{-r}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \cos\left( \frac{1}{R}(m x_4 +n x_5) \right) \right. \nonumber \\ [0.5em] && + \left.\left.
P_L \mathcal{U}_{-l}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \sin\left( \frac{1}{R}(m x_4
+ n x_5) \right) \right] \right\} \nonumber\\
\mathcal{D}_{-} (x^\mu,x_a) & = & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{(2\pi R)}
\left\{ d_{-r}(x^\mu) + \sqrt{2} \sum_{m,n}\right. \left[ P_R \mathcal{D}_{-r}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \cos\left( \frac{1}{R}(m x_4 +n x_5) \right) \right. \nonumber \\ [0.5em] && + \left.\left.
P_L \mathcal{D}_{-l}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \sin\left( \frac{1}{R}(m x_4
+ n x_5) \right) \right] \right\} \nonumber\\
L_{-} (x^\mu,x_a) & = & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{(2\pi
R)}\left\{\ell_{+ l}(x^\mu) + \sqrt{2} \sum_{m,n} \right.
\left[P_L L_{+ l}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \cos\left( \frac{1}{R}(j_1 x_4 +
j_2 x_5) \right) \right. \nonumber \\ [0.5em] && + \left.\left.
P_R L_{+ r}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \sin\left( \frac{1}{R}(j_1 x_4
+ j_2 x_5) \right)\right] \right\} ~,\nonumber\\
\mathcal{E}_{-} (x^\mu,x_a) & = & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{(2\pi R)}
\left\{ e_{- r}(x^\mu) + \sqrt{2} \sum_{m,n}\right. \left[ P_R \mathcal{E}_{- r}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \cos\left( \frac{1}{R}(m x_4 +n x_5) \right) \right. \nonumber \\ [0.5em] && + \left.\left.
P_L \mathcal{E}_{- L}^{(m,n)}(x^\mu) \, \sin\left( \frac{1}{R}(m x_4
+ n x_5) \right) \right] \right\}
\label{ffermion} ~,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{Q_+}$ is the weak doublet quark and $q_{+L}$ is its zero mode, $\mathcal{U_-},\mathcal{D_-}$ is weak singlet quarks and $u_{-R},d_{-r}$ is its zero mode respectively. Similarly $L_+$, $\mathcal{E}_{-}$ is the doublet lepton and singlet electron and $\ell_{+ l}$, $e_{- r}$ are their zero mode respectively.
$P_{L,R}=\frac{1\pm\gamma^5}{2}$ is the chiral projection operator in 4-dimensions.
\subsection{Bilinears}
\label{section:A2}
To compute the operators given in Table.\ref{tab:ops}, it is worth writing the following.
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\mathcal{U}_-
&=&q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)\mathcal{U}_{-l}^{(1,0)} \nonumber\\
&+&\mathcal{Q}^{T(1,0)}_{+R}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)u_{-r} + \text{higher order}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\mathcal{E}_- & = &\mathcal{Q}^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)\mathcal{E}_{-L}^{(1,0)}\nonumber\\
&+&\mathcal{Q}^{T(1,0)}_{+R}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)\mathcal{E}_{-r} + \text{higher order}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M \mathcal{Q}_+&=&q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma^\mu)\mathcal{Q}_{+r}^{(1,0)}\nonumber\\
&+&\mathcal{Q}^{T(1,0)}_{+r}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma^\mu)q_{+l}\nonumber\\
&+&q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)q_{+l}\nonumber\\
&+&q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)q_{+l} + \text{higher order}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M L_+& = &q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma^\mu)L_{+r}^{(1,0)}\nonumber\\
&+&\mathcal{Q}^{T(1,0)}_{+r}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma^\mu)\ell_{+l}\nonumber\\
&+&q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2)\ell_{+l}\nonumber\\
&+&q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)\ell_{+l} + \text{higher order}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M \mathcal{Q}_+)(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma_M \mathcal{Q}_+) & = &(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma^\mu)\mathcal{Q}_{+r}^{(1,0)})(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma_\mu)\mathcal{Q}_{+r}^{(1,0)})+\nonumber\\
&+&(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2)q_{+l})(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2)q_{+l})+\nonumber\\
&+&(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)q_{+l})(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)q_{+l}) + \text{higher order}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma^M \mathcal{L}_+)(\mathcal{Q}^T_+C\Gamma_M \mathcal{L}_+) & = &(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma^\mu)L_{+r}^{(1,0)})(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5\gamma_\mu)L_{+r}^{(1,0)})+\nonumber\\
&+&(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2)L_{+l})(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2)\ell_{+l})+\nonumber\\
&+&(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)\ell_{+l})(q^T_{+l}(\gamma^0\gamma^2\gamma^5)\ell_{+l}) + \text{higher order}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{KK modes of Gauge fields}
\label{section:A3}
For UED with 2 extra dimensions , the gauge fields are decomposed in KK modes as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{A_{\mu}}(x^{\mu},y^{a})&=& \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2\pi r}\left(\mathcal{A_{\mu}}(x^{\mu})+\sqrt{2} \sum_{m,n}
\mathcal{A_{\mu}}(x^{\mu})cos\left[\frac{1}{R}(mx_4+n x_5) \right]\right)\nonumber, \\
\mathcal{A}_b(x^{\mu},y^{a})&=& \frac{2}{2\pi r}\sum_{m,n}
\mathcal{A}_b(x^{\mu})sin\left[\frac{1}{R}(mx_4+n x_5) \right]
\end{eqnarray}
The summation is over all KK numbers $m$ and $n$ with $m+n\geq1$.
The zero mode corresponds to the 4-dimensional standard model gauge fields.
The gauge fields along $x^\nu$ ($\mathcal{A_\nu}$) are even and that are polarized along the $y^b$ are odd under the orbifold transformation, so that after dimensional reduction only zero mode fields are projected out.
In order to remove the ghost terms, lagrangian is modified with $R_{\xi}$ gauge
The 6D lagrangian is given by,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\frac{1}{4} F^{MN}F_{MN}+ \mathcal{L}_{GF}
\end{equation}
where,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{GF}=-\frac{1}{2\xi} (\partial_\mu A_\mu - \xi (\partial_4 A_4+\partial_5 A_5))^2
\end{equation}
Expanding the terms with extra-dimensional coordinates,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}&=&\frac{1}{4} F^{\mu \nu}F_{\mu \nu}+\frac{1}{2}((\partial_\mu A_4- \partial_4 A_\mu)^2+ (\partial_\mu A_5- \partial_5 A_\mu)^2+ (\partial_5 A_4- \partial_4 A_5)^2)
-\frac{1}{2\xi}(\partial_\mu A_\mu)^2 \nonumber \\ &-&\frac{\xi}{2}( (\partial_4 A_4)^2+(\partial_5 A_5)^2 + 2(\partial_4 A_4)(\partial_5 A_5))-(\partial_\mu A_\mu) (\partial_4 A_4) -(\partial_\mu A_\mu)(\partial_5 A_5)
\label{4dleg}
\end{eqnarray}
After integrating out the $y^b$ coordinates, the partial derivatives $\partial_4, \partial_5$
is replaced by $\frac{m}{R}$ and $\frac{n}{R}$ respectively. The simplified lagrangian in 4D is,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}&=&\frac{1}{4} F^{\mu \nu}F_{\mu \nu}-\frac{1}{2\xi}(\partial_\mu A_\mu)^2+ \frac{1}{2}(\frac{n}{R} A_4- \frac{m}{R} A_5)^2- \frac{\xi}{2 R^2}(m^2 A_4^2+n^2 A_5^2+ 2 mn A_4 A_5)
\end{eqnarray}
The term involving $\frac{\xi}{2}$ say $\mathcal{L_\xi}$ can be represented in matrix form,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L_\xi}=\begin{bmatrix}A_{4}&A_{5}\end{bmatrix}\frac{1}{R}\begin{bmatrix}
m^2&mn\\mn&n^2\end{bmatrix}\frac{1}{R}\begin{bmatrix}A_{4}\\A_{5}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation}
After diagonalising the matrix we get,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L_\xi}= \begin{bmatrix}V_{1}^{(m,n)}&V_{2}^{(m,n})\end{bmatrix}\frac{1}{R}\begin{bmatrix}
{m^2+n^2}&0\\0&0\end{bmatrix}\frac{1}{R}\begin{bmatrix}V_{1}^{(m,n)}\\V_{2}^{(m,n)}\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Where $V_1^{(m,n)}$ and $V_2^{(m,n)}$ are the adjoint representation of fields $A_4$ and $A_5$, given by
\begin{eqnarray}
V_1^{(m,n)}= \frac{m}{\sqrt{m^2+n^2}}A_4+\frac{n}{\sqrt{m^2+n^2}}A_5\nonumber \\
V_2^{(m,n)}=\frac{-n}{\sqrt{m^2+n^2}}A_4+\frac{m}{\sqrt{m^2+n^2}}A_5
\label{adj}
\end{eqnarray}
The fields $A_4$ and $A_5$ are replaced by its scalar adjoint $V_1^{(m,n)}$ and $V_2^{(m,n)}$ in Eq.(\ref{4dleg}),
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\frac{1}{4} F^{\mu \nu}F_{\mu \nu}-\frac{1}{2\xi}(\partial_\mu A_\mu)^2+ (m^2+n^2)V_2^{(m,n)2}+\frac{\xi}{2 R^2}(m^2+n^2) V_1^{(m,n)2}
\label{vleg}
\end{equation}
Gauge invariance implies that $\xi$ must drop out from any calculation of physical observables. The limit $\xi\rightarrow \infty$ corresponds to the Unitary gauge. The limit $\xi \rightarrow \infty$ is equivalent to making the choice $V_1=0$.
The adjoint $V_2^{(m,n)}$ remain as a physical spin-$0$ particle, which is polarised along the extra dimensions. The lightest stable spinless adjoint is $V_2^{(1,0)}$ of photon called "Spinless Photon" which is a possible dark matter component. The spinless adjoint of hypercharge gauge group $B^{(1,0)}$ (say $V_B^{(1,0)}$)is the lightest (1,0) particle and hence it is the dark matter candidate.
\subsection{Interaction of $V_B^{(1,0)}$ with Fermions}
\label{section:A4}
The 6-dimensional lagrangian for the quark field is given by,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_f=\mathcal{\bar{Q}}_+\Gamma^M D_M\mathcal{Q}_++\mathcal{\bar{U}}_-\Gamma^M D_M \mathcal{U}_- \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma^M$ are the 6-dimensional gamma matrices and the covariant derivatives $D_M\mathcal{Q}_+=(\partial_M-\frac{ig}{2}\tau^i W^i_M-i\frac{g_y}{2}y_+)\mathcal{Q}_+$, $D_M\mathcal{U}_-=(\partial_M-\frac{ig_y}{2}y_-)\mathcal{U}_-$.
We are interested in the interactions of quarks with $B_M^{(1,0)}$. The interaction lagrangian is given by:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_I=\frac{ig_y}{2}(y_+\mathcal{\bar{Q}}_+ \Gamma^M B_M^{(1,0)}\mathcal{Q}_+ + y_-\mathcal{\bar{U}}_- \Gamma^M B_M^{(1,0)}\mathcal{U}_-)
\end{equation}
The spinless adjoint $V_B^{(1,0)}$ is the fifth component of $B_M^{(1,0)}$ (Eq.\ref{adj})
\begin{equation}
V_B^{(1,0)}=\frac{1}{\pi r}
\mathcal{B}_5^{(1,0)}(x^{\mu})\sin\left(\frac{x_4}{R} \right)
\end{equation}
After integrating out the extra dimensions, non vanishing terms in the interaction between the $V_B^{(1,0)}$ and quarks takes the form:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_I=\frac{ig_Y}{2} V_B^{(1,0)}(y_l \bar{\mathcal{Q}}^{(1,0)}_{+r} q_{+l}+y_r \bar{\mathcal{U}}^{(1,0)}_{-l} u_{-r})
\label{eq:DMqint}
\end{equation}
Similarly, for leptons, the interaction becomes,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_I=\frac{ig_Y}{2} V_B^{(1,0)}(y_l \bar{L}^{(1,0)}_{+r} \ell_{+l}+y_r \bar{\mathcal{E}}^{(1,0)}_{-l} e_{-r})
\label{eq:DMeint}
\end{equation}
where $y_l=\frac{1}{3}$ and $y_r=\frac{4}{3}$ are the normalised 4-dimensional hypercharge quantum numbers of left-handed and right-handed quarks respectively.
The term involving ${\mathcal{Q}}_{+l} $ and ${\mathcal{U}}_{-r}$ are vanishes while integrating out the extra dimensions. This makes the spinless adjoint more stable and long-lived.
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{willsch_sec_introduction}
Quantum computing\cite{NielsenChuang} is an emerging computer technology that uses quantum effects in the design of its computational model. There are two major paradigms in quantum computing, namely the gate-based quantum computer and the quantum annealer.
A gate-based quantum computer is inspired by the circuit model for classical, digital computers. This means that every program is defined in terms of a sequence of fundamental operations, the so-called \emph{quantum gates}. Each quantum gate operates on the fundamental units of computation, the so-called \emph{quantum bits} or \emph{qubits}. The gate-based quantum computer executes these quantum gates step-by-step and thus updates its internal quantum state. At the end of the quantum gate sequence, the quantum state is ``measured'', which means that the quantum computer outputs, with a certain probability, one out of several classical bitstrings. The maximum number of bits in this bitstring is given by the number of qubits in the quantum computer. At the time of writing, gate-based quantum computers with approximately one hundred qubits have been manufactured\cite{randomrandomdevarmonk}.
A quantum annealer, on the other hand, tries to harness the natural evolution of a quantum system, steered by external magnetic fields, to solve an optimisation problem. Internally, it also operates on a set of qubits, which are measured at the end of a quantum annealing run. It thus also produces a bitstring as output. At the time of writing, quantum annealers with more than 5000 qubits have been manufactured\cite{dwave2020Advantage}.
Both types of quantum computers share the property that the same program can produce different bitstrings obtained after a run. The computational models are thus inherently probabilistic. This means that quantum computers can also be used as \emph{samplers}. A program is often executed multiple times to obtain a representative distribution of bitstrings.
In this article, we consider simulations of hybrid quantum classical variational algorithms. Such algorithms obtain their name from the combined usage of gate-based quantum and classical computers in a single application. The working of such algorithms is visualised in Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_labelv}. The optimiser in the classical central processing unit (CPU) sends the parameters placed in a circuit to be executed by the quantum processing unit (QPU). The QPU prepares a problem specific initial state, executes the circuit, and sends the results to the CPU after measurement. The outcomes of the measurements, called bitstrings, are used to calculate the energy which is given to the optimiser. The optimiser then decides what new parameters will lower the energy, and the cycle continues until convergence. The CPU also controls the QPU through other instructions, e.g. the number of measurements, microwave pulses, or the time between measurements.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.9]{fig_jattana_VQEforNIC.eps}
\caption{\textbf{Schematic diagram of hybrid quantum classical variational algorithms.} The tasks are divided between a QPU and a CPU. The CPU suggests certain parameters of a parametrised quantum circuit. This quantum circuit, along with other instructions, is then sent to and executed by the QPU. Following this, the measurement results from the QPU are sent back to the CPU, which in turn evaluates the energy to be optimised. From this result, the CPU obtains new parameters for the quantum circuit. This process continues until some convergence criterion is met.}
\label{willsch_fig_labelv}
\end{figure}
This article is structured as follows.
Section \ref{willsch_sec_juqcs} contains an overview of the J\"ulich Universal Quantum Computer Simulator, which is used for the simulation of the following two hybrid quantum classical applications.
In Sec.~\ref{willsch_sec_qaoa}, we introduce the QAOA, discuss its relation to AQA, and compare both algorithms when applied to the tail assignment problem.
In Sec.~\ref{willsch_sec_vqe}, we discuss the VQE and its application to the Heisenberg model.
Section \ref{willsch_sec_conclusion} contains our conclusions.
\section{J\"ulich Universal Quantum Computer Simulator}
\label{willsch_sec_juqcs}
In this section, we briefly describe the J\"ulich Universal Quantum Computer Simulator (JUQCS), and outline how a program for a gate-based quantum computer can be simulated using supercomputers. More details and in-depth descriptions of the implementation are given in Refs.~\citen{DeRaedt2007MassivelyParallel,DeRaedt2018MassivelyParallel,Willsch2021JUQCSGQAOA}.
The basic unit of computation for quantum computers is the qubit. Mathematically, a qubit is described by a unit vector of two complex numbers $\ket\psi = (\psi_0, \psi_1)$ fulfilling $\braket{\psi|\psi}=|\psi_0|^2+|\psi_1|^2=1$. Usually, the basis states (i.e., orthonormal basis vectors) are denoted by $\ket{0}$ and $\ket{1}$. An $N$-qubit system is defined by $2^N$ complex numbers
\begin{eqnarray}
\ket\psi&=&\psi_{0\ldots00}\ket{0\ldots00}+\psi_{0\ldots01}\ket{0\ldots01}+\ldots+\psi_{1\ldots11}\ket{1\ldots11},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\ket{0\ldots00},\ldots,\ket{1\ldots11}$ denote the computational basis states~\cite{NielsenChuang} and the complex coefficients $\psi_{0\ldots00},\ldots,\psi_{1\ldots11}$ again fulfil $\braket{\psi|\psi}=1$.
The $2^N$ complex coefficients in the state
$\ket\psi$ can be written as a rank-$N$ tensor $\psi_{q_{N-1}\cdots q_1 q_0}$ where $q_j\in\{0,1\}$ denote the indices.
Since the number of coefficients grows exponentially in the number of qubits $N$, the memory requirement grows exponentially too, which makes large-scale simulations of universal quantum computers only possible on supercomputers with enough (distributed) random access memory.
To simulate for instance a quantum computer with $N=42$ qubits, the tensor $\psi_{q_{N-1}\cdots q_1 q_0}$ requires $16\times2^{42}\,\mathrm B = 64\,\mathrm{TiB}$ of memory (using double precision floating-point numbers) while the simulation of $N=21$ qubits only requires $16\times 2^{21}\,\mathrm{B}=32\,\mathrm{MiB}$ of memory.
The GPU version of JUQCS (JUQCS--G) distributes the complex coefficients over the memory of the participating GPUs. A sketch is shown in Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_mpi}.
Each GPU stores a power of two coefficients, say $2^M$ coefficients, of the state vector $\ket\psi$ in its local memory. Qubits $j$ whose amplitudes $\psi_{q_{N-1}...q_{j+1}0q_{j-1}...q_0}$ and $\psi_{q_{N-1}...q_{j+1}1q_{j-1}...q_0}$ are stored on the same local memory are thus called \emph{local} qubits.
Qubits whose amplitudes are distributed over different GPUs are called \emph{global} qubits. The total number of GPUs needed is $N_{\mathrm{GPU}}=2^{N-M}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig_willsch_juqcsg_node.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Distribution of the coefficients of the state vector $\ket\psi$ across the GPUs and compute nodes of JUWELS Booster\cite{JUWELSBooster}.} Each GPU is handled by a single MPI process. For each GPU, the global qubit indices of the coefficients represent its MPI rank. For the GPUs belonging to
MPI rank 0 and 3 this is indicated on the right (the 10 leftmost indices are the global qubit indices). The complex coefficients
of the local qubits are stored locally on the GPUs.}
\label{willsch_fig_mpi}
\end{figure}
Since the state vector is distributed over several GPUs, potentially also over different compute nodes, it is necessary to transfer data from one GPU to another over the network, for instance if (part of) the data is needed for a computation on another GPU or node. We use the \emph{Message Passing Interface} (MPI) to transfer the data between different GPUs.
Each MPI process controls a GPU, and its rank $r\in\{0,\ldots,N_{\mathrm{GPU}}-1\}$ is given by the global qubit indices in binary notation.
The application of a quantum gate is performed as the matrix-vector update $U\ket\psi$, where the matrix $U$ is unitary and acts only on a few-qubit subspace. For instance, the matrix corresponding to a single-qubit gate is a $2\times2$ unitary matrix $U_1 = (u^{(1)}_{qq'})$. It acts only on a single-qubit subspace and thus transforms the coefficients of $\ket\psi$ in terms of 2-component updates: Acting on qubit $j$, $U_1$ transforms the state vector $\ket\psi$ according to
\begin{align}
\label{willsch_eq_twocomponentupdates}
\psi_{q_{N-1}\cdots q_{j+1}qq_{j-1}\cdots q_0} \leftarrow \sum_{q'=0}^1 u^{(1)}_{qq'} \psi_{q_{N-1}\cdots q_{j+1}q'q_{j-1}\cdots q_0},
\end{align}
for $q=0,1$. Similarly, a two-qubit gate is a $4\times 4$ unitary matrix that acts on a two-qubit subspace of $\ket\psi$, and so on.
A suitable set of one- and two-qubit gates (called a universal gate set) is sufficient for the implementation of a universal quantum computer (simulator)~\cite{Deutsch95universality, divincenzo1995twoqubitgates}.
The full gate set of JUQCS is documented in Ref.~\citen{DeRaedt2018MassivelyParallel}.
The implementation of JUQCS exploits the special structure of single-, two- and three-qubit operations. Large, dense matrices are never stored nor operated on.
It is sufficient to loop over pairs of coefficients of the state vector and to perform the 2-component updates given in Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_twocomponentupdates}) for the same $2\times2$ matrix $U_1$ (how $U_1$ looks like depends on the particular gate). Depending on the index of the qubit that the gate operates on, the pairs of coefficients are grouped differently. Accordingly, for two-qubit gates, the loop goes over quadruples of coefficients of $\ket{\psi}$ and the 4-component updates are performed with a $4\times4$ matrix (whose entries are determined by the particular gate).
A quantum gate acting on a global qubit requires MPI communication, because coefficients of $\ket\psi$ that need to be combined in the update are stored on different GPUs.
Thus, to perform a single-qubit gate on a global qubit, the transfer of $2^N/2$ coefficients (i.e., half of the state vector) between pairs of GPUs is required. The communication overhead is minimised by \emph{relabelling} global and local qubits after the transfer happened once. Thus, the coefficients do not need to be transferred back again after the transformation.
Each MPI rank has to keep track of the current labelling of global and local qubits.
More details on this MPI communication scheme are given in Ref.~\citen{DeRaedt2007MassivelyParallel}.
\section{Quantum Approximate Optimisation Algorithm}
\label{willsch_sec_qaoa}
The QAOA\cite{Farhi2014QAOA} is an algorithm for gate-based quantum computers to solve combinatorial optimisation problems. Such problems can be mapped to binary optimisation problems, which are defined in terms of an $N$-bit binary string $\mathbf{x} = x_1 \dots x_N$, with the goal of finding a bitstring $\mathbf{x}$ that minimises a classical objective function $C(\mathbf{x}) : \{0, 1\}^N \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$.
For quantum computers, a natural way of encoding a binary optimisation problem is to express its solution as the ground state (i.e., the state corresponding to the lowest energy) of the so-called Ising Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\label{willsch_eq_isinghamiltonian}
H_\mathrm{C} = \sum_{i=0}^{N-1} h_i\sigma_i^z + \sum_{i<j} J_{ij}\sigma_i^z\sigma_j^z.
\end{equation}
Here, $\{h_i\}$ and $\{J_{ij}\}$ denote real numbers that represent the optimisation problem instance, and $\sigma_i^z=I\otimes I\cdots I\otimes\mathrm{diag}(1,-1)\otimes I\otimes\cdots\otimes I$ (with $I$ being the $2\times2$ identity matrix) is the Pauli $z$ matrix acting on the $i^{\mathrm{th}}$ qubit subsystem.
The idea of the QAOA is to solve the optimisation problem by bringing the quantum computer into a variational state
\begin{align}
\label{willsch_eq_QAOA_state}
\ket{\beta,\gamma} = \left(\prod_{k=p}^1 \exp \left[ -i \beta_k H_\mathrm{D} \right] \exp \left[ -i \gamma_k H_\mathrm{C} \right]\right) \ket{+}^{\otimes N},
\end{align}
where $\gamma=(\gamma_1,...,\gamma_p)$ and $\beta=(\beta_1,...,\beta_p)$ are the $2p$ variational parameters to be optimised, $\ket+=(\ket0+\ket1)/\sqrt2$ is the uniform superposition of the qubit state $\ket0$ and $\ket1$, $H_C$ is the cost Hamiltonian encoding the optimisation problem (see Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_isinghamiltonian})), and $H_\mathrm{D} = -\sum_{i=0}^{N-1} \sigma_i^x$ is a so-called driving Hamiltonian (i.e., a sum of Pauli $x$ matrices). By finding optimal angles $\beta$ and $\gamma$ that minimise the energy expectation value $E_p(\beta,\gamma) = \bra{\beta,\gamma} H_\mathrm{C} \ket{\beta,\gamma}$, one hopes to find the ground state of $H_\mathrm{C}$. As $\ket{\beta,\gamma}$ is a linear combination of $2^N$ potential states, the idea is that optimising the $2p$ variational parameters may be much simpler than solving the original optimisation problem. However, note that in general, determining a set of optimal $\beta$ and $\gamma$ may require numerous queries to a quantum computer.
A quantum circuit to bring the quantum computer into the variational state $\ket{\beta,\gamma}$ given by Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_QAOA_state}) is shown in Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_qaoa_circuit}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{equation*}
\Qcircuit @C=1.2em @R=0.7em @!R {
& & & & \mbox{Repeat for $k=1,\ldots,p$ QAOA steps \hphantom{MM}} & & \\
& & & & \mbox{Weighting \hphantom{MMMMMMMM}} & \mbox{Mixing} & & \\
\lstick{ \ket{{q}_{0}} } & \gate{H} & \qw & \gate{R^z(2\gamma_kh_0)} & \multigate{3}{\prod\limits_{i,j} e^{-i\gamma_k J_{ij}\sigma_i^z\sigma_j^z}} & \gate{R^x(2\beta_k)} & \qw & \meter \\
\lstick{ \ket{{q}_{1}} } & \gate{H} & \qw & \gate{R^z(2\gamma_kh_1)} & \ghost{\prod\limits_{i,j} e^{-i\gamma_k J_{ij}\sigma_i^z\sigma_j^z}} & \gate{R^x(2\beta_k)} & \qw & \meter\\
\lstick{ \vdots\:\:\, } & \vdots & & \vdots & & \vdots & & \vdots \\
\lstick{ \ket{{q}_{N-1}} } & \gate{H} & \qw & \gate{R^z(2\gamma_kh_{N-1})} & \ghost{\prod\limits_{i,j} e^{-i\gamma_k J_{ij}\sigma_i^z\sigma_j^z}} & \gate{R^x(2\beta_k)} & \qw & \meter \gategroup{3}{4}{6}{5}{1em}{^\}} \gategroup{3}{6}{6}{6}{1em}{^\}}\gategroup{2}{4}{6}{6}{1.5em}{--} \\
}
\end{equation*}
\caption{\textbf{General QAOA circuit.} Initially, we bring the qubits into a uniform superposition over all states using the Hadamard gate $H$. Then, we apply $k=1,\ldots,p$ QAOA steps with parameters $\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_p$ and $\gamma_1,\ldots,\gamma_p$ (see Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_QAOA_state})). Each QAOA step $k$ consists of a ``weighting step'' using single-qubit $z$ rotation gates $R^z(\varphi)=\exp(-i\varphi\sigma^z/2)$ and the set of two-qubit gates indicated in the circuit,
followed by a ``mixing step'' using single-qubit $x$ rotation gates
$R^x(\varphi)=\exp(-i\varphi\sigma^x/2)$.
The result after the measurement gates is used to update the variational parameters until the energy is sufficiently low (cf.~Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_labelv}).}
\label{willsch_fig_qaoa_circuit}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Emulation of the QAOA}
To emulate the QAOA, JUQCS produces the variational state $\ket{{\beta,\gamma}}$ (see Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_QAOA_state})) by simulating the quantum circuit in Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_qaoa_circuit} for given variational parameters $\beta$ and $\gamma$.
For the optimisation phase of the QAOA, the energy expectation value in the variational state $E_p(\beta,\gamma)=\bra{{\beta,\gamma}}H_C\ket{{\beta,\gamma}}$ is computed by JUQCS and passed to the optimiser (cf.~Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_labelv}; we use optimisers from the \texttt{scipy} library \cite{scipy}).
The optimiser then returns new values for the variational parameters, which are in turn used for the next simulation of the QAOA circuit, and so on.
In case the optimisation does not converge or if it converges too slowly, an additional stopping criterion of a maximum of 200 calls to JUQCS is used.
Note that in practice, the only quantity that can be estimated using a real quantum computer is the energy expectation value $E_p(\beta,\gamma)$, and not the success probability $P_{\mathrm{success}}$ (i.e., the probability of the ground state in the variational state $\ket{{\beta,\gamma}}$).
Although we could in principle also optimise for the success probability, we consider the realistic situation and optimise for the energy only. However, the success probability is also evaluated by JUQCS to assess the quality of the solution (cf.~Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_aqa_qaoa} below).
\subsection{Approximate Quantum Annealing}
\label{willsch_sec_AQA}
In this section, we first review how to simulate the time evolution of a quantum annealing process, and then we explain under which conditions we refer to ``approximate'' quantum annealing (AQA). Additionally, we point out the structural relation to the QAOA introduced above. A more detailed discussion of AQA and its comparison to the QAOA is given in Ref.~\citen{Willsch2021JUQCSGQAOA}.
In order to simulate a quantum annealing process, the time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation (TDSE) with $\hbar=1$, $i\partial_t\ket{\psi(t)}=H(t)\ket{\psi(t)}$, for the quantum annealing Hamiltonian $H(t)=A(t)H_\mathrm{D}+B(t)H_\mathrm{C}$ has to be solved at times $0\le t\le t_{\mathrm{anneal}}$, where $t_{\mathrm{anneal}}$ is the annealing time. Here, $H_D$ ($H_C$) is the driving (cost) Hamiltonian used in Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_QAOA_state}), and the so-called annealing functions $A$ and $B$ satisfy $A(0) \gg B(0)$ and $A(t_{\mathrm{anneal}}) \ll B(t_{\mathrm{anneal}})$. Therefore, we also call $H(0)\approx H_D$ and $H(t_{\mathrm{anneal}})\approx H_C$ the initial and final Hamiltonian, respectively.
The TDSE can be solved by time-stepping using the second-order Suzuki-Trotter product formula~\cite{Suzuki1993GeneralDecompositionTheoryOrderedExponentials,deraedt2004computational}
\begin{align}
|\Psi((l+1)\tau)\rangle &=
\left\{\exp\left[-\frac{i\tau}{2} A(l\tau)H_D\right]\right.
\times \exp\!\left[ -i\tau B(l\tau)H_C \right]\nonumber\\
&\ \ \ \ \!\left.\times\exp\left[-\frac{i\tau}{2} A(l\tau)H_D\right]\right\}|\Psi(l\tau)\rangle\;,
\label{willsch_eq_pf_update}
\end{align}
where $\tau$ denotes the time step and $l=0,\ldots,n$ (such that $t_{\mathrm{anneal}}=(n+1)\tau)$.
The action of the three matrix exponentials in Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_pf_update}) on any state vector can be computed analytically.
The initial state is taken to be the ground state of $H_\mathrm{D}$, namely $|\Psi(0)\rangle = |+\rangle^{\otimes N}$.
Note that the structure of Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_pf_update}) and of the QAOA (cf.~Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_QAOA_state})) are essentially the same.
The idea of AQA is now to use a time step $\tau$ that is too large and a number of time steps $n$ that is too small to yield an accurate discretisation of the time evolution. Thus, we do not expect that the sequence of states $|\Psi((l+1)\tau)\rangle$ resembles the solution of the time evolution of a quantum annealing process. However, we hope that we can still generate a final state which has a relatively large overlap with the ground state of the final problem Hamiltonian $H_\mathrm{C}$ by using only a small number of matrix-vector operations. This heuristic method is motivated by empirical findings~\cite{Crooks2018PerformanceQAOAMaxCut,Brandao2018QAOAFixedControlParameters,Willsch2019BenchmarkingQAOA,Zhou2018QAOATensorFlow,Vikstal2019QAOATailAssignment} that the values for $\beta$ and $\gamma$ obtained from the optimisation were often found to approximately follow curves that are suitable as coarsely discretised quantum annealing functions $A$ and $B$.
The amounts of single-qubit and two-qubit gates required to implement either one time step of AQA, or one layer of the QAOA, are the same. Thus, for fixed $n$, (i.e., $n+1$ AQA time steps) the computational effort is equivalent to a single QAOA circuit evaluation (i.e., no optimisation) where $p=n+1$.
\subsection{Tail Assignment Problem}
The tail assignment problem \cite{Groenkvist2005TailAssignmentProblem} is a formulation of aircraft assignment problems that respects typical operational constraints such as connection times, preassigned activities, maintenance and airport curfews.
We consider the constraint-only version of the tail assignment problem used in Ref.~\citen{Willsch2021BenchmarkAdvantage} (other models for the tail assignment problem can be found in Refs.~\citen{Vikstal2019QAOATailAssignment,Martins2020TailAssignmentProblemQA,svensson2021LargeILPBranchPrice}). In this form, the problem can be formulated as an exact cover problem, which is an NP-complete problem\cite{Karp1972KarpsNPCompleteProblems} from the class of set covering and partitioning problems. The corresponding classical objective function to be minimised reads
\begin{align}
C(\mathbf{x}) = \sum_{f=1}^{F}\left(\sum_{i=1}^N \mathbf{A}_{if}x_i - 1\right)^2.
\end{align}
Here, $\mathbf{A}\in\{0,1\}^{N\times F}$ is a Boolean matrix that defines the exact cover problem instance. In the context of aircraft assignment, each of the $F$ columns of $\mathbf{A}$ represents one flight, and each of the $N$ rows represents a given route. Thus, $\mathbf{A}_{if}=1$ if and only if flight $f$ is contained in route $i$. The solution $\mathbf{x} = x_1 \dots x_N$ therefore selects a set of aircraft routes from $\mathbf{A}$ such that each flight is covered exactly once (see Ref.~\citen{Willsch2021BenchmarkAdvantage}, which also contains the explicit expression for $H_\mathrm{C}$ in Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eq_isinghamiltonian}) as a function of $\mathbf A$).
We consider the same $N=30,\ldots,40$ qubit problems with $F=472$ flights that have been used in Ref.~\citen{Willsch2021JUQCSGQAOA}.
\subsection{Results}
\begin{figure}
\flushright
\includegraphics[width=.85\textwidth]{fig_willsch_aqa_qaoa_for_nic.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Success probabilities $P_\mathrm{success}$ obtained from AQA and the QAOA, in comparison to random guessing, for different problem sizes $N$.} The success probabilities obtained with the QAOA are shown for a case in which the variational parameters are separately optimised for each problem size $N$ (blue circles, $p=7$), and for a case in which fixed variational parameters are taken from a previous optimisation of the $N=30$ case (blue triangles, $p=6$). The success probabilities obtained with AQA are shown for $\tau=0.8$ (green crosses) and $\tau=0.1$ (green squares).
The dashed, dotted, and dash-dotted lines represent fits to the average success probabilities (in these cases, two instances per problem size have been simulated).
The red dash-dot-dotted line represents the probability $1/2^N$ to find the solution by random guessing.
The solid line is a guide to the eye.}
\label{willsch_fig_aqa_qaoa}
\end{figure}
In this section, we summarise some representative QAOA and AQA results. In Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_aqa_qaoa}, we plot the success probability $P_{\mathrm{success}}$ as a function of the problem size $N$ for two versions of AQA and the QAOA. The AQA results are for $n=5$ steps with time step $\tau=0.1$ (green squares) and $\tau=0.8$ (green crosses). The QAOA results are for standard QAOA (i.e., the variational parameters are optimised individually for each problem instance, initialised from AQA with $n=6$ and $\tau=0.4$; blue circles), and for pre-optimised QAOA (i.e., the variational parameters are optimised for a $30$-qubit problem, initialised from AQA with $n=5$ and $\tau=0.2$, and these same values are reused for all larger problem instances; blue triangles). Further results and additional details can be found in Ref.~\citen{Willsch2021JUQCSGQAOA}.
Both QAOA and AQA obtain better success probabilities than can be found by random guessing (red dash-dot-dotted line), but for the QAOA they are overall higher than for AQA. This is reasonable since the variational QAOA parameters have been initialised with AQA results.
More important, however, is the scaling behaviour as a function of the problem size $N$.
For AQA with $\tau=0.1$ (dash-dotted line), the scaling is equal to the scaling of random guessing ($1/2^N$).
The scaling of the QAOA with pre-optimised variational parameters (dashed line) is only marginally better. However, both AQA with $\tau=0.8$ (dotted line) and standard QAOA (solid line) show considerably good scaling behaviour (albeit still exponential).
Merely the particular QAOA data point for the largest problem size (the blue circle at $N=40$) falls out of this scaling behaviour. Here, the maximum number of $200$ JUQCS-calls (and thus the limit of the computational budget allocated for this job) was reached.
This represents the fact that the QAOA optimisation procedure requires a significant amount of computational work on many nodes of the supercomputer.
This is a noteworthy advantage of AQA, as it can extend the good scaling also to $N=40$ without requiring any involved optimisation procedure once a good value for $\tau$ is found.
Interestingly, the regime of ``good'' values appears to be for large time steps $\tau$, where AQA is actually not a genuine discretisation of quantum annealing anymore.
\section{Variational Quantum Eigensolver}
\label{willsch_sec_vqe}
An interesting and common problem is to find the ground state energy of a Hamiltonian $H$. As this is a hard problem to solve on classical computers, quantum computers are considered as an alternative route to solve the problem. When the ground state $\ket{\psi_0}$ can be prepared on a quantum computer, the expectation value
\begin{equation}
\braket{H}_0 = \frac{\bra{\psi_0}H\ket{\psi_0}}{\braket{\psi_0|{\psi_0}}}
\end{equation}
gives the ground state energy. The task is to find this ground state energy by initialising the quantum computer in an arbitrary initial trial state $\ket{\psi_t}$. The variational theorem states that $\braket{H}_t$ for any $\ket{\psi_t}\neq \ket{\psi_0}$ is an upper bound to the ground state energy. This means that
\begin{equation}
\braket{H}_t \geq E_0, \label{willsch_vqeeq1}
\end{equation}
where the equality sign holds if and only if $\ket{\psi_t}= \ket{\psi_0}$. In Eq.~(\ref{willsch_vqeeq1}), $E_0$ is the lowest eigenvalue or the ground state energy of the physical system described by $H$.
The VQE is an implementation of the variational principle on a quantum computer. Its working is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_labelv}. The VQE derives its name from the fact that it was used to solve for the lowest eigenvalue of a Hamiltonian \cite{willsch_Peruzzo2014}.
\subsection{Heisenberg model}
The Hamiltonian for the one-dimensional Heisenberg model is given by
\begin{equation}
H = \sum_{i>j}^N \Big({J}_{ij}^{xx} \sigma_i^x \cdot \sigma_j^x+{J}_{ij}^{yy} \sigma_i^y \cdot \sigma_j^y+{J}_{ij}^{zz} \sigma_i^z \cdot \sigma_j^z \Big ),
\end{equation}
where $N$ denotes the number of spins, $\sigma^x,\sigma^y,$ and $\sigma^z $ are the Pauli matrices, and $J_{ij}$ is the coupling interaction between the $i^{\text{th}}$ and $j^{\text{th}}$ spins. We use units such that $\hbar=1$ and the $J$'s are dimensionless. If $J_{ij} = 1$ for all $i,j=1,\dots,N$, we call $H$ the \textit{isotropic antiferromagnetic} model Hamiltonian. We consider bipartite spin lattices in our simulations.
\subsubsection{The ansatz}
The variational principle allows any ansatz to be used to solve the ground state energy problem. However, not every ansatz can express the ground state of $H$. An ansatz\cite{jattana2022assessment} that can find a reasonable approximation to the ground state energy is given by
\begin{equation}
U(\bm \theta) = \Big [\prod_{ l =N-1 }^{1} \prod_{k = N}^{ l+1} U_{lk}(\theta_{lk}) \Big ] \Big [\prod_{ l =N-1 }^{1} \prod_{k = N}^{ l+1} U_{kl}(\theta_{kl}) \Big ], \label{willsch_man1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
U_{pq}(\theta_{pq}) =
\begin{cases}
e^{-i\theta_{pq} \sigma_p^y\sigma_q^x } & \text{if $p=N$ or $q=N$,}\\
e^{-i\theta_{pq} \sigma_p^y\sigma_q^x\sigma_N^z } & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
If an ansatz can express the ground state, it is still challenging to optimise the parameters such that $\ket{\psi_t(\bm \Theta)} = \ket{\psi_0}$, where $\bm \Theta$ are the optimised parameters. In addition to the ansatz, it is important to specify the initial state (say $\ket{\Psi_0}$) of the quantum computer. The ansatz then acts on the initial state, i.e. $\bm U(\bm \theta) \ket{\Psi_0}$, with a set of initial parameters to give the initial energy. The task of the VQE is to lower this energy until it equals the ground state energy. A better choice of initial energy can improve the performance of the VQE. To obtain a better (than random) initial energy for the Heisenberg model, it helps to set the initial state to the N\'{e}el state and the initial parameters to zero. On a lattice with an even number of spins, the N\'{e}el state is prepared by setting adjacent spins anti-parallel. On a quantum computer, and for a one dimensional model, this is achieved by setting the qubits with the odd (even) indices to $\ket{0}$ ($\ket{1}$), or vice versa.
\subsubsection{Results}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\input{fig_jattana_gfreevsgb.tex}
\input{fig_jattana_ricompevo.tex}
\caption{(a) Optimised variational energies obtained using gradient based (SLSQP) and gradient free (COBYLA) algorithms in comparison to the ground state energies for different lattice sizes. (b) Comparison between the energy fidelities obtained using the N\'{e}el initial state, best of $100$ random sets of parameters, and quasi-dynamics.}
\label{willsch_fig_label1}
\end{figure}
We find the ground state energy of isotropic Heisenberg rings of length $11$ to $20$ using two different optimisers. We used the gradient based (free) optimiser SLSQP (COBYLA) \cite{Powell1994, scipy, Kraft}. The results are compared against the ground state energy found by the Lanczos algorithm and are shown in Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_label1}(a). We observe, as expected, that using different optimisers leads to different results. SLSQP performs better in all cases but the difference in obtained energies appears to grow with increasing lattice sizes.
\subsection{VQE and quasi-dynamics}
When using the VQE, the variational quantum state as a function of $m$ parameters is written as
\begin{equation}
\ket{\psi} = U(\bm \theta) \ket{\Psi_0}= U_m(\theta_m)\ldots U_1(\theta_1) \ket{\Psi_0}. \label{eq1a}
\end{equation}
If $\mathbb{U}(\bm \Theta)$ ($U(\bm \theta)$) represents the unitary operators corresponding to the optimised (unoptimised) numeric values of the parameters, then the VQE can be said to perform the task $U(\bm \theta) \to \mathbb{U}(\bm \Theta)$. After the optimiser signals convergence, the state obtained is
\begin{equation}
\ket{\Psi_1} = \mathbb{U}(\bm \Theta) \ket{\Psi_0}. \label{eq1p}
\end{equation}
The idea is to use this state as an initial state for another round of VQE optimisation. To do so, substitute Eq.~(\ref{eq1p}) in Eq.~(\ref{eq1a}) repeatedly ($p$ times), such that the final state is
\begin{equation}
\ket{\Psi_p} = \mathbb{U}_p(\bm \Theta_p) \ldots \mathbb{U}_1(\bm \Theta_1) \ket{\Psi_0}. \label{willsch_eqse}
\end{equation}
The procedure represented by Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eqse}) is termed \emph{quasi-dynamical evolution} \cite{man2}.
A suitable choice of initial parameters for each $U(\bm \theta)$ is $\bm \theta = [ 0,\dots,0 ]$. This step is necessary in order to preserve the progress made until then. By avoiding random initialisation we also avoid potential barren plateaus \cite{McClean2018}. Similar to the QAOA, the performance of the quasi-dynamics is expected to improve as $p$ is increased.
\subsubsection{Results}
We perform the quasi-dynamical evolution on isotropic rings of lengths $7$ to $12$. We set the threshold for the quasi-dynamics such that the process stops when the energy at step $p$ can no longer be lowered below $10^{-4}$ compared to the $(p-1)^{\text{th}}$ value. The results are compared against the final energy obtained when (1) the N\'{e}el initial state and (2) one hundred random sets of initial parameters were used. We define the energy fidelity as the ratio of the variational energy obtained upon convergence of the optimiser to the ground state energy. For (2), we plot only the highest energy fidelity obtained from all cases. The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{willsch_fig_label1}(b). We observe that the quasi-dynamical evolution can find a better energy fidelity.
In our results we used the same $\bm U(\bm \theta)$ (from Eq.~(\ref{willsch_man1})) for each of the $p$ iterations in Eq.~(\ref{willsch_eqse}). While it improves the results for the cases we tested, such an elementary choice may not always converge to the ground state energy. Equation~(\ref{willsch_eqse}) allows the use of any arbitrary $\bm U(\bm \theta)$; however, it remains an open question which choices of $\bm U(\bm \theta)$ will find the ground state energy for problems in general.
We observed that the number of random restart cases that found an energy better than the energy found when starting from the N\'{e}el state dropped as the lattice size is increased (data not shown). Since the ansatz has more parameters for larger lattices, one solution is to increase the number of restarts. However, this approach can be very resource expensive. Thus, random initialisation is not a suitable strategy. It is crucial to have a good combination of ansatz and initial parameters to have a reasonable chance of finding the ground state energy.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{willsch_sec_conclusion}
In this article, we have discussed two popular hybrid quantum classical algorithms, namely the QAOA and the VQE. Both have been simulated on JUWELS Booster using JUQCS--G.
For the QAOA, we found that the best scaling of the success probability can be obtained when the full variational optimisation procedure is carried out. However, due to tremendous computational resources required for simulations with $N=40$ qubits, it was not possible to reach convergence for the largest problem size. Therefore, we considered AQA as an alternative algorithm with only a single parameter $\tau$ to solve this problem. Although slightly worse in terms of actual success probabilities, AQA could extend the same promising scaling behaviour also to the largest problems. Interestingly, the resulting optimal $\tau$ was so large that it put AQA into a regime where it does not accurately describe a discretised quantum annealing process anymore.
For the VQE, we found that a suitable choice of an ansatz coupled with a good choice of initial parameters is critical for finding the ground state energies. For the Heisenberg model, one such choice is the N\'{e}el state with all variational parameters initialized to zero. However, which choices are helpful in general is an open question. We introduced and tested quasi-dynamical evolution, a technique which builds upon the VQE and improves its performance. An open question for the quasi-dynamics is the choice of $\bm U$ in each substitution which guarantees finding the ground state energy.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors gratefully acknowledge the Gauss Centre for Supercomputing e.V.
(www.gauss-centre.eu) for funding this project by providing computing time
on the GCS Supercomputer JUWELS at J\"ulich Supercomputing Centre (JSC).
We would like to thank M. Svensson for providing the exact cover problem instances.
D.W. and M.W. acknowledge support from the project J\"ulich UNified Infrastructure for Quantum computing (JUNIQ) that has received funding from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the Ministry of Culture and Science of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia. M.J. acknowledges support from the project OpenSuperQ (820363) of the EU Quantum Flagship.
\bibliographystyle{nic}
|
\section{Introduction}
With the increasing demand for the precise medical data analysis, deep learning methods are widely used in the medical image field. However, with the promulgation of the data act and the strengthening of data privacy, especially in the medical field, it has become more difficult to train models in large-scale centralized medical datasets. As one of the solutions, federated learning has attracted a lot of attention from researchers.
Federated learning(FL)[1][2] is a distributed machine learning paradigm in which all clients train a global model collaboratively while preserving their data locally. The naive repeat steps of FL are: (i) each client trains its model with local data; (ii) the server collects and aggregates the models from clients to get a global model, then delivers the global model to clients. The data flow between clients and server is the trained models rather than the original data, which avoids the leak of data privacy. As a crucial core of them, aggregation algorithm plays an important role in releasing data potential and improving global model performance. FedAvg[1], as pioneering work, is a simple and effective aggregation algorithm, which makes the proportions of local datasets size as the aggregation weights of local models. [3] proposed FedProx to limit the updates between local and global models by modifying the training loss of local models. FedMA[4] matches and averages the hidden elements with similar feature extraction signatures to construct the shared global model in a layer-wise manner. Federated learning has attracted the attention of scholars in more research fields.
In medical image segmentation, Since [5] and [6] explored the feasibility of FL in brain tumor segmentation(BraTS), FL on medical image segmentation is in full swing. Liu et al. [7] proposed FedDG to make the model generalize to unseen target domains via episodic learning in continuous frequency space in retinal fundus image segmentation. Xia et al. [8] proposed Auto-FedAvg, where the aggregation weights are dynamically adjusted according to the data distribution, to accelerate the training process and get better performance in COVID-19
lesion segmentation. Zhang et al. [9] proposed SplitAVG to overcome the performance drops from data heterogeneity in FL by network split and feature map concatenation strategies in the BraTS task. More than this, the first computational competition on federated learning, Federated Tumor Segmentation(FeTS) Challenge\footnote[1]{https://fets-ai.github.io/Challenge/} [10] is held to measure the performance of different aggregation algorithms on glioma segmentation[11,12,13,14]. Leon et al. [15] proposed FedCostWAvg to get a notable improvement compared to FedAvg by including the cost function decreased during the last round and won the challenge. However, most of these methods only study the single granularity or add other regular terms to the aggregation method, without considering the finer granularity factors, which limit the performance of global model.
Different from the above methods, in this paper, we propose a novel aggregation strategy, FedGraph, which attempts to explore the aggregation algorithm of FL from the topological perspective of neural networks. After the server collects the local models, the FedGraph explores the internal correlations between local models by three aspects from coarse to fine: the proportion of each local dataset size, the topology structure of model graphs, and the model weights. The proportion of local dataset size factor is similar to FedAvg. We compute the topological correlation by mapping the local models into topological graphs. Meanwhile, the finer grain model weights correlations are taken into account. Through the weighted combination of three different granularity factors from coarse to fine, the proposed method promotes the more effective aggregation of local models.
The primary contributions of this paper can be summarized as:
(1) We propose FedGraph, a novel aggregation strategy which takes coarse-to-fine three factors: the sample size, the topology of model graphs and the model weights, especially from the topological perspective of neural network;
(2) We propose an aggregation method which introduce the concept of graph into federated learning, and the aggregation weights can be adjusted adaptively;
(3) The superior performance is achieved by the proposed method, on the public FeTS challenge datasets.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{1.pdf}
\caption{Overview of proposed FedGraph. The FedGraph aggregates local models and explore the correlations by considering coarse-to-fine three factors: the sample size of local datasets, network topology and model weights. } \label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\section{Related Work}
\textbf{Federated Learning} The FedAvg[1] plays a cornerstone role in federated learning tasks because of its efficient algorithm design, and the proportion of each client's dataset is taken as weight during the aggregation process. Recently, Some methods[19-24] based on FedAvg are proposed because of the poor performance caused by heterogeneous data distribution across clients in the real world. For example, FedProx[3] limits the bias between global model and local model by imposing additional regularization terms. FedDyn introduces a regularization term for local training based on the global model to address the problem. FedNova improves the aggregation stage by normalizing and scaling the local updates of each client according to their local steps before updating the global model. SCAFFOLD addresses non-i.i.d problem by introducing variance among clients and employing the variance reduction technique. These methods have not been evaluated by real world datasets, although they have strict mathematical proof and good experimental results on manually created toy datasets.
\textbf{Federated Learning in Medical Image Segmentation} Because the data act tightens data privacy and federal learning has the natural attribute of protecting data privacy, the researches of federated learning in the field of medical images have been impressive. [5] and [6] take the lead in discussing the application and safety of federated learning in brain tumor segmentation(BraTS). To solve the non-i.i.d challenges of FL in medical image field, FedDG[7] and FedMRCM[25] is proposed to address the domain shift issue between the source domain and the target domain, but the sharing of latent features may cause privacy concerns. Auto-FedRL[26] and Auto-FedAvg[8] is proposed to deal with the non-i.i.d problem by using an optimization algorithm to learn super parameters and aggregate weights. IDA[27] introduces the Inverse Distance of local models and the average model of all clients to handle non-i.i.d data. FedCostWAvg[15] overcome this issue to introducing the ratio of local loss of two adjacent rounds based on FedAvg as the aggregation weights of local models. While these methods study the single granularity or add other regular terms to the aggregation method alone, without considering the finer granularity factors.
\section{Method}
This section describes the overall pipline and the specific process of FedGraph first, and then we introduce the topology of neural networks. After that, we describe the details of FedGraph.
\subsection{Overview}
Suppose {\itshape K} clients with private data cooperate to train a global model and share the same neural network structure, 3D-Unet[16], which was provided by FeTS challenge and keep unchanged. For the clients, every client trains a local model {\itshape $w_i$} for local {\itshape E} epochs, and then delivers the local model to the server. The server aggregates local models to global model by computing the aggregation weights with the proposed FedGraph and assign to all clients. Repeat and until {\itshape T} rounds or other limits. An overview of the method is shown in Fig.1.
\subsection{FedGraph}
Clients send the updated local model back to the server each round. In round t, the global model {\itshape $w_g^t$} is aggregated by the server,
\begin{equation}
\label{1}
w_g^{t+1} = \sum_{k=1}^{K} \alpha_k \cdot w_k^{t}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha_k$ is the weight coefficient. In FedAvg, $\alpha_k= \frac{N_k}{N}, N=\sum_{k=1}^{K}N_k$, $N_k$ is the sample size of dataset in {\itshape $k$}-th local client.
In FedGraph, the computation of $\alpha_k$ goes through the following steps:
\textbf{Graph mapping}. Suppose the server has received local models trained by local data, and we map them into the topological graph. Inspired by [17], take the {\itshape $j$}-th convolutional layer of {\itshape $k$}-th local model with 3D-Unet structure as an example, whose kernel dimension is {\itshape $3\times3\times3\times C_{in}\times C_{out}$}, it means this layer has $C_{in}\times C_{out}$ nodes with {\itshape $3\times3\times3$} filter, we can obtain $C_{in}\times C_{out}$ weight matrices of size {\itshape $3\times3\times3$}. Thus, we get $C_{in}\times C_{out}$ nodes {\itshape $W$}$\in$$\mathbb{R}$$^{27}$. And then, we make every node {\itshape $W$} as scalar by averaging or summing, which can be formulated as:
\begin{equation}
\label{2}
w_{sum} = \sum_{d=0}^{2}\sum_{h=0}^{2}\sum_{w=0}^{2} W_{dhw}.
\end{equation}
It can be mapped into a graph whose structure is similar to the full connection layer after scalarization of convolutional layer. Given a {\itshape $3\times3\times3\times C_{in}\times C_{out}$} convolutional layer, the dimensions of its input and output are {\itshape $C_{in}$} and {\itshape $C_{out}$} respectively. So, we obtain a weight matrix {\itshape $W_t$}$\in$$\mathbb{R}$$^{C_{in}\times C_{out}}$ after averaging or summing the weights of convolution kernel. We take the {\itshape $C_{in}$} and {\itshape $C_{out}$} as the number of node, and the weight summation $w_{sum}$ is the edge. The process of graphical model is shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{graph.pdf}
\caption{The process of graph mapping. } \label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Graph pruning}. The server collects local models from clients and makes the graph mapping on them to get {\itshape K} graphs which have same structure except the edge weights. To make the graphs more distinctive, the graph binarization is conducted. In detail, we differentiated these graphs by setting a threshold $\delta$, where the edge will be removed if the weight difference of each layer between the local models and global model in the last round is less than the threshold, otherwise, the edge will exist and the weight will be reset to 1. It can be simplified as:
\begin{equation}
\label{3}
edge= \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
1, \quad \mid w_{kj}^t-w_{gj}^{t}\mid<\delta, \\
0, \quad otherwise.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{4}
\delta = Sort(\mid w_{kj}^t-w_{gj}^{t}\mid)[\lfloor \lambda \cdot l \rfloor ], 0 \leq \lambda \leq 1.
\end{equation}
where in Eq. \ref{3}, 0 denotes the edge is removed and 1 denotes the edge exists and its weight is 1, $w_{kj}^t$ denotes edge weight of the $j$-th layer from the $k$-th graph in $t$-th round, also the weight summation of the $j$-th layer from the $k$-th local model in in $t$-th round, $w_{gj}^{t}$ is the the weight summation of the $j$-th layer from the global model in $t$-th round. The threshold $\delta$ varies adaptively with the weights of local models, and $\lambda$ is responsible for adjusting the degree of pruning. $Sort$ denotes that we sort weights in ascending order. After that we get $K$ discriminative graphs $G_i$, $i \in [1,K]$.
\textbf{Graph gravitational force}
In order to measure the degree of correlation between graphs and assign corresponding aggregation weights to local models, the further analysis is required on $K$ graphs obtained. In detail, we first measure the gravitational force between pairs of graphs to get the Graph Gravitational Force Matrix $\textbf{C} \in \mathbb{R}$$^{K\times K}$ by computing a matching between their sets of embeddings, where the Pyramid Match Graph Kernel[18] is employed. Then the Graph Gravitational Force Matrix $\textbf{C}$ is analyzed to compute the aggregation weights.
For the completeness and readability of the article, we will briefly review the algorithm of Pyramid Match Graph Kernel[18]. Graph kernels is a powerful tool for graph comparison. The Pyramid Match Graph Kernel focuses on global properties of graph compared with other graph kernels based on local properties. The algorithm represent each graph as a bag-of-vectors, and then map this vector to multi-resolution histograms to campare the histograms with a weighted histogram intersection measure in order to find an approximate correspondence between the two sets of vectors. In detail, given a pair of graph $G_1,G_2 \in \mathcal{G} $, $H_{G_1}^l$ and $H_{G_2}^l$ is the histograms of $G_1$ and $G_2$ at level $l$, and $H_{G_1}^l(i), H_{G_2}^l(i)$ is the number of vertices of $G_1, G_2$ that lie in the $i^{th}$ cell. The number of matched points in two sets is computed by the histogram intersection function:
\begin{equation}
\label{5}
I(H_{G_1}^l, H_{G_2}^l) = \sum_{i=1}^{D}min(H_{G_1}^l(i), H_{G_2}^l(i))
\end{equation}
The number of new matches at each level is $I(H_{G_1}^l, H_{G_2}^l)-I(H_{G_1}^{l+1}, H_{G_2}^{l+1})$ for $l=0,...L-1$, $L$ is the max level. The number of new matches found at each level in the pyramid is weighted according to the size of that level's cells, and the weight for level $l$ is $\frac{1}{2^{L-l}}$. The pyramid match kernel is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{6}
k_\triangle(G_1,G_2) = I(H_{G_1}^L,H_{G_2}^L)+\sum_{l=0}^{L-1}\frac{1}{2^{L-l}}(I(H_{G_1}^l,H_{G_2}^l))-I(H_{G_1}^{l+1},H_{G_2}^{l+1})
\end{equation}
more details can be found in [18].
\textbf{Graph weight}
According to the above method, the Graph Gravitational Force Matrix $\bm{C}$ is obtained and $\bm{C}$ is a symmetric matrix, and the element $c_{kj}$ in matrix $\bm{C}$ denotes the gravitational force of $G_k$ and $G_j$, so the elements of the $k$-th row represents the gravitational force between $G_k$ and all graphs, so we can get the average gravitational force of $k$-th graph with all graphs:
\begin{equation}
\label{7}
c_k = \sum_{j=1}^{K}c_{kj}
\end{equation}
last, we normalize $c_k$ as the aggregation weight of the $k$-th local model, which we refer to as the topological weight:
\begin{equation}
\label{8}
\alpha_{top\_k} = \frac{e^{c_k}}{\sum_{k=1}^{K} e^{c_k}}
\end{equation}
\textbf{coarse-to-fine}
In our FedGraph, we take three factors from coarse to fine into consideration: the factor of sample size in local dataset $\alpha_s$, the factor of gravitational force between graphs $\alpha_{top}$ and the factor of model weights $\alpha_w$, where $\alpha_s$ is a rough adjustment of the aggregation weights of the overall model from the perspective of sample size, $\alpha_{top}$ is a moderate adjustment from the perspective of model topology, and $\alpha_w$ is a further detailed adjustment from the perspective of more refined model weights. Through the effective combination of them, more relevant information between local models is uncovered and more differentiated to promote the local models to be assigned more appropriate aggregation weights and aggregated a better global model. It can be denoted as:
\begin{equation}
\label{9}
\alpha_{w} = \frac{\frac{1}{\left| w_k-w_g \right|}}{\sum_{k=1}^{K}{\frac{1}{\left| w_k-w_g \right|}}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{10}
\alpha_k = \omega_s \cdot \alpha_s+\omega_{top} \cdot \alpha_{top}+\omega_w \cdot \alpha_w
\end{equation}
where $\omega_s, \omega_{top}, \omega_w$ are the weight coefficients of three factors: the factor of local dataset size proportion $\alpha_s$, the factor of topology $\alpha_{top}$ and the factor of model weights $\alpha_w$, and $\omega_s+\omega_{top}+\omega_w=1$.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{FedGraph}
\label{alg1}
\begin{algorithmic}
\REQUIRE
{initial global model $w_g^0$, the global model weights in last round $w_g^{t-1}$, the local trained model weights $w_1^t,..., w_K^t$, and the local epochs $E$ in each client.}
\ENSURE
{The aggregation global model weights $w_g^T$.}
\FOR{$t=1 \to T$}
\FOR{$k=1 \to K$ \textbf{in parallel} }
\STATE $w_k^t \gets LocalTrain(k, w_g^{t-1})$
\STATE $\triangleright$ upload $ w_k^t$ to the server
\ENDFOR
\STATE $\Delta w_k^t \gets \left| w_k^t-w_g^t \right| $
\STATE $G_k^t \gets GraphMapping(\Delta w_k^t)$
\STATE $p\_G_k^t \gets GraphPruning(G_k^t)$
\STATE $c_{kj} \gets PyramidMatch(p\_G_k^t, p\_G_j^t)$
\STATE $c_k \gets \sum_{j=1}^{K}c_{kj}$
\STATE $\alpha_{top\_k}^t \gets \frac{e^{c_k}}{\sum_{k=1}^{K} e^{c_k}} $,
$\alpha_s^t \gets \frac{N_k}{\sum_{k=1}^{K}N_k}$,
$\alpha_{w}^t \gets \frac{\frac{1}{\Delta w_k^t}}{\sum_{k=1}^{K}{\frac{1}{\Delta w_k^t}}}$
\STATE $\alpha_k^t = \omega_s \cdot \alpha_s^t+\omega_{top} \cdot \alpha_{top}^t+\omega_w \cdot \alpha_w^t$
\STATE $w_g^{t+1} \gets \sum_{k=1}^{K} \alpha_k^t \cdot w_k^{t}$
\ENDFOR
\RETURN{$w_g^T$}
\STATE
\STATE $LocalTrain(k, w_g^{t-1}):$
\FOR{$t=1 \to E:$}
\STATE Sample batch $x$ from client $k$'s training data
\STATE Compute loss $loss(w;x)$
\STATE Compute gradient of $w$ and update $w$
\ENDFOR
\RETURN $w$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Algorithm}
We describe the algorithm of FedGraph in Algorithm \ref{alg1}. In each communicaition round $t$, the server send the global model $w_g^t$ to all clients, and then collects and aggragates the local models $w_1^t, ..., w_K^t$ with a set of weights $ \bm \alpha^t =[\alpha_1^t, ..., \alpha_K^t]$ to get an updated global model $w_g^{t+1}$ after the clients train and update their local models in parallel. The $\bm{\alpha^t}$ is determined by three factors $\alpha_s^t$, $\alpha_{top}^t$ in Eq. \ref{8} and $\alpha_w^t$ in Eq. \ref{9}, where the $\alpha_{top}^t$ is found by three steps: graph mapping in Eq. \ref{2}, graph pruning in Eq. \ref{3} and graph gravitational force in Eq. \ref{6}. After the weighted combination in Eq. \ref{10}, the server gets the new global model $w_g^t$ and deliver it to all clients to begin the next round.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Dateset and Settings}
The dataset used in experiments is provided by the FeTS Challenge organizer, which is the training set of the whole dataset about brain tumor segmentation. In order to evaluate the performance of FedGraph, we divide the dataset composed of 341 data samples into training set and validation set according to the ratio of 8:2, and the data is unevenly distributed between 17 data clients.
The segmentation network, 3D-Unet, is provided by FeTS and kept unchanged, the learning rate is 1e-4 and the models train 10 epochs per round. Limited by the framework and official code mechanism, the total number of rounds of training is set to 70, although the performance of the algorithm does not converge to the best. The dice similarity coefficient and hausdorff distance-95th percentile(HD95) are utilized to evaluate the performance of the global aggregated model. In the proposed FedGraph, the weight coefficients of three factors $\omega_s$, $\omega_{top}$, $\omega_w$ are $0.4, 0.3, 0.3$ respectively.
\subsection{Results and Discussion}
In this section, we compare our FedGraph with other state-of-the-art methods on the FeTS Challenge dataset.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\caption{Comparison with other state-of-the-art methods on FeTS Chanllege dataset.}\label{tab1}
\begin{tabular}{|m{2.5cm}|m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering}|m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering}|}
\hline
Method &DICE WT$\uparrow$ & DICE ET$\uparrow$& DICE TC$\uparrow$ &HD95 WT$\downarrow$ &HD95 ET$\downarrow$&HD95 TC$\downarrow$\\
\hline
FedAvg[1] & 90.91 &73.39 & 69.42 &3.96 & 40.99 & \textbf{15.37}\\
FedCostWAvg[15] &90.98 &74.63 &69.46 &3.87 &33.76 &15.58\\
FedGraph& \textbf{91.51} & \textbf{81.29} & \textbf{70.55} & \textbf{3.82} & \textbf{15.57} &16.10\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{m{4cm}<{\centering}m{4cm}<{\centering} m{4cm}<{\centering} }
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{wt_dice.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{et_dice.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{tc_dice.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{wt_hd.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{et_hd.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{tc_hd.pdf} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of different factors and threshold in FedGraph. The sam\_top denotes the FedGraph with sample size factor and topology factor.} \label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
We evaluate the performance of our algorithm by comparing six indicators: the Dice Similarity Coefficient and Hausdorff Distance-95th percentile(HD95) of whole tumor(WT), enhancing tumor(ET), and tumor core(TC). As is shown in Table 1, we list the FedAvg, FedCostWAvg, the champion method of FeTS Challenge, and the proposed FedGraph. Different from the original FedCostWAvg which changed the activation function of networks, our re-implemented version made the network unchanged to ensure a fair comparison. Through the quantitative comparison in Table 1, we can find that the proposed method FedGraph has achieved the best results in all indicators except the HD95 TC. Moreover, compared with FedCostWAvg, FedGraph has significantly improved the evaluation of segmentation performance, especially in enhancing tumor segmentation.
In addition, we counted the evaluation performance of these methods in the training process, as shown in Figure 3. We can observe that the FedGraph is in a leading position in almost all evaluation indicators after the training process tends to converge, which proved that the proposed method FedGraph can explore the correlations of local models better and achieved more excellent aggregation performance compared with other methods.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Comparison with other state-of-the-art methods on FeTS Chanllege dataset.}\label{tab1}
\begin{tabular}{|m{2cm}|m{1cm}<{\centering}|m{1.2cm}<{\centering} |m{1.2cm}<{\centering} |m{1.2cm}<{\centering} |m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering}|}
\hline
Method &$\delta$ &sample & topology & weights & DICE WT & DICE ET & DICE TC \\
\hline
\multirow{5}{*}{FedGraph}
&--&\checkmark &--&--& 90.91 &73.39 & 69.42 \\
&0.001&\checkmark &\checkmark&--& 90.95 &77.47 & 69.23 \\
&0.001&\checkmark &\checkmark&\checkmark& 91.42 &80.66 & 70.55 \\
&0.01&\checkmark &\checkmark&\checkmark& \textbf{91.51} &\textbf{81.29} & 70.55 \\
&0.1&\checkmark &\checkmark&\checkmark & 91.32 & 80.96 &\textbf{70.58}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Ablation Study}
To evaluate the effectiveness of each factor and the better configuration of FedGraph, we conduct the ablation study on the FeTS dataset and the results are shown in Table 2. First, we verified the impact of each factor. The FedGraph would degenerate into FedAvg when it contains only the proportion of local dataset size factor, and the topology factor can promote the performance of enhancing tumor segmentation effectively. With the gradual refinement of the granularity of the aggregation factor, the model weights factor cooperates the first two factors to make significant improvements of the test indicators, because the model weights factor is a finer granularity, and form effective complementarity with the first two factors to explore the more detailed relationship of the local models. Besides, we also test the different threshold $\delta$ to find the better configuration of FedGraph. The different values of $\delta$ denote the loose degree of topology, the smaller the $\delta$, the greater difference of topology. We can observe that it is a suitable degree when $\delta=0.01$ in our task, looser or stricter will lead to performance degradation. Fig.4 shows the comparison of dice in WT, ET, and TC for more intuitive representation.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{m{4cm}<{\centering}m{4cm}<{\centering} m{4cm}<{\centering} }
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{wt_dice2.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{et_dice2.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{tc_dice2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of different factors and threshold in FedGraph. The sam\_top denotes the FedGraph with sample size factor and topology factor.} \label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Comparison with other state-of-the-art methods on FeTS Chanllege dataset.}\label{tab1}
\begin{tabular}{|m{1.7cm}|m{1cm}<{\centering}|m{1.5cm}<{\centering} |m{1.7cm}<{\centering}|m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering} | m{1.5cm}<{\centering}|}
\hline
Method &$\delta$ &similarity & dissimilarity & DICE WT & DICE ET & DICE TC \\
\hline
FedAvg &--&-- & -- & 90.91 &73.39 & 69.42 \\
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{FedGraph}
&0.001&\checkmark &--& 91.20 &75.74 & \textbf{70.90} \\
&0.001&-- &\checkmark& \textbf{91.42} &\textbf{80.66} & 70.55 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Besides, in order to further explore the impact of local model gravitational force aggregation and repulsive force aggregation on the final global model in the aggregation process, we conduct ablation experiments under the condition of $\delta=0.001$, and the results are shown in table 3. Both gravitational force aggregation and repulsive force aggregation methods show better results than FedAvg, and the repulsive force aggregation method is more suitable for the non-i.i.d datasets in our experiment. We will continue to study the aggregation method of the combination of the two in our future work.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we introduced FedGraph, which improves the local model aggregation by taking coarse-to-fine three factors into account: the proportion of each local dataset size, the topology factor of graphic models, and the model weights. It can explore the correlations of local models better by an appropriately weighted combination of these factors. The further experiment results on MICCAI Federated Tumor Segmentation Challenge (FeTS) dataset demonstrate the superiority of the FedGraph.
\subsubsection{Acknowledgements} Please place your acknowledgments at
the end of the paper, preceded by an unnumbered run-in heading (i.e.
3rd-level heading).
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}
The dynamics of an open quantum system \cite{Open-1,Open-2} is usually represented by the dynamical map $\{\Lambda_{t,t_0}\}_{t \geq t_0}$, i.e. a family of completely positive trace-preserving maps $\Lambda_{t,t_0} : \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}) \to \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ \cite{Paulsen,Stormer} ($\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ stands for the vector space of bounded linear operators acting on the system's Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$). In this paper we consider only finite dimensional scenario and $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ and hence $\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ contains all linear operators. The map $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ transforms any initial system's state represented by a density operator $\rho_{0}$ at an initial time $t_0$ into a state at the current time $t$, i.e. $\rho_t = \Lambda_{t,t_0}(\rho_{0})$.
Dynamical maps $\{\Lambda_{t,t_0}\}_{t \geq t_0}$ provide the powerful generalization of the standard Schr\"odinger unitary evolution $U_{t,t_0} \rho_{0} U_{t,t_0}^\dagger$, where $U_{t,t_0}$ is a family of unitary operators acting on $\mathcal{H}$. A dynamical map is usually realized as a reduced evolution \cite{Open-1}
\begin{equation}\label{RED}
\Lambda_{t,t_0}(\rho_0) = {\rm Tr}_E\left( \mathbb{U}_{t,t_0} \rho_0 \otimes \rho_E \mathbb{U}_{t,t_0} \right) ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbb{U}_{t,t_0}$ is a unitary operator acting on $\mathcal{H} \otimes \mathcal{H}_E$, $\rho_E$ is a fixed state of the environment (living in $\mathcal{H}_E$), and ${\rm Tr}_E$ denotes a partial trace (over the environmental degrees of freedom). The unitary $\mathbb{U}_{t,t_0}$ is governed by the total (in general time-dependent) `system + environment' Hamiltonian $\mathbb{H}_t$. Now, if $\mathbb{H}_t=\mathbb{H}$ does not depend on time
the reduced evolution (\ref{RED}) is time homogeneous (or translationally invariant), i.e. $\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda_{t-t_0}$ (or equivalently $\Lambda_{t+\tau,t_0+\tau} = \Lambda_{t,t_0}$ for any $\tau$). In this case one usually fixes $t_0=0$ and simply considers one-parameter family of maps $\{\Lambda_t\}_{t \geq 0}$. Such scenario is usually considered by majority of authors. The most prominent example of time homogeneous dynamical maps is the celebrated Markovian semigroup $\Lambda_{t} = e^{\mathcal{L} t}$, where $\mathcal{L}$ denotes the Gorini-Kossakowski-Lindblad-Sudarshan (GKLS) generator \cite{GKS,L} (cf. also the detailed exposition in \cite{Alicki} and \cite{40-GKLS} for a brief history)
\begin{equation}\label{GKLS}
\mathcal{L}(\rho) = - i[H,\rho] + \sum_k \gamma_k \left( L_k \rho L_k^\dagger - \frac 12 \{ L_k^\dagger L_k,\rho\} \right) ,
\end{equation}
with the (effective) system's Hamiltonian $H$, noise operators $L_k$, and non-negative transition rates $\gamma_k$. It is well known, however, that semigroup evolution usually requires a series of additional assumptions and approximations like e.g. weak system-environment interaction and separation of natural time scales of the system and environment. Departure from a semigroup scenario calls for more refine approach which attracts a lot of attention in recent years and is intimately connected with quantum non-Markovian memory effects (cf. recent reviews \cite{NM1,NM2,NM3,NM4,five,Lidar,PR,Piilo-I,Piilo-II}). To go beyond dynamical semigroup keeping translational invariance one replaces time independent GKLS generator $\mathcal{L}$ by a memory kernel $\{\mathcal{K}_t\}_{t\geq 0}$ and considers the following dynamical equation
\begin{equation}\label{ME-K}
\partial_t \Lambda_t = \int_0^t \mathcal{K}_{t-\tau} \circ \Lambda_\tau d\tau = \mathcal{K}_t \ast \Lambda_t \ , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t=0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
where $A \circ B$ denotes composition of two maps. Equation (\ref{ME-K}) is often referred as Nakajima-Zwanzig master equation \cite{Nakajima,Zwanzig}.
The very structure of the convolution $\mathcal{K}_t \ast \Lambda_t$ does guarantee translational invariance. However, the property of complete positivity of $\Lambda_t$ is notoriously difficult as already observed in \cite{Stenholm,Shabani,Steve}. Time non-local master equation (\ref{ME-K}) were intensively studied by several authors \cite{K1,K2,K3,K4,K5,K6,K7,K8,K8a,K9,K10,K11}.
Since the master equation (\ref{ME-K}) involving the convolution is technically quite involved one usually tries to describe the dynamics in terms of convolution-less time-local approach involving a time dependent generator $\{\mathcal{L}_t\}_{t \geq 0}$ (cf. the recent comparative analysis \cite{Nina-NJP}). Time-local generator $\mathcal{L}_t$ plays a key role in characterizing the property of CP-divisibility which is essential in the analysis of Markovianity. Note, however, that the corresponding propagator $\Lambda_{t,s} = \Lambda_t \Lambda_s^{-1}$ is no longer time homogeneous unless $\mathcal{L}_t$ is time independent.
In this paper we go beyond time homogeneous case and consider the following generalization of (\ref{ME-K})
\begin{equation}\label{ME-KN}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \int_{t_0}^t \mathcal{K}_{t,\tau} \circ \Lambda_{\tau,t_0} d\tau , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
which reduces to (\ref{ME-K}) if $\mathcal{K}_{t,\tau} = \mathcal{K}_{t-\tau}$. Equation (\ref{ME-KN}) may be, therefore, considered as a time inhomogeneous Nakajima-Zwanzig master equation. Such description is essential whenever the `system + environment' Hamiltonian $\mathbb{H}_t$ does depend on time.
Note, that formally if $\mathcal{K}_{t,\tau} = \mathcal{L}_t \delta(\tau)$, then (\ref{ME-KN}) reduces to time-local but inhomogeneous master equation
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{L}_t \circ \Lambda_{t,t_0} , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
and the corresponding solution $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ is CPTP for all $t\geq t_0$ and arbitrary $t_0 \in \mathbb{R}$ if and only if $\mathcal{L}_t$ is of GKLS form for all $t \in \mathbb{R}$ \cite{Open-1,Open-2,Alicki}. This is just inhomogeneous generalization of semigroup evolution and it is often called an inhomogeneous semigroup \cite{Alicki}. Note, that contrary to homogeneous scenario the time dependent generator $\mathcal{L}_t$ is defined now for all $t\in \mathbb{R}$ (and not only for $t \geq 0$).
In this paper we propose a particular representation of dynamical maps $\{\Lambda_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq t_0}$ which by construction satisfy (\ref{ME-KN}). Hence, it may be also considered as a particular construction of a legitimate class of memory kernels $\mathcal{K}_{t,\tau}$ giving rise to CPTP dynamical maps. Clearly, it is not the most general construction. However, the proposed representation possesses a natural physical interpretation in terms of quantum jumps. Time-local (time convolution-less) approach is discussed as well. It turns out that a time dependent generator also depends upon the initial time $t_0$, i.e. one has a two-parameter family of generators $\{\mathcal{L}_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq t_0}$. Finally, the comparative analysis of traditional time homogeneous vs. time inhomogeneous scenario is provided.
\section{Time homogeneous evolution}
\subsection{Markovian semigroup}
Consider a Markovian semigroup governed by the time independent master equation
\begin{equation}\label{ME}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{L} \circ \Lambda_{t,t_0} \ , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}$ stands for the GKLS generator (\ref{GKLS}), and $t_0$ is an arbitrary initial time. It is clear that since $\mathcal{L}$ does not depend on time the dynamical map depends upon the difference $t-t_0$, i.e. the solution of (\ref{ME}) defines one-parameter semigroup $\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda_{t-t_0}= e^{(t-t_0)\mathcal{L}}$. Usually, one assumes $t_0=0$ and simply writes $\Lambda_t$. Observe, that any GKLS generator (\ref{GKLS}) can be represented as follows
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{L} = \Phi - \mathcal{Z} ,
\end{equation}
where $\Phi, \mathcal{Z} : \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}) \to \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H})$ are linear maps defined by
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Phi(\rho) = \sum_k \gamma_k L_k \rho L_k^\dagger , \ \ \ \mathcal{Z}(\rho) = C\rho + \rho C^\dagger ,
\end{equation}
with $C = iH + \frac 12 \sum_k L_k^\dagger L_k$.
\begin{Proposition} \label{PRO-1} The solution of Eq. (\ref{ME}) can be represented via the following series
\begin{equation}\label{I}
\Lambda_t = \Lambda^{(0)}_t + \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t + \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda^{(0)}_t = e^{- \mathcal{Z} t}$
\end{Proposition}
Proof: let us introduce a {\em perturbation parameter} $\lambda$ and a one-parameter family of generators
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{L}^{(\lambda)} := \lambda \Phi - \mathcal{Z} ,
\end{equation}
such that $\mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L}^{(\lambda=1)}$. We find a solution to
\begin{equation}\label{ME-l}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t} = \mathcal{L}^{(\lambda)} \circ \Lambda_{t} , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t=0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
as a perturbation series
\begin{equation}\label{s}
\Lambda_{t} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} + \lambda \Lambda^{(1)}_{t} + \lambda^2 \Lambda^{(2)}_{t} + \ldots .
\end{equation}
Inserting the series (\ref{s}) into (\ref{ME-l}) one finds
the following infinite hierarchy of equations
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_t &=& - Z \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t , \nonumber \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(1)}_t &=& - Z \circ \Lambda^{(1)}_t + \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t , \nonumber \\
&\vdots & \nonumber \label{H1} \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_t &=& - Z \circ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_t + \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(\ell -1)}_t , \\
& \vdots & \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with initial conditions
\begin{equation}\label{INI}
\Lambda^{(0)}_{t=0} = {\rm id} \ , \ \ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t=0} = 0 \ , \ (\ell \geq 1) .
\end{equation}
It is clear that $\Lambda^{(0)}_t = e^{- \mathcal{Z}t}$, and
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda^{(\ell+1)}_{t} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \underbrace{\Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \ldots \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t}}_{\ell\ \mbox{terms}} .
\end{equation}
Finally, fixing $\lambda=1$ the series (\ref{s}) reduces to (\ref{I}). \hfill $\Box$
Note, that (\ref{I}) is indeed time homogeneous. One finds
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda_{t-t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t- t_0} + \Lambda^{(0)}_{t-t_0} \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t-t_0} + \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{}
A_{t-t_0} \ast B_{t - t_0} := \int_{t_0}^t A_{t-\tau} \circ B_{\tau-t_0}d \tau = \int_{0}^{t-t_0} A_{t-\tau} \circ B_{\tau}d \tau ,
\end{equation}
does depend upon `$t-t_0$'. A series (\ref{I}) is an alternative representation for the conventional exponential representation
\begin{eqnarray}\label{exp}
\Lambda_t = {\rm id} + \mathcal{L} t + \frac{t^2}{2} \mathcal{L}^2 + \frac{t^3}{3!} \mathcal{L}^3 + \ldots
= {\rm id} + t(\Phi-\mathcal{Z}) + \frac{t^2}{2} (\Phi-\mathcal{Z})^2 + \frac{t^3}{3!} (\Phi-\mathcal{Z})^3 + \ldots .
\end{eqnarray}
Note, that contrary to (\ref{exp}) each term in (\ref{I}) is completely positive and has a clear physical interpretation: an $\ell$th term reads
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \underbrace{\Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \ldots \ast \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t}}_{\ell\ \mbox{terms}} =
\int_0^t dt_\ell \, \Lambda^{(0)}_{t-t_\ell} \circ \Phi \circ \int_0^{t_{\ell}} dt_{\ell-1}\,\Lambda^{(0)}_{t_{\ell} -t_{\ell-1}} \circ \Phi \ldots \circ \Phi \circ \int_0^{t_2} dt_1\, \Lambda^{(0)}_{t_2-t_1} \circ \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t_1} ,
\end{equation}
and it can be interpreted as follows: there are $\ell$ quantum jumps up to time `$t$' at $\{t_1 \leq t_2 \leq \ldots \leq t_\ell\}$ represented by a completely positive map $\Phi$. Between jumps the system evolves according to (unperturbed) completely positive maps $ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t_2-t_1},\Lambda^{(0)}_{t_3-t_2}, \ldots , \Lambda^{(0)}_{t_\ell -t_{\ell-1}}$. The series (\ref{I}) represents all possible scenario of $\ell$ jumps for $\ell=0,1,2,\ldots$. By construction, the resulting completely positive map $\Lambda_t$ is also trace-preserving. One often calls (\ref{I}) a {\em quantum jump} representation of a dynamical map \cite{Zoller,Plenio,Car}. Note, however, that truncating (\ref{I}) at any finite $\ell$ violates trace-preservation since processes with more than $\ell$ jumps are not included. The standard exponential representation (\ref{exp}) does not have any clear interpretation. Each separate term $t^k \mathcal{L}^k$ does annihilate the trace but is not completely positive. Only the infinite sum of such terms gives rise to completely positive (and trace-preserving) map.
\begin{Corollary} \label{COR-1} Introducing two completely positive maps $Q_t := \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t}$ and $\,\mathcal{P}_t := \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \circ \Phi$ a series (\ref{I}) can be rewritten as follows
\begin{eqnarray}\label{QP}
\Lambda_t
&=& \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} + \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \Big( Q_t + Q_t \ast Q_t + Q_t \ast Q_t \ast Q_t + \ldots \Big) \nonumber \\
&=& \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} + \Big( \mathcal{P}_t + \mathcal{P}_t \ast \mathcal{P}_t + \mathcal{P}_t \ast \mathcal{P}_t \ast \mathcal{P}_t + \ldots \Big) \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} .
\end{eqnarray}
\end{Corollary}
To summarise: the Markovian semigroup represented in (\ref{I}) is constructed out of the {\em unperturbed} completely positive and trace non-increasing map $\Lambda^{(0)}_t= e^{- \mathcal{Z} t}$ and the jump operator represented by a completely positive map $\Phi$. These two objects are constrained to satisfy ${\rm Tr}\mathcal{L}(\rho) = 0$, where $\mathcal{L} = \Phi - \mathcal{Z}$ defines a GKLS generator.
\subsection{Beyond a semigroup}
How to generalize (\ref{I}) beyond a semigroup such that time homogeneity is preserved? Suppose that $\Lambda^{(0)}_t$ is an arbitrary completely positive and trace non-increasing map satisfying $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t=0} = {\rm id}$. Let $\{\mathcal{Z}_t\}_{t\geq 0}$ be a family of maps such that
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_t = - \mathcal{Z}_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t ,
\end{equation}
that is, $\mathcal{Z}_t$ is a time non-nonlocal generator of $\Lambda^{(0)}_t$. Note, that $\Lambda^{(0)}_t$ defines a semigroup if and only if $\mathcal{Z}_t = \delta(t) \mathcal{Z}$. Consider a family of jump operators represented by completely positive maps $\{\Phi_t\}_{t \geq 0}$. Define now the following generalization of (\ref{I})
\begin{equation}\label{Ia}
\Lambda_t = \Lambda^{(0)}_t + \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t + \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
that is, one replaces $\Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_t$ by the convolution $\Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t$. By construction (\ref{Ia}) represents a completely positive map being an infinite sum of completely positive maps
\begin{equation}\label{Lambda-l}
\Lambda^{(\ell)}_t = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \underbrace{\Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \ldots \ast \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t}}_{\ell\ \mbox{terms}} , \ \ \ \ell = 1,2,\ldots .
\end{equation}
Also a similar quantum jump interpretation still remains true. One finds
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda^{(\ell)}_t = \int_0^t dt_\ell \Lambda^{(0)}_{t-t-\ell} \circ \ldots \circ \int_0^{t_3} dt_2\, \Phi_{t_3-t_2} \circ \int_0^{t_2} dt_1\, \Lambda^{(0)}_{t_2-t_1} \circ \int_0^{t_1} d\tau\, \Phi_{t_1-\tau} \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_\tau .
\end{equation}
Between jumps the system evolves according to (unperturbed) completely positive maps $ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t_2-t_1},\Lambda^{(0)}_{t_3-t_2}, \ldots , \Lambda^{(0)}_{t_\ell -t_{\ell-1}}$ which are no longer semigroups.
\begin{Proposition} \label{PRO-2} The map represented by (\ref{Ia}) satisfies the following memory kernel master equation
\begin{equation}\label{ME-K-1}
\partial_t \Lambda_t = \mathcal{K}_t \ast \Lambda_t , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t=0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{K}_t = \Phi_t - \mathcal{Z}_t .
\end{equation}
The map $\Lambda_t$ is trace-preserving if and only if $\mathcal{K}_t$ is trace annihilating.
\end{Proposition}
Proof: the proof goes the same lines as that of Proposition \ref{PRO-1}. Introducing
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{K}^{(\lambda)}_t = \lambda \Phi_t - \mathcal{Z}_t ,
\end{equation}
and inserting (\ref{s}) into
\begin{equation}\label{ME-K-2}
\partial_t \Lambda_t = \mathcal{K}^{(\lambda)}_t \ast \Lambda_t , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t=0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
one obtains the following infinite hierarchy of equations
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_t &=& - \mathcal{Z}_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t , \nonumber \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(1)}_t &=& - \mathcal{Z}_t \ast \Lambda^{(1)}_t + \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t , \nonumber \\
&\vdots & \nonumber \label{H2} \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_t &=& - \mathcal{Z}_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell)}_t + \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell -1)}_t , \\
& \vdots & \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with initial conditions (\ref{INI}). We show that $\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t} = \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t}$ is a solution to (\ref{H2}) which immediately implies (\ref{Lambda-l}). Indeed, one has
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_t = \partial_t [\Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t}] = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t=0} \circ [\Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t}] + [\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_t] \ast \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t} ,
\end{equation}
and hence using $\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_t = - \mathcal{Z}_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t$, one obtains
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_t = \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t} - \mathcal{Z}_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_t \ast \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t} = \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t} - \mathcal{Z}_t \ast \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t} ,
\end{equation}
which proves the claim. \hfill $\Box$
\begin{Remark} Usually on solves the time homogeneous differential equations using the technique of Laplace transform. We provide the alternative proof of Proposition \ref{PRO-2} in the Appendix. Here, we provided the proof which can be easily generalized to inhomogeneous case where the Laplace transform technique can not be directly applied.
\end{Remark}
\begin{Remark} It is clear that if $\Lambda^{(0)}_t = e^{- \mathcal{Z}t}$ is a semigroup, i.e. $\mathcal{Z}_t = \delta(t) Z$, then $\Phi_t = \delta(t) \Phi$, and hence
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{K}_t = \delta(t)(\Phi - \mathcal{Z}) = \delta(t) \, \mathcal{L} .
\end{equation}
\end{Remark}
\begin{Corollary} \label{COR-2} Introducing two completely positive maps $Q_t := \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t}$ and $\,\mathcal{P}_t := \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \Phi_t$ a series (\ref{Ia}) can be rewritten as follows
\begin{eqnarray}\label{QP-a}
\Lambda_t
= \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} + \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \Big( Q_t + Q_t \ast Q_t + Q_t \ast Q_t \ast Q_t + \ldots \Big) ,
\end{eqnarray}
or, equivalently,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{QP-b}
\Lambda_t = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} + \Big( \mathcal{P}_t + \mathcal{P}_t \ast \mathcal{P}_t + \mathcal{P}_t \ast \mathcal{P}_t \ast \mathcal{P}_t + \ldots \Big) \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} ,
\end{eqnarray}
that is, one has exactly the same representation as in the case of semigroup (\ref{QP}). The only difference is the definition of $Q_t$ and $\mathcal{P}_t$ in terms of $\Phi_t$ and $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t}$. Note, however, that if $\Phi_t = \delta(t)\Phi$, then $\Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} = \Phi \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t}$, i.e. one recovers the same relation as in Corollary \ref{COR-1}.
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Remark} It should be stressed that even when $\Phi_t$ is not completely positive, but $Q_t = \Phi_t \ast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t}$ is completely positive, then
(\ref{QP-a}) is completely positive. Similarly, when $\,\mathcal{P}_t := \Lambda^{(0)}_{t} \ast \Phi_t$ is completely positive, then (\ref{QP-b})
is completely positive. Hence, complete positivity of $\Phi_t$ is sufficient but not necessary for complete positivity of the dynamical map $\Lambda_t$. Note, however, if $\Phi_t$ is not completely positive the intuitive interpretation of the series (\ref{Ia}) in terms of quantum jumps is no longer valid.
\end{Remark}
\section{Time inhomogeneous evolution}
\subsection{Time inhomogeneous semigroup}
Consider now the dynamical map $\{\Lambda_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq t_0}$ governed by the time dependent master equation
\begin{equation}\label{ME-IN}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{L}_t \circ \Lambda_{t,t_0} \ , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}_t$ stands for the time dependent GKLS generator, and $t_0$ is an arbitrary initial time. The corresponding solution has the well known structure
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{T} \exp\left( \int_{t_0}^t \mathcal{L}_\tau d \tau \right) ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{T}$ stands for chronological time ordering. The two-parameter family of maps $\{\Lambda_{t,t_0}\}_{t \geq t_0}$ satisfies the following composition law
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda_{t_3,t_2} \circ \Lambda_{t_2,t_1} = \Lambda_{t_3,t_1} ,
\end{equation}
for any triple $\{t_1, t_2, t_3\}$. This very property is a generalization of the standard (homogeneous) semigroup property
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda_{t_3-t_2} \circ \Lambda_{t_2-t_1} = \Lambda_{t_3-t_1} ,
\end{equation}
and hence one often calls such maps an inhomogeneous semigroup.
Let us represent the time dependent generator as follows
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{L}_t = \Phi_t - \mathcal{Z}_t ,
\end{equation}
where now
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Phi_t(\rho) = \sum_k \gamma_k(t) L_k(t) \rho L_k^\dagger(t) , \ \ \ \mathcal{Z}_t(\rho) = C(t)\rho + \rho C^\dagger(t) ,
\end{equation}
with $C(t) = iH(t) + \frac 12 \sum_k \gamma_k(t)L_k^\dagger(t) L_k(t)$. To find the corresponding jump representation of $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ let us introduce the following (inhomogeneous) generalization of the convolution.
\begin{DEF} For any two families of maps $A_{t,t_0}$ and $B_{t,t_0}$
\begin{equation}\label{CON}
(A \circledast B)_{t,t_0} \equiv A_{t,t_0} \circledast B_{t,t_0} := \int_{t_0}^t A_{t,\tau} \circ B_{\tau,t_0}\, d\tau .
\end{equation}
\end{DEF}
Note, that when $A_{t,t_0}=A_{t-t_0}$ and $B_{t,t_0}=B_{t-t_0}$, then
\begin{equation}\label{}
(A \circledast B)_{t,t_0} = \int_{t_0}^t A_{t-\tau} \circ B_{\tau-t_0}\, d\tau = \int_{0}^{t-t_0} A_{t-u} \circ B_{u}\, du = (A \ast B)_{t-t_0} .
\end{equation}
\begin{Proposition} \label{PRO-CON} The convolution (\ref{CON}) is associative
\begin{equation}\label{ASS}
([A \circledast B] \circledast C)_{t,t_0} = (A \circledast [B \circledast C])_{t,t_0} ,
\end{equation}
for any thee families $A_{t,t_0},\, B_{t,t_0}$ and $C_{t,t_0}$.
\end{Proposition}
See Appendix for the proof.
\begin{Proposition} \label{PRO-3} The solution to (\ref{ME-IN}) can be represented via the following series
\begin{equation}\label{II}
\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} + \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast (\Phi_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}) + \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast (\Phi_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}) \circledast (\Phi_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}) + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{T} \exp\left( - \int_{t_0}^t \mathcal{Z}_\tau d \tau \right)$.
\end{Proposition}
Proof: the proof is a generalization of the proof of Proposition \ref{PRO-1}. Consider the family of generators
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{L}^{(\lambda)}_t := \lambda \Phi_t - \mathcal{Z}_t .
\end{equation}
We find a solution to
\begin{equation}\label{ME-2}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{L}^{(\lambda)}_t \circ \Lambda_{t,t_0} , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
as a perturbation series
\begin{equation}\label{s1}
\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} + \lambda \Lambda^{(1)}_{t,t_0} + \lambda^2 \Lambda^{(2)}_{t,t_0} + \ldots .
\end{equation}
Inserting the series (\ref{s1}) into (\ref{ME-2}) one finds
the following hierarchy of dynamical equations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} &=& - \mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} , \nonumber \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(1)}_{t,t_0} &=& - \mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Lambda^{(1)}_{t,t_0} + \Phi_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} , \nonumber \\
&\vdots & \nonumber \label{H3} \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} &=& - \mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} + \Phi_t \circ \Lambda^{(\ell -1)}_{t,t_0} , \\
& \vdots & \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with initial conditions
\begin{equation}\label{INI-1}
\Lambda^{(0)}_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id} , \ \ \ \ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t_0,t_0} = 0 \ \ (\ell > 0) .
\end{equation}
Clearly, the above hierarchy provides a generalization of (\ref{H1}) for the inhomogeneous scenario. Now,
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{T} \exp\left( - \int_{t_0}^t \mathcal{Z}_\tau d\tau \right) ,
\end{equation}
defines an inhomogeneous semigroup which is completely positive (but not trace-preserving). As before it is sufficient to show that
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast (\Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0}) ,
\end{equation}
solves (\ref{H3}). One finds
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t} \circ \Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} + [\partial_t\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}] \circledast (\Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0}) .
\end{equation}
Using $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t} = {\rm id}$, and $\partial_t\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} = - \mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}$, one gets
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} - [\mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}] \circledast (\Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0})
\end{equation}
and finally, observing that
\begin{equation}\label{}
[\mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}] \circledast (\Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0}) = \mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Big[ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast (\Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0})\Big] = \mathcal{Z}_t \circ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} ,
\end{equation}
one completes the proof. \hfill $\Box$
For an alternative proof which does not use properties of the convolution `$\circledast$' cf. Appendix.
\subsection{Beyond an inhomogeneous semigroup}
Suppose now that for any initial time $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}$ is an arbitrary completely positive and trace non-increasing map satisfying $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id}$. Let $\{\mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq t_0}$ be a family of maps such that
\begin{equation}\label{ME-CON}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} =
- \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} ,
\end{equation}
that is $\{\mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq t_0}$ is a inhomogeneous generalization of $\{\mathcal{Z}_t\}_{t\geq 0}$. Now, $\mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0}$ does not only depends upon the current time `$t$' but also upon the initial time $t_0$. Define the following generalization of (\ref{II})
\begin{equation}\label{IIa}
\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} + \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} + \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
where $\{\Phi_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq t_0}$ is a family of completely positive maps which reduces to $\{\Phi_t\}_{t\geq 0}$ in the time homogeneous case.
Hence, one replaces $\Phi_t \circ \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}$ by the convolution $\Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}$. By construction Eq. (\ref{IIa}) represents a completely positive map being an infinite sum of completely positive maps
\begin{equation}\label{Lambda-la}
\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \underbrace{\Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \ldots \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} }_{\ell\ \mbox{terms}} , \ \ \ \ell = 1,2,\ldots .
\end{equation}
Clearly, quantum jump interpretation still remains true.
\begin{Proposition} \label{PRO-4} The map represented by (\ref{IIa}) satisfies the following memory kernel master equation
\begin{equation}\label{ME-K-3}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{K}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda_{t,t_0} , \ \ \ \Lambda_{t_0,t_0} = {\rm id} ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathcal{K}_{t,t_0} = \Phi_{t,t_0} - \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} .
\end{equation}
The map $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ is trace-preserving if and only if $\mathcal{K}_{t,t_0}$ is trace annihilating.
\end{Proposition}
Proof: the proof goes the same lines as that of Proposition \ref{PRO-2} and \ref{PRO-3}. One easily finds the following hierarchy of equations for maps $\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0}$ defining the series (\ref{s1}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} &=& - \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} , \nonumber \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(1)}_{t,t_0} &=& - \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(1)}_{t,t_0} + \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} , \nonumber \\
&\vdots & \nonumber \label{H4} \\
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} &=& - \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} + \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell -1)}_{t,t_0} , \\
& \vdots & \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with initial conditions (\ref{INI-1}). Clearly, the above hierarchy provides a generalization of (\ref{H2}) for the inhomogeneous scenario.
It is enough to prove that
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} .
\end{equation}
One has
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t} \circ \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} + [\partial_t \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}] \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} .
\end{equation}
Using $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t} = {\rm id}$, and $\partial_t\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} = - \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}$, one gets
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} - \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Big( \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} \Big) ,
\end{equation}
and hence
\begin{equation}\label{}
\partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} - \mathcal{Z}_{t,t_0} \circledast \partial_t \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} ,
\end{equation}
which ends the proof. \hfill $\Box$
\begin{Corollary} \label{COR-2a} Introducing two completely positive maps $Q_{t,t_0} := \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}$ and $\,\mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} := \Lambda^{(0)}_{{t,t_0}} \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0}$ a series (\ref{Ia}) can be rewritten as follows
\begin{eqnarray}\label{QP-aa}
\Lambda_{t,t_0}
= \Lambda^{(0)}_{{t,t_0}} + \Lambda^{(0)}_{{t,t_0}} \circledast \Big( Q_{t,t_0} + Q_{t,t_0} \circledast Q_{t,t_0} + Q_ \circledast Q_{t,t_0} \circledast Q_{t,t_0} + \ldots \Big) ,
\end{eqnarray}
or, equivalently,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{QP-bb}
\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{{t,t_0}} + \Big( \mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} + \mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} \circledast \mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} + \mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} \circledast \mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} \circledast \mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} + \ldots \Big) \circledast \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} .
\end{eqnarray}
They reduce to (\ref{QP-a}) and (\ref{QP-b}) in the time homogeneous case.
\end{Corollary}
\section{Time local approach}
Very often describing the evolution of an open system one prefers to use a time-local (or so-called convolutionless (TCL)) approach \cite{Open-1}.
Formally, in the time homogeneous case given a dynamical map $\{\Lambda_t\}_{t\geq 0}$ one defines the corresponding time-local generator $\mathcal{L}_t := [\partial_t \Lambda_t] \circ \Lambda_t^{-1} $ (assuming that $\Lambda_t$ is invertible). This way the map $\Lambda_t$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{TCL-1}
\partial_t \Lambda_t = \mathcal{L}_t \circ \Lambda_ t .
\end{equation}
This procedure might be a bit confusing since (\ref{TCL-1}) coincides with (\ref{ME-IN}) for the inhomogeneous map $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$. To clarify this point let us introduce again an initial time and consider $\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda_{t-t_0}$. Now, the time-local generator reads
\begin{equation}\label{L10}
\mathcal{L}_{t-t_0} := [\partial_t \Lambda_{t-t_0}] \circ \Lambda_{t-t_0}^{-1} ,
\end{equation}
that is, the generator does depend upon the initial time \cite{PRL-2010}. It implies that the corresponding propagators
\begin{equation}\label{}
V_{t,s} := \Lambda_{t-t_0} \circ \Lambda^{-1}_{s-t_0} = \mathcal{T} \exp\left( \int_s^t \mathcal{L}_{\tau - t_0} d\tau \right) = \mathcal{T} \exp\left( \int_{s-t_0}^{t-t_0} \mathcal{L}_{\tau} d\tau \right) ,
\end{equation}
also does depend upon $t_0$. Clearly, fixing $t_0=0$ this fact is completely hidden. The dependence upon $t_0$ drops out only in the semigroup case when $\mathcal{L}_{t-t_0} = \mathcal{L}$.
Similar analysis may be applied to inhomogeneous scenario as well. Now, instead of convolution (\ref{ME-CON}) one may define a time-local generator
\begin{equation}\label{L20}
\mathcal{L}_{t,t_0} := [\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0}] \circ \Lambda_{t,t_0}^{-1} ,
\end{equation}
such that $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ satisfies the following inhomogeneous TCL master equation
\begin{equation}\label{TCL-2}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{L}_{t,t_0} \circ \Lambda_{t,t_0} .
\end{equation}
Again, the corresponding propagator
\begin{equation}\label{}
V_{t,s} := \Lambda_{t,t_0} \circ \Lambda^{-1}_{s,t_0} = \mathcal{T} \exp\left( \int_s^t \mathcal{L}_{\tau,t_0} d\tau \right) ,
\end{equation}
also does depend upon $t_0$. Hence, the local composition law
\begin{equation}\label{}
V_{t,s} \circ V_{s,u} = V_{t,u} ,
\end{equation}
holds only if the above propagators are defined w.r.t. the same initial time. Otherwise, composing the propagators does not have any sense.
Equation (\ref{L20}) reduces to (\ref{ME-IN}) only if $\mathcal{L}_{t,t_0}$ does not depend upon $t_0$. In this case one recovers an inhomogeneous semigroup and $\mathcal{L}_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{L}_{t}$.
\section{Conclusions}
We have constructed a family of time inhomogeneous dynamical maps $\{\Lambda_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq 0}$ represented by the following infinite series
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} + \Lambda^{(1)}_{t,t_0} + \Lambda^{(2)}_{t,t_0} + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
where each single map $\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0}$ is completely positive. Moreover, the construction does guarantee that $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ is trace-preserving. Each map $\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0}$ represents a process with $\ell$ quantum jumps occurring in the interval $[t_0,t]$. The `free' evolution (no jumps) corresponds to $\Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0}$. Quantum jumps are represented by a family of completely positive maps $\{\Phi_{t,t_0}\}_{t\geq t_0}$ such that $\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0}$ is represented as in the following table
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|c|}
\hline
& \mbox{Time homogeneous} & \mbox{Time inhomogeneous} \\ \hline\hline
& & \\
\mbox{General map} & $\ \ \ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t-t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t-t_0} \ast \Phi_{t-t_0} \ast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t-t_0} \ \ $ & $\ \ \ \Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0} \ \ \ $ \\
& & \\ \hline
& & \\
\mbox{Markovian semigroup} $\ $ & $\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t-t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t-t_0} \ast (\Phi \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t-t_0})$ & $\Lambda^{(\ell)}_{t,t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t,t_0} \circledast (\Phi_{t} \circ \Lambda^{(\ell-1)}_{t,t_0}) $ \\
& & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
In the time-homogeneous case the above representation simplifies to
\begin{equation}\label{}
\Lambda_{t-t_0} = \Lambda^{(0)}_{t-t_0} + \Lambda^{(1)}_{t-t_0} + \Lambda^{(2)}_{t-t_0} + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
with a similar interpretation. The dynamical map $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ satisfies the corresponding Nakajima-Zwanzig memory kernel master equation or equivalently time-local (TCL) master equation displayed in the table
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline
& \mbox{Time homogeneous} & \mbox{Time inhomogeneous} \\ \hline \hline
& & \\
Memory kernel ME & $\ \ \ \partial_t \Lambda_{t-t_0} = \mathcal{K}_{t-t_0} \ast \Lambda_{t-t_0}\ \ \ $ & $\ \ \ \partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{K}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda_{t,t_0}\ \ \ $ \\
& & \\ \hline
& & \\
Markovian semigroup $\ $ & $\mathcal{K}_{t-t_0} = \delta(t-t_0)\, \mathcal{L}$ & $\mathcal{K}_{t,\tau} = \delta(t-\tau)\, \mathcal{L}_t$ \\
& & \\ \hline
& & \\
TCL ME & $\partial_t \Lambda_{t-t_0} = \mathcal{L}_{t-t_0} \circ \Lambda_{t-t_0}$ & $\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathcal{L}_{t,t_0} \circ \Lambda_{t,t_0}$ \\
& & \\\hline
& & \\
TCL generator & $\mathcal{L}_{t-t_0} = [\partial_t \Lambda_{t-t_0}] \circ \Lambda_{t-t_0}^{-1}$ & $\mathcal{L}_{t,t_0} = [\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0}] \circ \Lambda_{t,q
t_0}^{-1}$ \\
& & \\\hline
& & \\
\mbox{New ME} & $\ \ \partial_t \Lambda_{t-t_0} = \mathbb{K}_{t-t_0} \ast \Lambda_{t-t_0} + \partial_t \Lambda_{t-t_0}^{(0)} \ \ $ & $ \ \ \partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathbb{K}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda_{t,t_0} + \partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0}^{(0)} \ \ $\\
& & \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Interestingly, apart from Nakajima-Zwanzing memory kernel master equation the map $\Lambda_{t,t_0}$ satisfies the following dynamical equation
\begin{equation}\label{new}
\partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0} = \mathbb{K}_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda_{t,t_0} + \partial_t \Lambda_{t,t_0}^{(0)} ,
\end{equation}
where the new kernel $\mathbb{K}_{t,t_0}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{}
\mathbb{K}_{t,t_0} = \partial_t \mathcal{P}_{t,t_0} = \partial_t[ \Phi_{t,t_0} \circledast \Lambda_{t,t_0}^{(0)}] ,
\end{equation}
that is, it is constructed in terms of the `free' evolution represented by $\Lambda_{t,t_0}^{(0)}$ and the jump operators $\Phi_{t,t_0}$ (the details of the derivation are presented in the Appendix).
This is very general class of legitimate quantum evolutions and corresponding dynamical equations. It would be interesting to apply the above scheme to discuss time inhomogeneous semi-Markov processes \cite{K6,K7,K10,K13} and collision models (cf. \cite{CM} for the recent review).
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The work was supported by the Polish National Science Centre project No. 2018/30/A/ST2/00837. I thank Stefano Marcantoni for his remark.
|
\section{Introduction}
For 6G wireless communication, such as Terahertz (THz) systems, transformative solutions to a fully connected world are expected to drive the surge for accommodating the complicated propagation environment, boosting spectral efficiency and providing high reliability. When the 6G system mitigating to higher frequency, these requirements are huge challenges due to fast attenuation and weak penetration \cite{boulogeorgos2018terahertz}. One promising approach that emerged recently is the notion of an intelligent communication environment (ICE). ICE is able to control the propagation environment to adapt to the complicated propagation environment, enhance the reliability, and enlarge the coverage cost-effectively \cite{akyildiz20206g}.
Various technologies have been proposed to achieve ICE, and one popular and practical solution is the intelligent reflective surface \cite{wu2019towards}, which is also known as reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) \cite{di2020smart}, and large-scale intelligent surface (LIS) \cite{han2019large}. The IRS consists of a massive number of passive reflective elements on its planar surface and a control part that adjusts each element's phase shift and direction. In contrast to traditional RF chains, the passive IRS elements only reflect signals without additional active processing, which facilitates the IRS to be deployed easily and cost-efficiently. It is worth noting that the passive-IRS potentially achieves a quantum leap improvement for self-interference and noise amplification compared to active relays and surfaces. In other words, IRS is a revolutionary technology that can achieve high spectrum and energy efficiency communications with low costs \cite{wu2021intelligent}. Based on these advantages, we will adopt passive-IRS in the sequel.
\subsection{Related works}
Spurred by the massive popularity of IRS, considerable researches have been undertaken in the latest decades regarding each aspects of IRS. There are relatively sufficient works about the link-level analysis of IRS-assisted wireless communication systems \cite{wu2021intelligent}. In \cite{jia2020analysis}, the direct link from Base Station (BS) to User Equipment (UE) was modeled as Rayleigh fading while links aided by IRS were modeled as Rician fading, and the IRS worked with quasi-static phase shift design. In \cite{atapattu2020reconfigurable}, the authors analyzed the network performance of IRS-assisted two-way communications between two users over Rayleigh fading by approximating the double Rayleigh fading with a Gamma distribution through moment matching. In contrast, network-level research is still scarce. In \cite{lyu2021hybrid}, the network-level performance of IRS-assisted downlink network was analyzed over Rayleigh fading by approximating the cascaded channel as Complex Normal (CN) distribution through Central Limit Theorem (CLT). Additionally, Gamma distribution is introduced to approximate the received signal power. However, the existing works are focused on simple fading models, and the channel models on the cascaded link and the mixture channel are scarce.
\subsection{Motivation}
The previous system performance analysis mainly worked on Rayleigh fading due to its simplicity and tractability \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. Nonetheless, given the diverse range of operating environments of 6G, they may also be subject to clustering of scattered multipath contributions, \textit{i.e.}, propagation characteristics which are quite dissimilar to conventional Rayleigh fading environments \cite{chun2017stochastic}. Aside from small-scale fading, large-scale fading and random shadowing caused by obstacles in the local environment or human body movements can impact link performance via fluctuating the received signals, which can not be ignored in future wireless communications systems, \textit{i.e.}, mm-Wave wireless communications and THz wireless communications \cite{chun2017comprehensive}. As such, it is essential to extend the analysis of IRS-assisted wireless communication systems to generalized fading channels with novel channel modeling methods.
Moreover, the mixture channel between typical UE and its serving BS consists of two types of link: direct link (BS$\rightarrow$UE), and cascaded link (BS$\rightarrow$IRS$\rightarrow$UE). Statistical characterization of the cascaded and mixture channel in IRS-assisted networks involves highly specialized functions, such as Fox-H or Meijer G-function, even with the simplest Rayleigh fading on each individual links, which causes the performance analysis of IRS-assisted wireless network to be challenging. Considerable researches have been conducted to analyze over asymmetric cascaded channels in relay-assisted networks: mixed Rayleigh and Rician \cite{duong2007effect}, mixed Nakagami-$m$ and Rician \cite{gurung2010performance}, mixed $\eta - \mu$ and $\kappa - \mu$ fading channels \cite{6473919}. Furthermore, there are some approximation works on a symmetric cascaded fading channel in MIMO communications: N*Nakagami-$m$ distribution for Nakagami-$m$ fading channels \cite{karagiannidis2007n}. In addition, \cite{di2009comprehensive} analyzed the dual-hop link over generalized fading channels by leveraging properties of Meijer-G function. While significant advances have been made by previous researches, most of the existing literature approximated the cascaded channels by CN distribution based on CLT or modeled the channels with Meijer-G function. Besides, the system performance analysis is mainly based on the ratio of signal power and noise power (SNR), and ignored the interference, which is an essential part in future dense networks. Although \cite{lyu2021hybrid} has considered the interference effect, the channel model adopted is still approximated by CN distributions through CLT, with Rayleigh as the underlying fading model. Therefore, an approximation model for cascaded link and mixture channel with high accuracy for generalized fading models, is critical for evaluating IRS-assisted network system performance metrics of interest, especially for B5G and 6G.
\subsection{Contributions}
Motivated by the above, we emphasize addressing the modeling of cascaded link, mixture channel, and system-level performance analysis for IRS-assisted wireless networks in this work. We extend the research from Rayleigh fading to arbitrary underlying fading types, such as Nakagami-$m$, Rician, $\kappa$ - $\mu$, and $\kappa$ - $\mu$ shadowed fading, which is a generalized channel modeling method fitting to various networks. We also evaluated the performance metrics with a uniform stochastic geometric framework. The main contributions of this work are summarized as below:
\begin{enumerate}
\item First and foremost, modeling the channel gain tractably for the cascaded link and mixture channel with high accuracy is essential for the analysis of IRS-assisted networks. In this work, we introduced a general channel modeling method for multiple types of channels in IRS-assisted networks utilizing the multipliability and quadratic form of the mixture Gamma distribution. Thus, we approximated the direct channel, cascaded channel and mixture channel by mixture Gamma distributions with accuracy less than $10^{-5}$. This mixture Gamma channel modeling method works for arbitrary underlying fading and includes single channel, double channel, and mixture channel as a special case.
\item Then, we derived the distribution of conditional received signal power, and Laplace transform of the aggregated interference using stochastic geometry under three operation modes: a) one IRS is associated with the typical UE and performs beamforming whilst other related IRSs randomly scattering the received signals; b) all related IRSs randomly scatter signals to the typical UE without beamforming; c) there is no related IRS, and the whole network works as a traditional network.
\item Next, we introduced a unified analytical framework for the IRS-assisted network performance evaluation based on the proposed mixture Gamma channel modeling method, where interested performance metrics can be expressed as functions of the ratio of signal power and interference power plus noise power (SINR). Furthermore, we illustrated several performance metrics, such as spectrum efficiency, SINR moments, and outage probability by invoking their corresponding SINR functions.
\item Finally, we verified our channel model by Monte-Carlo simulation, which illustrated that the proposed channel modeling method fits well for multiple types of channel with high accuracy. As such, the proposed modeling method can be applied to various wireless systems. Our analysis provides insights on system design and further optimization of the IRS-assisted networks.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Organizations}
The remaining paper is organized as below. In section \ref{sectionSystemM}, we introduced the system model, association policy, and channel models. In section \ref{sectionMG}, we evaluated channel modeling method of the single link, cascaded link, and mixture channel by proving the multipliability and quadratic form of mixture Gamma distributed channels. In section \ref{section:Perf}, we derived the channel power gain and Laplace transforms of the aggregated interference power under three operation modes and introduced a unified stochastic geometric system performance analysis framework for the IRS-assisted network. In section \ref{sectionNumerical}, we provided simulations to verify our theoretical analysis. In section \ref{sectionConclusion}, we concluded the whole work.
\section{SYSTEM MODEL} \label{sectionSystemM}
We consider an IRS-assisted multi-cell wireless network, where the IRSs are deployed to assist the downlink transmission as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}. The locations of BSs are modeled by an independent two dimensional (2D) homogeneous Poisson Point Process (HPPP), denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm B}$ with node density $\lambda_{\rm B}$. The locations of IRSs and UEs are modeled as independent 2D-HPPPs, denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I}$ with density $\lambda_{\rm I}$ and $\Lambda_{\rm U}$ with density $\lambda_{\rm U}$, respectively. Without loss of generality, we assume that a typical UE, denoted by ${\rm UE}_{0}$, is located at the origin and each BS has an infinitely backlogged queue. The channel is assumed to be frequency-flat and constant while the channel may vary over different frequency bands or time slots \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. To facilitate the analysis, we employ orthogonal multiple access, implying no intra-cell interference. We summarized the common notations used in this paper in Table~\ref{Tab:notations}.
\subsection{BS and IRS association policy }
We adopt a general association model for BS where each UE connects to the BS that provides strongest long term received signal power without small-scale fading, denoted as ${\rm BS}_{0}$, which is equivalent to connecting to the nearest BS. As such, PDF of the distance between ${\rm BS}_{0}$ and ${\rm UE}_{0}$, denoted as $d_{\rm BU}$, could be derived from the void probability of a 2D HPPP. The PDF of $d_{\rm BU}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
f_{d_{\rm BU}}(d)=2\pi \lambda_{\rm B} d e^{-\lambda _{\rm B}\pi d^{2}} \label{con:PDFofDistanceBSUE}.
\end{equation}
For the IRS association policy, we assume that at most one IRS is associated between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and ${\rm BS}_{0}$. As \cite{you2022deploy} shows the optimal deployment location for a single associated IRS is in the vicinity of either ${\rm UE}_{0}$ or ${\rm BS}_{0}$. However, the communications suffer severe product path loss when the link distances between nodes are too large. For this reason, we define a service area of each IRS, which is a circle with radius $D_{1}$. Further, we define an interference area, within which the not associated UEs can receive interference signals from the IRS. The radius of this interference area is denoted as $D_{2}$ \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. Since the deployment of a large-scale centralized IRS is not practical, the association policy adopted in this work is connecting the ${\rm UE}_{0}$ with its nearest IRS located within service area, denoted as ${\rm IRS}_{0}$. Based on the distance to ${\rm UE}_{0}$, the $\Lambda_{\rm I}$ is thinned into three small point processes: the serving IRSs (denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I,S} \triangleq \{ {\rm IRS}_{0} \}$), the interfering IRSs (denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I,F}$), the noise IRSs (denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I,N}$). As such, this IRS association policy contains three operation modes in terms of the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Mode 1.} If the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS is less than $D_{1}$, ${\rm UE}_{0}$ associates to its nearest IRS.
\item \textbf{Mode 2.} If the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS is larger than $D_{1}$ and less than $D_{2}$, ${\rm UE}_{0}$ does not connect with any IRS. The IRSs, whose distance to ${\rm UE}_{0}$ is less than $D_{2}$, randomly scatter any received signals, which contribute to the interference.
\item \textbf{Mode 3.} If the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS is larger than $D_{2}$ , the random scattering can be ignored or treated as an additive Gaussian white noise (AWGN).
\end{itemize}
As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}, for Mode 1, if there is one IRS associated with ${\rm UE}_{0}$, there are two types of links between the serving BS (${\rm BS}_{0}$) and ${\rm UE}_{0}$, including ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ (the direct link) and ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm IRS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ (the cascaded link). According to void probability of the 2D HPPP, the PDF of the inter-node distance across ${\rm IRS}_{0}$ and the ${\rm UE}_{0}$ (denoted as $d_{\rm IU}$) is given by
\begin{equation}
f_{d_{\rm IU}}({d})=2\pi \lambda _{\rm I} {d} e^{-\lambda_{\rm I}\pi {d}^{2}} \label{con:PDFofDistanceIRSUE}.
\end{equation}
To ensure tractability of the analysis, we assume that the distance and its distribution from ${\rm BS}_{0}$ to ${\rm UE}_{0}$ are identical with that from ${\rm BS}_{0}$ to ${\rm IRS}_{j}$, $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)} \approx d_{\rm BU} $, where $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)}$ denotes the distance between ${\rm BS}_{0}$ and ${\rm IRS}_{j}$, which is widely adopted in literature \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. Additionally, in Appendix~\ref{appendix:Distance}, we provide math proof for the first time, by deriving the conditional PDF, CDF, and mean of the distance between ${\rm IRS}_{j}$ and ${\rm BS}_{0}$, denoted as $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)}$. Besides, there is no need to derive the unconditional PDF and CDF of $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)}$, since only the corresponding $d_{\rm BI}^{(0)}$ for each $d_{\rm IU}^{(0)}$ and $d_{\rm BU}$ pair is meaningful. In other words, the absolute position of IRS is meaningless while the relative position for a given UE matters. This result provides positive insights for operators on the deployment of IRS.
\subsection{Channel model}
For simplicity, assume that both the BSs and UEs are equipped with a single antenna while each IRS consists of $N$ reflective elements. Let $h_{\rm BU} = \sqrt{\zeta_{\rm BU}} g_{\rm BU}$ denotes the channel from BS to UE, where $\zeta_{\rm BU}\triangleq \epsilon d_{\rm BU}^{-\alpha_{\rm BU}}$ denotes the BS-UE path-loss with $\epsilon$ representing the reference channel power gain at a distance of $1$ m, $d_{\rm BU}$ being the BS-UE distance, and $\alpha_{\rm BU}$ being the corresponding path-loss exponent. Moreover, $g_{\rm BU}$ denotes the small-scale fading channel. Similarly, the BS$\to$IRS and IRS$\to$UE channels, denoted by ${\bf h}_{{\rm BI}}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 1}$ and ${\bf h}^H_{{\rm IU}}\in\mathbb{C}^{1\times N}$, respectively, can be modeled as
\begin{align}
{\bf h}_{\rm BI}=\sqrt{\zeta_{\rm BI}}{\bf g}_{\rm BI},~~ {\bf h}^H_{\rm IU}=\sqrt{\zeta_{\rm IU}}{\bf g}_{\rm IU}^H,
\end{align}
where $\zeta_{\rm BI}\triangleq\epsilon d_{\rm BI}^{-\alpha_{\rm BI}}$ and $\zeta_{\rm IU}\triangleq\epsilon d_{\rm IU}^{-\alpha_{\rm IU}}$ denotes the BS$\to$IRS and IRS$\to$UE link path-loss, respectively, with $d_{\rm BI}$ ($d_{\rm IU}$) being the link distance and $\alpha_{\rm BI} (\alpha_{\rm IU})$ being the path-loss exponent\footnote{For ease of notation, we simply use $\alpha$ to represent the path-loss exponent in the sequel for each individual link without causing confusion. }. Moreover, ${\bf g}_{\rm BI}$ (${\bf g}_{\rm IU}^H$) denotes the corresponding small-scale fading channel with $| g_{{\rm BI}, n}|$ and $|g_{{\rm IU}, n}|$, respectively.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7cm,width=10cm]{systemModel.eps}
\caption{IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}
\label{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}
\end{figure}
\makeatletter
\def\thickhline{%
\noalign{\ifnum0=`}\fi\hrule \@height \thickarrayrulewidth \futurelet
\reserved@a\@xthickhline}
\def\@xthickhline{\ifx\reserved@a\thickhline
\vskip\doublerulesep
\vskip-\thickarrayrulewidth
\fi
\ifnum0=`{\fi}}
\makeatother
\newlength{\thickarrayrulewidth}
\setlength{\thickarrayrulewidth}{1.2pt}
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{COMMON PARAMETERS}
\begin{tabular}{m{0.24\linewidth}<{\centering}|m{0.62\linewidth}<{\centering}}%
\thickhline%
Parameter & Description\\%
\hline%
$ \Lambda_{\rm B}, \Lambda_{\rm I},\Lambda_{\rm U}$&Point processes of BSs, IRSs, and UEs\\
\hline
$ \Lambda_{\rm I,S}, \Lambda_{\rm I,F}, \Lambda_{\rm I,N} $&Daughter point processes of $\Lambda_{\rm I}$ and represent serving IRSs, interference IRSs, and noise IRSs\\
\hline%
$N$ & The number of IRS elements on each IRS\\%
\hline%
$ D_{1}, D_{2} $ & The radius of IRS serving area and interference area\\%
\hline%
$ h_{\rm BU} $, $ {\bf h}_{\rm BI} $, $ {\bf h}^H_{\rm IU} $& The channel of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links\\ %
\hline%
$g_{\rm BU}$, ${\bf g}_{\rm BI}$, ${\bf g}_{\rm IU}^H$& Small-scale fading channel of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links\\%
\hline%
$ \zeta_{\rm BU}, \zeta_{\rm BI}, \zeta_{\rm IU} $& Path loss of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links\\%
\hline%
$\epsilon$ & The reference channel power gain at a distance of $1$ m\\%
\hline%
$ H_{\rm BU}, H_{\rm BIU}, H_{\rm S} $& Channel gain of direct path, cascaded path, and the mixture channel\\%
\hline
$ M_{1} $, $ M_{2} $, $ I $& The number of mixture Gamma terms \\
\hline
$ ( \varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i} ) $& The parameters of mixture Gamma distributions \\
\hline
${\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}$, ${\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}$& The index of sufficiency condition expression of multipliability and quadratic form \\
\hline
$ m_{\rm BU} $, $ m_{\rm BI} $, $ m_{\rm IU} $& The fading parameters of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links for Nakagami-$m$ channels \\
\hline
$I_{\rm F}$ & The interference \\
\hline
$ K_v(y) $ & Modified Bessel function of the second kind \\
\hline
$ G_{m,n}^{p,q}\left( y| a,b\right) $ & Meijer-G function \\
\hline
$L_n(t)$ & Laguerre polynomial \\
\hline
$t_{i}$ & The $i$-th zero of Laguerre polynomials \\
\hline
$\varpi_{i}$ & The $i$-th weight factor of Laguerre polynomials \\
\hline
$\omega_{i}$ & The $i$-th weight factor of the $ i $-th Gamma component \\
\hline
$f_{i}(x)$ & PDF of the $ i $-th Gamma component \\
\hline
$\gamma\left(\cdot, \cdot \right)$ & The incomplete Gamma function \\
\hline
$\Gamma\left(\cdot \right)$ & The Gamma function \\
\thickhline%
\end{tabular}%
\label{Tab:notations}
\end{table}
For the passive IRS, let ${\bf \Theta}\triangleq{\rm diag}(e^{j\phi_{1}}, \cdots, e^{j\phi_{N}}) \in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ denote its reflection matrix, where $\phi_{n}$ is the phase shift at each element $n\in\mathcal{N}\triangleq\{1, \cdots, N\}$. For the connected ${\rm IRS}_{0}$, its phase shift is adjusted to align with the direct link based on the full CSI obtained, which is given by
\begin{equation}
[{\bf \Phi}^*]_n = e^{j(\angle{h_{\rm BU}}-\angle{[{\bf h}_{{\rm I} {\rm U}}^H]_n}-\angle{[{\bf h}_{{\rm BI}}]_n})},\forall n.
\end{equation}
However, for those not connected but interfering IRSs, the phase shift is not specifically designed and the IRSs randomly scatter received signals to ${\rm UE}_{0}$.
The received SINR is defined as below
\begin{equation}
{\rm SINR} = \frac{\mathbf{S}}{\mathbf{I}+\delta^2},
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{S}, \mathbf{I}, \delta^2$ represents the resived signal power, aggregated interference power, and noise power, respectively. For the given network model, the received signal at ${\rm UE}_{0}$, denoted as $y$, can be generated in four different forms. First, when the ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {S}}$ and ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ are empty, the received signal only comes from the direct link and we denote this case as $y^{(1)}$. Second, when the ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {S}}$ is empty and ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ is not empty, the received signal comes from the direct link with interference from ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ and we denote this case as $y^{(2)}$. Third, when both ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {S}}$ and ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ are not empty, the received signal comes from both the direct link and IRS link with interference from ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ and we denote this case as $y^{(3)}$. Fourth, when the direct link is blocked, the signal can only be transmitted to UE through the IRS with interference from ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ and we denote this case as $y^{(4)}$. We summarized the received signal envelope for each cases below together with the corresponding signal power $\mathbf{S}$ and interference power $\mathbf{I}$ as described below
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
y^{(1)} = h_{\rm BU}x+n_{0},\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} = |h_{\rm BU}|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = 0,\label{eqn:line-1} \\
y^{(2)} = h_{\rm BU}x+\sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}x^{'}+n_{0},
\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} = |h_{\rm BU}|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = \sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} \left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}\right|^2,
\label{eqn:line-2} \\
y^{(3)} = (h_{\rm BU}+h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)})x+\sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}x^{'}+n_{0},
\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} =\left|h_{\rm BU}+h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}\right|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = \sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} \left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}\right|^2,
\label{eqn:line-3} \\
y^{(4)} = h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}x+\sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}x^{'}+n_{0},
\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} =\left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}\right|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = \sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} \left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}\right|^2,
\label{eqn:line-4}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $x$ is the transmitted signal with unit transmit power $P_{\rm t}$, $x^{'}$ is the interference signal, $h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}=\sum_{n=1}^N |{h}_{{\rm IU},n}| |{h}_{{\rm BI},n}|$ is the channel of ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow{{\rm IRS}_{j}} \rightarrow{{\rm UE}_{0}}$, and $n_{0}$ is the received noise with power $\delta^2$.
\section{Mixture Gamma Approximation of Fading Channels} \label{sectionMG}
In this section, we use properties of mixture Gamma distribution to model the cascaded channel ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm IRS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ and combined channel of the direct link ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ and cascaded link.
\subsection{Summary of mixture Gamma distribution}
\textbf{Necessity}: In \cite{devore1993constructive}, it is proved that an arbitrary function $f(x)$ with a positive domain $x \in (0, \infty)$ and $lim_{x \to +\infty}f(x) \to 0$, can be accurately approximated as a weighted sum of Gamma distribution as written in (\ref{con:MGapprox}). Given that $f(x)$ is a valid PDF, we refer to (\ref{con:MGapprox}) as the mixture Gamma distribution with parameters $\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right)$, denoted as $f(x) \sim \mathrm{GM}\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right)$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f(x) &= \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \omega_{i}f_{i}(x) = \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\varepsilon_{i}x^{\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x} \simeq \sum_{i=1}^{I}\varepsilon_{i}x^{\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x},
\end{split}
\label{con:MGapprox}
\end{equation}
where $f_{i}(x)=\frac{\xi_{i}^{\beta_{i}}x^{\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x}}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}$ is the PDF of a Gamma distribution with parameters $\left(\xi_i, \beta_{i}\right)$, $\Gamma(\cdot)$ is the Gamma function, $\omega_{i}=\varepsilon_{i}\cdot\Gamma(\beta_{i})/\xi_{i}^{\beta_{i}}$ is the weight of the $i$-th term, $I$ is the truncation limit that determines the approximation accuracy, and $\int_{0}^{\infty} f(x) {\rm d}x = 1$ with $f(x) \geq 0$ and $\sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \omega_i = 1$.
\textbf{Sufficiency}: In \cite{devore1993constructive}, the existence of a mixture Gamma function $S_u\left(x\right)$ that uniformly converges to an arbitrary function $f(x)$ is proved as written below
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&lim_{u \to +\infty} S_u(x) = f(x) \quad \text{uniformly for } 0 < x < \infty,\\
\text{where } S_u(x) &= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{u}f\left(\frac{k}{u}\right) \mathrm{Gamma}\left(u, k+1\right) = \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{u}f\left(\frac{k}{u}\right) \cdot \frac{u^{k+1} x^k}{k!} e^{-u x},
\end{split}
\label{eq-11-rev}
\end{equation}
and $u$ is an arbitrarily large number that determines the approximation accuracy.
The equality in (\ref{eq-11-rev}) indicates that an arbitrary function $f(x)$ can be accurately approximated by a mixture of Gamma distributions $\mathrm{Gamma}\left(u, k+1\right)$ with parameters $u$, $k+1$ and weight $\frac{1}{u}f\left(\frac{k}{u}\right)$. Note that (\ref{con:MGapprox}) represents the necessity condition to construct an arbitrary function from a mixture of Gamma distributions, whereas (\ref{eq-11-rev}) corresponds to the sufficiency condition that maps the weight $\omega_i$ and $f_i(x)$. We can find a direct relation between the arbitrary distribution $f(x)$ and tuples $\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right)$ by using (\ref{con:MGapprox}) and (\ref{eq-11-rev}) as described below
\begin{equation}
\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right) = \left(\frac{u^{i-1}}{\Gamma(i)} \cdot f\left(\frac{i-1}{u}\right), i, u \right).
\label{eq-9-rev}
\end{equation}
The statistics of mixture Gamma distribution, including the CDF, moments, and Laplace transform of a mixture Gamma distributed random variable, are derived in \cite{chun2017comprehensive} as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
F(x) = \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i}\xi^{-\beta_{i}}\gamma(\beta_{i}, \xi_{i}x),\quad
\mathbb{E}\left[ x^l \right] = \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \frac{\Gamma(\beta_i+l)}{\xi_i^{\beta_i+l}}, \quad
\mathcal{L}(s) = \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \frac{\Gamma(\beta_i)}{(\xi_i+s)^{\beta_i}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma\left(\cdot, \cdot \right)$ is the incomplete Gamma function. The authors in \cite{6059452} proved that majority of the known fading models can be approximated by the mixture Gamma distribution. Particularly, Rayleigh and Nakagami-$m$ fading can be represented by a mixture Gamma distribution with a single term. For an arbitrary fading model, whose PDF can be approximated by a mixture Gamma distribution, $I$ is no need to be larger than 20 with accuracy less than $10^{-5}$ \cite{6059452}.
However, the IRS-assisted network in Fig. \ref{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)} involves combined channel that is composed of the double-faded, cascaded link through IRS and the direct link. Traditional works on cascaded channel utilized specialized function, such as Fox-H or Meijer G-function, which lack tractability and are hard to gain any insights. To resolve this issue, we adopt the mixture Gamma approximation to model the wireless channels of IRS-assisted network.
\subsection{Properties of mixture Gamma distribution}
\begin{theorem} \label{theorem:Multipliability} \textbf{Multipliability:}
The product distribution of two independent, mixture Gamma distributed random variables $X_{1}$ and $X_{2}$ can be represented by a mixture Gamma distribution $Y=X_{1}X_{2}$ with parameters $\left(\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}\right)$ as described below
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\text{Given }
f_{\rm X_1}(x_1) = \sum_{m_{1}=0}^{M_{1}} \omega_{m_{1}} \cdot \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{m_{1}}, \beta_{m_{1}}\right) \text{ and }
f_{\rm X_2}(x_2) =\sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{{M_{2}}} \omega_{m_{2}} \cdot \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{m_{2}}, \beta_{m_{2}}\right),\\
&\text{the product distribution of } Y=X_{1}X_{2} \text{ follows }
f_{\rm Y}(y) = \sum_{\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}} \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} \cdot y^{\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}-1} \cdot e^{-y \cdot \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}} }},
\end{split}
\label{MGdouble}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
where the summation range $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}$ and parameters are defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} &= \{0 \leq m_{1} \leq M_1,~ 0 \leq m_2 \leq M_2,~ 1 \leq i \leq I\},\\
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} &= \varepsilon_{m_{1}},\quad \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \frac{\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}}, \quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \left(\prod_{j=1}^{2} \frac{\omega_{m_j} \beta_{m_j}^{\varepsilon_{m_1}} }{\Gamma\left(\varepsilon_{m_j}\right) } \right)
\cdot \varpi_{i}{t_{i}^{-\varepsilon_{m_{1}}+\varepsilon_{m_{2}}-1}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
$t_{i}$ is the $i$-th root of the Laguerre polynomial $L_n(t)$ and $\varpi_{i}$ is the $i$-th weight of the Gaussian-Laguerre quadrature $\int_0^\infty e^{-t}f(t)dt \approx \sum_{i=1}^{n} \varpi_{i} f\left(t_i\right)$ defined as $\varpi_{i} = \frac{t_i}{\left(n+1\right)^2 L_{n+1}\left(t_i\right)^2}$ \cite{abramowitz1964handbook}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{appendix:CascadedMG}.
\end{proof}
Given two independent Gamma distributed random variables $X_1$ and $X_2$, the product distribution of $Y=X_{1}X_{2}$ can be further simplified by substituting $M_1 = M_2 = 0$, $\omega_{m_1} = \omega_{m_2} = 1$ in (\ref{MGdouble}), which is described in the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:GamProduct}
The product distribution of two independent Gamma-distributed random variables $X_1$ and $X_2$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Y}(y) &= \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} \cdot y^{\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}-1} \cdot e^{-y\cdot\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}} }},
\end{split}
\label{MGdouble-lemma1-eq1}
\end{equation}
where $X_1 \sim \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{{m_{1}}}, \beta_{{m_{1}}}\right)$, $X_2 \sim \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{{m_{2}}}, \beta_{{m_{2}}}\right)$, and the parameter tuple $\left(\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}\right)$ is defined as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \varepsilon_{m_{1}},\quad \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \frac{\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}},
\quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \left(\prod_{j=1}^{2} \frac{\beta_{m_j}^{\varepsilon_{m_1}} }{\Gamma\left(\varepsilon_{m_j}\right) } \right)
\cdot \varpi_{i}{t_{i}^{-\varepsilon_{m_{1}}+\varepsilon_{m_{2}}-1}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:Mixture}\textbf{Quadratic form:}
Given two independent, mixture Gamma distributed random variables $X^2$ and $Y^2$, the quadratic form $S = (X+Y)^{2}$ follows a mixture Gamma distribution with parameters $\left(\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}, \beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}, \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}\right)$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&f_{\rm S}(s) = \sum_{\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}} \left( \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}}
e^{-s \cdot \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1} }} - \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}}
e^{-s \cdot \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2} }} \right)
\cdot s^{\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}-1},\\
&\text{where }
X \sim \mathrm{GM}\left(\varepsilon_{m_1}, \beta_{m_1}, \xi_{m_1}\right), \text{ and } Y \sim \mathrm{GM}\left(\varepsilon_{m_2}, \beta_{m_2}, \xi_{m_2}\right),
\end{split}
\label{thm2-eq17-rev}
\end{equation}
the summation range $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}$ and parameter tuples are given by
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \{0 \leq m_{1} \leq M_1,~ 0 \leq m_2 \leq M_2, 0 \leq k_1 \leq 2\beta_{m_2}-1,\\
&\quad \quad 0 \leq k_2 \leq 2\beta_{m_1}-1+k_1,~ 0 \leq k_3 \leq \infty\},
\end{split}
\label{thm2-eq18a-rev}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \beta_{m_1}+\beta_{m_2}+k_{3}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} = \xi_{m_2}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \xi_{m_1},\\
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} &= (-1)^{k_{2}} \chi \cdot \xi_{m_2}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1}, \quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \chi \cdot \xi_{m_1}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1},
\end{split}
\label{thm2-eq18b-rev}
\end{equation}
and $\chi=\frac{\varepsilon_{i}\varepsilon_{j}\tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}}{k_{2}}(-1)^{k_{1}}\xi_{j}^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-k_{2}-1}\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2})} {\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}+k_{3}+1)(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}+k_{3}}}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix~\ref{appendix:TheoremMixtureChannel}.
\end{proof}
Although the mixture Gamma distributions in (\ref{MGdouble}) and (\ref{thm2-eq17-rev}) involve multiple summations, it is worth noting that these functions still converge extremely fast, thanks to the rapid convergence of the weight terms. In Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_mmse}, we validated that the mixture Gamma distributions achieve an approximation error of less than $10^{-4}$ with only ten terms.
\begin{remark}
Since the production distribution of two independent, mixture Gamma random variables is still a mixture Gamma, Theorem~\ref{theorem:Multipliability} can be easily extended to a multiplication of $K$ independent, mixture Gamma distributed random variables. We introduced a heuristic algorithm in Appendix~\ref{appendix:IterationAlgorithmForChannel} to evaluate the product distribution of $K$ independent, mixture Gamma random variables. Similarly, the distribution of the quadratic form can be easily extended to $K$ independent, mixture Gamma random variables. Hence, the analytical framework derived in this paper can be applied to network environments with multiple IRS association.
\end{remark}
Some mixture Gamma approximations of single links and cascaded links are provided in Fig.~\ref{fig:table} for ease reference.
\section{Performance analysis} \label{section:Perf}
\subsection{Channel power statics}
For network performance analysis, we assume that the transmit power is one and the amplitude $g_{\rm BU}$, $g_{{\rm BI},n}$ and $g_{{\rm IU},n}$ follow Nakagami-$m$ distribution with parameters $m_{\rm BU}$, $m_{\rm BI}$ and $m_{\rm IU}$, respectively. Let us denote the power terms as follows
\begin{align}
H_{\rm BU}\triangleq |h_{\rm BU}|^2=\epsilon d_{\rm BU}^{-\alpha} |g_{\rm BU}|^2, \label{Eq:HBU}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
H_{\rm BIU}= \left|{\bf h}^H_{\rm IU}{\bf h}_{\rm BI}\right|^{2} \triangleq |h_{\rm BIU}|^2=\epsilon^2 d_{\rm BI}^{-\alpha} d_{\rm IU}^{-\alpha} \left|\sum_{n=1}^N |{g}_{{\rm IU},n}| |{g}_{{\rm BI},n}|\right|^2,\label{Eq:HBIU}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
H_{\rm S}\triangleq \left||h_{\rm BU}|+|h_{\rm BIU}|\right|^2. \label{Eq:HS}
\end{align}
\subsubsection{Single path}
As $g_{\rm BU}$, $g_{\rm BI}$ and $g_{\rm IU}$ are distributed by the Nakagami-$m$ fading, the power term $H_{\rm BU}$ follows a Gamma distribution, whereas the statistics of $H_{\rm BIU}$ is characterized by the mixture Gamma distribution and the parameter tuples are described in the following lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:H_BU}$H_{\rm BU}$ follows the Gamma distribution, which can be modeled as a mixture Gamma distribution with $I = 1$ and
\begin{align}
\left(\varepsilon_{\rm BU}, \beta_{\rm BU}, \xi_{\rm BU}\right) = \left(\frac{({d_{\rm BU}^{\alpha }m_{\rm BU} })^{m_{\rm BU} }}{\epsilon^{m_{\rm BU} }\Gamma(m_{\rm BU} )}, m_{\rm BU}, \frac{m_{\rm BU} d_{\rm BU}^{\alpha}}{\epsilon}\right).
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:HBIU}By Theorem~\ref{Lem:GamProduct}, $H_{\rm BIU}$ follows the mixture Gamma distribution as (\ref{MGdouble}) with parameters $\left(\varepsilon, \beta, \xi\right)$ given by
\begin{align}\label{eq: MG_para_BIU}
\begin{split}
&~ \varepsilon_{{\rm BIU},i} = \frac{(m_{\rm BI}m_{\rm IU})^{m_{\rm BI} }\varpi_{i}t_{i}^{m_{\rm IU} -m_{\rm BI} -1}}{\Gamma(m_{\rm BI} )\Gamma(m_{\rm IU} )}\left({\frac{W}{N^2}}\right)^{m_{\rm BI} }, \\ &~
\beta_{{\rm BIU},i} = m_{\rm BI} , \quad
\xi_{{\rm BIU},i} = \frac{m_{\rm BI} m_{\rm IU} }{t_{i}}{\frac{W}{N^2}},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $W= \frac{{d^{\alpha}_{\rm BI}}{d^{\alpha}_{\rm IU}}}{\epsilon^2}$ and $I=20$ achieves sufficient approximation error of less than $10^{-5}$.
\end{lemma}
\subsubsection{Mixture path}
In the following Lemma, we use Theorem~\ref{theorem:Mixture} to characterize the distribution of the combined channel, given that the channel gain of the individual paths follows a mixture Gamma distribution.
\begin{lemma}
Given that the channel gain of the direct link and cascaded link follow mixture Gamma distributions, the channel gain of the combined channel, $H_{\rm S}$, follows a mixture Gamma distribution as (\ref{thm2-eq17-rev}) with parameters given by
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \{1 \leq m_{1} \leq M_1,~ m_2 = 1, 0 \leq k_1 \leq 2m_{\rm BU}-1,\\
&\quad \quad 0 \leq k_2 \leq 2m_{\rm BI}+k_1-1,~ 0 \leq k_3 \leq \infty\},\\
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \beta_{{\rm BIU},i}+\beta_{\rm BU}+k_{3}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} = \xi_{\rm BU}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \xi_{{\rm BIU},i},\\
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} &= (-1)^{k_{2}} \chi \cdot \xi_{\rm BU}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1}, \quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \chi \cdot \xi_{{\rm BIU},i}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1}, \\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\chi &= \frac{\varepsilon_{\rm BU}\varepsilon_{\rm BIU,i}\tbinom{2\beta_{\rm BU}-1}{k_{1}}(-1)^{k_{1}}\tbinom{2\beta_{\rm BU}-k_{1}-1}{k_{2}}\xi_{\rm BU}^{2\beta_{\rm BU}+k_{1}-k_{2}-1}\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}) } {\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}+k_{3}+1)(\xi_{{\rm BIU},i}+\xi_{\rm BU})^{2\beta_{\rm BU}+k_{1}+k_{3}}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Laplace transform of the aggregated interference power}
In this subsection, we will derive the Laplace transform of the aggregated interference. The interference power received at the ${\rm UE}_{0}$ from direct links and cascaded links are given by $I_{{\rm F},1}$ and $I_{{\rm F},2}$, respectively
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
I_{{\rm F},1} = &~ \sum_{m \in \Lambda_{\rm B} \setminus\{0\}} H_{{\rm BU}}^{(m)} ,\\ I_{{\rm F},2} = &~ \sum_{m \in \Lambda_{\rm B} \setminus\{0\}} \sum_{j\in \Lambda_{\rm I,F}\bigcup\Lambda_{\rm I,S}} H_{\rm BIU}^{(m,j)} .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Laplace transforms of the interference power are given by
\begin{align} \label{eq:L_I12}
\mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},1}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} =&~ \mathbb{E}[e^{-sI_{{\rm F},1}}] |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathbb{E}_{\Lambda_{B}\setminus\{0\}}\left\{ e^{-s H_{\rm BU} } \right\}\Big|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} , \notag \\
\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}}= &~ \mathbb{E}_{\Lambda _{B}\setminus\{0\},\Lambda_{\rm I,F}\bigcup\Lambda_{\rm I,S}}\left\{ e^{-s \eta H_{\rm BIU}} \right\}\Big|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} ,
\end{align}
where $d_{\rm BU}^{(m)}$ is the distance from $ {\rm BS}_{m}$ to $ {\rm UE}_{0}$, $\eta = \mathbb{E}\left[{d_{\rm BI}^{(m,j)}}^{-\alpha}\right]$, $d_{\rm BI}^{(m,j)}$ is the distance from ${\rm BS}_{m}$ to ${\rm IRS}_{j}$, and we assumed $d_{\rm BU} \simeq d_{\rm BI}$.
If $\Lambda_{\rm I,F}$ is empty, the aggregated interference and its corresponding Laplace transform are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_IFo}
\begin{split}
I_{{\rm F},\rm o} &= I_{{\rm F},1}, \quad
\mathcal{L}_{ \rm I_{{\rm F},\rm o}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathbb{E}[e^{-sI_{{\rm F},1}}] |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{ {{\rm F},1}}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
If $\Lambda_{\rm I,F}$ is not empty, the aggregated interference and its corresponding Laplace transform are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_IFa}
I_{{\rm F},\rm a} = I_{{\rm F},1} + I_{{\rm F},2}, \quad
\mathcal{L}_{ \rm I_{{\rm F},\rm a}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},1}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} \cdot\mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},2}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} .
\end{equation}
The closed form expressions of (\ref{eq:L_IFo}) and \eqref{eq:L_IFa} are given in (\ref{eq:L_I1_appen}), (\ref{eq:L_I2_appen}) and derived in Appendix \ref{appendix:LaplaceI}.
The CDF of the aggregated interference power can be numerically obtained by taking the inverse Laplace transform of $\mathcal{L}_{ \rm I|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}(s)$ and MATLAB offers software library to evaluate the operation as follows
\begin{equation}
F_{ \rm I_{\rm F}|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}(x) = \mathcal{L}^{-1}\left[ \frac{1}{s} \mathcal{L}_{ \rm I_{\rm F}|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}(s) \right] (x). \label{LaplaceICDF}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Analytical framework}
In this subsection, we adopt an analytical framework to assess the system performance metrics by using stochastic geometry. The original idea was proposed by Hamdi in \cite{hamdi2007useful} for Nakagami-$m$ fading, later in \cite{chun2017stochastic} for $\kappa$ - $\mu$ and $\eta$ - $\mu$ fading, and in \cite{chun2017comprehensive} for $\kappa$ - $\mu$ shadowed fading, which we further extend to IRS-assisted networks with mixture Gamma distributed channels. With the proposed method, any performance measures can be evaluated and represented as a function of SINR $g(\rm SINR)$, including the spectral efficiency, moments of SINR, and outage probability.
\begin{theorem} \label{theoremPerfAnalysis}
For a network with mixture Gamma distributed channels, whose received signal can be modeled as a mixture Gamma distribution with tuple $ (\varepsilon_{i},\beta_{i},\xi_{i})$, $\mathbb{E}[g(\rm SINR)]$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}[g(\rm SINR)] = \int_{0}^{\infty} {g(\rm SINR)f_{\rm S}(s)}\mathrm{d}s = \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} {g_{\beta_{i}}(z) e^{-\delta^{2} {\xi_{i}} z}} \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}({\xi_{i}} z) \mathrm{d}z ,
\label{eq-32-thm3-rev}
\end{equation}
where $g_{\beta_{i}}(z)$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g_{{\beta_{i}}}(z) = \frac{1}{\Gamma({\beta_{i}})}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{{\beta_{i}}}}{\mathrm{d}z^{{\beta_{i}}}}g(z) .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{appendix:Perf}.
\end{proof}
In the following, we utilize Theorem \ref{theoremPerfAnalysis} and (\ref{eq-32-thm3-rev}) to evaluate several system performance metrics of interest by invoking their SINR functions.
\subsubsection{Spectral efficiency}
Spectral efficiency is given by \cite{jo2012heterogeneous}
\begin{equation} \label{spectralEfficiency}
\mathcal{R} = \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+\rm SINR)].
\end{equation}
By substituting $g(z)=\ln(1+z)$ and $g_{\beta_{i}}(z)$ to (\ref{eq-32-thm3-rev}) \cite{hamdi2007useful}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gz}
\begin{split}
g_{\beta_{i}}(z) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{\beta_{i}}}{\mathrm{d}z^{\beta_{i}}}g(z)= \frac{1}{z}\left( 1-\frac{1}{(1+z)^{\beta_{i}}} \right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
the spectral efficiency of an IRS-assisted wireless network is evaluated as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{R} = \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} { {\frac{1}{z}\left( 1-\frac{1}{(1+z)^{\beta_{i}}} \right) } \frac{\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}({\xi_{i}} z)}{e^{\delta^{2}{\xi_{i}} z}} } \mathrm{d}z .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Moments of SINR}
The moments of the SINR $\mathbb{E}[{\rm SINR}^{l}]$ can be derived by substituting $g(z)=z^{l}$ and $g_{\beta_{i}}(z)$ to (\ref{eq-32-thm3-rev})
\begin{equation}
g_{\beta_{i}}(z) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{\beta_{i}}}{\mathrm{d}z^{\beta_{i}}}g(z)=\frac{\Gamma(\beta_{i}+l)}{\Gamma(l)\Gamma(\beta_{i})}z^{l-1}.
\end{equation}
Then, the moments of the SINR is evaluated as follows \cite{chun2017comprehensive}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[{\rm SINR}^{l}] = \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} { { \frac{\Gamma(\beta_{i}+l)}{\Gamma(l)\Gamma(\beta_{i})}z^{l-1} } e^{-\delta^{2}\xi_{i} z}} \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}({\xi_{i}} z) \mathrm{d}z .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Outage probability}
The outage probability is defined as written below, which is averaged over the link distance
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
P_{\rm outage}= &1 - \mathbb{P}\{{\rm SINR} > \tau \} = 1-\mathbb{E}\left[ \mathbb{P} \left( I_{\rm F} < \frac{S}{\tau}-\delta^{2} \right) \right] , \label{con:outageP}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for a given SINR threshold $\tau$. By substituting \eqref{LaplaceICDF} into \eqref{con:outageP}, the outage probability can be further simplied to
\begin{equation}
P_{\rm outage} = 1- \mathcal{L}^{-1}\left[ \frac{1}{s} \mathcal{L}_{I_{\rm F}|_{d_{\rm BU}}^{(0)}}(s) \right] \left(\frac{S}{\tau}-\delta^{2}\right). \label{OutageLaplaceInverse}
\end{equation}
The CDF of the interference can be evaluated by using the Gil-Pelaez's inversion as described below
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{P}(I_{\rm F}<x) =&~ \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{0}^{\infty} {\frac{Im\{ e^{itx}\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{F}}(it) \}}{t} \mathrm{d}t},\quad i = \sqrt{-1} \\
=&~ \frac{1}{2}+\int_{0}^{\infty} {Im \left\{ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \frac{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}{(\xi_{i}-it)^{\beta_{i}}} \phi(x) \right\} \mathrm{d}t},\\
\phi(x) \triangleq&~ \int_{0}^{\infty} {\exp\left[ i\delta^{2}\lambda_{\rm I}^{-\frac{\alpha}{2}}xt^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} - \pi t \psi(ix) \right]} \mathrm{d}t, \\
\psi(z) \triangleq&~ \mathbb{E}_{\rm S}\left[ {}_{1}F_{1} \left[ ~{\left.{\!\genfrac..{0pt}{}{-\frac{2}{\alpha}}{1-\frac{2}{\alpha}}}~\right |zH_{\rm S}} \right] \right],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we used \cite[eq.(4)]{di2014stochastic}.
\section{NUMERICAL RESULTS} \label{sectionNumerical}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[PDF of mixture Gamma approximation of the cascaded link.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chCascaded.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_double}
}~
\subfigure[MMSE of mixture Gamma approximation.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chMmseOfMG.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_mmse}
}
\centering
\subfigure[mixture Gamma approximation of the mixture channel.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chMixture.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_mixture}
}~
\subfigure[PDF of mixture Gamma approximation of all kinds of channel in IRS-assisted networks.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chAllLink.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_all_link}
}
\caption{Channel modeling of the channel gains.}
\label{fig:MG_approx}
\vspace{1em}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Signal power CDF with different distance of IRS-UE.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{RxSignalCDF_diffR.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:sigP_d_IU}
}~
\subfigure[Tradeoff between the distance of IRS-UE and the number of IRS elements.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{RxSignalCDF_tradeoffND.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:sigP_tradeoffND}
}
\caption{The received signal power distribution given link distances.}
\label{fig:sigP}
\vspace{1em}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Spectral Efficiency.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{perfDiffDensityR.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:spectralE_densityR}
}~
\subfigure[Tradeoff between the distance of IRS-UE and the number of IRS elements.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{perfDiffPLexp.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:spectralE_densityAlpha}
}
\subfigure[ {Outage probability with different path-loss exponents, $\alpha$}.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{outageP_diffAlpha.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:outageP_diffAlpha}
}~
\subfigure[ {Outage probability with different IRS density, $\lambda_{\rm I}$, and number of IRS elements of each IRS, $N$}.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{outageP.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:outageP_diffIrsDensity}
}
\caption{System performance analysis.}
\label{fig:performance}
\end{figure*}
In this section, we introduced numerical results to verify the theoretical analysis. First, we displayed approximation results of cascaded channel gain and mixture channel gain compared with numerical results. Next, we illustrated CDF of the received signal distribution given link distance. Furthermore, the tradeoff between link distance and the number of IRS elements is provided. Finally, we showed the performance metrics. All of the simulations were carried out using MATLAB with the following parameters: BS density $\lambda_{\rm B}=1\times 10^{-5} {\rm /m^2}$, IRS density $\lambda_{\rm I}=1\times 10^{-4}{\rm /m^2}$, $D_1=25 \,{\rm m}$, $D_2=50\, {\rm m}$, unit transmit power $P_{\rm t} = 1\, {\rm Watt}$, noise power $\delta^{2}=-147$ dBm, and the number of elements of each IRS $N=500$. To better understand the mixture propagation environments and the system-level performance, the numerical analysis is carried out with Nakagami-$m$ fading channels as the underlying fading channel, if not specified otherwise.
\subsection{Channel modeling of the channel gains}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_double}, we compared the mixture Gamma approximated PDF and CLT approximated PDF with the numerical PDF of the cascaded channel, from which we can observe that the PDF of mixture Gamma distribution fits well on cascaded fading channel gains compared with the CLT approximation, which validated the derivation in Theorem~\ref{theorem:Multipliability}. In addition, we displayed the minimum mean-square error (MMSE) of the mixture Gamma approximation of the cascaded channel gain with multiple fading types. In Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_mmse}, we can see that when the number of Gamma components of the mixture Gamma distribution is larger than 20, the accuracy can achieve $10^{-5}$ for most fading types. Moreover, in Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_mixture}, we compared the numerical PDF, mixture Gamma approximated PDF, and CLT approximated PDF of the mixture channel, which verified that the derivation of the PDF of the mixture channel in Theorem~\ref{theorem:Mixture}. At last, in Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_all_link}, the PDF of all types of channel gain are displayed, i.e., single channel gain, cascaded channel gain and mixture channel gain. We can observe that the cascaded channel gain is more concentrated than the single link while the mixture channel gain is more flat.
\subsection{The received signal power distribution given link distances}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:sigP_d_IU}, we displayed the CDF of the received signal power given the link distances. By varying the link distance between the typical UE and its serving IRS, $d_{\rm IU}$, we can observe that the benefit of decreasing $d_{\rm IU}$ is more significant when $d_{\rm IU}$ is smaller due to severe productive path loss, which is coincidence with \cite{lyu2021hybrid}.
Besides, in Fig.~\ref{fig:sigP_tradeoffND}, we illustrated the tradeoff between $d_{\rm IU}$ and the number of IRS elements of each IRS, $N$. The results are expected since the passive IRS suffers severe productive path loss, which hugely degrades the performance gain. We can see that about 8-fold the number of IRS elements is required to compensate for the path loss caused by large link distance.
\subsection{System performance analysis}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:spectralE_densityR}, the spectral efficiency versus the density ratio of IRSs and BSs, $ \lambda_{\rm I}/\lambda_{\rm B} $, with different numbers of IRS elements, $ N $, are displayed. We observe that the IRSs always provide spectral efficiency boosting. Besides, we can observe an optimal $ \lambda_{\rm I}/\lambda_{\rm B} $ under each $ N $, which slightly increases with the density ratio. This is expected since the IRSs enhance both signals and interference but with different scaling order \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:spectralE_densityAlpha}, the effect of the path loss exponents of each link is displayed. We can observe that when the path loss of the BS$\rightarrow$IRS link and IRS$\rightarrow$UE link is severe, the performance improved by IRS is limited due to the productive path loss of the cascaded path. Besides, an interesting result is that worse BS$\rightarrow$UE link leads to a better performance, which is understandable since the interference is largely eliminated.
Next, we displayed the outage probability in Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffAlpha} and Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffIrsDensity}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffAlpha}, we can observe that IRS boots the outage probability especially when the direct link is weak, which is the same as spectral efficiency, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:spectralE_densityAlpha}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffIrsDensity}, we studied the impact of density ratios of IRSs and BSs on outage probability. Surprisingly, the results differ from spectral efficiency, where the IRS definitely boosts the spectral efficiency. Several interesting observations are made as follows. First, when IRS density is small ($\lambda_{\rm I} = \lambda_{\rm B}$), the outage probability enhancement of IRS disappears. Second, when slightly increasing the IRS density, ($ \lambda_{\rm I}=10\lambda_{\rm B} $), although the outage probability at low SINR region is improved, within the high SINR region, the outage probability is decreased. The trend is that at low SINR region, larger number of IRS elements improves more significant enhancement of outage probability. In contrast, at the high SINR region, larger number of IRS elements decrease more significant enhancement of outage probability. This is reasonable since when amplifying the received signal, the interference is also enlarged. Third, when the IRS density is large enough ($\lambda_{\rm I} = 500 \lambda_{\rm B}$), the outage probability does not relied on the number of IRS elements on each IRS since the product path loss decreased due to small node distances. Fourth, if you want to increase the outage probability at low SINR, you can achieve this by increasing the IRS density and the number of IRS elements on each IRS smartly, such as, $\lambda_{\rm I} = 100\lambda_{\rm B}$ and $N=3000$, which can contribute to improving the reliability. However, at high SINR region, there is an optimal density ratio for improving the outage probability.
\section{CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS} \label{sectionConclusion}
We proposed a uniform mixture Gamma channel modeling method for analyzing IRS-assisted wireless communication systems under any arbitrary fading environment and arbitrary number of links in this work. First, we proposed a method to approximate the channel gain of both the direct link and cascaded link independently over the mixture Gamma distributions for any arbitrary fading types by proving the multipliability of mixture Gamma distributed channels. Furthermore, the mixture channel is also modeled as a mixture Gamma distribution by proving the quadratic form of mixture Gamma distributed channels. Additionally, the fractional moments, Laplace transform, and CDF of mixture Gamma distribution are provided to facilitate the analysis. Second, we derived the mean conditional received signal power distribution and the Laplace transform of aggregated interference, under three operation modes: (a) one IRS associated with typical UE and other related IRSs scattering, (b) all related IRS randomly scattering, (c) no related IRS, given the distance between ${\rm BS}_{0}$ and ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and the distance between ${\rm IRS}_{0}$ and ${\rm UE}_{0}$. Finally, we introduced a uniform stochastic geometric system performance analysis framework based on the mixture Gamma distributed channels and derived the performance metrics availing of their corresponding SINR functions. In this way, the spectral efficiency, SINR moments, and outage probability are evaluated. Besides, the Monte-Carlo simulation verified the analysis and useful insights on system design are provided. We note that the properties of mixture Gamma distribution enormously facilitate the modeling and analysis in IRS-assisted networks with high accuracy. This modeling method also provides new insights on $K$ cascaded channels and $K$ mixture channels, which can be applied to multiple types of networks, such as active IRS networks, UAV networks, and relay networks.
\appendices
\section{} \label{appendix:CascadedMG}
In this appendix, we provide a proof for Theorem~\ref{theorem:Multipliability}.
In \cite{bhargav2018product}, the authors show that the PDF of a product of two random variables whose PDFs are linear combinations of Gamma distributions could be expressed by the Meijer-G function. Thus, the step (a) in \eqref{eq:fy} is achieved. However, the Meijer-G function is lack of tractability. As such, by employing $G_{0,2}^{2,0}\left( y| b,c\right) = 2y^{\frac{1}{2}(b+c)}K_{b-c}(2\sqrt{y})$, we first simplified this to modified Bessel function in step (b).
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Y}(y) \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{m_{1}=0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}} \frac{\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}}{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}G_{0,2}^{2,0}\left( y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}} | \upsilon_{m_{1}} -1, \upsilon_{m_{2}}-1 \right)
\\ \overset{(b)}{=} &~ \sum_{{m_{1}} =0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}} \frac{\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}} }{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}\times2(y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}})^{\frac{1}{2}(\upsilon_{m_{1}} +\upsilon_{m_{2}})} \times K_{\upsilon_{m_{1}} -\upsilon_{m_{2}}}(2\sqrt{y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}})
\end{split}\label{eq:fy}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the modified Bessel function $K_v(y)$ can be expressed as follows
\begin{equation}
K_{\upsilon_{m_{1}}-\upsilon_{m_{2}}}(2\sqrt{y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}) = \frac{1}{2}\left({y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}\right)^{\frac{\upsilon_{m_{1}}-\upsilon_{m_{2}}}{2}} \cdot \begin{matrix} \\ \underbrace{ \int_0^\infty \exp \left(-t-\frac{y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t}\right){t^{-\upsilon_{m_{1}}+\upsilon_{m_{2}}-1}}\mathrm {d}t} \\I(t)\end{matrix} \label{appendix_eq:ModifiedBessel}
\end{equation}
where $I(t)$ can be derived as
\begin{equation}
I(t) = \int_0^\infty e^{-t}g(t)\mathrm {d}t,
\end{equation}
and $g(t)$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
g(t) = {\exp\left(-\frac{y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t}\right){t^{-\upsilon_{m_{1}}+\upsilon_{m_{2}}-1}}}.
\end{equation}
To solve this integration tractably, the modified Bessel function is approximated by Gaussian-Hermite functions with $\int_0^\infty e^{-t}g(t)dt \approx \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varpi_{i} g(t_i)$. As such, the PDF of {$Y$} is achieved in \eqref{eq:fy1} with the restriction that absolute phase value of {$y$} is no large than $\frac{1}{4}\pi$.
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Y}(y) =&~ \sum_{{m_{1}} =0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \frac{ \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}}\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}} }{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}(y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}})^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} } \int_0^\infty {\exp\left(-t-\frac{y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}}{t}\right)\frac{1}{t^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} -\upsilon_{m_{2}}+1}}} \mathrm {d}t \\ = &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{{m_{1}} =0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}} \frac{(\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}})^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} +1} }{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}{t_{i}^{-\upsilon_{m_{1}} +\upsilon_{m_{2}}-1}} \varpi_{i} y^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} }e^{-\frac{\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}}y}
\end{split}, \label{eq:fy1}
\end{equation}
With some mathematical simplifications, the double-link distribution PDF could be simplified as a mixture Gamma distribution as shown in \eqref{MGdouble}. This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:TheoremMixtureChannel}
In this appendix, we provide a proof for Theorem~\ref{theorem:Mixture}. If $X^{2}$ follows mixture Gamma distribution, the PDF of $X$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:X_naka}
f_{\rm X}(x)=2\sum_{i=1}^{I}\varepsilon_{i}x^{2\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x^{2}}.
\end{equation}
The PDF of $Z=X+Y$ can be derived using convolution and \eqref{eq:X_naka}, as shown in \eqref{eq:mixture1}. With some simple mathematical simplifications, (a) is achieved by invoking $(a+x)^{n}=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\tbinom{n}{k}x^{k}a^{n-k}$
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Z}(z) = &~ \int_{0}^{z}{f_{\rm X}(x)f_{\rm Y}(z-x)}\mathrm{d}x = \int_{0}^{z}{ \left (2\sum_{i=1}^{I}\varepsilon_{i}x^{2\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x^{2}}\right)\left(2\sum_{j=1}^{J}\varepsilon_{j}(z-x)^{2\beta_{j}-1}e^{-\xi_{j}(z-x)^{2}}\right)} \mathrm{d}x \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{j=1}^{J} 4\varepsilon_{i} \varepsilon_{j} \sum_{k_{1}=0}^{2\beta_{j}-1} \tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}} (-1)^{k_{1}} z^{2\beta_{j}-k_{1}-1} e^{ z^{2}\left( \frac{\xi_{j}^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} - \xi_{j}\right) } \begin{matrix} \\ \underbrace{\int_{0}^{z} {x^{k_{1}+2\beta_{i}-1} e^{-(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})\left(x-\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z\right)^{2}}} \mathrm{d}x, } \\g^{'}(x)\end{matrix}
\end{split}\label{eq:mixture1}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
where $g^{'}(x)$ can be further derived by substituting $t = \left(x-\frac{\xi_{j}^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}\right)^2$ and \cite[eq.(3.381.2)]{zwillinger2007table}
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g^{'}(x) = &~ \int_{0}^{\left(\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z\right)^2} {\left(\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z-\sqrt{t}\right)^{k_{1}+2\beta_{i}-1} }\frac{e^{-(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})t}}{2\sqrt{t}} + {\left(\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z+\sqrt{t}\right)^{k_{1}+2\beta_{i}-1} }\frac{e^{-(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})t}}{2\sqrt{t}} \mathrm{d}t \\ = &~ \frac{1}{2}\sum_{k_{2}=0}^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}}{k_{2}}\frac{(\xi_{j}z)^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}-k_{2}}}{(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}}}\left[ \gamma\left( \frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{j}^{2}z^2}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right) + \gamma\left( \frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{i}^{2}z^2}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right)\right].
\end{split}\label{eq:mixture_gx
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
Then, by substituting \eqref{eq:mixture_gx} into \eqref{eq:mixture1}, the PDF of $Z$ is derived as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Z}(z) = &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{j=1}^{J} 2\varepsilon_{i} \varepsilon_{j}e^{ - \frac{\xi_{i}\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z^{2} } \sum_{k_{1}=0}^{2\beta_{j}-1} \tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}} (-1)^{k_{1}} \sum_{k_{2}=0}^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}{k_{2}} z^{2\beta_{i}+2\beta_{j}-2-k_{2}} \\ &~ \cdot \frac{\xi_{j}^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}-k_{2}}}{(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}}} \left[(-1)^{k_{2}} \gamma\left(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{j}^{2}z^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right) + \gamma\left(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{i}^{2}z^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right) \right] \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{j=1}^{J} 2\varepsilon_{i} \varepsilon_{j} \sum_{k_{1}=0}^{2\beta_{j}-1} \tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}} (-1)^{k_{1}} \sum_{k_{2}=0}^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}{k_{2}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}){\xi_{j}^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}-k_{2}}}z^{2\beta_{i}+2\beta_{j}+2k_{3}-2}}{\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}+k_{3}+1){(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}+k_{3}}}} \\ &~ \cdot \left[ (-1)^{k_{2}}\xi_{j}^{k_{2}+1+2k_{3}}e^{-\xi_{j}z^{2}} +\xi_{i}^{k_{2}+1+2k_{3}}e^{-\xi_{i}z^{2}} \right] ,
\end{split}\label{eq:MGcomposite
\end{equation}
where we applied the power series expansion of incomplete Gamma function in step (a). Last, we apply $f_{\rm S}(s) = \frac{1}{2}s^{-\frac{1}{2}}f_{\rm Z}(\sqrt{s})$ to derive the PDF of $S$. This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:LaplaceI}
This appendix provides derivation of $ \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},1}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}} $ and $ \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}} $. Similar to \cite{chun2017comprehensive}, the Laplace transform of $I_{{\rm F},1}$ is derived in \eqref{eq:L_I1_appen}. In step (a), a substitution $t=sH_{\rm BU}{d_{\rm BU}}^{-\alpha}$ is applied. Next, in step (b) the integration is achieved through integration by parts. Then, the last step is achieved with some mathematical simplifications.
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_I1_appen}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},1}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} =&~ \exp\left( -2\pi\lambda_{\rm B}\int_{{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}^{\infty} \left( 1-\mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \left[ e^{-sH_{\rm BU}d_{\rm BU}^{-\alpha}} \right] \right)d_{\rm BU}{\rm d}d_{\rm BU} \right) \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \exp\left( -2\pi\lambda_{\rm B} \frac{(sH_{\rm BU})^{\frac{2}{\alpha}}}{\alpha}\mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \left[\int_{0}^{sH_{\rm BU}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}} \left( 1-e^{-t} \right) t^{-1-\frac{2}{\alpha}} {\rm d} t \right] \right) \\ \overset{(b)}{=} &~ \exp\left( -2\pi\lambda_{\rm B} \frac{(sH_{\rm BU})^{\frac{2}{\alpha}}}{2}\mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \left[ -t^{-\frac{2}{\alpha} }\left(1-e^{-t}\right)\Big|_{0}^{sH_{\rm BU}} + \int_{0}^{sH_{\rm BU}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}} t^{-\frac{2}{\alpha}} e^{-t} {\rm d} t \right] \right) \\ = &~ \exp \left( -\pi\lambda_{\rm B}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{2} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{k}\frac{m_{\rm BU}^{-1-k}\left(s{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}\right)^{1+k}}{\Gamma(m_{\rm BU} )k!(1-\frac{2}{\alpha}+k)} \Gamma(1+k+m_{\rm BU} ) \right) \\ &~ \cdot \exp \left( -\pi\lambda_{\rm B}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{2} (s\eta)^{\frac{2}{\alpha}}\frac{m_{\rm BU} ^{m_{\rm BU} }}{\Gamma(m_{\rm BU} )} \Gamma\left(\frac{2}{\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} \right)\left( m_{\rm BU} ^{\frac{2}{\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} } - (s\eta {d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} )^{\frac{2}{\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} } \right) \right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
Following similar procedure, $ \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}} $ can be derived as \eqref{eq:L_I2_appen}.
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_I2_appen}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}}=&~ \mathbb{E}_{\Lambda _{B}\setminus\{0\}}\left\{ e^{-s \eta H_{\rm BIU}} \right\}\Big|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} \\ = &~ {\rm exp}\left(-2\pi \lambda_{\rm B} \int_{0}^{D_{2}}\int_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{\infty}\left({1-\mathbb{E}_{\rm H}\left[ e^{-s \eta H_{\rm BIU} } \right]}\right)d_{\rm BU} \,\,\mathrm {d} d_{\rm BU} \,\, d_{\rm IU} f_{\rm d_{\rm IU}}( d_{\rm IU} )\,\,\mathrm {d} d_{\rm IU} \right) \\ = &~ \exp \Bigg( -\pi\lambda_{\rm B} \int_{0}^{D_{2}} \mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \Big[ \left(s\eta H_{\rm BIU}\right)^{\frac{2}{\alpha}} \gamma\left(1-\frac{2}{\alpha},s\eta H_{\rm BIU}({d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}d_{\rm IU})^{-\alpha}\right) \\&~ - \left({d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} d_{\rm IU}\right)^{2} \left(1-e^{-s\eta H_{\rm BIU} ({d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} d_{\rm IU})^{-\alpha} }\right) \Big] f_{\rm d_{\rm IU}}( d_{\rm IU} )\,\,\mathrm {d} d_{\rm IU} \Bigg).
\end{split
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\section{} \label{appendix:Perf}
In this appendix, we provide a proof for Theorem~\ref{theoremPerfAnalysis}. In \eqref{ESINR}, $\mathbb{E}[g({\rm SINR})]$ is derived. The step (a) is achieved by substitute $z$ with $z=\frac{H_{\rm S}}{I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}}$. Then the step (b) is achieved by substitute $b$ with $b=\xi_{i} {({I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}})}$
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[g( {\rm SINR})] = &~ \int_{0}^{\infty} {g( {\rm SINR})f_{\rm H_{\rm S}}(x)}\mathrm{d}x = \int_{0}^{\infty} {g\left( \frac{H_{\rm S}}{I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}} \right) \sum_{i=0}^{N}}{\varepsilon_{i}H_{\rm S}e^{-\xi_{i}H_{\rm S}}}\mathrm{d}H_{\rm S} \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=0}^{N}{\varepsilon_{i} {({I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}}) }^{\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} {g(z)z^{\beta_{i}-1} e^{-\xi_{i} z {({I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}})}}}\mathrm{d}z } \\ \overset{(b)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=0}^{N} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \begin{matrix} \\ \underbrace{ \int_{0}^{\infty} {g(z) \frac{z^{\beta_{i}-1}}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})} b^{\beta_{i}} e^{-b {\xi_{i}} z}}\mathrm{d}z } \\Q\end{matrix} \\ = &~ \sum_{i=0}^{N} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} {g_{\beta_{i}}(z) e^{-\delta^{2} {\xi_{i}} z}} \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}( {\xi_{i}}z) \mathrm{d}z.
\end{split}\label{ESINR}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
Next, $Q$ is evaluated in \eqref{Q} by utilizing the partial integral as follows
\begin{equation}
Q = -\sum_{k=0}^{\beta_{i}-1}g_{k}(z)b^{\beta_{i}-k-1}e^{-bz}|_{0}^{\infty} + \int_{0}^{\infty} {g_{\beta_{i}}(z) e^{-b z}}\mathrm{d}z. \label{Q}
\end{equation}
This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:Distance}
In this appendix, we evaluated the PDF and CDF of the distance between IRS and BS.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=6.22cm,width=8cm]{model.eps}
\caption{Distance Model.}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure}
As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:model}, for given $r$ and $d$, ${\rm IRS}_{0}$ is located on a circle with $\rm UE_0$ as the center and $r$ as the radius. According to their geometric relationship, we can get the following equation
\begin{equation}
l^2 = r^2 + d^2 + 2dr \cos\theta .
\end{equation}
Assuming that $\theta$ is uniformly distributed over $[0, 2\pi]$, then the conditional PDF of $y = \cos \theta$ is given by
\begin{equation}
f_{\rm Y}(y)|_{d,r} = \left\{ \begin{array}{rcl}
\frac{1}{\pi \sqrt{1-y^2}}, & & {y\in [-1,1]},\\
0, & & \text{otherwise}. \end{array} \right .
\end{equation}
Next,the conditional CDF of $l=\sqrt{2dry+r^2+d^2}$ is derived as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
F_{\rm L}(l)|_{d,r} = &~ P(L \leq l) = P(Y \leq \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr}) \\ = &~ \int_{0}^{\frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr}} \frac{1}{\pi \sqrt{1-y^2}} \mathrm{d}y = \frac{1}{\pi} \arcsin\left( \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr} \right) + \frac{1}{2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By taking the derivative of CDF, we can get its PDF
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm L}(l)|_{d,r} = \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}l} F_{\rm L}(l) = \frac{l/dr}{\pi \sqrt{1-\left( \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr} \right) ^2}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and by substituting $x=\frac{l^2}{2dr}$ and $a=\frac{r^2+d^2}{2dr}$, its mean can be achieved as follows
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mean}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[l]|_{d,r} = &~ \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{d-r}^{d+r} \frac{l^2/dr}{\sqrt{1-\left( \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr} \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}l \overset{(a)}{=} \frac{2}{\pi} \int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{x}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x \\ = &~ \frac{2}{\pi} \Bigg[ \int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{x-a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x + \int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x \Bigg]\notag \\ = &~ 2a = \frac{r^2+d^2}{dr}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
The integral of step (a) can be derived by two parts as shown in \eqref{eq:itegral1} and \eqref{eq:itegral2}, where the result in \eqref{eq:itegral1} is achieved by substituting $u=x-a$
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{x-a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x = \int_{-1}^{1} \frac{u}{\sqrt{1-u^2}} \mathrm{d}u = -\sqrt{1-u^2}|_{-1}^{1} = 0,
\end{split} \label{eq:itegral1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x = a\cdot \arcsin (x-a)|_{a-1}^{a+1} = a\pi.
\end{split} \label{eq:itegral2}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
The result $\mathbb{E}[l]|_{d,r}=\frac{r^2+d^2}{dr}$ does match with our assumption, $l \approx d$ when $d \gg r$, assuming that $r>1$. This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:IterationAlgorithmForChannel}
In this appendix, we provided the iteration algorithm for obtaining the PDF of the $K$ cascaded channels in Algorithm~\ref{alg:A},
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{The PDF of $K$-cascaded channel gain}
\label{alg:A}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require The mixture Gamma distribution parameters of each link: $\Theta_{k} \colon = \{ \varepsilon_{m_{k}}, \beta_{m_{k}}, \xi_{m_{k}},M_{k} \}$, $M_{k}$ is the number of Gamma terms of the $k$-th link, $k=1,2,...,K$, $m_{k}=1,2,...,M_{k}$
\Function{Cascade}{ {$\Theta_{k}$
}
\For{$m_{1} = 1 \to M_{1}$}
\For{$m_{2} = 1 \to M_{2}$}
\For{$i = 1 \to I$}
\State $\varepsilon_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(2)} = \frac{\varepsilon_{m_{1}}\varepsilon_{m_{2}}(\xi_{m_{1}}\xi_{m_{2}})^{\beta_{m_{1}}}}{\xi_{m_{1}}^{\beta_{m_{1}}}\xi_{m_{2}}^{\beta_{m_{2}}}}\varpi_{i}t_{i}^{-\beta_{m_{1}}+\beta_{m_{2}}-1}$,
\State $\beta_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(2)} = \varepsilon_{m_{1}}$,
\State $\xi_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(2)} = \frac{\xi_{m_{1}}\xi_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}}$
\EndFor
\EndFor
\EndFor
\State $M^{(2)}=M_{1}M_{2}I$
\For{$k=3\to K$}
\For{$m_{1} = 1 \to M^{(k-1)}$}
\For{$m_{2} = 1 \to N_{k}$}
\For{$i = 1 \to I$}
\State $\varepsilon_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(k)} = \frac{\varepsilon_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}\varepsilon_{m_{k}}(\xi_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}\xi_{m_{k}})^{\beta_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}}}{{\xi_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}}^{\beta_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}}\xi_{m_{k}}^{\beta_{m_{k}}}}\varpi_{i}t_{i}^{-\beta_{m_{1}}+\beta_{m_{2}}-1}$,
\State $\beta_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(k)} = \varepsilon_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}$,
\State $\xi_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(k)} = \frac{\xi_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}\xi_{m_{2}}^{(k-1)}}{t_{i}}$
\EndFor
\EndFor
\EndFor
\State $M^{(k)}=M^{(k-1)}M_{k}I$
\EndFor
\State \Return{$\Theta^{(k)}\colon=\{\varepsilon^{(k)},\beta^{(k)},\xi^{(k)},M^{(k)} \}$}
\EndFunction
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Moreover, the iteration algorithm can be straightforwardly obtained following a similar iteration procedure as Algorithm~\ref{alg:A}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=90,scale=0.55]{table.png}
\caption{Multiple channels and their mixture Gamma approximation table}
\label{fig:table}
\end{figure*}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\section{Introduction}
For 6G wireless communication, such as Terahertz (THz) systems, transformative solutions to a fully connected world are expected to drive the surge for accommodating the complicated propagation environment, boosting spectral efficiency and providing high reliability. When the 6G system mitigating to higher frequency, these requirements are huge challenges due to fast attenuation and weak penetration \cite{boulogeorgos2018terahertz}. One promising approach that emerged recently is the notion of an intelligent communication environment (ICE). ICE is able to control the propagation environment to adapt to the complicated propagation environment, enhance the reliability, and enlarge the coverage cost-effectively \cite{akyildiz20206g}.
Various technologies have been proposed to achieve ICE, and one popular and practical solution is the intelligent reflective surface \cite{wu2019towards}, which is also known as reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) \cite{di2020smart}, and large-scale intelligent surface (LIS) \cite{han2019large}. The IRS consists of a massive number of passive reflective elements on its planar surface and a control part that adjusts each element's phase shift and direction. In contrast to traditional RF chains, the passive IRS elements only reflect signals without additional active processing, which facilitates the IRS to be deployed easily and cost-efficiently. It is worth noting that the passive-IRS potentially achieves a quantum leap improvement for self-interference and noise amplification compared to active relays and surfaces. In other words, IRS is a revolutionary technology that can achieve high spectrum and energy efficiency communications with low costs \cite{wu2021intelligent}. Based on these advantages, we will adopt passive-IRS in the sequel.
\subsection{Related works}
Spurred by the massive popularity of IRS, considerable researches have been undertaken in the latest decades regarding each aspects of IRS. There are relatively sufficient works about the link-level analysis of IRS-assisted wireless communication systems \cite{wu2021intelligent}. In \cite{jia2020analysis}, the direct link from Base Station (BS) to User Equipment (UE) was modeled as Rayleigh fading while links aided by IRS were modeled as Rician fading, and the IRS worked with quasi-static phase shift design. In \cite{atapattu2020reconfigurable}, the authors analyzed the network performance of IRS-assisted two-way communications between two users over Rayleigh fading by approximating the double Rayleigh fading with a Gamma distribution through moment matching. In contrast, network-level research is still scarce. In \cite{lyu2021hybrid}, the network-level performance of IRS-assisted downlink network was analyzed over Rayleigh fading by approximating the cascaded channel as Complex Normal (CN) distribution through Central Limit Theorem (CLT). Additionally, Gamma distribution is introduced to approximate the received signal power. However, the existing works are focused on simple fading models, and the channel models on the cascaded link and the mixture channel are scarce.
\subsection{Motivation}
The previous system performance analysis mainly worked on Rayleigh fading due to its simplicity and tractability \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. Nonetheless, given the diverse range of operating environments of 6G, they may also be subject to clustering of scattered multipath contributions, \textit{i.e.}, propagation characteristics which are quite dissimilar to conventional Rayleigh fading environments \cite{chun2017stochastic}. Aside from small-scale fading, large-scale fading and random shadowing caused by obstacles in the local environment or human body movements can impact link performance via fluctuating the received signals, which can not be ignored in future wireless communications systems, \textit{i.e.}, mm-Wave wireless communications and THz wireless communications \cite{chun2017comprehensive}. As such, it is essential to extend the analysis of IRS-assisted wireless communication systems to generalized fading channels with novel channel modeling methods.
Moreover, the mixture channel between typical UE and its serving BS consists of two types of link: direct link (BS$\rightarrow$UE), and cascaded link (BS$\rightarrow$IRS$\rightarrow$UE). Statistical characterization of the cascaded and mixture channel in IRS-assisted networks involves highly specialized functions, such as Fox-H or Meijer G-function, even with the simplest Rayleigh fading on each individual links, which causes the performance analysis of IRS-assisted wireless network to be challenging. Considerable researches have been conducted to analyze over asymmetric cascaded channels in relay-assisted networks: mixed Rayleigh and Rician \cite{duong2007effect}, mixed Nakagami-$m$ and Rician \cite{gurung2010performance}, mixed $\eta - \mu$ and $\kappa - \mu$ fading channels \cite{6473919}. Furthermore, there are some approximation works on a symmetric cascaded fading channel in MIMO communications: N*Nakagami-$m$ distribution for Nakagami-$m$ fading channels \cite{karagiannidis2007n}. In addition, \cite{di2009comprehensive} analyzed the dual-hop link over generalized fading channels by leveraging properties of Meijer-G function. While significant advances have been made by previous researches, most of the existing literature approximated the cascaded channels by CN distribution based on CLT or modeled the channels with Meijer-G function. Besides, the system performance analysis is mainly based on the ratio of signal power and noise power (SNR), and ignored the interference, which is an essential part in future dense networks. Although \cite{lyu2021hybrid} has considered the interference effect, the channel model adopted is still approximated by CN distributions through CLT, with Rayleigh as the underlying fading model. Therefore, an approximation model for cascaded link and mixture channel with high accuracy for generalized fading models, is critical for evaluating IRS-assisted network system performance metrics of interest, especially for B5G and 6G.
\subsection{Contributions}
Motivated by the above, we emphasize addressing the modeling of cascaded link, mixture channel, and system-level performance analysis for IRS-assisted wireless networks in this work. We extend the research from Rayleigh fading to arbitrary underlying fading types, such as Nakagami-$m$, Rician, $\kappa$ - $\mu$, and $\kappa$ - $\mu$ shadowed fading, which is a generalized channel modeling method fitting to various networks. We also evaluated the performance metrics with a uniform stochastic geometric framework. The main contributions of this work are summarized as below:
\begin{enumerate}
\item First and foremost, modeling the channel gain tractably for the cascaded link and mixture channel with high accuracy is essential for the analysis of IRS-assisted networks. In this work, we introduced a general channel modeling method for multiple types of channels in IRS-assisted networks utilizing the multipliability and quadratic form of the mixture Gamma distribution. Thus, we approximated the direct channel, cascaded channel and mixture channel by mixture Gamma distributions with accuracy less than $10^{-5}$. This mixture Gamma channel modeling method works for arbitrary underlying fading and includes single channel, double channel, and mixture channel as a special case.
\item Then, we derived the distribution of conditional received signal power, and Laplace transform of the aggregated interference using stochastic geometry under three operation modes: a) one IRS is associated with the typical UE and performs beamforming whilst other related IRSs randomly scattering the received signals; b) all related IRSs randomly scatter signals to the typical UE without beamforming; c) there is no related IRS, and the whole network works as a traditional network.
\item Next, we introduced a unified analytical framework for the IRS-assisted network performance evaluation based on the proposed mixture Gamma channel modeling method, where interested performance metrics can be expressed as functions of the ratio of signal power and interference power plus noise power (SINR). Furthermore, we illustrated several performance metrics, such as spectrum efficiency, SINR moments, and outage probability by invoking their corresponding SINR functions.
\item Finally, we verified our channel model by Monte-Carlo simulation, which illustrated that the proposed channel modeling method fits well for multiple types of channel with high accuracy. As such, the proposed modeling method can be applied to various wireless systems. Our analysis provides insights on system design and further optimization of the IRS-assisted networks.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Organizations}
The remaining paper is organized as below. In section \ref{sectionSystemM}, we introduced the system model, association policy, and channel models. In section \ref{sectionMG}, we evaluated channel modeling method of the single link, cascaded link, and mixture channel by proving the multipliability and quadratic form of mixture Gamma distributed channels. In section \ref{section:Perf}, we derived the channel power gain and Laplace transforms of the aggregated interference power under three operation modes and introduced a unified stochastic geometric system performance analysis framework for the IRS-assisted network. In section \ref{sectionNumerical}, we provided simulations to verify our theoretical analysis. In section \ref{sectionConclusion}, we concluded the whole work.
\section{SYSTEM MODEL} \label{sectionSystemM}
We consider an IRS-assisted multi-cell wireless network, where the IRSs are deployed to assist the downlink transmission as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}. The locations of BSs are modeled by an independent two dimensional (2D) homogeneous Poisson Point Process (HPPP), denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm B}$ with node density $\lambda_{\rm B}$. The locations of IRSs and UEs are modeled as independent 2D-HPPPs, denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I}$ with density $\lambda_{\rm I}$ and $\Lambda_{\rm U}$ with density $\lambda_{\rm U}$, respectively. Without loss of generality, we assume that a typical UE, denoted by ${\rm UE}_{0}$, is located at the origin and each BS has an infinitely backlogged queue. The channel is assumed to be frequency-flat and constant while the channel may vary over different frequency bands or time slots \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. To facilitate the analysis, we employ orthogonal multiple access, implying no intra-cell interference. We summarized the common notations used in this paper in Table~\ref{Tab:notations}.
\subsection{BS and IRS association policy }
We adopt a general association model for BS where each UE connects to the BS that provides strongest long term received signal power without small-scale fading, denoted as ${\rm BS}_{0}$, which is equivalent to connecting to the nearest BS. As such, PDF of the distance between ${\rm BS}_{0}$ and ${\rm UE}_{0}$, denoted as $d_{\rm BU}$, could be derived from the void probability of a 2D HPPP. The PDF of $d_{\rm BU}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
f_{d_{\rm BU}}(d)=2\pi \lambda_{\rm B} d e^{-\lambda _{\rm B}\pi d^{2}} \label{con:PDFofDistanceBSUE}.
\end{equation}
For the IRS association policy, we assume that at most one IRS is associated between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and ${\rm BS}_{0}$. As \cite{you2022deploy} shows the optimal deployment location for a single associated IRS is in the vicinity of either ${\rm UE}_{0}$ or ${\rm BS}_{0}$. However, the communications suffer severe product path loss when the link distances between nodes are too large. For this reason, we define a service area of each IRS, which is a circle with radius $D_{1}$. Further, we define an interference area, within which the not associated UEs can receive interference signals from the IRS. The radius of this interference area is denoted as $D_{2}$ \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. Since the deployment of a large-scale centralized IRS is not practical, the association policy adopted in this work is connecting the ${\rm UE}_{0}$ with its nearest IRS located within service area, denoted as ${\rm IRS}_{0}$. Based on the distance to ${\rm UE}_{0}$, the $\Lambda_{\rm I}$ is thinned into three small point processes: the serving IRSs (denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I,S} \triangleq \{ {\rm IRS}_{0} \}$), the interfering IRSs (denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I,F}$), the noise IRSs (denoted as $\Lambda_{\rm I,N}$). As such, this IRS association policy contains three operation modes in terms of the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Mode 1.} If the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS is less than $D_{1}$, ${\rm UE}_{0}$ associates to its nearest IRS.
\item \textbf{Mode 2.} If the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS is larger than $D_{1}$ and less than $D_{2}$, ${\rm UE}_{0}$ does not connect with any IRS. The IRSs, whose distance to ${\rm UE}_{0}$ is less than $D_{2}$, randomly scatter any received signals, which contribute to the interference.
\item \textbf{Mode 3.} If the distance between ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and its nearest IRS is larger than $D_{2}$ , the random scattering can be ignored or treated as an additive Gaussian white noise (AWGN).
\end{itemize}
As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}, for Mode 1, if there is one IRS associated with ${\rm UE}_{0}$, there are two types of links between the serving BS (${\rm BS}_{0}$) and ${\rm UE}_{0}$, including ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ (the direct link) and ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm IRS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ (the cascaded link). According to void probability of the 2D HPPP, the PDF of the inter-node distance across ${\rm IRS}_{0}$ and the ${\rm UE}_{0}$ (denoted as $d_{\rm IU}$) is given by
\begin{equation}
f_{d_{\rm IU}}({d})=2\pi \lambda _{\rm I} {d} e^{-\lambda_{\rm I}\pi {d}^{2}} \label{con:PDFofDistanceIRSUE}.
\end{equation}
To ensure tractability of the analysis, we assume that the distance and its distribution from ${\rm BS}_{0}$ to ${\rm UE}_{0}$ are identical with that from ${\rm BS}_{0}$ to ${\rm IRS}_{j}$, $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)} \approx d_{\rm BU} $, where $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)}$ denotes the distance between ${\rm BS}_{0}$ and ${\rm IRS}_{j}$, which is widely adopted in literature \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. Additionally, in Appendix~\ref{appendix:Distance}, we provide math proof for the first time, by deriving the conditional PDF, CDF, and mean of the distance between ${\rm IRS}_{j}$ and ${\rm BS}_{0}$, denoted as $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)}$. Besides, there is no need to derive the unconditional PDF and CDF of $d_{\rm BI}^{(j)}$, since only the corresponding $d_{\rm BI}^{(0)}$ for each $d_{\rm IU}^{(0)}$ and $d_{\rm BU}$ pair is meaningful. In other words, the absolute position of IRS is meaningless while the relative position for a given UE matters. This result provides positive insights for operators on the deployment of IRS.
\subsection{Channel model}
For simplicity, assume that both the BSs and UEs are equipped with a single antenna while each IRS consists of $N$ reflective elements. Let $h_{\rm BU} = \sqrt{\zeta_{\rm BU}} g_{\rm BU}$ denotes the channel from BS to UE, where $\zeta_{\rm BU}\triangleq \epsilon d_{\rm BU}^{-\alpha_{\rm BU}}$ denotes the BS-UE path-loss with $\epsilon$ representing the reference channel power gain at a distance of $1$ m, $d_{\rm BU}$ being the BS-UE distance, and $\alpha_{\rm BU}$ being the corresponding path-loss exponent. Moreover, $g_{\rm BU}$ denotes the small-scale fading channel. Similarly, the BS$\to$IRS and IRS$\to$UE channels, denoted by ${\bf h}_{{\rm BI}}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 1}$ and ${\bf h}^H_{{\rm IU}}\in\mathbb{C}^{1\times N}$, respectively, can be modeled as
\begin{align}
{\bf h}_{\rm BI}=\sqrt{\zeta_{\rm BI}}{\bf g}_{\rm BI},~~ {\bf h}^H_{\rm IU}=\sqrt{\zeta_{\rm IU}}{\bf g}_{\rm IU}^H,
\end{align}
where $\zeta_{\rm BI}\triangleq\epsilon d_{\rm BI}^{-\alpha_{\rm BI}}$ and $\zeta_{\rm IU}\triangleq\epsilon d_{\rm IU}^{-\alpha_{\rm IU}}$ denotes the BS$\to$IRS and IRS$\to$UE link path-loss, respectively, with $d_{\rm BI}$ ($d_{\rm IU}$) being the link distance and $\alpha_{\rm BI} (\alpha_{\rm IU})$ being the path-loss exponent\footnote{For ease of notation, we simply use $\alpha$ to represent the path-loss exponent in the sequel for each individual link without causing confusion. }. Moreover, ${\bf g}_{\rm BI}$ (${\bf g}_{\rm IU}^H$) denotes the corresponding small-scale fading channel with $| g_{{\rm BI}, n}|$ and $|g_{{\rm IU}, n}|$, respectively.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7cm,width=10cm]{systemModel.eps}
\caption{IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}
\label{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)}
\end{figure}
\makeatletter
\def\thickhline{%
\noalign{\ifnum0=`}\fi\hrule \@height \thickarrayrulewidth \futurelet
\reserved@a\@xthickhline}
\def\@xthickhline{\ifx\reserved@a\thickhline
\vskip\doublerulesep
\vskip-\thickarrayrulewidth
\fi
\ifnum0=`{\fi}}
\makeatother
\newlength{\thickarrayrulewidth}
\setlength{\thickarrayrulewidth}{1.2pt}
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{COMMON PARAMETERS}
\begin{tabular}{m{0.24\linewidth}<{\centering}|m{0.62\linewidth}<{\centering}}%
\thickhline%
Parameter & Description\\%
\hline%
$ \Lambda_{\rm B}, \Lambda_{\rm I},\Lambda_{\rm U}$&Point processes of BSs, IRSs, and UEs\\
\hline
$ \Lambda_{\rm I,S}, \Lambda_{\rm I,F}, \Lambda_{\rm I,N} $&Daughter point processes of $\Lambda_{\rm I}$ and represent serving IRSs, interference IRSs, and noise IRSs\\
\hline%
$N$ & The number of IRS elements on each IRS\\%
\hline%
$ D_{1}, D_{2} $ & The radius of IRS serving area and interference area\\%
\hline%
$ h_{\rm BU} $, $ {\bf h}_{\rm BI} $, $ {\bf h}^H_{\rm IU} $& The channel of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links\\ %
\hline%
$g_{\rm BU}$, ${\bf g}_{\rm BI}$, ${\bf g}_{\rm IU}^H$& Small-scale fading channel of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links\\%
\hline%
$ \zeta_{\rm BU}, \zeta_{\rm BI}, \zeta_{\rm IU} $& Path loss of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links\\%
\hline%
$\epsilon$ & The reference channel power gain at a distance of $1$ m\\%
\hline%
$ H_{\rm BU}, H_{\rm BIU}, H_{\rm S} $& Channel gain of direct path, cascaded path, and the mixture channel\\%
\hline
$ M_{1} $, $ M_{2} $, $ I $& The number of mixture Gamma terms \\
\hline
$ ( \varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i} ) $& The parameters of mixture Gamma distributions \\
\hline
${\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}$, ${\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}$& The index of sufficiency condition expression of multipliability and quadratic form \\
\hline
$ m_{\rm BU} $, $ m_{\rm BI} $, $ m_{\rm IU} $& The fading parameters of BS$\rightarrow$UE, BS$\rightarrow$IRS, IRS$\rightarrow$UE links for Nakagami-$m$ channels \\
\hline
$I_{\rm F}$ & The interference \\
\hline
$ K_v(y) $ & Modified Bessel function of the second kind \\
\hline
$ G_{m,n}^{p,q}\left( y| a,b\right) $ & Meijer-G function \\
\hline
$L_n(t)$ & Laguerre polynomial \\
\hline
$t_{i}$ & The $i$-th zero of Laguerre polynomials \\
\hline
$\varpi_{i}$ & The $i$-th weight factor of Laguerre polynomials \\
\hline
$\omega_{i}$ & The $i$-th weight factor of the $ i $-th Gamma component \\
\hline
$f_{i}(x)$ & PDF of the $ i $-th Gamma component \\
\hline
$\gamma\left(\cdot, \cdot \right)$ & The incomplete Gamma function \\
\hline
$\Gamma\left(\cdot \right)$ & The Gamma function \\
\thickhline%
\end{tabular}%
\label{Tab:notations}
\end{table}
For the passive IRS, let ${\bf \Theta}\triangleq{\rm diag}(e^{j\phi_{1}}, \cdots, e^{j\phi_{N}}) \in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ denote its reflection matrix, where $\phi_{n}$ is the phase shift at each element $n\in\mathcal{N}\triangleq\{1, \cdots, N\}$. For the connected ${\rm IRS}_{0}$, its phase shift is adjusted to align with the direct link based on the full CSI obtained, which is given by
\begin{equation}
[{\bf \Phi}^*]_n = e^{j(\angle{h_{\rm BU}}-\angle{[{\bf h}_{{\rm I} {\rm U}}^H]_n}-\angle{[{\bf h}_{{\rm BI}}]_n})},\forall n.
\end{equation}
However, for those not connected but interfering IRSs, the phase shift is not specifically designed and the IRSs randomly scatter received signals to ${\rm UE}_{0}$.
The received SINR is defined as below
\begin{equation}
{\rm SINR} = \frac{\mathbf{S}}{\mathbf{I}+\delta^2},
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{S}, \mathbf{I}, \delta^2$ represents the resived signal power, aggregated interference power, and noise power, respectively. For the given network model, the received signal at ${\rm UE}_{0}$, denoted as $y$, can be generated in four different forms. First, when the ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {S}}$ and ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ are empty, the received signal only comes from the direct link and we denote this case as $y^{(1)}$. Second, when the ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {S}}$ is empty and ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ is not empty, the received signal comes from the direct link with interference from ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ and we denote this case as $y^{(2)}$. Third, when both ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {S}}$ and ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ are not empty, the received signal comes from both the direct link and IRS link with interference from ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ and we denote this case as $y^{(3)}$. Fourth, when the direct link is blocked, the signal can only be transmitted to UE through the IRS with interference from ${\Lambda}_{\rm I, {F}}$ and we denote this case as $y^{(4)}$. We summarized the received signal envelope for each cases below together with the corresponding signal power $\mathbf{S}$ and interference power $\mathbf{I}$ as described below
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
y^{(1)} = h_{\rm BU}x+n_{0},\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} = |h_{\rm BU}|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = 0,\label{eqn:line-1} \\
y^{(2)} = h_{\rm BU}x+\sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}x^{'}+n_{0},
\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} = |h_{\rm BU}|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = \sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} \left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}\right|^2,
\label{eqn:line-2} \\
y^{(3)} = (h_{\rm BU}+h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)})x+\sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}x^{'}+n_{0},
\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} =\left|h_{\rm BU}+h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}\right|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = \sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} \left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}\right|^2,
\label{eqn:line-3} \\
y^{(4)} = h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}x+\sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}x^{'}+n_{0},
\quad &\Rightarrow \quad
\mathbf{S} =\left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}\right|^2,~
\mathbf{I} = \sum_{j\in\Lambda_{\rm I,F}} \left|h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}\right|^2,
\label{eqn:line-4}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $x$ is the transmitted signal with unit transmit power $P_{\rm t}$, $x^{'}$ is the interference signal, $h_{\rm BIU}^{(j)}=\sum_{n=1}^N |{h}_{{\rm IU},n}| |{h}_{{\rm BI},n}|$ is the channel of ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow{{\rm IRS}_{j}} \rightarrow{{\rm UE}_{0}}$, and $n_{0}$ is the received noise with power $\delta^2$.
\section{Mixture Gamma Approximation of Fading Channels} \label{sectionMG}
In this section, we use properties of mixture Gamma distribution to model the cascaded channel ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm IRS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ and combined channel of the direct link ${\rm BS}_{0} \rightarrow {\rm UE}_{0}$ and cascaded link.
\subsection{Summary of mixture Gamma distribution}
\textbf{Necessity}: In \cite{devore1993constructive}, it is proved that an arbitrary function $f(x)$ with a positive domain $x \in (0, \infty)$ and $lim_{x \to +\infty}f(x) \to 0$, can be accurately approximated as a weighted sum of Gamma distribution as written in (\ref{con:MGapprox}). Given that $f(x)$ is a valid PDF, we refer to (\ref{con:MGapprox}) as the mixture Gamma distribution with parameters $\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right)$, denoted as $f(x) \sim \mathrm{GM}\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right)$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f(x) &= \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \omega_{i}f_{i}(x) = \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\varepsilon_{i}x^{\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x} \simeq \sum_{i=1}^{I}\varepsilon_{i}x^{\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x},
\end{split}
\label{con:MGapprox}
\end{equation}
where $f_{i}(x)=\frac{\xi_{i}^{\beta_{i}}x^{\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x}}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}$ is the PDF of a Gamma distribution with parameters $\left(\xi_i, \beta_{i}\right)$, $\Gamma(\cdot)$ is the Gamma function, $\omega_{i}=\varepsilon_{i}\cdot\Gamma(\beta_{i})/\xi_{i}^{\beta_{i}}$ is the weight of the $i$-th term, $I$ is the truncation limit that determines the approximation accuracy, and $\int_{0}^{\infty} f(x) {\rm d}x = 1$ with $f(x) \geq 0$ and $\sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \omega_i = 1$.
\textbf{Sufficiency}: In \cite{devore1993constructive}, the existence of a mixture Gamma function $S_u\left(x\right)$ that uniformly converges to an arbitrary function $f(x)$ is proved as written below
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&lim_{u \to +\infty} S_u(x) = f(x) \quad \text{uniformly for } 0 < x < \infty,\\
\text{where } S_u(x) &= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{u}f\left(\frac{k}{u}\right) \mathrm{Gamma}\left(u, k+1\right) = \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{u}f\left(\frac{k}{u}\right) \cdot \frac{u^{k+1} x^k}{k!} e^{-u x},
\end{split}
\label{eq-11-rev}
\end{equation}
and $u$ is an arbitrarily large number that determines the approximation accuracy.
The equality in (\ref{eq-11-rev}) indicates that an arbitrary function $f(x)$ can be accurately approximated by a mixture of Gamma distributions $\mathrm{Gamma}\left(u, k+1\right)$ with parameters $u$, $k+1$ and weight $\frac{1}{u}f\left(\frac{k}{u}\right)$. Note that (\ref{con:MGapprox}) represents the necessity condition to construct an arbitrary function from a mixture of Gamma distributions, whereas (\ref{eq-11-rev}) corresponds to the sufficiency condition that maps the weight $\omega_i$ and $f_i(x)$. We can find a direct relation between the arbitrary distribution $f(x)$ and tuples $\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right)$ by using (\ref{con:MGapprox}) and (\ref{eq-11-rev}) as described below
\begin{equation}
\left(\varepsilon_{i}, \beta_{i}, \xi_{i}\right) = \left(\frac{u^{i-1}}{\Gamma(i)} \cdot f\left(\frac{i-1}{u}\right), i, u \right).
\label{eq-9-rev}
\end{equation}
The statistics of mixture Gamma distribution, including the CDF, moments, and Laplace transform of a mixture Gamma distributed random variable, are derived in \cite{chun2017comprehensive} as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
F(x) = \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i}\xi^{-\beta_{i}}\gamma(\beta_{i}, \xi_{i}x),\quad
\mathbb{E}\left[ x^l \right] = \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \frac{\Gamma(\beta_i+l)}{\xi_i^{\beta_i+l}}, \quad
\mathcal{L}(s) = \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \frac{\Gamma(\beta_i)}{(\xi_i+s)^{\beta_i}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma\left(\cdot, \cdot \right)$ is the incomplete Gamma function. The authors in \cite{6059452} proved that majority of the known fading models can be approximated by the mixture Gamma distribution. Particularly, Rayleigh and Nakagami-$m$ fading can be represented by a mixture Gamma distribution with a single term. For an arbitrary fading model, whose PDF can be approximated by a mixture Gamma distribution, $I$ is no need to be larger than 20 with accuracy less than $10^{-5}$ \cite{6059452}.
However, the IRS-assisted network in Fig. \ref{fig:IRS-assisted muti-cell wireless network (DL)} involves combined channel that is composed of the double-faded, cascaded link through IRS and the direct link. Traditional works on cascaded channel utilized specialized function, such as Fox-H or Meijer G-function, which lack tractability and are hard to gain any insights. To resolve this issue, we adopt the mixture Gamma approximation to model the wireless channels of IRS-assisted network.
\subsection{Properties of mixture Gamma distribution}
\begin{theorem} \label{theorem:Multipliability} \textbf{Multipliability:}
The product distribution of two independent, mixture Gamma distributed random variables $X_{1}$ and $X_{2}$ can be represented by a mixture Gamma distribution $Y=X_{1}X_{2}$ with parameters $\left(\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}\right)$ as described below
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\text{Given }
f_{\rm X_1}(x_1) = \sum_{m_{1}=0}^{M_{1}} \omega_{m_{1}} \cdot \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{m_{1}}, \beta_{m_{1}}\right) \text{ and }
f_{\rm X_2}(x_2) =\sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{{M_{2}}} \omega_{m_{2}} \cdot \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{m_{2}}, \beta_{m_{2}}\right),\\
&\text{the product distribution of } Y=X_{1}X_{2} \text{ follows }
f_{\rm Y}(y) = \sum_{\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}} \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} \cdot y^{\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}-1} \cdot e^{-y \cdot \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}} }},
\end{split}
\label{MGdouble}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
where the summation range $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}$ and parameters are defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} &= \{0 \leq m_{1} \leq M_1,~ 0 \leq m_2 \leq M_2,~ 1 \leq i \leq I\},\\
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} &= \varepsilon_{m_{1}},\quad \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \frac{\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}}, \quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \left(\prod_{j=1}^{2} \frac{\omega_{m_j} \beta_{m_j}^{\varepsilon_{m_1}} }{\Gamma\left(\varepsilon_{m_j}\right) } \right)
\cdot \varpi_{i}{t_{i}^{-\varepsilon_{m_{1}}+\varepsilon_{m_{2}}-1}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
$t_{i}$ is the $i$-th root of the Laguerre polynomial $L_n(t)$ and $\varpi_{i}$ is the $i$-th weight of the Gaussian-Laguerre quadrature $\int_0^\infty e^{-t}f(t)dt \approx \sum_{i=1}^{n} \varpi_{i} f\left(t_i\right)$ defined as $\varpi_{i} = \frac{t_i}{\left(n+1\right)^2 L_{n+1}\left(t_i\right)^2}$ \cite{abramowitz1964handbook}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{appendix:CascadedMG}.
\end{proof}
Given two independent Gamma distributed random variables $X_1$ and $X_2$, the product distribution of $Y=X_{1}X_{2}$ can be further simplified by substituting $M_1 = M_2 = 0$, $\omega_{m_1} = \omega_{m_2} = 1$ in (\ref{MGdouble}), which is described in the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:GamProduct}
The product distribution of two independent Gamma-distributed random variables $X_1$ and $X_2$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Y}(y) &= \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} \cdot y^{\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}-1} \cdot e^{-y\cdot\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}} }},
\end{split}
\label{MGdouble-lemma1-eq1}
\end{equation}
where $X_1 \sim \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{{m_{1}}}, \beta_{{m_{1}}}\right)$, $X_2 \sim \mathrm{Gamma}\left(\varepsilon_{{m_{2}}}, \beta_{{m_{2}}}\right)$, and the parameter tuple $\left(\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}, \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}}\right)$ is defined as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \varepsilon_{m_{1}},\quad \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \frac{\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}},
\quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{m}}} = \left(\prod_{j=1}^{2} \frac{\beta_{m_j}^{\varepsilon_{m_1}} }{\Gamma\left(\varepsilon_{m_j}\right) } \right)
\cdot \varpi_{i}{t_{i}^{-\varepsilon_{m_{1}}+\varepsilon_{m_{2}}-1}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:Mixture}\textbf{Quadratic form:}
Given two independent, mixture Gamma distributed random variables $X^2$ and $Y^2$, the quadratic form $S = (X+Y)^{2}$ follows a mixture Gamma distribution with parameters $\left(\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}, \beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}, \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}\right)$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&f_{\rm S}(s) = \sum_{\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}} \left( \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}}
e^{-s \cdot \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1} }} - \varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}}
e^{-s \cdot \xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2} }} \right)
\cdot s^{\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}-1},\\
&\text{where }
X \sim \mathrm{GM}\left(\varepsilon_{m_1}, \beta_{m_1}, \xi_{m_1}\right), \text{ and } Y \sim \mathrm{GM}\left(\varepsilon_{m_2}, \beta_{m_2}, \xi_{m_2}\right),
\end{split}
\label{thm2-eq17-rev}
\end{equation}
the summation range $\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}}$ and parameter tuples are given by
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \{0 \leq m_{1} \leq M_1,~ 0 \leq m_2 \leq M_2, 0 \leq k_1 \leq 2\beta_{m_2}-1,\\
&\quad \quad 0 \leq k_2 \leq 2\beta_{m_1}-1+k_1,~ 0 \leq k_3 \leq \infty\},
\end{split}
\label{thm2-eq18a-rev}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \beta_{m_1}+\beta_{m_2}+k_{3}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} = \xi_{m_2}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \xi_{m_1},\\
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} &= (-1)^{k_{2}} \chi \cdot \xi_{m_2}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1}, \quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \chi \cdot \xi_{m_1}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1},
\end{split}
\label{thm2-eq18b-rev}
\end{equation}
and $\chi=\frac{\varepsilon_{i}\varepsilon_{j}\tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}}{k_{2}}(-1)^{k_{1}}\xi_{j}^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-k_{2}-1}\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2})} {\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}+k_{3}+1)(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}+k_{3}}}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix~\ref{appendix:TheoremMixtureChannel}.
\end{proof}
Although the mixture Gamma distributions in (\ref{MGdouble}) and (\ref{thm2-eq17-rev}) involve multiple summations, it is worth noting that these functions still converge extremely fast, thanks to the rapid convergence of the weight terms. In Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_mmse}, we validated that the mixture Gamma distributions achieve an approximation error of less than $10^{-4}$ with only ten terms.
\begin{remark}
Since the production distribution of two independent, mixture Gamma random variables is still a mixture Gamma, Theorem~\ref{theorem:Multipliability} can be easily extended to a multiplication of $K$ independent, mixture Gamma distributed random variables. We introduced a heuristic algorithm in Appendix~\ref{appendix:IterationAlgorithmForChannel} to evaluate the product distribution of $K$ independent, mixture Gamma random variables. Similarly, the distribution of the quadratic form can be easily extended to $K$ independent, mixture Gamma random variables. Hence, the analytical framework derived in this paper can be applied to network environments with multiple IRS association.
\end{remark}
Some mixture Gamma approximations of single links and cascaded links are provided in Fig.~\ref{fig:table} for ease reference.
\section{Performance analysis} \label{section:Perf}
\subsection{Channel power statics}
For network performance analysis, we assume that the transmit power is one and the amplitude $g_{\rm BU}$, $g_{{\rm BI},n}$ and $g_{{\rm IU},n}$ follow Nakagami-$m$ distribution with parameters $m_{\rm BU}$, $m_{\rm BI}$ and $m_{\rm IU}$, respectively. Let us denote the power terms as follows
\begin{align}
H_{\rm BU}\triangleq |h_{\rm BU}|^2=\epsilon d_{\rm BU}^{-\alpha} |g_{\rm BU}|^2, \label{Eq:HBU}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
H_{\rm BIU}= \left|{\bf h}^H_{\rm IU}{\bf h}_{\rm BI}\right|^{2} \triangleq |h_{\rm BIU}|^2=\epsilon^2 d_{\rm BI}^{-\alpha} d_{\rm IU}^{-\alpha} \left|\sum_{n=1}^N |{g}_{{\rm IU},n}| |{g}_{{\rm BI},n}|\right|^2,\label{Eq:HBIU}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
H_{\rm S}\triangleq \left||h_{\rm BU}|+|h_{\rm BIU}|\right|^2. \label{Eq:HS}
\end{align}
\subsubsection{Single path}
As $g_{\rm BU}$, $g_{\rm BI}$ and $g_{\rm IU}$ are distributed by the Nakagami-$m$ fading, the power term $H_{\rm BU}$ follows a Gamma distribution, whereas the statistics of $H_{\rm BIU}$ is characterized by the mixture Gamma distribution and the parameter tuples are described in the following lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:H_BU}$H_{\rm BU}$ follows the Gamma distribution, which can be modeled as a mixture Gamma distribution with $I = 1$ and
\begin{align}
\left(\varepsilon_{\rm BU}, \beta_{\rm BU}, \xi_{\rm BU}\right) = \left(\frac{({d_{\rm BU}^{\alpha }m_{\rm BU} })^{m_{\rm BU} }}{\epsilon^{m_{\rm BU} }\Gamma(m_{\rm BU} )}, m_{\rm BU}, \frac{m_{\rm BU} d_{\rm BU}^{\alpha}}{\epsilon}\right).
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:HBIU}By Theorem~\ref{Lem:GamProduct}, $H_{\rm BIU}$ follows the mixture Gamma distribution as (\ref{MGdouble}) with parameters $\left(\varepsilon, \beta, \xi\right)$ given by
\begin{align}\label{eq: MG_para_BIU}
\begin{split}
&~ \varepsilon_{{\rm BIU},i} = \frac{(m_{\rm BI}m_{\rm IU})^{m_{\rm BI} }\varpi_{i}t_{i}^{m_{\rm IU} -m_{\rm BI} -1}}{\Gamma(m_{\rm BI} )\Gamma(m_{\rm IU} )}\left({\frac{W}{N^2}}\right)^{m_{\rm BI} }, \\ &~
\beta_{{\rm BIU},i} = m_{\rm BI} , \quad
\xi_{{\rm BIU},i} = \frac{m_{\rm BI} m_{\rm IU} }{t_{i}}{\frac{W}{N^2}},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $W= \frac{{d^{\alpha}_{\rm BI}}{d^{\alpha}_{\rm IU}}}{\epsilon^2}$ and $I=20$ achieves sufficient approximation error of less than $10^{-5}$.
\end{lemma}
\subsubsection{Mixture path}
In the following Lemma, we use Theorem~\ref{theorem:Mixture} to characterize the distribution of the combined channel, given that the channel gain of the individual paths follows a mixture Gamma distribution.
\begin{lemma}
Given that the channel gain of the direct link and cascaded link follow mixture Gamma distributions, the channel gain of the combined channel, $H_{\rm S}$, follows a mixture Gamma distribution as (\ref{thm2-eq17-rev}) with parameters given by
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{C}_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \{1 \leq m_{1} \leq M_1,~ m_2 = 1, 0 \leq k_1 \leq 2m_{\rm BU}-1,\\
&\quad \quad 0 \leq k_2 \leq 2m_{\rm BI}+k_1-1,~ 0 \leq k_3 \leq \infty\},\\
\beta_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}}} &= \beta_{{\rm BIU},i}+\beta_{\rm BU}+k_{3}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} = \xi_{\rm BU}, \quad
\xi_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \xi_{{\rm BIU},i},\\
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_1}} &= (-1)^{k_{2}} \chi \cdot \xi_{\rm BU}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1}, \quad
\varepsilon_{\mathbf{\underbar{q}_2}} = \chi \cdot \xi_{{\rm BIU},i}^{k_{2}+2k_{3}+1}, \\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\chi &= \frac{\varepsilon_{\rm BU}\varepsilon_{\rm BIU,i}\tbinom{2\beta_{\rm BU}-1}{k_{1}}(-1)^{k_{1}}\tbinom{2\beta_{\rm BU}-k_{1}-1}{k_{2}}\xi_{\rm BU}^{2\beta_{\rm BU}+k_{1}-k_{2}-1}\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}) } {\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}+k_{3}+1)(\xi_{{\rm BIU},i}+\xi_{\rm BU})^{2\beta_{\rm BU}+k_{1}+k_{3}}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Laplace transform of the aggregated interference power}
In this subsection, we will derive the Laplace transform of the aggregated interference. The interference power received at the ${\rm UE}_{0}$ from direct links and cascaded links are given by $I_{{\rm F},1}$ and $I_{{\rm F},2}$, respectively
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
I_{{\rm F},1} = &~ \sum_{m \in \Lambda_{\rm B} \setminus\{0\}} H_{{\rm BU}}^{(m)} ,\\ I_{{\rm F},2} = &~ \sum_{m \in \Lambda_{\rm B} \setminus\{0\}} \sum_{j\in \Lambda_{\rm I,F}\bigcup\Lambda_{\rm I,S}} H_{\rm BIU}^{(m,j)} .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Laplace transforms of the interference power are given by
\begin{align} \label{eq:L_I12}
\mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},1}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} =&~ \mathbb{E}[e^{-sI_{{\rm F},1}}] |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathbb{E}_{\Lambda_{B}\setminus\{0\}}\left\{ e^{-s H_{\rm BU} } \right\}\Big|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} , \notag \\
\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}}= &~ \mathbb{E}_{\Lambda _{B}\setminus\{0\},\Lambda_{\rm I,F}\bigcup\Lambda_{\rm I,S}}\left\{ e^{-s \eta H_{\rm BIU}} \right\}\Big|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} ,
\end{align}
where $d_{\rm BU}^{(m)}$ is the distance from $ {\rm BS}_{m}$ to $ {\rm UE}_{0}$, $\eta = \mathbb{E}\left[{d_{\rm BI}^{(m,j)}}^{-\alpha}\right]$, $d_{\rm BI}^{(m,j)}$ is the distance from ${\rm BS}_{m}$ to ${\rm IRS}_{j}$, and we assumed $d_{\rm BU} \simeq d_{\rm BI}$.
If $\Lambda_{\rm I,F}$ is empty, the aggregated interference and its corresponding Laplace transform are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_IFo}
\begin{split}
I_{{\rm F},\rm o} &= I_{{\rm F},1}, \quad
\mathcal{L}_{ \rm I_{{\rm F},\rm o}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathbb{E}[e^{-sI_{{\rm F},1}}] |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{ {{\rm F},1}}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
If $\Lambda_{\rm I,F}$ is not empty, the aggregated interference and its corresponding Laplace transform are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_IFa}
I_{{\rm F},\rm a} = I_{{\rm F},1} + I_{{\rm F},2}, \quad
\mathcal{L}_{ \rm I_{{\rm F},\rm a}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} = \mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},1}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} \cdot\mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},2}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} .
\end{equation}
The closed form expressions of (\ref{eq:L_IFo}) and \eqref{eq:L_IFa} are given in (\ref{eq:L_I1_appen}), (\ref{eq:L_I2_appen}) and derived in Appendix \ref{appendix:LaplaceI}.
The CDF of the aggregated interference power can be numerically obtained by taking the inverse Laplace transform of $\mathcal{L}_{ \rm I|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}(s)$ and MATLAB offers software library to evaluate the operation as follows
\begin{equation}
F_{ \rm I_{\rm F}|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}(x) = \mathcal{L}^{-1}\left[ \frac{1}{s} \mathcal{L}_{ \rm I_{\rm F}|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}(s) \right] (x). \label{LaplaceICDF}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Analytical framework}
In this subsection, we adopt an analytical framework to assess the system performance metrics by using stochastic geometry. The original idea was proposed by Hamdi in \cite{hamdi2007useful} for Nakagami-$m$ fading, later in \cite{chun2017stochastic} for $\kappa$ - $\mu$ and $\eta$ - $\mu$ fading, and in \cite{chun2017comprehensive} for $\kappa$ - $\mu$ shadowed fading, which we further extend to IRS-assisted networks with mixture Gamma distributed channels. With the proposed method, any performance measures can be evaluated and represented as a function of SINR $g(\rm SINR)$, including the spectral efficiency, moments of SINR, and outage probability.
\begin{theorem} \label{theoremPerfAnalysis}
For a network with mixture Gamma distributed channels, whose received signal can be modeled as a mixture Gamma distribution with tuple $ (\varepsilon_{i},\beta_{i},\xi_{i})$, $\mathbb{E}[g(\rm SINR)]$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}[g(\rm SINR)] = \int_{0}^{\infty} {g(\rm SINR)f_{\rm S}(s)}\mathrm{d}s = \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} {g_{\beta_{i}}(z) e^{-\delta^{2} {\xi_{i}} z}} \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}({\xi_{i}} z) \mathrm{d}z ,
\label{eq-32-thm3-rev}
\end{equation}
where $g_{\beta_{i}}(z)$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g_{{\beta_{i}}}(z) = \frac{1}{\Gamma({\beta_{i}})}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{{\beta_{i}}}}{\mathrm{d}z^{{\beta_{i}}}}g(z) .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{appendix:Perf}.
\end{proof}
In the following, we utilize Theorem \ref{theoremPerfAnalysis} and (\ref{eq-32-thm3-rev}) to evaluate several system performance metrics of interest by invoking their SINR functions.
\subsubsection{Spectral efficiency}
Spectral efficiency is given by \cite{jo2012heterogeneous}
\begin{equation} \label{spectralEfficiency}
\mathcal{R} = \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+\rm SINR)].
\end{equation}
By substituting $g(z)=\ln(1+z)$ and $g_{\beta_{i}}(z)$ to (\ref{eq-32-thm3-rev}) \cite{hamdi2007useful}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gz}
\begin{split}
g_{\beta_{i}}(z) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{\beta_{i}}}{\mathrm{d}z^{\beta_{i}}}g(z)= \frac{1}{z}\left( 1-\frac{1}{(1+z)^{\beta_{i}}} \right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
the spectral efficiency of an IRS-assisted wireless network is evaluated as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{R} = \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} { {\frac{1}{z}\left( 1-\frac{1}{(1+z)^{\beta_{i}}} \right) } \frac{\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}({\xi_{i}} z)}{e^{\delta^{2}{\xi_{i}} z}} } \mathrm{d}z .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Moments of SINR}
The moments of the SINR $\mathbb{E}[{\rm SINR}^{l}]$ can be derived by substituting $g(z)=z^{l}$ and $g_{\beta_{i}}(z)$ to (\ref{eq-32-thm3-rev})
\begin{equation}
g_{\beta_{i}}(z) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{\beta_{i}}}{\mathrm{d}z^{\beta_{i}}}g(z)=\frac{\Gamma(\beta_{i}+l)}{\Gamma(l)\Gamma(\beta_{i})}z^{l-1}.
\end{equation}
Then, the moments of the SINR is evaluated as follows \cite{chun2017comprehensive}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[{\rm SINR}^{l}] = \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} { { \frac{\Gamma(\beta_{i}+l)}{\Gamma(l)\Gamma(\beta_{i})}z^{l-1} } e^{-\delta^{2}\xi_{i} z}} \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}({\xi_{i}} z) \mathrm{d}z .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Outage probability}
The outage probability is defined as written below, which is averaged over the link distance
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
P_{\rm outage}= &1 - \mathbb{P}\{{\rm SINR} > \tau \} = 1-\mathbb{E}\left[ \mathbb{P} \left( I_{\rm F} < \frac{S}{\tau}-\delta^{2} \right) \right] , \label{con:outageP}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for a given SINR threshold $\tau$. By substituting \eqref{LaplaceICDF} into \eqref{con:outageP}, the outage probability can be further simplied to
\begin{equation}
P_{\rm outage} = 1- \mathcal{L}^{-1}\left[ \frac{1}{s} \mathcal{L}_{I_{\rm F}|_{d_{\rm BU}}^{(0)}}(s) \right] \left(\frac{S}{\tau}-\delta^{2}\right). \label{OutageLaplaceInverse}
\end{equation}
The CDF of the interference can be evaluated by using the Gil-Pelaez's inversion as described below
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{P}(I_{\rm F}<x) =&~ \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{0}^{\infty} {\frac{Im\{ e^{itx}\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{F}}(it) \}}{t} \mathrm{d}t},\quad i = \sqrt{-1} \\
=&~ \frac{1}{2}+\int_{0}^{\infty} {Im \left\{ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \varepsilon_{i} \frac{\Gamma(\beta_{i})}{(\xi_{i}-it)^{\beta_{i}}} \phi(x) \right\} \mathrm{d}t},\\
\phi(x) \triangleq&~ \int_{0}^{\infty} {\exp\left[ i\delta^{2}\lambda_{\rm I}^{-\frac{\alpha}{2}}xt^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} - \pi t \psi(ix) \right]} \mathrm{d}t, \\
\psi(z) \triangleq&~ \mathbb{E}_{\rm S}\left[ {}_{1}F_{1} \left[ ~{\left.{\!\genfrac..{0pt}{}{-\frac{2}{\alpha}}{1-\frac{2}{\alpha}}}~\right |zH_{\rm S}} \right] \right],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we used \cite[eq.(4)]{di2014stochastic}.
\section{NUMERICAL RESULTS} \label{sectionNumerical}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[PDF of mixture Gamma approximation of the cascaded link.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chCascaded.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_double}
}~
\subfigure[MMSE of mixture Gamma approximation.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chMmseOfMG.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_mmse}
}
\centering
\subfigure[mixture Gamma approximation of the mixture channel.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chMixture.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_mixture}
}~
\subfigure[PDF of mixture Gamma approximation of all kinds of channel in IRS-assisted networks.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{chAllLink.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:MG_all_link}
}
\caption{Channel modeling of the channel gains.}
\label{fig:MG_approx}
\vspace{1em}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Signal power CDF with different distance of IRS-UE.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{RxSignalCDF_diffR.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:sigP_d_IU}
}~
\subfigure[Tradeoff between the distance of IRS-UE and the number of IRS elements.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{RxSignalCDF_tradeoffND.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:sigP_tradeoffND}
}
\caption{The received signal power distribution given link distances.}
\label{fig:sigP}
\vspace{1em}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Spectral Efficiency.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{perfDiffDensityR.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:spectralE_densityR}
}~
\subfigure[Tradeoff between the distance of IRS-UE and the number of IRS elements.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{perfDiffPLexp.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:spectralE_densityAlpha}
}
\subfigure[ {Outage probability with different path-loss exponents, $\alpha$}.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{outageP_diffAlpha.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:outageP_diffAlpha}
}~
\subfigure[ {Outage probability with different IRS density, $\lambda_{\rm I}$, and number of IRS elements of each IRS, $N$}.]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{outageP.eps}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:outageP_diffIrsDensity}
}
\caption{System performance analysis.}
\label{fig:performance}
\end{figure*}
In this section, we introduced numerical results to verify the theoretical analysis. First, we displayed approximation results of cascaded channel gain and mixture channel gain compared with numerical results. Next, we illustrated CDF of the received signal distribution given link distance. Furthermore, the tradeoff between link distance and the number of IRS elements is provided. Finally, we showed the performance metrics. All of the simulations were carried out using MATLAB with the following parameters: BS density $\lambda_{\rm B}=1\times 10^{-5} {\rm /m^2}$, IRS density $\lambda_{\rm I}=1\times 10^{-4}{\rm /m^2}$, $D_1=25 \,{\rm m}$, $D_2=50\, {\rm m}$, unit transmit power $P_{\rm t} = 1\, {\rm Watt}$, noise power $\delta^{2}=-147$ dBm, and the number of elements of each IRS $N=500$. To better understand the mixture propagation environments and the system-level performance, the numerical analysis is carried out with Nakagami-$m$ fading channels as the underlying fading channel, if not specified otherwise.
\subsection{Channel modeling of the channel gains}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_double}, we compared the mixture Gamma approximated PDF and CLT approximated PDF with the numerical PDF of the cascaded channel, from which we can observe that the PDF of mixture Gamma distribution fits well on cascaded fading channel gains compared with the CLT approximation, which validated the derivation in Theorem~\ref{theorem:Multipliability}. In addition, we displayed the minimum mean-square error (MMSE) of the mixture Gamma approximation of the cascaded channel gain with multiple fading types. In Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_mmse}, we can see that when the number of Gamma components of the mixture Gamma distribution is larger than 20, the accuracy can achieve $10^{-5}$ for most fading types. Moreover, in Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_mixture}, we compared the numerical PDF, mixture Gamma approximated PDF, and CLT approximated PDF of the mixture channel, which verified that the derivation of the PDF of the mixture channel in Theorem~\ref{theorem:Mixture}. At last, in Fig.~\ref{fig:MG_all_link}, the PDF of all types of channel gain are displayed, i.e., single channel gain, cascaded channel gain and mixture channel gain. We can observe that the cascaded channel gain is more concentrated than the single link while the mixture channel gain is more flat.
\subsection{The received signal power distribution given link distances}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:sigP_d_IU}, we displayed the CDF of the received signal power given the link distances. By varying the link distance between the typical UE and its serving IRS, $d_{\rm IU}$, we can observe that the benefit of decreasing $d_{\rm IU}$ is more significant when $d_{\rm IU}$ is smaller due to severe productive path loss, which is coincidence with \cite{lyu2021hybrid}.
Besides, in Fig.~\ref{fig:sigP_tradeoffND}, we illustrated the tradeoff between $d_{\rm IU}$ and the number of IRS elements of each IRS, $N$. The results are expected since the passive IRS suffers severe productive path loss, which hugely degrades the performance gain. We can see that about 8-fold the number of IRS elements is required to compensate for the path loss caused by large link distance.
\subsection{System performance analysis}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:spectralE_densityR}, the spectral efficiency versus the density ratio of IRSs and BSs, $ \lambda_{\rm I}/\lambda_{\rm B} $, with different numbers of IRS elements, $ N $, are displayed. We observe that the IRSs always provide spectral efficiency boosting. Besides, we can observe an optimal $ \lambda_{\rm I}/\lambda_{\rm B} $ under each $ N $, which slightly increases with the density ratio. This is expected since the IRSs enhance both signals and interference but with different scaling order \cite{lyu2021hybrid}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:spectralE_densityAlpha}, the effect of the path loss exponents of each link is displayed. We can observe that when the path loss of the BS$\rightarrow$IRS link and IRS$\rightarrow$UE link is severe, the performance improved by IRS is limited due to the productive path loss of the cascaded path. Besides, an interesting result is that worse BS$\rightarrow$UE link leads to a better performance, which is understandable since the interference is largely eliminated.
Next, we displayed the outage probability in Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffAlpha} and Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffIrsDensity}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffAlpha}, we can observe that IRS boots the outage probability especially when the direct link is weak, which is the same as spectral efficiency, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:spectralE_densityAlpha}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:outageP_diffIrsDensity}, we studied the impact of density ratios of IRSs and BSs on outage probability. Surprisingly, the results differ from spectral efficiency, where the IRS definitely boosts the spectral efficiency. Several interesting observations are made as follows. First, when IRS density is small ($\lambda_{\rm I} = \lambda_{\rm B}$), the outage probability enhancement of IRS disappears. Second, when slightly increasing the IRS density, ($ \lambda_{\rm I}=10\lambda_{\rm B} $), although the outage probability at low SINR region is improved, within the high SINR region, the outage probability is decreased. The trend is that at low SINR region, larger number of IRS elements improves more significant enhancement of outage probability. In contrast, at the high SINR region, larger number of IRS elements decrease more significant enhancement of outage probability. This is reasonable since when amplifying the received signal, the interference is also enlarged. Third, when the IRS density is large enough ($\lambda_{\rm I} = 500 \lambda_{\rm B}$), the outage probability does not relied on the number of IRS elements on each IRS since the product path loss decreased due to small node distances. Fourth, if you want to increase the outage probability at low SINR, you can achieve this by increasing the IRS density and the number of IRS elements on each IRS smartly, such as, $\lambda_{\rm I} = 100\lambda_{\rm B}$ and $N=3000$, which can contribute to improving the reliability. However, at high SINR region, there is an optimal density ratio for improving the outage probability.
\section{CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS} \label{sectionConclusion}
We proposed a uniform mixture Gamma channel modeling method for analyzing IRS-assisted wireless communication systems under any arbitrary fading environment and arbitrary number of links in this work. First, we proposed a method to approximate the channel gain of both the direct link and cascaded link independently over the mixture Gamma distributions for any arbitrary fading types by proving the multipliability of mixture Gamma distributed channels. Furthermore, the mixture channel is also modeled as a mixture Gamma distribution by proving the quadratic form of mixture Gamma distributed channels. Additionally, the fractional moments, Laplace transform, and CDF of mixture Gamma distribution are provided to facilitate the analysis. Second, we derived the mean conditional received signal power distribution and the Laplace transform of aggregated interference, under three operation modes: (a) one IRS associated with typical UE and other related IRSs scattering, (b) all related IRS randomly scattering, (c) no related IRS, given the distance between ${\rm BS}_{0}$ and ${\rm UE}_{0}$ and the distance between ${\rm IRS}_{0}$ and ${\rm UE}_{0}$. Finally, we introduced a uniform stochastic geometric system performance analysis framework based on the mixture Gamma distributed channels and derived the performance metrics availing of their corresponding SINR functions. In this way, the spectral efficiency, SINR moments, and outage probability are evaluated. Besides, the Monte-Carlo simulation verified the analysis and useful insights on system design are provided. We note that the properties of mixture Gamma distribution enormously facilitate the modeling and analysis in IRS-assisted networks with high accuracy. This modeling method also provides new insights on $K$ cascaded channels and $K$ mixture channels, which can be applied to multiple types of networks, such as active IRS networks, UAV networks, and relay networks.
\appendices
\section{} \label{appendix:CascadedMG}
In this appendix, we provide a proof for Theorem~\ref{theorem:Multipliability}.
In \cite{bhargav2018product}, the authors show that the PDF of a product of two random variables whose PDFs are linear combinations of Gamma distributions could be expressed by the Meijer-G function. Thus, the step (a) in \eqref{eq:fy} is achieved. However, the Meijer-G function is lack of tractability. As such, by employing $G_{0,2}^{2,0}\left( y| b,c\right) = 2y^{\frac{1}{2}(b+c)}K_{b-c}(2\sqrt{y})$, we first simplified this to modified Bessel function in step (b).
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Y}(y) \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{m_{1}=0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}} \frac{\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}}{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}G_{0,2}^{2,0}\left( y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}} | \upsilon_{m_{1}} -1, \upsilon_{m_{2}}-1 \right)
\\ \overset{(b)}{=} &~ \sum_{{m_{1}} =0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}} \frac{\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}} }{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}\times2(y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}})^{\frac{1}{2}(\upsilon_{m_{1}} +\upsilon_{m_{2}})} \times K_{\upsilon_{m_{1}} -\upsilon_{m_{2}}}(2\sqrt{y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}})
\end{split}\label{eq:fy}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the modified Bessel function $K_v(y)$ can be expressed as follows
\begin{equation}
K_{\upsilon_{m_{1}}-\upsilon_{m_{2}}}(2\sqrt{y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}) = \frac{1}{2}\left({y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}\right)^{\frac{\upsilon_{m_{1}}-\upsilon_{m_{2}}}{2}} \cdot \begin{matrix} \\ \underbrace{ \int_0^\infty \exp \left(-t-\frac{y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t}\right){t^{-\upsilon_{m_{1}}+\upsilon_{m_{2}}-1}}\mathrm {d}t} \\I(t)\end{matrix} \label{appendix_eq:ModifiedBessel}
\end{equation}
where $I(t)$ can be derived as
\begin{equation}
I(t) = \int_0^\infty e^{-t}g(t)\mathrm {d}t,
\end{equation}
and $g(t)$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
g(t) = {\exp\left(-\frac{y\beta_{m_{1}}\beta_{m_{2}}}{t}\right){t^{-\upsilon_{m_{1}}+\upsilon_{m_{2}}-1}}}.
\end{equation}
To solve this integration tractably, the modified Bessel function is approximated by Gaussian-Hermite functions with $\int_0^\infty e^{-t}g(t)dt \approx \sum_{i=0}^{I} \varpi_{i} g(t_i)$. As such, the PDF of {$Y$} is achieved in \eqref{eq:fy1} with the restriction that absolute phase value of {$y$} is no large than $\frac{1}{4}\pi$.
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Y}(y) =&~ \sum_{{m_{1}} =0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \frac{ \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}}\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}} }{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}(y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}})^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} } \int_0^\infty {\exp\left(-t-\frac{y\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}}{t}\right)\frac{1}{t^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} -\upsilon_{m_{2}}+1}}} \mathrm {d}t \\ = &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{{m_{1}} =0}^{M_{1}} \sum_{{m_{2}}=0}^{M_{2}} \omega_{m_{1}} \omega_{m_{2}} \frac{(\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}})^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} +1} }{\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{1}} )\Gamma(\upsilon_{m_{2}})}{t_{i}^{-\upsilon_{m_{1}} +\upsilon_{m_{2}}-1}} \varpi_{i} y^{\upsilon_{m_{1}} }e^{-\frac{\beta_{m_{1}} \beta_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}}y}
\end{split}, \label{eq:fy1}
\end{equation}
With some mathematical simplifications, the double-link distribution PDF could be simplified as a mixture Gamma distribution as shown in \eqref{MGdouble}. This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:TheoremMixtureChannel}
In this appendix, we provide a proof for Theorem~\ref{theorem:Mixture}. If $X^{2}$ follows mixture Gamma distribution, the PDF of $X$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:X_naka}
f_{\rm X}(x)=2\sum_{i=1}^{I}\varepsilon_{i}x^{2\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x^{2}}.
\end{equation}
The PDF of $Z=X+Y$ can be derived using convolution and \eqref{eq:X_naka}, as shown in \eqref{eq:mixture1}. With some simple mathematical simplifications, (a) is achieved by invoking $(a+x)^{n}=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\tbinom{n}{k}x^{k}a^{n-k}$
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Z}(z) = &~ \int_{0}^{z}{f_{\rm X}(x)f_{\rm Y}(z-x)}\mathrm{d}x = \int_{0}^{z}{ \left (2\sum_{i=1}^{I}\varepsilon_{i}x^{2\beta_{i}-1}e^{-\xi_{i}x^{2}}\right)\left(2\sum_{j=1}^{J}\varepsilon_{j}(z-x)^{2\beta_{j}-1}e^{-\xi_{j}(z-x)^{2}}\right)} \mathrm{d}x \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{j=1}^{J} 4\varepsilon_{i} \varepsilon_{j} \sum_{k_{1}=0}^{2\beta_{j}-1} \tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}} (-1)^{k_{1}} z^{2\beta_{j}-k_{1}-1} e^{ z^{2}\left( \frac{\xi_{j}^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} - \xi_{j}\right) } \begin{matrix} \\ \underbrace{\int_{0}^{z} {x^{k_{1}+2\beta_{i}-1} e^{-(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})\left(x-\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z\right)^{2}}} \mathrm{d}x, } \\g^{'}(x)\end{matrix}
\end{split}\label{eq:mixture1}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
where $g^{'}(x)$ can be further derived by substituting $t = \left(x-\frac{\xi_{j}^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}\right)^2$ and \cite[eq.(3.381.2)]{zwillinger2007table}
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g^{'}(x) = &~ \int_{0}^{\left(\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z\right)^2} {\left(\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z-\sqrt{t}\right)^{k_{1}+2\beta_{i}-1} }\frac{e^{-(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})t}}{2\sqrt{t}} + {\left(\frac{\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z+\sqrt{t}\right)^{k_{1}+2\beta_{i}-1} }\frac{e^{-(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})t}}{2\sqrt{t}} \mathrm{d}t \\ = &~ \frac{1}{2}\sum_{k_{2}=0}^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}}{k_{2}}\frac{(\xi_{j}z)^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}-k_{2}}}{(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}}}\left[ \gamma\left( \frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{j}^{2}z^2}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right) + \gamma\left( \frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{i}^{2}z^2}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right)\right].
\end{split}\label{eq:mixture_gx
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
Then, by substituting \eqref{eq:mixture_gx} into \eqref{eq:mixture1}, the PDF of $Z$ is derived as follows
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm Z}(z) = &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{j=1}^{J} 2\varepsilon_{i} \varepsilon_{j}e^{ - \frac{\xi_{i}\xi_{j}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}}z^{2} } \sum_{k_{1}=0}^{2\beta_{j}-1} \tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}} (-1)^{k_{1}} \sum_{k_{2}=0}^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}{k_{2}} z^{2\beta_{i}+2\beta_{j}-2-k_{2}} \\ &~ \cdot \frac{\xi_{j}^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}-k_{2}}}{(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}}} \left[(-1)^{k_{2}} \gamma\left(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{j}^{2}z^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right) + \gamma\left(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2},\frac{\xi_{i}^{2}z^{2}}{\xi_{i}+\xi_{j}} \right) \right] \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=1}^{I} \sum_{j=1}^{J} 2\varepsilon_{i} \varepsilon_{j} \sum_{k_{1}=0}^{2\beta_{j}-1} \tbinom{2\beta_{j}-1}{k_{1}} (-1)^{k_{1}} \sum_{k_{2}=0}^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}\tbinom{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}-1}{k_{2}} \frac{\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}){\xi_{j}^{2\beta_{i}-1+k_{1}-k_{2}}}z^{2\beta_{i}+2\beta_{j}+2k_{3}-2}}{\Gamma(\frac{k_{2}+1}{2}+k_{3}+1){(\xi_{i}+\xi_{j})^{2\beta_{i}+k_{1}+k_{3}}}} \\ &~ \cdot \left[ (-1)^{k_{2}}\xi_{j}^{k_{2}+1+2k_{3}}e^{-\xi_{j}z^{2}} +\xi_{i}^{k_{2}+1+2k_{3}}e^{-\xi_{i}z^{2}} \right] ,
\end{split}\label{eq:MGcomposite
\end{equation}
where we applied the power series expansion of incomplete Gamma function in step (a). Last, we apply $f_{\rm S}(s) = \frac{1}{2}s^{-\frac{1}{2}}f_{\rm Z}(\sqrt{s})$ to derive the PDF of $S$. This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:LaplaceI}
This appendix provides derivation of $ \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},1}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}} $ and $ \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}} $. Similar to \cite{chun2017comprehensive}, the Laplace transform of $I_{{\rm F},1}$ is derived in \eqref{eq:L_I1_appen}. In step (a), a substitution $t=sH_{\rm BU}{d_{\rm BU}}^{-\alpha}$ is applied. Next, in step (b) the integration is achieved through integration by parts. Then, the last step is achieved with some mathematical simplifications.
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_I1_appen}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}_ {\rm I_{{\rm F},1}} |_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} =&~ \exp\left( -2\pi\lambda_{\rm B}\int_{{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}}^{\infty} \left( 1-\mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \left[ e^{-sH_{\rm BU}d_{\rm BU}^{-\alpha}} \right] \right)d_{\rm BU}{\rm d}d_{\rm BU} \right) \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \exp\left( -2\pi\lambda_{\rm B} \frac{(sH_{\rm BU})^{\frac{2}{\alpha}}}{\alpha}\mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \left[\int_{0}^{sH_{\rm BU}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}} \left( 1-e^{-t} \right) t^{-1-\frac{2}{\alpha}} {\rm d} t \right] \right) \\ \overset{(b)}{=} &~ \exp\left( -2\pi\lambda_{\rm B} \frac{(sH_{\rm BU})^{\frac{2}{\alpha}}}{2}\mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \left[ -t^{-\frac{2}{\alpha} }\left(1-e^{-t}\right)\Big|_{0}^{sH_{\rm BU}} + \int_{0}^{sH_{\rm BU}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}} t^{-\frac{2}{\alpha}} e^{-t} {\rm d} t \right] \right) \\ = &~ \exp \left( -\pi\lambda_{\rm B}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{2} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{k}\frac{m_{\rm BU}^{-1-k}\left(s{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}\right)^{1+k}}{\Gamma(m_{\rm BU} )k!(1-\frac{2}{\alpha}+k)} \Gamma(1+k+m_{\rm BU} ) \right) \\ &~ \cdot \exp \left( -\pi\lambda_{\rm B}{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{2} (s\eta)^{\frac{2}{\alpha}}\frac{m_{\rm BU} ^{m_{\rm BU} }}{\Gamma(m_{\rm BU} )} \Gamma\left(\frac{2}{\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} \right)\left( m_{\rm BU} ^{\frac{2}{\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} } - (s\eta {d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{-\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} )^{\frac{2}{\alpha}+m_{\rm BU} } \right) \right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
Following similar procedure, $ \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}} $ can be derived as \eqref{eq:L_I2_appen}.
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L_I2_appen}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{{\rm F},2}}| _{d_{\rm BIU}^{(0)}}=&~ \mathbb{E}_{\Lambda _{B}\setminus\{0\}}\left\{ e^{-s \eta H_{\rm BIU}} \right\}\Big|_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} \\ = &~ {\rm exp}\left(-2\pi \lambda_{\rm B} \int_{0}^{D_{2}}\int_{d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}^{\infty}\left({1-\mathbb{E}_{\rm H}\left[ e^{-s \eta H_{\rm BIU} } \right]}\right)d_{\rm BU} \,\,\mathrm {d} d_{\rm BU} \,\, d_{\rm IU} f_{\rm d_{\rm IU}}( d_{\rm IU} )\,\,\mathrm {d} d_{\rm IU} \right) \\ = &~ \exp \Bigg( -\pi\lambda_{\rm B} \int_{0}^{D_{2}} \mathbb{E}_{\rm H} \Big[ \left(s\eta H_{\rm BIU}\right)^{\frac{2}{\alpha}} \gamma\left(1-\frac{2}{\alpha},s\eta H_{\rm BIU}({d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}}d_{\rm IU})^{-\alpha}\right) \\&~ - \left({d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} d_{\rm IU}\right)^{2} \left(1-e^{-s\eta H_{\rm BIU} ({d_{\rm BU}^{(0)}} d_{\rm IU})^{-\alpha} }\right) \Big] f_{\rm d_{\rm IU}}( d_{\rm IU} )\,\,\mathrm {d} d_{\rm IU} \Bigg).
\end{split
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
\section{} \label{appendix:Perf}
In this appendix, we provide a proof for Theorem~\ref{theoremPerfAnalysis}. In \eqref{ESINR}, $\mathbb{E}[g({\rm SINR})]$ is derived. The step (a) is achieved by substitute $z$ with $z=\frac{H_{\rm S}}{I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}}$. Then the step (b) is achieved by substitute $b$ with $b=\xi_{i} {({I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}})}$
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[g( {\rm SINR})] = &~ \int_{0}^{\infty} {g( {\rm SINR})f_{\rm H_{\rm S}}(x)}\mathrm{d}x = \int_{0}^{\infty} {g\left( \frac{H_{\rm S}}{I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}} \right) \sum_{i=0}^{N}}{\varepsilon_{i}H_{\rm S}e^{-\xi_{i}H_{\rm S}}}\mathrm{d}H_{\rm S} \\ \overset{(a)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=0}^{N}{\varepsilon_{i} {({I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}}) }^{\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} {g(z)z^{\beta_{i}-1} e^{-\xi_{i} z {({I_{\rm F}+\delta^{2}})}}}\mathrm{d}z } \\ \overset{(b)}{=} &~ \sum_{i=0}^{N} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \begin{matrix} \\ \underbrace{ \int_{0}^{\infty} {g(z) \frac{z^{\beta_{i}-1}}{\Gamma(\beta_{i})} b^{\beta_{i}} e^{-b {\xi_{i}} z}}\mathrm{d}z } \\Q\end{matrix} \\ = &~ \sum_{i=0}^{N} \varepsilon_{i} \Gamma(\beta_{i}) {\xi_{i}}^{-\beta_{i}} \int_{0}^{\infty} {g_{\beta_{i}}(z) e^{-\delta^{2} {\xi_{i}} z}} \mathcal{L}_{\rm I_{\rm F}}( {\xi_{i}}z) \mathrm{d}z.
\end{split}\label{ESINR}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
Next, $Q$ is evaluated in \eqref{Q} by utilizing the partial integral as follows
\begin{equation}
Q = -\sum_{k=0}^{\beta_{i}-1}g_{k}(z)b^{\beta_{i}-k-1}e^{-bz}|_{0}^{\infty} + \int_{0}^{\infty} {g_{\beta_{i}}(z) e^{-b z}}\mathrm{d}z. \label{Q}
\end{equation}
This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:Distance}
In this appendix, we evaluated the PDF and CDF of the distance between IRS and BS.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=6.22cm,width=8cm]{model.eps}
\caption{Distance Model.}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure}
As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:model}, for given $r$ and $d$, ${\rm IRS}_{0}$ is located on a circle with $\rm UE_0$ as the center and $r$ as the radius. According to their geometric relationship, we can get the following equation
\begin{equation}
l^2 = r^2 + d^2 + 2dr \cos\theta .
\end{equation}
Assuming that $\theta$ is uniformly distributed over $[0, 2\pi]$, then the conditional PDF of $y = \cos \theta$ is given by
\begin{equation}
f_{\rm Y}(y)|_{d,r} = \left\{ \begin{array}{rcl}
\frac{1}{\pi \sqrt{1-y^2}}, & & {y\in [-1,1]},\\
0, & & \text{otherwise}. \end{array} \right .
\end{equation}
Next,the conditional CDF of $l=\sqrt{2dry+r^2+d^2}$ is derived as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
F_{\rm L}(l)|_{d,r} = &~ P(L \leq l) = P(Y \leq \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr}) \\ = &~ \int_{0}^{\frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr}} \frac{1}{\pi \sqrt{1-y^2}} \mathrm{d}y = \frac{1}{\pi} \arcsin\left( \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr} \right) + \frac{1}{2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By taking the derivative of CDF, we can get its PDF
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f_{\rm L}(l)|_{d,r} = \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}l} F_{\rm L}(l) = \frac{l/dr}{\pi \sqrt{1-\left( \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr} \right) ^2}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and by substituting $x=\frac{l^2}{2dr}$ and $a=\frac{r^2+d^2}{2dr}$, its mean can be achieved as follows
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mean}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[l]|_{d,r} = &~ \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{d-r}^{d+r} \frac{l^2/dr}{\sqrt{1-\left( \frac{l^2-r^2-d^2}{2dr} \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}l \overset{(a)}{=} \frac{2}{\pi} \int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{x}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x \\ = &~ \frac{2}{\pi} \Bigg[ \int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{x-a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x + \int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x \Bigg]\notag \\ = &~ 2a = \frac{r^2+d^2}{dr}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
The integral of step (a) can be derived by two parts as shown in \eqref{eq:itegral1} and \eqref{eq:itegral2}, where the result in \eqref{eq:itegral1} is achieved by substituting $u=x-a$
\begin{small}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{x-a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x = \int_{-1}^{1} \frac{u}{\sqrt{1-u^2}} \mathrm{d}u = -\sqrt{1-u^2}|_{-1}^{1} = 0,
\end{split} \label{eq:itegral1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_{a-1}^{a+1} \frac{a}{\sqrt{1-\left( x-a \right) ^2}} \mathrm{d}x = a\cdot \arcsin (x-a)|_{a-1}^{a+1} = a\pi.
\end{split} \label{eq:itegral2}
\end{equation}
\end{small}%
The result $\mathbb{E}[l]|_{d,r}=\frac{r^2+d^2}{dr}$ does match with our assumption, $l \approx d$ when $d \gg r$, assuming that $r>1$. This completes the proof.
\section{} \label{appendix:IterationAlgorithmForChannel}
In this appendix, we provided the iteration algorithm for obtaining the PDF of the $K$ cascaded channels in Algorithm~\ref{alg:A},
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{The PDF of $K$-cascaded channel gain}
\label{alg:A}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require The mixture Gamma distribution parameters of each link: $\Theta_{k} \colon = \{ \varepsilon_{m_{k}}, \beta_{m_{k}}, \xi_{m_{k}},M_{k} \}$, $M_{k}$ is the number of Gamma terms of the $k$-th link, $k=1,2,...,K$, $m_{k}=1,2,...,M_{k}$
\Function{Cascade}{ {$\Theta_{k}$
}
\For{$m_{1} = 1 \to M_{1}$}
\For{$m_{2} = 1 \to M_{2}$}
\For{$i = 1 \to I$}
\State $\varepsilon_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(2)} = \frac{\varepsilon_{m_{1}}\varepsilon_{m_{2}}(\xi_{m_{1}}\xi_{m_{2}})^{\beta_{m_{1}}}}{\xi_{m_{1}}^{\beta_{m_{1}}}\xi_{m_{2}}^{\beta_{m_{2}}}}\varpi_{i}t_{i}^{-\beta_{m_{1}}+\beta_{m_{2}}-1}$,
\State $\beta_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(2)} = \varepsilon_{m_{1}}$,
\State $\xi_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(2)} = \frac{\xi_{m_{1}}\xi_{m_{2}}}{t_{i}}$
\EndFor
\EndFor
\EndFor
\State $M^{(2)}=M_{1}M_{2}I$
\For{$k=3\to K$}
\For{$m_{1} = 1 \to M^{(k-1)}$}
\For{$m_{2} = 1 \to N_{k}$}
\For{$i = 1 \to I$}
\State $\varepsilon_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(k)} = \frac{\varepsilon_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}\varepsilon_{m_{k}}(\xi_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}\xi_{m_{k}})^{\beta_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}}}{{\xi_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}}^{\beta_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}}\xi_{m_{k}}^{\beta_{m_{k}}}}\varpi_{i}t_{i}^{-\beta_{m_{1}}+\beta_{m_{2}}-1}$,
\State $\beta_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(k)} = \varepsilon_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}$,
\State $\xi_{m_{1},m_{2},i}^{(k)} = \frac{\xi_{m_{1}}^{(k-1)}\xi_{m_{2}}^{(k-1)}}{t_{i}}$
\EndFor
\EndFor
\EndFor
\State $M^{(k)}=M^{(k-1)}M_{k}I$
\EndFor
\State \Return{$\Theta^{(k)}\colon=\{\varepsilon^{(k)},\beta^{(k)},\xi^{(k)},M^{(k)} \}$}
\EndFunction
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Moreover, the iteration algorithm can be straightforwardly obtained following a similar iteration procedure as Algorithm~\ref{alg:A}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=90,scale=0.55]{table.png}
\caption{Multiple channels and their mixture Gamma approximation table}
\label{fig:table}
\end{figure*}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Complex Question Answering (CQA) over text is a challenging task in Natural Language Understanding (NLU).
Based on the \textit{programmer-interpreter} paradigm, Neural Module Networks (NMNs) \cite{Gupta2020NeuralMN} learn to first parse complex questions as executable programs composed of various predefined trainable modules, and then execute such programs (implemented by modules) over the given paragraph to predict answers of all kinds.
NMNs achieve competitive reasoning performance on a subset of DROP \cite{dua2019drop}, and possess remarkable interpretability that is also important for CQA.
However, NMNs' numerical reasoning capability is insufficient: it is incapable of handling arithmetic operations such as addition and subtraction between numbers, which make up nearly 40\% questions of the DROP dataset.
Moreover, a gap exists between the interpreter and the complex question since there is no interaction between them.
Motivated by these, we propose two methods to improve NMNs' numerical reasoning skills.
First, we incorporate the original question in the interpreter, aiming to \textbf{directly provide question information in the ``execution'' process}, especially number-related questions.
The intuition behind is that, in the original NMNs, questions participate in the process only through the programmer.
This can cause a distance between queries and returns.
For example, in Figure \ref{fig:main1}, the first row shows that the original NMNs found the wrong event (i.e., `besieged Sinj') solely based on the paragraph information.
In contrast, our model NMNs$_\pm$ can easily target the correct event (i.e., `Sinj finally fell') with the help of question information.
Second, we introduce new modules to \textbf{support addition and subtraction of up to three numbers}.
Endowing NMNs with the ability to support arithmetic can greatly boost its overall performance on DROP and beyond.
For instance, in Figure \ref{fig:main1}, the second row shows that the original NMNs improperly adopt the \verb|find-num| module for the addition question because the module set does not cover such an arithmetic ability.
To facilitate the learning of the \verb|add/sub| modules, we extract QA pairs related to addition and subtraction from the original DROP dataset to construct a new dataset for training and evaluation.
Experimental results show that our methods significantly enhance NMNs' numerical reasoning capability.
On a subset of DROP, our methods improve F1 score by 17.7\% absolute points, and on \textsc{add-sub} questions by 65.7\% absolute points.
Compared to NumNet \cite{2019NumNet}, which is specifically designed for numerical reasoning, our method outperforms it by 2.9\% absolute F1 points.
\section{Background and Related Work}
\noindent \textbf{Semantic Parsing} is a widely-adopted approach in the compositional question answering (CQA) task, which involves a number of reasoning steps. In this approach, a \textit{programmer} maps natural-language questions into machine-readable representations (logical forms), which are executed by an \textit{interpreter} to yield the final answer. For instance, WNSMN \cite{2021Weakly} uses a generalized framework of dependency parsing inspired by the Stanford dependency parse tree \cite{chen-manning-2014-fast} to parse queries into noisy heuristic programs. Neural Module Networks \cite{Gupta2020NeuralMN} extend semantic parsing by making interpreter a learnable function with specified modules and executing the logical forms from the programmer in a step-wise manner.
\noindent \textbf{Neural Module Networks} initially is proposed to overcome the Visual Question Answering (VQA) problem \cite{NMN16}, where questions are often compositional.
\citet{Gupta2020NeuralMN} employs the programmer-interpreter framework with attention \cite{vaswani2017attention} to tackle the CQA task.
Specifically, the programmer parses each question into an executable program.
The interpreter takes the program as input and perform various symbolic reasoning functions.
The modules are defined in a differentiable way, aiming to maintain the uncertainty about each intermediate decision output and propagate them through layers.
For instance, the predicted program of the first example in Figure \ref{fig:main1} is \verb|span(compare-date-lt(find,find))|.
The interpreter would first calls the \verb|find| module twice to find events queried by the question (e.g., `the fell of Sinj') and outputs appropriate paragraph attention.
The \verb|compare-date-lt| module can further locate the dates (e.g., `30 September 1686') to compute their relation.
By demonstrating the intermediate reasoning steps in this manner, NMNs perform interpretable problem-solving.
\noindent \textbf{Numerical Reasoning} is a necessary ability for models to handle the CQA task \cite{GevaGB20}.
\citet{dua2019drop} modify the output layer of QANet~\cite{YuDLZ00L18-qanet} and propose a number-aware model NAQANet to deal with numerical questions.
NumNet~\cite{2019NumNet} leverage Graph Neural Network to capture relations between numbers.
Similarly, QDGAT~\cite{chen-etal-2020-qdgat} distinguish number types more precisely by adding the connection with entities and obtained better performance.
Nerd~\cite{ChenLYZSL20-nerd} search possible programs exhaustively based on answers and employed these programs as weak supervision.
Another similar work \cite{GuoLH21} proposes a question-aware interpreter but uses a totally different approach to measure the alignment between the question and the context paragraph.
Though these approaches can achieve the high performance on DROP dataset, it is incomprehensible for the reasoning procedure.
\section{Model}\label{sec:method}
In this section, we tend to illustrate our proposed methods.
Basically, we will show the incorporation of questions in Section \ref{subsec:question information}.
In Section \ref{subsec:addition and subtraction}, the newly extended module: addition and subtraction will be described.
\subsection{The Incorporation of Questions}
\label{subsec:question information}
Taking one module \verb|compare-date| as a case study: it performs comparisons between two references queried by the question.
A key reasoning step inside, is the \verb|find-date| module that obtains appropriate a date token distribution $D$ related to each reference: $\verb|find-date|(P) \rightarrow D$.
It is worth noting that there is no interaction with the question, which could contain essential information (e.g., entities) that is useful to correctly answer the question.
Therefore, we revise the \verb|find-date| module as follows: $\verb|find-date|(P, Q) \rightarrow D$:
\begin{align}
\textbf{S}^{date}_{i,d_j} &= [\alpha \textbf{P}; (1-\alpha )\textbf{Q}]_{i}\textbf{W}_{date}\textbf{P}_{d_j}, \label{eq2}\\
\textbf{A}^{date}_{i:} &= softmax(\textbf{S}^{date}_{i:}), \label{eq3}\\
D &= {\textstyle \sum_{i}} [\alpha P; (1-\alpha )Q]_{i} \cdot \textbf{A}^{date}_{i:} \label{eq4}
\end{align}
where $\textbf{P}$ and $\textbf{Q}$ represent the contextualized embeddings of the paragraph and question, and $\textbf{P}_{d_j}$ of the $j^{th}$ date tokens in the paragraph, $\textbf{W}_{date}$ is a trainable parameter, $P, Q$ are the expected attention distribution of the paragraph and the question respectively.
In Equation \ref{eq2}, we concatenate the paragraph embeddings $\textbf{P}$ and question embeddings $\textbf{Q}$ that output from a pre-trained BERT \cite{DBLP:conf/naacl/DevlinCLT19} model to construct the context representation.
A hyper-parameter $\alpha$ is used to adjust their contributions, whose value is empirically determined (Appendix \ref{sec:appendix0}).
The context representation is provided to compute the improved similarity matrix $\textbf{S}_{date}$.
We concatenate the paragraph and question attention inputs in the same way to calculate the final expected distribution over the date tokens $D$ (Eq.\ \ref{eq4}).
Now the interpreter is equipped with question information to make the prediction.
\subsection{Addition and Subtraction Modules}
\label{subsec:addition and subtraction}
In the NMNs' modelling paradigm, for addition/subtraction operations, the programmer takes as input two number distributions and produces an output number distribution over all possible result values: $\verb|add/sub|(N_1, N_2) \rightarrow RL$. $N_1$ and $N_2$ represent the probability distributions of the $1^{st}$ and $2^{nd}$ operands over all numbers that are extracted from the paragraph and collected into a sorted operand list $OL$. The positive and negative values of these numbers are exhaustively combined in pairs, from which the possible results of addition/subtraction operations are compiled into a sorted result list $RL$.
For each input number distribution $N_i, i=1,2$, a matrix $\textbf{C}_i\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ is constructed, where $m$ is the total number of possible results, and $n$ is the maximum number of unique combinations.
Each value $\textbf{C}_i[j,k]$ is found by looking up the probability value in $N_i[k]$ where $OL[k]$ is the $i^{th}$ operand in any pair that produces result $RL[j]$. The probability that the $j^{th}$ number in $N_i$ is the correct operand of the $k^{th}$ pair.
We compute the marginalized joint probability by summing over the product of $C_i$ as the expected distribution over result list $RL$. For the addition module, it is:
\begin{align*}
&p(prediction=RL[j])=\\
&\sum_{k_1,k_2=1}^n \mathbb{1}_{(OL[k_1]+OL[k_2]=RL[j])}\textbf{C}_1[j,k_1]*\textbf{C}_2[j,k_2]
\end{align*}
For instance, assume the sorted operand list $OL$ from a paragraph is [1, 5, 7, 11] and $N_1=[0.1,0.4,0.2,0.3]$. Different combinations are formed, e.g., (+$n_1$, +$n_2$) for addition and (+$n_1$, -$n_2$) for subtraction, and all possible results of the combinations are compiled into two result lists, one for addition and one for subtraction. For subtraction in this case, $RL=[0,2,4,6,10]$. The value of $\textbf{C}_1[2, 1]$ is 0.4, which is found from $N_1[1]$ because the result 4 can be calculated from (+5, -1); and $\textbf{C}_1[2, 3]=0.3$ which equals to $N_1[3]$ as 4 is the result of (+11, -7) as well.
$\textbf{C}_2$ is computed in the same way to further obtain final distribution over $RL$.
We compose \verb|add/sub| modules in programs to perform 3-number arithmetic. The key to our approach is to construct and distinguish appropriate $C_i$ and $RL$ in different reasoning steps.
In the second arithmetic step, we should combine the operand list from the paragraph and the result list from the previous step to obtain a new result list $RL'$, $\verb|add/sub|(RL, N) \rightarrow RL'$. Due to the changes in operands and results, the modules should refer to a different $\textbf{C}_i'\in \mathbb{R}^{m'\times n'}$ in the computation.
We extend 2-number \verb|add/sub| modules to recognize the participation of the third number by conditional statement, in order to differentiate the operand and result lists the interpreter should refer to in different steps.
Taking the last example in Figure {\protect\ref{fig:main1}}, the \verb|addition| module would first compute the distribution over result list for `Albanian and Bulgarian citizens'. The \verb|subtraction| module can identify itself in the second step calculation and take the correct input to construct the new matrix $\textbf{C}_i'$. The expected distribution over new result list $RL'$ now represent the difference of `Greek citizens' and the previous result.
Instead of introducing specific modules for multi-number arithmetic such as `3-num-add', the structure of NMNs allows us to recursively execute basic operations several times in a compositional program. This design is in accord with the reasoning process of the CQA task, and natural for NMNs to perform complex computations.
\section{Experiments}
\paragraph{Dataset.}
We construct our own train/dev/test sets based on the DROP dataset \cite{dua2019drop}, which requires numerical reasoning skills.
\citet{Gupta2020NeuralMN} extracted a subset of questions from DROP that is supported by the model's reasoning capability.
This subset contains approximately 20,000/500/2,000 QA pairs for train/dev/test.
To train the \verb|add/sub| modules, we augment the NMNs' subset with more than 5,000 new questions from DROP.
These questions were heuristically identified based on first n-grams and regular expressions (Appendix \ref{sec:appendix1}).
Statistics of this newly constructed dataset can be found in Table \ref{table0}.
Note that the \textsc{add-sub} questions include both 2-/and 3-number arithmetic and \textbf{all experiments in this paper are conducted on this new dataset}.
Model performance is evaluated with the same F1 and EM (Exact Match) scores as \citet{Gupta2020NeuralMN}.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
\toprule
Question types & train & dev & test \\ \midrule
Full & 25,165 & 623 & 2,547 \\ \midrule
\textsc{date-compare} (13.9\%) & 3,505 & 91 & 333 \\
\textsc{date-difference} (12.2\%) & 3,055 & 75 & 313 \\
\textsc{number-compare} (12.1\%) & 2,642 & 157 & 632 \\
\textsc{extract-number} (12.8\%) & 3,349 & 57 & 222 \\
\textsc{count} (17.3\%) & 4,527 & 73 & 288 \\
\textsc{extract-argument} (13.1\%) & 3,467 & 51 & 208 \\
\textsc{\textbf{add-sub}} (18.6\%) & \textbf{4,689} & \textbf{124} & \textbf{553} \\
\quad{2-numbers} & 4,440 & 106 & 505 \\
\quad{3-numbers} & 259 & 24 & 66 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Question types distribution on the expanded DROP subset used in the follow experiments.}
\label{table0}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Result.}
\noindent In Table \ref{table1}, we list the overall performance of the original NMNs, NumNet and our proposed method NMNs$_\pm$.
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering\small
\begin{tabular}{lrr}
\toprule
Method & F1 & EM \\ \midrule
original NMNs \cite{Gupta2020NeuralMN} & 57.5 & 54.9 \\
NumNet \cite{2019NumNet} & 72.3 & 69.4 \\ \midrule
NMNs$_\pm$ (ours) & \textbf{75.2} & \textbf{72.6} \\
\quad w/o add/sub & 61.4 & 58.1 \\
\quad w/o qi & 74.3 & 71.7 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Performance comparison between different models on \textbf{our test set}. Constrained by the page limit, case study and analysis are in Appendix \ref{sec:appendix3}.}
\label{table1}
\end{table}
In Table~\ref{table1}, row ``w/o add-sub'' is the model variant with question attention only, and row ``w/o qi'' only has the \verb|add/sub| modules only.
Compared to the original NMNs, two proposed methods both improve model performance and the \verb|add/sub| modules contributes more.
Our full NMNs$_\pm$ model, with both components added, achieves 75.2\% F1 and 72.6\% EM scores, obtaining significant deltas of 17.7\% absolute points compared to the original NMNs for both F1 and EM.
Additionally, NMNs$_\pm$ outperforms NumNet by 2.9\% and 3.2\% absoule points in F1 and EM.
It can be unfair since the original NMNs will perform poorly on the newly added \textsc{add-sub} questions.
Therefore, we list the model performance on different question types in Table \ref{table2}.
Our model achieves higher scores across almost all question types comparing to the original NMNs, attesting to the effectiveness of our proposed techniques.
And it turns out that adding ADD-SUB question types and more training data does not improve the results of the original DROP split.
This might due to the performance degradation of the programmer after adding these new ADD-SUB programs.
When comparing to NumNet, though our model fail on 2-number \textsc{add-sub} questions, we achieve 5.4\% F1 improvement on 3-number \textsc{add-sub} questions, thus results in a comparable performance.
Note that the 2-number data is nearly \textbf{18 times} the 3-number data, which shows our model or NMNs relies less on large scale datasets.
\begin{table}[hbt!]
\centering
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
\toprule
Question type & NMNs & NMNs$_\pm$ & NumNet \\ \midrule
\textsc{date-compare} & 79.2 & \textbf{84.9} & 72.0 \\
\textsc{date-difference} & 69.0 & 73.3 & \textbf{74.1} \\
\textsc{number-compare} & 89.6 & \textbf{90.3} & 89.9 \\
\textsc{extract-number} & 86.4 & \textbf{89.1} & 85.6 \\
\textsc{count} & 54.2 & \textbf{60.2} & 52.4 \\
\textsc{extract-argument} & 73.4 & \textbf{75.3} & 66.1 \\
\textsc{add-sub} & 0.7 & 66.4 & \textbf{67.6} \\
\quad {2-numbers} & 0.8 & 67.9 & \textbf{71.5} \\
\quad {3-numbers} & 0.3 & \textbf{41.2} & 35.8 \\\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{F1 comparison on different question types.}
\label{table2}
\end{table}
Additional ablation studies for the \verb|add/sub| modules (\ref{sec:appendix2}) and a qualitative analysis (\ref{sec:appendix4}) can be found in the appendix.
\section{Conclusion}
In this work, we extend NMNs' numerical reasoning capability to 2-/and 3-number addition and subtraction, and incorporate the influence of question information to the interpreter on number related questions.
Experimental results show that our methods significantly enhance NMNs' numerical reasoning ability, with an increase of 17.7\% absolute F1 points on a newly constructed DROP subset that includes arithmetic questions.
Moreover, our approach also outperforms NumNet, a SOTA numerical reasoning model, by 2.9\% F1 points.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work is partially funded by the DARPA CCU program (HR001121S0024).
\section{Appendix}
\subsection{Hyper-parameter setting for compare-date modules}
\label{sec:appendix0}
\noindent As mentioned above, we use a hyper-parameter $\alpha$ to represent question's and paragraph's weights for the combined context representation. We determine the final coefficient through a series of control parameter comparison experiments: use the same data to train and validate the model with different $\alpha$. The model achieves the best performance (84.9 F1) for \textsc{date-compare} questions when $\alpha$ was set to 0.4 (40\% for paragraph attention and 60\% for question attention), which increase 5.7 absolute points compared to the original NMNs model. The experiment verifies the importance of question information in the numerical reasoning process.
\subsection{Data extraction}
\label{sec:appendix1}
In this research, we expand the DROP subset for original NMNs to cover addition and subtraction questions. Subtraction questions can be easily targeted by their first n-gram, such as `how many more', `how many yards difference'. For three number subtraction, we need to further specified the format by regular expression, such as `how many more \textsc{event-a} and \textsc{event-b} than \textsc{event-c}?' or `how many more \textsc{event-a} compared to \textsc{event-b} and \textsc{event-c}?'. For addition, it is hard to identify how many numbers should participate in the calculation from some of the questions (e.g. `how many total yards did Roethlisberger get in the game?'). Therefore, we use regular expression to distinguish two or three numbers addition and follow the patterns such as `how many total...', `how many ... combined'.
\subsection{Addition and subtraction modules training}
\label{sec:appendix2}
\noindent To discuss the contribution of individual \verb|addition| and \verb|subtraction| module for NMNs, we conduct an ablation experiment by training and testing the model on different datasets as shown in Table \ref{table3}. The five rows represent the model trained on various datasets: addition questions only, subtraction questions only, addition and the original NMNs subset, subtraction and original NMNs subset and our full subset. The columns indicate the model performance results when they test on addition/subtraction questions only and the full DROP subset. As can be seen from the result, the model with subtraction ability only perform greater than with addition ability only.
\begin{table}[hbt!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Datasets} & \multicolumn{2}{l}{addsub dataset} & \multicolumn{2}{l}{full dataset} \\
& F1 & EM & F1 & EM \\ \hline
add & 41.2 & 41.2 & 46.0 & 43.8 \\
sub & 45.7 & 45.7 & 51.3 & 49.2 \\
add+origin & 51.5 & 51.5 & 69.2 & 64.2 \\
sub+origin & 55.1 & 55.1 & 72.6 & 69.8 \\
add+sub+origin & 66.4 & 66.4 & 74.3 & 71.7 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Ablation experiment result for addition and subtraction modules}
\label{table3}
\end{table}
\subsection{Qualitative analysis}
\label{sec:appendix4}
Figure \ref{fig:appendix1} shows some incorrect prediction cases from the original NMNs and the answer from our improved model NMNs$_\pm$. From the examples, we can clearly identify how the proposed techniques improve the numerical reasoning process:
\begin{figure*}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \textwidth]{pdf/Figure_a1.pdf}
\caption{Qualitative analysis. The highlighted spans are corresponding to the modules in the program for each question.}
\label{fig:appendix1}
\end{figure*}
\begin{itemize}
\item In the first example, the original NMNs match wrong tokens `dissolved the Constituent Assembly' given the question `Which event happened first, the Constituent Assembly being elected, or the elimination of hierarchy in the army?', thus located a wrong date `January 1918'. After enhancing the interpreter's awareness of the question, NMNs$_\pm$ can precisely target the spans `a Constituent Assembly was elected' in the paragraph and further provide the correct prediction.
\item The following two examples are wrongly answered by the original NMNs because of incorrect program predictions. The second question was initially categorized into a \textsc{count} question which called the \verb|count| module to calculate the number of attended paragraph spans. The same situation occurs in the third question, because the original NMNs lack the modules that can correctly expresses the reasoning behind the question. The prediction results prove that our NMNs$_\pm$ model handle simple arithmetic operations such as addition and subtraction which meets the task requirement.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Prediction analysis}
\label{sec:appendix3}
The wrong prediction cases study for the original NMNs over DROP is the main motivation of our proposed methods. We conclude the error factors of five numerical question types in detail: \textsc{date-compare}, \textsc{count}, \textsc{date-difference}, \textsc{number-compare} and \textsc{extract-number}.
\begin{figure*}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \textwidth]{pdf/Figure_a2.pdf}
\caption{Root causes for the wrong prediction in \textsc{date-compare} questions. The related events mentioned in the question are highlighted in blue and red, and their relevant dates are in the same color with underline.}
\label{fig:appendix2}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \textwidth]{pdf/Figure_a3.pdf}
\caption{Root causes for the wrong prediction in \textsc{count} questions. The inputs to the find module and their targets in the paragraph are highlighted in red. The blue spans are related to the filter module.}
\label{fig:appendix3}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \textwidth]{pdf/Figure_a4.pdf}
\caption{Root causes for the wrong prediction in date-difference questions. The related events are highlighted in blue, which is the input of the find module. The dates grounding correctly predicted in the compare-date modules are highlighted in red color. The answer predicted by NMNs should be the difference of these two dates.}
\label{fig:appendix4}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \textwidth]{pdf/Figure_a5.pdf}
\caption{Root causes for the wrong prediction in number-compare questions. Similar to figure 1, the input of the find module is highlighted in blue and red, and their related numbers are underlined. The paragraph span predicted as the answer is the one associated to a smaller/larger-valued number according to the questions asking.}
\label{fig:appendix5}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \textwidth]{pdf/Figure_a6.pdf}
\caption{Root causes for the wrong prediction in extract-number questions. The inputs to the find module and their targets in the paragraph are highlighted in red. The blue spans are related to the filter module. The find-num module finally extracts the number associated with this paragraph attention as the answer.}
\label{fig:appendix6}
\end{figure*}
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec1}}
Increasing demands in high-power and high-temperature electronic devices call for wide-band-gap semiconductors as alternative functional materials to silicon. Silicon carbide (SiC) has become one of the most promising materials in power electronic devices owning to its unique combination of high carrier mobility, high critical field strength, high saturation velocity, and high thermal conductivity \cite{Kimoto2014, Millan2014, Kimoto2015, Puschkarsky2019, Han2021, Tian2021}. Among the more than two hundred polytypes, 4H-SiC is preferred for its wider band gap and higher critical electric field than the cubic 3C-SiC and higher carrier mobilities and lower anisotropy as compared to 6H-SiC. Therefore, it is more technologically relevant and has become the major functional SiC polytype for applications in electronic devices \cite{Kimoto2014}.
Despite the recent surge of academic and industrial interests in 4H-SiC, many important aspects of its physical properties and the underlying physics are not clarified yet. For example, as a hexagonal crystal, anisotropy is expected for its physical properties like mechanical \cite{Liu2022} and transport properties \cite{Kimoto2014} such as carrier mobilities and Hall effect. The carrier mobility is a key functional property that determines device performance such as on-resistance \cite{Huang2022}. However, it is difficult to experimentally distinguish between the anisotropy contributions from drift mobility and Hall factor in a Hall measurement, and the common practice is either assuming a unity Hall factor $r_H=1$, estimating $r_H$ using empirically parametrized models, or estimating the true carrier concentration from dopant concentration and activation energies \cite{Iwata2001,Parisini2013,Asada2016,Tanaka2018,Ishikawa2021, Huang2022}. Additionally, the analysis of one of most important mechanisms underlying its charge transport phenomena, i.e. the electron-phonon interactions and scatterings, still relies on empirically determined, adjustable parameters with significant uncertainty. These adjustable parameters were also employed to explain exotic phenomena such as non-unity hole Hall factors \cite{Iwata2001,Asada2016,Tanaka2018}. Therefore, it becomes increasingly important to investigate such microscopic physics and confirm their respective contributions in the charge transport process without resorting to uncertain fitting parameters.
Electron-phonon interactions from the density functional perturbation theory (DFPT) calculations \cite{Giustino2017} emerged as a powerful tool for studying importance phenomena in solid state and their underlying microscopic mechanisms, including phonon-limited charge transport \cite{Ponce2019,Ponce2020a,Ponce2021}, superconductivity \cite{Ma2021,Giustino2007a}, polaron \cite{Verdi2017,Sio2019a}, phonon-assisted optical absorption \cite{Noffsinger2012}, band structure renormalization \cite{Giustino2010,Li2020}, etc. In conjunction with Boltzmann transport equation (BTE), the charge transport in the presence of electrical field and magnetic field can be simulated self-consistently to obtain key quantities like drift mobility \cite{Ponce2019}, breakdown field \cite{Ponce2020}, and thermoelectricity \cite{Deng2020}. Recently, the Hall effect in several typical cubic semiconductors has been studied by solving the BTE in the presence of both electric and magnetic fields, where quantitative agreement has been achieved in comparison with experimental measurements \cite{Ponce2021}. It is thus intriguing to explore the possible anisotropy in the hexagonal phase, to compute the Hall factors in the intrinsic limit, and to clarify the role of electron-phonon interactions in 4H-SiC.
In this work, we performed in-depth analysis of electron-phonon interactions, phonon-limited charge transport, and their anisotropy in 4H-SiC by first-principles calculations. Both short-ranged and long-ranged dipolar/quadrupolar electron-phonon interactions are included from first principles in combination with Wannier-interpolation technique \cite{Brunin2020,Brunin2020a,Park2020,Jhalani2020,Ponce2021}. We find that the spin-orbit coupling (SOC) significantly affect the hole effective masses, even though the SOC splitting is small. The phonon-limited mobilities agree well with experimental measurements of lightly-doped samples, and hole mobility exhibits a stronger anisotropy than that of electron. The electrons are mainly scattered by optical phonons, while the band-edge holes are mostly scattered by acoustic phonons. The Hall factors depend on the directions of both the applied magnetic field and the electric current. Hall factors deviate from 1 for both electrons and holes, and distinct temperature-dependence were predicted. The non-unity is explained by non-parabolic band structure, non-spherical equienergy surface, and energy-dependent electron-phonon scattering strength. This work thus clarifies the anisotropic charge transport phenomena in 4H-SiC and the impact of electron-phonon interactions in the intrinsic limit from a microscopic, \textit{ab initio} perspective. The predicted Hall factors without empirical, adjustable parameters also allows possible comparison between drift mobility and Hall mobility from experimental measurements.
\section{Methods\label{sec2}}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.6cm]{bzband.pdf}
\caption{\label{bzband} (a) The first Brillouin zone of 4H-SiC and major high-symmetry points. The band structure of (b) conduction and (c) valence bands near the band edges. The effective masses along ($\parallel$) and perpendicular to the $c$-axis ($\perp$) are also given.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Carrier mobility and Hall effect calculations}
In a typical Hall measurement for Hall mobility along $\alpha$ direction, an electric current density $\mathbf{j}$ along $\alpha$ and magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$ along $\gamma$ are applied, and the induced Hall field $\mathbf{E}$ or Hall voltage along $\beta$ is measured, where $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are orthogonal. In the linear regime of small $B_{\gamma}$, the Hall coefficient is
\begin{align}
R_{\alpha\beta\gamma}^{H}=\frac{E_{\beta}}{j_{\alpha}B_{\gamma}} = \frac{[\sigma^{-1}(B_{\gamma})-\sigma^{-1}(0)]_{\beta\alpha}}{B_{\gamma}}\nonumber\\
\approx\left[\sigma^{-1}(0)\frac{\sigma(B_{\gamma})-\sigma(0)}{B_{\gamma}}\sigma^{-1}(0)\right]_{\beta\alpha}\label{eq:rh}.
\end{align}
Therefore, calculation of the carrier mobility and Hall coefficient involves computing the magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$-dependent conductivity tensor
\begin{equation}
[\sigma(\mathbf{B})]_{\alpha\beta}=\frac{-e}{V_{uc}}\sum_{n}\int_{\text{BZ}}\frac{d^3 k}{\Omega_{\text{BZ}}}v_{n\mathbf{k}\alpha}\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{n\mathbf{k}}^{\mathbf{B}}.
\end{equation}
Here $V_{uc}$ is the unit-cell volume, $v_{n\mathbf{k}\alpha}=\frac{\partial \varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}}{\partial \hbar k_{\alpha}}$ is the band velocity defined as the $\mathbf{k}$-derivative of eigen-energy $\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}$ along $\alpha$ direction, and $\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{n\mathbf{k}}^{\mathbf{B}}$ is the solution of the linearized (BTE) with magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$
\begin{align}
&-ev_{n\mathbf{k}\beta}\frac{\partial f_{n\mathbf{k}}^0}{\partial\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}}-\frac{e}{\hbar}(\mathbf{v}_{n\mathbf{k}}\times \mathbf{B})\cdot\mathbf{\nabla_{\mathbf{k}}}\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{n\mathbf{k}}^{\mathbf{B}}\nonumber\\
=&\sum_{m}\int_{\text{BZ}}\frac{d^3 q}{\Omega_{\text{BZ}}}\left[\tau_{m\mathbf{k+q}\to n\mathbf{k}}^{-1}\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{m\mathbf{k+q}}^{\mathbf{B}}\right.\nonumber\\
&\left.-\tau_{n\mathbf{k}\to m\mathbf{k+q}}^{-1}\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{n\mathbf{k}}^{\mathbf{B}}\right],
\end{align}
with $f_{n\mathbf{k}}^0$ and $\Omega_{\text{BZ}}$ being the equilibrium Fermi-Dirac distribution and first Brillouin zone volume, and electron-phonon (\textit{e-ph}) scattering rate defined as
\begin{align}
&\tau_{n\mathbf{k}\to m\mathbf{k+q}}^{-1}\nonumber\\
=&\frac{2\pi}{\hbar}\sum_{\nu}|g_{mn\nu}(\mathbf{k},\mathbf{q})|^2\nonumber\\
&\times[(n_{\nu\mathbf{q}}+1-f_{m\mathbf{k+q}}^0)\delta(\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}-\varepsilon_{m\mathbf{k+q}}-\hbar\omega_{\nu\mathbf{q}})\nonumber\\
&+(n_{\nu\mathbf{q}}+f_{m\mathbf{k+q}}^0)\delta(\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}-\varepsilon_{m\mathbf{k+q}}+\hbar\omega_{\nu\mathbf{q}})]\label{eq:tau}.
\end{align}
The \textit{e-ph} matrix element $g_{mn\nu}(\mathbf{k},\mathbf{q})$ is induced by a phonon $\nu\mathbf{q}$ that scatters an electron from state $\left|n\mathbf{k}\right>$ to $\left|m\mathbf{k+q}\right>$, and $n_{\nu\mathbf{q}}$ is the equilibrium Bose-Einstein distribution. The BTE can be further re-cast into a form that is more suitable for iterative solution
\begin{align}
&\left [1-\frac{e}{\hbar}\tau_{n\mathbf{k}}(\mathbf{v}_{n\mathbf{k}}\times \mathbf{B})\cdot\mathbf{\nabla_{\mathbf{k}}}\right ]\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{n\mathbf{k}}^{\mathbf{B}}\nonumber\\
=&ev_{n\mathbf{k}\beta}\tau_{n\mathbf{k}}\frac{\partial f_{n\mathbf{k}}^0}{\partial\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{2\pi\tau_{n\mathbf{k}}}{\hbar}\sum_{m}\int_{\text{BZ}}\frac{d^3 q}{\Omega_{\text{BZ}}}\left[\tau_{m\mathbf{k+q}\to n\mathbf{k}}^{-1}\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{m\mathbf{k+q}}^{\mathbf{B}}\right]\label{eq:bte},
\end{align}
The total scattering time is
\begin{equation}
\tau_{n\mathbf{k}}^{-1}=\sum_{m}\int_{\text{BZ}}\frac{d^3 q}{\Omega_{\text{BZ}}}\tau_{n\mathbf{k}\to m\mathbf{k+q}}^{-1}.
\end{equation}
The above equations can be solved from first principles without any empirical parameters \cite{Ponce2020a,Ponce2021,Desai2021,Macheda2018}. By solving Eq. \eqref{eq:bte} iteratively one obtain the self-consistent solution of $\partial_{E_{\beta}}f_{n\mathbf{k}}^{\mathbf{B}}$. One common approximate solution is the so-called self-energy relaxation time approximation (SERTA), which is approximated using the scattering time $\tau_{n\mathbf{k}}$ by omitting the second term on the right-hand side of Eq. \eqref{eq:bte}. This is equivalent to the first step in iterative solution of Eq. \eqref{eq:bte}. Further approximation, i.e. the constant relaxation time approximation (CRTA) can be made by assuming $\tau_{n\mathbf{k}}$ to be a universal constant $\tau_0$ such that only band structure information is included.
Given the Hall coefficient and conductivity tensor, the Hall mobility along $\alpha$ direction with $B_{\gamma}$ can be computed as
\begin{equation}
\mu_{\alpha}^{\text{H},B_\gamma}=\sigma_{\alpha\alpha}R_{\alpha\beta\gamma}\label{eq:muh},
\end{equation}
and the drift mobility is
\begin{equation}
\mu_{\alpha}=\frac{\sigma_{\alpha\alpha}}{ne}\label{eq:mu}.
\end{equation}
Thus the Hall factor is the factor between Hall and drift mobility
\begin{equation}
r_{\alpha\beta\gamma}^{\text{H}}=\frac{\mu_{\alpha}^{\text{H},B_\gamma}}{\mu_{\alpha}}=R_{\alpha\beta\gamma}ne
\end{equation}
\subsection{First principles calculations}
Evaluation of the \textit{e-ph} scattering rate in Eq. \eqref{eq:tau} requires knowledge of $g_{mn\nu}(\mathbf{k},\mathbf{q})$ and $\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}$ in the whole Brillouin zone. Here we compute the band structure $\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}$ using density functional theory on a $8\times 8\times 2$ $\mathbf{k}$-grid, which is sufficient for accurate Wannier-interpolation as shown in the Appendix. The $g_{mn\nu}(\mathbf{k},\mathbf{q})$ on the same $\mathbf{k/q}$-grid were calculated using relativistic DFPT \cite{Giustino2017} as implemented in {\sc Quantum ESPRESSO} \cite{Giannozzi2009,Giannozzi2017}. Subsequent Fourier-Wannier-interpolation onto much finer grids \cite{Giustino2007} using maximally localized Wannier functions \cite{Marzari2012,Pizzi2020} were carried out with EPW software \cite{Noffsinger2010,Ponce2016}. Dipolar and quadrupolar corrections to the interpolation were also included \cite{Verdi2015,Ponce2021,Brunin2020,Brunin2020a,Jhalani2020,Park2020}, with Born effective charge and dielectric, and dynamical quadrupole tensors calculated from linear response \cite{Baroni2001,Royo2019} as implemented in {\sc Quantum ESPRESSO} \cite{Giannozzi2009,Giannozzi2017} and {\sc abinit} \cite{Gonze2020,Romero2020}. PBEsol generalized gradient approximation \cite{Perdew2008} and norm-conserving pseudopotentials from PseudoDojo project \cite{VanSetten2018} were used for structural relaxation and DFPT calculations. The $GW$ quasiparticle band structure $\varepsilon_{n\mathbf{k}}$ is computed using YAMBO \cite{Marini2009,Sangalli2019} with 800 bands for screening and Green's function calculations. Hybrid functional band structure was computed with HSE06 functional \cite{Heyd2003,Heyd2006}.
\section{Results and Discussion\label{sec3}}
\subsection{Band Structure}
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{table1} The effective masses of electrons ($e$) and holes ($hh$ for heavy hole, $lh$ for light hole, and $sh$ for crystal-field split-off hole) along transverse ($\perp$, in basal plane) and longitudinal ($\parallel$, along $c$-axis) directions. All masses are given in the unit of electron rest mass $m_e$.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\multicolumn{2}{c}{} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{w/o SOC} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{w/ SOC} & \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{c}{{HSE}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{{GW}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{{HSE}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{{GW}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{{Exp}} \\ \midrule
& $m_{\text{M}\Gamma}^{e}$ & 0.58 & 0.54 & 0.58 & 0.54 & 0.58±0.01 \cite{Volm1996}\\ \cmidrule{2-7}
{$m_{\perp}^{e}$} & $m_{\text{MK}}^{e}$ & 0.28 & 0.29 & 0.28 & 0.29 & 0.31±0.01 \cite{Volm1996} \\ \cmidrule{2-7}
& $m_{\perp}^{e}$ & 0.4 & 0.39 & 0.4 & 0.39 & 0.425 \cite{Volm1996}\\ \cmidrule{1-7}
{$m_{\parallel}^{e}$} & $m_{\parallel}^{e}$ & 0.34 & 0.33 & 0.34 & 0.33 & 0.33±0.01 \cite{Volm1996} \\ \cmidrule{1-7}
& $m_{\perp}^{hh}$ & 3.04 & 12.9 & 0.64 & 0.65 & {0.66±0.02 \cite{Son2000}} \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
{$m_{\perp}^{h}$} & $m_{\perp}^{lh}$ & 0.29 & 0.31 & 0.45 & 0.44 & \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
& $m_{\perp}^{sh}$ & 1.37 & 1.14 & 1.40 & 1.42 & \\ \cmidrule{1-7}
& $m_{\parallel}^{hh}$ & 1.48 & 1.48 & 1.48 & 1.50 & {1.75±0.02 \cite{Son2000}} \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
{$m_{\parallel}^{h}$} & $m_{\parallel}^{lh}$ & 1.48 & 1.48 & 1.30 & 1.35 & \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
& $m_{\parallel}^{sh}$ & 0.20 & 0.20 & 0.20 & 0.21 &\\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
We first compare the computed effective masses with those from experiments \cite{Volm1996,Son2000}, as detailed in Table \ref{table1}. The effective masses are computed through polynomial fitting of the band structure near band extrema, as shown in Figure \ref{bzband}. Since the valence bands are very anisotropic and non-parabolic, quartic polynomials were used for them and the effective masses were computed from the quadratic term coefficients. The conduction band edge is at M point, as shown in Figure \ref{bzband}b, and the valley is anisotropic in all three directions. The electron effective mass is almost not affected by band structure method ($GW$ and HSE) or spin-orbit coupling (SOC), possibly due to the low intra-valley degeneracy. The transverse electron effective mass $m_\perp^e$ in basal plane, which is the average of effective masses along M-K and M-$\Gamma$ directions, is around 0.39. The longitudinal electron effective mass $m_\parallel^e$ along $c$-axis (M-L direction) is calculated to be around 0.33. All components of electron effective masses are very close to the experimental values from cyclotron resonance measurements \cite{Volm1996}. On the contrary, the hole effective mass is strongly affected by the SOC, while $GW$ shows very small improvement over HSE. The measured transverse hole effective mass $m_\parallel^e$ of 0.66±0.02 very close to the predicted heavy hole ($hh$) effective mass from $GW$+SOC calculation. The measured longitudinal hole effective mass of 1.75±0.02 is 17\% heavier than the predicted value. Considering the low measurement temperature (4 K), only $hh$ should be occupied and contributing to the cyclotron resonance signals. Overall, the electron effective mass predictions are closer to the experimental counterparts than those for holes, similar to the case of Si \cite{Ponce2018}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=16.4cm]{n_type.pdf}
\caption{\label{n_type} (a) The anisotropic electron mobilities compared with experimentally measured values by Ishikawa et al \cite{Ishikawa2021}. (b) The mode-resolved electron-phonon interactions $|g_{mn\nu}(\mathbf{k},\mathbf{q})|$ with the initial state $m\mathbf{k}$ at conduction band edge (M point) and $\mathbf{q}$ along high-symmetry path. The red circles mark the phonon energy measured at $10 ^\circ C$ \cite{Bauer2009}. Contributions of acoustic phonons, longitudinal optical (LO) phonons, and other optical phonons are compared with the total electron scattering rate at 300 K in (c). The long-ranged (LR) \textit{e-ph} interactions contributions are shown in (d).}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=16.4cm]{p_type.pdf}
\caption{\label{p_type} (a) The anisotropic hole mobilities compared with experimental measurement from literature\cite{Pernot2005,Tanaka2018,Wagner2002,Contreras2017}. (b) The mode-resolved electron-phonon interactions $|g_{mn\nu}(\mathbf{k},\mathbf{q})|$ with the heavy hole state at valence band edge ($\Gamma$ point) being the initial state $m\mathbf{k}$ and $\mathbf{q}$ along high-symmetry path. The red circles mark the phonon energy measured at $10 ^\circ C$ \cite{Bauer2009}. Contributions of acoustic phonons, longitudinal optical (LO) phonons, and other optical phonons are compared with the total hole scattering rate at 300 K in (c). The long-ranged (LR) \textit{e-ph} interactions contributions are shown in (d).}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Intrinsic mobility}
By solving the full-band BTE iteratively, we compute carrier mobilities using Eq. \eqref{eq:rh} to \eqref{eq:mu}. By increasing the density of $\mathbf{k/q}$ Brillouin zone mesh sampling from $15 \times 15 \times 5$ to $75 \times 75 \times 25$, we observe a rapid convergence of the drift mobilities. The Hall mobility, on the other hand, converges slower with a linear trend in $\mathbf{k}$-mesh density $1/N_k$ towards $N_k\to\infty$. Therefore, we linearly extrapolate the mobility data towards $N_k\to\infty$ following Ponc\'e et al \cite{Ponce2021} using the three points with densest $\mathbf{k}$-mesh, as detailed in Appendix.
We first compare the computed anisotropic electron mobilities with experimental measurement on an epitaxial sample fabricated on SiC (11$\overline{2}$0) substrate with a donor density of $2.1\times10^{15} \text{cm}^{-3}$ \cite{Ishikawa2021}. As shown in Figure \ref{n_type}(a), the experimentally measured Hall mobilities are slightly lower than the predicted phonon-limited Hall mobilities and close to the predicted drift mobilities. This is expected as additional scattering mechanisms such as impurities are not included in the calculations. The temperature dependence is also studied by fitting with a power-law relation, $\mu \propto T^{-\beta}$. The typical $\beta$ value for lightly n-doped 4H-SiC is 2.4 to 2.8\cite{Kimoto2014}, while Ishikawa et al \cite{Ishikawa2021} found an decreasing $\beta$ with increased doping concentration with highest $\beta = 2.67$ for $\mu_{\parallel}^{H}$ and $\beta = 2.58$ for $\mu_{\perp}^{H}$ at donor concentration of $2.1\times10^{15} \text{cm}^{-3}$. The calculated $\beta$ in this work is $2.82\pm0.03$ for $\mu_{\parallel}^{H}$ and $2.83\pm0.03$ for $\mu_{\perp}^{H}$ which is expected to be the intrinsic limit. The stronger $T$-dependence of intrinsic mobility is expected as defect-scatterings are absent and the strongly $T$-dependent phonon-scattering is the only mobility-limiting factor here.
Next we investigate the mode-resolved contributions to the \textit{e-ph} scatterings. As shown in Figure \ref{n_type}(c), most of the scatterings for high-energy electrons are contributed by the optical phonons, particularly the polar longitudinal optical (LO) phonons. Near the conduction band edge, the LO phonon contribution reduces due to energy mismatch and the low-energy electrons are mainly scattered by other optical phonons. Moreover, by computing the scattering rate only with long-ranged (LR) interactions, i.e. those from dipolar and quadrupolar \textit{e-ph} interactions, LR contribution is revealed to be important for both high- and low-energy electrons as shown in Figure \ref{n_type}(d). For further clarification, the \textit{e-ph} interactions between conduction band edge state at M point and phonons along high-symmetry path are calculated and visualized in Figure \ref{n_type}(b). It is evident that the electron-LO-phonon interactions are the strongest due to the diverging Fr\"ohlich interaction from non-zero Born effective charges whose average values are $\overline{Z_{\parallel}^*}\approx 2.78$ and $\overline{Z_{\perp}^*}\approx 2.68$, respectively. Additionally, the optical phonons around 75 meV at M point, which could scatter the electrons at one M valley to another M valley, is also significant and becomes another major scattering mechanism apart from the Fr\"ohlich interaction. \textit{e-ph} interactions with other intervalley phonons branches are much weaker. The interactions with acoustic phonons are rather weak, which could be attributed to the \textit{floating} nature of conducting electrons in SiC, whose wave functions are away from atoms or bonds \cite{Matsushita2012}. The short-ranged part of electron-ion interactions can be reduced in this case resulting in weaker deformation potential.
The hole mobilities are also computed and compared with experimental values from several reference\cite{Pernot2005,Tanaka2018,Wagner2002,Contreras2017}, as shown in Figure \ref{p_type}(a). The experimental data were all measured for epilayers on (0001) or slightly off-axis (0001) substrate. Therefore, the measured mobility should be close to the in-basal-plane component and are compared with $\mu_{\perp}$. While the measured mobilities are close to or lower than the computed Hall mobility $\mu_{\perp}^{H}$ around room temperature, at higher temperature the measured mobility decreases at a faster rate than the predictions. Previous studies attributed the strong decrease partially to the reduced hole Hall factor at high temperature, which can be further reduced by high doping levels\cite{Asada2016,Tanaka2018}. The impact of \textit{e-ph} interactions on Hall factor will be further discussed in the next session.
The hole scattering rates are also decomposed into different phonon branches, as shown in Figure \ref{p_type}(b) to \ref{p_type}(d). The holes at valence band edge are mainly scattered by acoustic phonons, while at higher energy above 0.1 eV the optical phonon scatterings are dominant since the emission of high-frequency optical phonons become available in this region. By comparing the contributions from acoustic phonons and LR \textit{e-ph} interactions, it is evident that the short-ranged deformation potential is dominant while the long-ranged piezoelectric scattering from non-zero quadrupolar coupling with acoustic phonons is weak for holes in 4H-SiC at 300 K. The strong deformation potential scattering arises from the $sp^3$ bond nature of the valence electrons, which can strongly couple with the atomic displacement through bond distortion. Although the intermediate-frequency intervalley phonons still couples strongly with holes, there is no final states available for scattering as the valence band edge is centered at the $\Gamma$ point. Therefore, the holes are mainly scattered by intravalley acoustic and optical phonons.
\subsection{Hall factor}
Using the fully \textit{ab initio} band structure without resorting to approximate parabolic or $k\cdot p$ band models, we first compute the Hall factor tensors in the constant relaxation time approximation without considering the scattering mechanisms. In this case, we eliminates the impact of scattering and their deviation from $r_H=1$ solely reflects the realistic band structure, i.e. the band multiplicity, anisotropy, and non-parabolicity.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.6cm]{CRTA_Hall.pdf}
\caption{\label{crta_hall} The Hall factor $r_{\text{H}}$ for (a) electrons and (b) holes, for current $j$ and magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$ parallel to ($\parallel$) or perpendicular to ($\perp$) the $c$-axis.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.6cm]{fs.pdf}
\caption{\label{fs} The equienergy lines of conduction (blue) and valence (red) bands in a $\mathbf{k}$-plane perpendicular to the applied magnetic field, with (a) $\mathbf{B}$ along $c$-axis and (b) $\mathbf{B}$ perpendicular to $c$-axis, respectively. The equienergy lines are 0.1 eV above the conduction band edge and below the valence band edge.}
\end{figure}
As shown in Figure \ref{crta_hall}(a), the electron Hall factors are not significantly temperature-dependent. When the magnetic field $\mathbf{B}_{\parallel}$ is applied along $c$-axis, $r_{\text{H}}$ is around 0.9. The deviation from 1 is attributed to the in-plane anisotropy of the conduction valley, where the electron effective mass along M-$\Gamma$ direction is about twice that of M-K direction, leading to the elliptic equienergy line show in Figure \ref{fs}(a). When $\mathbf{B}_{\perp}$ is applied, the mass anisotropy in the planes perpendicular to $\mathbf{B}_{\perp}$ is reduced because $m_{\parallel}^{e}$ is between $m_{\text{M}\Gamma}^{e}$ and $m_{\text{M}\Gamma}^{e}$. Therefore, the Hall factors with $\mathbf{B}_{\perp}$ are very close to 1 as shown in Figure \ref{crta_hall}(a).
The case of holes is more complicated. The $hh$ and $lh$ bands are energetically close and are all involved in the transport process at the temperatures studied here. Moreover, these bands are very anisotropic and non-parabolic in the vicinity of valence band edge, as revealed by the effective masses and equienergy line shape (Figure \ref{fs}). Therefore, a deviation from unity is naturally expected even without any specific scattering mechanism as in CRTA. Indeed, the computed hole Hall factors are all away from unity. Interestingly, we observed different temperature-dependent Hall factors when magnetic fields are applied in different directions: when $B_{\parallel}$ is applied, $r_{\text{H}}$ decreases as temperature increases; when $B_{\perp}$ is applied, $r_{\text{H}}$ slightly increases at higher temperature. Such behaviours can be traced back to the equienergy line shapes of different bands. As illustrated in Figure \ref{fs}, in the (0001) plane, the low-energy heavy-hole $hh$ bands shows complex, non-elliptic equienergy line, while the high-energy $lh$ bands have almost isotropic, circular equienergy line. Therefore, as temperature increases, $lh$ bands participates into the transport process which explains the $r_{\text{H}}$ approaching 1 at high temperature with $B_{\parallel}$. In the case of $B_{\perp}$, as shown in Figure \ref{fs}(b), the $hh$ bands are elliptic while the $lh$ band becomes non-elliptic. Therefore, $r_{\text{H}}$ deviates further from 1 as temperature increases.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.6cm]{val_tau_path.pdf}
\caption{\label{val_tau_path} The mode-resolved scattering rate of holes in heavy hole band near valence band edge. No significant anisotropy is observed for either the total scattering rate or contributions from individual phonon modes to the band edge holes.}
\end{figure}
When the \textit{e-ph} interactions are included and the BTE is self-consistently solved, the Hall factor $r_{\text{H}}$ changes drastically. The electron $r_{\text{H}}$ increases to as high as 1.6 at 1000 K and remains anisotropic depending on the direction of applied magnetic field. Specifically, when the magnetic field is applied perpendicular to $c$-axis, the Hall factor is almost isotropic. But the value changes significantly when magnetic field is switched to $B\parallel c$-axis, from around 1.6 to around 1.4 at high temperature. Additionally, the electron $r_{\text{H}}$ is increasing with temperature in contrast to the CRTA results which are almost constant across the studied temperature range. Similarly, the hole Hall factor is also different from CRTA results, but the change is less significant. This is attributed to the energy-dependent $\tau$, whose contribution can be approximately described in isotropic case by the Hall scattering factor $r_s=\frac{\langle\langle\tau^2\rangle\rangle}{\langle\langle\tau\rangle\rangle^2}$ where $\langle\langle \tau^i\rangle\rangle=\sum_{nk}\varepsilon_{nk}f_{nk}\tau_{nk}^i/\sum_{nk}\varepsilon_{nk}f_{nk}$\cite{Lundstrom2000}. The computed $r_s$ is 1.22 for electrons and 1.09 for holes at 300 K, which also reflects the different distributions of $\tau$ for electrons and holes near the band edge. The difference arises from both the difference in major scattering mechanisms, as discussed in previous section, and the difference in band structure complexity. Due to the strong anisotropy, non-parabolicity and band multiplicity, the available scattering phase space is more complex than the simple parabolic conduction band. This not only leads to the difference in CRTA $r_{\text{H}}$, but also different $r_s$ in the presence of \textit{e-ph} interactions.
We note that in previous literatures, the Hall factors (deduced from experimental Hall measurement, donor/acceptor density and ionization energy) are lower than the BTE-predicted values in this work. Considering the agreement between theoretical and experimental effective masses, the discrepancy likely arises from the factors other than the band structure, including but not limited to scattering. For example, Asada et al \cite{Asada2016} revealed experimentally that the Hall factors showed significant reduction with increased Al-doping in 4H-SiC, suggesting that doping can be a factor that lowers the Hall factor. Tanaka et al \cite{Tanaka2018} computed the p-type 4H-SiC Hall factor and mobility using BTE in relaxation time approximation with simplified phonon and impurity scattering model in conjunction with adjustable parameters. They assumed that the non-polar optical phonon scattering may lead to highly anisotropic scattering rate in the Basal plane direction ($\perp$) and reduces the Hall factor. However by computing the phonon mode-resolved contributions to the total scattering rate, as shown in Figure \ref{val_tau_path}, it can be seen that both the total and mode-resolved scattering rates are almost isotropic in the basal plane. This suggests that the transport anisotropy is likely dominated by the band structure. Therefore, experimentally observed small Hall factors may not be explained by anisotropic phonon-limited scattering rate. Alternative explanations could be impurity scatterings, dislocation scatterings, uncertainty in the estimated carrier concentrations in experimental works using hydrogenic model, among others.
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we studied the phonon-limited electron and hole transport behaviors of the 4H silicon carbide by solving the Boltzmann transport equation in conjunction with Wannier interpolation of band structure and electron-phonon interactions from density functional (perturbation) theory calculations. The resulting effective masses and carrier mobilities agree well with experimental measurement. The anisotropy of band structure, electron-phonon scattering, and carrier mobilities are investigated in details. Spin-orbit interactions must be included to correctly reproduce the experimental valence band structure, while both HSE and GW calculations could excellently reproduce the experimental effective masses. We showed that the anisotropy of electron effective masses and mobilities is weaker than that of the holes, while both the electron and hole Hall factors are strongly direction- and temperature-dependent. The Hall factors significantly deviate from 1, which is explained by the energy-dependent electron-phonon scattering rate and anisotropic band structure. The results clarified the role of electron-phonon interactions in the transport phenomena of the technologically-relevant 4H-SiC.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the "Pioneer" and "Leading Goose" R\&D Program of Zhejiang (Grant No. 2022C01021). We are grateful for the computational resources provided by the National SuperComputer Center in Tianjin and the ZJUICI Supercomputer Platform.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
The purpose of this work is to establish the results on the well-posedness of the wave equation for the Sturm-Liouville operator with a singular intermediate coefficient and a singular potential.
In \cite{Lan-Ham}, very weak solutions of the wave equation for the Landau Hamiltonian with an irregular electromagnetic field are obtained for an unbounded domain in the space. A number of works (\cite{ARST1}, \cite{ARST2}, \cite{ARST3}, \cite{CRT1}, \cite{CRT2}, \cite{CRT3}, \cite{Garet}, \cite{R-Y}) are also devoted to this topic. The difference between our results is that we consider the problem in a bounded domain. We have obtained similar results in the work \cite{R-Sh-Y}, so our current work is a further development of these results, allowing one to include the intermediate term.
It is well known that the wave equation is easily reduced to ordinary linear equations by the ``separation of variables" method (see, for example, \cite{Separ}).
To obtain the main results, we present some information about the Sturm-Liouville operator with singular potentials. Savchuk and Shkalikov in \cite{Sav-Shk} obtained eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the Sturm-Liouville operator with singular potentials. This method was further developed in the works \cite{N-zSk}, \cite{Savch}, \cite{Sav-Shk2}, \cite{SV}. We are guided by this method and will develop it with the addition of an intermediate coefficient, and, accordingly, additional conditions will be imposed on the coefficients, and the regularity requirements will be relaxed.
In particular, we consider the problem of constructing eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the Sturm-Liouville operator $\mathcal{L}$ generated on the interval (0,1) by the differential expression
\begin{equation}\label{St-L}
\mathcal{L}y:=-\frac{d^2}{dx^2}y+p(x)\frac{d}{dx}y+q(x)y
\end{equation}
with the boundary conditions
\begin{equation}\label{Dirihle}
y(0)=y(1)=0.
\end{equation}
We first assume that $p \in W^2_1(0,1)$ (summable squared with the first derivative), and that the potential $q$ is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{con-q}
q(x)=\nu'(x), \qquad \nu\in L^2(0,1).
\end{equation}
We consider the eigenvalue equation $\mathcal{L}y=\lambda y$. Introducing the substitution
\begin{equation}\label{repl}
y=\exp{\left\{\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}z,
\end{equation}
we get the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq-z}
-z''+q(x)z+\left(\frac{p^2(x)}{4}-\frac{p'(x)}{2}\right)z=\lambda z,
\end{equation}
while the boundary conditions do not change:
\begin{equation}\label{bou-z}
z(0)=z(1)=0.
\end{equation}
We introduce the quasi-derivative in the following form
$$z^{[1]}(x)=z'(x)-\nu(x)z(x),$$
then equation \eqref{eq-z} transforms to the equation
\begin{equation}\label{quasi}
-\left(z^{[1]}\right)'-\nu(x)z^{[1]}+\left(-\nu^2(x)+\frac{p^2(x)}{4}-\frac{p'(x)}{2}\right)z=\lambda z.
\end{equation}
We introduce
$$\mathbf{z}(x)=\left(\begin{array}{c}
z(x) \\
z^{[1]}(x)
\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}
\psi_1(x) \\
\psi_2(x)
\end{array}\right),\qquad A=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\nu & &1 \\
-\nu^2+\frac{p^2}{4}-\frac{p'}{2}-\lambda & & -\nu
\end{array}\right),$$
then we pass from the \eqref{quasi} to the system
$$\mathbf{z}'(x)=A\mathbf{z}.$$
We make the substitution
$$\psi_1(x)=r(x)\sin \theta(x),\qquad \psi_2(x)=\lambda^\frac{1}{2}r(x)\cos \theta(x),$$
which is a modification of the Prufer substitution (\cite{Ince}). Here we have
\begin{equation}\label{theta}
\theta'(x,\lambda)=\lambda^\frac{1}{2}+\nu(x)\sin 2\theta(x,\lambda) +\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}\left(\nu^2(x)-\frac{p^2(x)}{4}+\frac{p'(x)}{2}\right)\sin^2 \theta(x,\lambda),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{r}
r'(x,\lambda)=-r(x,\lambda)\left[\nu(x)\cos 2\theta(x,\lambda)+\frac{\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{2}\left(\nu^2(x)-\frac{p^2(x)}{4}+\frac{p'(x)}{2}\right)\sin 2\theta(x,\lambda)\right].
\end{equation}
The solution of the equation \eqref{theta} will be sought in the form $\theta(x,\lambda)=\lambda^\frac{1}{2} x+\eta(x,\lambda), $ where
$$\eta(x,\lambda)=\int\limits_0^x\nu(s)\sin 2\theta(s,\lambda)ds+\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}\int\limits_0^x\left(\nu^2(s)-\frac{p^2(s)}{4}+\frac{p'(s)}{2}\right)\sin^2 \theta(s,\lambda)ds.$$
Using the method of successive approximations, it is easy to show that this equation has a solution that is uniformly bounded for $0\leq x\leq 1$ and $\lambda\geq 1$. Since $p\in W^1_2(0,1), \, \nu\in L^2(0,1)$ and $\nu^2\in L^1(0,1)$, by virtue of the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma $\eta(x,\lambda)=o(1)$ at $\lambda \to \infty$. Therefore,
$$\theta(x,\lambda)=\lambda^\frac{1}{2}x+o(1),$$
moreover $\theta(0,\lambda)=0.$
Using the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma again, from equation \eqref{r} we find
\begin{eqnarray*}
r(x,\lambda)=\exp{\left(-\int\limits_0^x\nu(s)\cos 2\theta(s,\lambda)ds-\frac{\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{2}\int\limits_0^x\left(\nu^2(s)-\frac{p^2(s)}{4}+\frac{p'(s)}{2}\right)\sin 2\theta(s,\lambda)ds\right)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Using the boundary conditions \eqref{bou-z} we obtain
$$ \psi_1(1,\lambda)=r(1,\lambda)\sin\theta(1,\lambda)=0,\,\, r(1,\lambda)\neq 0,\,\,\theta(1,\lambda)=\pi n.$$
Then the eigenvalues of the equation \eqref{eq-z} with the boundary conditions \eqref{bou-z} are given by
\begin{equation}\label{e-val}
\lambda_n=(\pi n)^2(1+o(n^{-1})),\qquad n=1,2,...,
\end{equation}
and the corresponding eigenfunctions are
\begin{equation}\label{sol-SL}
\Tilde{\psi}_n(x)=r_n(x)\sin(\sqrt{\lambda_n}x +\eta_n(x)).
\end{equation}
The first derivatives of $\Tilde{\psi_n}$ are then given by the formulas
\begin{equation}\label{phi-der}
\Tilde{\psi}'_n(x)=\sqrt{\lambda_n}r_n(x)\cos(\theta_n(x))+\nu(x)\Tilde{\psi}_n(x).
\end{equation}
Let us estimate $\|\Tilde{\psi}_n\|_{L^2}$ using the formula \eqref{sol-SL} as follows
\begin{eqnarray}\label{est-high}
\|\Tilde{\psi}_n\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|r_n(x)\sin\left(\lambda_n^{\frac{1}{2}}x+\eta_n(x)\right)\right|^2dx\leq \int\limits_0^1\left|r_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\leq& \int\limits_0^1\left|\exp\left(-\int\limits_0^x \nu(s)\cos{2\theta_n(s)}ds\right.\right.\nonumber\\
&-&\left.\left.\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\int\limits_0^x\left(\nu^2(s)-\frac{p^2(s)}{4}+\frac{p'(s)}{2}\right)\sin{2\theta_n(s)}ds\right)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim& \int\limits_0^1\exp{\left(2\int\limits_0^x|\nu(s)|ds+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\left(\int\limits_0^x|\nu^2(s)|ds+\int\limits_0^x|p^2(s)|ds+\int\limits_0^x|p'(s)|ds\right)\right)}dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\left(\|\nu\|_{L^1}+\lambda^{-\frac{1}{2}}_n\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|_{L^1}\right)\right)}<\infty,
\end{eqnarray}
since $\nu\in L^2(0,1)$, $p\in W^2_1(0,1)$ and $\lambda_n\to \infty$ at $n\to \infty$.
Also, according to Theorem 4 in \cite{Sav-Shk}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{est_low}
\Tilde{\psi}_n(x)=\sin(\pi nx)+o(1)
\end{equation}
for sufficiently large $n$, it means that there exist some $C_0>0$, such that $C_0<\|\Tilde{\phi}_n\|_{L^2}<\infty$.
Since the eigenfunctions \eqref{sol-SL} form an orthogonal basis in $L^2(0,1)$, we normalize them for further use
\begin{equation}\label{norm}
\psi_n(x)=\frac{\Tilde{\psi}_n(x)}{\sqrt{\langle\Tilde{\psi}_n,\Tilde{\psi}_n\rangle}}=\frac{\Tilde{\psi}_n(x)}{\|\Tilde{\psi}_n\|_{L^2}}.
\end{equation}
Returning again to the substitution \eqref{repl}, we obtain the eigenfunctions
\begin{equation}\label{eig-f}
\phi_n(x)=\exp{\left\{\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}\psi_n(x)
\end{equation}
of the operator $\mathcal{L}$ generated by the differential expression \eqref{St-L} with the boundary conditions \eqref{Dirihle}. In this case, the eigenvalues remain as \eqref{e-val}. It should be noted that the eigenfunctions $\phi_n$ are orthogonal in the weighted space $L^2_g(0,1)$ with norm
$$\|\phi_n\|_{L^2_g}^2=\int\limits_0^1\left|g(x)\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx,$$
where
$$g(x)=\exp{\left\{-\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}.$$
Let us estimate the norm of $\phi_n$ in $L^2(0,1)$ as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{norm-phi}
\|\phi_n\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1\exp{\left\{\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}|\psi_n(x)|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\leq& \exp{\left\{\int\limits_0^1|p(x)|dx\right\}}\int\limits_0^1|\psi_n(x)|^2dx\leq\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}<\infty,
\end{eqnarray}
since $p\in W^2_1(0,1)$ and $\|\psi_n\|_{L^2}=1$.
\section{Main results}
We consider the wave equation
\begin{equation}\label{C.p1}
\partial^2_t u(t,x)+\mathcal{L} u(t,x)=0,\qquad (t,x)\in [0,T]\times (0,1),
\end{equation}
with initial conditions
\begin{equation}\label{C.p2} \left\{\begin{array}{l}u(0,x)=u_0(x),\,\,\, x\in (0,1), \\
\partial_t u(0,x)=u_1(x), \,\,\, x\in (0,1),\end{array}\right.\end{equation}
and with Dirichlet boundary conditions
\begin{equation}\label{C.p3}
u(t,0)=0=u(t,1),\qquad t\in [0,T],
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{1}
\mathcal{L} u(t,x):=-\partial^2_x u(t,x)+p(x)\partial_xu(t,x)+ q(x)u(t,x),\qquad x\in(0,1),
\end{equation}
where $p\in W^2_1(0,1)$, and $q$ is defined as in \eqref{con-q}.
In our results below, concerning the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3}, as the preliminary step we first carry out the analysis in the strictly regular case for summable $q \in L^2(0,1)$. In this case, we obtain the well-posedness in the Sobolev spaces $W^k_\mathcal{L}$ associated to the operator $\mathcal{L}$: we define the Sobolev spaces $W^k_\mathcal{L}$ associated to $\mathcal{L}$, for any $k \in \mathbb{R}$, as the space
$$W^k_{\mathcal{L}}:=\left\{f\in \mathcal{D}'_\mathcal{L}(0,1):\,\mathcal{L}^{k/2}f\in L^2(0,1)\right\},$$
with the norm $\|f\|_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}:=\|\mathcal{L}^{k/2}f\|_{L^2}$. The global space of distributions $\mathcal{D}'_\mathcal{L}(0,1)$ is defined as bellow.
The space $C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1):=\mathrm{Dom}(\mathcal{L}^\infty)$ is called the space of test functions for $\mathcal{L}$, where we define
$$\mathrm{Dom}(\mathcal{L}^\infty):=\bigcap\limits_{m=1}^\infty \mathrm{Dom}(\mathcal{L}^m),$$
where $\mathrm{Dom}(\mathcal{L}^m)$ is the domain of the operator $\mathcal{L}^m$, in turn defined as
$$\mathrm{Dom}(\mathcal{L}^m):=\left\{f\in L^2(0,1): \mathcal{L}^j f\in \mathrm{Dom}(\mathcal{L}),\,\, j=0,1,2,...,m-1\right\}.$$
The Fréchet topology of $C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1)$ is given by the family of norms
\begin{equation}\label{frechet}
\|\phi\|_{C^m_\mathcal{L}}:=\max\limits_{j\leq m}\|\mathcal{L}^j\phi\|_{L^2(0,1)},\quad m\in \mathbb{N}_0,\,\, \phi\in C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1).
\end{equation}
The space of $\mathcal{L}$-distributions
$$\mathcal{D}'_\mathcal{L}:=\mathbf{L}\left(C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1),\mathbb{C}\right)$$
is the space of all linear continuous functionals on $C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1)$. For $\omega \in \mathcal{D}'_\mathcal{L}(0,1)$ and $\phi\in C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1)$, we shall write
$$\omega(\phi)=\langle \omega, \phi\rangle.$$
For any $\psi \in C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1)$, the functional
$$C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1)\ni \phi \mapsto \int\limits_0^1 \psi(x)\phi(x)dx$$
is an $\mathcal{L}$-distribution, which gives an embedding $\psi \in C^\infty_\mathcal{L}(0,1)\hookrightarrow \mathcal{D}'_\mathcal{L}(0,1)$.
We introduce the spaces $C^j([0,T],W^k_\mathcal{L}(0,1))$, given by the family of norms
\begin{equation}
\|f\|_{C^n([0,T],W^k_\mathcal{L}(0,1))}=\max\limits_{0\leq t\leq T}\sum\limits_{j=0}^n\left\|\partial^j_t f(t,\cdot)\right\|_{W^k_\mathcal{L}},
\end{equation}
where $k\in \mathbb{R}, \, f\in C^n([0,T],W^k_\mathcal{L}(0,1)).$
\begin{thm}\label{th1}
Assume that $p'\in L^2(0,1)$, $q=\nu'$, $\nu \in L^\infty(0,1)$. For any $k\in \mathbb{R}$ if the initial data satisfy $(u_0,\, u_1) \in W^{1+k}_{\mathcal{L}}\times W^k_{\mathcal{L}}$ then the wave equation \eqref{C.p1} with the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p2}-\eqref{C.p3} has unique solution $u\in C([0,T], W^{1+k}_{\mathcal{L}})\cap C^1([0,T], W^{k}_{\mathcal{L}})$. It satisfies the estimates
\begin{equation}\label{est1}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{est2}
\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{est3}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\right.\right.\nonumber\\
&+& \left.\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\Big)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{est4}
\left\|\partial^2_xu(t,\cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}
&\lesssim &\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left\{\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left.\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)+\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^2_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{equation}\label{est5}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{W^k_\mathcal{L}} \lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}+\left\|gu_1\right\|^2_{W^{k-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right),
\end{equation}
where the constants in these inequalities are independent of $u_0$, $u_1$, $p$ and $q$.
\end{thm}
We note that $p'\in L^2(0,1)$ implies that $\|p\|_{L^\infty}\leq |p(0)|+\|p'\|_{L^2(0,1)}.$
Indeed, if $p'\in L^2(0,1)$, then
$$|p(x)|=\left|\int\limits_0^xp'(\xi)d\xi+p(0)\right|\leq |p(0)|+\|p'\|_{L^2}<\infty.$$
\begin{proof}
Let us apply the technique of the separation of variables (see, e.g. \cite{Separ}). This method involves finding a solution of a certain form. In particular, we are looking for a solution of the form
$$u(t,x)=T(t)X(x),$$
for functions $T(t)$, $X(x)$ to be determined. Suppose we can find a solution of \eqref{C.p1} of this form. Plugging a function $u(t,x)=T(t)X(x)$ into the wave equation, we arrive at the equation
$$T''(t)X(x)-T(t)X''(x)+p(x)T(x)X'(x)+q(x)T(t)X(x)=0,$$
Dividing this equation by $T(t)X(x)$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{3-1}
\frac{T''(t)}{T(t)}=\frac{X''(x)-p(x)X'(x)-q(x)X(x)}{X(x)}=-\lambda,
\end{equation}
for some constant $\lambda$. Therefore, if there exists a solution $u(t,x) = T(t)X(x)$ of the wave equation, then $T(t)$ and $X(x)$ must satisfy the equations
$$\frac{T''(t)}{T(t)}=-\lambda,$$
$$\frac{X''(x)-p(x)X'(x)-q(x)X(x)}{X(x)}=-\lambda,$$
for some constant $\lambda$. In addition, in order for $u$ to satisfy the boundary conditions \eqref{C.p3}, we need our function $X$ to satisfy the boundary conditions \eqref{Dirihle}. That is, we need to find a function $X$ and a scalar $\lambda$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{4}
-X''(x)+p(x)X'(x)+q(x)X(x)=\lambda X(x),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{5}
X(0)=X(1)=0.
\end{equation}
The equation \eqref{4} with the boundary conditions \eqref{5} has the eigenvalues of the form \eqref{e-val} with the corresponding eigenfunctions of the form \eqref{eig-f} of the Sturm-Liouville operator $\mathcal{L}$ generated by the differential expression \eqref{St-L}.
Further, we solve the left hand side of the equation \eqref{3-1} respect to the independent variable $t$,
\begin{equation}\label{3}
T''(t)=-\lambda T(t), \qquad t\in [0,T].
\end{equation}
It is well known (\cite{Separ}) that the solution of the equation \eqref{3} with the initial conditions \eqref{C.p2} is
$$T(t)=A_n \cos \sqrt{\lambda_n}t+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n \sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right).$$
Then the solution of equation \eqref{C.p1} is given by
\begin{equation}\label{part-sol}
u(t,x)=\left(A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n \sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right)\phi_n(x).
\end{equation}
For each value of $n$ equation \eqref{part-sol} is a solution. By the superposition principle the sum of all these solution is also a solution
\begin{equation}\label{23}
u(t,x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left(A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n \sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right)\phi_n(x).
\end{equation}
Applying the initial conditions to equation \eqref{23}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{u0u1}
u_0(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty A_n\phi_n(x),\qquad u_1(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty B_n\phi_n(x),
\end{equation}
multiplying both sides of each equation in \eqref{u0u1} by $g(x)\psi_m(x)$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{u0u1-g}
\begin{array}{l}
u_0(x)g(x)\psi_m(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty A_n\psi_n(x)\psi_m(x),\\
u_1(x)g(x)\psi_m(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty B_n\psi_n(x)\psi_m(x).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Note that
$$g(x)=\exp{\left\{-\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}},\quad \phi_n(x)g(x)=\psi_n(x).$$
Integrating over $(0,1)$ in \eqref{u0u1-g}, taking into account the orthonormality of $\psi_n$ in $L^2(0,1)$, we obtain
$$A_n=\int\limits_0^1u_0(x)g(x)\psi_n(x)dx, \quad B_n=\int\limits_0^1 u_1(x)g(x)\psi_n(x)dx.$$
Further we will prove that $u\in C^2([0,T],L^2(0,1))$. By using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and fixed $t$, we can deduce that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{25}
\|u(t, \cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1|u(t,x)|^2dx \nonumber\\
&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[A_n \cos \sqrt{\lambda_n} t+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}} B_n\sin\sqrt{\lambda_n} t\right]\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim& \int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|A_n \cos\sqrt{\lambda_n} t+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n} }B_n\sin\sqrt{\lambda_n} t\right|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\leq& \int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left(|A_n||\phi_n(x)|+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}|B_n||\phi_n(x)|\right)^2 dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left(\int\limits_0^1|A_n|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx+\int\limits_0^1\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx\right).
\end{eqnarray}
By using the Parseval identity and taking into account \eqref{norm-phi},
we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{An1}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \int\limits_0^1|A_n|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx&\leq& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty |A_n|^2\nonumber\\
&=&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\int\limits_0^1u_0(x)g(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2\nonumber\\
&=&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\langle (g u_0), \psi_n\rangle\right|^2\leq \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\|g u_0\|^2_{L^2}\nonumber\\
&\leq&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Now, let us estimate $\|g\|_{L^\infty}$, where
$$g(x)=\exp{\left\{-\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}.$$
If $p\geq0$ at $x\in (0,1)$, then $\|g\|_{L^\infty}=1$. Otherwise, when we do not have $p\geq0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{g-exp}
\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}=\esssup_{x\in(0, 1)}|g(x)|^2\leq \exp{\left\{\int\limits_0^1|p(x)|dx\right\}}=\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}.
\end{equation}
According to the last expressions, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{An}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \int\limits_0^1|A_n|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx
&\leq&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\nonumber\\
&\leq&\exp{\left\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
For the second term in \eqref{25}, using \eqref{norm-phi}, the properties of the eigenvalues of the operator $\mathcal{L}$ and the Parseval's identity, we obtain the following estimate
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \int\limits_0^1\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx&\leq& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2\\
&=&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left|\int\limits_0^1\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}u_1(x)g(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2\\
&=&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left|\langle gu_1,\mathcal{L}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\psi_n\rangle\right|^2\\
&=&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left|\langle \mathcal{L}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\left(gu_1\right),\psi_n\rangle\right|^2\\
&=&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\|\mathcal{L}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\left(gu_{1}\right)\right\|^2_{L^2}\leq \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\|gu_{1}\right\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore
$$
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right).
$$
Now, let us estimate
\begin{eqnarray}\label{t26}
\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2&=&\int\limits_0^1|\partial_tu(t,x)|^2dt\nonumber\\
&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[-\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sqrt{\lambda_n}B_n\cos \sqrt{\lambda_n} t\right]\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx \nonumber\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|\sqrt{\lambda_n} A_n |^2+\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|B_n|^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
The second term of \eqref{t26} gives the norm of $\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}$ by the Parseval identity. Since $\lambda_n$ are eigenvalues and $\phi_n$ are eigenfunctions of the operator $\mathcal{L}$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{21-1}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n|^2&=& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\sqrt{\lambda_n}\int\limits_0^1 g(x)u_0(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2 \nonumber\\
&\leq& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left| \int\limits_0^1 \mathcal{L}^\frac{1}{2}\left(gu_0\right)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2.
\end{eqnarray}
It is known by Parseval's identity that
$$\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left| \int\limits_0^1 \mathcal{L}^\frac{1}{2}\left(gu_0\right)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2=\|\mathcal{L}^\frac{1}{2}\left(gu_0\right)\|^2_{L^2}=\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}.$$
Thus,
$$\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right).$$
We now consider the next estimate for the derivative
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1|\partial_xu(t,x)|^2dt\\
&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\phi'(x)$, taking into account \eqref{sol-SL}, \eqref{norm} and \eqref{eig-f}, is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{phi'}
\phi'_n(x)&=&\left(\exp{\left\{\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}\psi_n(x)\right)'=\exp{\left\{\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}\times\nonumber\\
&\times&\left(\frac{\sqrt{\lambda_n}r_n(x)}{\|\Tilde{\psi}_n\|_{L^2}}\cos{\theta_n(x)}+\left(\frac{p(x)}{2}+\nu(x)\right)\psi_n(x)\right).
\end{eqnarray}
By using formula \eqref{phi'} let us estimate
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[A_n\cos \sqrt{\lambda_n}t+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\exp{\left\{\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}\times \right. \nonumber\\
&\times&\left.\left(\frac{\sqrt{\lambda_n}r_n(x)}{\|\Tilde{\psi}_n\|_{L^2}}\cos{\theta_n(x)}+\left(\frac{p(x)}{2}+\nu(x)\right)\psi_n(x)\right)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[|A_n|^2+\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\right|^2\right]\int\limits_0^1\exp{\left\{\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}\left|\frac{\sqrt{\lambda_n}r_n(x)}{\|\Tilde{\psi}_n\|_{L^2}}\right|^2dx \nonumber\\
&+&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[|A_n|^2+\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\right|^2\right]\times\\
&\times&\int\limits_0^1\exp{\left\{\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}\left|\left(\frac{p(x)}{2}+\nu(x)\right)\psi_n(x)\right|^2dx.
\end{eqnarray*}
According \eqref{est-high} and \eqref{est_low}, there exist some $C_0>0$, such that $C_0<\|\Tilde{\psi}_n\|_{L^2}<\infty$, and taking into account \eqref{norm-phi} we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{38}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n|^2+\left|B_n\right|^2\right]\int\limits_0^1\left|r_n(x)\right|^2dx+ \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\times \nonumber\\
&\times&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[|A_n|^2+\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\right|^2\right]\int\limits_0^1\left|\left(\frac{p(x)}{2}+\nu(x)\right)\psi_n(x)\right|^2dx.
\end{eqnarray}
We follow the proof of Lemma 1 in \cite{Savch} to obtain
$$r_n(x)=1+\rho_n(x),\quad \|\rho_n\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\right)\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right),$$
where the constant is independent of $\nu$ and $n$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{39}
\|r_n\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim 1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right).
\end{equation}
For the second term we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{40}
\int\limits_0^1\left|\left(\frac{p(x)}{2}+\nu(x)\right)\psi_n(x)\right|^2dx\lesssim \left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|\psi_n\|^2_{L^2}=\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty} ,
\end{equation}
since $\{\psi_n\}$ is an orthonormal basis in $L^2$. Using the last relations we can obtain the estimate for $\|\psi'_n\|_{L^2}$ as the following form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{psi'-norm}
\|\psi'_n\|^2&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\Big).
\end{eqnarray}
Using \eqref{38}, \eqref{39}, \eqref{40}, \eqref{21-1} and \eqref{An1} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{u_x}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&
\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left[\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\right.\right.\nonumber\\
&+& \left.\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\Big)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Let us get next estimates by using that $\phi''_n(x)=p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)$, since $\phi_n$ is a normalised eigenfunction for $\mathcal{L}$ with eigenvalue $\lambda_n$. We have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{u_x2}
\left\|\partial_x^2u(t, \cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\partial^2_xu(t,x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[A_n \cos \sqrt{\lambda_n}t+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}} B_n \sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi''_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[\left|A_n\right|^2 +\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2 \right]\left|p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[\left|A_n\right|^2 + \left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2 \right]\left|p(x)\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&+&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[\left|A_n\right|^2 +\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2 \right]|(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)|^2dx=J_1+J_2.
\end{eqnarray}
By using \eqref{phi'}-\eqref{u_x} we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{u_xx1}
J_1&:=&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[\left|A_n\right|^2 +\frac{1}{\lambda_n} \left|B_n\right|^2 \right]\left|p(x)\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&=&\int\limits_0^1|p(x)|^2\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[\left|A_n\right|^2 +\frac{1}{\lambda_n} \left|B_n\right|^2 \right]\left|\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim&\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left[\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\right.\right.\nonumber\\
&+& \left.\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\Big)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Let us estimate the second term of \eqref{u_x2},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{u_xx}
J_2&:=&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[\left|A_n\right|^2 + \left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2 \right]|(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim&\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left(|A_n|^2 +\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2\right)\int\limits_0^1|q(x)\psi_n(x)|^2dx+\nonumber\\
&+&\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left(|\lambda_n A_n|^2 +\left|\sqrt{\lambda_n} B_n\right|^2\right)\int\limits_0^1|\psi_n(x)|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\leq&\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left(|A_n|^2 +\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left|\lambda_n A_n\right|^2 +\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\sqrt{\lambda_n}B_n\right|^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Using the property of the operator $\mathcal{L}$ and the Parseval identity for the last expression in \eqref{u_xx}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\sqrt{\lambda_n}B_n\right|^2&=& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\int\limits_0^1\sqrt{\lambda_n}g(x)u_1(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2
\leq\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\int\limits_0^1\mathcal{L}^\frac{1}{2}\left(gu_1\right)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2\\
&=&\left\|\mathcal{L}^\frac{1}{2}\left(gu_1\right)\right\|^2_{L^2}=\|gu_1\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Taking into account the last expression and \eqref{u_xx1}, \eqref{u_xx} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\|\partial^2_xu(t,\cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}
&\lesssim &\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\Big[\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times& \left.\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right]\\
&+&\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\|q\|^2_{L^\infty} \left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)+\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^2_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Let us carry out the last estimate \eqref{est5} using that $\mathcal{L}^ku=\lambda_n^ku$ and Parseval's identity,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\|u(t, \cdot)\right\|^2_{W^k_\mathcal{L}}&=&\left\|\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}u(t, \cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}=\int\limits_0^1\left|\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}u(t,x)\right|^2dx=\int\limits_0^1\left|\lambda_n^\frac{k}{2}u(t,x)\right|^2dx\\
&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[A_n \cos \sqrt{\lambda_n}t+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}} B_n \sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\lambda_n^\frac{k}{2}\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left( \left| \lambda_n^\frac{k}{2}A_n\right|^2+ \left| \lambda_n^\frac{k-1}{2}B_n\right|^2\right)\\
&\leq&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\left\|\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}\left(gu_0\right)\right\|^2_{L^2}+\left\|\mathcal{L}^\frac{k-1}{2}\left(gu_1\right)\right\|^2_{L^2}\right)\\
&=&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}+\left\|gu_1\right\|^2_{W^{k-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof of Theorem \ref{th1} is complete.
\end{proof}
We will now express all the estimates in terms of the coefficients, to be used in the very weak well-posedness in Section \ref{ch4}.
\begin{cor}\label{cor1}
Assume that $p'\in L^2(0,1)$, $q=\nu'$, $\nu \in L^\infty(0,1)$. If the initial data satisfy $(u_0,\, u_1) \in L^2(0,1)\times L^2(0,1)$ and $(u_0'', \, u''_1)\in L^2(0,1)\times L^2(0,1)$, then the wave equation \eqref{C.p1} with the initial/boundary problems \eqref{C.p2}-\eqref{C.p3} has unique solution $u\in C([0,T], L^2(0,1))$ which satisfies the estimates
\begin{equation}\label{ec1}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ec2}
\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \exp{\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left( \|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ec3}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left.\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ec4}
\left\|\partial_x^2u(t, \cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u''_1\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u'_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
where the constants in these inequalities are independent of $u_0$, $u_1$, $p$ and $q$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By using inequality \eqref{25} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{26}
\|u(t, \cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left(\int\limits_0^1|A_n|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx+\int\limits_0^1\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx\right).
\end{eqnarray}
In Theorem \ref{th1} we obtained estimates with respect to the operator $\mathcal{L}$, but here we want to obtain estimates with respect to the initial data $(u_0,\, u_1)$ and functions $p$ and $q$. Therefore, since $\lambda_n\geq 1$ we can use the next estimate
\begin{equation}\label{B-lam}
\int\limits_0^1\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx\leq \int\limits_0^1|B_n|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2dx.
\end{equation}
Thus, using \eqref{An} and the Parseval identity in \eqref{26}, taking into account the last relation, we obtain
$$\|u(t, \cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left(|A_n|^2+|B_n|^2\right) \right)\leq \exp{\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right).$$
By \eqref{t26} we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2 &\lesssim& \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|\sqrt{\lambda_n} A_n |^2+\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|B_n|^2\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $\lambda_n$ are eigenvalues of the operator $\mathcal{L}$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}\label{21}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n|^2&\lesssim&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left| \int\limits_0^1 \lambda_n gu_0(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2\nonumber\\
&=&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left| \int\limits_0^1 \left(-(gu_0)''(x)+p(x)(gu_0)'(x)+q(x)(gu_0)(x)\right)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2\\
&\lesssim& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left| \int\limits_0^1 (gu_0)''(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2+\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left| \int\limits_0^1p(x)(gu_0)'(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2\\
&+&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\int\limits_0^1q(x)(gu_0)(x)\psi_n(x)dx\right|^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $p,\,q\in L^\infty(0,1)$ and by Parseval's identity, we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{LA}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n|^2&\lesssim&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty |\langle (gu_0)'',\psi_n\rangle|^2+\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty |\langle p(gu_0)',\psi_n\rangle|^2+\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty |\langle q(gu_0),\psi_n\rangle|^2\nonumber\\
&=&\|(gu_0)''\|^2_{L^2}+\|p(gu_0)'\|^2_{L^2}+\|q(gu_0)\|^2_{L^2}\nonumber\\
&\leq&\|(gu_0)''\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|(gu_0)'\|^2_{L^2}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|q(gu_0)\|^2_{L^2},
\end{eqnarray}
thus,
$$\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left( \|(gu_0)''\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|(gu_0)'\|^2_{L^2}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right).$$
To obtain the results of Section \ref{ch4}, we need estimates in terms of $p$, $q$, and $(u_0,\,u_1)$. Therefore, we proceed to the next estimates. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|(gu_0)'\|^2&\lesssim& \|g'u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu'_0\|^2_{L^2}\leq \|g'\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2},
\end{eqnarray*}
where
$$g'(x)=-\frac{1}{2}p(x)\exp{\left\{-\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}=-\frac{1}{2}p(x)g(x),$$
and according to \eqref{g-exp} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gu'}
\|(gu_0)'\|^2&\lesssim&\|pg\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}\leq \|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&\leq&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
For $(gu_0)''$ one can obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gu''}
\|(gu_0)''\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \|g''u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|g'u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu''_0\|^2_{L^2}\leq \|(p^2+p')g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\nonumber\\
&+&\|pg\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u_0'\|^2_{L^2}+\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\times\nonumber\\
&\times&\left(\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Given estimates \eqref{gu'}, \eqref{gu''} and \eqref{g-exp}, for $\|\partial_tu(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2}$ we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&\exp{\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left( \|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\\
&+&\left.\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Taking \eqref{phi'}, \eqref{u_x}, \eqref{B-lam} and \eqref{LA} into account, we make the following estimates
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1|\partial_xu(t,x)|^2dt\\
&=&
\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n \right|^2+\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|B_n|^2\right)\int\limits_0^1|r_n(x)|^2dx\\
&+&\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|A_n|^2+\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\right|^2\right)\times\\
&\times&\int\limits_0^1\left(|p(x)|^2+|\nu(x)|^2\right)|\psi_n(x)|^2dx\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|(gu_0)''\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|(gu_0)'\|^2_{L^2}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|gu_0\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\\
&+&\left.\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
According to \eqref{gu'}, \eqref{gu''} and \eqref{g-exp} we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\\
&+&\left.\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left.\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let us get an estimate for
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\|\partial_x^2u(t, \cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\partial^2_xu(t,x)\right|^2dx\\
&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[A_n \cos \sqrt{\lambda_n}t+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}} B_n \sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi''_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim& \int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left(|A_n|^2|\phi''_n(x)|^2 +\left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2|\phi''_n(x)|^2\right)dx\\
&\leq&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty |A_n|^2|p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)|^2dx\\
&+&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2|p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)|^2dx=M_1+M_2.
\end{eqnarray*}
We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
M_1&:=&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty |A_n|^2|p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\int\limits_0^1|p(x)|^2\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|A_n|^2|\phi'_n(x)|^2\right)dx+\int\limits_0^1|q(x)|^2\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|A_n|^2|\phi_n(x)|^2\right)dx\\
&+&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|\lambda_nA_n\phi_n(x)|^2dx,
\end{eqnarray*}
carrying out estimates as in \eqref{u_xx1} and \eqref{LA}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
M_1&\lesssim& \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\left( \|(gu_0)''\|^2_{L^2}\right.\right.\right.\\
&+&\left.\left.\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|(gu_0)'\|^2_{L^2}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}\right)\\
&+&\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|(gu_0)''\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|(gu_0)'\|^2_{L^2}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Similarly, we obtain the following estimate
\begin{eqnarray*}
M_2&:=&\int\limits_0^1\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left|\frac{B_n}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\right|^2|p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)|^2dx\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(
\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right.\right.\\
&+&\left.\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}+\|(gu_1)''\|^2_{L^2}\\
&+&\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|(gu_1)'\|^2_{L^2}+\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Using \eqref{gu'}, \eqref{gu''} and \eqref{g-exp}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\|\partial_x^2u(t, \cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&
\exp{\left\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\\
&+&\left.\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\\
&+&\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u''_1\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u'_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\\
&+&\left.\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof of Corollary \ref{cor1} is complete.
\end{proof}
\section{Non-homogeneous equation case}
In this section, we are going to give brief ideas for how to deal with the non-homogeneous wave equation with initial/boundary conditions
\begin{equation}\label{nonh}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
\partial^2_t u(t,x)+\mathcal{L} u(t,x)=f(t,x),\qquad (t,x)\in [0,T]\times (0,1),\\
u(0,x)=u_0(x),\quad x\in (0,1),\\
\partial_tu(0,x)=u_1(x),\quad x\in(0,1),\\
u(t,0)=0=u(t,1),\quad t\in[0,T],
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where operator $\mathcal{L}$ is defined by
$$\mathcal{L}=-\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+p(x)\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+q(x),\qquad x\in(0,1).$$
\begin{thm}\label{non-hom}
Assume that $p'\in L^2(0,1)$, $q=\nu'$, $\nu \in L^\infty(0,1)$ and $f=f(t,x)\in C^1([0,T],L^2(0,1))$. For any $k\in \mathbb{R}$ if the initial data satisfy $(u_0,\, u_1) \in W^{1+k}_\mathcal{L}\times W^k_\mathcal{L}$ then the non-homogeneous wave equation with initial/boundary conditions \eqref{nonh} has unique solution $u\in C([0,T], W^{1+k}_\mathcal{L})\cap C^1([0,T], W^{k}_\mathcal{L})$ which satisfies the estimates
\begin{equation}\label{es-nh1}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}+2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{es-nh2}
\|\partial_tu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}+2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{es-nh3}
\|\partial_xu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\Big\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times&\left.2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{es-nh4}
\|\partial^2_xu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&
\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^2}\}}\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\Big\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times& \left.\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\|q\|^2_{L^\infty} \left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)+\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^2_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\nonumber\\
&+&\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\right.\times\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(2T^2\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+T^2\|f\|^2_{C^1([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right)\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{es-nh5}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{W^k_\mathcal{L}} &\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}+\left\|gu_1\right\|^2_{W^{k-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.2T^2\left\|gf(\cdot,\cdot)\right\|^2_{C([0,T],W^{k-1}_\mathcal{L}(0,1))}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where the constants in these inequalities are independent of $u_0$, $u_1$, $p$, $q$ and $f$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Substitution
\begin{equation}\label{u-v}
u(t,x)=\exp{\left\{\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_0^xp(\xi)d\xi\right\}}v(t,x)
\end{equation}
brings equation \eqref{nonh} to the form
\begin{equation}\label{nonh-s}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
\partial^2_t v(t,x)-\partial^2_x v(t,x)+\left(\frac{p^2(x)}{4}-\frac{p'(x)}{2}+q(x)\right)v(t,x)=g(x)f(t,x),\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad (t,x)\in [0,T]\times (0,1),\\
v(0,x)=g(x)u_0(x),\quad x\in (0,1),\\
\partial_tv(0,x)=g(x)u_1(x),\quad x\in(0,1),\\
v(t,0)=0=v(t,1),\quad t\in[0,T].
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
We can use the eigenfunctions \eqref{norm} of the corresponding (homogeneous) eigenvalue problem \eqref{eq-z}-\eqref{bou-z}, and look for a solution in the series form
\begin{equation}\label{nonhu}
v(t,x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty v_n(t)\psi_n(x),
\end{equation}
where
$$v_n(t) =\int\limits_0^1 v(t,x)\psi_n(x)dx.$$
We can similarly expand the source function,
\begin{equation}\label{func}
g(x)f(t,x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty (gf)_n(t)\psi_n(x),\qquad (gf)_n(t)=\int\limits_0^1g(x)f(t,x)\psi_n(x)dx.
\end{equation}
Now, since we are looking for a twice differentiable function $v(t,x)$ that satisfies the homogeneous
Dirichlet boundary conditions, we can differentiate the Fourier series \eqref{nonhu} term by term and using that the $\psi_n(x)$ satisfies the equation \eqref{eq-z} to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{uxx}
v_{xx}(t,x) = \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty v_n(t)\psi''_n(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty v_n(t)\left(\frac{p^2(x)}{4}-\frac{p'(x)}{2}+q(x)-\lambda_n\right)\psi_n(x).
\end{equation}
We can also twice differentiate the series \eqref{nonhu} with respect to $t$ to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{utt}
v_{tt}(t,x) = \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty v''_n(t)\psi_n(x),
\end{equation}
since the Fourier coefficients of $v_{tt}(t,x)$ are
$$\int\limits_0^1v_{tt}(t,x)\psi_n(x)dx=\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\left[\int\limits_0^1v(t,x)\psi_n(x)dx\right]=v''_n(t).$$
Differentiation under the above integral is allowed since the resulting integrand is continuous.
Substituting \eqref{utt} and \eqref{uxx} into the equation, and using \eqref{func}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty v''_n(t)\psi_n(x)&-&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty v_n(t)\left(\frac{p^2(x)}{4}-\frac{p'(x)}{2}+q(x)-\lambda_n\right)\psi_n(x)\\
&+&\left(\frac{p^2(x)}{4}-\frac{p'(x)}{2}+q(x)\right)\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty v_n(t)\psi_n(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty (gf)_n(t)\psi_n(x),
\end{eqnarray*}
and after a slight rearrangement, we get
$$\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[v''_n(t)+\lambda_nv_n(t)\right]\psi_n(x)=\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty (gf)_n(t)\psi_n(x).$$
But then, due to the completeness,
$$v''_n(t)+\lambda_nv_n(t)=(gf)_n(t), \qquad n=1,2,...,$$
which are ODEs for the coefficients $v_n(t)$ of the series \eqref{nonhu}. By the method of variation of constants we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
v_n(t)&=&A_n\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n \sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\\
&-&\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\\
&+& \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds,
\end{eqnarray*}
where
$$A_n=\int\limits_0^1g(x)u_0(x)\psi_n(x)dx,\qquad B_n=\int\limits_0^1g(x)u_1(x)\psi_n(x)dx.$$
Thus, we can write a solution of the equation \eqref{nonh-s} in the form
\begin{eqnarray*}\label{sol-nh-v}
v(t,x)&=&\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\psi_n(x) \nonumber\\
&-& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\psi_n(x)\nonumber\\
&+&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\psi_n(x).
\end{eqnarray*}
According to \eqref{u-v}, we obtain the solution of the equation \eqref{nonh} in the following form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{sol-nh}
u(t,x)&=&\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi_n(x) \nonumber\\
&-& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\nonumber\\
&+&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x).
\end{eqnarray}
Let us estimate $\|u(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2}$. For this we use the estimates
\begin{eqnarray}\label{est-nonh}
\int\limits_0^1|u(t,x)|^2dx&\lesssim&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx \nonumber\\
&+& \int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&+&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&=&I_1+I_2+I_3.
\end{eqnarray}
For $I_1$ by using \eqref{est1} for the homogeneous case we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
I_1&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Now we estimate $I_2$ in \eqref{est-nonh} as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{I2+}
I_2&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty \left[\int\limits_0^t|(gf)_n(s)|ds\right]^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Using Holder's inequality and taking into account that $t\in [0,T]$ we get
\begin{equation}\label{I2-1}
\left[\int\limits_0^t|(gf)_n(s)|ds\right]^2\leq \left[\int\limits_0^T 1\cdot| (gf)_n(t)|dt\right]^2\leq T\int\limits_0^T| (gf)_n(t)|^2dt,
\end{equation}
since $(gf)_n(t)$ is the Fourier's coefficient of the function $g(x)f(t,x)$ and by Parseval's identity we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{I2-2}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty T\int\limits_0^T|(gf)_n(t)|^2dt&=& T\int\limits_0^T\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty|(gf)_n(t)|^2dt = T\int\limits_0^T\|gf(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}dt\nonumber\\
&\leq& T\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\int\limits_0^T\|f(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}dt.
\end{eqnarray}
Since
$$\|f\|_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}=\max\limits_{0\leq t\leq T}\|f(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2},$$
we arrive at the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{I2-3}
T\int\limits_0^T\|f(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}dt\leq T^2\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}.
\end{equation}
Thus,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{I2}
I_2&=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim& T^2\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))},
\end{eqnarray}
and $I_3$ in \eqref{est-nonh} is evaluated similarly
\begin{eqnarray}\label{I3}
I_3&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx \nonumber\\
&\lesssim& T^2\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}.
\end{eqnarray}
We finally get
$$
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_\mathcal{L}}+2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right).
$$
Let us estimate $\|\partial_tu(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2}$, for this we calculate $\partial_tu(t,x)$ as follows
\begin{eqnarray*}
\partial_tu(t,x)&=&\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[-\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+B_n\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi_n(x) \\
&+& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\\
&+&
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x),
\end{eqnarray*}
then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_tu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1|\partial_tu(t,x)|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[-\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+B_n\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx \\
&+& \int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&+&
\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left|-\sqrt{\lambda_n}A_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+B_n\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right|^2 \\
&+& \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\right|^2\\
&+&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\right|^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
by using the \eqref{est2} for the homogeneous case and conducting evaluations as in \eqref{I2}, \eqref{I3} we obtain
$$\|\partial_tu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_\mathcal{L}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}+2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right).$$
For \eqref{es-nh3} we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{nh-ux}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1|\partial_xu(t,x)|^2dt\nonumber\\
&\lesssim&
\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&+& \int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&+&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&=&K_1+K_2+K_3.
\end{eqnarray}
Taking \eqref{u_x} into account, we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
K_1&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&+& \left.\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
For $K_2$ in \eqref{nh-ux} using \eqref{phi'}, \eqref{38}, \eqref{39} and \eqref{40} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{K2}
K_2&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\phi'_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\right|^2\nonumber\\
&+&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times&\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\right|^2,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{l}
\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\right|^2\\
\leq \sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\right|^2,
\end{array}
\end{equation*}
since $\lambda_n\geq 1,\,n=1,2,...,$ according to \eqref{I2}, so it is enough to estimate
\begin{equation}\label{f2}
\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\right|^2 \lesssim T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}.
\end{equation}
Thus,
\begin{eqnarray*}
K_2&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\times\\
&\times&T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}.
\end{eqnarray*}
For $K_3$ in \eqref{nh-ux} we similarly get
\begin{eqnarray*}
K_3&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\times\\
&\times&T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Taking into account the estimates for $K_1$, $K_2$ and $K_3$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_x u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times&\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+ \left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\\
&+&\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\times\\
&\times&\left.2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We have $\phi_n''(x)=p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x)$, so that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial^2_xu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&=&\int\limits_0^1|\partial^2_xu(t,x)|^2dx\\
&\lesssim& \int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\times\right.\\
&\times&\left(p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n\right)\phi_n(x))\Biggr|^2dx \\
&+& \int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\times\right.\\
&\times&\left(p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n\right)\phi_n(x))\Biggr|^2dx \\
&+&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\times\right.\\
&\times&\left(p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n\right)\phi_n(x))\Biggr|^2dx \\
&=& E_1+E_2+E_3.
\end{eqnarray*}
Using \eqref{est4} we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
E_1&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\times\right.\\
&\times&(p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x))\Bigg|^2dx\\&\lesssim&
\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^2}\}}\Big\{\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left.\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty} \left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)+\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^2_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let us estimate $E_2$ by using \eqref{K2}-\eqref{f2}
\begin{eqnarray*}
E_2&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\times\right.\\
&\times&(p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x))\Biggr|^2dx\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\Big\{\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\right.\\
&+&\left.\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C^1([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We similarly get
\begin{eqnarray*}
E_3&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\times\right.\\
&\times&(p(x)\phi'_n(x)+(q(x)-\lambda_n)\phi_n(x))\Biggr|^2dx\\
&\lesssim& \exp{\{\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\Big\{\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\right.\\
&+&\left.\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C^1([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial^2_xu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&
\exp{\{\|p\|_{L^2}\}}\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\Big\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|gu_0\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\|q\|^2_{L^\infty} \left(\|gu_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^{-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right)+\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^2_{\mathcal{L}}}+\|gu_1\|^2_{W^1_{\mathcal{L}}}\nonumber\\
&+& \left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\right.\\
&+&\left.\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|^2_{C^1([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let us estimate $\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}&\lesssim&
\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx \nonumber\\
&+& \int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&+&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&=&F_1+F_2+F_3.
\end{eqnarray*}
By using \eqref{est5} we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_1&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\left[A_n\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}B_n\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\right]\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}+\left\|gu_1\right\|^2_{W^{k-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Using that $\mathcal{L}^{\frac{k}{2}}\phi_n(x)=\lambda ^{\frac{k}{2}}\phi_n(x)$, \eqref{norm-phi} and following as \eqref{I2+}-\eqref{I2-3}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_2&:=& \int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\cos\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&\exp{\|p\|_{L^1}}\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\int\limits_0^t\sin\left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\lambda^\frac{k-1}{2}\psi_n(x)\right|^2dx\\
&\lesssim&T\exp{\|p\|_{L^1}}\int\limits_0^T\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\left|\lambda^\frac{k-1}{2}(gf)_n(t)\right|^2dt=T\exp{\|p\|_{L^1}}\int\limits_0^T\left\|\lambda^\frac{k-1}{2}gf(t,\cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}dt\\
&=&T\exp{\|p\|_{L^1}}\int\limits_0^T\left\|\mathcal{L}^\frac{k-1}{2}gf(t,\cdot)\right\|^2_{L^2}dt=T\exp{\|p\|_{L^1}}\int\limits_0^T\left\|gf(t,\cdot)\right\|^2_{\mathcal{L}^{k-1}}dt\\
&\leq& T^2\exp{\|p\|_{L^1}}\left\|gf(\cdot,\cdot)\right\|^2_{C([0,T],W^{k-1}_\mathcal{L}(0,1))}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We similarly get
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_3&:=&\int\limits_0^1\left|\sum\limits_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_n}}\sin \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}t\right)\int\limits_0^t \cos \left(\sqrt{\lambda_n}s\right)(gf)_n(s)ds\mathcal{L}^\frac{k}{2}\phi_n(x)\right|^2dx\nonumber\\
&\lesssim&T^2\exp{\|p\|_{L^1}}\left\|gf(\cdot,\cdot)\right\|^2_{C([0,T],W^{k-1}_\mathcal{L}(0,1))}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}\lesssim \exp{\left\{\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left(\left\|gu_0\right\|^2_{W^k_{\mathcal{L}}}+\left\|gu_1\right\|^2_{W^{k-1}_{\mathcal{L}}}+2T^2\left\|gf(\cdot,\cdot)\right\|^2_{C([0,T],W^{k-1}_\mathcal{L}(0,1))}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof of Theorem \ref{non-hom} is complete.
\end{proof}
We will now express all the estimates in terms of the coefficients, to be used in the very weak well-posedness in Section \ref{ch4}.
\begin{cor}\label{cor2}
Assume that $p'\in L^2(0,1)$, $q=\nu'$, $\nu \in L^\infty(0,1)$ and $f(t,x)\in C^1([0,T],L^2(0,1))$. If the initial data satisfy $(u_0,\, u_1) \in L^2(0,1)$ and $(u_0'',\, u''_1)\in L^2(0,1)$, then the non-homogeneous wave equation with initial/boundary conditions \eqref{nonh} has unique solution $u\in C([0,T], L^2(0,1))$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{ec-nh1}
\|u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\{2\|p\|_{L^2}\}}\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}+2T^2\|f\|_{C([0,1],L^2(0,1))}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ec-nh2}
\|\partial_t u(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \exp{\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\}}\left\{ \|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}\right.\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}+2T^2\|g\|^2_{L^\infty}\|f\|_{C([0,1],L^2(0,1))}\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ec-nh3}
\|\partial_xu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times&\left.2T^2\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ec-nh4}
\|\partial^2_xu(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&\exp{\left\{2\|p\|_{L^1}\right\}}\Big\{\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\|u''_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u''_1\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(\|u'_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u'_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\left(\|p\|^4_{L^\infty}+\|p'\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_0\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_1\|^2_{L^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\left(\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}\left(1+\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu\|^2_{L^2}+\|p\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'\|^2_{L^1}\right)+\|p\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left.\|q\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)2T^2\|f\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+T^2\|f\|^2_{C^1([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
where the constants in these inequalities are independent of $u_0$, $u_1$, $p$, $q$ and $f$.
\end{cor}
The proof of Corollary \ref{cor2} immediately follows from Corollary \ref{cor1} and Theorem \ref{non-hom}.
\section{Very weak solutions}\label{ch4}
In this section we will analyse the solutions for less regular potentials $q$ and $p$. For this we will be using the notion of very weak solutions.
Assume that the coefficients $q$, $p$ and initial data $(u_0,\, u_1)$ are the distributions on $(0,1)$.
\begin{defn}\label{D1} (i)
A net of functions $\left(u_\varepsilon=u_\varepsilon(t,x)\right)$ is said to be $L^2$-moderate if there exist $N\in \mathbb{N}_0$ and $C>0$ such that
$$\|u_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2}\leq C \varepsilon^{-N}, \quad \text{for all } t\in[0,T].$$
(ii) Moderateness of data: a net of functions $(u_{0,\varepsilon}=u_{0,\varepsilon}(x))$ is said to be $H^2$-moderate if there exist $N\in \mathbb{N}_0$ and $C>0$ such that
$$\|u'_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\leq C\varepsilon^{-N}, \quad \|u''_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\leq C\varepsilon^{-N}.$$
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}\label{D1-1} (i)
A net of functions $\left(\nu_\varepsilon=\nu_\varepsilon(x)\right)$ is said to be $L^\infty_1$-moderate if there exist $N\in \mathbb{N}_0$ and $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{nu-mod}
\|\nu_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C \varepsilon^{-N}, \qquad \|\nu'_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C \varepsilon^{-N}.
\end{equation}
(ii) A net of functions $(p_\varepsilon)$ is said to be $\log$-$L^\infty_1$-moderate if there exist $N\in \mathbb{N}_0$ and $C>0$ such that
$$\|p_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C |\log \varepsilon|^N, \qquad \|p'_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C \varepsilon^{-N}.$$
\end{defn}
\begin{rem}
We note that for the clarity of expression, we put two condition in \eqref{nu-mod} explicitly. However, we note that the first one follows from the second:
$$\left|\nu_\varepsilon(x)\right|=\left|\int\limits_0^x \nu'_\varepsilon(\xi)d\xi\right|\leq C\|\nu'_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty(0,1)}.$$
The same remark applies to other conditions.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem} We note that such assumptions are natural for distributional coefficients in the sense that regularisations of distributions are moderate. Precisely, by the structure theorems for distributions (see, e.g. \cite{Garet}, \cite{Friedlander}), we know that distributions
\begin{equation}\label{moder}
\mathcal{D}'(0,1) \subset \{L^\infty(0,1) -\text{moderate families} \},
\end{equation}
and we see from \eqref{moder}, that a solution to an initial/boundary problem may not exist in the sense of distributions, while it may exist in the set of $L^\infty$-moderate functions.
\end{rem}
To give an example, at least for $1\leq p<\infty$, let us take $f\in L^2(0,1)$, $f:(0,1)\to \mathbb{C}$. We introduce the function
$$\Tilde{f}=\left\{\begin{array}{l}
f, \text{ on }(0,1), \\
0, \text{ on }\mathbb{R} \setminus (0,1),
\end{array}\right.$$
then $\Tilde{f}:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{C}$, and $\Tilde{f}\in \mathcal{E}'(\mathbb{R}).$
Let $\Tilde{f}_\varepsilon=\Tilde{f}*\psi_\varepsilon$ be obtained as the convolution of $\Tilde{f}$ with a Friedrich mollifier $\psi_\varepsilon$, where
$$\psi_\varepsilon(x)=\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\psi\left(\frac{x}{\varepsilon}\right),\quad \text{for}\,\, \psi\in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R}),\, \int \psi=1. $$
Then the regularising net $(\Tilde{f}_\varepsilon)$ is $L^p$-moderate for any $p \in [1,\infty)$, and it approximates $f$ on $(0,1)$:
$$0\leftarrow \|\Tilde{f}_\varepsilon-\Tilde{f}\|^p_{L^p(\mathbb{R})}\approx \|\Tilde{f}_\varepsilon-f\|^p_{L^p(0,1)}+\|\Tilde{f}_\varepsilon\|^p_{L^p(\mathbb{R}\setminus (0,1))}.$$
Now, let us introduce the notion of a very weak solution to the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3}.
\begin{defn}\label{D2}
Let $p, \, \nu \in \mathcal{D}'(0,1)$. The net $(u_\varepsilon)_{\varepsilon>0}$ is said to be a very weak solution to the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} if there exist a $\log$-$L^\infty_1$-moderate regularisation $p_\varepsilon$ of $p$, $L^\infty_1$-moderate regularisation $\nu_\varepsilon$ of $\nu$ with $q_\varepsilon=\nu'_\varepsilon$, $H^2$-moderate regularisation $u_{0,\varepsilon}$ of $u_0,$ and $L^2$-moderate regularisation $u_{1,\varepsilon}$ of $u_1$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{vw1}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}\partial^2_t u_\varepsilon(t,x)-\partial^2_x u_\varepsilon(t,x)+p_\varepsilon(x)\partial_xu_\varepsilon(t,x)+q_\varepsilon(x) u_\varepsilon(t,x)=0,\,\, (t,x)\in [0,T]\times(0,1),\\
u_\varepsilon(0,x)=u_{0,\varepsilon}(x),\,\,\, x\in (0,1), \\
\partial_t u_\varepsilon(0,x)=u_{1,\varepsilon}(x), \,\,\, x\in (0,1),\\
u_\varepsilon(t,0)=0=u_\varepsilon(t,1), \quad t\in[0,T],
\end{array}\right.\end{equation}
and $(u_\varepsilon)$, $(\partial_x u_\varepsilon)$ are $L^{2}$-moderate.
\end{defn}
Then we have the following properties of very weak solutions.
\begin{thm}[Existence]\label{Ext}
Let the coefficients $p$, $q$ and initial data $(u_0,\, u_1)$ be distributions in $(0,1)$. Then the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} has a very weak solution.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Since the formulation of \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} in this case might be impossible in the distributional sense due to issues related to the product of distributions, we replace \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} with a regularised equation. In other words, we regularise $p$, $p'$, $\nu$, $q$, $u_0$, $u_1$, $u'_0$ and $u''_0$ by some corresponding sets $p_\varepsilon$, $p'_\varepsilon$, $\nu_\varepsilon$, $q_\varepsilon$, $u_{0,\varepsilon}$, $u_{1,\varepsilon}$, $u'_{0,\varepsilon}$ and $u''_{0,\varepsilon}$ of smooth functions from $L^ \infty(0,1)$ and $L^2(0,1)$, respectively.
Hence, $p_\varepsilon$ is $\log$-$L^\infty_1$-moderate regularisation of the coefficient $p$, and $\nu_\varepsilon$ with $q_\varepsilon=\nu'_\varepsilon$ is $L^\infty_1$-moderate regularisation of $\nu$, $u_{0,\varepsilon}$ is $H^2$-moderate regularisation of $u_0$ and $u_{1,\varepsilon}$ is $L^2$-moderate regularisation of $u_1$. So by Definition \ref{D1} there exist $N\in \mathbb{N}_0$ and $C_1>0$, $C_2>0$, $C_3>0$, $C_4>0$, $C_5>0$, $C_6>0$, $C_7>0$, $C_8>0$ such that
$$\|p_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C_1|\log{\varepsilon}|^N,\quad \|p'_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C_2\varepsilon^{-N},\quad \|\nu_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C_3\varepsilon^{-N}\quad \|q_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\leq C_4\varepsilon^{-N},$$
$$\|u_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\leq C_5\varepsilon^{-N}, \quad \|u_{1,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\leq C_6\varepsilon^{-N}, \quad \|u'_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\leq C_7\varepsilon^{-N}, \quad \|u''_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\leq C_8\varepsilon^{-N}.$$
Now we fix $\varepsilon\in (0,1]$, and consider the regularised problem \eqref{vw1}. Then all discussions and calculations of Theorem \ref{th1} are valid. Thus, by Theorem \ref{th1}, the equation \eqref{vw1} has unique solution $u_\varepsilon(t,x)$ in the space $C^0([0,T]; H^1(0,1))\cap C^1([0,T];L^2(0,1))$.
By Corollary \ref{cor1} there exist $N\in \mathbb{N}_0$ and $C>0$, such that
$$\|u_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2}\lesssim \exp{\{2\|p_\varepsilon\|_{L^2}\}}\left(\|u_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}+\|u_{1,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\right)\leq C\varepsilon^{-N},$$
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_x u_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}
&\lesssim& \exp{\left\{2\|p_\varepsilon\|_{L^1}\right\}}\left\{\left(1+\|\nu_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^2}\left(\|\nu_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^2}+\|p_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^2}+\|p'_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^1}\right)\right)\times\right.\nonumber\\
&\times& \left(\|u''_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}+\|p_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}+\left(\|p^2_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|p'_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\|u_{1,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}\right)+\left.\left(\|p_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|\nu_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\left(\|u_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_{1,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}\right)\right\}\leq C\varepsilon^{-N},
\end{eqnarray*}
where the constants in these inequalities are independent of $p$, $p'$, $\nu$, $q$, $u_0$, $u_1$, $u'_0$ and $u''_0$.
Hence, $(u_\varepsilon)$ is $L^2$-moderate, and the proof of Theorem \ref{Ext} is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
By
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\partial_t u_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \exp{\{2\|p_\varepsilon\|_{L^1}\}}\left( \|u''_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}+\|p_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u'_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.\left(\|p^2_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|p'_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}+\|q_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\|u_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_{1,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}\right)\leq C\varepsilon^{-N},
\end{eqnarray*}
we note that the net $\partial_tu_\varepsilon$ is also $L^2$-moderate.
\end{rem}
Describing the uniqueness of the very weak solutions amounts to “measuring” the changes on involved associated nets: negligibility conditions for nets of functions/distributions read as follows:
\begin{defn}[Negligibility]\label{D3}
(i) Let $(u_\varepsilon)$, $(\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon)$ be two nets in $L^2(0,1)$. Then, the net $(u_\varepsilon-\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon)$ is called $L^2$-negligible, if for every $N\in \mathbb{N}$, there exists $C>0$ such that the following condition is satisfied
$$\|u_\varepsilon-\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon\|_{L^2}\leq C \varepsilon^N,$$
for all $\varepsilon\in (0,1]$. In the case where $u_\varepsilon=u_\varepsilon(t,x)$ is a net depending on $t\in [0,T]$, then the negligibility condition can be introduced as
$$\|u_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)-\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2}\leq C \varepsilon^N,$$
uniformly in $t\in [0,T]$. The constant $C$ can depend on $N$ but not on $\varepsilon$.
(ii) Let $(p_\varepsilon)$, $(\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon)$ be two nets in $L^\infty(0,1)$. Then, the net $(p_\varepsilon-\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon)$ is called $L^\infty$-negligible, if for every $N\in \mathbb{N}$, there exists $C>0$ such that the following condition is satisfied
$$\|p_\varepsilon-\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon\|_{L^2}\leq C \varepsilon^N,$$
for all $\varepsilon\in (0,1]$.
\end{defn}
Let us state the ``$\varepsilon$-parameterised problems" to be considered:
\begin{equation}\label{un1}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}\partial^2_t u_\varepsilon(t,x)-\partial^2_x u_\varepsilon(t,x)+p_\varepsilon(x)\partial_xu_\varepsilon(t,x)+ q_\varepsilon(x) u_\varepsilon(t,x)=0,\,\,\, (t,x)\in [0,T]\times(0,1),\\
u_\varepsilon(0,x)=u_{0,\varepsilon}(x),\,\,\, x\in (0,1), \\
\partial_t u_\varepsilon(0,x)=u_{1,\varepsilon}(x), \,\, x\in (0,1),\\
u_\varepsilon(t,0)=0=u_\varepsilon(t,1),\,\, t\in[0,T],
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{un2}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}\partial^2_t \Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,x)-\partial^2_x \Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,x)+\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon(x)\partial_x\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,x)+\Tilde{q}_\varepsilon(x) \Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,x)=0,\quad (t,x)\in [0,T]\times(0,1),\\
\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(0,x)=\Tilde{u}_{0,\varepsilon}(x),\,\,\, x\in (0,1), \\
\partial_t \Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(0,x)=\Tilde{u}_{1,\varepsilon}(x), \,\,\, x\in (0,1),\\
\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,0)=0=\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,1), \quad t\in[0,T].
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{defn}[Uniqueness of the very weak solution]\label{D4}
We say that initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} has a unique very weak solution, if
for all $\log$-$L^\infty_1$-moderate nets $p_\varepsilon$, $\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon$, such that $(p_\varepsilon-\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon)$ is $L^\infty$-negligible; $L^\infty_1$-moderate nets $\nu_\varepsilon$, $\Tilde{\nu}_\varepsilon$ with $q_\varepsilon=\nu'_\varepsilon$, $\Tilde{q}_\varepsilon=\Tilde{\nu}'_\varepsilon$ such that $(q_\varepsilon-\Tilde{q}_\varepsilon)$ is $L^\infty$-negligible; for all $H^2$-moderate regularisations $u_{0,\varepsilon},\,\Tilde{u}_{0,\varepsilon}$, such that $(u_{0,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{0,\varepsilon})$ are $L^2$-negligible and for all $L^2$-moderate regularisations $u_{1,\varepsilon},\,\Tilde{u}_{1,\varepsilon}$, such that $(u_{1,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{1,\varepsilon})$ are $L^2$-negligible, we have that $u_\varepsilon-\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon$ is $L^2$-negligible.
\end{defn}
\begin{thm}[Uniqueness of the very weak solution]\label{Th-U}
Let the coefficients $p$, $q=\nu'$ and initial data $(u_0,\, u_1)$ be distributions in $(0,1)$. Then the very weak solution to the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} is unique.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We denote by $u_\varepsilon$ and $\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon$ the families of solutions to the initial/boundary problems \eqref{un1} and \eqref{un2} respectively. Setting $U_\varepsilon$ to be the difference of these nets $U_\varepsilon:=u_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)-\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)$, then $U_\varepsilon$ solves
\begin{equation}\label{unq}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}\partial^2_t U_\varepsilon(t,x)-\partial^2_x U_\varepsilon(t,x)+p_\varepsilon(x)\partial_xU_\varepsilon(t,x)+q_\varepsilon(x) U_\varepsilon(t,x)=f_\varepsilon(t,x),\\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad (t,x)\in [0,T]\times(0,1),\\
U_\varepsilon(0,x)=(u_{0,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{0,\varepsilon})(x),\,\,\, x\in (0,1), \\
\partial_t U_\varepsilon(0,x)=(u_{1,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{1,\varepsilon})(x), \,\,\, x\in (0,1),\\
U_\varepsilon(t,0)=0=U_\varepsilon(t,1),
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where we set $f_\varepsilon(t,x):=(\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon(x)-p_\varepsilon(x))\partial_x\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,x)+(\Tilde{q}_\varepsilon(x)-q_\varepsilon(x))\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon(t,x)$ for the forcing term to the non-homogeneous initial/boundary problem \eqref{unq}.
Passing to the $L^2$-norm of the $U_\varepsilon$, by using \eqref{ec-nh1} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|U_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& \exp{\{2\|p_\varepsilon\|_{L^2}\}}\left(\|U_\varepsilon(0,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}+\|\partial_tU_\varepsilon(0,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}+2T^2\|f_\varepsilon\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since
$$\|f_\varepsilon\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\leq\|p_\varepsilon-\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\|\partial_x\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+ \|q_\varepsilon-\Tilde{q}_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\|\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}$$
and using the initial data of \eqref{unq}, we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|U_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim&C\varepsilon^{-N_0}\Big( \|u_{0,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_{1,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{1,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}\\
&+&\left.2T^2\|p_\varepsilon-\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\|\partial_x\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+2T^2\|q_\varepsilon-\Tilde{q}_\varepsilon\|^2_{L^\infty}\|\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
for some $N_0>0$.
Taking into account the negligibility of the nets $u_{0,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{0,\varepsilon}$, $u_{1,\varepsilon}-\Tilde{u}_{1,\varepsilon}$, $p_\varepsilon-\Tilde{p}_\varepsilon$ and $q_\varepsilon-\Tilde{q}_\varepsilon$ we get
$$\|U_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\leq C_1\varepsilon^{-N_0}\left(C_2\varepsilon^{N_1}+C_3\varepsilon^{N_2}+C_4\varepsilon^{N_3}\varepsilon^{-N_4}+C_5\varepsilon^{N_5}\varepsilon^{-N_6}\right)$$
for some $C_1>0,\,C_2>0,\,C_3>0,\,C_4>0,\,C_5>0,\,N_0,\, N_4,\,N_6\in \mathbb{N}$ and all $N_1,\,N_2,\,N_3,\,N_5\in \mathbb{N}$, since $\Tilde{u}_\varepsilon$ is moderate. Then, for all $M\in \mathbb{N}$ we have
$$\|U_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}\leq C_M \varepsilon^M.$$
The last estimate holds true uniformly in $t$ , and this completes the proof of Theorem \ref{Th-U}.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}[Consistency]\label{Th-C} Assume that $p'\in L^2(0,1)$, $q=\nu'$, $\nu \in L^\infty(0,1)$, and let $p_\varepsilon$ be any $\log$-$L^\infty_1$-moderate regularisation of $p$, $\nu_\varepsilon$ be any $L^\infty_1$-moderate regularisation of $\nu$ with $q_\varepsilon=\nu'_\varepsilon$. Let the initial data satisfy $(u_0,\, u_1) \in L^2(0,1)\times L^2(0,1)$. Let $u$ be a very weak solution of the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3}. Then for any families $p_\varepsilon$, $q_\varepsilon$, $u_{0,\varepsilon}$, $u_{1,\varepsilon}$ such that $\|u_{0}-u_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\to 0$, $\|u_{1}-u_{1,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\to 0$, $\|p-p_{\varepsilon}\|_{L^\infty}\to 0$ $\|q-q_{\varepsilon}\|_{L^\infty}\to 0$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$, any representative $(u_\varepsilon)$ of $u$ converges as $$\sup\limits_{0\leq t\leq T}\|u(t,\cdot)-u_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2(0,1)}\to 0$$ for $\varepsilon\to 0$ to the unique classical solution in $C([0,T];L^2(0,1))$ of the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} given by Theorem \ref{th1}.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
For $u$ and for $u_\varepsilon$, as in our assumption, we introduce an auxiliary notation $V_\varepsilon(t, x):= u(t,x)-u_\varepsilon(t,x)$. Then the net $V_\varepsilon$ is a solution to the initial/boundary problem
\begin{equation}\label{51}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
\partial^2_tV_\varepsilon(t,x)-\partial^2_xV_\varepsilon(t,x)+p_\varepsilon(x)\partial_x V_\varepsilon(t,x)+q_\varepsilon(x)V_\varepsilon(t,x)=f_\varepsilon(t,x),\\
V_\varepsilon(0,x)=(u_0-u_{0,\varepsilon})(x),\quad x\in (0,1),\\
\partial_tV_\varepsilon(0,x)=(u_1-u_{1,\varepsilon})(x),\quad x\in (0,1),\\
V_\varepsilon(t,0)=0=V_\varepsilon(t,1), \quad t\in[0,T],
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where $f_\varepsilon(t,x)=(p_\varepsilon(x)-p(x))\partial_xu(t,x)+(q_\varepsilon(x)-q(x))u(t,x)$. Analogously to Theorem \ref{Th-U} we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|V_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|^2_{L^2}&\lesssim& C\|p_\varepsilon\|_{L^\infty}\Big( \|u_{0}-{u}_{0,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}+\|u_{1}-{u}_{1,\varepsilon}\|^2_{L^2}\\
&+&\left.2T^2\|p_\varepsilon-p\|^2_{L^\infty}\|\partial_xu\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}+2T^2\|q_\varepsilon-q\|^2_{L^\infty}\|u\|^2_{C([0,T],L^2(0,1))}\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
Since
$$\|u_{0}-{u}_{0,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\to 0,\quad \|u_{1}-{u}_{1,\varepsilon}\|_{L^2}\to 0,\quad \|p_\varepsilon-p\|_{L^\infty}\to 0,\quad \|q_\varepsilon-q\|_{L^\infty}\to 0$$
for $\varepsilon\to 0$ and $u$ is a very weak solution of the initial/boundary problem \eqref{C.p1}-\eqref{C.p3} we get
$$\|V_\varepsilon(t,\cdot)\|_{L^2}\to 0$$
for $\varepsilon\to 0$. This proves Theorem \ref{Th-C}.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Motivation}
In this note we study properties of semigroups that are defined by
the commutator, see (Definition \ref{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)}). Namely, we
are interested when is the commutator or its iteration of the full
congruence 1 equal to the equality relation 0. The first such
property is the \emph{term condition} or \emph{abelian}, that is, when
$[1,1]=0$. Abelian semigroups have been completely characterized by
Warne in \cite{Warne}. In particular, a regular semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is
abelian if and only if it is isomorphic to a direct product
$\mathbf{G}\times \mathbf{A}\times \mathbf{B}$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is an abelian
group, $\mathbf{A}$ is a left zero semigroup and $\mathbf{B}$ is a
right zero semigroup \cite[Corollary 2.6]{Warne}. Further properties
well developed in group theory, and studied in algebras in general,
that are defined using iterated commutator of the full congruence
$1$ are \textit{left (right) nilpotency} and \textit{solvability}
(Definition \ref{DefNilpSolv}). These properties can be further
generalized trough the notion of \textit{supernilpotency}
(Definition \ref{DefSupernilp}). It is important to note that in
general case, a supernilpotent algebra does not have to be nilpotent
(\cite{MM:SNNIN}). One can ask whether a characterization of Warne
type can hold for such properties. The main results of this note are
the following. A regular semigroup is $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable,
$n$-supernilpotent) if and only if it is an $n$-nilpotent
($n$-solvable, $n$-supernilpotent) completely simple semigroup
(Theorem \ref{ThmRegNilpSolv} and Proposition
\ref{PropSupernilpRegular}). Moreover, if we restrict ourselves to
orthodox semigroups, we obtain that an orthodox semigroup is
$n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable, $n$-supernilpotent) if and only if it
is isomorphic to a direct product $\mathbf{G}\times \mathbf{A}\times
\mathbf{B}$ where $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable,
$n$-nilpotent) group, $\mathbf{A}$ is a left zero semigroup and
$\mathbf{B}$ is a right zero semigroup (Theorem
\ref{ThmOrthodoxNilpSolv} and Theorem \ref{SuperNilpOrthCSsg}).
Therefore, we obtain that in orthodox semigroups, conditions of
nilpotency and supernilpotency are equivalent.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section we will review some definitions and properties of regular semigroups and commutator theory, that are needed for our results. For more details one can refer to monographs \cite{Howie} and \cite{McMc}.
In this note we will study \textit{regular} semigroups, that is semigroups $\mathbf{S}=(S,\cdot)$ in which for every element $x$ there exists an element $y\in S$ such that $xyx=x$. For an element $x\in S$ will use notation $V(x)$ for the set of all \textit{inverses} of $x$, that is, all $y\in S$ such that $xyx=x$ and $yxy=y$. Clearly, in a regular semigroup $V(x)\neq\emptyset$ for every $x\in S$. The set of all idempotents of the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ will be, as usual, denoted by $E=E(S)$. Let us recall that there is a \textit{natural partial order} on the set of idempotents $E(S)$ of semigroup $\mathbf{S}$, defined by $e\leq f$ if and only if $ef=fe=e$. We will also study a special class of regular semigroups -- \textit{orthodox} semigroups, which are regular semigroups such that its set of idempotents forms a subsemigroup. In the case $E(S)=S$, we have a semigroup which we call a \textit{band}. A semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is a rectangular band if for every $a,b\in S$ we have $aba=a$. Recall that a semigroup is a rectangular band if and only if it is isomorphic to a direct product of a left zero semigroup and a right zero semigroup, that is, to a semigroup of the form $L\times R$ where $L$, $R$ are nonempty sets, and where multiplication is given by $(l_1,r_1)\cdot (l_2,r_2)=(l_1,r_2)$(\cite[Theorem 1.1.3]{Howie}).
Recall that in a regular semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ two elements $a$ and $b$ are in Green's $\mathcal{J}$ equivalence relation if there exist $x,y,u,v\in S$ such that $a=xby$ and $b=uav$ (\cite{Howie}, page 45). For an element $a\in S$ we will denote its $\mathcal{J}$-equivalence class by $J_a$. One can also define a partial order on the set $S/\mathcal{J}$ of all $\mathcal{J}$-classes in $\mathbf{S}$. For $a,b\in S$ we say that $J_a\leq J_b$ if there exist $u,v\in S$ such that $a=ubv$. The following result is the direct corollary of \cite[Proposition 2.3.2]{Howie}. The following two results are well known properties, however for easier referencing in proofs, we will state them as separete propositions.
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{Howie} Proposition 2.3.2)}\label{HowieProp2.3.2}
In a regular semigroup, every $\mathcal{J}$-class contains at least one idempotent.
\end{pro}
We will also use the following alternative definition of simple semigroups, that is, semigroups that have no proper ideals.
\begin{pro}\textup{\cite{Howie} page 66}\label{HowieSimpleJ}
A semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is simple if and only if $\mathcal{J}=S\times S$.
\end{pro}
In a semigroup without zero, an idempotent $e$ is \textit{primitive} if it is minimal in the ordering of idempotents. If a simple semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ contains a primitive idempotent, we say that $\mathbf{S}$ is a \textit{completely simple semigroup}. Completely simple semigroups are well studied, and characterized by Rees matrix semigroups.
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{Howie} Theorem 3.3.1)}\label{HowieTe3.3.1}
Let $G$ be a group, let $I$ and $\Lambda$ be non-empty sets, and let
$P=[p_{\lambda i}]$ be a $\Lambda\times I$ matrix with entries in
$G$. Let $S=I\times G\times\Lambda$, and define multiplication on
$S$ by
\begin{align*}
&(i,g,\lambda) \cdot (j,h,\mu) = (i,gp_{\lambda j} h,\mu).
\end{align*}
Then $\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]=(S,\cdot)$ is a completely simple semigroup. Conversely, every completely simple semigroup is isomorphic to a semigroup constructed in this way.
\end{pro}
Recall that completely simple semigroups are regular. If $\mathbf{S}=\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ is a completely simple semigroup, then the set of idempotents of $\mathbf{S}$ equals $E(S)=\{(i,p_{\lambda i}^{-1},\lambda):i\in I, \lambda\in\Lambda\}$. Without loss of generality, we can assume that both sets $I$ and $\Lambda$ contain a fixed element $\iota$. Also recall that the group $\mathbf{G}$ is isomorphic to the maximal subgroup of $\mathbf{S}$.
By $\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{A})$ we denote the lattice of all congruences on an algebra $\mathbf{A}$. Recall that a polynomial term $p=p(x_1,\dotsc,x_k)$ of semigroup (group) type of arity $k$, $k\in\mathbb{N}$ is a word over the alphabet $\{x_1,\dotsc,x_k\}\cup\{c_1,\dotsc,c_m\}$ ($\{x_1,\dotsc,x_k\}\cup\{x_1^{-1},\dotsc,x_k^{-1}\}\cup\{c_1,\dotsc,c_m\}$), where $c_1,\dotsc,c_m$, $m\in\mathbb{N}$ are constants, that is, nullary operations. Every polynomial $p$ of arity $k$ over semigroup $\mathbf{S}$, induced by its polynomial term $p$, is a function $p^{\mathbf{S}}:S^k\rightarrow S$. We will use the notation $\operatorname{Pol}_k(\mathbf{S})$ for the set of all polynomials over semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ of arity $k$, $k\in\mathbb{N}$. Also, we will omit writing the superscript $\mathbf{S}$ for the polynomial $p^{\mathbf{S}}(x_1,\dotsc,x_k)$ on $\mathbf{S}$ corresponding to the polynomial term $p(x_1,\dotsc,x_k)$, unless necessary. Note that $p(s_1,\dotsc,s_k)$ for given $s_1,\dotsc,s_k\in S$ is a product of the powers of some of $s_1,\dotsc,s_k$ and some constants from $\mathbf{S}$.
For $k\in\mathbb{N}$, we will denote by $\mathbf{x}$ a $k$-tuple $(x^1,\dotsc,x^k)$ from $S^k$. Also, if $\alpha$ is a congruence on $\mathbf{S}$, and $\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}\in S^k$, we will use notation $\mathbf{x}\;\alpha\;\mathbf{y}$ to denote that for every $i\in\{1,\dotsc,k\}$ we have $x^i\;\alpha\;y^i$. Sometimes we put the domain of the semigroup $S$ as the index of the relation to avoid confusion (for example $1_S$ or $0_S$).
The following definition is due to A. Bulatov \cite{Bu:OTNO}, and it presents a generalization of the binary term condition commutator.
\begin{de}(\cite{Bu:OTNO})\label{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)}
Let $\mathbf{A}$ be an algebra. Let $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and let $\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k,\beta,\delta\in\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{A})$. Then we say that $\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k$ \textit{centralize} $\beta$ \textit{modulo} $\delta$, and we write $C(\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k,\beta;\delta)$, if for every polynomial $p\in\operatorname{Pol}(\mathbf{A})$, of arity $n_1+\dotsc+n_k+m$, where $n_1,\dotsc,n_k,m\in\mathbb{N}$, and every $\mathbf{a}_1,\mathbf{b}_1\in A^{n_1}$, $\dotsc$, $\mathbf{a}_{k},\mathbf{b}_{k}\in A^{n_{k}}$ and $\mathbf{c},\mathbf{d}\in A^{m}$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] $\mathbf{a}_j \;\alpha_j\; \mathbf{b}_j$, for $j=1,\dotsc,k$;
\item[(2)] $\mathbf{c} \;\beta\; \mathbf{d}$;
\item[(3)] $p(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k},\mathbf{c})\;\delta\;p(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k},\mathbf{d})$ for all $k$-tuples $(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k}) \in \{\mathbf{a}_1,\mathbf{b}_1\}\times\dotsc\times\{\mathbf{a}_{k},\mathbf{b}_{k}\} \setminus \{(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k})\}$
\end{enumerate}
we have $p(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k},\mathbf{c}) \; \delta \; p(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k},\mathbf{d})$.
\end{de}
\begin{de}(\cite{Bu:OTNO})\label{DefnHC}
Let $\mathbf{A}$ be an algebra. Let $k\geq 2$ and let $\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k\in\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{S})$. The \textit{$k$-ary commutator of $\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k$} is the smallest congruence $\delta$ on $\mathbf{A}$ such that $C(\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k;\delta)$.
\end{de}
The $k$-ary commutator of $\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k$ will be denoted
by $[\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_k]$. For a congruence
$\alpha\in\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{A})$ the unary commutator $[\alpha]$ denotes the
congruence $\alpha$ itself. For $k=2$ and congruences
$\alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{A})$, the commutator
$[\alpha_1,\alpha_2]$ defined by Definition \ref{DefnHC} is the
binary term condition commutator (see \cite{McMc}, Definition 4.150
and Exercises 4.156.2). This has been proved in \cite{EA:TPFoCA}.
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{FM:CTCMV}, Proposition 3.4)} \label{CommutatorProperties}
Let $\mathbf{A}$ be an algebra, and let $\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta$ be congruences on $\mathbf{A}$. Then we have
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $[\alpha,\beta] \leq \alpha\wedge\beta$;
\item[(ii)] if $\gamma\leq\alpha$ and $\delta\leq\beta$, then $[\gamma,\delta]\leq[\alpha,\beta]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{pro}\label{HC3}
Let $\mathbf{A}$ be an algebra, let $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and let
$\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{n}$ be congruences on $\mathbf{A}$. Then we have
$[\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n]\leq[\alpha_{n-1},\alpha_n]$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof} This follows from the property (HC3) in
\cite{AM:Magna} and \cite{Bu:OTNO}.
\end{proof}
\begin{de}\textup{(\cite{FM:CTCMV}, Definition 6.1)}\label{DefNilpSolv}
Let $\mathbf{A}$ be an algebra, and let $\rho,\sigma$ be congruences on $\mathbf{A}$. We define the series $(\rho,\sigma]^{(k)}$, $k\in\mathbb{N}$, as follows: $(\rho,\sigma]^{(1)} = [\rho,\sigma]$, and $(\rho,\sigma]^{(k+1)} = [\rho,(\rho,\sigma]^{(k)}]$, for $k\in\mathbb{N}$. Similarly, we define the series $[\rho]^{(k)}, k\in\mathbb{N}$ by $[\rho]^{(1)}=[\rho,\rho]$ and $[\rho]^{(k+1)}=[[\rho]^{(k)},[\rho]^{(k)}]$, for $k\in\mathbb{N}$.
Algebra $\mathbf{A}$ is \textit{$n$-nilpotent}, $n\in\mathbb{N}$ if $(1_A,1_A]^{(n)}=0_A$. Similarly, an algebra $\mathbf{A}$ is $n$-solvable, $n\in\mathbb{N}$, if $[1_A]^{(n)}=0_A$.
\end{de}
\begin{rem}\label{remNilp}
An $n$-nilpotent algebra is often called \textit{left} $n$-nilpotent. This notion is justified, since we can dually define the series $[\rho,\sigma)^{(k)}$, $k\in\mathbb{N}$, as $[\rho,\sigma)^{(1)} = [\rho,\sigma]$, and $[\rho,\sigma)^{(k+1)} = [[\rho,\sigma)^{(k)},\sigma]$, for $k\in\mathbb{N}$. We then say that an algebra $\mathbf{A}$ is \textit{right $n$-nilpotent}, $n\in\mathbb{N}$ if $[1_A,1_A)^{(n)}=0_A$. In the general case, the series $(1_A,1_A]^{(n)}$, $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and $[1_A,1_A)^{(n)}$, $n\in\mathbb{N}$ do not have to coincide, and the degrees of left and right nilpotency do not have to be equal (see \cite{KK}). However, for groups the notions of left and right nilpotency do coincide.
Also note that the properties of the commutator stated in Proposition \ref{CommutatorProperties}(ii) imply the inequalities $(\rho,\sigma]^{(k+1)}\leq (\rho,\sigma]^{(k)}$ and $[\rho]^{(k+1)}\leq [\rho]^{(k)}$, for every $k\in\mathbb{N}$, and for arbitrary congruences $\rho,\sigma\in\operatorname{Con}(\mathbf{A})$. Hence, if an algebra $\mathbf{A}$ is $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable), $n\in\mathbb{N}$, then it is $m$-nilpotent ($m$-solvable) for every $m\in\mathbb{N}$ such that $m\geq n$.
\end{rem}
In completely simple semigroups, the commutator is symmetric.
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{CRMS}, Proposition 6.2)}\label{CommRMSSymmetric}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a completely simple semigroup, and let $\rho, \sigma$
be congruences on $\mathbf{S}$. Then $[\rho,\sigma]=[\sigma,\rho]$.
\end{pro}
Therefore, the notions of left and right nilpotency in completely simple semigroups are equivalent. Now we will state the conditions for nilpotency and solvability of completely simple semigroups, but first we need to introduce some notation. Let $\mathbf{S}=\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ be a completely simple semigroup. Every congruence $\rho$ on $\mathbf{S}$ determines equivalence relations $\rho_I$ and $\rho_{\Lambda}$ on sets $I$ and $\Lambda$, respectively (see \cite{Howie}, page 84), in the following way
\begin{align*}
& \rho_I = \{ (i,j)\in I\times I : (\forall \lambda\in\Lambda) (i,p_{\lambda i}^{-1},\lambda)\;\rho\;(j,p_{\lambda j}^{-1},\lambda)\}, \\
& \rho_{\Lambda} = \{ (\lambda,\mu) \in \Lambda\times\Lambda : (\forall i \in I) (i,p_{\lambda i}^{-1},\lambda)\;\rho\;(i,p_{\mu i}^{-1},\mu) \}.
\end{align*}
\begin{de}\textup{(\cite{CRMS}, Definition 5.6)}\label{thetarhosigma}
Let $\mathbf{S}=\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ be a completely simple semigroup and let $\rho,\sigma$ be congruences on $\mathbf{S}$. By $\Theta_{\rho,\sigma}$ we denote the congruence on $\mathbf{G}$ generated by all ordered pairs $(p_{\mu i} p_{\lambda i}^{-1},p_{\mu j}p_{\lambda j}^{-1})$ where $i,j\in I$ and $\lambda,\mu\in\Lambda$ are such that $i\;\rho_I\;j$ and $\lambda\;\sigma_{\Lambda}\;\mu$, or $\lambda\;\rho_{\Lambda}\;\mu$ and $i\;\sigma_I\;j$.
\end{de}
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{CRMS}, Proposition 6.6)}\label{PropNilpSolvEq}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a completely simple semigroup, isomorphic to the Rees matrix semigroup $\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$. Then for every $n\in\mathbb{N}$, we have
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] if the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-nilpotent, then the group $\mathbf{G}$ is also $n$-nilpotent;
\item[(ii)] if the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-solvable, then the group $\mathbf{G}$ is also $n$-solvable.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{CRMS}, Proposition 6.8)}\label{PropNilpSolvCond}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a completely simple semigroup, isomorphic to the Rees matrix semigroup $\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$. If $\Theta_{1,1}\leq [1_G,1_G]$ then for every $n\in\mathbb{N}$, we have
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] if the group $\mathbf{G}$ is $n$-nilpotent, then the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-nilpotent;
\item[(ii)] if the group $\mathbf{G}$ is $n$-solvable, then the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-solvable.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\section{Nilpotency and solvability of regular semigroups}
\begin{pro}\label{ProIdempNilpSolv}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a semigroup, and let $e$ and $f$ be idempotents in $\mathbf{S}$. If $e\leq f$, then for every $n\in\mathbb{N}$ we have
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $e \; (1,1]^{(n)} \; f$;
\item[(ii)] $e\; [1,1)^{(n)}\; f$;
\item[(iii)] $e\; [1]^{(n)} \;f$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
We will prove the relations (i)--(iii) by induction on $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Note that for $n=1$ we have $(1,1]^{(1)}=[1,1]=[1,1)^{(1)}$, as well as $[1]^{(1)}=[1,1]$. Inequality $e\leq f$ gives us $ef=e=fe$. We can write the first part of this double equality as $ef=ee$, which further implies $ef\;[1,1]\; ee$. Now since $e\;1\;f$, $f\;1\;e$, by Definition \ref{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)} the condition $C(1,1;[1,1])$ implies $ff\;[1,1]\;fe$, that is $f\;[1,1]\;e$. This proves the basis of induction for statements (i)--(iii).
(i) Assume that for some $n=k$, $k\in\mathbb{N}$ we have $e \; (1,1]^{(k)}
\; f$. Again from $e\leq f$ we have $ef=e=ee$, which implies
$ef\;[1,(1,1]^{(k)}]\;ee$. Since we also have $e\;1\;f$ and
$f\;(1,1]^{(k)}\;e$, by the inductive hypothesis then by Definition
\ref{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)} the condition
$C(1,(1,1]^{(k)};[1,(1,1]^{(k)}])$ implies
$ff\;[1,(1,1]^{(k)}]\;fe$, that is $f\;(1,1]^{(k+1)}\;e$.
(ii) Dually to (i).
(iii) Assume that for some $n=k$, $k\in\mathbb{N}$ we have $e \; [1]^{(k)} \; f$.
Equality $ef=e=ee$ now implies $ef\;[[1]^{(k)},[1]^{(k)}]\;ee$.
Since we have $e\;[1]^{(k)}\;f$ and $f\;[1]^{(k)}\;e$, by the
inductive hypothesis then by Definition \ref{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)}, the
condition $C([1]^{(k)},[1]^{(k)};[[1]^{(k)},[1]^{(k)}])$ gives us
$ff\;[[1]^{(k)},[1]^{(k)}]\;fe$, that is $f\;[1]^{(k+1)}\;e$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{Cor:e<=f}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a semigroup. If the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ satisfies either of the following conditions
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $\mathbf{S}$ is left $n$-nilpotent,
\item[(ii)] $\mathbf{S}$ is right $n$-nilpotent,
\item[(iii)] $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-solvable,
\end{enumerate}
for some $n\in\mathbb{N}$, then for every $e,f\in E(S)$ the inequality $e\leq f$ implies $e=f$, that is, $(E(S),\leq)$ is an antichain.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $e,f\in S$ idempotents such that $e\leq f$. \\
(i) First assume that $\mathbf{S}$ is a left $n$-nilpotent semigroup, that is $(1,1]^{(n)}=0$. Since $e\leq f$, by Proposition \ref{ProIdempNilpSolv}(i) it follows $e\;(1,1]^{(n)}\;f$, that is $e=f$. \\
(ii) Dually to (i), if $[1,1)^{(n)}=0$, then $e=f$ follows from Proposition \ref{ProIdempNilpSolv}(ii).\\
(iii) If the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-solvable, then $[1]^{(n)}=0$. From Proposition \ref{ProIdempNilpSolv}(iii) we obtain that the inequality $e\leq f$ implies $e\;[1]^{(n)}\;f$, that is $e=f$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{LemaID}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a regular semigroup, and let $J_1,J_2$ be $\mathcal{J}$-classes such that $J_1\leq J_2$. Then there exist idempotents $e$ and $f$ such that $e\in J_1$, $f\in J_2$ and $e\leq f$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is regular, from Proposition \ref{HowieProp2.3.2} it follows that each $\mathcal{J}$-class contains at least one idempotent. Hence, there exist $e_1,e_2\in E(S)$ such that $e_1\in J_1$ and $e_2\in J_2$. Since $J_1\leq J_2$, it follows that $e_1=xe_2y$ for some $x,y\in S$. Denote by $a$ the element $e_2yxe_2$. Then we have $e_1=e_1^2=xe_2y \cdot xe_2y = x\cdot e_2yxe_2 \cdot y = xay$, which implies $J_1\leq J_a$. Now consider the element $b=a^2$, that is $b=e_2yxe_2e_2yxe_2= e_2yxe_2yxe_2$. Since $e_1=xe_2y$, we can write $b=e_2ye_1xe_2$, which gives us $J_b\leq J_1$. On the other hand, we have $e_1=e_1^3= xe_2y \cdot xe_2y \cdot xe_2y = x \cdot e_2yxe_2 \cdot e_2yxe_2 \cdot y = x a^2 y = xby$, which implies $J_1\leq J_b$. Hence, $\mathcal{J}$-classes $J_1$ and $J_b$ coincide. Observe that $b$ is an idempotent, since
\begin{equation*}
b^2= e_2ye_1xe_2 \cdot e_2ye_1xe_2 = e_2ye_1 \cdot xe_2y \cdot e_1xe_2 = e_2ye_1 \cdot e_1 \cdot e_1xe_2 = e_2ye_1xe_2 = b.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, we have the idempotent $b$ in $J_1$ and the idempotent $e_2$ in $J_2$. They satisfy $e_2b = e_2 \cdot e_2ye_1xe_2 = e_2ye_1xe_2=b$ and $be_2 = e_2ye_1xe_2 \cdot e_2 = e_2ye_1xe_2=b$. Therefore $b\leq e_2$, and we can take $e=b$ and $f=e_2$ to be the desired idempotents from $J_1$ and $J_2$, respectively.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{CorOfLemmaID}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a regular semigroup such that $(E(S),\leq)$ is an antichain, where $\leq$ is the natural partial ordering of idempotents. Then $\mathbf{S}$ is a completely simple semigroup.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
First recall that since $\mathbf{S}$ is a regular semigroup, its set of idempotents is non-empty, since $aa',a'a\in E(S)$ for every $a\in S$, $a'\in V(a)$. Let $a,b\in S$ be arbitrary elements, and let $a'\in V(a)$, $b'\in V(b)$. We have $ab=aa' \cdot a \cdot b$ and $ab = a\cdot b \cdot b'b$, which implies $J_{ab}\leq J_a$ and $J_{ab}\leq J_b$. From Lemma \ref{LemaID} it follows that there exist idempotents $e_1,e_2,f_1,f_2\in E(S)$ such that $e_1,e_2\in J_{ab}$, $f_1\in J_a$, $f_2\in J_b$ and $e_1\leq f_1$, $e_2\leq f_2$. However, since $(E(S),\leq)$ is an antichain, these inequalities imply $e_1=f_1$ and $e_2=f_2$. Consequently, we obtain $J_{ab}=J_{e_1}=J_{f_1}=J_a$ and $J_{ab}=J_{e_2}=J_{f_2}=J_b$. Hence, we have $J_a=J_b$ for arbitrary elements $a$ and $b$. Therefore, $\mathcal{J} = S\times S$ which implies that $\mathbf{S}$ is a simple semigroup, by Proposition \ref{HowieSimpleJ}. Now note that in the antichain $(E(S),\leq)$ every element is minimal. Hence, every idempotent in $E(S)$ is a primitive idempotent, which implies that $\mathbf{S}$ is a completely simple semigroup.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{ThmRegNilpSolv}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a regular semigroup, and let $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] Semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is left (right) $n$-nilpotent if and only if $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-nilpotent completely simple semigroup.
\item[(ii)] Semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-solvable if and only if $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-solvable completely simple semigroup.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
(i), (ii) ($\leftarrow$) Every completely simple semigroup is regular, hence this implication is trivially true in both statements (i) and (ii).
\noindent (i) ($\rightarrow$) Assume that $\mathbf{S}$ is a left (right) $n$-nilpotent regular semigroup. From Corollary \ref{Cor:e<=f}(i) (Corollary \ref{Cor:e<=f}(ii)), it follows that $(E(S),\leq)$ is an antichain. Therefore, by Corollary \ref{CorOfLemmaID} we obtain that $\mathbf{S}$ is a left (right) $n$-nilpotent completely simple semigroup, which means that $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-nilpotent completely simple semigroup by Proposition \ref{CommRMSSymmetric}. \\
(ii) ($\rightarrow$) Similarly, if $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-solvable, Corollary \ref{Cor:e<=f}(iii) gives us that $(E(S),\leq)$ is an antichain, and consequently from Corollary \ref{CorOfLemmaID} it follows that $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-solvable completely simple semigroup.
\end{proof}
Because of the statement (i) of Theorem \ref{ThmRegNilpSolv} we will not make the distinction between left and right nilpotency in regular semigroups.
\section{Nilpotency and solvability of orthodox semigroups}
One characterization of completely simple orthodox semigroups is
given as an exercise in \cite[Exercise 4.10]{Howie}, and its full
proof can be found in \cite[Exercise 5.6]{ACain}. It does not give
us the descriptions of the isomorphic structures in detail. Hence we
will be using modified versions of that result, which can again be
found as exercises in \cite{Howie} and \cite{ACain}.
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{Howie}, Exercise 3.8)}\label{HowieExer3.8}
Let $\mathbf{S}=\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ be a completely simple orthodox semigroup. Then $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to the direct product $\mathbf{G}\times\mathbf{B}$, where $\mathbf{B}=I\times \Lambda$ is rectangular band.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
One can show that the map $\phi$ given by $\phi((g,(i,\lambda)) = (i,p_{1i}^{-1}gp_{11}p_{\lambda 1}^{-1},\lambda)$ is isomorphism from $\mathbf{G}\times (I\times \Lambda)$ onto $\mathbf{S}$. Since the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is orthodox, the set of its idempotents forms a subsemigroup of $\mathbf{S}$. For the proof of the homomorphic property of $\phi$ we note that in a completely simple semigroup $\mathbf{S}=\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ idempotents form a subsemigroup if and only if for every $i,j\in I$, $\lambda,\mu\in\Lambda$ we have $p_{\lambda i}^{-1}p_{\lambda j}p_{\mu j}^{-1}=p_{\lambda i}$ (see \cite{Howie}, Exercise 3.7). For the complete proof of the statement see \cite{ACain}, Exercise 5.6 (ii).
\end{proof}
\begin{pro} \textup{(cf. \cite{Howie}, Exercise 4.10, \cite{ACain}, Exercise 5.6)}\label{PropBandTimesGroup}
Let $\mathbf{G}$ be a group and let $\mathbf{B}=I\times\Lambda$ be a rectangular band, and let the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ be the direct product $\mathbf{G}\times\mathbf{B}$. Let $\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ be the Rees matrix semigroup, where $P=[e_G]_{\Lambda\times I}$ is the $\Lambda\times I$ matrix whose all the entries are the identity $e_G$ of group $\mathbf{G}$. Then $\mathbf{S}$ is an orthodox completely simple semigroup, isomorphic to the Rees matrix semigroup $\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
One can show that the map $\psi:\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]\rightarrow\mathbf{S}$ defined by $\psi((i,g,\lambda)) = (g,(i,\lambda))$ is an isomorphism. For the details see \cite{ACain}, Exercise 5.6 (ii).
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}\label{GtimesBisband}
A semigroup $\mathbf{G}\times(I\times\Lambda)$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is a group, and $I\times \Lambda$ is a rectangular band, is a band if and only if $\mathbf{G}$ is the trivial group.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Note that the semigroup $\mathbf{G}\times(I\times\Lambda)$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is a group, and $I\times \Lambda$ is a rectangular band, is itself a band if and only if for every $g\in G$ and $(i,\lambda)\in I\times \Lambda$ we have
\begin{equation*}
(g^2,(i,\lambda)) = (g,(i,\lambda))(g,(i,\lambda)) = (g,(i,\lambda)),
\end{equation*}
which is equivalent with $g^2=g$ for every $g\in G$. Hence, $\mathbf{G}\times(I\times\Lambda)$ is a band if and only if $G=\{e_G\}$ is the trivial group.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}\label{PropOrthodoxNilpSolv}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be an orthodox semigroup, and let $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] If $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-nilpotent then $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to a direct product $\mathbf{G}\times (I\times \Lambda)$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-nilpotent group and $I\times \Lambda$ is a rectangular band.
\item[(ii)] If $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-solvable then $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to a direct product $\mathbf{G}\times (I\times \Lambda)$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-solvable group and $I\times \Lambda$ is a rectangular band.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
(i)-(ii) Assume that the orthodox semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable). Since an orthodox semigroup is regular, from Theorem \ref{ThmRegNilpSolv} it follows that $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable) completely simple semigroup. From Proposition \ref{HowieTe3.3.1} it follows that $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to a Rees matrix semigroup $\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$. Proposition \ref{PropNilpSolvEq} then implies that $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable) group. Since $\mathbf{S}$ is a completely simple orthodox semigroup, from Proposition \ref{HowieExer3.8} it follows that $\mathbf{S}$ isomorphic to the direct product $\mathbf{G}\times(I\times\Lambda)$, where $I\times\Lambda$ is the rectangular band. Therefore, $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to the direct product of an $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable) group $\mathbf{G}$ and the rectangular band $I\times\Lambda$.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}\label{PropBandTimesNilpSolvGroup}
Let $\mathbf{G}$ be a group, and let $I\times\Lambda$ be a rectangular band.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] If $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-nilpotent group, $n\in\mathbb{N}$, then the direct product $\mathbf{S}=\mathbf{G}\times (I\times\Lambda)$ is an $n$-nilpotent orthodox semigroup.
\item[(ii)] If $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-solvable group, $n\in\mathbb{N}$, then the direct product $\mathbf{S}=\mathbf{G}\times (I\times\Lambda)$ is an $n$-solvable orthodox semigroup.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
(i), (ii) Let $\mathbf{S}$ be the direct product of the group $\mathbf{G}$ and the rectangular band $I\times\Lambda$. By Proposition \ref{PropBandTimesGroup} it follows that $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to the completely simple orthodox semigroup $\mathbf{R}=\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$, where $P=[e_G]_{\Lambda\times I}$. Since $p_{\xi x}=e_G$ for all $\xi\in\Lambda,x\in I$, it follows that $p_{\lambda i}^{-1} p_{\lambda j} = e_G = p_{\mu i}^{-1} p_{\mu j}$, for all $i,j\in I$, $\lambda,\mu\in\Lambda$. Therefore, congruence $\Theta_{1_R,1_R}$ is generated by the ordered pair $(e_G,e_G)$. Hence, $\Theta_{1_R,1_R}=0_G$, and consequently $\Theta_{1_R,1_R}\leq [1_G,1_G]$. Therefore, if the group $\mathbf{G}$ is $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable), $n\in\mathbb{N}$, then from Proposition \ref{PropNilpSolvCond}(i) (Proposition \ref{PropNilpSolvCond}(ii)) it follows that the semigroup $\mathbf{R}=\mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ is $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable). Hence, semigroup $\mathbf{S}\simeq \mathcal{M}[G;I,\Lambda;P]$ is also $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable).
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{ThmOrthodoxNilpSolv}
Let $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] An orthodox semigroup is $n$-nilpotent if and only if it is isomorphic to a direct product of an $n$-nilpotent group and a rectangular band.
\item[(ii)] An orthodox semigroup is $n$-solvable if and only if it is isomorphic to a direct product of an $n$-solvable group and a rectangular band.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Follows directly from Proposition \ref{PropOrthodoxNilpSolv} and Proposition \ref{PropBandTimesNilpSolvGroup}.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite{Warne}, Corollary 2.6)}\label{WarneCor2.6}
A regular semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is abelian if and only if $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to the direct product $\mathbf{G}\times \mathbf{L}\times \mathbf{R}$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is an abelian group, $\mathbf{L}$ is a left zero semigroup and $\mathbf{R}$ is a right zero semigroup.
\end{pro}
The characterization of abelian regular semigroups obtaine by Warne can be used to easily deduce the following result.
\begin{cor}\label{CorollaryofWarne}
All rectangular bands are abelian.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a rectangular band. From Proposition
\ref{HowieThm1.1.3} it follows that there exist a left zero
semigroup $\mathbf{L}$ and a right zero semigroup $\mathbf{R}$, such
that $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to the direct product $\mathbf{L}\times
\mathbf{R}$. If $\mathbf{H}=\{e\}$ is the trivial group, then we can
easily see that $\mathbf{L}\times \mathbf{R}$ is isomorphic to
$\mathbf{H}\times \mathbf{L}\times \mathbf{R}$. Hence, $\mathbf{S}$ is
isomorphic to $\mathbf{H}\times \mathbf{L}\times \mathbf{R}$, where
$\mathbf{H}$ is trivially an abelian group. Therefore, $\mathbf{S}$ is
abelian by Proposition \ref{WarneCor2.6}.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}
Let $\mathbf{B}$ be a band, and let $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] Band $\mathbf{B}$ is $n$-nilpotent if and only if it is a rectangular band.
\item[(ii)] Band $\mathbf{B}$ is $n$-solvable if and only if it is a rectangular band.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
(i), (ii) Since each band is an orthodox semigroup, by Theorem
\ref{ThmOrthodoxNilpSolv} it follows that $\mathbf{B}$ is
$n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable) if and only it is isomorphic to a
direct product $\mathbf{G}\times(I\times\Lambda)$ where $\mathbf{G}$
is an $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable) group, and $I\times\Lambda$ is a
rectangular band. From Proposition \ref{GtimesBisband} it follows
that the group $\mathbf{G}$ is trivial. Therefore, a band $\mathbf{B}$ is
an $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable) semigroup if and only if it is
isomorphic to $\{e_G\}\times(I\times\Lambda)$, which is isomorphic
with the rectangular band $I\times\Lambda$. From Corollary
\ref{CorollaryofWarne} it follows that the rectangular band
$I\times\Lambda$ is abelian. By Remark \ref{remNilp},
$I\times\Lambda$ is also $n$-nilpotent ($n$-solvable).
\end{proof}
\section{Supernilpotency in regular semigroups}
\begin{de}(\cite[Definition 7.1]{AM:Magna})\label{DefSupernilp}
Let $k\in\mathbb{N}$. An algebra is $k$-\emph{supernilpotent} if
$[\,\underbrace{1,\dotsc,1}_k\,]=0$.
\end{de}
\begin{pro}\textup{(\cite[Theorem 6.8]{AE:IJAC}, \cite[Corollary 6.15]{AM:Magna})}\label{GroupNilpSupernilp}
Let $\mathbf{G}$ be a group, and let $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Then $\mathbf{G}$ is $n$-supernilpotent if and only if $\mathbf{G}$ is $n$-nilpotent.
\end{pro}
\begin{pro}\label{PropSupernilpIdemp}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a semigroup and let $k\in\mathbb{N}$. If $e,f\in E(S)$ are such that $e\leq f$, then $e\;[\, \underbrace{1,\dotsc,1}_k \, ]\;f$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Let $e,f\in E(S)$ be such that $e\leq f$, that is $ef=e=fe$. The implication is trivially true for the case $k=1$, hence let $k\geq 2$. Define the polynomial $p(x_1,\dotsc,x_k)=x_1\dotsc x_k$, and let $a_1=\dotsc=a_{k-1}=e=c$ and $b_1=\dotsc=b_{k-1}=f=d$. Trivially we have $a_i\;1\;b_i$ for $i=1,\dotsc,k-1$ and $c\;1\;d$. Note also that from equalities $ef=e$ and $fe=e$ it follows that for any $(k-1)$-tuple $(x_1,\dotsc,x_{k-1})$ from $\{a_1,b_1\}\times\dotsc\times\{a_{k-1},b_{k-1}\}\setminus\{(b_1,\dotsc,b_{k-1})\}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
p(x_1,\dotsc,x_{k-1},c) = x_1\dotsc x_{k-1}c = e = x_1\dotsc x_{k-1} d = p(x_1,\dotsc,x_{k-1},d),
\end{equation*}
since such a $(k-1)$-tuple contains at least one coordinate $j$ such that $x_j=e$. Therefore, by Definition \ref{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)}, from $C(1,\dotsc,1;[\,\underbrace{1,\dotsc,1}_k\,])$ and equalities $ef=e=fe$ it follows
\begin{equation*}
e = f\cdot \dotsc \cdot f \cdot e=p(b_1,\dotsc,b_{k-1},c) \; [\,\underbrace{1,\dotsc,1}_k\,] \; p(b_1,\dotsc,b_{k-1},d) = f\cdot \dotsc \cdot f\cdot f = f.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{CorSupernilpIdemp}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a $k$-supernilpotent semigroup, $k\in\mathbb{N}$, $k\geq 2$. Then for every $e,f\in E(S)$ such that $e\leq f$ we have $e=f$, that is, $(E(S),\leq)$ is an antichain.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Since $\mathbf{S}$ is $k$-supernilpotent we have $[\,\underbrace{1,\dotsc,1}_k\,]=0$. Let $e,f\in E(S)$ be such that $e\leq f$. From Proposition \ref{PropSupernilpIdemp} it follows that $e\;[\,\underbrace{1,\dotsc,1}_k\,]\;f$, that is $e=f$.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}\label{PropSupernilpRegular}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be a regular semigroup, and let $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Then $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-supernilpotent if and only if $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-supernilpotent completely simple semigroup.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
($\leftarrow$) Every completely simple semigroup is also regular, therefore this direction of the statement is trivially true.
\noindent ($\rightarrow$) Assume that $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-supernilpotent regular semigroup, where $n\in\mathbb{N}$. From Corollary \ref{CorSupernilpIdemp} it follows that $(E(S),\leq)$ is an antichain. Therefore, $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-supernilpotent completely simple semigroup, by Corollary \ref{CorOfLemmaID}.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}\label{SuperNilpOrthCSsg}
Let $\mathbf{S}=\mathbf{G}\times \mathbf{I}\times\mathbf{\Lambda}$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is a group, $\mathbf{I}$ is a left zero semigroup and $\mathbf{\Lambda}$ is a right zero semigroup. Then for every $k\in\mathbb{N}$, $\mathbf{S}$ is $k$-supernilpotent if and only if $\mathbf{G}$ is $k$-nilpotent.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Since the case $k=1$ is possible only if the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is
trivial, we let $k\in\mathbb{N}$, $k\geq 2$. By Proposition
\ref{GroupNilpSupernilp} and Definition \ref{DefSupernilp} it
follows that the group $\mathbf{G}$ is $k$-nilpotent if and only if
$[\,\underbrace{1_G,\dotsc,1_G}_{k}\,]=0_G$. From Definition
\ref{DefnHC} we obtain that the equalities
$[\,\underbrace{1_S,\dotsc,1_S}_{k}\,] = 0_S$ and
$[\,\underbrace{1_G,\dotsc,1_G}_{k}\,]=0_G$ are equivalent, if and
only if the conditions $C(\underbrace{1_S,\dotsc,1_S}_k;0)$ and
$C(\underbrace{1_G,\dotsc,1_G}_k;0_G)$ are equivalent. Therefore, we
will prove the equivalence of these conditions.
By $\pi_j$, $j=1,2,3$ we will denote the $j$-th projection of $\mathbf{S}$ onto the $j$-th factor of the direct product $\mathbf{G}\times \mathbf{I}\times\mathbf{\Lambda}$. For every polynomial $p^{\mathbf{S}}\in\operatorname{Pol}_n(\mathbf{S})$, $p^{\mathbf{S}}=p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{x})$, we have
\begin{equation}
p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{x}) = (p^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{x})),p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{x})),p^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{x}))). \label{eqn:PolDirProd}
\end{equation}
($\rightarrow$) Assume that $C(\underbrace{1_S,\dotsc,1_S}_k;0_S)$ for the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$. Let $p^{\mathbf{G}}=p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_k)$ be a polynomial from $\operatorname{Pol}(\mathbf{G})$, of arity $\operatorname{ar}(p) = n_1+\dotsc+n_k$ for $n_1,\dotsc,n_k\in\mathbb{N}$. Let $\mathbf{g}_j,\mathbf{h}_j\in G^{n_j}$, for $j=1,\dotsc,k-1$ and let $\mathbf{e},\mathbf{f}\in G^{n_k}$, then trivially we have $\mathbf{g}_j\;1_G\;\mathbf{h}_j$, for $j=1,\dotsc,k-1$ and $\mathbf{e}\;1_G\;\mathbf{f}$. Assume that for every $(k-1)$-tuple $(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1})\in\{\mathbf{g}_1,\mathbf{h}_1\}\times\dotsc\{\mathbf{g}_{k-1},\mathbf{h}_{k-1}\}\setminus \{(\mathbf{h}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{h}_{k-1})\}$ we have
\begin{equation}
p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1},\mathbf{e}) = p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1},\mathbf{f}).\label{eqn:p(3)inG}
\end{equation}
Note that the polynomial word $p=\alpha_1\dotsc\alpha_s$ of $p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_k)$ is a word over the alphabet $\bigcup_{j=1}^k\{x_j^1,(x_j^1)^{-1},\dotsc,x_j^{n_j},(x_j^{n_j})^{-1}\} \cup \{c_1,\dotsc,c_m\}$, for some constants $c_1,\dotsc,c_m\in\mathbf{G}$. We will define a polynomial $q^{\mathbf{G}} = q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_k)$, of arity $2n_1+\dotsc+2n_k$, where $\mathbf{u}_j=(x_j^1,\dotsc,x_j^{n_j},y_j^1,\dotsc,y_j^{n_j})$, $j=1,\dotsc,k$, in the following way: the polynomial word of $q^{\mathbf{G}}$ is equal to $q=\beta_1\dotsc\beta_s$, where
\begin{equation*}
\beta_t = \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{cc}
c_l & \mbox{ if } \alpha_t = c_l, \mbox{ for some constant } c_l \\
x_j^{\ell} & \mbox{ if } \alpha_t = x_j^{\ell} \mbox{ for some variable } x_j^{\ell} \\
y_j^{\ell} & \mbox{ if } \alpha_t = (x_j^{\ell})^{-1} \mbox{ for some variable } x_j^{\ell}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation*}
for $t\in\{1,\dotsc,s\}$. If we denote $\mathbf{X}_j=(x_j^1,\dotsc,x_j^{n_j},(x_j^1)^{-1},\dotsc,(x_j^{n_j})^{-1})$, for $j=1,\dotsc,k$, then we have
\begin{equation}
q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_k) = p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_k).\label{eqn:qandp}
\end{equation}
For simplified writing, let us introduce the following notation:
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{G}_j &= (g_j^1,\dotsc,g_j^{n_j},(g_j^1)^{-1},\dotsc,(g_j^{n_j})^{-1}), \mbox{ for } j=1,\dotsc,k-1\\
\mathbf{H}_j &= (h_j^1,\dotsc,h_j^{n_j},(h_j^1)^{-1},\dotsc,(h_j^{n_j})^{-1}), \mbox{ for } j=1,\dotsc,k-1\\
\mathbf{E} &= (e^1,\dotsc,e^{n_k},(e^1)^{-1},\dotsc,(e^{n_k})^{-1}),\\
\mathbf{F} &= (f^1,\dotsc,f^{n_k},(f^1)^{-1},\dotsc,(f^{n_k})^{-1}).
\end{align*}
Therefore, equations \eqref{eqn:p(3)inG} imply
\begin{equation}
q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_{k-1},\mathbf{E}) = q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_{k-1},\mathbf{F}),\label{eqn:q(3)inG}
\end{equation}
for every $(k-1)$-tuple $(\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_{k-1})$ in $\{\mathbf{G}_1,\mathbf{H}_1\}\times\dotsc\times\{\mathbf{G}_{k-1},\mathbf{H}_{k-1}\} \setminus \{(\mathbf{H}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{H}_{k-1})\}$.
Define the vectors $\mathbf{a}_j,\mathbf{b}_j\in S^{2n_j}$, $j=1,\dotsc,k-1$, $\mathbf{c},\mathbf{d}\in S^{2n_k}$ in the following way
\begin{align*}
&\mathbf{a}_j = ((g_j^1,\iota,\iota),\dotsc,(g_j^{n_j},\iota,\iota),((g_j^1)^{-1},\iota,\iota),\dotsc,((g_j^{n_j})^{-1},\iota,\iota)),\\
&\mathbf{b}_j = ((h_j^1,\iota,\iota),\dotsc,(h_j^{n_j},\iota,\iota),((h_j^1)^{-1},\iota,\iota),\dotsc,((h_j^{n_j})^{-1},\iota,\iota)),
\end{align*}
for $j=1,\dotsc,k-1$, and
\begin{align*}
&\mathbf{c} = ((e^1,\iota,\iota),\dotsc,(e^{n_k},\iota,\iota),((e^1)^{-1},\iota,\iota),\dotsc,((e^{n_k})^{-1},\iota,\iota)),\\
&\mathbf{d} = ((f^1,\iota,\iota),\dotsc,(f^{n_k},\iota,\iota),((f^1)^{-1},\iota,\iota),\dotsc,((f^{n_k})^{-1},\iota,\iota)).
\end{align*}
Let $(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1})$ be a $(k-1)$-tuple from $\{\mathbf{a}_1,\mathbf{b}_1\}\times\dotsc\{\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{b}_{k-1}\}\setminus \{(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1})\}$. From the property \eqref{eqn:PolDirProd} we obtain
\begin{align*}
& q^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) = (q^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})),q^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})),q^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}))),\\
& q^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}) = (q^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})),q^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})),q^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}))).
\end{align*}
Note that we have $\pi_2(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) =
(\underbrace{\iota,\dotsc,\iota}_{2n_1+\dotsc+2n_k}) =
\pi_2(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})$, which gives us
\begin{equation}
q^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = q^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})).\label{eqn:LeftParts}
\end{equation}
Similarly, from $\pi_3(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) =
(\underbrace{\iota,\dotsc,\iota}_{2n_1+\dotsc+2n_k})=
\pi_3(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
q^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = q^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})).\label{eqn:RightParts}
\end{equation}
Note that $\pi_1((\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1})) = (\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_{k-1})$ for some $(k-1)$-tuple $(\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_{k-1})$ in $\{\mathbf{G}_1,\mathbf{H}_1\}\times\dotsc\{\mathbf{G}_{k-1},\mathbf{H}_{k-1}\} \setminus \{(\mathbf{H}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{H}_{k-1})\}$. Also note that $\pi_1(\mathbf{c})=\mathbf{E}$ and $\pi_1(\mathbf{d})=\mathbf{F}$. Therefore, from \eqref{eqn:q(3)inG} we have
\begin{align}
&q^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_{k-1},\mathbf{E}) \nonumber\\
&= q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{X}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{X}_{k-1},\mathbf{F}) = q^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})). \label{eqn:MiddleParts}
\end{align}
Now from equalities \eqref{eqn:LeftParts}, (\ref{eqn:MiddleParts}) and \eqref{eqn:RightParts} it follows that
\begin{equation*}
q^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) = q^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}).
\end{equation*}
By Definition \ref{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)}, from $C(\underbrace{1_S,\dotsc,1_S};0_S)$ we obtain
\begin{equation*}
q^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) = q^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}),
\end{equation*}
which further implies $q^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = q^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}))$, by \eqref{eqn:PolDirProd}. Since $\pi_1(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1}) = (\mathbf{H}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{H}_{k-1})$, and $\pi_1(\mathbf{c})=\mathbf{E}$, $\pi_1(\mathbf{d})=\mathbf{F}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{H}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{H}_{k-1},\mathbf{E}) = q^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{H}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{H}_{k-1},\mathbf{F}).
\end{equation*}
Finally, from \eqref{eqn:qandp} it follows that
\begin{equation*}
p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{h}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{h}_{k-1},\mathbf{e}) = p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{h}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{h}_{k-1},\mathbf{f}),
\end{equation*}
which proves the condition $C(\underbrace{1_G,\dotsc,1_G}_k;0_G)$.
($\leftarrow$) Now assume that
$C(\underbrace{1_G,\dotsc,1_G}_k;0_G)$ is true. Let $p^{\mathbf{S}}$ be a
polynomial in $\operatorname{Pol}(\mathbf{S})$, of arity $n_1+\dotsc+n_k$, where
$n_1,\dotsc,n_k\in\mathbb{N}$. Let $\mathbf{a}_j,\mathbf{b}_j\in S^{n_j}$,
$j=1,\dotsc,k-1$, and $\mathbf{c},\mathbf{d}\in S^{n_k}$, then trivially we have
$\mathbf{a}_j\;1_S\;\mathbf{b}_j$, for $j=1,\dotsc,k-1$ and $\mathbf{c}\;1_S\;\mathbf{d}$. For
$j=1,\dotsc,k-1$ denote $\mathbf{g}_j=\pi_1(\mathbf{a}_j)$ and
$\mathbf{h}_j=\pi_1(\mathbf{b}_j)$. Also let $\mathbf{e}$ and $\mathbf{f}$ denote $\pi_1(\mathbf{c})$
and $\pi_1(\mathbf{d})$, respectively. Trivially we have
$\mathbf{g}_j\;1_G\;\mathbf{h}_j$ for $j=1,\dotsc,k-1$ and $\mathbf{e}\;1_G\;\mathbf{f}$. Assume
that for every $(k-1)$-tuple
$(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1})\in\{\mathbf{a}_1,\mathbf{b}_1\}\times\dotsc\{\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{b}_{k-1}\}\setminus
\{(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1})\}$ we have
\begin{equation}
p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) = p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}).\label{eqn:p(3)inS}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eqn:PolDirProd} and the equality \eqref{eqn:p(3)inS} it follows that
\begin{equation*}
p^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = p^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})),
\end{equation*}
that is,
\begin{equation*}
p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{e}) = p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1},\mathbf{f}),
\end{equation*}
where $(\mathbf{u}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{u}_{k-1})$ goes over all $(k-1)$-tuples from
$\{\mathbf{g}_1,\mathbf{h}_1\}\times\dotsc\{\mathbf{g}_{k-1},\mathbf{h}_{k-1}\}\setminus\{(\mathbf{h}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{h}_{k-1})\}$.
By Definition \ref{DefnC(a,a,a,b;d)}, from the condition
$C(\underbrace{1_G,\dotsc,1_G}_k;0_G)$ we obtain
$p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{h}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{h}_{k-1},\mathbf{e}) =
p^{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{h}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{h}_{k-1},\mathbf{f})$, that is
\begin{equation}
p^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = p^{\mathbf{G}}(\pi_1(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})).\label{MiddleParts2}
\end{equation}
Let $p=\alpha_1\dotsc\alpha_s$ be the polynomial word of
$p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_k)$, where $\alpha_1,\dotsc,\alpha_s$
belong to the set $\{x^1,\dotsc,x^n\}\cup\{c_1,\dotsc,c_m\}$ for
some constants $c_1,\dotsc,c_m$. Then $p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{x})) =
\pi_2(\alpha_1^{\mathbf{S}})$, since $\mathbf{I}$ is a left zero semigroup.
Similarly, we obtain $p^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{x})) =
\pi_3(\alpha_s^{\mathbf{S}})$, since $\mathbf{\Lambda}$ is a right zero
semigroup. If $\alpha_1$ is a constant $c_{\ell}$,
$\ell\in\{1,\dotsc,m\}$, then
$p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{v}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{v}_k)) =
\pi_2(c_{\ell}^{\mathbf{S}})$ for every valuation
$(\mathbf{v}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{v}_k)$ from $S^{n_1+\dotsc+n_k}$.
Hence, $p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) =
\pi_2(c_{\ell}^{\mathbf{S}}) =
p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}))$. If $\alpha_1$ is
a variable, then we can differentiate between two cases. First
assume that $\alpha_1$ is $x_j^{\ell}$ for some
$\ell\in\{1,\dotsc,n_j\}$, and $j\in\{1,\dotsc,k-1\}$. Then
$p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) =
p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(b_j^{\ell})) =
p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}))$. Otherwise,
assume that $\alpha_1^{\mathbf{S}}$ equals $x_k^{\ell}$ for some
$\ell\in\{1,\dotsc,n_k\}$. From \eqref{eqn:p(3)inS} for
$(\mathbf{x}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{x}_{k-1})=(\mathbf{a}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{a}_{k-1})$, it follows
\begin{equation}
p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{a}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) = p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{a}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})\label{eqn:p(3)inSfora-s}
\end{equation}
Now, from \eqref{eqn:PolDirProd} we obtain the equalities
\begin{align*}
&\pi_2(p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{a}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{a}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = \pi_2(c^{\ell}),\\
&\pi_2(p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{a}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})) = p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{a}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{a}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})) = \pi_2(d^{\ell}),
\end{align*}
which together with \eqref{eqn:p(3)inSfora-s} imply $\pi_2(c^{\ell})=\pi_2(d^{\ell})$. This further implies
\begin{equation*}
p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = \pi_2(c^{\ell}) = \pi_2(d^{\ell}) = p^{\mathbf{I}}(\pi_2(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})).
\end{equation*}
Dually we obtain that $p^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c})) = p^{\mathbf{\Lambda}}(\pi_3(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d}))$. The previous two equalities and \eqref{MiddleParts2} give us $p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{c}) = p^{\mathbf{S}}(\mathbf{b}_1,\dotsc,\mathbf{b}_{k-1},\mathbf{d})$, by \eqref{eqn:PolDirProd}. This completes the proof of $C(\underbrace{1_S,\dotsc,1_S}_k;0_S)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{SupernilpOrthodox}
Let $\mathbf{S}$ be an orthodox semigroup, and let $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Then $\mathbf{S}$ is $n$-supernilpotent if and only if $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to a direct product of an $n$-nilpotent group and a rectangular band.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
($\rightarrow$) Let $\mathbf{S}$ be an $n$-supernilpotent orthodox semigroup. Since an orthodox semigroup is regular, from Proposition \ref{PropSupernilpRegular} it follows that $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-supernilpotent completely simple semigroup. Since $\mathbf{S}$ is orthodox and completely simple, Proposition \ref{HowieExer3.8} implies that it is isomorphic to a direct product $\mathbf{G}\times(I\times\Lambda)$ where $\mathbf{G}$ is a group and $(I\times\Lambda)$ is a rectangular band. Now from Proposition \ref{SuperNilpOrthCSsg} it follows that $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-nilpotent group. Hence, $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to a direct product of an $n$-nilpotent group and a rectangular band.
\noindent ($\leftarrow$) Let $\mathbf{S} = \mathbf{G}\times (I\times\Lambda)$, where $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-nilpotent group and $I\times\Lambda$ is a rectangular band. From Proposition \ref{PropBandTimesGroup} it follows that $\mathbf{S}$ is a completely simple orthodox semigroup. Since the group $\mathbf{G}$ is $n$-nilpotent, from Proposition \ref{SuperNilpOrthCSsg} it follows that the semigroup $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-supernilpotent semigroup. Hence, $\mathbf{S}$ is an $n$-supernilpotent orthodox semigroup.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Let $n\in\mathbb{N}$. A band $\mathbf{B}$ is $n$-supernilpotent if and only if it is a rectangular band.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
\noindent ($\rightarrow$) Let $\mathbf{B}$ be an $n$-supernilpotent band. Recall that each band is an orthodox semigroup. Therefore, from Theorem \ref{SupernilpOrthodox} it follows that $\mathbf{B}$ is isomorphic to a direct product where $\mathbf{G}$ is an $n$-nilpotent group and $(I\times\Lambda)$ is a rectangular band. From Proposition \ref{GtimesBisband} it follows that the group $\mathbf{G}$ is trivial, hence $\mathbf{S}$ is isomorphic to the rectangular band $I\times \Lambda$.
\noindent ($\leftarrow$) All rectangular bands are abelian by
Corollary \ref{CorollaryofWarne}. Therefore they satisfy $[1,1]=0$.
Hence they are $n$-supernilpotent for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$ by Proposition
\ref{HC3}.
\end{proof}
\section{Acknowledgments}
We thank Igor Dolinka for the useful discussion that lead to Lemma \ref{LemaID}.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec1}
As the academic frontier of hadron physics, the study of the exotic hadronic states has been a hot spot focused by both theorist and experimentalist in the past two decades \cite{Liu:2013waa,Hosaka:2016pey,Chen:2016qju,Richard:2016eis,Lebed:2016hpi,Olsen:2017bmm,Guo:2017jvc,Brambilla:2019esw,Liu:2019zoy,Chen:2022asf,Meng:2022ozq}, since exotic hadronic states are beyond the conventional meson ($q\bar q$) and baryon ($qqq$), which may construct new particle zoo. In fact, it is not limited to the construction of the exotic hadron family. Exploring exotic hadronic states may also provide unique insight to deepen our understanding of the nonperturbative behavior of the strong interactions.
Among different assignments of exotic hadrons to these observed new hadronic states, the molecular state explanation is popular since there exist the corresponding thresholds of two hadrons which are near some observed new hadronic states. It makes the hadronic molecular states to be extensively studied in the past 19 years \cite{Liu:2013waa,Hosaka:2016pey,Chen:2016qju,Richard:2016eis,Lebed:2016hpi,Olsen:2017bmm,Guo:2017jvc,Liu:2019zoy,Brambilla:2019esw,Chen:2022asf,Meng:2022ozq}. In particular, after observing two $P_c$ states in 2015 \cite{Aaij:2015tga}, the LHCb Collaboration reported two substructures, the $P_{c}(4440)$ and $P_{c}(4457)$, corresponding to former observed $P_c(4450)$ \cite{Aaij:2015tga}, and found a new $P_c(4312)$, where LHCb analyzed the $\Lambda_b\to J/\psi p K$ process again \cite{Aaij:2019vzc}. Indeed, LHCb provided strong experimental evidence to show the existences of the $\Sigma_c \bar D^{(*)}$-type hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks \cite{Wu:2010jy,Wang:2011rga,Yang:2011wz,Wu:2012md,Li:2014gra,Karliner:2015ina,Chen:2015loa}. In the following years, LHCb reported the evidence of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ \cite{LHCb:2020jpq} and observed the $P_{\psi s}^{\Lambda}(4338)$ \cite{Collaboration:2022boa}. These exciting experimental progresses not only make the hidden-charm pentaquark family becomes abundant \cite{Hofmann:2005sw,Wu:2010vk,Anisovich:2015zqa,Wang:2015wsa,Feijoo:2015kts,Chen:2015sxa,Chen:2016ryt,Lu:2016roh,Xiao:2019gjd,Shen:2020gpw,Zhang:2020cdi,Wang:2019nvm,Weng:2019ynv,Chen:2020uif,Peng:2020hql,Chen:2020opr,Liu:2020hcv,Dong:2021juy,Chen:2022onm,Chen:2020kco,Chen:2021cfl,Chen:2021spf,Du:2021bgb,Hu:2021nvs,Xiao:2021rgp,Zhu:2021lhd,Wang:2022neq,Wang:2022mxy,Karliner:2022erb,Yan:2022wuz,Meng:2022wgl}, but also inspire theorists to explore other types of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks \cite{Liu:2013waa,Hosaka:2016pey,Chen:2016qju,Richard:2016eis,Lebed:2016hpi,Olsen:2017bmm,Guo:2017jvc,Liu:2019zoy,Brambilla:2019esw,Chen:2022asf,Meng:2022ozq}. In recent years, the study around mass spectra of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness and triple strangeness was performed by the Lanzhou group, which are involved in the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{(*)}$ \cite{Wang:2020bjt} and $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{(*)}$ \cite{Wang:2021hql} interactions.
At present, studying the properties of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks is still an interesting and important research issue of hadron physics, which can provide useful hints when constructing the family composed of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks. As is known well, exploring the electromagnetic properties is one of the effective approaches to reflect the hadronic inner structures. A typical example is that the constituent quark model has been used to depict the magnetic moments of the decuplet and octet baryons successfully \cite{Schlumpf:1993rm,Kumar:2005ei,Ramalho:2009gk}, where there were the corresponding experimental data \cite{Workman:2022ynf}. Obviously, the electromagnetic properties of hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks should be emphasized. Until now, some discussions of the electromagnetic properties of the $\Sigma_c^{(*)} \bar{D}^{(*)}$-type hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks and the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,\,*)} \bar{D}^{(*)}$-type hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with single strangeness have been given in the constituent quark model \cite{Wang:2016dzu,Gao:2021hmv,Li:2021ryu,Wang:2022tib}, which may reflect the inner structures of these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks. We should indicate that these studies \cite{Wang:2016dzu,Gao:2021hmv,Li:2021ryu,Wang:2022tib} of the electromagnetic properties of some hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks is still at the start stage. Along this line, we still need to continue our effort of obtaining the electromagnetic properties of other types of hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks.
In this work, we focus on the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$-type hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness and the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$-type hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with triple strangeness, which were predicted in Refs. \cite{Wang:2020bjt,Wang:2021hql}. We study their electromagnetic properties including the magnetic moments, the transition magnetic moments, and the radiative decay behaviors within the constituent quark model. In the realistic calculation, the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect and the coupled channel effect are taken into account. Hopefully, the present investigation can make our knowledge of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness and triple strangeness \cite{Wang:2020bjt,Wang:2021hql} become complete.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \ref{sec2}, the calculation method of the electromagnetic properties of the hadronic molecules will be given. Meanwhile, the electromagnetic properties of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ molecular states will be presented. In Sec. \ref{sec3}, we discuss the electromagnetic properties of the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states. Finally, a short summary is given in Sec. \ref{sec4}.
\section{The electromagnetic properties of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ molecular states}\label{sec2}
In this section, we explore the electromagnetic properties including the magnetic moments, the transition magnetic moments, and the radiative decay behaviors of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ \cite{Wang:2020bjt}, which may provide useful information to reflect their inner structures.
\subsection{The magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ molecules}
As pointed out in Refs. \cite{Liu:2003ab,Huang:2004tn,Zhu:2004xa,Haghpayma:2006hu,Wang:2016dzu,Gao:2021hmv,Li:2021ryu,Deng:2021gnb,Zhou:2022gra,Wang:2022tib,Schlumpf:1992vq,Schlumpf:1993rm,Cheng:1997kr,Ha:1998gf,Ramalho:2009gk,Girdhar:2015gsa,Menapara:2022ksj,Mutuk:2021epz,Menapara:2021vug,Menapara:2021dzi,Gandhi:2018lez,Dahiya:2018ahb,Kaur:2016kan,Thakkar:2016sog,Shah:2016vmd,Dhir:2013nka,Sharma:2012jqz,Majethiya:2011ry,Sharma:2010vv,Dhir:2009ax,Simonis:2018rld,Ghalenovi:2014swa,Kumar:2005ei,Gandhi:2019bju,Rahmani:2020pol,Hazra:2021lpa,Majethiya:2009vx,Shah:2016nxi,Shah:2018bnr,Ghalenovi:2018fxh}, we can estimate the magnetic moments of the hadrons $\mu_{H}$ and the transition magnetic moments between the hadrons $\mu_{H \to H^{\prime}}$ by calculating the expectation values of the $z$-component of the magnetic moment operator $\hat{\mu}_z$, and their general expressions can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{H}S_z&=&\left\langle{\psi_{H}} \left|\hat{\mu}_z \right| {\psi_{H}}\right\rangle^{S_z}S,\label{expectationvalue1}\\
\mu_{H \to H^{\prime}}S_z&=&\left\langle{\psi_{H^{\prime}}} \left|\hat{\mu}_z \right| {\psi_{H}}\right\rangle^{S_z}S, \label{expectationvalue2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $|{\psi_{H}}\rangle$ and $|{\psi_{H^{\prime}}}\rangle$ stand for the wave functions of the hadrons $H$ and $H^{\prime}$, respectively. Thus, we first need to discuss their wave functions, which include the color part, the flavor part, the spin part, and the spatial part. For the hadronic state, the color wave function is simply 1. Its flavor-spin wave function can be constructed on the basis of the symmetry constraint, while the spatial wave function can be obtained by studying the mass spectrum of the hadron quantitatively \cite{Wang:2022tib}.
In the realistic calculation, we take the maximum value of the third component of the hadronic spin quantum number to discuss the hadronic magnetic moment. We adopt the maximum third component of the spin of the lower-spin state to investigate the transition magnetic moment. If we use the above convention, the Eqs. (\ref{expectationvalue1})-(\ref{expectationvalue2}) can be simplified as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{H}&=&\left\langle{\psi_{H}} \left|\hat{\mu}_z \right| {\psi_{H}}\right\rangle,\\
\mu_{H \to H^{\prime}}&=&\left\langle{\psi_{H^{\prime}}} \left|\hat{\mu}_z \right| {\psi_{H}}\right\rangle.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $H^{(\prime)}$ stands for either fundamental hadron or compound hadron.
In the framework of the constituent quark model, the hadronic magnetic moment ${\mu}$ includes the spin magnetic moment ${\mu}^{\rm spin}$ and the orbital magnetic moment ${\mu}^{\rm orbital}$. Specifically, the $z$-component of the spin magnetic moment operator of the hadron $\hat{\mu}_z^{\rm spin}$ can be expressed as \cite{Liu:2003ab,Huang:2004tn,Zhu:2004xa,Haghpayma:2006hu,Wang:2016dzu,Deng:2021gnb,Gao:2021hmv,Li:2021ryu,Zhou:2022gra,Wang:2022tib,Li:2021ryu,Schlumpf:1992vq,Schlumpf:1993rm,Cheng:1997kr,Ha:1998gf,Ramalho:2009gk,Girdhar:2015gsa,Menapara:2022ksj,Mutuk:2021epz,Menapara:2021vug,Menapara:2021dzi,Gandhi:2018lez,Dahiya:2018ahb,Kaur:2016kan,Thakkar:2016sog,Shah:2016vmd,Dhir:2013nka,Sharma:2012jqz,Majethiya:2011ry,Sharma:2010vv,Dhir:2009ax,Simonis:2018rld,Ghalenovi:2014swa,Kumar:2005ei,Rahmani:2020pol,Hazra:2021lpa,Gandhi:2019bju,Majethiya:2009vx,Shah:2016nxi,Shah:2018bnr,Ghalenovi:2018fxh}
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{\mu}_z^{\rm spin}&=&\sum_{i}\frac{e_i}{2M_i}\hat{\sigma}_{iz}.
\end{eqnarray}
In the above expression, $e_i$, $M_i$, and $\hat{\sigma}_{iz}$ denote the charge, mass, and $z$-component of Pauli's spin operator of the $i$-th constituent of the hadron, respectively. For the hadronic molecule composed of the baryon and meson, the $z$-component of its orbital magnetic moment operator $\hat{\mu}_z^{\rm orbital}$ can be written as \cite{Cheng:1997kr,Liu:2003ab,Huang:2004tn,Haghpayma:2006hu,Sharma:2010vv,Sharma:2012jqz,Girdhar:2015gsa,Wang:2016dzu,Dahiya:2018ahb,Gao:2021hmv,Li:2021ryu,Zhou:2022gra,Wang:2022tib}
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{\mu}_z^{\rm orbital}&=&\mu_{bm}^L\hat{L}_z\nonumber\\
&=&\left(\frac{M_{b}}{M_{b}+M_{m}}\frac{e_m}{2M_m}+\frac{M_{m}}{M_{b}+M_{m}}\frac{e_b}{2M_b}\right)\hat{L}_z,
\end{eqnarray}
where the subscripts $b$ and $m$ stand for the baryon and the meson, respectively, and $\hat{L}_z$ denotes the $z$-component of the orbital angular momenta operator between the baryon and the meson.
In the following, we study the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ by the following three cases: case (1) by only considering the $S$-wave component, case (2) by adding the contribution of the $D$-wave channels, and case (3) under the coupled channel analysis. By the above procedure, we may present the roles of the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect and the coupled channel effect to the electromagnetic properties of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ molecular states.
\subsubsection{The case by only considering the $S$-wave component}
Firstly, we study the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ when only considering the $S$-wave component. Their flavor wave functions $|I,I_3\rangle$ can be written as \cite{Wang:2020bjt}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}\right\rangle&=&|\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)+}{D}_s^{*-}\rangle,\\
\left|\frac{1}{2},-\frac{1}{2}\right\rangle&=&|\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)0}{D}_s^{*-}\rangle,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $I$ and $I_3$ represent isospins and isospin's third components of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)}\bar{D}_s^{*}$ systems, respectively. Meanwhile, their spin wave functions $|S,S_3\rangle$ can be constructed by the following coupling \cite{Wang:2020bjt}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar{D}_s^{*}:\,|S,S_3\rangle&=&\sum_{S_{\Xi_c^{\prime}},S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}C^{SS_3}_{\frac{1}{2}S_{\Xi_c^{\prime}},1S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}\left|\frac{1}{2},S_{\Xi_c^{\prime}}\right\rangle\left|1,S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}\right\rangle,\\
\Xi_c^{*}\bar{D}_s^{*}:\,|S,S_3\rangle&=&\sum_{S_{\Xi_c^{*}},S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}C^{S S_3}_{\frac{3}{2}S_{\Xi_c^{*}},1S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}\left|\frac{3}{2},S_{\Xi_c^{*}}\right\rangle\left|1,S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}\right\rangle.
\end{eqnarray*}
In the above expressions, $S$ and $S_3$ stand for spins and spin's third components of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)}\bar{D}_s^{*}$ systems, respectively. Additionally, $C^{ef}_{ab,cd}$ is the Clebsch-Gordan coefficient, while $S_{\Xi_c^{\prime}}$, $S_{\Xi_c^{*}}$, and $S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}$ denote spin's third components of the $\Xi_c^{\prime}$, $\Xi_c^{*}$, and $\bar{D}_s^{*}$, respectively.
With the above preparations, we can obtain the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$. For example,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}&=&\left\langle \chi_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}{{D}_s^{*-}}}^{\left|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}\right\rangle|1,1\rangle} \right|\hat{\mu}_z\left| \chi_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}{{D}_s^{*-}}}^{\left|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}\right\rangle|1,1\rangle} \right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}}+\mu_{D_s^{*-}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\chi_f^s$ is the spin and flavor wave function of the discussed hadron, while the superscript $s$ and subscript $f$ stand for the spin wave function and the flavor wave function, respectively. In addition, when studying the hadronic magnetic moment with the single channel analysis, the overlap of its spatial wave function is 1, which is omitted in the above expression.
As for the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime(*)}$ baryons and the $\bar D_s^*$ meson, we calculate them within the constituent quark model. We first introduce the flavor and spin wave functions of the $\Xi_c^{\prime(*)}$ baryons and the $\bar D^{*}_s$ meson. Their flavor wave functions can be written as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Xi_c^{\prime(*)+}&:&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(usc+suc\right),\\
\Xi_c^{\prime(*)0}&:&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(dsc+sdc\right),\\
D_s^{*-}&:&\bar c s,
\end{eqnarray*}
while their corresponding spin wave functions $|S,S_3\rangle$ can be expressed as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Xi_c^{\prime}&:&\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\left|\dfrac{1}{2},\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(2\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow-\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow-\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\right)\\
\left|\dfrac{1}{2},-\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow+\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow-2\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow\right)
\end{array}
\right.,\\
\Xi_c^{*}&:&\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},\dfrac{3}{2}\right\rangle=\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\\
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow+\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow+\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\right)\\
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},-\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow+\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow+\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow\right)\\
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},-\dfrac{3}{2}\right\rangle=\downarrow\downarrow\downarrow
\end{array}
\right.,\\
\bar D^{*}_s&:&\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\left|1,1\right\rangle=\uparrow\uparrow\\
\left|1,0\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\uparrow\downarrow+\downarrow\uparrow\right)\\
\left|1,-1\right\rangle=\downarrow\downarrow
\end{array}
\right..
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, $\uparrow$ and $\downarrow$ represent the third components of the quark spin having $1/2$ and $-1/2$, respectively.
Based on the flavor and spin wave functions of the $\Xi_c^{\prime(*)}$ baryons and the $\bar D^{*}_s$ meson, we can calculate their magnetic moments. As an example, we deduce the magnetic moment of the $\Xi^{\prime +}_c$ baryon as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{\Xi^{\prime +}_c}&=&\left\langle \chi_{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(usc+suc\right)}^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(2\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow-\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow-\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\right)} \right|\hat{\mu}_z\left| \chi_{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(usc+suc\right)}^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(2\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow-\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow-\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\right)} \right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{2}{3}\mu_u+\frac{2}{3}\mu_s-\frac{1}{3}\mu_c.
\end{eqnarray}
In the present work, we define $\mu_{q}=-\mu_{\bar q}={e_q}/{2M_q}$, while $e_q$ stands for the quark charge and $M_q$ is the constituent quark mass. By this way, we can get the expressions of the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime(*)}$ baryons and the $\bar D^{*}_s$ meson. In the numerical analysis, we take the constituent quark masses as input, i.e., $M_{u}=0.336\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $M_{d}=0.336\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $M_{s}=0.450\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $M_{c}=1.680\,\mathrm{GeV}$, to study the electromagnetic properties of these discussed hadrons quantitatively, which are taken from Ref. \cite{Kumar:2005ei} and widely used to discuss the magnetic moments of the hadronic molecular states \cite{Li:2021ryu,Zhou:2022gra,Wang:2022tib}.
In Table~\ref{MT1}, we collect the expressions and numerical results of the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime(*)}$ baryons and the $\bar D^{*}_s$ meson, where the present numerical results are agreement with those from Refs. \cite{Kumar:2005ei,Sharma:2010vv,Glozman:1995xy,Patel:2007gx,Simonis:2018rld,Ghalenovi:2014swa,Zhang:2021yul,Aliev:2015axa}. In this work, the hadronic magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments are presented in the units of the nuclear magneton $\mu_N=e/2M_N$ with $M_N=0.938\,{\rm GeV}$ \cite{Workman:2022ynf}. As shown in Table~\ref{MT1}, the $\Xi^{\prime +}_c$ and $\Xi^{\prime 0}_c$ have different magnetic moments, while the magnetic moment of the $\Xi^{* +}_c$ is different from that of the $\Xi^{* 0}_c$, which is due to the magnetic magnetons of the up quark and down quark exist obvious difference, i.e., $\mu_u=1.862~\mu_N$ and $\mu_d=-0.931~\mu_N$. In addition, there exist approximately equal magnetic moments for the $\Xi_c^{\prime0}$ and $\Xi_c^{*0}$.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.01cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.80}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\caption{The magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime(*)}$ baryons and the $\bar D^{*}_s$ meson. Here, the magnetic moment and the transition magnetic moment are in units of $\mu_N$, while the square brackets represent the expressions of their magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments in the second column.}
\label{MT1}
\begin{tabular}{c|l|l}
\toprule[1.0pt]
\toprule[1.0pt]
Quantities & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{Our results} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Other results} \\\hline
$\mu_{\Xi^{\prime +}_c}$ & $0.654\,\left[\frac{2}{3}\mu_u+\frac{2}{3}\mu_s-\frac{1}{3}\mu_c\right]$ & 0.65 \cite{Glozman:1995xy},\,0.67 \cite{Zhang:2021yul} \\
$\mu_{\Xi^{\prime 0}_c}$ & $-1.208\,\left[\frac{2}{3}\mu_d+\frac{2}{3}\mu_s-\frac{1}{3}\mu_c\right]$ & $-1.20$ \cite{Aliev:2015axa},\,$-1.20$ \cite{Zhang:2021yul}\\
$\mu_{\Xi^{*+}_c}$ & $1.539\,\left[\mu_u+\mu_s+\mu_c\right]$ &1.51 \cite{Patel:2007gx},\,1.59 \cite{Sharma:2010vv}\\
$\mu_{\Xi^{*0}_c}$ & $-1.254\,\left[\mu_d+\mu_s+\mu_c\right]$ &$-1.20$ \cite{Simonis:2018rld},\,$-1.18$ \cite{Ghalenovi:2014swa}\\
$\mu_{D^{*-}_s}$ & $-1.067\,\left[\mu_{\overline{c}}+\mu_s\right]$ &$-1.00$ \cite{Simonis:2018rld},\,$-1.08$ \cite{Zhang:2021yul}\\
$\mu_{\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c}$ & $0.199\,\left[\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}(\mu_u+\mu_s-2\mu_c)\right]$ &0.17 \cite{Kumar:2005ei},\,0.16 \cite{Aliev:2009jt}\\
$\mu_{\Xi^{*0}_c \to \Xi^{\prime 0}_c}$ & $-1.117\,\left[\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}(\mu_d+\mu_s-2\mu_c)\right]$ &$-1.07$ \cite{Simonis:2018rld},\,$-1.03$ \cite{Simonis:2018rld}\\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Based on the obtained magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime(*)}$ baryons and the $\bar D^{*}_s$ meson, we can get the numerical results of the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$. In Table~\ref{ME1}, we present the expressions and numerical results of the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ when performing the single channel analysis.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.42cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.50}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\caption{The expressions and values of the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ when only considering the $S$-wave component.}\label{ME1}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\toprule[1.0pt]
\toprule[1.0pt]
Physical quantities & Expressions & Values \\\hline
$\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}$ & $\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{\prime+}}+\mu_{D_{s}^{*-}}$& $-0.414~\mu_N$ \\
$\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=-1/2}$ & $\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{\prime0}}+\mu_{D_{s}^{*-}}$& $-2.275~\mu_N$\\
$\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}$ & $\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{*+}}+\mu_{D_{s}^{*-}}$& $0.472~\mu_N$ \\
$\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=-1/2}$ & $\mu_{\Xi_{c}^{*0}}+\mu_{D_{s}^{*-}}$& $-2.321~\mu_N$\\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
As indicated in Table~\ref{ME1}, the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime} \bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule with $I_3=1/2$, the $\Xi_c^{\prime} \bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule with $I_3=-1/2$, the $\Xi_c^{*} \bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule with $I_3=1/2$, and the $\Xi_c^{*} \bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule with $I_3=-1/2$ are $-0.414~\mu_N$, $-2.275~\mu_N$, $0.472~\mu_N$, and $-2.321~\mu_N$, respectively. Due to the magnetic moment of the $\Xi_c^{\prime} \bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule can be written as the sum of the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime}$ baryon and the $\bar D_s^*$ meson, and the magnetic moment of the $\Xi^{\prime +}_c$ is different from that of the $\Xi^{\prime 0}_c$ significantly. Thus, the magnetic moment of the $\Xi_c^{\prime} \bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule with $I_3=1/2$ is obviously different from that with $I_3=-1/2$. Similar to the $\Xi_c^{\prime} \bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecular state, the $\Xi_c^{*} \bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecular state with different $I_3$ quantum numbers have different magnetic moments. In addition, there exist almost same magnetic moments for the $\Xi_c^{\prime} \bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule with $I_3=-1/2$ and $\Xi_c^{*} \bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle$ molecule with $I_3=-1/2$, since the magnetic moment of the $\Xi_c^{\prime0}$ is close to that of the $\Xi_c^{*0}$.
Except for exploring the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$, the study of their transition magnetic moments also can give useful hints to reflect their inner structures. For instance, the transition magnetic moment between the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ with $I_3=1/2$ can be given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}\nonumber\\
&=&\left\langle\chi_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}{D}_s^{*-}}^{\left|\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}\right\rangle|1,1\rangle} \right|\hat{\mu}_z\left| \chi_{\Xi_c^{*+}{D}_s^{*-}}^{\sqrt{\frac{2}{5}}\left|\frac{3}{2},\frac{3}{2}\right\rangle\left|1,0\right\rangle+\sqrt{\frac{3}{5}}\left|\frac{3}{2},\frac{1}{2}\right\rangle\left|1,1\right\rangle}\right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&\sqrt{\frac{3}{5}}\mu_{\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c}.
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the transition magnetic moment of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process can be related to that of the $\Xi^{*}_c \to \Xi^{\prime }_c \gamma$ process. In the following, we further estimate the transition magnetic moment of the $\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c \gamma$ process, which can be deduced by
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c}&=&\left\langle \chi_{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(usc+suc\right)}^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow+\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow+\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow\right)} \right|\hat{\mu}_z\left| \chi_{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(usc+suc\right)}^{\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(2\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow-\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow-\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\right)}\right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{2}{3}\mu_u+\frac{2}{3}\mu_s-\frac{1}{3}\mu_c.
\end{eqnarray}
In Table~\ref{MT1}, the expressions and numerical results of the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c \gamma$ and $\Xi^{*0}_c \to \Xi^{\prime 0}_c\gamma$ processes are collected, where these results are comparable with the theoretical predictions from Refs. \cite{Kumar:2005ei,Aliev:2009jt,Simonis:2018rld}.
According to the numerical results of the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c \gamma$ and $\Xi^{*0}_c \to \Xi^{\prime 0}_c\gamma$ processes, we can get the values of the transition magnetic moments between the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}&=&0.154~\mu_N,\\
\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=-1/2}&=&-0.866~\mu_N.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, we need to specify that the absolute value of the transition magnetic moment of the $\Xi^{*0}_c \to \Xi^{\prime 0}_c$ process is much larger than that of the $\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c$ process \cite{Simonis:2018rld,Aliev:2009jt}. Thus, the value of $|\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}|$ with $I_3=-1/2$ is much larger than that of $|\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}|$ with $I_3=1/2$.
\subsubsection{The case by adding the contribution of the $D$-wave channels}
We further study the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ by adding the contribution of the $D$-wave channels. In our calculation, we take into account the following $S$-wave and $D$-wave channels for the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ \cite{Wang:2020bjt}, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^{*}|{3}/{2}^-\rangle:~~|^{4} S_{3/2}\rangle,\,|^{2} D_{3/2}\rangle,\,|^{4} D_{3/2}\rangle,\nonumber\\
&&\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^{*}|{5}/{2}^-\rangle:~~|^{6} S_{5/2}\rangle,\,|^{2} D_{5/2}\rangle,\,|^{4} D_{5/2}\rangle,\,|^{6} D_{5/2}\rangle.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, we take $|^{2S+1} L_{J}\rangle$ to represent the spin $S$, orbital angular momentum $L$, and total angular momentum $J$ for the discussed molecular states.
When considering the contribution of the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect, the magnetic moment and the transition magnetic moment of the molecular state can be deduced by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{A}_i \to \mathcal{A}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{A}_j}|R_{\mathcal{A}_i}\rangle,\label{MSD1}\\
&&\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{B}_i \to \mathcal{A}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{A}_j}|R_{\mathcal{B}_i}\rangle,\label{MSD2}
\end{eqnarray}
respectively. Here, $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$ represent two discussed molecular states, while $R_{i}$ stands for the spatial wave function of the corresponding $i$-th channel.
If adding the contribution of the $D$-wave channels to study the electromagnetic properties of the molecular states, we need to introduce the procedure of getting the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $D$-wave channels. For these discussed molecular states, their spin-orbital wave functions $|{ }^{2 S+1} L_{J}\rangle$ can be constructed by the coupling of the spin wave function $\left|S, m_{S}\right\rangle$ and the orbital wave function $Y_{L, m_{L}}$, which can be explicitly written as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left|{ }^{2 S+1} L_{J}\right\rangle=\sum_{m_{S}, m_{L}} C_{S m_{S}, L m_{L}}^{J M} \left|S, m_{S}\right\rangle Y_{L, m_{L}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
As the result, the magnetic moment of the $\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D^{*}|^{2} D_{3/2}\rangle$ channel with $I_3=1/2$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D^{*}|^{2} D_{3/2}\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}&=&\frac{1}{5}\left(-\frac{1}{3} \mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}}+\frac{2}{3}\mu_{D_s^{*-}}+\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}D_s^{*-}}^L\right)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{4}{5}\left(\frac{1}{3} \mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}}-\frac{2}{3}\mu_{D_s^{*-}}+2\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+} D_s^{*-}}^L\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{5} \mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}}-\frac{2}{5}\mu_{D_s^{*-}}+\frac{9}{5}\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+} D_s^{*-}}^L,
\end{eqnarray}
while the transition magnetic moment of the $\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D^{*}|^{4} D_{3/2}\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D^{*}|^{2} D_{3/2}\rangle$ process with $I_3=1/2$ can be deduced as
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D^{*}|^{4} D_{3/2}\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D^{*}|^{2} D_{3/2}\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}\nonumber\\
&&=-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{5}\left(\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3} \mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}}-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}\mu_{D_s^{*-}}\right)\nonumber\\
&&\quad-\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{5}\left(\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3} \mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}}-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}\mu_{D_s^{*-}}\right)\nonumber\\
&&=-\frac{4}{5} \mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime+}}+\frac{2}{5}\mu_{D_s^{*-}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Through the above procedure, we can obtain the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $D$-wave channels involved in our calculation.
From Eqs. (\ref{MSD1})-(\ref{MSD2}), the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the hadronic molecules are dependent on the relevant mixing channel components $\langle R_{\mathcal{A}_j}|R_{\mathcal{A}_i}\rangle$ and $\langle R_{\mathcal{B}_j}|R_{\mathcal{A}_i}\rangle$ when performing the $S$-$D$ wave mixing analysis, which are related to the binding energies for the discussed molecular states. Here, we adopt three typical binding energies $-0.5$ MeV, $-6.0$ MeV, and $-12.0$ MeV for the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ to present their magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments. In Table~\ref{ME2}, the relevant numerical results are listed.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.00cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.50}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\caption{The magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$. When discussing the electromagnetic properties of the hadronic molecules, we consider the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect. Since these discussed molecules are still missing in experiment, we take three typical binding energies $-0.5$ MeV, $-6.0$ MeV, and $-12.0$ MeV for the initial and final molecules to present the corresponding numerical results, where the different binding energies mainly come from the different fine-tuning cutoff values in the mass spectrum analysis.}
\label{ME2}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\toprule[1.0pt]
\toprule[1.0pt]
$I_3$&Physical quantities & Values \\\hline
\multirow{4}{*}{$\frac{1}{2}$} &$\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $-0.414~\mu_N$,\,$-0.416~\mu_N$,\,$-0.416~\mu_N$ \\
&$\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $0.472~\mu_N$,\,$0.472~\mu_N$,\,$0.472~\mu_N$ \\
&$\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $0.154~\mu_N$,\,$0.154~\mu_N$,\,$0.154~\mu_N$ \\\hline
\multirow{4}{*}{$-\frac{1}{2}$} &$\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $-2.272~\mu_N$,\,$-2.264~\mu_N$,\,$-2.261~\mu_N$ \\
&$\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $-2.320~\mu_N$,\,$-2.319~\mu_N$,\,$-2.319~\mu_N$ \\
&$\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $-0.865~\mu_N$,\,$-0.864~\mu_N$,\,$-0.864~\mu_N$ \\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
For the obtained magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ after adding the contribution of the $D$-wave channels, we want to specify two points:
(1) The $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect is not obvious to the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$. Here, the variations of their magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments are less than $0.014~\mu_N$ after considering the contribution of the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect, which is due to the $S$-wave channels have the dominant contributions with the probabilities over 99\% and play the important role in forming the loosely bound states for the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ \cite{Wang:2020bjt}; (2) Since the relevant mixing channel components are less dependent on the binding energies for the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ \cite{Wang:2020bjt}, their electromagnetic properties are not significantly dependent on their binding energies.
\subsubsection{The case under the coupled channel analysis}
We continue to study the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of these discussed molecular states when performing the coupled channel analysis. For the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$, we can further consider the contribution of the coupled channel effect from the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ and $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ systems \cite{Wang:2020bjt}.
When considering the coupled channel effect with two channels $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$, the magnetic moment of the molecular state can be deduced by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\sum_{i,\,j}\mu_{\mathcal{A}_i\to \mathcal{A}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{A}_j}|R_{\mathcal{A}_i}\rangle+\sum_{i,\,j}\mu_{\mathcal{B}_i\to \mathcal{B}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{B}_j}|R_{\mathcal{B}_i}\rangle\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{B}_i \to \mathcal{A}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{A}_j}|R_{\mathcal{B}_i}\rangle+\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{A}_i \to \mathcal{B}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{B}_j}|R_{\mathcal{A}_i}\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
while the transition magnetic moment between the molecular states can be given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{A}_i \to \mathcal{C}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{C}_j}|R_{\mathcal{A}_i}\rangle+\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{A}_i \to \mathcal{D}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{D}_j}|R_{\mathcal{A}_i}\rangle\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{B}_i \to \mathcal{C}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{C}_j}|R_{\mathcal{B}_i}\rangle+\sum_{i,\,j} \mu_{\mathcal{B}_i \to \mathcal{D}_j}\langle R_{\mathcal{D}_j}|R_{\mathcal{B}_i}\rangle.
\end{eqnarray}
Performing several lengthy and tedious deduction, we obtain the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness when performing the coupled channel analysis, and the relevant numerical results are presented in Table~\ref{ME3}. Here, we take three typical binding energies $-0.5$ MeV, $-6.0$ MeV, and $-12.0$ MeV for the investigated molecular states when presenting these numerical results.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.10cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.50}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\caption{The magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness when performing the coupled channel analysis. Here, we take three typical binding energies $-0.5$ MeV, $-6.0$ MeV, and $-12.0$ MeV for the investigated molecular states when presenting these numerical results.}\label{ME3}
\label{ME2}
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\toprule[1.0pt]
\toprule[1.0pt]
Physical quantities & Values \\\hline
$\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}$ & $-0.389~\mu_N$,\,$-0.335~\mu_N$,\,$-0.308~\mu_N$ \\
$\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=-1/2}$ & $-2.305~\mu_N$,\,$-2.354~\mu_N$,\,$-2.370~\mu_N$ \\
$\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=1/2}$ & $0.088~\mu_N$,\,$-0.039~\mu_N$,\,$-0.091~\mu_N$ \\
$\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}^{I_3=-1/2}$ & $-0.866~\mu_N$,\,$-0.864~\mu_N$,\,$-0.862~\mu_N$ \\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
After including the contribution of the coupled channel effect, the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness can be changed, where the most obvious change happens to the transition magnetic moment of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle$ process with $I_3=1/2$, which can reach up to $0.245~\mu_N$.
Since the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ and $\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ thresholds are close to each other, we discuss the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ after considering the mixing of the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ and $\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ channels. First we list the deduced OBE effective potentials for the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*/\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ coupled channel system,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{V}^{\Xi_{c}^*\bar D_s^*\rightarrow\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*}&=&-l_Sg_S\mathcal{A}_{23}Y_\sigma-\frac{g_1 g}{12f_\pi^2}\left[\mathcal{A}_{24}\mathcal{O}_r+\mathcal{A}_{25}\mathcal{P}_r\right]Y_{\eta}\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{\beta \beta_S g_{V}^2}{4}\mathcal{A}_{23}Y_{\phi}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\lambda \lambda_S g_V^2}{6}\left[2\mathcal{A}_{24}\mathcal{O}_r-\mathcal{A}_{25}\mathcal{P}_r\right]Y_{\phi},\\
\mathcal{V}^{\Xi_{c}^*\bar D_s^*\rightarrow\Omega_{c}^*\bar D^*}&=&-\frac{g_1 g}{2\sqrt{2}f_\pi^2}\left[\mathcal{A}_{24}\mathcal{O}_r+\mathcal{A}_{25}\mathcal{P}_r\right]Y_{K0}\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{\beta \beta_S g_{V}^2}{2\sqrt{2}}\mathcal{A}_{23}Y_{K^*0}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\lambda \lambda_S g_V^2}{3\sqrt{2}}\left[2\mathcal{A}_{24}\mathcal{O}_r-\mathcal{A}_{25}\mathcal{P}_r\right]Y_{K^*0},\\
\mathcal{V}^{\Omega_{c}^*\bar D^*\rightarrow\Omega_{c}^*\bar D^*}&=&\frac{g_1 g}{6f_\pi^2}\left[\mathcal{A}_{24}\mathcal{O}_r+\mathcal{A}_{25}\mathcal{P}_r\right]Y_{\eta}.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, the involved coupling constants, operators, and functions can be referred to Ref. \cite{Wang:2020bjt}, and $q_0=0.113~{\rm GeV}$. By solving the coupled channel Schr$\ddot{\rm o}$dinger equation, we get the bound state solutions for the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*/\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ mixing state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$. In Table~\ref{reply1}, the results are collected.
The calculation also gives the probabilities of these involed channels. Furthermore, one gets $\mu_{\Omega_c^{*0}}=-1.018~\mu_N$, $\mu_{\bar D^{*0}}=1.489~\mu_N$, and $\mu_{D^{*-}}=-1.303~\mu_N$. In Table~\ref{reply2}, we compare the obtained magnetic moments with and without considering the $\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ channel. From Table~\ref{reply2}, we find that the $\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ channel hardly affects the magnetic moments since the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ as dominant channel has the probability over 80\%. The other reason lies that the magnetic moment of the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ state is extremely close to that of the $\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$, which shows the results in the same row no difference with four effective figures.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.30cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.50}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\caption{Bound state solutions for the $S$-wave $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ and $\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ mixing state with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$.}\label{reply1}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}\toprule[1pt]\toprule[1pt]
$\Lambda~({\rm GeV})$ &$E~({\rm MeV})$ &$r_{\rm RMS}~({\rm fm})$ &P($\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*/\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$)\\
\hline
1.544&$-0.536$ &3.746&\textbf{97.129}/2.871\\
1.575&$-6.086$ &1.154&\textbf{88.923}/11.077\\
1.593&$-12.188$ &0.813&\textbf{84.560}/15.440\\
\bottomrule[1pt]\bottomrule[1pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.60cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.50}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\caption{The magnetic moments of the pure $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ and the mixing $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*/\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*$ molecular states with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$.}
\label{reply2}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\toprule[1.0pt]
\toprule[1.0pt]
$I_3(J^P)$&$\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*}$ & $\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*/\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D^*}$ \\\hline
$1/2({5}/{2}^-)$ & $0.472~\mu_N$ & $0.472~\mu_N$ \\
$-1/2({5}/{2}^-)$ & $-2.321~\mu_N$& $-2.321~\mu_N$\\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{The radiative decay behaviors of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ molecules}
Experimentally, the radiative decay process is the ideal platform to study the hadronic electromagnetic properties. In the following, we simply estimate the radiative decay behaviors between the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ after getting their transition magnetic moments. For the radiative decay process $H \to H^{\prime}\gamma$, the decay width $\Gamma_{H \to H^{\prime}\gamma}$ can be related to the corresponding transition magnetic moment $\mu_{H \to H^{\prime}}$ \cite{Dey:1994qi,Simonis:2018rld,Gandhi:2019bju,Hazra:2021lpa,Li:2021ryu,Zhou:2022gra,Wang:2022tib,Rahmani:2020pol,Menapara:2022ksj,Menapara:2021dzi,Gandhi:2018lez,Majethiya:2011ry,Majethiya:2009vx,Shah:2016nxi,Ghalenovi:2018fxh}, and the general relation can be written as
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{H \to H^{\prime}\gamma}=\alpha_{\rm {EM}}\frac{E_{\gamma}^{3}}{M_{P}^{2}} \frac{2J_{H^{\prime}}+1}{2J_{H}+1}\left(\frac{\mu_{H \to H^{\prime}}}{\mu_N}\right)^{2}.\label{width}
\end{equation}
Here, $\alpha_{\rm {EM}}$ is the fine structure constant with $\alpha_{\rm {EM}} \approx {1}/{137}$, the proton mass $M_P$ is taken as $0.938\,\mathrm{GeV}$ \cite{Workman:2022ynf}, and $E_{\gamma}$ is the photon momentum, which is defined by
\begin{equation}
E_{\gamma}=\frac{M_{H}^2-M_{H^{\prime}}^2}{2M_{H}}.
\end{equation}
In this work, the masses of the $S$-wave charmed baryons and the $S$-wave charmed-strange meson are taken from the Particle Data Group \cite{Workman:2022ynf}.
Firstly, we estimate the radiative decay widths between the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ by performing the single channel analysis, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Gamma_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma}^{I_3=1/2}&=&0.022 \sim 0.061\,{\rm keV},\\
\Gamma_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma}^{I_3=-1/2}&=&0.683 \sim 1.930\,{\rm keV}.
\end{eqnarray*}
For these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness, we estimate their radiative decay behaviors by the obtained transition magnetic moments and their binding energies. Since the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})$ are still missing in experiment, we discuss the radiative decay widths dependent on the binding energies of the initial and final molecular state by scanning the binding energy range from $-12.0$ to $-0.5$ MeV. The smallest decay width can be obtained by taking $E(\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*[I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})])=-12.0~{\rm MeV}$ and $E(\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*[I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})])=-0.5~{\rm MeV}$, and the largest decay width can be found, which corresponds to $E(\Xi_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*[I(J^P)=1/2({5}/{2}^{-})])=-0.5~{\rm MeV}$ and $E(\Xi_{c}^{\prime}\bar D_s^*[I(J^P)=1/2({3}/{2}^{-})])=-12.0~{\rm MeV}$.
Furthermore, the radiative decay width of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process with $I_3=1/2$ is much smaller than that of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process with $I_3=-1/2$, which is similar to the radiative decay behaviors of the $\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c \gamma$ and $\Xi^{*0}_c \to \Xi^{\prime 0}_c \gamma$ processes \cite{Simonis:2018rld,Aliev:2009jt}.
When discussing the radiative decay behaviors of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma$ process, we can further consider the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect. In our concrete calculation, we take three typical binding energies $-0.5$ MeV, $-6.0$ MeV, and $-12.0$ MeV for the initial and final molecules to present the corresponding numerical results. By performing numerical calculation, we can obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Gamma_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma}^{I_3=1/2}&=&0.038,\,0.038,\,0.038\,{\rm keV},\\
\Gamma_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma}^{I_3=-1/2}&=&1.200,\,1.197,\,1.196\,{\rm keV},
\end{eqnarray*}
where the difference of the numerical results for three cases is mainly due to the probabilities of these involved channels.
Similar to considering the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect, we continue to discuss the radiative decay behaviors of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma$ process by performing the coupled channel analysis, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Gamma_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma}^{I_3=1/2}&=&0.012,\,0.002,\,0.013\,{\rm keV},\\
\Gamma_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma}^{I_3=-1/2}&=&1.203,\,1.197,\,1.190\,{\rm keV}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Based on the obtained results, we can find that the radiative decay widths of these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness do not change too much with increasing their binding energies \cite{Wang:2020bjt}. For example, the most significant change of the radiative decay width is the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process with $I_3=-1/2$, which is less than $0.013\,{\rm keV}$.
In the present work, we mainly focus on the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moments of these discussed molecular states. As a byproduct, we simply estimate the radiative decay behaviors of these discussed molecular states by the obtained transition magnetic moments, which is similar to the treatment to the radiative decay of the transition between the baryons or the transition between the mesons as shown in Refs. \cite{Majethiya:2009vx,Majethiya:2011ry,Shah:2016nxi,Gandhi:2018lez,Simonis:2018rld,Ghalenovi:2018fxh,Gandhi:2019bju,Rahmani:2020pol,Hazra:2021lpa,Menapara:2021dzi,Menapara:2022ksj}. If treating the radiative decay widths more carefully, we need to take into account the square of the overlap of the spatial wave functions of the initial and final states ${|\int d^3 \vec{r} \psi_f(\vec{r}) \psi_i(\vec{r}) \exp{(i m_1 / (m_1+m_2) \vec{q} \cdot \vec{r} )} |}^2$. If the momentum of the emitted photon is particularly small, the factor ${|\int d^3 \vec{r} \psi_f(\vec{r}) \psi_i(\vec{r}) \exp{(i m_1 / (m_1+m_2) \vec{q} \cdot \vec{r} )} |}^2$ is approximately equal to 1, which does not affect the final result. However, for the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma$ process, the momentum of the emitted photon is about $66.696~{\rm MeV}$, and we get ${|\int d^3 \vec{r} \psi_f(\vec{r}) \psi_i(\vec{r}) \exp{(i m_1 / (m_1+m_2) \vec{q} \cdot \vec{r} )} |}^2=0.224$. Thus, we should consider its contribution to the radiative decay width of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma$ process, where the radiative decay width directly transferred by the transition magnetic moment should be multiplied by a factor 0.224. In addition, we need to point out that the uncertainty of the binding energies of the initial and final molecules may lead to the uncertainty of the radiative decay widths. Moreover, the electric quadruple moments would also contribute if $q$ is not neglectable. Thus, the experimental measurement of the binding energies of the relevant molecular states will help us to improve our analysis about the radiative decay width of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle\gamma$ process.
\section{The electromagnetic properties of the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states}\label{sec3}
In our previous study \cite{Wang:2021hql}, we predicted the existences of the $\Omega_{c}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$, which are the typical hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with triple strangeness. In order to reflect the inner structures of the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$, providing their electromagnetic properties is an essential task.
Within the constitute quark model, the procedure of calculating the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moment of the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states is same as that of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,\,*)} \bar D_s^*$ molecular states. The flavor wave functions of the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)0}$ baryons are written as $ssc$, and their corresponding spin wave functions $|S,S_3\rangle$ can be expressed as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Omega_{c}&:&\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\left|\dfrac{1}{2},\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(2\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow-\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow-\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\right)\\
\left|\dfrac{1}{2},-\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow+\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow-2\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow\right)
\end{array}
\right.,\\
\Omega_{c}^{*}&:&\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},\dfrac{3}{2}\right\rangle=\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\\
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow+\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow+\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\right)\\
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},-\dfrac{1}{2}\right\rangle=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow+\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow+\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow\right)\\
\left|\dfrac{3}{2},-\dfrac{3}{2}\right\rangle=\downarrow\downarrow\downarrow
\end{array}
\right..
\end{eqnarray*}
In Table~\ref{MT2}, the corresponding results of the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moment of the $\Omega_c^{(*)}$ baryons are collected. Furthermore, we compare these numerical results with other theoretical predictions \cite{Gandhi:2018lez,Patel:2007gx,Simonis:2018rld,Sharma:2010vv,Majethiya:2009vx}, where our obtained results are comparable with other theoretical values \cite{Gandhi:2018lez,Patel:2007gx,Simonis:2018rld,Sharma:2010vv,Majethiya:2009vx}. Interestingly, the magnetic moments of the $\Omega_c^{0}$ and $\Omega_c^{*0}$ are very close to each other, which is similar to the case of the magnetic moments of the $\Xi_c^{\prime0}$ and $\Xi_c^{*0}$.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.05cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.50}
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\caption{The magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moment of the $\Omega_c^{(*)}$ baryons. Here, the magnetic moment and the transition magnetic moment are in units of $\mu_N$, while the square brackets represent the expressions of their magnetic moments and transition magnetic moment in the second column.}
\label{MT2}
\begin{tabular}{c|l|l}
\toprule[1.0pt]
\toprule[1.0pt]
Quantities & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{Our results} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Other results} \\\hline
$\mu_{\Omega^{0}_c}$ & $-1.051\,\left[\frac{4}{3}\mu_s-\frac{1}{3}\mu_c\right]$ & $-1.127$ \cite{Gandhi:2018lez},\,$-0.960$ \cite{Patel:2007gx} \\
$\mu_{\Omega^{*0}_c}$ & $-1.018\,\left[2\mu_s+\mu_c\right]$ & $-1.127$ \cite{Gandhi:2018lez},\,$-0.936$ \cite{Simonis:2018rld}\\
$\mu_{\Omega^{*0}_c \to \Omega^{0}_c}$ & $-1.006\,\left[\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3}(\mu_s-\mu_c)\right]$ &$-0.960$ \cite{Sharma:2010vv},\,$-1.128$ \cite{Majethiya:2009vx}\\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
And then, we can study the magnetic moments, the transition magnetic moment, and the radiative decay width of the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$. Here, the involved flavor wave functions $|I,I_3\rangle$ are expressed as $|0,0\rangle=|\Omega_{c}^{(*)0}{D}_s^{*-}\rangle$, where $I$ and $I_3$ are isospins and isospin's third components of the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar{D}_s^{*}$ systems, respectively. Their spin wave functions $|S,S_3\rangle$ can be constructed by the coupling of the spin wave functions of the constitute hadrons, i,e.,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Omega_{c}\bar{D}_s^{*}:\,|S,S_3\rangle&=&\sum_{S_{\Omega_{c}},S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}C^{SS_3}_{\frac{1}{2}S_{\Omega_{c}},1S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}\left|\frac{1}{2},S_{\Omega_{c}}\right\rangle\left|1,S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}\right\rangle,\\
\Omega_{c}^{*}\bar{D}_s^{*}:\,|S,S_3\rangle&=&\sum_{S_{\Omega_{c}^{*}},S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}C^{SS_3}_{\frac{3}{2}S_{\Omega_{c}^{*}},1S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}}\left|\frac{3}{2},S_{\Omega_{c}^{*}}\right\rangle\left|1,S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}\right\rangle.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, $S$ and $S_3$ stand for spins and spin's third components of the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar{D}_s^{*}$ systems, respectively. The notations $S_{\Omega_{c}}$, $S_{\Omega_{c}^{*}}$, and $S_{\bar{D}_s^{*}}$ denote the third components of the spins of the $\Omega_{c}$, $\Omega_{c}^{*}$, and $\bar{D}_s^{*}$, respectively.
Similar to the case for the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness, the study of the electromagnetic properties of the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$ is carried out when the single channel analysis, the $S$-$D$ wave mixing analysis, and the coupled channel analysis are included in the calculation one by one. For the case of considering the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect, the allowed $S$-wave and $D$-wave channels $|^{2S+1} L_{J}\rangle$ for the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$ are \cite{Wang:2021hql}
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\Omega_c\bar D_s^{*}|{3}/{2}^-\rangle:~~|^{4} S_{3/2}\rangle,\,|^{2} D_{3/2}\rangle,\,|^{4} D_{3/2}\rangle,\nonumber\\
&&\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^{*}|{5}/{2}^-\rangle:~~|^{6} S_{5/2}\rangle,\,|^{2} D_{5/2}\rangle,\,|^{4} D_{5/2}\rangle,\,|^{6} D_{5/2}\rangle.
\end{eqnarray*}
Additionally, we can further consider the contribution of the coupled channel effect for the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ \cite{Wang:2021hql}.
In Table~\ref{ME4}, we present the numerical results of the electromagnetic properties of the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$ by performing the single channel, $S$-$D$ wave mixing, and coupled channel analysis, respectively. Here, we present the radiative decay width of the $\Omega_c^*\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process by varying the binding energies of the initial and final molecular states from $-12.0$ to $-0.5\,{\rm MeV}$ with the single channel analysis. We further take three typical binding energies $-0.5$ MeV, $-6.0$ MeV, and $-12.0$ MeV for the discussed molecular states to present their magnetic moments, transition magnetic moment, and radiative decay width when performing the $S$-$D$ wave mixing and coupled channel analysis.
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{0.20cm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.50}
\begin{table*}[!htbp]
\caption{The magnetic moments, the transition magnetic moment, and the radiative decay width of the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$ by performing the single channel, $S$-$D$ wave mixing, and coupled channel analysis, respectively. When discussing the electromagnetic properties of the hadronic molecules, we consider the $S$-$D$ wave mixing and coupled channel effect. Since these discussed molecules are still missing in experiment, we take three typical binding energies $-0.5$ MeV, $-6.0$ MeV, and $-12.0$ MeV for the initial and final molecules to present the corresponding numerical results, where the different binding energies mainly come from the different fine-tuning cutoff values in the mass spectrum analysis.}
\label{ME4}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c}
\toprule[1.0pt]
\toprule[1.0pt]
Physical quantities & Single channel case& $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect & Coupled channel effect\\\hline
$\mu_{\Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $-2.118~\mu_N$ & $-2.117~\mu_N$,\,$-2.117~\mu_N$,\,$-2.117~\mu_N$& $-2.152~\mu_N$,\,$-2.190~\mu_N$,\,$-2.199~\mu_N$\\
$\mu_{\Omega_c^*\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $-2.085~\mu_N$ & $-2.084~\mu_N$,\,$-2.084~\mu_N$,\,$-2.084~\mu_N$&/\\
$\mu_{\Omega_c^*\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ & $-0.780~\mu_N$ & $-0.778~\mu_N$,\,$-0.776~\mu_N$,\,$-0.776~\mu_N$&$-0.787~\mu_N$,\,$-0.795~\mu_N$,\,$-0.796~\mu_N$\\
$\Gamma_{\Omega_c^*\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma}$ & $0.685\sim1.820\,{\rm keV}$ & $1.157\,{\rm keV}$,\,$1.152\,{\rm keV}$,\,$1.152\,{\rm keV}$& $1.185\,{\rm keV}$,\,$1.208\,{\rm keV}$,\,$1.212\,{\rm keV}$\\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
From Table~\ref{ME4}, we can find several interesting results:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Since the magnetic moments of the $\Omega_c^{0}$ and $\Omega_c^{*0}$ are very close to each other, the magnetic moments of the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$ are almost same. Additionally, the radiative decay width of the $\Omega_c^*\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process is around 1.00 keV.
\item The $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect is not obvious to the magnetic moments, the transition magnetic moment, and the radiative decay width of the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$, since the changes of their magnetic moments and transition magnetic moment are smaller than $0.004~\mu_N$ after taking into account the contribution of the $D$-wave channels.
The main reason is that the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect can be ignored for forming the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$ \cite{Wang:2021hql}.
\item The coupled channel effect has influence to the electromagnetic properties of these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with triple strangeness, where the changes of their magnetic moments and transition magnetic moment are less than $0.09~\mu_N$.
\end{enumerate}
Additionally, the electromagnetic properties of these discussed hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness and triple strangeness exist several similarities. In particular, the numerical results of $\mu_{\Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$, $\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle}$, and $\mu_{\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ with $I_3=-1/2$ are close to $\mu_{\Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$, $\mu_{\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle}$, and $\mu_{\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle}$ with $I_3=0$, respectively, since the magnetic moments and the transition magnetic moment of the $\Xi_{c}^{\prime(*)0}$ baryons are similar to those of the $\Omega_{c}^{(*)0}$ baryons.
\section{Summary}\label{sec4}
Since the discovery of the hidden-charm pentaquark structures $P_c(4380)$ and $P_c(4450)$ by LHCb in 2015 \cite{Aaij:2015tga}, the study of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks has become a focused subject in hadron physics \cite{Liu:2013waa,Hosaka:2016pey,Chen:2016qju,Richard:2016eis,Lebed:2016hpi,Olsen:2017bmm,Guo:2017jvc,Liu:2019zoy,Brambilla:2019esw,Chen:2022asf,Meng:2022ozq}. In the past years, the remarkable progress on both the theoretical and experimental sides has been made, where these topics around the mass spectra, decay behaviors, and production mechanisms of different types of hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks were explored simultaneously, which deepen our understanding of the nature of hidden-charm pentaquarks. It is obvious that it is not the end of whole story.
In Refs. \cite{Wang:2020bjt,Wang:2021hql}, the Lanzhou group once predicted the existences of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquark candidates with double strangeness and triple strangeness by discussing the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{(*)}$ and $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{(*)}$ interactions, where their mass spectra were given. Facing these predicted hidden-charm molecular pentaquark candidates with double strangeness and triple strangeness, in this work we propose to study their electromagnetic properties including the magnetic moments, the transition magnetic moments, and the radiative decay behaviors, which are important physics quantities to reflect their inner structures. In the concrete investigation, different effects including the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect and the coupled channel effect are considered.
\iffalse
crucial step when constructing the zoo of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with double strangeness and triple strangeness. Based on the obtained numerical results, we find that (1) the radiative decay width of the $\Xi_c^{*}\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Xi_c^{\prime}\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process with $I_3=1/2$ is much smaller than that with $I_3=-1/2$, which is similar to the radiative decay behaviors of the $\Xi^{*+}_c \to \Xi^{\prime +}_c \gamma$ and $\Xi^{*0}_c \to \Xi^{\prime 0}_c \gamma$ processes, (2) the $\Omega_c\bar D_s^*$ molecular state with $I(J^P)=0({3}/{2}^{-})$ and the $\Omega_c^{*}\bar D_s^*$ molecule with $I(J^P)=0({5}/{2}^{-})$ exist approximately equal magnetic moments, (3) the radiative decay width of the $\Omega_c^*\bar D_s^*|{5}/{2}^-\rangle \to \Omega_c\bar D_s^*|{3}/{2}^-\rangle \gamma$ process is around 1.00 keV, and (4) the electromagnetic properties of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ and $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states exist several similarities. Furthermore, we also discuss the roles of the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect and the coupled channel effect to the electromagnetic properties of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ and $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states. By performing the numerical analysis, we can obtain that the changes of their magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments are smaller than $0.02\mu_N$ after considering the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect, and the coupled channel effect results their variations less than $0.25\mu_N$. Thus, the $S$-$D$ wave mixing effect and the coupled channel effect can influence the electromagnetic properties of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ and $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states, but their changes are more obvious after including the coupled channel effect, which is similar to the mass spectroscopy behaviors of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ and $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states \cite{Wang:2020bjt,Wang:2021hql}.
\fi
In summary, the present exploration is only a start point for the study of the electromagnetic properties of the $\Xi_c^{(\prime,*)} \bar{D}_s^{*}$ and $\Omega_{c}^{(*)}\bar D_s^{*}$ molecular states. Further theoretical studies by different approaches and models around this subject are encouraged. Of course, experimental measurement to the electromagnetic properties of these discussed pentaquarks will be a challenge task in future.
As the crucial information to reflect the inner structure of hadron, exploring the electromagnetic properties can be used to distinguish their spin-parity quantum numbers and configurations. It is worthwhile to study the magnetic moments of non-molecular hidden-charm pentaquarks with double or triple strangeness in future, which will help distinguish the nature of these pentaquarks. Since our knowledge of the electromagnetic properties of the compact hidden-charm pentaquarks with double strangeness and triple strangeness is still absent, more experimental and theoretical investigations of these discussed exotic states are encouraged, which may provide valuable information to construct the cluster composed of the hidden-charm pentaquarks with double strangeness and triple strangeness.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
This work is supported by the China National Funds for Distinguished Young Scientists under Grant No. 11825503, National Key Research and Development Program of China under Contract No. 2020YFA0406400, the 111 Project under Grant No. B20063, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 12175091, 11965016, and 12047501.
|
\section{Introduction}
The AdS/CFT correspondence, also known as holographic duality, provides a novel way to study strongly correlated quantum systems in terms of weakly coupled gravity. In particular, it can describe strongly correlated gapped systems in terms of gravity duals. One class of such models at zero density include the GPPZ gapped geometry \cite{Girardello:1999hj}, AdS soliton \cite{Witten:1998zw}, AdS with cutoffs in IR \cite{Erlich:2005qh} and so on. Another class of models are for finite density systems with translational symmetry breaking effects, see e.g. \cite{Kiritsis:2015oxa}.
Physical systems in the real world often have boundaries and the boundary effects play important roles, ranging from D-branes in string theory to topological states in condensed matter physics. One well known example of the topological states in condensed matter system is the topological insulator, which is gapped in the bulk while nontrivial gapless charged excitations exist on the boundary \cite{ti-kane}. We are interested in constructing a holographic model for topological insulators.\footnote{Previous attempts to study the holographic model of topological insulator include e.g. \cite{Hoyos-Badajoz:2010etp, Rozali:2012gf}.} Instead, we replace it with a simpler question to analyze what happens to a holographic gapped system in the presence of a boundary. We study this problem in the framework of AdS/BCFT.
AdS/BCFT allows us to study the properties of field theories with boundaries from the holographic dual. In AdS/BCFT, the bulk geometry terminates at the end-of-the-world (EOW) brane such that the boundary of EOW brane near AdS coincides with the boundary of BCFT \cite{Takayanagi:2011zk, Fujita:2011, Karch:2000gx}. AdS/BCFT has been actively explored during the last decade. A far from complete list includes applications to condensed matter physics \cite{Fujita:2012, Melnikov:2012tb}, cosmology \cite{Antonini:2019qkt}, black hole physics \cite{Geng:2021mic, Suzuki:2022xwv}, quantum information \cite{Seminara:2018pmr} and so on. However, so far the studies of AdS/BCFT have been mainly limited to critical gapless systems with boundaries.
The purpose of this paper is to study the properties of gapped systems in the presence of boundaries in the framework of AdS/BCFT. We will focus on the vacuum states of the first class of models as mentioned in the first paragraph at zero temperature and zero density. Here we consider two different holographic models of gapped systems. The first one is the gapped geometry in Einstein-scalar theory. We choose Neumann boundary condition for the fields on the EOW brane. Taking a proper scalar potential term localized on the brane, we can get a consistent background for the gapped geometry with an EOW brane. Then we will study the transport properties and entanglement entropies of the BCFT. The second gapped system is described by the AdS soliton \cite{Witten:1998zw}. The AdS soliton can be obtained by analytic continuation of the AdS Schwartzschild black hole. At finite temperature there is a first order phase transition between the AdS Schwartzschild black hole and the AdS soliton, which describes the confinement/deconfinement phase transition. There is a compact spatial dimension in the AdS soliton which sets the scale of the transition.
We consider the presence of a boundary for the dual field theory of the AdS soliton
along one noncompact spatial direction and study its transport properties and entanglement entropies. We will make comparisons on the profiles and the properties between these two different gapped systems in the presence of boundaries.
Our paper is organized as follows. In section \ref{sec2}, we first construct a gapped system in the presence of a boundary in Einstein-scalar theory using AdS/BCFT, and then study its conductivity along the spatial direction of the boundary as well as its entanglement entropy. In section \ref{sec3}, we study the properties of gapped system which is described by the AdS soliton in AdS/BCFT. We summarize our results in section \ref{sec4} and discuss the possible open questions. Some calculation details are collected in the appendices.
\section{A gapped system in AdS$_4$/BCFT$_3$}
\label{sec2}
In this section, we study the holographic gapped system with boundaries in the Einstein-scalar gravity and consider its properties in the framework of AdS/BCFT \cite{Takayanagi:2011zk, Fujita:2011}. We focus on the case of three dimensional field theories with two dimensional boundaries and it is straightforward to generalized to other dimensions.
The configuration under consideration is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:cf}. The three dimensional boundary field theory is defined on the manifold $M$ with boundary $P$ along $y$ direction. The gravity dual lives in the bulk $N$ with the EOW brane $Q$ which anchors to the BCFT boundary $P$. Note that $u$ is the holographic direction and the boundary $M$ lives at $u=0$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.7]
\draw [fill=blue!10] (0,0)--(7,0)--(10,3)--(3,3);
\draw [fill=green!5] (0,0)
to[out=150, in=270](-3,5)--(0,8)
to[out=-90, in=-210](3,3);
\draw [fill=red] (0,0)--(3,3) node[anchor=east,midway]{ $P$ };
\draw[black] (5.0, 1.5) node{ $M$ };
\draw[black] (-1.0, 4.0) node{ $Q$ };
\draw[black] (5.0, 6.0) node{ $N$ };
\draw[black] (0, 0);
\draw[-latex, very thick, blue, opacity=0.7] (7, 0)--(8.5, 1.5) node[anchor=west, near end]{$ ~\{ t,\,y\} $ };
\draw[-latex, very thick, blue, opacity=0.8] (0, 0)--(8.5, 0) node[anchor=north, at end]{ $x$ };
\draw[-latex, very thick, opacity=0.8 ] (11, 2)--(11, 5) node[anchor=west, midway]{ $u$ };
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small The configuration under consideration. The field theory lives in the manifold $M$ with boundary $P$. The dual gravity lives in the bulk $N$ with boundary $Q$. }
\label{fig:cf}
\end{figure}
We consider the Einstein-scalar gravitational theory
\begin{equation}
S_\text{bulk}=S_N +S_Q \,,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:action1}
\begin{split}
S_N&=\int_N d^4x\sqrt{-g}\,\bigg[\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\bigg(R+6-\frac{1}{2}(\partial\phi)^2
-V(\phi)\bigg)-\frac{Z(\phi)}{4e^2}F^2
\bigg] \,,\\
S_{Q}&=\int_Q d^3x\sqrt{-\gamma}\, \bigg[\frac{1}{\kappa^2}(K-T\big)+v(\phi)
\bigg] \,,\\
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
where the bulk gauge field $A_a$ is dual to the electric current on the boundary and it has field strength $F_{ab}=\partial_a A_b-\partial_b A_a$. $\kappa$ and $e$ are the gravitational constant and the bulk gauge coupling constant, respectively. Note that the scalar fields $\phi$ is real. The induced metric on the EOW brane $Q$ is denoted as $\gamma_{\mu\nu}$, where $K$ and $T$ are the extrinsic curvature and the tension of the EOW brane $Q$. Note that on $Q$ we also consider a potential term $v(\phi)$ and it contributes to the effective tension of the brane.
We set $2\kappa^2=e^2=1$.
The equations of motion in the bulk $N$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
R_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}g_{ab}\big(R+6\big)-\frac{1}{2}T_{ab}&=0 \,,\\
\nabla_b\big(Z(\phi) F^{ba}\big)
&=0\,,\\
\nabla_{a}\nabla^{a}\phi-\frac{\partial_\phi Z(\phi)}{4}F^2-\partial_\phi V(\phi)&=0 \,,
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{ab}&=&Z(\phi)\bigg[F_{ac}F_{b}^{~c}-\frac{1}{4}g_{ab}F^2\bigg]
+\nabla_{a}\phi\nabla_{b}\phi-g_{ab}\bigg[\frac{1}{2}(\partial\phi)^2+V(\phi)\bigg] \,. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The equations of motion on the EOW brane $Q$ can be obtained from the variations. The variation for metric fields, scalar field and vector field yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
\delta S\Big{|}_Q&=
\int_Qd^3x\sqrt{-\gamma}\,\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\left[K_{\mu\nu}-(K-T)\gamma_{\mu\nu} -\frac{1}{2} v(\phi) \gamma_{\mu\nu}
\right] \delta\gamma^{\mu\nu}
\\
&+\int_Q d^3x\sqrt{-\gamma}\,\left[-n^a\nabla_a\phi+v'(\phi)
\right]\,\delta\phi \\
&+\int_Q d^3x \sqrt{-\gamma}\,n_a\left( -\frac{Z(\phi)}{e^2}F^{ab}\right)\,\delta A_b\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $n^a$ is the outward unit vector of $Q$. Here $\gamma_{\mu\nu}$ should be understood as the metric from the Gaussian normal coordinate on the EOW brane. Following the standard AdS/BCFT, we impose Neumann boundary condition on $Q$.\footnote{AdS/BCFT with Dirichlet boundary condition or mixed boundary condition can be found in e.g.
\cite{Chu:2017aab, Miao:2018qkc}. It would be interesting to consider gapped systems with generalized boundary conditions in AdS/BCFT.}
Then we obtain the following equations on $Q$
\begin{eqnarray}{\label{eq:Qbc}}
\begin{split}
K_{\mu\nu}-(K-T)\gamma_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}v(\phi)\gamma_{\mu\nu}&=0\,, \\
n^{a}\partial_a\phi-\partial_\phi v(\phi)&=0\,,\\
n_aF^{ab}&=0\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that we choose Dirichlet boundary condition on $M$ and $P$.
\subsection{Zero temperature ground state}
\label{subsec:groundstate}
We focus on the vacuum solution at zero temperature and zero density and consider the following ansatz of the metric fields, scalar and vector fields
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:ansatz d4}
ds^2=\frac{1}{u^2}\bigg[-dt^2+dx^2+dy^2+\frac{du^2}{f(u)}\bigg] \,,~~~ \phi=\phi(u)\,,~~~A_a=0\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Near the AdS boundary, i.e. $u\to 0$, the metric field $f(u)\to 1$. The IR regime is $u\to\infty$.
The equations of motion for the system in $N$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
\frac{V-6}{u^2 f}+\frac{6}{u^2}-\frac{1}{2} \phi'^2&=0\,, \\
\phi'^2-\frac{2f'}{uf}&=0\,,\\
\phi''+\phi'\left(
\frac{f'}{2f}-\frac{2}{u}\right)-\frac{\partial_\phi V}{u^2 f}&=0\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
We have the bulk solution which satisfy the gapped spectrum condition
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bgsol1}
f(u)=1+a_0 u^n\,,~~~\phi(u)=\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{n}}\,\text{arcsinh}\big[\sqrt{a_0}u^{\frac{n}{2}}\big]
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bgsp}
V(\phi)=(n-6)\,\Big(\sinh\Big[
\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2\sqrt{2}} \phi \Big]\Big)^2\,.
\end{equation}
Note that $a_0>0$ and can be set to be $1$ using the scaling symmetry $u\to \lambda u,\, (t,x,y)\to \lambda(t,x,y),\, (f,\phi)\to (f,\phi)$. In the following we set $a_0=1$.
In the IR region, i.e. $u\to\infty$, from the solution \eqref{eq:bgsol1} we have $f(u)\to u^n$. It is known that this kind of geometry has a gapped spectrum for probe fields when $n\geq 2$ \cite{Liu:2013una}.
Additionally,
in the deep IR, i.e. $u\to\infty$, the Ricci scalar is divergent (except the $n=4$ case where the Ricci scalar is finite while the Kretschmann scalar is divergent),
from which we know that there is a curvature singularity for the solution \eqref{eq:bgsol1}. Nonetheless, the singularity is physically acceptable if the Gubser criterion is satisfied \cite{Gubser:2000nd, Charmousis:2010zz} which constraints
$n \leq 6$.\footnote{Note that the strong energy condition requires $n \leq 6$, while the null energy condition does not put any constraint on the system.} In the following we will focus on the cases $n\in [2, 6].$
Near the AdS boundary, we have $\phi\to0$ and $V(\phi)=\frac{n(n-6)}{8}\phi^2+\cdots$. This gives the effective mass of scalar field $m^2=\frac{n(n-6)}{4}$ which is always above the BF bound for arbitrary $n$. Here we focus on the parameter regimes $2\leq n\leq 6$. The scalar field near the AdS boundary behaves as
\begin{equation} \phi\to \frac{ 2\sqrt{2} }{\sqrt{n}} u^{n/2}\,\Big(1-\frac{1}{6} u^n +\frac{3}{40} u^{2n}+\dots\Big)\,.
\end{equation} For the parameters we are interested in, i.e. $n\in \,[2, 6]$, $\phi$ is dual to operators of dimension $n/2$. The dual system is a $Z_2$ spontaneously symmetry broken state.\footnote{Note that for $n\in \,[2, 5]$, both quantizations are possible and $\phi$ could also be viewed as being dual to operator with conformal dimension $(6-n)/2$ and this seems to be an unphysical case since the dual theory has a deformation with scalar source which does not produce any response.}
For simplicity, we suppose the manifold $M$ is restricted to be a half infinite plane with coordinates $t,y$ and $x$ with $x\geq 0$. Assuming the boundary $Q$ is parameterized as $x(u)$, the space-like unit vector $n^a$ normal to the boundary $Q$ (outward direction) is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:normal1}
(n^t,n^x,n^y,n^u)=\bigg(0,~~\frac{-u}{\sqrt{1+f(u)x'(u)^2}},~~0,~~\frac{u f(u)x'(u)}{\sqrt{1+f(u)x'(u)^2}}\bigg)\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The extrinsic curvature $K_{ab}$ can be obtained from $K_{ab}=h_a^{~c}h_b^{~d}\nabla_c n_d$ where $h_{ab}=g_{ab}-n_a n_b$.
Note that since the coordinates here are not the Gaussian normal coordinate of the EOW brane, we should use $h_{ab}$ to calculate the boundary equations. In the end, the boundary conditions (\ref{eq:Qbc}) result in the following constraints on the EOW brane $Q$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:bc}
\begin{split}
x''+\frac{f'}{2f}x' &=0 \,, \\
x'+\frac{\big(2T-v(\phi) \big)\sqrt{1+fx'^2}}{4f} &=0 \,, \\
n^{u}\partial_u\phi-\partial_\phi v(\phi) &=0\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
From above equations, we find the solution for the EOW brane $Q$
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:bgeol2}
x&=&c\, u\, {}_2F_1\left[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{n}, 1+\frac{1}{n}, - u^n \right]\,,\\
\label{eq:scalarpot2}
v(\phi)&=&2T+\frac{4c}{\sqrt{1+c^2}}\cosh
\left[\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2\sqrt{2}}\phi
\right]\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $c$ is a real integration constant. The first equation parameters the profiles of the EOW brane, while the second equation is a potential term for the scalar field on $Q$ which should be thought of as an input quantity to determine the profiles of the system.
Equations (\ref{eq:bgsol1}) and (\ref{eq:bgeol2}) are the background solutions of the gravitational system.
The profile of the EOW brane $Q$, which is described by $x(u)$ in \eqref{eq:bgeol2}, is independent of the parameter $T$ while depends on the effective tension $T-v(\phi)/2$, i.e. the contribution of the potential of the scalar field that is parameterized by the parameter $c$.
When $c=0$, the profile of the EOW brane $Q$ is trivial and it is given by $x=0$. When $c\neq 0$, different from the case without scalar field that was first studied in \cite{Takayanagi:2011zk}, the profile of $Q$ here is nonlinear in $u$. Near the AdS boundary, i.e. $u\to 0$, we have linear behavior at leading order
\begin{equation}
\frac{x}{c}= u- \frac{1}{2(n+1)} u^{n+1} + \frac{3}{8(2n+1)}u^{2n+1}+\cdots ,
\end{equation}
while in the deep IR, i.e. $u\to\infty$, we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{x}{c} =
\begin{cases}
\log(2u)+\frac{1}{4 u^2} \cdots &\quad\quad \textrm{if $n=2$} \\[2ex]
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}\Gamma \left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{n} \right) \Gamma \left( 1+\frac{1}{n}\right)- \frac{2 n}{n-2} \frac{ \Gamma (1+\frac{1}{n} )}{ \Gamma (\frac{1}{n}) } u^{1-\frac{n}{2}}+\cdots &\quad\quad \textrm{if $n>2$}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
These expressions indicate that near the boundary $P$ of BCFT, the profile of the EOW brane $Q$ is linear in $x$ with a slop $1/c$. When $u\to \infty$, the EOW brane approaches to infinity for $n=2$, depending on the sign of $c$, while it approaches a constant $x_m$ for $n=3,4,5,6$.
Fig. \ref{fig:config} shows the profiles of the EOW brane as a function of $x/c$ at different values of $n$. The particular properties of the profiles for the EOW brane will play important roles in the calculations of the entanglement entropy that we study in the section \ref{subsec:2ee}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.62\textwidth]{fig-Q.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small The plot for the profile of the EOW brane $Q$ as a function of $x/c$ when $c\neq 0$ for $n=2$ (red), $\,3$ (brown), $\,4$ (orange), $\,5$ (purple), $\,6$ (blue). When $c<0$, the EOW brane $Q$ extends along negative $x$, while it extends along positive $x$ when $c>0$. }
\label{fig:config}
\end{figure}
With the profile (\ref{eq:bgeol2}) of $Q$, the normal vector \eqref{eq:normal1} on $Q$ can be simplified as
\begin{eqnarray}
n^a=\bigg(0,~~\frac{-u}{\sqrt{1+c^2} },~~0,~~\frac{c\, u \sqrt{1
u^n } }{ \sqrt{1+c^2} } \bigg)\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Then we can obtain the projection tensor
\begin{equation}
h_{ab}dx^adx^b=\frac{1}{u^2}\left[-dt^2+dy^2+\frac{1}{1+c^2}\bigg(c\, dx +\frac{du}{ \sqrt{f}}\bigg)^2\right]\,.
\end{equation}
One can check that the trace of extrinsic curvature on the EOW brane, $K=\frac{-3c }{\sqrt{1+c^2} }\, \sqrt{1+u^n}$, is divergent near the singularity of geometry $N$ when $c\neq 0$. From the induced metric
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:im}
\tilde{\gamma}_{\mu\nu}dx^\mu dx^\nu\Big{|}_Q=\frac{1}{u^2}\left[-dt^2+dy^2+\frac{1+c^2}{f}d u^2\right]\end{equation}
in the coordinates $\{t, y, u\}$,
we know that on the EOW brane, the metric is asymptotic to AdS$_3$ in UV with AdS radius $\sqrt{1+c^2}$, which is different from the one in $N$. Similar to the gapless system in AdS/BCFT which is a pure AdS on the EOW brane \cite{Takayanagi:2011zk}, the induced metric on $Q$ is also asymptotic AdS. The intrinsic curvature from the induced metric on the EOW brane $Q$ is in general divergent except $n=3$ where the Kretschmann scalar is divergent. Nonetheless it is physically acceptable following the arguments in \cite{Gubser:2000nd, Charmousis:2010zz} since it is believed that all the singularities are resolvable after considering extra degrees of freedom that do not affect any calculations here.
One particular interesting case is $n=2$. In this case all the above formulae can be simplified and we just collect them here for later use
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:ir2}
\begin{split}
f(u)& =1+
u^2 \,, ~~~
\phi(u)=2\,\text{arcsinh}\big[
u \big]\,,~~~~x(u)=c\,
\text{arcsinh}\big[
u \big]
\,,\\
V(\phi)&=-4\,\left(\text{sinh}\left[\frac{\phi}{2} \right]\right)^2\,
, ~~~~
v(\phi)=2T+\frac{4c}{\sqrt{1+c^2}}\text{cosh}\left[\frac{\phi}{2}\right]\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Conductivity}
\label{subsec:con}
In the previous subsection, we have constructed the gapped geometry in the presence of a boundary and found the solutions (\ref{eq:bgsol1}) and (\ref{eq:bgeol2}) with proper choices of the potential terms for the scalar fields in the bulk $N$ \eqref{eq:bgsp} and on the EOW brane $Q$ \eqref{eq:scalarpot2}. In this subsection, we will study its conductivity along the spatial direction $y$ of the boundary $P$.
We consider the linear fluctuations of the gauge fields
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gauflu}
\delta A_i(t, x, u)=\int\frac{d\omega}{2\pi} a_i(\omega, x, u) e^{-i\omega t}\,.
\end{equation}
We are interested in the conductivity along the $y$ direction. It turns out that the equations of motion for $a_y$ decouples from other fields. The fluctuation equation for $a_y$ in $N$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:fulay1}
a_y''+\left(\frac{f'}{2f}+\frac{\phi' \partial_\phi Z}{Z}\right)a_y'+\frac{\omega^2
+\partial_x^2}{f} a_y&=0\,,
\end{eqnarray}
and the equation for $a_y$ on the boundary $Q$ is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:be}
(-\partial_x a_y +f x' \partial_u a_y)\Big{|}_Q=0\,.
\end{equation}
Here the prime denotes the derivative with respect to the radial coordinate $u$. Now we have a boundary value problem for the partial differential equation \eqref{eq:fulay1}.
The solution of the above equations depend on if $c$ equals zero or not and we first focus on the case with nonzero $c$.
When $c\neq 0$, we can solve \eqref{eq:fulay1} by using the separation of variables. We choose
\begin{equation}
\frac{Z'}{Z}=\frac{\alpha}{\sqrt f}\,,
\end{equation}
where the prime is the derivative with respect to $u$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:conZ}
\setlength\arraycolsep{1pt}
Z=\exp{\left(\alpha\Big(\sinh\left[\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2\sqrt 2}\phi\right]\Big)^{\frac{2}{n}} \, {}_2F_1\left[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{n},1+\frac{1}{n},-\Big(\sinh\left[\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2\sqrt 2}\phi\right]\Big)^2\right]\right)}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that we have normalized $Z\to 1$ near the AdS boundary. When $n=2$, the above result can be further simplified as $Z= e^{\alpha \phi/2}$. For other values of $n$, we have $u\to \infty$, $Z\sim e^{\alpha x_m}$, i.e. $Z$ approaches a constant value in the deep IR.
With this choice of $Z$, we find the solution of \eqref{eq:fulay1} with boundary equation \eqref{eq:be} is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:solay}
a_y=e^{b x +\frac{b}{c^2} x(u)-i\omega t}\,.
\end{equation}
The second term $x(u)$ in the exponential should be viewed as the solution in \eqref{eq:bgeol2} and in this way, $a_y$ is a function explicitly depending on the variables $x, u, t$. In \eqref{eq:solay}, we have (when $|\omega| < \frac{|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$)
\begin{equation}
b=\frac{c}{2(1+c^2)}
\left(-\alpha\pm\sqrt{\alpha^2-4(1+c^2)\omega^2}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
For $|\omega| <\frac{|\alpha |}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$, the solution (\ref{eq:solay}) is real and normalizable\footnote{This is only true for the cases $n>2$ and $c\alpha>0$ and the following discussion should apply for these cases. When $n=2$, the field $a_y$ is divergent at either $x\to \infty$ or $x\to -\infty$ and we do not have a reliable solution yet. One might expect that the conclusions below are also true for the case of $n=2$. } for both choices of $b$. However, for $\omega>\frac{|\alpha|}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$, the sector with
\begin{equation}
b=\frac{c}{2(1+c^2)}\left(-\alpha + i\sqrt{4(1+c^2)\omega^2-\alpha^2}\right)
\end{equation}
describes the infalling wave.
Following \cite{Kiritsis:2015oxa, Yan2018}, we use the analytic continuation from $|\omega| > \frac{|\alpha |}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$ to $|\omega| < \frac{|\alpha |}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$ to fix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:b}
b=\frac{c}{2(1+c^2)}\left(-\alpha-
\sqrt{\alpha^2-4(1+c^2)\omega^2}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
From the above solution, i.e. \eqref{eq:solay} with \eqref{eq:b}, we can compute the conductivity. When $u\to 0$, we have
\begin{equation} a_y=e^{bx-i\omega t}\,\left(1+ \frac{b}{c}u+\mathcal{O}(u^2)\right)\,. \end{equation}
Note that on $M$, we choose Dirichlet boundary condition for the gauge field (i.e. fixing the source) and we do not need to include any counterterm for the gauge field.
We have the on-shell action for the gauge field,
\begin{equation}
S_M=-\int dt dx dy\,\sqrt{-\gamma}\, Z A_\nu F^{u\nu}n_u
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is the induced metric on $M$ while $n_u$ is an outward-pointing unit vector of $M$, i.e. $\gamma_{\mu\nu}=\text{diag} \big(-1/u^2, 1/u^2, 1/u^2\big)$ and $n^u=-u \sqrt{f}$.
In the case with the fluctuations of the gauge field along $y$ direction, we have
\begin{equation}
S_M=\int dtdxdy\, Z a_y \partial_u a_y=
\int dtdxdy\, a_y^{(0)}a_y^{(1)}\,
\end{equation}
from which we have the retarded Green's function on $M$,
\begin{equation}
G_R=\frac{a_y^{(1)}}{a_y^{(0)}}\,.
\end{equation}
Therefore we have conductivity in $M$
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{y}= \frac{1}{i\omega}\frac{a_y^{(1)}}{a_y^{(0)}}=\frac{b}{i\omega c}\,.
\end{equation}
For $\omega<\frac{|\alpha |}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$, $b$ is real, this means that $\sigma_y$ is pure imaginary.
The DC conductivity in $M$ along $y$ direction can be obtained from the real part
\begin{equation}\sigma_\text{DC}=\lim_{\omega\to 0} \text{Re} [\sigma_y] =0\,.\end{equation}
Note that we have assumed $\alpha<0$ for simplicity and used the fact that $b\simeq -\frac{c}{\alpha}\omega^2$ when $\omega\to 0$, which means that there is no pole for $\sigma_y$ at $\omega\to 0$.\footnote{Note that when $\alpha>0$, from \eqref{eq:b} one concludes that there is a pole at $\omega=0$. However, from the experimental point of view, one needs to consider the subtle commutability between the two limits $T\to 0$ and $\omega\to 0$. Nevertheless, now we have $\lim_{\omega\to \epsilon^+}\text{Re}[\sigma_y]=0 $ and one might naively take it as an insulator for any $\alpha$.}
The gap of the conductivity is given by $\frac{|\alpha |}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$.\footnote{One might need to calculate the conductivity along $x$ direction to confirm if it is also gapped for $\sigma_x$ and we will not discuss this here.}
When $\omega >\frac{|\alpha |}{2\sqrt{1+c^2}}$, we have a nonzero conductivity with
$\text{Re}[\sigma_y]=\frac{1}{2\omega (1+c^2)}\sqrt{4(1+c^2)\omega^2-\alpha^2}$.
For the boundary $P$, we have not considered any dynamics of the gauge field on the EOW brane $Q$. The gauge field on $Q$ should be understood as the induced gauge field of $A_a$ in the bulk. Since the induced metric on $Q$ is asymptotic AdS$_3$, it is known from AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ \cite{Jensen:2010em} that the expansion of the gauge field near $P$ depends on the action in the bulk. For gauge field with a canonical kinetic term\footnote{In presence of a Chern-Simons term, the expansion will be slightly different and depends on the level \cite{Jensen:2010em, Andrade:2011sx}. However, the dual current is no longer conserved and we will not consider this case here.}
we have \cite{Jensen:2010em, Faulkner:2012gt}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:exax2}
a_y \sim a_y^{(r)}\log(u)+a_y^{(s)}+\dots\,,
\end{equation}
where $a_y^{(r)}$ is the response of the dual operator while $a_y^{(s)}$ can be understood as the source term. Note that there is a scaling anomaly and the defination of the source depends on the Landau pole of the theory \cite{Faulkner:2012gt}.
Along $P$, we evaluate the solution (\ref{eq:solay}) on $Q$ and obtain
\begin{equation}
a_y\Big{|}_Q=e^{-i\omega t}\left(1+b(c+\frac{1}{c})u+\dots\right)\end{equation}
when $u\to 0.$ Comparing to \eqref{eq:exax2} we know that the Green's function is completely trivial and therefore we have $\sigma=0$ on $P$.
When $c=0$, the boundary equation \eqref{eq:be} can be further simplified as
$\partial_x a_y=0$ on $Q$.
In this case we have solution $a_y=a_y(u)$ which is a solution \eqref{eq:fulay1} with $\partial_x^2 a_y=0$. In appendix \ref{app:sch}, we analyze the solution of this equation by writing it into a Schr\"{o}dinger problem and show that it indeed has gapped spectrum. Repeating the previous study along $P$ one concludes that the conductivities are trivial both in $M$ and $P$.
Our study shows that for the holographic insulator in the presence of a boundary, the conductivity on the boundary is also trivial. This indicates that the strong correlation would not make a trivial insulator topologically nontrivial.\footnote{In the literature of condensed matter physics, there are also examples of topological insulator with gapped boundary states \cite{Witten:2015aba, Seiberg:2016rsg} and it would be interesting to be attempt to make contact with these field theories.} To obtain a topological insulator, it seems that one has to add more dynamics of gauge field on $Q$ and we leave this possibility for future investigation.
\subsection{Entanglement entropy}
\label{subsec:2ee}
Entanglement entropy is an important physical quantity in quantum many body systems \cite{Nishioka:2009un}. For a topological insulator, the gapless modes on the boundary are encoded in the degeneracies of the bulk ground state entanglement spectrum \cite{Fidkowski}. More generally, the concept of quantum entanglement plays important roles in characterising topological phase \cite{kitaev, wen}. Although the study in the previous subsection shows that the gapped system from holography in the presence of a boundary is a topologically trivial insulator, it should still be interesting to explore its entanglement entropies. In this subsection, we study the entanglement entropies of the gapped system with boundaries from AdS/BCFT.
It is known that the entanglement entropy is dominated by the divergent area law with the UV cutoff. In the presence of a boundary, additional terms might contribute to the entanglement entropy \cite{Fujita:2011, Seminara:2018pmr}. In \cite{Myers:2012ed, Liu:2012eea, Liu:2013una}, a renormalized entanglement entropy, which is finite and independent of the UV cutoff, has been introduced to characterize the entanglement at certain length (or energy) scale. We will generalize it to the case of BCFT.
We will first compute the entanglement entropy and then study the renormalized entanglement entropy for the gapped system in AdS/BCFT.
The subsystem under consideration is an infinite strip adjacent to the boundary
i.e. $0<x<\ell$, while $y$ is infinite which will be renormalized to be $y\in [-L, L]$ with $L\to\infty$. The minimal surface $\gamma$ is specified by $u=u(x)$ which is a section at constant $y$. The extremal surface has the boundary condition $u(\ell)=0$.
The induced metric on $\gamma$ is
\begin{equation}
ds^2_\gamma=\frac{1}{u^2}\bigg[\,\Big(1+\frac{u'^2}{f(u)}\Big)\,dx^2+dy^2\bigg]\,,
\end{equation}
from which one obtains the area functional
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:areafun1}
A=2L\,\int_{x_*}^{\ell} dx\,\frac{1}{u^2}\sqrt{1+\frac{u'^2}{f}}\,.
\end{equation}
When $f=1$, the above equations reduces to the AdS$_4$/BCFT$_3$ in \cite{Seminara:2018pmr}. Here we focus on the gapped geometries with $f$ shown in \eqref{eq:bgsol1}.
Since the above functional does not implicitly depend on $x$, there is a conserved quantity
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:consq}
\frac{1}{u^2\sqrt{1+\frac{u'^2}{f(u)}}}=C\,,
\end{equation}
where $C$ is a constant. The final profile of the surface $\gamma$ depends on the value of $c$ which determines the embedding of the EOW brane $Q$ via \eqref{eq:bgeol2}. In the following we will discuss the cases $c\leq 0$ and
$c>0$ separately. For these two different cases, the cartoon plot of the extremal surfaces are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5]
\draw [blue!10] (0,0)--(7.5,0);
\draw [purple] (6,0)--(6,6) node[midway, right]{$\gamma_1$};
\draw [green, domain=-2.5:0] plot(\x,-sinh\x );
\draw [orange] (6,0) .. controls (6,1) and (5,4.5) .. (2,4.5) node[above]{$(x_t, u_t)$ } node[midway, left]{$\gamma_2$}.. controls (1,4.5) and (-1,4) .. (-1.5, 2.13) node[left]{$(x_*, u_*)$};
\draw[black] (-2.5, 6.0) node[above]{ $Q $ };
\filldraw[orange] (2, 4.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[orange] (-1.5, 2.13) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (0, 0) circle (2pt) node[below] {$O$};
\filldraw[black] (6, 0) circle (2pt) node[below] {$\ell$};
\draw[-latex, blue, opacity=0.8] (0, 0)--(8.5, 0) node[anchor=north, at end]{ $x$ };
\draw [blue!10] (15,0)--(17,0);
\draw [purple] (21,0)--(21,6) node[midway, right]{$\gamma_1$};
\draw [green, domain=15:17.7] plot(\x, -1155/2+227/2*\x -15/2* \x^2 + 1/6*\x^3);
\draw [orange] (21,0) .. controls (21,1) and (19,3) .. (17, 10/3) node[midway, left]{$\gamma_2$} node[left]{$(x_*, u_*)$};
\draw[black] (17.7, 6.0) node[above]{ $Q$ };
\filldraw[orange] (17, 10/3) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (15,0) circle (2pt) node[below]{$O$};
\filldraw[black] (21, 0) circle (2pt) node[below]{$\ell$};
\draw[-latex, blue, opacity=0.8] (15, 0)--(23.5, 0) node[anchor=north, at end]{ $x$ };
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small Cartoon plot for the configuration of the extremal surfaces at $c\leq 0$ ({\em left}) and $c>0$ ({\em right}). The right plot is for the cases with $n>2$ while there is no configuration of $\gamma_1$ for $n=2$. We have suppressed the $y$-axis and now the boundary theory lives along the $x$-axis. The Green line is the profile of the EOW brane $Q$ with $u(x)$ parameterized by \eqref{eq:bgeol2}. For the strip geometry we considered, there might exist two different kinds of extremal surfaces.}
\label{fig:exsurface0}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item Case 1: $c\leq 0$.
\end{itemize}
In the case $c<0$ the profiles of the EOW brane $Q$ is along the regime $x\leq 0$ as shown in \eqref{eq:bgeol2}, while in the case $c=0$ the profile of $Q$ sits along $u$ axis with $x=0$. Nevertheless, the properties of extremal surfaces in these two cases (except the case of $c=0, n=2$) share lots of similarities and therefore we discuss them together.
Intuitively we expect to have two different kinds of local exterma of the area functional as shown in the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0}. One configuration is the surface $x=\ell$ which corresponds to $C=0$ in \eqref{eq:consq}, i.e. the purple line $\gamma_1$ in the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0}.
This configuration exists at arbitrary value of $\ell>0$. As we will discuss later, for $\ell>\ell_c$, this is the unique configuration.
The entanglement entropy is\footnote{Note that one can suppress $G$ using the unit $16\pi G=1$. In the following we will not do this.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:ee1a}
\setlength\arraycolsep{1pt}
S=\frac{2L}{4G}\int_{u_c}^\infty \frac{du}{u^2\sqrt{f}}\,
=\frac{2L}{4G} \frac{2}{(n+2) u_c^{(n+2)/2}}\, {}_2 F_1\left[\frac{1}{2},
\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{n},
\frac{3}{2}+\frac{1}{n},
- \frac{1}{u_c^n} \right] \,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $n\in[2,~6]$, $G$ is the Newton constant and $u_c$ is the cutoff near the boundary. When $u_c\to 0$, we have
$u_c A/(2L) \to 1$. Note that the entanglement entropy \eqref{eq:ee1a} is independent of $\ell$. Therefore we have $\partial{S}/\partial \ell=0$, which means that the renormalized entropy is zero for this configuration.
Another kind of configuration is shown as orange curved line $\gamma_2$ in the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0}. We have the turning point $(x_t, u_t)$ at which $u'(x_t)=0$ and the intersecting point $(x_*, u_*)$ between the extremal surface $\gamma_2$ and the EOW brane $Q$ where $n_Q\cdot n_\gamma=0$, i.e.
$u'(x_*)=-c\sqrt{f}$.
From \eqref{eq:consq}, we therefore have $C^{-1}=u_t^2=u_*^2\sqrt{1+c^2}$ which leads to
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eerel1}
u_t=u_* (1+c^2)^{1/4}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:eerel2}
u'^2=\left(\,\frac{u_t^4}{u^4}-1\right)f\,.
\end{equation}
When $c=0$, we have $u_t=u_*$.
Note that for $x<x_t$ we have $u'>0$, while for $x>x_t$ we have $u'<0$, where the prime is the derivative with respect to $x$.
From \eqref{eq:eerel2} we have the relation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:eeeqn1}
\ell-x_*=\int_{u_*}^{u_t} du \frac{1}{\sqrt{(\frac{u_t^4}{u^4}-1\big)f}}+\int^{u_t}_0 du \frac{1}{\sqrt{(\frac{u_t^4}{u^4}-1\big)f}}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that $u_*(x_*)$ is given by \eqref{eq:bgeol2}.
From (\ref{eq:eeeqn1}, \ref{eq:eerel1}) and the relation \eqref{eq:bgeol2} which relates $u_*(x_*)$, one could obtain $u_t$ as a function of $\ell$ as $ u_t=u_t(\ell, c, n)$.
The equation \eqref{eq:eeeqn1} can only be solved numerically. In the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:config2}, we show the dependence of $u_t$ as a function of $\ell$ for different $n$. We can see that the existence of a maximal $\ell_m$. Below it, i.e. $\ell<\ell_m$, there exist two different extremal surfaces in addition to the configuration of the straightforward line. Above $\ell_m$ the configuration of this kind (i.e. the orange curve in the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0}.) does not exist. This is different from the pure AdS case with a negative tension on the EOW brane in which there does not exist a maximal $\ell$ which separates the topology of minimal surfaces \cite{Seminara:2018pmr}.
In the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:config2}, we show the dependence of $\ell_m$ as function of $c$ for different $n$. We found that $\ell_m$ decreases when $c$ becomes smaller and there exists a critical value $c_m$ such that below it we do not have any curved configuration of extremal surface. This reminds us the existence of the critical tension for the extremal surfaces in the pure AdS/BCFT \cite{Seminara:2018pmr}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig-ut-l.pdf}
~~~
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-l-c.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small {\em Left: } The location of the turning point $u_t$ as a function of the width of the strip $\ell$ when $c=-1$ and different $n$. {\em Right}: The maximal value the width $\ell_m$ below which there are two extremal curved surfaces as a function of the tension parameter $c$ for different $n$ when $c\leq 0$. There exists a critical value of $c\approx -1.32$
below which we do not have curved extremal surface.
In these two plots, we have $n=2$ (red),$\,3$ (brown), $\,4$ (orange), $\,5$ (purple), $\,6$ (blue).
}
\label{fig:config2}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:es} shows examples of extremal surfaces for a specific value of $n=2, c=-1$. The BCFT lives in $x\geq 0$ and the green line refers to the location of the EOW brane $Q$. We choose one specific value of $\ell$ with $\ell<\ell_m$ and plot the two curved (brown and orange) and one straight (purple) extremal surfaces. For any value of $\ell$, the vertical line of extremal surface always exists. When $\ell$ is smaller than $\ell_m$, there exist three different configurations of extremal surfaces. When $
\ell=\ell_m$ there exist two different configurations of extremal surface where the two curved lines merge into the same line, while when $\ell$ is greater than $\ell_m$, there exists only one extremal surface which is the straight line.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.62\textwidth]{fig-min-surface.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{\small Plot of the extremal surfaces for $c=-1,\, n =2$. In this case $\ell_m\approx 0.036$. When $\ell=0.015<\ell_m$, there exist three different extremal surfaces, including the curved brown, orange lines and the straight purple line. The dots on the curves are the locations of the turning points.
}
\label{fig:es}
\end{figure}
The entanglement entropy can be obtained from the area of the extremal surfaces
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ee1}
\begin{split}
S&= \frac{A}{4G}=\frac{L}{2G} \,\int_{x_*}^{\ell-\epsilon} dx\,\frac{1}{u^2}\sqrt{1+\frac{u'^2}{f}}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
As seen from the discussions above, there might be multiple extremal surfaces and the RT surface is determined by the one with minimal area. Using the same cutoff $u_c$ which satisfies $u(\ell-\epsilon)=u_c$, the area of the extremal surfaces $ \frac{u_c A}{2L}$ for $n=2, c=-1$ are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:eec>0}. We find that there exists a critical $\ell_c$ below which the orange curve has minimal area, while above $\ell_c$ the straight vertical purple line has minimal area. There is a first order transition at $\ell_c$. Moreover, we always have $\ell_c<\ell_m$. These phenomena are quite general for any $c\leq 0$ except the case of $c=0, n=2$ which we will comment on at the end of this part.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig-S-l-clt0.pdf}
~~~
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-lc.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{\small {\em Left:} Plot of entanglement entropy $\frac{u_cA}{2L}$ as a function of $\ell$ for $c=-1, n=2$. We have used $u_c=10^{-3}$. Note that when $\ell$ is small, one needs to choose smaller $u_c$ to make sure $\epsilon\ll \ell$.
{\em Right:} The critical length $\ell_c$ as a function of $c$ for different $n$.}
\label{fig:eec>0}
\end{figure}
We find that the entanglement entropy satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
S=\frac{A}{4G}=\frac{L}{2G}\,\Big[ \frac{a_1}{u_c}-a_2+\mathcal{O}(u_c) \Big] \,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $a_1$ is approximately equal to $1$, which can be seen from \eqref{eq:ee1}. Furthermore, $a_2 ~(a_2>0)$ is a function of $\ell$ and independent on the cutoff. From \eqref{eq:areafun1}, when $\ell\to 0$, we have $f\to 1$, $u'\to -\infty$, one expects $a_2\propto 1/\ell$ at very small $\ell$. For larger $\ell>\ell_c$, from \eqref{eq:ee1a} we have $a_2=0$.
For other values of $\ell$,
we have to obtain the behavior of $a_2$ numerically.
For holographic CFTs without boundary, we have $a_2\propto 1/\ell$ with a constant coefficient \cite{Nishioka:2009un}, while for AdS$_4$ plus the EOW brane with constant tension, we also have $a_2\propto 1/\ell$ with the coefficient depending on the effective tension of the EOW brane \cite{Seminara:2018pmr}.
Nonetheless, in our case, $a_2$ has a complicated dependence on $\ell$.
Now let us discuss the renormalized entanglement entropy following \cite{Myers:2012ed,Liu:2013una}. Close to $u\to 0$, from \eqref{eq:eerel2} we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uto01}
x(u)=\ell-\frac{u^3}{3 u_t^2}+\dots\,.
\end{equation}
From the variation of \eqref{eq:ee1} with respect to $\ell$ and using \eqref{eq:uto01}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:effent}
\mathcal{F}=
\frac{\ell^2}{2L}\frac{\partial S}{\partial \ell } =\frac{1}{4G}\frac{\ell^2}{u_t^2}\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The detailed derivation of the above equation can be found in the appendix \ref{app:ree}.
We see that the renormalized entanglement entropy $\mathcal{F}$ is determined by $\ell, u_t$,
which takes the similar form as the case of AdS$_4$/CFT$_3$ without boundary \cite{Myers:2012ed,Liu:2013una}.
However now the detailed dependence of $u_t$ on $\ell$ is different from the case without boundary. Compared with AdS$_4$/BCFT$_3$ in pure AdS$_4$ where $\mathcal{F}$ is independent of $\ell$ \cite{Chu:2017aab,Seminara:2018pmr}, now we have interesting nontrivial
$\ell$ dependence of $\mathcal{F}$ as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:reeF}: when $\ell<\ell_c$, $\mathcal{F}$ is positive and monotonically decreasing, at $\ell=\ell_c$ there is a discontinuity for $\mathcal{F}$ and when $\ell>\ell_c$, $\mathcal{F}=0$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{fig-F-l-clt0.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{\small Plot of the renormalized entanglement entropy $4G \mathcal F$ as a function of $\ell$ when $c=-1$ and $n=2$. The solid lines are for the minimal surfaces while the dashed brown, yellow and purple lines are for the non-minimal extremal surfaces. The dashed black line is the location of the transition $\ell_c$.
}
\label{fig:reeF}
\end{figure}
We make some comments on the case of $c=0, n=2$. In this case the extremal surface behaves differently comparing to other cases of $c\leq 0$ (the left plot in Fig. \ref{fig:config5}), i.e. when $\ell<\ell_m$, there is only one curved extremal surface in addition to the straight vertical one, while in other cases there exist two different curved extremal surfaces. In the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:config5}, we show one example of the extremal surface for $\ell<\ell_m$. When $\ell>\ell_m$, we have only one single straight extremal surface which is the same as other cases.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-ut-l-c0.pdf}
~~~
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig-min-surface-c0n2.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small {\em Left:} Plots of $u_t$ as functions of $\ell$ when $c=0$ and $n=2$ (red),$\,3$ (brown), $\,4$ (orange), $\,5$ (purple), $\,6$ (blue). {\em Right:} The extremal surfaces for $c=0, n=2$. In this case $\ell_m\simeq 0.785$ and we have chosen $\ell=0.753$ (with $\ell<\ell_m$) so that there exists two different extremal surfaces.
}
\label{fig:config5}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:ee0n2} shows the area of the extremal surfaces (left plot) and the renormalized entanglement entropy (right plot) as a function of the width of the strip $\ell$. We see that different from the other cases discussed in this part (e.g. Fig. \ref{fig:eec>0}), the area of the curved extremal surface is equal to the area of the straight vertical surface at $\ell=\ell_m$. The renormalized entanglement entropy is positive and monotonically decreasing when $\ell<\ell_c$ and is continuous while not smooth at $\ell=\ell_c$, which is different from the other cases of $c\leq 0$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{fig-S-l-c0-n2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig-F-l-c0-n2.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small {\em Left:} Plots of the area of the extremal surfaces as a function of $\ell$ when $c=0, n=2$. We set the cutoff $u_c=10^{-3}$.
{\em Right:} The renormalized entanglement entropy $4G \mathcal F$ as a function of $\ell$ for $c=0, n=2$.
}
\label{fig:ee0n2}
\end{figure}
Comparing the right plot in Fig. \ref{fig:ee0n2} with the one in Fig. \ref{fig:reeF}, we see the renormalized entanglement entropy $\mathcal{F}$ behaves differently. Note that in both these two cases, we have fixed the same metric in $N$ (i.e. $n=2$) while different values of $c$ which plays the role of the effective tension of the EOW brane. This indicates the boundary of BCFT have nontrivial effects on the renormalized entanglement entropy, i.e. the number of the effective degrees
of freedom inside the strip.
\begin{itemize}
\item Case 2: $c > 0$.
\end{itemize}
In this case we have different profiles of the EOW branes, which depends on the value of $n$. As can be seen from Fig. \ref{fig:config}, when $n=2$ the EOW brane will approach $x\to\infty$, while when $n\in (2, 6]$, the EOW brane can only approach a finite value of $x_m$.
Thus, in the case $n=2$, there is only one kind of extremal surface, while in the later case there might be two different kinds of extremal surfaces when $x>x_m$, as shown in the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0}. In the following we will study these two cases separately.
The entanglement entropy associated with the straight line has the same form as \eqref{eq:ee1a}. We focus on the configuration of the curved extremal surface, i.e. the curved line $\gamma_2$ in the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0}.
The intersecting point between the extremal surface and the EOW brane $(x_*, u_*)$ satisfies $n_Q\cdot n_\gamma=0$, i.e.
$u'(x_*)=-c\sqrt{f}$. Then $C^{-1}=u_*^2\sqrt{1+c^2}$.
Therefore we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:eerel3}
u'=-\sqrt{f}\,\bigg(\frac{u_*^4}{u^4}(1+c^2)-1\bigg)^{1/2}\,.
\end{equation}
Then we have the relation
\begin{align}
\ell-x_*=-\int_{u_*}^0 du\, \frac{1}{\sqrt{f}\,\bigg(\frac{u_*^4}{u^4}(1+c^2)-1\bigg)^{1/2}}\,.
\end{align}
As we know $x_*(u_*)$ from the equation \eqref{eq:bgeol2} for the EOW brane $Q$, one can obtain $u_*$ as a function of $c, n, \ell$. The plots for $u_*$ as functions of $\ell$ at two different values of $c$ and different $n$'s are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:cf-sol}. For $n=2$, we see that $u_*$ is monotonically increasing when we increase $\ell$ and this is what we expected because the EOW brane approaches $x\to\infty$. For other values of $n=3,4,5,6$, there exists a critical value of $c$ which separates different behaviors of the extremal surfaces. In the left plot with $c<c_m$, we find that when $\ell<x_m$, there exists only one curved extremal surfaces, while when $x_m<\ell<\ell_m$, there exist two different curved surfaces, and when $\ell_m<\ell$, there does not exist any curved extremal surface. Note that the vertical straight extremal surface shown as $\gamma_1$ in the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:exsurface0} exits when $x_m<\ell$. When we increase $c$ to make it larger than a critival value $c_m$, as shown in the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:cf-sol}, we find that when $\ell<x_m$ there exists only one curved extremal surface, while when $\ell>x_m$ there exists only the vertical straight extremal surface.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{fig-us-l-cs.pdf}
~~
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{fig-us-l-cl.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small The location of interacting point between the extremal surface and the EOW brane $u_*$ as a function of $\ell$ for $c=1/4$ ({\em left}) and $c=3$ ({\em right}). In both cases, we have $n=2$ (red),$\,3$ (brown), $\,4$ (orange), $\,5$ (purple), $\,6$ (blue).
}
\label{fig:cf-sol}
\end{figure}
Three typical extremal surfaces are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ee-sol}. The blue line is the $x$ axis of the BCFT, while the green line is the location of the EOW brane $Q$. The left plot is for $n=2$ and there always exist a single curved extremal surface for arbitrary $\ell$, shown as orange line. The middle and right plots are for $n=4$ while different $c$. In the middle plot, $c<c_m$ and $x_m<\ell<\ell_m$, we have three extremal surfaces. In the right plot, $c>c_m$ while $\ell<x_m$, we have only one curved extremal surface. In the following we will study the behavior of the entanglement entropy and the renormalized entanglement entropy for these typical behaviors.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig-min-surface-n2c1.pdf}
~
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{fig-min-surface-n4c05.pdf}
~
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{fig-min-surface-n4c2-l.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small Three typical extremal surfaces for $c>0$: we have set $n=2, c=1$ ({\em left}), $n=4, c=1/2$ ({\em middle}) and $n=4,c=2$ ({\em right}). The green line is the location of the EOW brane $Q$ and the blue line is the $x$ axis of BCFT.
}
\label{fig:ee-sol}
\end{figure}
The entanglement entropy of the strip can be obtained from the area of the minimal surface
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:ee2}
\begin{split}
S=\frac{A}{4G}&=\frac{L}{2G}\,\int_{x_*}^{\ell-\epsilon}\, dx\frac{1}{u^2}\,\sqrt{1+\frac{u'^2}{f}}\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
When there are multiple extremal surfaces, we again need to choose the one with the minimal area.
The areas of the above typical configurations of extremal surfaces can be found in Fig. \ref{fig:ee-sol2}. For $n=2$ and $c=1$ (left), the entanglement entropy is continuous and smooth when we increase $\ell$. For $n>2$, we find that for the case $c<c_m$ (middle) or $c>c_m$ (right), there is a continuous transition at $\ell_c$ (with $x_m<\ell_c<\ell_m$) or smooth crossover at $\ell=x_m$ from the orange curved line to the purple straight line.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig-S-l-c1n2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig-S-l-c01n6.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig-S-l-c2n4.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{\small Plots of the area of extremal surfaces as a function of the width of the strip $\ell$ for $n=2, c=1$ ({\em left}), $n=6, c=1/10$ ({\em middle}), $n=4,c=2$ ({\em right}).
We have set $u_c=10^{-3}$. The one with smallest area gives the correct entanglement entropy.
}
\label{fig:ee-sol2}
\end{figure}
Due to the divergence of the entanglement entropy, we again study the renormalized entanglement entropy which is independent of the cutoff. Close to $u\to 0$, from \eqref{eq:eerel3} we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uto02}
x(u)=\ell-\frac{u^3}{3 u_*^2\,(1+c^2)}+\dots\,.
\end{equation}
Following \cite{Myers:2012ed,Liu:2013una} and the calculations in the appendix \ref{app:ree}, we do the variation of \eqref{eq:ee2} with respect to $\ell$. Using \eqref{eq:uto02}, we can obtain the dimensionless renormalised entanglement entropy
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:effent2}
\mathcal{F}=
\frac{\ell^2}{2L}\frac{\partial S}{\partial \ell }=\frac{1}{4G}\frac{\ell^2}{u_*^2\sqrt{1+c^2}}\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The behavior of renormalized entanglement entropy is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ree-sol}. The left plot is for $n=2$ and we find that the renormalized entanglement entropy is non-negative and monotonically decreasing.
The middle plot is for $n=6$ while $c<c_m$. The solid line is for the configuration with minimal area and we see that there is a jump for the renormalized entanglement entropy at $\ell=\ell_c$ (with $x_m<\ell_c<\ell_m$). The right plot is for $n=4$ while $c>c_m$. We see that the renormalized entanglement entropy is continuous while not smooth at $\ell=x_m$ (black dashed line).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig-F-l-c1n2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig-F-l-c01n6.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig-F-l-c2n4.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{\small Plots of the renormalized entanglement entropy $4G\mathcal F$ as a function of $\ell$ for $n=2, c=1$ ({\em left}), $n=6, c=1/10$ ({\em middle}), $n=4,c=2$ ({\em right}).
}
\label{fig:ree-sol}
\end{figure}
Finally, let us discuss on the effect of the boundary on the BCFT. We have seen that with different choices of $c$ which is related to the effective tension of the EOW brane, the profiles of the brane are different. From the plot in Fig. \ref{fig:reeF}, the right one in Fig. \ref{fig:ee0n2} and the left one in Fig. \ref{fig:ree-sol} which are for the same bulk geometry with $n=2$ while different values of $c$, we find that the renormalized entanglement entropy behaves differently. Fig. \ref{fig:ree-c} shows the behavior of the renormalized entanglement entropy in the limit $\ell\to 0$ as a function of $c$ which is independent of $n$. It is known that the renormalized entanglement entropy can be viewed as the number of the effective degrees of freedom. We find that with different profile of the EOW brane which should determined by the properties of the BCFT, the UV degrees of freedom of the BCFT are different. When the size of the strip is large enough, i.e. $\ell>\ell_c$, the renormalized entanglement entropy goes to zero.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{fig-F0-c.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{\small Plots of $4G\mathcal F(\ell\to 0)$ as a function of $c$. The behavior is independent of $n$ since in the limit $\ell\to 0$, only the UV physics is important.
}
\label{fig:ree-c}
\end{figure}
\section{AdS Soliton in AdS/BCFT}
\label{sec3}
In the previous section we have studied the gapped system which is dual to Einstein-scalar theory in the presence of a boundary. In this section, we will study another gapped system which is described by the AdS soliton \cite{Witten:1998zw}.
We will focus on the five dimensional AdS soliton where one of the spatial dimension is compact, therefore the dual filed theory is 2+1 dimensional with an additional compact extra dimension. We consider the presence of a boundary for the dual field theory along the non-compact dimension and study its transports and entanglement structure parallel to the discussion in the previous section.
The action of the holographic model is
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{S}_\text{bulk}&=&\mathcal{S}_N+\mathcal{S}_Q\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{S}_N&=\int_N d^5x\sqrt{-g}\,
\bigg[\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\bigg(R+12 \bigg) -\frac{1}{4e^2}F^2 \bigg] \,,\\
\mathcal{S}_{Q}&=\int_Q d^4x\sqrt{-\gamma}\, \bigg[\frac{1}{\kappa^2}\big(K-T\big)
\bigg]\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
The EOW brane $Q$ is similar to the setup in the previous subsection as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:cf}, which extends from the boundary $P$ of the BCFT to the bulk. $T$ is the tension of the brane. We set $2\kappa^2=e=1$.
The equations of motion in $N$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}g_{ab}\big(R+12\big)-\frac{1}{2}\bigg[\mathcal{F}_{ac}\mathcal{F}_{b}^{~c}-\frac{1}{4}g_{ab}\mathcal{F}^2\bigg]&=0 \,,\\
\nabla_b F^{ba}&=0\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The metric of AdS soliton
geometry at zero density is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:adssoliton}
ds^2=\frac{1}{u^2}\bigg[-dt^2+dx^2+dy^2+\frac{du^2}{f(u)}\bigg]+\frac{f(u)}{u^2}d\theta^2\,,~~ f(u)=1-\frac{u^4}{u_0^4}\,,~~~A_a=0\,,
\end{equation}
$\theta$ has a period of $\theta\sim \theta +\pi u_0$. Note that $u_0$ sets the scale of the gap. This geometry is asymptotic to AdS and approaches to $R^{1,2}\times S^1$ near the boundary. Here $M$ is also defined on the half plane with $x\geq 0$.
The AdS boundary is at $u\to 0$. AdS soliton exists at $u\leq u_0$.
Obviously, the AdS soliton geometry \eqref{eq:adssoliton} is a solution of the system.
The equations of motion on $Q$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
K_{\mu\nu}-(K-T)\gamma_{\mu\nu}&=0\,, \\
n_aF^{ab}&=0\,.
\end{split}
\end{eqnarray}
where $n^a$ is the outforward unit vector for $Q$. We assume $Q$ is described by equation $u=u(x)$, then we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:sol-na}
(n^t,n^x,n^y,n^u,n^\theta)=\bigg(0,~~\frac{-u}{\sqrt{1+f(u)x'(u)^2}}\,,~~0,~~\frac{u f(u)x'(u)}{\sqrt{1+f(u)x'(u)^2}}\,,~~0\bigg)\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Plugging \eqref{eq:sol-na} into the equations on $Q$, we find that there is only one consistent solution with trivial embedding $x(u)=0$ with $T=0$.\footnote{It is interesting to study if other nontrivial consistent embedding could be found when we choose Dirichlet or mixed boundary conditions. We leave this possibility for future study.}
This fact makes the discussion for the AdS soliton simpler than the gapped geometry in section \ref{subsec:groundstate} where there are different profiles for $Q$.
\subsection{Conductivity}
\label{ss:solcon}
With the above configurations for the AdS soliton with a boundary, we can study its transport physics and entanglement structure. We first study the conductivity along the $y$-direction.
Considering the fluctuations of the gauge fields as \eqref{eq:gauflu}, we obtain
the fluctuation equation for $a_y$ in $N$
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:fulay2}
a_y''+\left(\frac{f'}{f}-\frac{1}{u}\right)a_y'+\frac{\omega^2+\partial_x^2}{f} a_y&&=0\,,
\end{eqnarray}
and the equation for $a_y$ on the EOW brane $Q$
\begin{equation}
(-\partial_x a_y +f x' \partial_u a_y)\Big{|}_Q=0\,.
\end{equation}
Since $Q$ is described by $x=0$, the boundary equation can be simplied further as $\partial_x a_y\big{|}_Q=0$.
Therefore this is quite similar to the case of $c=0$ in section \ref{subsec:con}, and we have solution
\begin{equation} a_y=c_0 a(u,\omega)
\end{equation}
where $c_0$ is a constant and $a(u,\omega)$ satisfy
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:fula}
a''+\left(\frac{f'}{f}-\frac{1}{u}\right)a'+\frac{\omega^2}{f} a=0\,,
\end{eqnarray}
We have analyzed in appendix \ref{app:sch} that the system is gapped by transforming the above equations into a Schr\"{o}dinger problem to show that the real part of conductivity is a sum of discrete poles. Thus for this model, both in $M$ and $P$ the conductivities along the boundary of BCFT are trivial.
\subsection{Entanglement entropy}
Similar to the discussions in section \ref{subsec:2ee}, we study the entanglement entropy of a strip geometry. The subsystem under consideration is $0<x<\ell$, while $-L<y<L$ with $L\to\infty$ and $0\leq \theta\leq \pi u_0 $.
The extremal surface $\gamma$ is specified by $u=u(x)$ which is a section at $y=\text{constant}$.
The induced metric on $\gamma$ is
\begin{equation}
ds^2_\gamma=\frac{1}{u^2}\bigg[\,\Big(1+\frac{u'^2}{f(u)}\Big)\,dx^2+dy^2\bigg]+\frac{f(u)}{u^2}d\theta^2\,,
\end{equation}
from which one obtains the area functional
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:areafun2}
A=2\pi u_0 L\,\int_{x_*}^{\ell} dx\,\frac{\sqrt{f+u'^2}}{u^3}\,.
\end{equation}
Since the above functional does not implicitly depend on $x$, there is a conserved quantity
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:consq2sol}
\frac{f}{u^3\sqrt{f+u'^2}}=C\,.
\end{equation}
Note that for the extremal surface, we have boundary $u(\ell)=0$. Since the geometry is only for $0<u\leq u_0$ and $Q$ is located at $x=0$, one might expect that there are two different kinds of extremal surfaces as shown in the cartoon plot of Fig. \ref{fig:caree-sol}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.7]
\draw[black] (0,0) node[anchor=north, below]{ $O$ };
\draw [blue!10] (0,0)--(7,0);
\draw [black, dashed] (0,6)--(8,6);
\draw [purple] (6,0)--(6,6) node[midway, right]{$\gamma_1$};
\draw [green] (0,0)--(0,7);
\draw [orange] (6,0) .. controls (6,2) and (5,4.5) .. (0,5) node[left]{$(x_*, u_*)$ } node[midway, left]{$\gamma_2$};
\draw[black] (0, 7) node[above]{ $Q$ };
\draw[black] (0, 6) node[left]{ $u_0$ };
\filldraw[orange] (0, 5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (0, 0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[blue] (6, 0) circle (2pt);
\draw[black] (6, 0) node[below]{ $\ell$ };
\draw[-latex, blue, opacity=0.8] (0, 0)--(8.5, 0) node[anchor=north, at end]{ $x$ };
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small Cartoon plot for the extremal surfaces $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ in the AdS soliton geometry with an EOW brane $Q$. }
\label{fig:caree-sol}
\end{figure}
The first configuration $\gamma_1$ in Fig. \ref{fig:caree-sol} is the surface $x=\ell$ which corresponds to $C=0$ in \eqref{eq:consq2sol}. Note that this configuration should exist for any $\ell$. The entanglement entropy from this extremal surface is
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ee-sol-straight}
S=\frac{2\pi u_0 L}{4G}\int_{u_c}^{u_0} \frac{du}{u^3}\,
=\frac{\pi u_0 L}{4G}\left(\frac{1}{u_c^2}-\frac{1}{u_0^2}\right) ,
\end{align}
where $u_c$ is the cutoff close to the boundary and $u(\ell-\epsilon)=u_c$.
When $u_c\to 0$, we have $u_c A/(2\pi u_0 L)\to 1/2$.
The entanglement entropy is independent of $\ell$ and therefore we have
$\partial{S}/\partial \ell=0$.
Another configuration $\gamma_2$ in Fig. \ref{fig:caree-sol} only exists for small $\ell$. We have the intersecting point $(x_*, u_*)$ between the extremal surface and the EOW brane where $n_Q\cdot n_\gamma=0$, i.e.
$u'(x_*=0)=0$.
From \eqref{eq:consq2sol}, we have $C=\sqrt{f(u_*)}/u_*^3$ which leads to
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:eerel2sol}
u'=-\sqrt{\frac{u_*^6 f^2}{u^6 f(u_*)}-f}\,.
\end{equation}
Then we have relation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:eeeqn1sol}
\ell=\int^{u_*}_0 du\, \frac{1}{\sqrt{\frac{u_*^6 f^2}{u^6 f(u_*)}-f}}\,.
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq:eeeqn1sol}, one could obtain $u_*$ as a function of $\ell$ as
shown in the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:config-s1}.
Note that we should have $u_*< u_0$. There exists a maximal value $\ell_m$ below which we have two different configurations of curved extremal surfaces. One example of the extremal surfaces at $\ell<\ell_m $ is shown in the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:config-s1}. These features remind us the discovery in \cite{Klebanov:2007ws} without boundary.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{fig-ut-l-soliton.pdf}
~~~
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth]{fig-min-surface-soliton.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small {\em Left:} The location of intersecting point $u_*$ as function of the width of the strip $\ell$. {\em Right:} One example of the extremal surfaces in AdS soliton geometry with the EOW brane for a given width $\ell<\ell_m$. Note that here we have set $u_0=1$.
}
\label{fig:config-s1}
\end{figure}
The entanglement entropy can be obtained from the area of the extremal surfaces
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{eq:eesol}
S&= \frac{A}{4G}=\frac{\pi u_0 L}{2G} \,\int_{x_*}^{\ell-\epsilon} dx\frac{\sqrt{f+u'^2}}{u^3}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The extremal surface with minmial area gives the correct entanglement entropy. In the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:ree-soliton}, we show the area of the extremal surfaces as a function of the width of the strip $\ell$. We find that there exists a critical value of $\ell_c$ which is smaller than $\ell_m$ that was found in the left plot of Fig. \ref{fig:config-s1}. When $\ell<\ell_c$, the orange curved extremal surface has minimal area. When $\ell>\ell_c$, the straight vertical purple curve has minimal area. Furthermore, when $\ell\to 0$, we have $f\to 1, u'\to-\infty$, from \eqref{eq:eesol} we found that $S\propto \frac{1}{\ell^2}$ which reflects the UV properties of the BCFT.
The renormalized entanglement entropy can also be discussed. Close to $u\to 0$, from \eqref{eq:eerel2sol} we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uto02sol}
x(u)=\ell-\frac{u^{4}}{4 u_*^3}+\dots\,.
\end{equation}
From the variation of \eqref{eq:eesol} with respect to $\ell$ and using \eqref{eq:uto02sol}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:effentsol}
\mathcal{F}=
\frac{\ell^3}{2\pi u_0 L}\frac{\partial S}{\partial \ell } =\frac{\sqrt{f(u_*)}}{4G}\frac{\ell^3}{u_*^3}\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The behavior of renormalized entanglement entropy is shown in the right plot of Fig. \ref{fig:ree-soliton}, which reminds us the plot in Fig. \ref{fig:reeF}. We find that the renormalized entanglement entropy (solid lines) is non-negative and monotonically decreasing and there is a discontinuous transition at $\ell_c$ (dashed black line). Different from the discussion in previous section, there is no free parameters similar to the effective tension of the EOW brane to make the entanglement structure more richer.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig-S-l-soliton.pdf}
~~
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig-F-l-soliton.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\small {\em Left:} The area of the extremal surfaces $u_cA/(2\pi u_0 L)$ as function of the width of the strip $\ell$. When we set the cut off $u_c=10^{-5}$, the difference along the vertical axis is of order $10^{-10}$ and thus we do not explicitly show them. {\em Right:} The renormalized entanglement entropy $4G\mathcal{F}$ as function of the width $\ell$. There is a discontinuous transition for renormalized entanglement entropy at $\ell=\ell_c$.
}
\label{fig:ree-soliton}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion and discussion}
\label{sec4}
We have studied the properties of two holographic gapped systems at zero density in the presence of boundaries using AdS/BCFT. The first gapped system is described by Einstein-scalar gravity and the second one is the dual of AdS soliton geometry. In the first system, the profiles of the EOW brane is quite richer, depending on the effective tension of the EOW brane, while in the second system we only find one consistent trivial profile of the EOW brane. In these two systems, both the bulk and boundary conductivities in BCFT along the spatial direction of its boundary are trivial and hence we learn that the strong correlation can not make a topologically trivial insulator topologically nontrivial. The entanglement structure in the first system is very rich. The boundary physics has non-trivial effects on the entanglement structure of the system. For example, by comparing the plot in Fig. \ref{fig:reeF}, the right one in Fig. \ref{fig:ee0n2} and the left one in Fig. \ref{fig:ree-sol} which are for the same bulk geometry parameterized by $n=2$ while different values of $c$ that parameterized the effective tension of the EOW brane, we find that the renormalized entanglement entropies behave differently. Nevertheless, in the presence of a boundary, the renormalized entanglement entropy is always non-negative and monotonically decreasing and can discontinuously or continuously or even smoothly evolve when we increase the length scale of the subsystem.
In the system of AdS soliton with a boundary, the renormalized entanglement entropy exhibits a ``unique" behavior with a discontinuous drop when we increase the size of the subsystem.
One immediate open question is to study other fluctuations modes, e.g. metric fluctuations, to check if there are any gapless degrees of freedom on the boundary of BCFT. Another interesting question is to define a proper physical quantity to extract the contribution from the boundary side. A possible candidate might be the quantity of the differences between the cases with and without boundaries. The entanglement structure in the gapped geometry without any EOW brane has been studied in \cite{Liu:2013una} where the renormalized entanglement entropy has been calculated to be the same expression as (\ref{eq:effent}). For the geometry without any boundary, one might naively identify the system through a mirror reflection $x\to -x$ which would result in the same conclusions as $c=0$. For $n=2$, we have seen that the renromalized entanglement entropy crucially depends on the value of $c$. Especially for small $\ell$ when $c$ is positive, we have larger renormalized entanglement entropy, while when $c$ is negative, we have smaller renormalized entanglement entropy. This indicates that the different profiles of the EOW brane can add or reduce the UV degrees of freedom of the CFT. It would be interesting to study how to reveal this procedure more precisely. Meanwhile, it would be interesting to study the entanglement entropy for other different subsystems to see if similar phenomena could be observed.
It would be very interesting to construct a holographic model for topological insulator from AdS/BCFT and then make predictions from the model. The study in this work suggests that new ingredients should be incorporated if we start from a gapped system by introducing an EOW brane using AdS/BCFT. One possibility is to study other types of gauge theories on the gravity side, e.g. the Dirac-Born-Infeld action for the gauge field, to make the boundary equation for the gauge field more complicated in order to have gapless excitations. Another possibility is to introduce a new dynamical gauge field on the brane to model the gapless excitations in analogy to the holographic Kondo model \cite{Erdmenger:2015xpq, Andrei:2018die}. We leave these interesting questions for future research.
\vspace{.8cm}
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Li Li, Rong-Xin Miao, Francisco Peña-Benitez, Jie Ren, Ya-Wen Sun, Xin-Meng Wu for useful discussions. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China grant No.11875083. Jun-Kun Zhao is also supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China grant No.12122513 and No.12075298.
\vspace{.6 cm}
|
\section{Introduction}
A random laser (RL) is an optical device that utilizes the disorder in the system for the optical feedback. Unlike conventional lasers, no well-defined cavities are present in RLs. The idea of feedback by multiple scattering was first proposed by Letokhov \cite{letokhov1968optical} and has been extensively used to realize random lasing in a variety of disordered systems \cite{tulek2010studies,lu2015random,cao1999random,song2010random,lawandy1994laser,shivakiran2012optofluidic,ferjani2008random}. Two types of RLs have been reported namely, coherent RLs and incoherent RLs, depending on whether the scattering induces the feedback in the field or the intensity, respectively \cite{cao2003lasing}. The scattering strength determines the lasing characteristics such as the lasing threshold of the system, spatial confinement of the modes, etc. Based on the scattering strength, disordered systems can be broadly divided into two categories, namely, strongly scattering and weakly scattering systems. In the strongly scattering systems the lasing modes are localized well within the system and are identical to the quasi-bound (QB) states of the passive system \cite{sebbah2002random,jiang2002localized,andreasen2011modes}, whereas, in weakly scattering systems the lasing modes extend all over the system \cite{andreasen2011modes,vanneste2007lasing}.
Unlike conventional lasers, RL emission is random in wavelength, omnidirectional \cite{cao1999random} and has low spatial and temporal coherence \cite{gouedard1993generation,noginov1999interferometric,redding2011spatial}. These properties make them suitable for different applications like, imaging \cite{redding2012speckle}, displays and lighting \cite{chang2018white}, holography \cite{mallick2020holographic}, etc., but it limits their use where specific wavelength or unidirectional emission is required. Spatial light modulators (SLMs) have been used to shape the pump intensity profile to control the emission and directionality of RLs making them useful for different applications \cite{bachelard2012taming,hisch2013pump,liew2014active,liew2015pump,ge2015selective,bachelard2014adaptive,kumar2021localized}. As the feedback in RLs is provided by disorder-induced scattering, the lasing modes are very sensitive to any changes in the scattering medium. This makes RLs a natural candidate for designing sensors for various applications. The strong dependence of emission characteristics of RLs on the scattering properties of the medium have been utilized to assess nanoscale perturbations \cite{ho2012random}. The monitoring of single nanoparticle perturbation enables to detect single virus, bacterium and biolmolecule. Random lasers have been used as a diagnostic tool for bio-imaging and bio sensing in various biological structures infiltrated with dye \cite{polson2004random,song2010random,siddique1995mirrorless}. The nanoscale deformation and prefailure damage in bones can be detected by monitoring the shifts in the random lasing peaks \cite{song2010detection}. In ex-vivo dye infiltrated human tissues, the changes in the emission spectrum have been observed in malignant tissues as compared to the healthy ones \cite{polson2010cancerous}. The cancerous tissues of different grades of malignancy can be differentiated as they exhibit different lasing spectra for same pump energy \cite{wang2017random}. RLs have been proposed as an in-vivo tool to differentiate between skin, fat, muscle and nerve tissues during laser surgery \cite{hohmann2019investigation}.
In this work, RLs have been proposed as a tool to map the regions of nanoscale perturbation in several random media. A two dimensional (2D) active disordered system has been considered and nanoscale perturbations have been introduced in the medium. Using finite difference time domain (FDTD) method \cite{taflove1995finite} the modes and the corresponding spatial field distributions for the system before and after the perturbation have been computed. In the past, RLs have been used to detect changes in the scattering medium \cite{ho2012random}. In this work we go a step further and show numerically that it is also possible to identify the position of the perturbation with good precision. A small perturbation in the system leads to minute changes in the spectral position of the modes and their corresponding spatial field distributions, but the individual modes do not provide any information about the location of the perturbation. So, a tracking parameter is defined which takes into account the cumulative effect of changes in the modes, to map the region of perturbation. We find that its mapping converges to the defect location when the number of modes increases. This finding paves the way to single particle tracking in disordered systems. The theoretical explorations in this work provide an initial framework to utilize RLs in the field of diagnostics to monitor and track the growth of tumors in disordered biological systems.
\section{Numerical method and computational details}
A 2D disordered system of size, $L^{2}= 5 \times 5 $ $\mu m^2$ has been considered. It consists of circular particles with radius, $r =60 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$ and refractive index, $n_2=2.54$, randomly distributed in a background medium of refractive index, $n_1=1.53$. The values of the refractive index have been chosen to mimic the presence of $TiO_2$ particles in 4-(Dicyanomethylene)-2-methyl-6-(4-dimethylaminostyryl)-4H-pyran (DCM) doped polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) thin films \cite{sarkar2017effect,choubey2020origin,choubey2020random}. The background medium has been chosen as the active part of the system and modeled as a four level atomic system. The surface filling fraction of the scatterers is $28\%$.
In this study, 2D FDTD computation has been carried out using transverse magnetic fields with a grid resolution of $\Delta x= \Delta y=10 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$, along $x$ and $y$ directions, respectively. In order to ensure the stability of the simulation, the time step chosen is, $\Delta t =2.37 \times 10^{-17} s$ \cite{yee1966numerical}. The parameters used for the active medium are mentioned in Ref. \cite{sebbah2002random}. The system is pumped uniformly with a Gaussian pulse of central wavelength $ 532 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$ and pulse duration $ \sim 10^{-15}$ s at a pump level above the lasing threshold of system.
\section{Results and discussion}
The 2D active, random system was pumped above the lasing threshold. The energy in the system was observed to grow exponentially, and after some strong relaxation oscillations, it eventually reaches a steady-state. The lasing modes of the system are calculated by the Fourier transform of the time records of the field after the system has reached the stationary state. Several distinct peaks are observed as shown in Fig. \ref{fig3}. The ten modes considered for further analysis are marked with arrows. The discrete peaks in the emission spectrum indicate lasing action with resonant feedback. The spatial field distribution of the modes is computed by taking the Fourier transform of the field recorded at each grid point. The spatial field distribution of the modes marked as (1-4) in Fig. \ref{fig3} is shown in Figs. \ref{fig2}(a-d). It is observed that the modes are confined well within the system, indicating that the system is strongly scattering. The numerically computed scattering mean free path for the system using Mie scattering theory is, $l_s \approx 0.3 \hspace{0.1 cm}\mu m$ \cite{hulst1981light}. The localization length for the system is calculated by considering the field intensity profiles of modes averaged along $x$ or $y$ directions. The averaged intensity profile exhibits strong local fluctuations but its envelope decays exponentially whose characteristic length, gives the localization length of the modes. The average localization length calculated for the system is, $\xi \approx 2.6 \hspace{0.1 cm}\mu m$. The scattering mean free path and the localization length also indicate that system is strongly scattering and the modes are confined well within the system, respectively.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth, height=4.5 cm]{fig3m}
\captionsetup{justification=raggedright}
\caption{Emission spectra of the unperturbed system and the system with a single particle perturbed by $ 10\hspace{0.1 cm} nm$ at three different locations in the system. Ten peaks considered are marked with arrows. The labeled modes are $607.45$ nm (1), $613.20$ nm (2), $623.01$ nm (3), and $626.13$ nm (4). The inset shows the magnified image of the region marked with dashed magenta line. It shows the spectral shift of the mode as the perturbation is introduced in the system. }
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{fig2a}
\label{fig2:a}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{fig2e}
\label{fig2:e}
\end{subfigure}
\\[-3ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{fig2b}
\label{fig2:b}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{fig2f}
\label{fig2:f}
\end{subfigure}
\\[-3ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4.05cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4.05cm]{fig2c}
\label{fig2:c}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{fig2g}
\label{fig2:g}
\end{subfigure}
\\[-3ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{fig2d}
\label{fig2:d}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{fig2h}
\label{fig2:h}
\end{subfigure}
\captionsetup{justification=raggedright}
\caption{Spatial field distribution of modes marked as (1-4) in Fig. \ref{fig3}, before (a-d), and after (e-h) a single particle is displaced by $ 10 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$. The perturbed particle is marked in blue.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
Next, in order to introduce a single nanoscale perturbation in the system, a randomly chosen scatterer was displaced by $10 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$ along an arbitrary direction. The numerical parameters limit the minimum and the maximum perturbation that can be introduced in the system. The minimum displacement cannot be smaller than the grid resolution and maximum displacement possible is dependent on the surface filling fraction of the system. In realistic systems, such limitations don't exist and hence it is expected that even smaller perturbations can be detected. The effect of perturbation at different locations in the system, on the RL spectra and spatial field distribution of modes has been studied. The emission spectra of the system, when a single particle is perturbed at three different locations in the system are shown in Fig. \ref{fig3}. It is observed that the perturbation causes slight shift in the spectral positions of the random lasing modes, as shown in the inset. The modes 1-4 experience spectral shifts ($\Delta \lambda$) of magnitude $0.239 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$, $0.039 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$, $0.004 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$ and $0.004 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$, respectively. Further details on the correspondence between the magnitude of the spectral shifts and the mode field distributions are presented later.
The perturbation also leads to changes in the spatial field distribution of modes as shown in Figs. \ref{fig2}(e-h), for the perturbation at location 1 (Fig. \ref{fig3}), wherein the perturbed particle is marked in blue. In order to quantify the changes in the system due to perturbation, 2D correlation coefficient ($C_E$) between the spatial field distribution of modes before and after perturbation is calculated, which is defined as:
\begin{equation} \label{1}
C_E= \frac{\sum_{x} \sum_{y}(E(x,y)-\bar E)(E^{'}(x,y)-\bar E^{'})}{\sqrt{\left ( \sum_{x} \sum_{y}(E(x,y)-\bar E)^2 \right ) \left ( \sum_{x} \sum_{y} (E^{'}(x,y)-\bar E^{'})^2 \right )}}
\end{equation}
where, $E(x,y)$ and $E^{'}(x,y)$ are the field magnitudes of the modes at location $(x,y)$ in the system, before and after perturbation, respectively. $\bar{E}$ and $\bar E^{'} $ represent the mean field values of the corresponding modes. The $C_E$ value quantifies the similarity between the modes before and after the perturbation, and for the system shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}, it is found to be 0.92, 0.95, 0.99, and 0.99 for modes 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. The $C_E$ values indicate that the perturbation leads to more changes in modes 1 and 2 as compared to modes 3 and 4. It is evident from Figs. \ref{fig2}(e-f) that the perturbed scatterer is present in the region with high field value for modes 1 and 2 as compared to modes 3 and 4. Thus, a perturbation in the high field region of a mode leads to more changes in the lasing modes as compared to a perturbation in low field region. It is also observed that the shape of the spatial field profiles of modes do not change drastically after the perturbation. However, minute changes are observed in the distribution of the field and its magnitude. Moreover, the perturbation also leads to changes in the spectral location of the lasing modes. The spectral shift ($\Delta \lambda$) in the modes is linearly related to $C_E$ value as shown in Fig. \ref{lcefig}. For modes exhibiting small changes in their spectral position, the $C_E$ values are found to be $\sim$ 1, and as $\Delta \lambda$ increases, $C_E$ decreases. Thus, with increasing spectral shift the changes in the field distribution of the corresponding modes become more prominent.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8 cm, height=6 cm]{lce}
\caption{Variation of $C_E$ with the spectral shift ($\Delta \lambda$) in the lasing modes due to perturbation introduced in the system. The solid line represents the linear fit to the data points. The data points marked in red correspond to modes 1-4 in Fig. \ref{fig2}.}
\label{lcefig}
\end{figure}
The sensitivity of lasing modes to nanoscale displacements has been utilized to monitor perturbations in the system. It is observed that the nanoscale alteration in the scatterer position leads to changes in the lasing modes and their spatial field distributions, and the amount of change varies for each mode. But, these changes in the individual modes do not provide any information about the position of the perturbed particle. Now, it is interesting to ask a question on whether one can identify the particle that has been perturbed, given the modes before and after the perturbation are known. Here, we show that it is possible to locate the position of the scatterer that has been perturbed with the help of the computed modes by defining a tracking parameter, TP as,
\begin{equation} \label{2}
TP(x,y)= \prod_{m} \lvert E_{m}(x,y)-E_{m}^{'}(x,y) \rvert
\end{equation}
where $E_{m}(x,y)$ and $E_{m}^{'}(x,y)$ are the normalized field values of mode $m$ before and after the perturbation at $(x,y)$ position in the system, respectively. The tracking parameter is given by the product of change in the field distribution of the modes considered, due to perturbation. Here, the normalized field values have been considered as we are interested in how the field at a point in the system changes with respect to its neighbouring positions with perturbation.
In Fig. \ref{fig4}(a), $TP$ shows the impact of perturbation on a single mode of the system. This contrasts with Fig. \ref{fig2} that shows that modes are rather preserved after perturbation. Thus, for N = 1, $TP$ quantifies the impact of perturbation on a single mode and implies that a single mode is indeed sensitive to any small change in the system, but it fails to identify the location of perturbation. Further, when two modes are considered, a significant reduction in the region mapped by $TP$ is observed as shown in Fig. \ref{fig4}(b). As the number of modes considered to evaluate $TP$ is increased further, the $TP$ mapped region reduces and concentrates around the perturbed particle as shown in Figs. \ref{fig4} (c-f). Thus, $TP$ provides a way to locate the perturbed particle. The accuracy of the localization of the perturbation increases with the number of modes considered to evaluate $TP$. Here, we were limited to ten modes, but by considering more modes (larger system, larger spectral range) the localization can be improved further.
Next, to understand the consistency of the proposed approach to locate perturbation, a single particle was displaced at different locations in the system along arbitrary directions by $10 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$. Figs. \ref{fig5} (a-d), show how the accuracy of the localization of the defect fluctuates from place to place in the system, when ten modes are considered to evaluate $TP$. It is observed that the perturbed particle lies within the mapped region for the perturbation at different locations in the system.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig4a}
\label{fig4:a}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig4b}
\label{fig4:b}
\end{subfigure}
\\[-2ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig4c}
\label{fig4:c}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig4d}
\label{fig4:d}
\end{subfigure}
\\[-2ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig4e}
\label{fig4:e}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig4f}
\label{fig4:f}
\end{subfigure}
\captionsetup{justification=raggedright}
\caption{The maps generated to locate the position of perturbed particle with the help of TP. The TP mapped regions when number of modes, (a) N=1, (b) N=2, (c) N=4, (d) N=6, (e) N=8, and, (f) N=10 are considered for the particle perturbed by $ 10 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$ at location 1 (Fig. \ref{fig3}). The perturbed particle is marked in blue.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
In order to quantify the accuracy to which the location of perturbation has been identified, a proximity parameter has been calculated as a function of number of modes considered. The proximity parameter, $P$ is defined as the root mean square of the distance of the perturbed particle from each point in the tracking parameter mapped region having a $TP$ value of atleast $\frac{1}{e}$ times the maximum TP value. The value of $P$ is defined as follows,
\begin{equation} \label{3}
P = \sqrt{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} d^{2}_i }, \hspace{0.5 cm}
d_{i}=\sqrt{(x_{p}-x_i)^{2}+(y_{p}-y_i)^{2}}
\end{equation}
Here, $d_i$ is the distance of perturbed particle at $(x_p,y_p)$ from the location $(x_i,y_i)$ in the region mapped with $TP$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig5a}
\label{fig5:a}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig5b}
\label{fig5:b}
\end{subfigure}
\\[-2ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig5c}
\label{fig5:c}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.45cm,height=3.45cm]{fig5d}
\label{fig5:d}
\end{subfigure}
\\[-1ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{7 cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5cm, height=4.5cm]{fig5e}
\label{fig4:g}
\end{subfigure}
\captionsetup{justification=raggedright}
\caption{(a-d) The maps generated with the help of $TP$ to locate the position of a particle perturbed by $ 10 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$ at different locations in the system. The perturbed particle is marked in blue. (e) The proximity parameter, $P$ as a function of number of modes (N), for systems in (a-d), and for the system in Fig. \ref{fig4} (marked as (e)).}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig5}(e) shows how the value of $P$ changes when different number of modes are considered. The value of $P$ for systems in Figs. \ref{fig5} (a-d) are marked as (a-d) in Fig. \ref{fig5} (e). The plot (e) in Fig. \ref{fig5} (e) corresponds to the system perturbed at location 1 in Fig. \ref{fig3}, for which the variation of $TP$ for different number of modes considered is shown in Fig. \ref{fig4}. In Fig. \ref{fig5}(e), it is observed that as the number of modes considered increases, the proximity parameter value decreases, i.e. the region mapped with $TP$ gives a more accurate estimate of the location of perturbation.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.4cm]{fig6a}
\label{fig6:a}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.4cm]{fig6b}
\label{fig6:b}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.4cm]{fig6c}
\label{fig6:c}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[b]{3.5cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.4cm]{fig6d}
\label{fig6:d}
\end{subfigure}
\\[2 ex]
\begin{subfigure}[b]{7 cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.4 cm, height=4.5cm]{fig6e}
\label{fig6:e}
\end{subfigure}
\captionsetup{justification=raggedright}
\caption{The maps generated with the help of $TP$ to locate the position of a particle perturbed by (a) $ 20 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$, (b)$ 30 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$, (c)$ 40 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$ and (d)$ 50 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm$ at location 1 in the system. The perturbed particle is marked in blue. (e) The proximity parameter for different values of displacements in (a-d).}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
To investigate the applicability of the proposed method for larger displacements, the particle perturbed at location 1 in Fig. \ref{fig3} is subjected to displacements of $20 \hspace{0.1 cm}nm - 50\hspace{0.1 cm}nm $, along an arbitrary direction. It is observed that, for larger displacements, the changes in the mode locations and their corresponding spatial field distributions become more prominent. The region mapped with the help of $TP$ and the displaced particle (marked in blue) are shown in Figs. \ref{fig6} (a-d) when a single particle is perturbed by (a) $20 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$, (b) $30 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$, (c) $ 40 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$ and (d) $50 \hspace{0.1 cm} nm$.
It is observed that as the displacement increases, the mapped regions becomes wider. This result is supported by the proximity parameter values in Fig. \ref{fig6} (e). Effectively, the tracking parameter can be applicable to accurately identify single-step displacements of $\sim 20 \hspace{0.1cm} nm$ or smaller. Larger displacements can also be accurately mapped if they are carried out in multiple steps of $\sim 20 \hspace{0.1cm} nm$.
\section{Conclusion}
In summary, a numerical study on the detection and localization of nanoscale perturbation in a 2D strongly scattering active disordered system has been presented. The modes and the corresponding spatial intensity distributions have been calculated by solving Maxwell’s equation combined with rate equations for a four level atomic system. A tracking parameter has been proposed to identify the region of nanoscale perturbation. It is shown that the tracking parameter can map the regions of perturbation very well for single nanoscale perturbations. The results presented in this paper demonstrate that nanoscale perturbations in a system can be tracked if the spatial field distribution of the modes before and after the perturbation are known. Thus, RLs have been proposed as a tool to track minute changes taking place in a disordered system. As of now, the tracking parameter can be evaluated with the help of tailored pump intensity profiles used for selective excitation of modes. It was demonstrated recently that localized modes of 1D random laser can be selected and mapped individually \cite{kumar2022investigation}. Our method can be easily tested in this system. It can prove to be useful in biomedical applications to track minute growth of tumor in cells. The imaging methods such as X-ray, CT scan etc. can be used to locate the region of diagnosis and then detailed monitoring of tumor can be carried out with the proposed method.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors acknowledge Jonathan Andreasen, Georgia Tech Research Institute and Anirban Sarkar, National Institute of Technology, Calicut for fruitful discussions and help in computation. We acknowledge support from Science and Engineering Research Board (CRG/2020/002650) sponsored project. DST-FIST facility, Department of Physics, IIT Kharagpur is acknowledged for computational support. We acknowledge National Supercomputing Mission (NSM) for providing computing resources of ‘PARAM Shakti’ at IIT Kharagpur, which is implemented by C-DAC and supported by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India. Israel Science Foundation (Grants No. 1871/15, 2074/15 and 2630/20), the United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation NSF/BSF (Grant No. 2015694 and Grant No 2021811) are acknowledged.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently, many cities have been committed to developing intelligent transportation systems (ITS) .
As an important part of ITS, traffic forecasting has attracted tremendous attention from academia and industry.
From the perspective of traffic managers, traffic forecasting can help reduce congestion and provide early warning for safety accidents.
From the traveler's perspective, traffic forecasting can help plan travel routes and improve travel efficiency.
Traffic forecasting is a time series forecasting problem, using the past traffic data to predict the data in the future.
Early works simply deployed the classic time series analysis models, e.g., history average (HA), vector
auto regression (VAR), and auto regressive integrated moving average
(ARIMA)\cite{Ahmed1979ANALYSISOF}. These models can only model the linear dependency in the
data, while the traffic data has complex nonlinear relationship,
so the performance of these linear models is poor in the real scenario. Therefore, researchers shift to traditional machine learning methods, such as support vector regression (SVR)\cite{Wu2004TraveltimePW} and k-nearest neighbors (KNN)\cite{Davis1991NonparametricRA}.
However, their performance relies heavily on the handcrafted features, which need to be designed by domain experts.
Recently, deep learning models have become the mainstream choice for traffic forecasting due to their automatic feature extraction ability and better empirical performance.
In deep learning, the temporal dependency of traffic data can be modeled with recurrent neural networks (RNNs)\cite{fu2016using,yu2017deep} or temporal convolution modules\cite{zhang2017deep,Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC,Wu2019GraphWF}.
However, such approaches only mines short-term dependency but ignores long-term dependency.
Traffic data has strong daily and weekly periodicity, which is crucial for traffic forecasting.
We can mine the periodicity in traffic data to model long-term dependency in traffic data.
The spatial dependency can be captured by convolutional neural network (CNN)\cite{Fang2019GSTNetGS,lin2019deepstn+,yao2019revisiting} or graph convolutional networks (GCN)\cite{Wu2019GraphWF,wang2020traffic,Bai2020AdaptiveGC}.
CNN can be applied to grid-based maps to capture spatial dependency.
In this case, the data needs to be divided into $H\times W$ equal size grids, where $H$ and $W$ represent the height and width of the grid-based map respectively.
However, CNN cannot handle non-Euclidean data, which is a more common form when describing road topology in real scenarios, with the predicted positions as nodes and the roads as edges.
GCN can process non-Euclidean data, calculating the weight of the edge by the distance between the nodes, obtaining a distance-based predefined adjacency matrix, and then feeding it into GCN to capture distance-based spatial dependency\cite{Li2018DiffusionCR,Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC}.
Besides, the self-adaptive adjacency matrices can be used to model hidden spatial dependency\cite{Wu2019GraphWF,wang2020traffic,Bai2020AdaptiveGC}.
However, there may be multiple hidden spatial dependencies, which have not been considered in existing works.
In addition, the periodic patterns of each prediction node may be different, which need to be taken into account when modeling the spatial dependency to prevent the periodic information of different nodes from interfering with each other.
To solve the above problems, we propose Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Network (STGCGRN) to improve the accuracy of traffic forecasting. Our contributions are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose a new framework to better exploit temporal and spatial dependency: We capture long-term temporal dependency by explicitly introducing daily and weekly periodic data, which are fed into the attention module with a sliding window. The DGCGRU layer is designed to extract the distance-based spatial dependency and multiple hidden spatial dependencies, which are captured by the predefined distance-based adjacency matrix and the multi-head self-adaptive adjacency matrix, respectively.
\item We explore the model structure and find that mining the periodic information of a single node, and then performing spatial dependency modeling can reduce the interference of periodic information among different nodes.
\item We conduct experiments on four datasets. The results show that our model outperforms the baseline methods. We also conduct ablation experiments to evaluate the impact of each component of our model on the performance.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work} \label{relatedwork}
\subsection{Graph Convolutional Neural Network}
Graph convolutional neural network is a special form of CNN generalized to non-Euclidean data, which can be applied to different tasks and domains, such as node classification \cite{Kipf2017SemiSupervisedCW}, graph classification \cite{ying2018hierarchical}, link prediction \cite{zhang2018link}, node clustering \cite{wang2017mgae}, spatial-temporal graph forecasting, etc.
Bruna et al.\cite{Bruna2014SpectralNA} is the first work to generalize the convolution operation to non-Euclidean data, and proposes a spatial method and a spectral method.
Spatial-based approaches aggregate neighborhood feature informations in the spatial domain to extract a node’s high-level representation.
DCNNs\cite{Atwood2016DiffusionConvolutionalNN} extend convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to general graph-structured data by introducing a ‘diffusion-convolution’ operation.
Message Passing Neural Network (MPNN)\cite{gilmer2017neural} describes a general framework for supervised learning on graphs, applying graph convolution to supervised learning of molecules.
GraphSage\cite{Hamilton2017InductiveRL} proposes a general inductive framework to efficiently generate node embeddings for previously unseen data, sampling and aggregating features from the node’s local neighborhood.
Spectral-based approaches implement the convolution operation in the spectral domain with graph Fourier transforms.
ChebyNet\cite{Defferrard2016ConvolutionalNN} achieves fast localized spectral filtering by introducing C order Chebyshev polynomials parametrization.
GCN\cite{Kipf2017SemiSupervisedCW} further reduces computational complexity of ChebNet by limiting C=2.
\subsection{Traffic Forecasting}
As an important component of ITS, traffic forecasting has received wide attention for decades.
Most of the early traffic forecasting works are based on some classic time series analysis models. ARIMA \cite{Ahmed1979ANALYSISOF} is used to predict the short-term freeway traffic data.
Subsequently, many variants of ARIMA are applied to this task, such as KARIMA \cite{van1996combining}, subset ARIMA \cite{Lee1999ApplicationOS}, ARIMAX \cite{Williams2001MultivariateVT}, etc.
Traffic data contains complex spatial-temporal dependency. However, the aforementioned works only consider the linear relationship in the temporal dimension, which is obviously insufficient.
Researchers apply traditional machine learning algorithms to traffic forecasting, including SVR \cite{Wu2004TraveltimePW}, KNN \cite{Davis1991NonparametricRA}, and so on.
These methods need handcrafted features, which require expert experience in related fields
Due to the advantages of deep learning in solving nonlinear problems and automatically extracting features, scholars pay more attention to deep learning.
RNN \cite{fu2016using,yu2017deep} and CNN \cite{zhang2017deep,Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC,Wu2019GraphWF} are adopted to capture temporal dependency. For example, Graph Wavenet \cite{Wu2019GraphWF} uses dilated casual convolutions to model the temporal dependency to increase the receptive field.
To model the spatial dependency, Some works \cite{Fang2019GSTNetGS,lin2019deepstn+,yao2019revisiting} divide the traffic data into grid-based map, and extract spatial information by CNN.
However, due to natural limitations, CNN can not handle non-Euclidean data. For this reason, researchers apply GCN to the field of traffic forecasting.
DCRNN \cite{Li2018DiffusionCR} captures the spatial dependency using bidirectional random walks on the graph.
STGCN \cite{Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC} employs a generalization of Chebnet to capture the spatial dependency of traffic data.
These methods only utilize the predefined graph structures, which is not sufficient.
Some works \cite{Wu2019GraphWF,wang2020traffic,Bai2020AdaptiveGC} calculate similarities among learnable node embeddings to capture the hidden spatial dependency in the data.
DGCRN \cite{li2021dynamic} filters the node embeddings and then uses them to generate dynamic graph at each time step.
However, these works do not adequately model spatial dependency and ignore periodic information.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{preliminaries}
\begin{itemize}
\item Definition 1: Traffic Network. The traffic network is an undirected graph $G= (V,E,A)$, where $V$ is a set consists of $N$ nodes, $E$ is a set of edges and $A \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$ is the adjacency matrix representing the nodes distance-based proximity.
\item Definition 2: Traffic Signal Matrix. Traffic signal matrix can be denoted as a tensor $X_{t}\in \mathbb{R}^{N\times C}$, where $C$ is the number of traffic features of each node (e.g., the speed, volume), $t$ denotes the time step.
\end{itemize}
The problem of traffic forecasting can be described as: given the traffic network $G= (V,E,A)$ and $P$ steps traffic signal matrix $X_{ (t-P):t}= (X_{t-P}, X_{t-P+1}, ..., X_{t-1})\in \mathbb{R}^{P \times N \times C}$, learning a function $f$ which maps $X_{ (t-P):t}$ to next $Q$ steps traffic signal matrix $X_{t: (t+Q)}= (X_{t}, X_{t+1}, ..., X_{t+Q-1})\in \mathbb{R}^{P \times N \times C}$, represented as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_1}
X_{t: (t+Q)} = f (X_{ (t-P):t}; G)
\end{equation}
\section{Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Network} \label{method}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[Model Framework]{%
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{pics/model1.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat[Encode Traffic Data]{%
\includegraphics[trim=50 200 50 30,width=1\columnwidth]{pics/model1_1.pdf}
}
\caption{ (a) is the architecture of the STGCGRN. It contains an encoder and a decoder. The former simply uses GRU, and the decoder consists of a GRU layer, an attention module, a DGCGRU layer, and an output layer.
The GRU layer generates hidden state vectors at each time step, modeling the short-term temporal dependency.
The attention module mines periodic information in the traffic data to capture long-term dependence.
The DGCGRU layer models spatial dependency.
The purpose of placing the DGCGRU layer behind the attention module is to prevent the periodic information of nodes from interfering with each other. Subsequent experiments have also proved the effectiveness of this point.
The output layer is a fully-connected layer.~ (b) is the details of the encoder.}
\label{model}
\end{figure}
We design the STGCGRN based on the sequence-to-sequence architecture to capture spatial-temporal dependency.
The architecture of our model is shown in Figure~\ref{model}.
\subsection{Periodic~Data~Construct} \label{periodi_data_construct}
Before introducing the model, we first explain the input data structure.
In order to model periodicity, we replace the traffic signal matrix $X_{ (t-P):t}$ in Equation~\ref{eq_1} with three time granularity inputs: recent data, daily periodicity, and weekly periodicity, denoted by $R, D, W$ respectively.
Details about the three parts are as follows:
(1) The recent traffic data:
The recent traffic data is a segment of traffic data before the forecast period.
Intuitively, the recent traffic data have a great impact on the traffic data in the future.
\begin{equation}\label{eq_2}
\begin{split}
&R = (R_{t-P}, R_{t-P+1}, ..., R_{t-1})\in \mathbb{R}^{P \times N \times C}
\\
&R_{t} = (r_{1,t}, r_{2,t}, ..., r_{N,t})\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times C}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $r_{i,t}$ means the traffic data of node $i$ at time step $t$.
(2) The daily periodic traffic data:
The daily periodic part is the data of the same period of the previous |d| days.
Since traffic data is determined by people's daily routine, there are often obvious fixed patterns, such as morning and evening peaks.
The daily periodic traffic data is introduced for the pattern.
\begin{equation}\label{eq_3}
\begin{split}
&D = (D^{|d|},D^{|d|-1}, ..., D^{1})\in \mathbb{R}^{|d| \times (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&D^{i} = (D_{t-P}^{i}, D_{t-P+1}^{i}, ..., D_{t+L-1}^{i})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&D_{t}^{i} = (d_{1,t-i*l_{d}}, d_{2,t-i*l_{d}}, ..., d_{N,t-i*l_{d}})\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times C}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $l_{d}$ means the number of samples per day, $|d|$ represents the number of days used, $L$ will be introduced later.
(3) The weekly periodic traffic data:
The weekly periodic part is the data of the same period of the previous |w| weeks, which is to model the weekly periodicity.
\begin{equation}\label{eq_4}
\begin{split}
&W = (W^{|w|},W^{|w|-1}, ..., W^{1})\in \mathbb{R}^{|w| \times (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&W^{i} = (W_{t-P}^{i}, W_{t-P+1}^{i}, ..., W_{t+L-1}^{i})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&W_{t}^{i} = (w_{1,t-i*l_{w}}, w_{2,t-i*l_{w}}, ..., w_{N,t-i*l_{w}})\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times C}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $l_{w}$ means the number of samples per week, $|w|$ represents the number of weeks used.
After introducing the period information, we can update the Equation~\ref{eq_1} to the following form:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_5}
X_{t: (t+Q)} = f (R,D,W; G)
\end{equation}
\subsection{Attention~Module} \label{attention_module}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=50 0 130 0,width=1\columnwidth]{pics/model2.pdf}
\caption{Attention Module}
\label{attention_module_fig}
\end{figure}
Weekly periodicity can be obtained through $W$. For example, the traffic data from last Saturday is helpful for the traffic forecast of this Saturday.
However, due to the temporal shifting of periodicity\cite{Yao2019RevisitingSS}, daily periodicity cannot depend only on the same moment of the previous days.
For example, yesterday's traffic peak occurred at 5:00 pm, but today's traffic peak may occur at 5:10 pm. So it is incorrect to use the traffic data of 5:10 pm yesterday as daily periodic data.
The traffic data at 5:00 pm yesterday is a better choice.
That is to say, the daily periodicity is not strictly periodic, and there will be a certain time deviation.
But in general, this deviation is not very large.
To cope with the deviation, we consider several time steps adjacent to the predicted time step.
We open a time window around the prediction moment, and only focus on the moment within the window.
The size of the window is $2*S+1$.
We introduce the variable $L$ when we construct $D$ and $W$.
According to the above analysis, we let $L=Q+S$.
The attention module is shown in Figure~\ref{attention_module_fig}.
We apply attention mechanism to the data within the window to capture daily periodicity.
The decoder generates a hidden state vector $h_{i,t}$ for node $i$ at time step $t$.
Meanwhile, we generate a time window centered on $t$ for the hidden state vectors of the daily periodic and weekly periodic data, and then concatenate the hidden state vectors in the window to get $h_{i,t}^{period}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_7}
\begin{split}
&h_{i,t}^{period} = (h^{d,|d|}_{i,t,S}, ..., h^{d,1}_{t,S}, h^{w,|w|}_{i,t,S}, ..., h^{w,1}_{t,S})
\\
&\in \mathbb{R}^{ ( (|w|+|d|)\times (2*S+1))\times d_{h}}
\\
&h^{d,j}_{i,t,S} = (h_{i,t-S-j*l_{d}}, ..., h_{i,t+S-j*l_{d}})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (2*S+1) \times d_{h}}
\\
&h^{w,j}_{i,t,S} = (h_{i,t-S-j*l_{w}}, ..., h_{i,t+S-j*l_{w}})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (2*S+1) \times d_{h}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $d_{h}$ is the dimension of the hidden vector.
In order to simplify the representation, we use $h_{p}$ to represent the hidden state vector in $h_{i,t}^{period}$.
We use the attention mechanism to assign a weight $w_{p}$ to each $h_{p}$. Then the content vector $c_{i,t}$ is obtained by weighted sum of $h_{p}$, which is defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_8}
c_{i,t} = \sum_{s} w_{p}h_{p}
\end{equation}
where $w_{p}$ measures the importance of $h_{p}$, which is calculated as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_9}
w_{p} = \frac{exp (score (h_{i,t},h_{p}))}{\sum_{s}exp (score (h_{i,t},h_{p}))}
\end{equation}
where $h_{i,t}$ means the hidden state of node $i$ at time step $t$ generated by the GRU layer.
The implementation of the score function refers to \cite{Luong2015EffectiveAT}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_10}
score (h_{i,t},h_{p}) = v^{T}tanh (W_{1}h_{i,t}+W_{2}h_{p}+b)
\end{equation}
where $v^{T},W_{1},W_{2},b$ are learnable parameters.
The output of the attention module is shown in the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_11}
a_{i,t} = c_{i,t} + h_{i,t}
\end{equation}
To sum up, the weekly periodicity is introduced through the weekly periodic traffic data $W$.
Then the attention mechanism is applied to the daily periodic data $D$ and weekly periodic data $W$ to capture the daily periodicity.
By processing $R$ with GRU, we can capture short-term dependency in traffic data.
By mining periodicity in traffic data, we can model long-term dependency.
\subsection{DGCGRU}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[DGCGRU]{%
\includegraphics[trim=50 0 50 0,width=0.8\columnwidth]{pics/model4.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat[Double Graph Convolution]{%
\includegraphics[trim=80 40 80 40,width=0.9\columnwidth]{pics/model3.pdf}
}
\caption{ (a) is the architecture of the Double Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Unit (DGCGRU), replacing the full connection layer of gate unit in GRU with double graph convolution operation. (b) is the detail of double graph convolution operation}
\label{gcgru}
\end{figure}
The attention module generates tensor $A_{t}= (a_{1,t}, a_{2,t}, ..., a_{N,t}) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times d_{h}}$. Next, we send $A_{t}$ to the DGCGRU layer to model the spatial dependency from two aspects: the distance-based spatial dependency and the hidden spatial dependency, as shown in Figure~\ref{gcgru}.
\subsubsection{Distance-based~Spatial~Dependency}
Graph Convolution Networks (GCNs) generalize convolution operation to non-Euclidean data.
The idea of GCNs is to learn the representation of nodes by exchanging information between them.
Specifically, given a node, GCNs first generate an intermediate representation of the node by aggregating the representations of its neighbor nodes, and then perform a transformation on the intermediate representation to obtain the node's representation.
Traffic network is usually a graph structure.
The vector $a_{i,t}$ generated at each time step can be regarded as the signal of the graph.
In general, the closer two predicted points are, the higher the correlation between them.
To take full advantage of the topology of the traffic network, we perform a graph convolution operation on $A_{t}$ based on distance information of the graph at each time step.
The k-hop graph convolution operation is as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_12}
\begin{split}
&o^{pre} = \sum_{i=0}^{K}S^{k}W^{k}
\\
&S^{k} = S^{k-1}\widetilde{A}^{pre}
\\
&S^{0} = i_{dgc}
\\
&\widetilde{A}^{pre} = (\widetilde{D}^{pre})^{-1}A^{pre}
\\
&\widetilde{D}^{pre}_{i,i} = \sum_{j}A^{pre}_{i,j}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $A^{pre}\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$ is predefined adjacency matrix that contains the distance information among nodes.
$i_{dgc}$ is the input of the double graph convolution operation.
$W^{k}\in \mathbb{R}^{d_{h} \times d_{h}}$ are learnable parameters.
$K$ is the number of hops for graph convolution.
$o^{pre}$ is the output of this submodule.
\subsubsection{Hidden~Spatial~Dependency}
The distance-based predefined adjacency matrix lacks hidden spatial dependency that are usually directly related to prediction tasks.
To solve this problem, some works \cite{Bai2020AdaptiveGC,Wu2019GraphWF} adopt a self-adaptive adjacency matrix to automatically infer the hidden spatial dependency between nodes, which is learned through stochastic gradient descent.
However, these works ignore that there may be multiple hidden spatial dependencies among nodes.
In our work, we combine the self-adaptive adjacency matrix with multi-head mechanism to model multiple hidden dependencies.
We randomly initialize two sets of node embeddings $E_{1},E_{2}\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times n_{head} \times d_{e}}$, where $n_{head}$ is the number of heads, and $d_{e}$ represents the dimension of the embedding of each head.
Next, we calculate the hidden dependencies among nodes according to the following formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_13}
\widetilde{A}^{adp}_{i} = softmax (\frac{ReLU (E_{1,i}E_{2,i}^{T})}{d_{e}})
\end{equation}
where $i$ indicates the $i$th head, and the ReLU function is used to eliminate some weak connections.
Through the multi-head mechanism, we divide the embedding into multiple subspaces, and learn the corresponding self-adaptive graph in each subspace.
It is worth noting that instead of generating the adjacency matrix $A^{adp}$ and then calculating the Laplacian matrix, we directly obtain the normalized self-adaptive adjacency matrix $\widetilde{A}^{adp}_{i}$ through the softmax function, avoiding unnecessary calculations.
We replace $A^{pre}$ in Equation~\ref{eq_12} with $\widetilde{A}^{adp}_{i}$, and then perform a graph convolution operation to obtain $o^{adp}_{i}$.
The output $o^{adp}$ models multiple hidden spatial dependency by averaging the $o^{adp}_{i}$ of each head.
\subsubsection{Multi-Component~Fusion}
The final output of the spatial dependency module is as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_15}
o_{dgc} = w^{pre}o^{pre}+w^{adp}o^{adp}
\end{equation}
where $w^{pre},w^{adp}$ are hyper parameters
\section{Experiments} \label{experiments}
\subsection{Datasets}
To evaluate the performance of our model, we conduct experiments on four datasets.
\subsubsection{Dataset~Description}
We use the following four datasets: PEMS03, PEMS04, PEMS07, and PEMS08, which are constructed from four districts, respectively in California.
All data is collected from the Caltrans Performance Measurement System(PeMS)\cite{chen2001freeway}.
The traffic data is aggregated into every 5-minute interval, which means every sensor contains 12 traffic data points per hour.
The detailed information of the dataset is shown in Table \ref{pems}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccc} \toprule
Datasets & \#Nodes & \#Edges & Time range\\ \midrule
PEMS03 & 358 & 547 & 9/1/2018-11/30/2018\\
PEMS04 & 307 & 340 & 1/1/2018-2/28/2018\\
PEMS07 & 883 & 866 & 5/1/2017-8/31/2017 \\
PEMS08 & 170 & 295 & 7/1/2016-8/31/2016 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Dataset description.}
\label{pems}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Data~Preprocessing}
We split all datasets into training set, validation set and test set with the ratio of 6:2:2.
We compute the distance-based predefined adjacency matrix $A^{pre}$ using thresholded Gaussian kernel \cite{Shuman2013TheEF}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_17}
\begin{aligned}
w_{ij}=\begin{cases}
exp (-\frac{dist (i,j)^{2}}{\sigma^{2}}) &\text{ if } dist (i,j)^{2}\leq \kappa \\
0 &\text{otherwise }
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $w_{ij}$ is the weight of the edge between node $i$ and node $j$, $dist (i,j)$ is distance between node $i$ and node $j$.
$\sigma$ is the standard deviation of distances and $\kappa$ is the threshold.
\subsection{Baseline~Methods}
\begin{itemize}
\item MLP: Multilayer Perceptron uses two fully connected layers for traffic forecasting.
\item CNN: Convolutional Neural Network performs convolution operations in the temporal dimension to capture temporal correlations.
\item GRU: Gate Recurrent Unit with fully connected layer is powerful in modeling time series.
\item DCRNN\cite{Li2018DiffusionCR}: Diffusion Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network captures the spatial dependency using bidirectional random walks on the graph, and the temporal dependency using the encoder-decoder architecture.
\item STGCN\cite{Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC}: Spatio-Temporal Graph Convolutional Networks combines graph convolutional layers and convolutional sequence learning layers, to model spatial and temporal dependency.
\item ASTGCN (r)\cite{Guo2019AttentionBS}: Attention based Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolution Network (r) adopts the spatial-temporal attention mechanism to effectively capture the dynamic spatial-temporal correlations in traffic data. Only recent components is used.
\item Graph WaveNet\cite{Wu2019GraphWF}: Graph WaveNet capture the hidden spatial dependency by developing a self-adaptive dependency matrix, and enlarges the receptive field a stacked dilated 1D convolution component.
\item AGCRN\cite{Bai2020AdaptiveGC}: Adaptive Graph Convolutional Recurrent Network employs adaptive graph to capture node-specific spatial and temporal correlations.
\item STSGCN\cite{song2020spatial}: Spatial-Temporal Synchronous Graph Convolutional Network captures the complex localized spatial-temporal correlations through an elaborately designed spatial-temporal synchronous modeling mechanism.
\item DGCRN\cite{Li2021DynamicGC}: Dynamic Graph Convolutional Recurrent Network employs a generation method to model fine topology of dynamic graph at each time step.
\item ASTGNN\cite{guo2021learning}: Attention based Spatial-Temporal Graph Neural Network employs self-attention to capture the spatial correlations in a dynamic manner while also introducing periodic information.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Experiment~Settings}
\subsubsection{Metrics}
We deploy Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) as evaluation metrics to measure the performance of the models.
\subsubsection{Optimizer~\&~Early Stopping}
We implement the STGCGRN model using pytorch.
We choose MAE as the loss function and Adam as the optimizer.
We employ early stopping to avoid overfitting.
The model with the best loss of the validation set is selected as the evaluation model.
We repeat the experiment 5 times and report the average value of evaluation metrics.
\subsubsection{Hyper parameters}
Hyper parameters are tuned on the validation set.
One hour historical data is used to construct $R$.
For $D, W$, we let $|d|=1, |w|=1$, and $S=3$.
For multi-component fusion, we let $w^{pre}=0.1,w^{adp}=0.9$.
We set the number of heads of the node embedding that generates the self-adaptive adjacency matrix to 8.
The learning rate is set to 0.001, and the batch size is set to 16.
\subsection{Experiment~Results} \label{results}
We compare our model with the baseline methods on four datasets. Table \ref{all_results} shows the results of traffic forecasting performance over the next hour.
GRU outperforms MLP and CNN, which means that RNNs have a natural advantage in dealing with sequence data.
MLP, CNN, and GRU only take short-term temporal dependency into consideration, ignoring spatial dependency in traffic data.
In contrast, other models, such as DCRNN, AGCRN, DGCRN, etc., exploit spatial dependency from different perspectives, performing better than MLP, CNN, and GRU.
DCRNN, STGCN, ASTGCN capture distance-based spatial dependency through the predefined adjacency matrix, and achieve a good performance.
AGCRN benefits a lot from the self-adaptive adjacency matrix, mining hidden spatial dependency.
Graph Wavenet simultaneously model distance-based spatial dependency and hidden spatial dependency.
By modeling dynamic spatial dependencies, DGCRN further improves model performance.
By introducing periodic information, ASTGNN outperforms other baselines.
Our model avoids the interference of periodic information among nodes while modeling spatial-temporal dependence, further enhancing the performance.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccccccccc}
\toprule
Datasets &Metric &MLP &CNN &GRU &DCRNN &STGCN &ASTGCN (r) &Graph Wavenet &AGCRN &STSGCN &DGCRN &ASTGNN &STGCGRN \\ \midrule
PEMS03 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{20.50$\pm$0.12} \\ \RS{24.43$\pm$3.21} \\\RS{31.67$\pm$0.08}} &\thead{\RS{20.99$\pm$0.15} \\ \RS{23.05$\pm$2.72} \\\RS{33.03$\pm$0.21}} &\thead{\RS{20.56$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{22.84$\pm$2.20} \\\RS{33.09$\pm$0.14}} &\thead{\RS{18.39$\pm$0.39} \\ \RS{20.22$\pm$2.83} \\\RS{30.56$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{18.28$\pm$0.39} \\ \RS{17.52$\pm$0.32} \\\RS{30.73$\pm$0.78}} &\thead{\RS{17.85$\pm$0.45} \\ \RS{17.65$\pm$0.79} \\\RS{29.88$\pm$0.65}} &\thead{\RS{14.79$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{14.32$\pm$0.24} \\\RS{25.51$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{15.58$\pm$0.03} \\ \RS{15.19$\pm$0.36} \\\RS{27.50$\pm$0.23}} &\thead{\RS{17.48$\pm$0.15} \\ \RS{16.78$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{29.21$\pm$0.56}} &\thead{\RS{14.96$\pm$0.07} \\ \RS{15.35$\pm$0.32} \\\RS{26.44$\pm$0.24}} &\thead{\RS{14.55$\pm$0.07} \\ \RS{13.66$\pm$0.14} \\\textbf{\RS{24.96$\pm$0.31}}} &\thead{\textbf{\RS{14.12$\pm$0.17}} \\ \textbf{\RS{13.54$\pm$0.33}} \\\RS{25.87$\pm$0.64}} \\ \midrule
PEMS04 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{26.37$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{19.89$\pm$1.10} \\\RS{40.19$\pm$0.12}} &\thead{\RS{27.18$\pm$0.23} \\ \RS{21.94$\pm$1.46} \\\RS{40.95$\pm$0.25}} &\thead{\RS{26.52$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{20.17$\pm$1.67} \\\RS{40.19$\pm$0.03}} &\thead{\RS{23.65$\pm$0.04} \\ \RS{16.05$\pm$0.10} \\\RS{37.12$\pm$0.07}} &\thead{\RS{22.27$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{14.36$\pm$0.12} \\\RS{35.02$\pm$0.19}} &\thead{\RS{22.42$\pm$0.19} \\ \RS{15.87$\pm$0.36} \\\RS{34.75$\pm$0.19}} &\thead{\RS{19.36$\pm$0.02} \\ \RS{13.31$\pm$0.19} \\\RS{31.72$\pm$0.13}} &\thead{\RS{19.33$\pm$0.13} \\ \RS{12.83$\pm$0.07} \\\RS{31.23$\pm$0.21}} &\thead{\RS{21.19$\pm$0.10} \\ \RS{13.90$\pm$0.05} \\\RS{33.65$\pm$0.20}} &\thead{\RS{20.22$\pm$0.12} \\ \RS{13.62$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{31.97$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{18.44$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{12.37$\pm$0.08} \\\RS{31.02$\pm$0.18}} &\textbf{\thead{\RS{18.11$\pm$0.02} \\ \RS{11.96$\pm$0.04} \\\RS{29.88$\pm$0.04}}} \\ \midrule
PEMS07 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{29.56$\pm$0.22} \\ \RS{14.57$\pm$1.68} \\\RS{44.39$\pm$0.19}} &\thead{\RS{30.59$\pm$0.25} \\ \RS{15.69$\pm$1.16} \\\RS{45.36$\pm$0.23}} &\thead{\RS{29.31$\pm$0.16} \\ \RS{13.73$\pm$0.48} \\\RS{44.05$\pm$0.14}} &\thead{\RS{23.60$\pm$0.05} \\ \RS{10.28$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{36.51$\pm$0.05}} &\thead{\RS{27.41$\pm$0.45} \\ \RS{12.23$\pm$0.38} \\\RS{41.02$\pm$0.58}} &\thead{\RS{25.98$\pm$0.78} \\ \RS{11.84$\pm$0.69} \\\RS{39.65$\pm$0.89}} &\thead{\RS{21.22$\pm$0.24} \\ \RS{9.07$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{34.12$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{20.73$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{8.86$\pm$0.10} \\\RS{34.38$\pm$0.15}} &\thead{\RS{24.26$\pm$0.14} \\ \RS{10.21$\pm$0.05} \\\RS{39.03$\pm$0.27}} &\thead{\RS{20.61$\pm$0.14} \\ \RS{8.90$\pm$0.11} \\\RS{33.48$\pm$0.16}} &\thead{\RS{19.26$\pm$0.17} \\ \RS{8.54$\pm$0.19} \\\RS{32.75$\pm$0.25}} &\textbf{\thead{\RS{17.98$\pm$0.03} \\ \RS{7.50$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{31.20$\pm$0.04}}} \\ \midrule
PEMS08 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{21.35$\pm$0.24} \\ \RS{15.71$\pm$1.77} \\\RS{32.45$\pm$0.11}} &\thead{\RS{21.93$\pm$0.22} \\ \RS{17.11$\pm$2.07} \\\RS{33.14$\pm$0.14}} &\thead{\RS{21.17$\pm$0.11} \\ \RS{13.97$\pm$0.53} \\\RS{32.31$\pm$0.08}} &\thead{\RS{18.22$\pm$0.06} \\ \RS{11.56$\pm$0.04} \\\RS{28.29$\pm$0.09}} &\thead{\RS{18.04$\pm$0.19} \\ \RS{11.16$\pm$0.10} \\\RS{27.94$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{18.86$\pm$0.41} \\ \RS{12.50$\pm$0.66} \\\RS{28.55$\pm$0.49}} &\thead{\RS{15.07$\pm$0.17} \\ \RS{9.51$\pm$0.22} \\\RS{23.85$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{15.90$\pm$0.14} \\ \RS{10.53$\pm$0.21} \\\RS{25.00$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{17.13$\pm$0.09} \\ \RS{10.96$\pm$0.07} \\\RS{26.18$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{15.86$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{10.50$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{24.98$\pm$0.15}} &\thead{\RS{12.72$\pm$0.09} \\ \RS{8.78$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{22.60$\pm$0.13}} &\textbf{\thead{\RS{12.54$\pm$0.01} \\ \RS{8.43$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{21.95$\pm$0.02}}} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Performance comparison of different approaches for traffic flow forecasting.}
\label{all_results}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[MAE]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/ablation/MAE.jpg}
}
\subfloat[MAPE]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/ablation/MAPE.jpg}
}
\subfloat[RMSE]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/ablation/RMSE.jpg}
}
\caption{Ablation study on the PEMS08 dataset.}
\label{ablation_res}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Ablation~Study} \label{ablation_study}
To further verify the effectiveness of different components of STGCGRN, we conduct ablation experiments on the PEMS08 dataset.
We design five variants of the STGCGRN model as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item w/o pre: We remove the distance-based predefined adjacency matrix from the DGCGRU layer.
\item w/o adp: We remove the self-adaptive adjacency matrix from the DGCGRU layer.
\item w/o pre\&adp: We remove the distance-based predefined adjacency matrix and self-adaptive adjacency matrix from the DGCGRU layer, replacing them with identity matrix.
\item w/o window: We remove the sliding window in the attention module.
\item w/o period: We remove the period information from STGCGRN.
\end{itemize}
We visualized the MAE, MAPE, RMSE of STGCGRN and its variants in the next 15min, 30min, 45min, 60min, as shown in the Figure~\ref{ablation_res}.
The introduction of periodic information has the most obvious improvement in model performance, which shows that long-term temporal dependency are critical to traffic forecasting.
In addition, with the growth of time, the effect of periodic information becomes more and more obvious.
This is because the error of the decoder gradually accumulate, and the period information can provide the decoder with historical data as a reference to help the decoder correct the error.
The effect of the hidden spatial dependency is second only to the period information.
This is because the self-adaptive adjacency matrix is trained with the model, and the learned hidden dependency are directly related to the downstream task
The predefined adjacency matrix can help to improve the performance of the model without the self-adaptive adjacency matrix, otherwise it has almost no effect, which indicates that the self-adaptive adjacency matrix has learned the part of the distance information that is helpful for prediction during the training process.
In addition, the sliding window also helps to improve the performance of the model, indicating that the time near the prediction time is of great help to the prediction task, which helps the attention mechanism to converge to a better position.
\subsection{Multi-Head~Mechanism~Study} \label{study_multihead}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccc} \toprule
& MAE & MAPE & RMSE\\ \midrule
1H & \RS{12.62$\pm$0.04} & \RS{8.46$\pm$0.05} & \RS{22.13$\pm$0.04}\\
2H & \RS{12.58$\pm$0.02} & \RS{8.45$\pm$0.02} & \RS{22.08$\pm$0.01}\\
4H & \RS{12.56$\pm$0.01} & \RS{8.44$\pm$0.04} & \RS{22.02$\pm$0.03}\\
8H & \textbf{12.54$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{8.43$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{21.95$\pm$0.02} \\
16H & \RS{12.55$\pm$0.01} & \RS{8.44$\pm$0.05} & \RS{21.99$\pm$0.01} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Multi-Head mechanism study on the PEMS08 dataset.}
\label{multihead}
\end{table}
Since there may be multiple hidden spatial dependencies between nodes, our work introduces the multi-head mechanism, hoping that $E_1$ and $E_2$ can model different hidden spatial dependencies.
We conducted experiments to verify that the introduction of the multi-head mechanism improves the performance of the model.
The experimental results are shown in the Table~\ref{multihead}.
Increasing the number of heads bring performance gain.
The model performs best when the number of heads is 8.
This shows that as the number of heads increases, the model captures more hidden spatial dependency information, which verify the effectiveness of the multi-head mechanism in the current scenario.
\subsection{Position of DGCGRU layer}
\begin{table}
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lccc} \toprule
& MAE & MAPE & RMSE\\ \midrule
STGCGRN & \RS{12.80$\pm$0.01} & \RS{8.60$\pm$0.03} & \RS{22.17$\pm$0.02}\\
STGCGRN\_rev & \textbf{12.54$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{8.43$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{21.95$\pm$0.02} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Comparative experiment on the PEMS08 dataset.}
\label{comparative_exp}
\end{table}
We explore how to better combine single-node periodic information and multi-node spatial dependencies to prevent periodic information of nodes from interfering with each other.
The result is shown in Table \ref{comparative_exp}. STGCGRN\_rev is a variant of STGCGRN where the order of the DGCGRU layer and the attention module is reversed.
We can see that the performance of STGCGRN\_rev decline, indicating that modeling spatial dependencies first will cause the periodic information of each node to interfere with each other when mining periodic information later. The architecture of STGCGRN is better.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Network (STGCGRN) for traffic forecasting.
For temporal dependency, we model short-term dependency by processing recent traffic data with GRU, and capture long-term dependency by mining daily and weekly periodicity.
For spatial dependency, we model distance-based spatial dependency and multiple hidden spatial dependencies with predefined adjacency matrix and multi-head self-adaptive adjacency matrix, respectively.
In addition, we also explored the model structure to avoid the mutual interference of periodic information among nodes during spatial dependency modeling.
Experiments and analysis on four datasets show that our model achieves state-of-the-art results.
The code have been released at: https://github.com/ZLBryant/STGCGRN.
\section{Introduction}
Recently, many cities have been committed to developing intelligent transportation systems (ITS) .
As an important part of ITS, traffic forecasting has attracted tremendous attention from academia and industry.
From the perspective of traffic managers, traffic forecasting can help reduce congestion and provide early warning for safety accidents.
From the traveler's perspective, traffic forecasting can help plan travel routes and improve travel efficiency.
Traffic forecasting is a time series forecasting problem.
Early works simply deployed the classic time series analysis models, e.g., history average (HA), vector
auto regression (VAR) and auto regressive integrated moving average
(ARIMA). These models can only model the linear dependency in the
data, while the traffic data has complex nonlinear relationship,
so the performance of these linear models is poor in the real scenario. Therefore, researchers shift to traditional machine learning methods, such as support vector regression (SVR) and k-nearest neighbors (KNN).
However, their performance relies heavily on the handcrafted features, which needs to be designed by domain experts.
Recently, deep learning models have become the mainstream choice for traffic forecasting due to its automatic feature extraction ability and better empirical performance.
In deep learning, the temporal dependency of traffic data can be modeled with recurrent neural networks (RNNs) or temporal convolution modules.
However, suc approach only mines short-term dependency but ignores long-term dependency.
Traffic data has strong daily and weekly periodicity, which is crucial for traffic forecasting.
We can mine the periodicities in traffic data to model long-term dependency in traffic data.
The spatial dependency can be captured by convolutional neural network (CNN) or graph convolutional networks (GCN).
CNN can be applied to grid-based graphs to capture spatial dependency.
In this case, the data needs to be divided into $H\times W$ equal size grids, where H and W represent the height and width of the grid-based map respectively.
However, CNN cannot handle non-Euclidean data, which is a more common form when describing road topology in real scenarios.
GCN can process non-Euclidean data, calculating the weight of the edge by the distance between the nodes, obtaining a distance-based predefined adjacency matrix, and then feeding it into GCN to capture distance-based spatial dependency.
Besides, the self-adaptive adjacency matrixs can be used to model hidden spatial dependency.
However, there may be multiple hidden spatial dependencies, which have not been considered in existing works.
In addition, the periodic patterns of each prediction node may be different, which needs to be taken into account when modeling the spatial dependencies to prevent the periodic information of different nodes from interfering with each other.
To solve the above problems, we propose Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Network (STGCGRN) to improve the accuracy of traffic forecasting. Our contributions are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We capture long-term dependency by introducing daily and weekly periodicity. Weekly periodicity is introduced by weekly periodicity data. Daily periodicity is captured by using attention mechanism on daily and weekly periodicity data.
\item We propose the DGCGRU to capture spatial dependency: distance-based spatial dependency and hidden spatial dependency. For distance-based spatial dependency, we obtain the predefined adjacency matrix by distance information. For hidden spatial dependency, we introduce trainable node embeddings to learn self-adaptive adjacency matrices. In addition, we introduce the multi-head mechanism to deal with situations where there may be multiple hidden spatial dependencies.
\item We explore the model structure and find that mining the periodic information of a single node, and then performing spatial dependency modeling can reduce the interference of periodic information between different nodes.
\item We conduct experiments on four datasets. The results show that our model outperforms the baseline methods. We also conduct ablation experiments to evaluate the impact of each components of model on the performance.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work} \label{relatedwork}
\subsection{Graph Convolutional Neural Network}
Graph convolutional neural network is a special form of CNN generalized to non-Euclidean data, which can be applied to different tasks and domains, such as node classification \cite{Kipf2017SemiSupervisedCW}, graph classification \cite{ying2018hierarchical}, link prediction \cite{zhang2018link}, node clustering \cite{wang2017mgae}, spatial-temporal graph forecasting, etc.
Bruna et al.\cite{Bruna2014SpectralNA} is the first work to generalize the convolution operation to non-Euclidean data, and proposes a spatial method and a spectral method.
Spatial-based approaches aggregate neighborhood feature informations in the spatial domain to extract a node’s high-level representation.
DCNNs\cite{Atwood2016DiffusionConvolutionalNN} extend convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to general graph-structured data by introducing a ‘diffusion-convolution’ operation.
Message Passing Neural Network (MPNN)\cite{gilmer2017neural} describes a general framework for supervised learning on graphs, applying graph convolution to supervised learning of molecules.
GraphSage\cite{Hamilton2017InductiveRL} proposes a general inductive framework to efficiently generate node embeddings for previously unseen data, sampling and aggregating features from the node’s local neighborhood.
Spectral-based approaches implement the convolution operation in the spectral domain with graph Fourier transforms.
ChebyNet\cite{Defferrard2016ConvolutionalNN} achieves fast localized spectral filtering by introducing C order Chebyshev polynomials parametrization.
GCN\cite{Kipf2017SemiSupervisedCW} further reduces computational complexity of ChebNet by limiting C=2.
\subsection{Traffic Forecasting}
As an important component of ITS, traffic forecasting has received wide attention for decades.
Most of the early traffic forecasting works is based on some classic time series analysis models. ARIMA \cite{Ahmed1979ANALYSISOF} is used to predict the short-term freeway traffic data.
Subsequently, many variants of ARIMA were applied on this task, such as KARIMA \cite{van1996combining}, subset ARIMA \cite{Lee1999ApplicationOS}, ARIMAX \cite{Williams2001MultivariateVT}, etc.
Traffic data contains complex spatial-temporal dependency. However, the aforementioned works only considers the linear relationship in the temporal dimension, which is obviously insufficient.
Researchers apply traditional machine learning algorithms to traffic forecasting, including SVR \cite{Wu2004TraveltimePW}, KNN \cite{Davis1991NonparametricRA}, and so on.
These methods need handcrafted features, which requires expert experience in related fields
Due to the advantages of deep learning in solving nonlinear problems and automatically extracting features, scholars pay more attention to deep learning.
RNN \cite{fu2016using,yu2017deep} and CNN \cite{zhang2017deep,Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC,Wu2019GraphWF} are adopted to capture temporal dependency. For example, Graph Wavenet \cite{Wu2019GraphWF} uses dilated casual convolutions to model the temporal dependency to increase the receptive field.
To model the spatial dependency, Some works \cite{Fang2019GSTNetGS,lin2019deepstn+,yao2019revisiting} divide the traffic data into grid-based map, and extract spatial information by CNN.
However, due to natural limitations, CNN can not handle non-Euclidean data. For this reason, researchers apply GCN to the field of traffic forecasting.
DCRNN \cite{Li2018DiffusionCR} captures the spatial dependency using bidirectional random walks on the graph.
STGCN \cite{Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC} employs a generalization of Chebnet to capture the spatial dependency of traffic data
These methods only utilize the predefined graph structures, which is not sufficient.
Some works \cite{Wu2019GraphWF,wang2020traffic,Bai2020AdaptiveGC} calculate similarities among learnable node embeddings to capture the hidden spatial dependency in the data.
DGCRN \cite{li2021dynamic} filters the node embeddings and then use them to generate dynamic graph at each time step.
ASTGNN \cite{guo2021learning} employs self-attention to capture the spatial correlations in a dynamic manner.
However, these works do not adequately model spatial dependency and ignore periodic information.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{preliminaries}
\begin{itemize}
\item Definition 1: Traffic Network. We define the traffic network as an undirected graph $G= (V,E,A)$, where $V$ is a set consists of $N$ nodes, $E$ is a set of edges and $A \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$ is the adjacency matrix representing the nodes distance-based proximity.
\item Definition 2: Traffic Signal Matrix. Traffic signal matrix can be denoted as a tensor $X_{t}\in \mathbb{R}^{N\times C}$, where $C$ is the number of traffic features of each node (e.g., the speed, volume), $t$ denotes the time step.
\end{itemize}
The proplem of traffic forecasting can be described as: given the traffic network $G= (V,E,A)$ and $P$ steps traffic signal matrix $X_{ (t-P):t}= (X_{t-P}, X_{t-P+1}, ..., X_{t-1})\in \mathbb{R}^{P \times N \times C}$, learning a function $f$ which maps $X_{ (t-P):t}$ to next $Q$ steps traffic signal matrix $X_{t: (t+Q)}= (X_{t+1}, X_{t+1}, ..., X_{t+Q-1})\in \mathbb{R}^{P \times N \times C}$, represented as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_1}
X_{t: (t+Q)} = f (X_{ (t-P):t}; G)
\end{equation}
\section{Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Network} \label{method}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[Model Framework]{%
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{pics/model1.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat[Encode Traffic Data]{%
\includegraphics[trim=50 200 50 30,width=1\columnwidth]{pics/model1_1.pdf}
}
\caption{ (a) is the architecture of the STGCGRN. It contains an encoder and a decoder. The former simply uses GRU, and the decoder consists of a GRU, an attention module, a DGCGRU layer, and a output layer.
The GRU layer generates hidden state vectors at each time step, modeling the short-term temporal dependency.
The attention module mines periodic information in the traffic data to capture long-term dependence.
And the DGCGRU layer models spatial dependency.
The purpose of placing the DGCGRU layer behind the attention module is to prevent the periodic information between nodes from interfering with each other. Subsequent experiments have also proved the effectiveness of this point.
The output layer is a fully-connected layer.~ (b) is the is the details of the encoder}
\label{model}
\end{figure}
We design the STGCGRN based on a sequence-to-sequence architecture to capture spatial-temporal dependency.
The architecture of our model is shown in Figure~\ref{model}.
\subsection{Periodic~Data~Construct} \label{periodi_data_construct}
Before introducing the model, we first explain the input data structure.
In order to model periodicity, the inputs corresponds to thee time granularities: recent, daily periodicity, and weekly periodicity, denoted by $R, D, W$ respectively.
Details about the three parts are as follows:
(1) The recent traffic data:
The recent traffic data is a segment of traffic data before the forecast period.
Intuitively, the traffic data in the past period have a great impact on the traffic data in the future.
\begin{equation}\label{eq_2}
\begin{split}
&R = (R_{t-P}, R_{t-P+1}, ..., R_{t-1})\in \mathbb{R}^{P \times N \times C}
\\
&R_{t} = (r_{1,t}, r_{2,t}, ..., r_{N,t})\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times C}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $r_{i,t}$ means the traffic data of node $i$ at time step $t$.
(2) The daily periodic traffic data:
The daily periodic part is the data of the same period of the previous |d| days.
Since traffic data is determined by people's daily routine, there are often obvious fixed patterns, such as morning and evening peaks.
The daily periodic traffic data is introduced for the pattern.
\begin{equation}\label{eq_3}
\begin{split}
&D = (D^{|d|},D^{|d|-1}, ..., D^{1})\in \mathbb{R}^{|d| \times (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&D^{i} = (D_{t-P}^{i}, D_{t-P+1}^{i}, ..., D_{t+L-1}^{i})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&D_{t}^{i} = (d_{1,t-i*l_{d}}, d_{2,t-i*l_{d}}, ..., d_{N,t-i*l_{d}})\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times C}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $l_{d}$ means the number of samples per day, $|d|$ represents the number of days used, $L$ will be introduced later.
(3) The weekly periodic traffic data:
The weekly periodic part is the data of the same period of the previous |w| weeks, which is to model the weekly periodicity.
\begin{equation}\label{eq_3}
\begin{split}
&W = (W^{|w|},W^{|w|-1}, ..., W^{1})\in \mathbb{R}^{|d| \times (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&W^{i} = (W_{t-P}^{i}, W_{t-P+1}^{i}, ..., W_{t+L-1}^{i})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (P+L) \times N \times C}
\\
&W_{t}^{i} = (w_{1,t-i*l_{w}}, w_{2,t-i*l_{w}}, ..., w_{N,t-i*l_{w}})\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times C}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $l_{w}$ means the number of samples per week, $|w|$ represents the number of weeks used.
After introducing the period information, we can update the Equation~\ref{eq_1} to the following form:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_5}
X_{t: (t+Q)} = f (R,D,W; G)
\end{equation}
\subsection{Attention~Module} \label{attention_module}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=200 0 130 0,width=1\columnwidth]{pics/model2.pdf}
\caption{Attention Module}
\label{attention_module_fig}
\end{figure}
Weekly periodicity can be obtained through $W$. For example, the traffic data of last Saturday is helpful to the traffic forecast of this Saturday.
However, due to temporal shifting of periodicity\cite{Yao2019RevisitingSS}, daily periodicity cannot depend only on the same moment of the previous days.
For example, yesterday's traffic peak occurred at 5:00 pm, but today's traffic peak may occur at 5:30 pm. So it is incorrect to use the traffic data of 5:30 pm yesterday as daily periodic data.
The traffic data at 5:00 pm yesterday is a better choice.
That is to say, the daily periodicity is not strictly periodic, and there will be a certain time deviation.
But in general, this deviation is not very large.
To cope with the deviation,, we consider several time steps adjacent to the predicted time step.
We open a time window around the prediction moment, the size of the window is $2*S+1$, and only focus on the moment within the window.
We introduce the variable $L$ when we construct $D$ and $W$.
According to the above analysis, we let $L=Q+S$.
The attention module is shown in Figure~\ref{attention_module_fig}.
We apply attention mechanism to the data within the window to capture daily periodicity.
The decoder generates a hidden state vector $h_{i,t}$ for node $i$ at time step $t$.
Meanwhile, we generate a time window centered on $t$ for the hidden state vectors of the daily perioric and weekly perioric data, and then concatenate the hidden state vectors in the window to get $h_{i,t}^{period}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_7}
\begin{split}
&h_{i,t}^{period} = (h^{d,|d|}_{i,t,S}, ..., h^{d,1}_{t,S}, h^{w,|w|}_{i,t,S}, ..., h^{w,1}_{t,S})
\\
&\in \mathbb{R}^{ ( (|w|+|d|)\times (2*S+1))\times d_{h}}
\\
&h^{d,j}_{i,t,S} = (h_{i,t-S-j*l_{d}}, ..., h_{i,t+S-j*l_{d}})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (2*S+1) \times d_{h}}
\\
&h^{w,j}_{i,t,S} = (h_{i,t-S-j*l_{w}}, ..., h_{i,t+S-j*l_{w}})\in \mathbb{R}^{ (2*S+1) \times d_{h}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In order to simplify the representation, we use $h_{s}$ to represent hidden state vectors in $h_{i,t}^{period}$.
We use the attention mechanism to assign a weight $w_{s}$ to each $h_{s}$. Then the content vector $c_{i,t}$ is obtained by weighted sum of $h_{s}$, which is defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_8}
c_{i,t} = \sum_{s} w_{s}h_{s}
\end{equation}
$w_{s}$ measures the importance of $h_{s}$, which is calculated as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_9}
w_{i} = \frac{exp (score (h_{i,t},h_{s}))}{\sum_{s}exp (score (h_{i,t},h_{s}))}
\end{equation}
The implementation of the score function refers to \cite{Luong2015EffectiveAT}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_10}
score (h_{i,t},h_{s}) = v^{T}tanh (W_{1}h_{i,t}+W_{2}h_{s}+b)
\end{equation}
where $v^{T},W_{1},W_{2},b$ are learnable parameters.
The output of the attention module is shown in the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_11}
s_{i,t} = c_{i,t} + h_{i,t}
\end{equation}
To sum up, the weekly periodicity is introduced through the weekly periodic traffic data $W$.
Then the attention mechanism is applied to the daily periodic data $D$ and weekly periodic data $W$ to capture the daily periodicity.
By processing $R$ with GRU, we can capture short-term dependency in traffic data.
By mining periodicity in traffic data, we can model long-term dependency.
\subsection{DGCGRU}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[DGCGRU]{%
\includegraphics[trim=50 0 50 0,width=0.8\columnwidth]{pics/model4.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat[Double Graph Convolution]{%
\includegraphics[trim=80 40 80 40,width=0.8\columnwidth]{pics/model3.pdf}
}
\caption{ (a) is the architecture of the Double Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Unit (DGCGRU), replacing the full connection layer of gate unit in GRU with double graph convolution operation. (b) is the detail of double graph convolution operation}
\label{gcgru}
\end{figure}
The decoder generates hidden states $H_{t}= (h_{1,t}, h_{2,t}, ..., h_{N,t}) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times d_{h}}$ at time step $t$, which contain short-term dependency.
The attention module generates tensor $S_{t}= (s_{1,t}, s_{2,t}, ..., s_{N,t}) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times d_{h}}$ by mining periodic information in $H_{t}$, capturing long-term dependency.
Next, we model the spatial dependency from two parts: the distance-based spatial dependency and the hidden spatial dependency, as shown in Figure~\ref{gcgru}.
\subsubsection{Distance-based~Spatial~Dependency}
Graph Convolution Networks (GCNs) generalize convolution operation to non-Euclidean data.
The idea of GCNs is to learn the representation of nodes by exchanging information between them.
Specifically, given a node, GCNs first generate an intermediate representation of the node by aggregating the representations of its neighbor nodes, and then perform a transformation on the intermediate representation to obtain the node's representation.
Traffic network is usually a graph structure.
The vector $s_{i,t}$ generated at each time step can be regarded as the signal of the graph.
In general, the closer two predicted points are, the higher the correlation between them.
To take full advantage of the topology of the traffic network, we perform a graph convolution operation on $S_{t}$ based on distance information of the graph at each time step.
The k-hop graph convolution operation is as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_12}
\begin{split}
&o^{pre} = \sum_{i=0}^{K}S^{k}W^{k}
\\
&S^{k} = S^{k-1}\widetilde{A}^{pre}
\\
&S^{0} = i_{dgc}
\\
&\widetilde{A}^{pre} = (\widetilde{D}^{pre})^{-1}A^{pre}
\\
&\widetilde{D}^{pre}_{i,i} = \sum_{j}A^{pre}_{i,j}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $A^{pre}\in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$ is predefined adjacency matrix that contains the static distance-based relations among nodes.
$W^{k}\in \mathbb{R}^{d_{h} \times d_{h}}$ are learnable parameters, and $K$ is the number of hops for graph convolution.
$o^{pre}$ is the output of this submodule.
\subsubsection{Hidden~Spatial~Dependency}
The distance-based predefined adjacency matrix lacks hidden spatial dependency that are usually directly related to prediction tasks.
To solve this problem, some works \cite{Bai2020AdaptiveGC,Wu2019GraphWF} adopt a self-adaptive adjacency matrix to automatically infer the hidden spatial dependency between nodes, which is learned through stochastic gradient descent.
However, these works ignore that there may be multiple hidden spatial dependencies among nodes.
In our work, we combine the self-adaptive adjacency matrix with multi-head mechanism to model multiple hidden dependencies.
We randomly initialize two sets of node embeddings $E_{1},E_{2}\in \mathbb{R}^{d_{h} \times n_{head} \times d_{e}}$, where each row in $E_{1},E_{2}$ represents two embeddings for a node, $n_{head}$ is the number of heads, and $d_{e}$ represents the dimension of the embedding of each head.
Next, we calculate the hidden dependencies among nodes according to the following formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_13}
\widetilde{A}^{adp}_{i} = softmax (\frac{ReLU (E_{1,i}E_{2,i}^{T})}{d_{e}})
\end{equation}
where the ReLU function is used to eliminate some weak connections.
Through the multi-head mechanism, we divide the embedding into multiple subspaces, and learn the corresponding self-adaptive graph in each subspace.
It is worth noting that instead of generating the adjacency matrix $A^{adp}$ and then calculating the Laplacian matrix, we directly obtain the normalized self-adaptive adjacency matrix $\widetilde{A}^{adp}_{i}$ through the softmax function, avoiding unnecessary calculations.
We replace $A^{pre}$ in Equation~\ref{eq_12} with $\widetilde{A}^{adp}_{i}$, and then perform a graph convolution operation to obtain $o^{adp}_{i}$.
The output $o^{adp}$ models multiple hidden spatial dependencies by averaging the $o^{adp}_{i}$ of each head.
\subsubsection{Multi-Component~Fusion}
The final output of the spatial dependency module is as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_15}
o_{dgc} = w^{pre}o^{pre}+w^{adp}o^{adp}
\end{equation}
where $w^{pre},w^{adp}$ are hyperparameters
\section{Experiments} \label{experiments}
\subsection{Datasets}
To evaluate the performance of our model, we conduct experiments on each of the four datasets.
\subsubsection{Dataset~Description}
We use the following four datasets: PEMS03, PEMS04, PEMS07, and PEMS08, which are constructed from four districts, respectively in California.
All data is collected from the Caltrans Performance Measurement System(PeMS)\cite{chen2001freeway}.
The traffic data is aggregated into every 5-minute interval, which means every sensor contains 12 traffic data points per hour.
The detailed information of the dataset is shown in Table \ref{pems}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccc} \toprule
Datasets & \#Nodes & \#Edges & Time range\\ \midrule
PEMS03 & 358 & 547 & 9/1/2018-11/30/2018\\
PEMS04 & 307 & 340 & 1/1/2018-2/28/2018\\
PEMS07 & 883 & 866 & 5/1/2017-8/31/2017 \\
PEMS08 & 170 & 295 & 7/1/2016-8/31/2016 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Dataset description.}
\label{pems}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Data~Preprocessing}
We split all datasets into training set, validation set and test set with the ratio of 6:2:2.
We normalize the data with:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_16}
X_{norm} = \frac{X-mean (X)}{std (X)}
\end{equation}
where $mean (X)$ is the mean of the data, and $std(X)$ is the standard deviation.
We compute the distance-based predefined adjacency matrix using thresholded Gaussian kernel \cite{Shuman2013TheEF}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_17}
\begin{aligned}
w_{ij}=\begin{cases}
exp (-\frac{dist (i,j)^{2}}{\sigma^{2}}) &\text{ if } dist (i,j)^{2}\leq \kappa \\
0 &\text{otherwise }
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $w_{ij}$ is the weight of the edge between node $i$ and node $j$, $dist (i,j)$ is distance between node $i$ and node $j$, which is provided by the dataset.
$\sigma$ is the standard deviation of distances and $\kappa$ is the threshold.
\subsection{Baseline~Methods}
\begin{itemize}
\item MLP: Multilayer Perceptron uses two fully connected layers for traffic forecasting.
\item CNN: Convolutional Neural Network performs convolution operations in the temporal dimension to capture temporal correlations.
\item GRU: Gate Recurrent Unit with fully connected layer is powerful in modeling time series.
\item DCRNN: Diffusion Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network captures the spatial dependency using bidirectional random walks on the graph, and the temporal dependency using the encoder-decoder architecture\cite{Li2018DiffusionCR}.
\item STGCN: Spatio-Temporal Graph Convolutional Networks combines graph convolutional layers and convolutional sequence learning layers, to model spatial and temporal dependency\cite{Yu2018SpatioTemporalGC}.
\item ASTGCN (r): Attention based Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolution Network (r) adopts the spatial-temporal at- tention mechanism to effectively capture the dynamic spatial-temporal correlations in traffic data. Only recent components is used\cite{Guo2019AttentionBS}.
\item Graph WaveNet: Graph WaveNet capture the hidden spatial dependency by developing a adaptive dependency matrix, and enlarges the receptive field a stacked dilated 1D convolution component\cite{Wu2019GraphWF}.
\item AGCRN: Adaptive Graph Convolutional Recurrent Network employs adaptive graph to capture node-specific spatial and temporal correlations\cite{Bai2020AdaptiveGC}.
\item STSGCN: Spatial-Temporal Synchronous Graph Convolutional Network captures the complex localized spatial-temporal correlations through an elaborately designed spatial-temporal synchronous modeling mechanism\cite{song2020spatial}.
\item DGCRN: Dynamic Graph Convolutional Recurrent Network employs a generation method to model fine topology of dynamic graph at each time step\cite{Li2021DynamicGC}.
\item ASTGNN: Attention based Spatial-Temporal Graph Neural Network employs self-attention to capture the spatial correlations in a dynamic manner while also introducing periodic information\cite{guo2021learning}.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Experiment~Settings}
\subsubsection{Metrics}
We deploy Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) as evaluation metrics to measure the performance of the models.
\subsubsection{Optimizer~\&~Early Stopping}
We implement the STGCGRN model using pytorch.
We choose MAE as the loss function and Adam as the optimizer.
We employ early stopping to avoid overfitting.
The model with the best loss of the validation set is selected as the evaluation model.
We repeat the experiment 5 times and report the average value of evaluation metrics.
\subsubsection{Hyperparameters}
Hyperparameters are tuned on the validation set.
One hour historical data is used to construct $R$.
For $D, W$, we let $|d|=1, |w|=1$ and $Q=1$.
For multi-component fusion, we let $w^{pre}=0.1,w^{adp}=0.9$.
We set the number of heads of the node embedding that generates the adaptive adjacency matrix to 4.
The learning rate is set to 0.001 and the batch size is set to 16.
\subsection{Experiment~Results} \label{results}
We compare our models with the baseline methods on four datasets. Table \ref{all_results} shows the results of traffic forecasting performance over the next moment.
Our model achieves the best performance on three other datasets
GRU outperforms MLP and CNN, which means that RNNs have a natural advantage in dealing with sequence data.
MLP, CNN and LSTM only take short-term temporal dependency into consideration, ignoring spatial dependency in traffic data.
In contrast, other models, such as DCRNN, AGCRN, DGCRN, etc., exploit spatial dependencies from different perspectives, performing better than MLP, CNN, and GRU.
DCRNN, STGCN, ASTGCN capture distance-based spatial dependencies through the predefined adjacency matrix, and achieves good performance.
AGCRN benifit a lot from the self-adaptive adjacency matrix, mining hidden spatial dependency.
Graph Wavenet simultaneously model distance-based spatial dependency and hidden spatial dependency.
However, the above models fail to model the dynamic characteristics of the traffic data, which limits the performance of the models.
By modeling dynamic spatial dependencies, DGCRN outperforms other baselines.
Our model captures long-term temporal dependency by mining period characteristics, further enhancing the performance significantly.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccccccccc}
\toprule
Datasets &Metric &MLP &CNN &GRU &DCRNN &STGCN &ASTGCN (r) &Graph Wavenet &AGCRN &STSGCN &DGCRN &ASTGNN &STGCGRN \\ \midrule
PEMS03 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{20.50$\pm$0.12} \\ \RS{24.43$\pm$3.21} \\\RS{31.67$\pm$0.08}} &\thead{\RS{20.99$\pm$0.15} \\ \RS{23.05$\pm$2.72} \\\RS{33.03$\pm$0.21}} &\thead{\RS{20.56$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{22.84$\pm$2.20} \\\RS{33.09$\pm$0.14}} &\thead{\RS{18.39$\pm$0.39} \\ \RS{20.22$\pm$2.83} \\\RS{30.56$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{18.28$\pm$0.39} \\ \RS{17.52$\pm$0.32} \\\RS{30.73$\pm$0.78}} &\thead{\RS{17.85$\pm$0.45} \\ \RS{17.65$\pm$0.79} \\\RS{29.88$\pm$0.65}} &\thead{\RS{14.79$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{14.32$\pm$0.24} \\\RS{25.51$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{15.58$\pm$0.03} \\ \RS{15.19$\pm$0.36} \\\RS{27.50$\pm$0.23}} &\thead{\RS{17.48$\pm$0.15} \\ \RS{16.78$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{29.21$\pm$0.56}} &\thead{\RS{14.96$\pm$0.07} \\ \RS{15.35$\pm$0.32} \\\RS{26.44$\pm$0.24}} &\thead{\RS{14.55$\pm$0.07} \\ \RS{13.66$\pm$0.14} \\\textbf{\RS{24.96$\pm$0.31}}} &\thead{\textbf{\RS{14.12$\pm$0.17}} \\ \textbf{\RS{13.54$\pm$0.33}} \\\RS{25.87$\pm$0.64}} \\ \midrule
PEMS04 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{26.37$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{19.89$\pm$1.10} \\\RS{40.19$\pm$0.12}} &\thead{\RS{27.18$\pm$0.23} \\ \RS{21.94$\pm$1.46} \\\RS{40.95$\pm$0.25}} &\thead{\RS{26.52$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{20.17$\pm$1.67} \\\RS{40.19$\pm$0.03}} &\thead{\RS{23.65$\pm$0.04} \\ \RS{16.05$\pm$0.10} \\\RS{37.12$\pm$0.07}} &\thead{\RS{22.27$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{14.36$\pm$0.12} \\\RS{35.02$\pm$0.19}} &\thead{\RS{22.42$\pm$0.19} \\ \RS{15.87$\pm$0.36} \\\RS{34.75$\pm$0.19}} &\thead{\RS{19.36$\pm$0.02} \\ \RS{13.31$\pm$0.19} \\\RS{31.72$\pm$0.13}} &\thead{\RS{19.33$\pm$0.13} \\ \RS{12.83$\pm$0.07} \\\RS{31.23$\pm$0.21}} &\thead{\RS{21.19$\pm$0.10} \\ \RS{13.90$\pm$0.05} \\\RS{33.65$\pm$0.20}} &\thead{\RS{20.22$\pm$0.12} \\ \RS{13.62$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{31.97$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{18.44$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{12.37$\pm$0.08} \\\RS{31.02$\pm$0.18}} &\textbf{\thead{\RS{18.11$\pm$0.02} \\ \RS{11.96$\pm$0.04} \\\RS{29.88$\pm$0.04}}} \\ \midrule
PEMS07 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{29.56$\pm$0.22} \\ \RS{14.57$\pm$1.68} \\\RS{44.39$\pm$0.19}} &\thead{\RS{30.59$\pm$0.25} \\ \RS{15.69$\pm$1.16} \\\RS{45.36$\pm$0.23}} &\thead{\RS{29.31$\pm$0.16} \\ \RS{13.73$\pm$0.48} \\\RS{44.05$\pm$0.14}} &\thead{\RS{23.60$\pm$0.05} \\ \RS{10.28$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{36.51$\pm$0.05}} &\thead{\RS{27.41$\pm$0.45} \\ \RS{12.23$\pm$0.38} \\\RS{41.02$\pm$0.58}} &\thead{\RS{25.98$\pm$0.78} \\ \RS{11.84$\pm$0.69} \\\RS{39.65$\pm$0.89}} &\thead{\RS{21.22$\pm$0.24} \\ \RS{9.07$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{34.12$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{20.73$\pm$0.08} \\ \RS{8.86$\pm$0.10} \\\RS{34.38$\pm$0.15}} &\thead{\RS{24.26$\pm$0.14} \\ \RS{10.21$\pm$0.05} \\\RS{39.03$\pm$0.27}} &\thead{\RS{20.61$\pm$0.14} \\ \RS{8.90$\pm$0.11} \\\RS{33.48$\pm$0.16}} &\thead{\RS{19.26$\pm$0.17} \\ \RS{8.54$\pm$0.19} \\\RS{32.75$\pm$0.25}} &\textbf{\thead{\RS{17.98$\pm$0.03} \\ \RS{7.50$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{31.20$\pm$0.04}}} \\ \midrule
PEMS08 &\thead{MAE \\ MAPE (\%) \\RMSE} &\thead{\RS{21.35$\pm$0.24} \\ \RS{15.71$\pm$1.77} \\\RS{32.45$\pm$0.11}} &\thead{\RS{21.93$\pm$0.22} \\ \RS{17.11$\pm$2.07} \\\RS{33.14$\pm$0.14}} &\thead{\RS{21.17$\pm$0.11} \\ \RS{13.97$\pm$0.53} \\\RS{32.31$\pm$0.08}} &\thead{\RS{18.22$\pm$0.06} \\ \RS{11.56$\pm$0.04} \\\RS{28.29$\pm$0.09}} &\thead{\RS{18.04$\pm$0.19} \\ \RS{11.16$\pm$0.10} \\\RS{27.94$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{18.86$\pm$0.41} \\ \RS{12.50$\pm$0.66} \\\RS{28.55$\pm$0.49}} &\thead{\RS{15.07$\pm$0.17} \\ \RS{9.51$\pm$0.22} \\\RS{23.85$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{15.90$\pm$0.14} \\ \RS{10.53$\pm$0.21} \\\RS{25.00$\pm$0.17}} &\thead{\RS{17.13$\pm$0.09} \\ \RS{10.96$\pm$0.07} \\\RS{26.18$\pm$0.18}} &\thead{\RS{15.86$\pm$0.18} \\ \RS{10.50$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{24.98$\pm$0.15}} &\thead{\RS{12.72$\pm$0.09} \\ \RS{8.78$\pm$0.20} \\\RS{22.60$\pm$0.13}} &\textbf{\thead{\RS{12.54$\pm$0.01} \\ \RS{8.43$\pm$0.02} \\\RS{21.95$\pm$0.02}}} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Performance comparison of different approaches for traffic flow forecasting.}
\label{all_results}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[MAE]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/ablation/MAE.jpg}
}
\subfloat[MAPE]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/ablation/MAPE.jpg}
}
\subfloat[RMSE]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/ablation/RMSE.jpg}
}
\caption{Ablation study on the PeMS08 dataset.}
\label{ablation_res}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Ablation~Study} \label{results}
To further verify the effectiveness of different components of STGCGRN, we conduct ablation experiments on the PEMS08 dataset.
We design four variants of the STGCGRN model as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item w/o pre: We remove the distance-based predefined adjacency matrix from the spatial dependency module.
\item w/o adp: We remove the self-adaptive adjacency matrix from the spatial dependency module.
\item w/o pre\&adp: We remove the distance-based predefined adjacency matrix and self-adaptive adjacency matrix from the spatial dependency module, replacing them with identity matrix.
\item w/o window: We remove the sliding window in the attention mechanism.
\item w/o period: We remove the period information from STGCGRN.
\end{itemize}
We visualized the MAE, MAPE, RMSE of STGCGRN and its variants in the next 15min, 30min, 45min, 60min, as shown in the Figure~\ref{ablation_res}.
The introduction of periodic information has the most obvious improvement in model performance, which shows that long-term temporal dependency are critical to traffic forecasting.
In addition, with the growth of time, the effect of periodic information becomes more and more obvious.
This is because the error of the decoder gradually accumulate, and the period information can provide the decoder with historical data as a reference to help the decoder correct the error.
The effect of the hidden spatial dependency is second only to the period information, while the improvement of the model by the distance-based spatial dependency is the smallest.
This is because the self-adaptive adjacency matrix is trained with the model, and the learned hidden dependencies are directly related to the downstream task, i.e. traffic prediction.
The predefined adjacency matrix can help to improve the performance of the model without the self-adaptive adjacency matrix, otherwise it has almost no effect, which indicates that the self-adaptive adjacency matrix has learned the part of the distance information that is helpful for prediction during the training process.
In addition, the sliding window also helps to improve the performance of the model, indicating that the prior information that the time near the prediction time is of great help to the prediction task is important, which helps the attention mechanism to converge to a better position.
\subsection{Multi-Head~Mechanism~Study} \label{study_multihead}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccc} \toprule
& MAE & MAPE & RMSE\\ \midrule
1H & \RS{12.62$\pm$0.04} & \RS{8.46$\pm$0.05} & \RS{22.13$\pm$0.04}\\
2H & \RS{12.58$\pm$0.02} & \RS{8.45$\pm$0.02} & \RS{22.08$\pm$0.01}\\
4H & \RS{12.56$\pm$0.01} & \RS{8.44$\pm$0.04} & \RS{22.02$\pm$0.03}\\
8H & \textbf{12.54$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{8.43$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{21.95$\pm$0.02} \\
16H & \RS{12.55$\pm$0.01} & \RS{8.44$\pm$0.05} & \RS{21.99$\pm$0.01} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Multi-Head mechanism study on the PeMS08 dataset.}
\label{multihead}
\end{table}
Since there may be multiple hidden spatial dependencies between nodes, our work introduces the multi-head mechanism, hoping that $E_1$ and $E_2$ can model different hidden spatial dependencies.
We conducted experiments to verify that the introduction of the multi-head mechanism improves the performance of the model.
The experimental results are shown in the Table~\ref{multihead}.
Increasing the number of heads bring performance gain.
The model performs best when the number of heads is 8.
This shows that as the number of heads increases, the model captures more hidden spatial dependency information, which verifies the effectiveness of the multi-head mechanism in the current scenario.
\subsection{Comparative Experiment}
\begin{table}
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lccc} \toprule
& MAE & MAPE & RMSE\\ \midrule
STGCGRN & \RS{12.80$\pm$0.01} & \RS{8.60$\pm$0.03} & \RS{22.17$\pm$0.02}\\
STGCGRN\_rev & \textbf{12.54$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{8.43$\pm$0.02} & \textbf{21.95$\pm$0.02} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Comparative experiment on the PeMS08 dataset.}
\label{comparative_exp}
\end{table}
We explore how to better combine single-node periodic information and multi-node spatial dependencies to prevent periodic information from multiple nodes from interfering with each other.
The result is shown in Figure \ref{comparative_exp}. STGCGRN\_rev is a variatn of STGCGRN where the order of the DGCGRU layer and the attention module is reversed.
We can see that the performance of STGCGRN\_rev declines, indicating that modeling multi-node spatial dependencies first will cause the periodic information of each node to interfere with each other when mining periodic information later. The architecture of STGCGRN is better.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, We proposed Spatial-Temporal Graph Convolutional Gated Recurrent Network (STGCGRN) for traffic forecasting.
For temporal dependency, we model short-term dependency by processing recent traffic data with GRU, and capture long-term dependencies by mining daily and weekly periodicity.
For spatial dependency, we model distance-based spatial dependency and multiple hidden spatial dependencies with predefined adjacency matrix and adaptive adjacency matrix, respectively.
Experiments and analysis on four datasets show that our model achieves state-of-the-art results.
The code have been released at: https://github.com/ZLBryant/STGCGRN.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Real data analysis often provides many justifiable choices at each step of the analysis, such as how measurements are combined and transformed, how missing data and outliers are handled, and even the choice of a statistical model. Generally, there is not a single justifiable choice for each decision researchers need to make, and several justifiable options exist for each step of the data analysis \citep{gelman2014statistical}. As a consequence, raw data do not uniquely give rise to a single data set for analysis. Instead, researchers are faced with a set of processed data sets, each of which is determined by a unique combination of choices -- a multiverse of data sets. As analyses performed on each data set can lead to different results, the data multiverse directly implies a multiverse of statistical results.
In recent years, concerns have been raised about how researchers can abuse this flexibility in data analysis to increase the probability of observing a statistically significant result. The reason researchers engage in such questionable research practices is that prestigious journals with high impact factors tend to predominantly publish statistically significant results \citep{begg1988publication,dwan2008systematic,fanelli2012negative}. When researchers select and report the results of a subset of all possible analyses that produce significant results \citep{gadbury2012inappropriate,brodeur2016star,simmons2016false}, they dramatically increase the actual false-positive rates despite their nominal endorsement of a low Type 1 error rate (e.g., $5\%$).
Two solutions have been proposed to deal with the problem of p-hacking. The first is to require researchers to specify their statistical analysis plan before they look at the raw data. Such preregistered studies control the Type 1 error rate by reducing flexibility during the data analysis. Preregistration is easily implemented for replication studies, where researchers specify they will perform the same analysis as was performed in an earlier study. For more novel studies, preregistration can be difficult because researchers often lack sufficient knowledge to be able to foresee how they should deal with all possible decisions that need to be made when analyzing the data. The second solution acknowledges that it is often not feasible to specify a single analysis before the data has been collected, and instead promotes transparently reporting all possible analyses that can be performed. \cite{steegen2016increasing} introduced multiverse analysis which aims to use all reasonable options for data processing to construct a multiverse of data sets, and then separately perform the same analysis of interest on each of these data sets. The main tool used to interpret the output of a multiverse analysis is a histogram of p-values that summarizes all the p-values obtained for a given effect. Subsequently, researchers typically discuss the results in terms of the proportion of significant p-values. The procedure not only provides a detailed picture of the robustness or fragility of results across different choices for processing but also allows researchers to explore key choices that are most consequential in the fluctuation of their results.
Multiverse analysis represents an invaluable step toward a transparent science. The method has become increasingly popular since it has been developed, and it has been applied in several experimental contexts, ranging from cognitive development and risk perception \citep{mirman2021advancing}, assessment of parental behavior \citep{modecki2020tuning}, and memory task \citep{wessel2020multiverse}. While parts of the applications remain confined to exploratory purposes with the scope to define brief guidelines for conducting a multiverse analysis \citep{dragicevic2019increasing,liu2020boba}, other studies aim to stimulate interest in this method as a robustness assessment for mediation analysis \citep{rijnhart2021assessing}, or an exhaustive modelling approach \citep{frey2021identifying}. This research approach permits to exhibit the stability and robustness of discoveries, not just between different exclusion criteria or modifications of the variables, but between different decisions for all phases of the elaboration of the data. This feature can be particularly interesting and appealing from the perspective of the replicability crisis in quantitative psychology \citep{open2015estimating}, and as an attempt to increase the transparency and credibility of scientific results \citep{nosek2014method}. Multiverse analysis can therefore be extended not only to the pre-processing step but also to the methods used for the analysis (the “multiverse of methods”) \citep{harder2020multiverse}.
The explicit flexibility in multiverse analysis is not to be condemned, as it reflects an effort to transparently describe the uncertainty about the best analysis strategy. However, if on the one hand the exploration of multiple analytic choices in data analysis must be advocated, on the other it is challenging to draw reliable inferences from such a large number of statistical analyses. Although most researchers have interpreted the results from multiverse analysis descriptively, while doing so it is extremely tempting to make claims about analyses that yield statistically significant results, and those that do not. However, a selective focus on a subset of statistically significant results once again introduces the problem of selective interference \citep{benjamini2020selective}, and can potentially inflate the rate at which claims about effects are false positives.
At present, the only method that allows researchers to make formal inferences in multiverse analysis is specification curve analysis \citep{simonsohn2020specification}. Analogously to multiverse analysis, it requires researchers to consider the entire set of reasonable combinations of data analytic decisions, called specifications; subsequently, these specifications are used jointly to derive a test for the null hypothesis of interest. If the null hypothesis is rejected, researchers can claim with a certain maximum error rate (e.g., $5\%$) that there exists at least one specification where the null hypothesis is false. In the most general case of non-experimental data, the inferential support is based on bootstrapping techniques and is valid only in linear regression models (LMs) without the possibility to provide an extension to other distributions for the dependent variable encompassed by generalized linear models (GLMs). More importantly, this methodology lacks a formal description of the statistical properties of the test, allows to test only a single hypothesis and the problem of controlling multiplicity when testing different hypotheses is not treated. A more formal study of the method's performance is provided in Sections \ref{sec:inference} and \ref{sec:sims}.
Because researchers are often interested in models more complex than LMs, want to explore several different processing steps, and possibly wish to investigate more null hypotheses together, it would be beneficial if more advanced analysis methods for multiverse analysis were developed. Such more advanced methods would, for instance, allow psychometricians to identify a group of predictors that are associated with a given outcome, or neuroscientists to identify brain regions activated by a stimulus. To summarize, the multiverse analysis framework makes it possible to manage researchers degrees of freedom in the data analysis, but the literature still lacks a formal inferential approach that allows researchers to draw reliable inferences about (sets of) specific analyses included in multiverse analysis.
In this paper, we define the Post-selection Inference approach to Multiverse Analysis (PIMA) which is a flexible and general inference approach for multiverse analysis that accounts for all possible models, i.e., the multiverse of reasonable analyses. In the framework of GLMs, we consider the null hypothesis that a given predictor of interest is not associated with the outcome, i.e., that the corresponding coefficient is zero. Moreover, we assume researchers consider all reasonable models that are given by different choices of data processing. We provide a resampling-based procedure based on the sign-flip score test of \cite{hemerik2020robust} and \cite{stdScore} that allows researchers to test the null hypothesis by merging information from all reasonable models, and show that this framework permits inferences about the coefficient of interest on three different levels. First, considering the predictor of interest we compute a {\it global p-value} considering all models, so researchers can state whether the coefficient is non-null in at least one of the models in multiverse analysis. Secondly, we compute individual {\it adjusted p-values} for each model and thus obtain the set of models where the coefficient is non-null. Since PIMA accounts for multiplicity, researchers are able to freely choose the preferred model post-hoc, after trying all models and seeing results. In other words, the procedure allows for selective inference, but unlike p-hacking, researchers can select statistically significant analyses from the multiverse while controlling the Type 1 error rate. Finally, we define a third inference strategy for multiverse analysis where researchers provide a lower confidence bound for the {\it true discovery proportion} (TDP), i.e., the proportion of models with a non-null coefficient. In this analysis, researchers cannot individually identify statistically significant models in the multiverse, but in some cases it may be more powerful to report the true discovery proportion than individual p-values. Finally, we argue that the method can be easily extended to the case of multiple hypotheses on different coefficients. The resulting procedure is general, flexible, and powerful, and can be applied to many different contexts. It is valid as long as all the considered models are reasonable and specified in advance, before carrying out the analysis.
The structure of the paper is the following. In Section \ref{sec:flipscore} we define the framework and construct the desired resampling-based test. Subsequently, in Section \ref{sec:inference} we use the test to make inference in the multiverse framework. Then we study the properties of the PIMA method and we apply it to real data in Sections \ref{sec:sims} and \ref{sec:dataanalysis}, respectively. We conclude with Section \ref{sec:conclusion} that contains a short remark of the main results, with some references to still open issues in multiverse analysis and practical recommendations to the PIMA methodology. All the analyses and simulations were implemented using the statistical software R \citep{R}.
All R code and data associated with the real data application are available at
\nolinkurl{https://osf.io/usrq7/?view_only=4c40978b0080496c98bb5b13592278b4},
while further analyses can be developed trough the dedicated package Jointest \citep{Jointest} available at \nolinkurl{https://github.com/livioivil/jointest}.
\section{The sign-flip score test}\label{sec:flipscore}
In the context of multiverse analysis, there is not a single pre-specified model, while we are interested in testing the effect of a given predictor on a response variable in the multiverse of possible models. In order to test the global null hypothesis that the predictor has no effect in any of the considered models, one needs to define a proper test statistic and its distribution under the null hypothesis. Finding a solution within the parametric framework represents a formidable challenge, due to the inherent dependence among the univariate test statistics, which in most of cases is very high and usually non-linear. The resampling-based approach usually provides a solution to this multivariate challenge. In this section, we rely on the sign-flip score test of \cite{hemerik2020robust} and \cite{stdScore} to define an asymptotically exact test for the global null hypothesis of interest. First, we specify the structure of the models and introduce the sign-flip score test for a single model specification. Subsequently, we give a natural extension to the multivariate framework.
\subsection{Model specification}
We consider the framework of GLMs. Let $Y=(y_1,\ldots,y_n)^\top\in\mathbb{R}^n$ be $n$ independent observations of a variable of interest, which is assumed to belong to the exponential dispersion family with density of the form
\begin{equation*}
{f}(y_i, \theta_i, \phi_i)=
\exp\left\{\frac{y_i\theta_i-b(\theta_i)}{a(\phi_i)}+c(y_i,\phi_i)\right\}\qquad (i=1,\ldots,n),
\end{equation*}
where $\theta_i$ and $\phi_i$ are the canonical and the dispersion parameter, respectively. According to the usual literature of GLMs \citep{agresti}, the mean and variance functions are
\begin{equation*}
\mu_i=E[y_i]=b'(\theta_i),\qquad v(\mu_i)=b''(\theta)=\frac{\myvar(y_i)}{a(\phi_i)}.
\end{equation*}
We suppose that the mean of $Y$ depends on an observed predictor of interest $X=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^\top\in\mathbb{R}^n$ and $m$ other observed predictors $Z=(z_1,\ldots,z_n)^\top\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times m}$ through a non linear relation
\begin{equation*}
g(\mu_i)=\eta_i=x_i\beta+z_i\gamma
\end{equation*}
where $g(\cdot)$ denotes the link function, $\beta\in\mathbb{R}$ is a parameter of interest, and $\gamma\in\mathbb{R}^m$ is a vector of nuisance parameters.
Finally we define the following quantities, that will be used in the next sections:
\begin{align*}
D&=\text{diag}\{d_i\}=\text{diag}\left\{\frac{\partial \mu_i}{\partial \eta_i}\right\}\\
V&=\text{diag}\{v_i\}=\text{diag}\{\myvar(y_i)\}\\
W&=D V^{-1}D.
\end{align*}
\subsection{Hypothesis testing for an individual model via sign-flip score test}
Given a model specified as in the previous section, we are interested in testing the null hypothesis $\hp:\beta=0$ that the predictor $X$ does not influence the response $Y$ with significance level $\alpha\in [0,1)$. Here $\gamma$ is estimated by $\hat{\gamma}$, and is therefore a vector of nuisance parameters. We consider the hypothesis $\beta=0$ for simplicity of exposition, however the sign-flip approach can be extended to the more general case $\beta=\beta_0$.
Relying on the work of \cite{hemerik2020robust}, \cite{stdScore} provide the sign-flip score test, a robust and asymptotically exact test for $\hp$ that uses $B$ random sign-flipping transformations. Even though larger values of $B$ tend to give more power, to have non-zero power it is sufficient to take $B\geq 1/\alpha$. Hence consider $B$ diagonal matrices $\fmat[1],\ldots,\fmat[B]\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$, where the first is fixed as the identity $\fmat[1]=I$, and the diagonal elements of the others are independently and uniformly drawn from $\{-1,1\}$. Each matrix $\fmat$ defines a flipped effective score
\begin{equation}
\Te^b=n^{-1/2}X^\top W^{1/2}(I-Q) V^{-1/2} \fmat (Y-\hat{\mu}) \label{eq:eff}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
Q=W^{1/2}Z(Z^\top WZ)^{-1}Z^\top W^{1/2}
\end{equation*}
is a particular hat matrix, symmetric and idempotent, and $\hat{\mu}$ is a $\sqrt{n}$-consistent estimate of the true value $\mu^*$ computed under $\hp$. This effective score may be written as a sum of individual contributions with flipped signs, as following.
\begin{equation}
\Te^{b} =\sum_{i=1}^n \fmat_{i,i}\nu_i,\qquad
\nu_i =\frac{(y_i-\hat{\mu}_i)x_id_i}{v_i} - X^\top WZ (Z^\top WZ)^{-1} \frac{(y_i-\hat{\mu}_i)z_id_i}{v_i}.
\label{eq:sum_contr}
\end{equation}
Here $\nu_i$ is the contribution of the $i$-th observation to the effective score.
An assumption is needed on the effective score computed when the true value $\gamma^*$ of the nuisance $\gamma$, and so the true value $\mu^*$ of $\mu$, are known. This quantity may be written analogously to \eqref{eq:eff} and \eqref{eq:sum_contr}, as
\begin{equation}
\Te^{*b} = n^{-1/2}X^\top W^{1/2}(I-Q) V^{-1/2} \fmat(Y-\mu^*)=\sum_{i=1}^n \fmat_{i,i}\nu^*_i. \label{eq:eff_star}
\end{equation}
\begin{assumption}\label{a:std}
As $n\rightarrow\infty$,
\[\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\myexp(\nu_i^{*2})\longrightarrow c\]
for some constant $c>0$. Moreover, for any $\varepsilon >0$
\[\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n \myexp\left(\nu_i^{*2}\cdot\mathbf{1}\left\{\frac{|\nu_i^*|}{\sqrt{n}}>\varepsilon \right\} \right)\longrightarrow 0\]
where $\mathbf{1}\{\cdot\}$ denotes the indicator function.
\end{assumption}
Given this assumption, the sign-flip score test of \cite{stdScore} relies on the standardized flipped scores, obtained dividing each effective score \eqref{eq:eff} by its standard deviation:
\begin{equation}
\Ts^b= \Te^b\, \myvar(\Te^b\,|\,\fmat)^{-1/2} \label{eq:std}
\end{equation}
where
\[\myvar(\Te^b\,|\,\fmat)=n^{-1} X^\top W^{1/2} (I-Q) \fmat (I-Q) \fmat (I-Q)W^{1/2}X + o_P(1).\]
Let $|\Ts^{(1)}|\leq\ldots\leq |\Ts^{(B)}|$ be the sorted absolute values of the standardized scores, and let $\lceil\cdot\rceil$ denote the ceiling function. Then the test is defined as following.
\begin{theorem}[De Santis et al., 2022]\label{T:stdScore}
Under Assumption \ref{a:std}, the test that rejects $\hp$ when $|\Ts^1|>|\Ts^{\lceil(1-\alpha)B\rceil}|$ is an $\alpha$-level test, asymptotically as $n\rightarrow\infty$.
\end{theorem}
The test of Theorem \ref{T:stdScore} is exact in the particular case of LMs, and second-moment exact in GLMs. The second-moment exactness means that under $\hp$ the test statistics $\Ts^b$ do not necessarily have the same distribution, but share the same mean and variance, independently of the sign flip; this provides exact control of the Type I error rate, for practical purposes, even for finite sample size. Furthermore, the test is robust to some model misspecifications, as long as the mean $\mu$ and the link $g$ are correctly specified. In particular, under minimal assumptions the test is still asymptotically exact for any generic misspecification of the variance $V$ \citep{stdScore}.
\section{PIMA: Post-selection Inference in the Multiverse Analysis}\label{sec:inference}
\subsection{Hypothesis testing in the multiverse via combination of sign-flip score tests} \label{sec:combine}
In the previous section we presented an asymptotically exact test for a prefixed null hypothesis. Now we consider the framework of multiverse analysis, where we define $K$ plausible models, given by different processing of the data. Each model $k=1,\ldots,K$ can be characterized by different specifications of the response $Y_k$ (e.g., through outlier deletion or leverage point removal), of the predictors $X_k$ and $Z_k$ (e.g., combining and transforming variables), and of the link function $g_k$. Let $\beta_k$ be the coefficient of interest in model $k$, and define the null hypothesis $\hp_k:\beta_k=0$ analogously to the previous section. Then consider the global (i.e., multivariate) null hypothesis as the intersection of the $K$ individual hypotheses:
\begin{equation*}
\hp=\bigcap_{k=1}^K \hp_k\,:\,\beta_k=0\text{ for all }k=1,\ldots,K.
\end{equation*}
This global hypothesis $\hp$ is true when the predictor of interest does not have any relation with the response within any of the $K$ models; it is false when such a relation exists in at least one of the models. To test $\hp$, we will extend the test of Theorem \ref{T:stdScore} similarly to the extension given in the case of the linear model of \cite{permMultisplit}.
To construct the desired global test, first we compute the flipped standardized scores \eqref{eq:std} for all models, using the same sign-flipping transformations. Hence we obtain $\Ts_1^b,\ldots,\Ts_K^b$ for $b=1,\ldots,B$. Intuitively, the $n$ scalar contributions $\nu_i$ in \eqref{eq:sum_contr} are now $n$ vectors of length $K$, each containing the contributions of the $i$-th observation to each one of the $K$ models. The same sign-flip for observation $i$, $\fmat_{i,i}$, is therefore applied to the whole vector. This resampling strategy will ensure that the test has an asymptotically exact control of the Type I error.
Subsequently we combine these flipped standardized scores through any function $\psi:\mathbb{R}^K\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}$ that is non-decreasing in each argument, such as the (weighted) mean and the maximum. This way we obtain the global test statistics
\begin{align}
T^b=\psi\left(|\Ts_1^b|,\ldots,|\Ts_K^b| \right)\qquad (b=1,\ldots,B). \label{def:combTs}
\end{align}
The following theorem gives a test for $\hp$ that relies on $T^1,\ldots,T^B$.
\begin{theorem}\label{T:multi}
Suppose that Assumption \ref{a:std} holds for all the considered models. Then the test that rejects $\hp$ when $T^1>T^{\lceil(1-\alpha)B\rceil}$ is an $\alpha$-level test, asymptotically as $n\rightarrow\infty$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Throughout the proof, we will denote the $k$-th model adding a pedix $k$ to the corresponding quantities that vary between models. First, for simplicity of notation we consider only specifications that maintain the sample size, while we do not consider outlier deletion or leverage point removal. This way, the response vector $Y$ is the same between models.
Fix any $k\in\{1,\ldots,K\}$, and suppose that $\hp_k\,:\,\beta_k=0$ is true, so that the coefficient of interest is null in the $k$-th model. The flipped effective scores \eqref{eq:eff} are
\[\Te_k^b=n^{-1/2}X_k^\top W_k^{1/2}(I-Q_k) V_k^{-1/2} \fmat[b](Y-\hat{\mu}_k)\qquad (b=1,\ldots,B)\]
where
\[Q_k=W_k^{1/2}Z_k(Z_k^\top W_k Z_k)^{-1}Z_k^\top W_k^{1/2}\]
and $\hat{\mu}_k$ is a $\sqrt{n}$-consistent estimate of the true value $\mu_k^*$ computed under $\hp_k$. Consider the flipped effective scores computed when the true value $\gamma_k^*$ of the nuisance $\gamma_k$, and so the true value $\mu_k^*$ of $\mu_k$, are known as in \eqref{eq:eff_star},
\[
\Te_k^{*b}=n^{-1/2}X_k^\top W_k^{1/2}(I-Q_k) V_k^{-1/2} \fmat[b](Y-\mu_k^*)\qquad (b=1,\ldots,B).
\]
\cite{hemerik2020robust} show that $\Te_k^b$ e $\Te_k^{*b}$ are asymptotically equivalent as $n\rightarrow\infty$ (see the proof of Theorem 2).
Subsequently, assume that the global null hypothesis $\hp$ is true. Hence all individual hypotheses $\hp_k$ are true, and $\beta_k$ is null in all considered models. Consider the $KB$-dimensional vectors of effective scores
\begin{align*}
S &=(\Te_1^1,\ldots,\Te_1^B,\ldots,\Te_K^1,\ldots,\Te_K^B)^\top\\
S^* &= (\Te_1^{*1},\ldots,\Te_1^{*B},\ldots,\Te_K^{*1},\ldots,\Te_K^{*B})^\top
\end{align*}
that are asymptotically equivalent. For any couple of models $k,j\in\{1,\ldots,K\}$ and any couple of transformations $b,c\in\{1,\ldots,B\}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\myexp(\Te_k^{*b})&=0\\
\mycov(\Te_k^{*b},\Te_j^{*c})&=n^{-1}X_k^\top W_k^{1/2}(I-Q_k) V_k^{-1/2}\myexp\left(\fmat[b](Y-\mu_k^*)
(Y-\mu_j^*)^\top \fmat[c]\right) V_j^{-1/2}(I-Q_j)W_j^{1/2}X_j \\
&=
\begin{cases}
\xi_{kj}\quad\text{if } b=c\\
0\quad\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
where
\[\xi_{kj}=n^{-1}X_k^\top W_k^{1/2}(I-Q_k) V_k^{-1/2}\text{diag}\left((Y-\mu_k^*)
(Y-\mu_j^*)^\top\right) V_j^{-1/2}(I-Q_j)W_j^{1/2}X_j.\]
Note that $S^*$ can be written as the sum of $n$ independent vectors. As Assumption \ref{a:std} holds for all models, by the multivariate Lindeberg-Feller central limit theorem \citep{vaart}
\[S,S^*\limdistr \multinormal[NB]\left(\mathbf{0},\Xi\otimes I\right)\]
where $\mathcal{N}$ denotes the multivariate normal distribution, $\otimes$ is the Kronecker product, and
\begin{align*}
I\in\mathbb{R}^{B\times B},\qquad \Xi=\left(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\xi_{kj}\right)\in\mathbb{R}^{K\times K}.
\end{align*}
Equivalently, we can say that
\begin{align*}
\begin{pmatrix}
\Te_1^1 & \ldots & \Te_K^1\\
\vdots & & \vdots\\
\Te_1^B & \ldots & \Te_K^B
\end{pmatrix}
\limdistr \matrixnormal[s\times B]\left(0,I,\Xi\right)
\end{align*}
where $\mathcal{MN}$ denotes the matrix normal distribution. Hence the $B$ vectors of effective scores $(\Te_1^1,\ldots,\Te_K^1),\ldots, (\Te_1^B,\ldots,\Te_K^B)$ converge to i.i.d.~random vectors.
For each $k$, the standardized scores $\Ts_k^b$ are obtained dividing the effective scores $\Te_k^b$ by their standard deviation $\myvar(\Te_k^b\,|\,\fmat)^{1/2}$, as in \eqref{eq:std}. \cite{stdScore} show that these standard deviations are asymptotically independent of $b$ (see the proof of Theorem 2). Therefore the $B$ vectors of the absolute values of standardized scores $(|\Ts_1^1|,\ldots,|\Ts_K^1|),\ldots,$ $(|\Ts_1^B|,\ldots,|\Ts_K^B|)$ converge to i.i.d.~random vectors. As a result, the combinations of their elements $T^1,\ldots,T^B$ defined in \eqref{def:combTs} converge to i.i.d.~random variables. Moreover, for each variable $k$ high values of $|\Ts_k^1|$ correspond to evidence against $\hp_k$ and $\psi$ is non-decreasing in each argument, and so high values of $T^1$ correspond to evidence against $\hp$. From \cite{hemerik2020robust} (see Lemma 1),
\[\lim_{n\to\infty}P\left(T^1 > T^{(\lceil (1-\alpha)B\rceil)}\right) = \frac{\lfloor\alpha B\rfloor}{B}\leq\alpha.\]
Finally, consider the more general case where we allow also for specifications that change the sample size, and so the response vector $Y_k$ may vary between models and have different lengths. The proof is written analogously to the previous one, with a slight modification of the sign-flipping matrices within each model. In model $k$ we use $\fmat_k$, obtained from $\fmat$ by removing the diagonal elements corresponding to the removed observations.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{T:multi} gives an asymptotically exact test for the global null hypothesis $\hp$ that the coefficient of interest is null in all considered models. A global p-value can be immediately obtained as
\[p= \frac{1}{B} \sum_{b=1}^B \mathbf{1} \{T^b\geq T^1\}\]
\citep{exact}.
An important role is played by the choice of the function $\psi$ that combines the flipped standardized scores to define the global test statistic \eqref{def:combTs}. There is a plethora of possible choices, anyone of them having different power properties in different settings. The most intuitive choices are the mean
\begin{align}
T_{\text{mean}}^b=\frac{1}{K}\sum_{i=1}^K |\Ts_k^b|\qquad (b=1,\ldots,B)\label{def:mean}
\end{align}
and the maximum
\begin{align}
T_{\text{max}}^b=\max_k |\Ts_k^b|\qquad (b=1,\ldots,B) \label{def:max}
\end{align}
but the definition of the test remains flexible and general, allowing for several combinations. Other possible global test statistics can be obtained transforming the standardized scores $\Ts_k^b$ in p-values $p_k^b$, and then considering p-value combinations. The p-values can be defined either through parametric inversion of the scores or using ranks; we suggest this second choice, where
\[p_k^b= \frac{1}{B} \sum_{c=1}^B \mathbf{1} \{|\Ts_k^c|\geq |\Ts_k^b|\}\qquad (k=1,\ldots,K;\;b=1,\ldots,B).\]
Subsequently, the p-values can be combined with different methods such as those described and compared in \cite{pesarin}. We mention especially \cite{fisher}
\begin{align}
T_{\text{Fisher}}^b=-2 \sum_{k=1}^K \log p_k^b \qquad(b=1,\ldots,B)\label{def:fisher}
\end{align}
and Liptak/Stouffer \citep{liptak}
\begin{align*}
T_{\text{Liptak}}^b=- \sum_{k=1}^K \zeta(p_k^b)\qquad (b=1,\ldots,B
\end{align*}
where $\zeta(\cdot)$ denotes the quantile function of the standard normal distribution.
\subsection{Post-selection Inference
In the previous section we considered different plausible specifications of a GLM and defined the global null hypothesis $\hp$ in which a predictor of interest does not influence the response in any of these models. We constructed a test that combines the models' standardized scores to test $\hp$ with level $\alpha$, and so ensures a weak control of the FWER. Therefore, if $\hp$ is rejected, we can state with confidence $1-\alpha$ that there exists at least one model where the predictor of interest has an influence on the response variable. In this section we show that the global test statistics $T^b$ defined in \eqref{def:combTs} can be used to make additional inferences on the models in two ways. We rely on the closed testing framework \citep{closed}, which has been proven to be the optimal way to construct multiple testing procedures, as all FWER, TDP, and related methods are either equivalent to or can be improved by it \citep{only}. It is based on the principle of testing different subsets of hypotheses by means of a valid $\alpha$-level local test, which in this case is the test of Theorem \ref{T:multi}.
First, to obtain adjusted p-values for each individual model, we apply the maxT-method of \cite{westyoung}, which corresponds to using as global test statistic the maximum defined in \eqref{def:max}. This procedure allows for a dramatic shortcut of the closed testing framework, and is fast and feasible even for high values of $K$ and $B$. The resulting p-values are adjusted for multiplicity, and so ensure strong control of the FWER. Researchers can postpone the choice of the preferred model after seeing the data, while still obtaining valid p-values; used in this way, the method allows researchers to make selective inferences. Where selective inference is a cause of the replication crisis when error rates are not controlled \citep{benjamini2020selective}, the PIMA procedure provides strong FWER control, allowing researchers to select a model after analyzing a multiverse of models without inflating the risk of a false positive.
Secondly, we can construct a lower ($1-\alpha$)-confidence bound for the proportion of models where the coefficient is non-null (TDP), using the general framework of \cite{genovese2} and \cite{exploratory} or, when the combining function $\psi$ can be written as a sum, the shortcut of \cite{sumsome}. The method allows to compute a confidence bound for the TDP not only for the whole set of models, but also simultaneously over all possible subsets without any adjustment of the $\alpha$-level. Simultaneity ensures that the procedure is not compromised by selective model selection. In this framework we are not able to individually identify statistically significant models, but in some cases reporting the TDP may be more powerful than individual adjusted p-values.
To conclude, the PIMA approach allows to make selective inference on the parameter of interest in the multiverse of models, providing not only a global p-value but also individual adjusted p-values and lower confidence bounds for the TDP of subsets of models. The PIMA procedure is exact only asymptotically in the sample size $n$; in spite of this, we will show through simulations that it maintains a good control of the Type I error even for small values of $n$. Furthermore, as shown in the real data analysis of Section \ref{sec:dataanalysis}, the same inference framework can be trivially extended to the case where we are interested in testing multiple parameters, i.e, where $\beta$ is a vector. Analogously to the extension from a single model to the multiverse, it is sufficient to define global test statistics \eqref{def:combTs} for all the individual parameters of interest using the same random sign-flipping transformations.
\subsection{Comparing PIMA with other proposals}
In this section we discuss and evaluate possible competitors to the PIMA procedure to test the global null hypothesis $\hp$. A first naive approach would be to rely on a parametric method. However, after computing a test for each model, there is the need to combine the univariate tests into a multivariate one. Since these tests coming from different specifications are generally non-independent and their dependence is very hard to model formally, the safest option is to use a Bonferroni correction. This approach has the invaluable advantage of simplicity, but has very low power in practice (as shown in the simulation results). This is mainly due to the strong correlation among model estimates that usually arises when different specifications of the same model are tested.
As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:intro}, the specification curve analysis of \cite{simonsohn2020specification} presents a first attempt to cast the descriptive approach of the multiverse analysis into an inferential framework. Two approaches are proposed. The first one relies on a naive permutation of the tested predictor followed by a refit of the models; the subsequent combination of the test statistics of each model follows the same logic exposed in Section \ref{sec:combine}. This method is only valid when the predictors are orthogonal. Since orthogonal predictors are typically limited to experimental designs, this approach is not very appealing in non-experimental designs. Furthermore, the method lacks statistical power when there are strong effects of the confounders in $Z$.
The second approach can be used in the more general case of non-experimental settings. For each specification, the model with the observed data is fitted (i.e., $y_i= \beta x_i + \gamma z_i + \varepsilon_i $), yielding the estimates of parameters $\beta$ and $\gamma$. A new dependent variable $\boot{y}_i$ is generated by subtracting the estimated effect of the predictor of interest $x_i$ on $y_i$: $\boot{y}_i = y_i – \hat{\beta} x_i = (\beta - \hat{\beta}) x_i + \gamma z_i + \varepsilon_i$, where $\hat{\beta}$ is the sample estimate of $\beta$. The random variable $(\beta - \hat{\beta})$ has zero-mean, therefore a null distribution of $\hat \beta$ can be obtained by re-fitting the model on bootstrapped data $\boot{y}_i,\ x_i,\ z_i$.
The resulting bootstrapped distribution of $\hat{\beta}$ is used to compute the p-value for $\hp$. Subsequently, the same resampling scheme is applied to each specification, and the resulting p-values are merged through appropriate combinations such as Fisher \citep{fisher} and Liptak/Stouffer \citep{liptak}.
We claim that this approach is largely improved by PIMA. We mention some points here. 1) The univariate test of the bootstrapped method is only asymptotically exact, while the sign-flip score test that PIMA relies on has univariate exact control in LMs and second-moment exactness in GLMs. 2) The bootstrapped method is confined to LMs while the extension to GLMs proposed by \cite{simonsohn2020specification} is not valid in our view. The authors propose to fit a GLM and create the $\boot{y}_i=g^{-1}(g(y_i)-\hat \beta x_i)$ followed by a rounding step to get plausible values of the distribution (e.g., 0 or 1 values of a binomial GLM, integers for a Poisson model, etc.). However, this proposal results to be very problematic since $g(y_i)$ produces non-finite values in many models (e.g., a binomial GLM with $g(y_i)=logit(y_i/(1-y_i))$ gets $+\infty$ and $-\infty$ for $y_i=1$ and $y_i=0$, respectively). Furthermore, the rounding step affects the variance of the bootstrapped test statistics, which is therefore different from the variance of the test statistic computed on the observed data. Hence we discourage the use of the proposal of \cite{simonsohn2020specification} in the case of GLMs. 3) The sign-flip score test is very robust to heteroscedasticity while, to the best of our knowledge, there is not any formal proof of robustness for the bootstrap approach. 4) Last but not least, specification curve analysis only provides weak control of the FWER, while PIMA allows for post-selection inference, i.e., strong control of the FWER. In Section \ref{sec:conclusion} we will discuss why this last point can be of critical importance in many practical situations.
\section{Simulations}\label{sec:sims}
The following simulation study is aimed at assessing the control of Type I error and quantifying the power of the global test of Theorem \ref{T:multi}. We set a common framework for all simulations, where each model has a predictor of interest $X$ and nine confounders $Z_1,\ldots, Z_9$. These ten variables are generated from a multivariate normal distribution with mean zero, unitary variance $\sigma^2=1$ and equal covariance $\rho=0.4$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{pmatrix}X\\
Z_{1}\\
\vdots\\
Z_{9}
\end{pmatrix} & \sim & \mathcal{N}\left[\left(\begin{array}{c}
0\\
0\\
\vdots\\
0
\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\sigma^2 & \rho & \ldots & \rho \\
\rho & \sigma^2& \ldots & \rho \\
\vdots & \vdots & & \vdots\\
\rho & \rho & \ldots &\sigma^2\\
\end{array}\right)\right]\\
\end{eqnarray*}
Then the response $Y$ is generated through a GLM, taking
\[g(\mu_i) = x_i\beta + \sum_{j=1}^{9} z_{ji}\gamma_j\]
(notice that no intercept appears). In particular, we consider a Gaussian LM in Section \ref{sec:gaussian}, and a GLM with binomial response and logit link function in Section \ref{sec:binomial}. Throughout simulations, we vary the tested coefficient $\beta$ and the nuisance parameters $\gamma$, as well as the sample size $n$.
In each simulation, we consider eight models derived by combining two different transformations of the first three confounders $Z_1,Z_2,Z_3$: a linear and a polynomial transformation (parabolic, two predictors for each confounder). The remaining confounders are left unchanged. Therefore, there are indeed $2^3=8$ possible combinations, i.e. models, ranging from all linear to all parabolic.
We apply different tests and assess both the Type I error rate, taking $\beta=0$, and the power. First, we consider the true data-generating model (only linear predictors) individually; we apply the sign-flip score test of Theorem \ref{T:stdScore} and a suitable parametric test (t-test for the LM, Wald test for the other GLMs). Subsequently, we combine information from the eight considered models. We apply the PIMA method, taking as global test statistic the mean \eqref{def:mean}, the maximum \eqref{def:max}, and Fisher's combination \eqref{def:fisher}. Moreover, we apply a global test obtained by the Bonferroni combination of the parametric tests on the eight considered models ($8\cdot\min(p-values)$). Finally, in the case of the LM we report results also for the bootstrapped method of specification curve analysis \citep{simonsohn2020specification}, combining the individual specifications' p-values with Liptak/Stouffer's method and the median.
In each simulation we use $B=1000$ random sign-flip permutations for the sign-flip score test, and 500 bootstraps for the specification curve. The choice of using a reduced number of bootstraps is motivated by the huge computational effort required by this method that refits the model at each step. To give an example, with $n=100$ and $1000$ bootstraps/flips the ratio of the two computational times is around 50. Moreover, data are simulated 5000 times. This implies a standard error around significance level $5\%$ equal to $\sigma_{\text{err}}=\sqrt{0.05*0.95/5000}=0.003$, and so the the 2-$\sigma_{\text{err}}$ limits in this case are $\alpha\pm 2\sigma_{\text{err}}=(0.044, 0.56)$.
The aim of this simulation study is to provide a broad overview of the performance of the PIMA method. An extensive simulation study would explore a wider range of scenarios by taking different values for the following quantities: the covariance $\rho$, the total number of predictors, the value of the nuisance parameters $\gamma$, the number of models in the multiverse analysis and their specifications (and possibly other quantities). This goes beyond the scope of this paper. A non-systematic exploration of some of the settings, however, confirms that the results follow the same pattern as the results presented in this section.
\subsection{(Gaussian) linear model}\label{sec:gaussian}
In this first scenario, we consider a GLM with gaussian response and identity link function. Hence the errors are normally distributed; in the homoscedastic case the variance is set as $\sigma^2=1$, while in the heteroscedastic case it is $\sigma^2=X^2$, a quadratic function of the tested predictor $X$. The nuisance parameters $\gamma$ are all set to 1.
To assess the Type I error rate we take $\beta=0$ and $n\in\{20,50,100\}$, while to evaluate the power we consider $\beta\in\{0.10,0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00\}$ and $n=100$.
Table \ref{tab:sim_null} reports the empirical Type I error rates for the different methods. The first three rows show results for the true model (only linear predictors). As expected, the parametric approach controls the Type I error only in the homoscedastic scenario, while the sign-flip score test controls the Type I error in both cases. Despite the lack of theoretical results, the bootstrap approach shows an overall good control of the Type I error, but it is extremely conservative in the smallest sample size setting. The subsequent rows show results in the multiverse of models. As a direct consequence of the lack of control of the Type I error in the univariate parametric tests, the Bonferroni combination should not be considered for the heteroscedastic scenario. Restricting the evaluation to the homoscedastic scenario, the Bonferroni correction is very conservative due to its inability to account for the correlations among test statistics, which are typically very strong in a multiverse analysis.
\import{}{sim_results_tables.tex}
Table \ref{tab:sim_lm_power} shows the empirical power of the different tests. In the homoscedastic scenario, the univariate sign-flip score test has a power comparable to its parametric counterpart, and the same is approximately true for the bootstrap approach. In the multiverse, the three combining functions in PIMA show a power very similar to the univariate sign-flip score test, hence demonstrating an efficient use of the underlying information, both in the homoscedastic and heteroscedastic cases. The bootstrap behaves similarly. The performance of the Bonferroni combination of parametric tests can be evaluated only in the homoscedastic case, as in the heteroscedastic case the Type I error is not controlled. The test reveals very low power as a consequence of the conservative nature revealed in Table \ref{tab:sim_null}.
\subsection{Binomial logit model}\label{sec:binomial}
In this second scenario, we consider a GLM with binomial response and logit link function. The nuisance parameters $\gamma$ are all set to 0.5.
Table \ref{tab:sim_type1_binomial} reports the empirical Type I error rate, obtained taking $\beta=0$ and $n\in\{50,100,200\}$, while Table \ref{tab:sim_power_binomial} shows the empirical power, considering $\beta\in\{0.5,1.5,2.5\}$ and $n=100$.
Surprisingly, the parametric model does not control the Type I error for the smallest sample size $n=50$, while the sign-flip score test does not suffer from this weakness. Similarly to the simulation with a LM, the Bonferroni combination of parametric tests is more conservative than the other approaches, while all the combinations in the PIMA method control the Type I error at the nominal level even with the smallest sample size. Moreover, the power for the parametric approach appears to be higher than other competitive methods, but the result is not satisfactory given the poor control of the Type I error exhibited for the univariate test.
\section{Data analysis: The COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy dataset}\label{sec:dataanalysis}
\subsection{Description of the dataset}
The COVID-19 hesitancy dataset collected information on people's intention to get vaccinated and several characteristics \citep{caserotti2021}. This survey was the first data collection that includes data on vaccine hesitancy before, during and after the lockdown in Italy that lasted from March 8 until May 3, 2020.
The dataset is formed by a collection of voluntary respondents on the basis of a snow-ball sampling scheme. The willingness to be vaccinated was originally collected on a scale between 1 and 100; in this example, we mark as hesitant all people with an index below 100 ($n=1359$), while the others are marked as not hesitant ($n=909$). The main characteristics are reported in Table \ref{tab2}, overall and by hesitancy status. Three variables were marginally associated with the hesitancy status: period, COVID-19 perceived risk, and vaccine doubts.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
\textbf{Characteristic} & \textbf{Overall} & \textbf{Hesitant} & \textbf{No hesitant} & \textbf{\textit{P}-value}\textsuperscript{2} \\
& N = 2,268\textsuperscript{1} & N = 1,359\textsuperscript{1} & N = 909\textsuperscript{1} & \\
\hline
\textbf{Gender} & & & & 0.065 \\
Female & 1,585 (70\%) & 930 (68\%) & 655 (72\%) & \\
Male & 683 (30\%) & 429 (32\%) & 254 (28\%) & \\
\textbf{Age} (years) & 35 (26, 49) & 35 (27, 48) & 35 (25, 51) & 0.4 \\
\textbf{Geographical area} & & & & 0.2 \\
Center & 95 (4.2\%) & 65 (4.8\%) & 30 (3.3\%) & \\
North & 2,015 (89\%) & 1,200 (88\%) & 815 (90\%) & \\
South & 158 (7.0\%) & 94 (6.9\%) & 64 (7.0\%) & \\
\textbf{Period} & & & & $<0.001$ \\
Pre-lockdown & 845 (37\%) & 609 (45\%) & 236 (26\%) & \\
Lockdown & 978 (43\%) & 494 (36\%) & 484 (53\%) & \\
Post-lockdown & 445 (20\%) & 256 (19\%) & 189 (21\%) & \\
\textbf{COVID-19 Perceived Risk}& 123 (80, 162) & 103 (62, 146) & 149 (110, 176) & $<0.001$ \\
\textbf{Vaccine doubts} & 8 (0, 25) & 11 (3, 40) & 2 (0, 10) & $<0.001$ \\
\textbf{Deprivation Index} & -0.69 (-1.61, 0.43) & -0.69 (-1.64, 0.43) & -0.69 (-1.49, 0.43) & 0.6 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{5}{l}{\textit{\textsuperscript{1}n (\%); Median (IQR)}}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{\textit{\textsuperscript{2}Pearson\textquotesingle{}s Chi-squared test; Wilcoxon rank sum test.}}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: variables included in the analysis, overall and by hesitancy status.}
\label{tab2}
\end{table}
\subsection{Inferential approach}
We want to assess whether before, during and the after the Italian lockdown people's doubts about a potential vaccine against COVID-19 remained constant or reported a substantial change, due to different perceptions of risk associated with COVID-19 contagion with respect to the different phases of the epidemic outbreak. To estimate the adjusted effect of the calendar period, several confounders are taken into account: {\tt Covid\_perc\_risk}, COVID-19 Perceived risk, a scale defined combining different COVID-19 risk subscales (for further details, see \cite{caserotti2021}); {\tt doubts\_vaccine}, vaccine doubts on a 0-100 scale; {\tt age}, age in years; {\tt gender}, gender; {\tt age*gender}, interaction between age and gender; {\tt deprivation\_ index}, Italian Deprivation Index at the city of residence; {\tt geo\_are}, geographical area.
The variable under test is the date of the period of data collection {\tt Period} which has been recoded in a categorical variable with three levels according to the temporal window of the Italian lockdown: pre-lockdown ({\tt Pre}), during ({\tt Lockdown}) and post-lokdown ({\tt Post}). We are interested in all three possible comparisons, and their post-hoc corrected p-values. For each comparison we fit a model with a zero-centered contrast that models the comparison of interest. As an example, to test the difference between {\tt Post} and {\tt Pre} we define $X$ as a variable having value 1 for {\tt Post}, -1 for {\tt Pre} and 0 for {\tt LockDown}. The confounders $Z$ comprise a dummy variable for the level not involved in the comparison together with the above-mentioned confounders.
Having a dichotomous response $Y=\{ \textrm{not hesitant, hesitant}\}$, then recoded as $Y=\{1, 0\}$,
we use a GLM model with binomial response and logit link:
\begin{align*}
y_i \sim Bernoulli(p_i),\qquad p_i \in (0,1)\\
g(p_i) = \log{\frac{p_i}{1-p_i}} = \alpha +\beta x_i +\gamma z_i.
\end{align*}
In order to implement a flexible approach, the relationship of the continuous predictors with the response is modeled also by basis of splines (B-splines). For each continuous predictors {\tt Covid\_perc\_risk}, {\tt doubts\_vaccine}, {\tt deprivation\_index} and {\tt age}, three transformations are tested: the natural variable, as well as a B-spline with three and four degree of freedom. Therefore, overall there are $K=3^4=81$ model specifications. For each comparison, e.g. {\tt Post} - {\tt Pre}, the $k$-th tested null hypothesis is defined in model $k$ as $\hp_k^{Post - Pre}:\ \beta_k^{Post - Pre}=0$. The global null hypothesis is the intersection of all null hypotheses: $\hp^{Post - Pre}=\cap_k^K \hp^{Post - Pre}_k$.
For each comparison we apply the PIMA framework with max-T combining function. Therefore we obtain: 1) a global p-value for the null hypothesis of no change over time (weak control of the FWER); 2) adjusted p-values for all individual models (strong control of the FWER); 3) lower confidence bounds for the True Discovery Proportion (TDP), i.e, the minimum proportion of models showing a significant difference. Furthermore, in this peculiar case we need to jointly test all possible pairwise comparisons: $\hp^{Post - Pre}\cap \hp^{Post - Lock} \cap \hp^{Lock - Pre}$. Accounting for the 81 model specifications, each one having three possible comparisons, we obtain 243 tests in total. The solution to this inferential problem is natural in the PIMA framework, as it is sufficient to define the closure set as the closure of the union of the univariate hypotheses of the three comparisons.
\subsubsection{Results}
We first report results for a parametric binomial model with linear predictors (i.e., natural variables, no B-spline used here) and two 0-centered contrasts variables that model the three-level {\tt Period} variable. Table \ref{tab:fitmod} reports the summary, while Table \ref{tab:posthocparam} shows the post-hoc Tukey correction for the three pairwise comparisons.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{rrrrr}
\hline
& Estimate & Std. Error & z value & Pr($>|z|$) \\
\hline
(Intercept) & -2.069 & 0.264 & -7.843 & 0.000 \\
Period 1 & -0.291 & 0.079 & -3.673 & 0.000 \\
Period 2 & -0.089 & 0.072 & -1.236 & 0.216 \\
Vaccine doubts & -0.036 & 0.003 & -13.029 & 0.000 \\
Deprivation Index & -0.011 & 0.028 & -0.389 & 0.697 \\
COVID-19 Perceived risk & 0.015 & 0.001 & 12.914 & 0.000 \\
Age (+1 years) & 0.012 & 0.004 & 2.665 & 0.008 \\
Gender [males] & 0.539 & 0.297 & 1.811 & 0.070 \\
Geo. Area [North] & -0.026 & 0.176 & -0.149 & 0.881 \\
Age*gender [males] & -0.016 & 0.007 & -2.106 & 0.035 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: parametric GLM with logit link and linear confounders, summary table.}
\label{tab:fitmod}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{rrrrr}
\hline
& coefficients & sigma & tstat & pvalues \\
\hline
LockDown - Pre & 0.202 & 0.124 & 1.634 & 0.230 \\
Post - LockDown & 0.469 & 0.138 & 3.392 & 0.002 \\
Post - Pre & 0.671 & 0.150 & 4.476 & 0.000 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: parametric GLM with logit link and linear confounders, post-hoc (Tukey) correction of pairwise comparisons.}
\label{tab:posthocparam}
\end{table}
As introduced in the previous section, the multiverse analysis framework is built on the basis of three possible transformations for each continuous predictor ($81$ models) and also across the 3 comparisons ({\tt Pre} - {\tt LockDown}, {\tt Pre} - {\tt Post}, {\tt LockDown} - {\tt Post}), leading to a multiverse of $81 \cdot 3 = 243$ models. Figure \ref{fig:scatter_raw} reports the results in a visual manner, while detailed results are reported in the Appendix. The common descriptive interpretation of a multiverse analysis allows to observe descriptively that the yellow and red clusters of tests yield p-values smaller than 0.05, but we cannot claim these test results are statistically significant due to the possibility that such a claim would have an unacceptably high false positive rate.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{./scatter_raw.pdf}
\caption{COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: multiverse analysis of 81 tested models (three coefficients for each model), raw p-values.}
\label{fig:scatter_raw}
\end{figure}
We now move from the descriptive analysis to the inferential one. The global test with post-hoc correction is shown in Table \ref{tab:posthocensemble}. The comparisons {\tt Post} - {\tt Pre} and {\tt Post} - {\tt LockDown} are significant (overall, over the 81 models of the multiverse), while the comparison {\tt Lock} - {\tt Pre} is not. Since at least one comparison is significant after multiplicity correction, one can claim that there is a significant effect of variable {\tt time} overall.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llrrrr}
\hline
Coeff & Stat & nMods & S & Pr($>|z|$) & p.adj (post-hoc) \\
\hline
LockDown - Pre & maxT & 81 & 1.71 & 0.1396 & 0.1396 \\
Post - LockDown & maxT & 81 & 3.78 & 0.0008 & 0.0008 \\
Post- Pre & maxT & 81 & 4.43 & 0.0002 & 0.0006 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: PIMA method, global tests with post-hoc correction of the three pairwise comparisons to assess overall significance.}
\label{tab:posthocensemble}
\end{table}
Figure \ref{fig:scatter_adj} shows the results of the adjusted p-values, while the Appendix reports the detailed results.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{./scatter_adj.pdf}
\caption{
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: PIMA method, adjusted p-values of the post-hoc comparisons of 81 tested models.}
\label{fig:scatter_adj}
\end{figure}
Finally, Table \ref{tab:TDP} reports the number of true discoveries and the TDP for each comparison. For the comparison {\tt Post} - {\tt Pre} all models show a significant difference (after multiplicity correction), while {\tt Lock} - {\tt Pre} does not show any significant effect. The comparison {\tt Post} - {\tt LockDown} has an intermediate number of significant comparisons ($29/81=36\%$).
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llrrr}
\hline
Coeff & Stat & nMods & True Discoveries & Proportion \\
\hline
LockDown - Pre & maxT & 81 & 0 & 0\% \\
Post - LockDown & maxT & 81 & 29 & 36\% \\
Post - Pre & maxT & 81 & 81 & 100\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: PIMA method, lower $0.95$-confidence bound for the number of true discoveries in each comparison.}
\label{tab:TDP}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion and final remarks}\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper we propose PIMA, a formal inferential framework to multiverse analysis \citep{steegen2016increasing}. Our approach allows researchers to move beyond a descriptive interpretation of the results of a multiverse analysis, and extends other methods to summarize the multitude of performed analyses, such as specification curve \citep{simonsohn2020specification} and vibration analysis \cite{vibrationofeffects} to any generalized linear model. By extending the sign-flip score test \citep{hemerik2020robust,stdScore} to the multivariate framework, researchers can now make use of the full variety of multivariate and multiple testing methods based on conditional resampling to obtain: 1) weak control of the FWER to test if there is an ‘overall' effect in one of the models explored in the multiverse analysis; 2) strong control of the FWER (i.e., adjusted p-values for each tested model) that allows the researcher to select the models that show a significant effect; 3) a lower confidence bound for the proportion of true discoveries among the tested models.
Furthermore, PIMA proves to be very robust to over/under-dispersion, allowing for a wide range of models and possible data pre-processing.
This flexibility, however, does not exempt the researcher from the responsibility of the analysis. Some further remarks and considerations in this direction should be done.
{\bf Define your theoretical model.} In the multiverse analysis framework, each specification should follow a model relying on a strong theory that is developed within the a research field (e.g., psychology, medicine, physics, etc.). As an example, in epidemiology a researcher usually defines a set of variables called ‘confounders' in order to adjust the estimated effect between the dependent variable (outcome) and the independent variable (determinant) in quasi-experimental design. In this case, each specification can be plausible if it includes the same set of confounders as an evaluation of the same initial theoretical model. The exclusion of some confounders is normally used in sensitivity analysis, but it could lead to implausible specifications since the potential mismatch with the theoretical initial model.
{\bf Plan your analysis in advance.} It is important to note that the PIMA method is not iterative, that is, the analysis specifications must be planned before performing the multiverse analysis. Not doing so (i.e. adding or removing models after having seen the results) will add a layer of data manipulation which is impossible to model and hard to formalize, and therefore can inflate the Type 1 error rate
The multiverse approach allows the researcher to plan (in advance) a plethora of models to be explored instead of just one single pre-specified model. However, it is still recommended to pre-register PIMA before it is performed.
{\bf Be parsimonious.} There are virtually no limits to the number of models to use, as the proposed PIMA approach will integrate all the resulting information. The power will be affected, however, by these choices. Indeed, the overall power to find a significant effect depends on the power of every single model. Even though adding ‘futile' models will not decrease the quality of the control of false positives, it will decrease the power of the global test, and so the ability to detect significant effects.
{\bf Be exhaustive.} There is a further consideration that applies not only to our inferential methods but also to the descriptive methods such as multiverse analysis, specification curve, and vibration analysis (and to data modeling, more broadly). When planning the data transformations, the practitioner must realize that failing to take into account any relationship between confounders and the response variable may be a catastrophic source of false positive results. This case is very well covered in any basic course in statistical modeling, but it may be useful to provide a flavor of the consequences of an inaccurate choice of models in the analysis in practice. We run a simple simulation under the same linear homoscedastic normal framework described in Section \ref{sec:sims}. In this case, however, we do not include the last two confounders in any of the models. The empirical Type I error rate exceeds $0.30$ (nominal level $\alpha=0.05$) in all tested models. As a consequence, the combined model exceeds the nominal level by the same amount. The same behavior can be seen in the parametric approach. As practical advice, we recommend including all potential confounders in all models, since losing control of the Type I error in any of them will make the inference unreliable.
A more subtle, but very relevant example is the case where some transformation of the confounders does not account for all the dependence among them. For instance, suppose that a confounder $Z$ has a linear relationship with the response $Y$ and with the variable of interest $X$. Now, to account for non-linear effects, the researcher decides to use a median-split transformation of $Z$. The resulting test on the coefficient of $X$ will lose its control of the Type I error. To elucidate this case in practice, we run a second simulation, again under the same setting described above (linear homoscedastic model). In this case, we include all the confounders, but we use a median-split transformation instead of the parabolic models. With sample size $n=200$, the empirical Type I error of the true (linear) model is under control (sign-flip score test: $0.051$, parametric: $0.054$), while it largely exceeds $5\%$ for any other model that median-splits the predictors, reaching $0.211$ for the sign-flip score test (and $0.219$ for the parametric test) when the model has all the three confounders with a median-split. As a direct consequence of the loss of control of Type I error of the univariate models, the PIMA method loses its error control as well. The empirical Type I error is $0.180$ for the maximum, and similar for other combining functions). It would be easy to define more dramatic scenarios, of course.
{\bf Thorough discussion of the results.}
The previous consideration may be discomforting. It implies that every significant test must be evaluated with great care and the researcher must take the responsibility to assume that the confounders in each tested model are dealt with properly. However, this is inherently false in many cases. A trivial example comes from the setting of the last simulation above: When a linear relationship is appropriate, the median-split transformation will not provide a test with an adequate control of the Type I error. And vice versa, when the dependence should be modeled via a median-split, the natural variables will fail as well. The same can be said for very well known transformations such as log and square-root functions.
These consideration shed a light on the implicit complexity of a multiverse analysis. A significant test must be interpreted as a significant relationship between the predictor of interest $X$ and the respose $Y$, given the confounders $Z$ of the model. And the significant result may be due to a real relationship between $X$ and $Y$ or a poor modeling of $Z$. It is the responsibility of the researcher to consider both options carefully.
Let's go back to the application in Section \ref{sec:dataanalysis}. The comparison {\tt LockDown - Pre} does not show any significant result, therefore no (false) claims can be made. More interestingly, the comparison {\tt Post - LockDown} has 29 significant -- i.e. multiplicity corrected -- tests. Let's now focus on this comparison. By exploring the results we can see that most of the significant ones are due to models where the variable {\tt age} is not transformed (i.e. 27/29), while when the age is modeled by a B-spline transformation, the test becomes not significant in most of the cases (see Table \ref{tab:tab_res_age}).
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrr}
\hline
Predictor of {\tt age} & p-adjusted $> 0.05$ & p-adjusted $\leq 0.05$ \\
\hline
Age in continuous & 0 & 27 \\
Age with 3 basis of B-splines & 27 & 0 \\
Age with 4 basis of B-splines & 25 & 2 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: PIMA method, number of models with significant difference {\tt Post - Lock} for different transformations of the variable {\tt age}.}
\label{tab:tab_res_age}
\end{table}
Such a result should cast doubt on the robustness of the results. Most likely, the significant results are due to inadequate modeling of the relationship of {\tt age} with the response variable which, in turn, induces a spurious correlation of the contrast under test with the response variable. In our opinion, therefore, there is not enough evidence to support the claim that the willingness to get vaccinated $Y$ has changed between the {\tt Pre} lock-down and the {\tt LockDown} period.
{\bf Robust analysis is still possible.}
Despite the challenges pointed out in this discussion, we claim that robust results can still be obtained. Consider the comparison {\tt Post - Pre}, where all comparisons turn out to yield significant effects. If we can assume that ‘at least one' among all tested models deals properly with confounders, we are allowed to claim that there is a significant difference between {\tt Post} and {\tt Pre} -- even though we cannot claim which model is the more appropriate one. This result directly follows from Berger’s general results on intersection-union tests \citep{BergerIntersectionUnion}. Thus, to control the relevant Type I error probability it is only necessary to test each one of the coefficients at the $\alpha$ level.
\bigskip
To conclude, we hope our proposed inferential framework for multiverse analysis will allow researchers to learn as much as possible from the multiverse analyses they perform. Our extension to generalized linear models allows researchers who design a greater variety of studies to move beyond a purely descriptive interpretation of a multiverse analysis, and permits researchers to test whether the null hypothesis can be statistically rejected in any or a subset of the models. Importantly, the strong control for multiplicity in PIMA provides researchers with a statistical tool that allows them to claim that the null hypothesis can be rejected for each specification that shows a significant effect, with the comfort of knowing that they are not p-hacking. PIMA makes it possible for researchers who feel that they can not a-priori specify a single analysis approach to efficiently test a plausible set of models while still drawing reliable inferences.
\vspace{\fill}\pagebreak
\medskip
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
|
\section{Introduction \label{s:1}}
Solar flares are explosive brightenings in the solar atmosphere. They are thought to be caused by the
conversion of magnetic energy into kinetic, thermal, and non-thermal energies via magnetic reconnection \citep{ShibataMagara2011}. In addition, filament/prominence eruptions and coronal mass ejections (CMEs) sometimes acommpany solar flares.
The interaction between CMEs and Earth's magnetosphere could produce geomagnetic storms, which have serious impacts
on the modern human life \citep[e.g.,][]{AirapetianETAL2020, CliverETAL2022}.
Like the Sun, various stars also show sudden brightenings called stellar
flares. In recent years, superflares---which are stellar flares emitting more than $10^{33}$ ergs---have been observed even in stars similar to the Sun \citep{MaeharaETAL2012,ShibayamaETAL2013,TuETAL2020,OkamotoETAL2021}. In order
to understand flares including superflares in unified way, stellar flares are being investigated actively \citep[e.g.,][]{KowalskiETAL2013,TsuboiETAL2016,HondaETAL2018,NotsuETAL2019,VidaETAL2019,MuhekiETAL2020,NamekataETAL2020b,MaeharaETAL2021,NamekataETAL2022a,NamekataETAL2022b}.
Stellar superflares may be accompanied by much larger CMEs than those of the Sun, which are thought to have severe impacts
on the exoplanets around the host stars \citep[e.g.,][]{AirapetianETAL2020}. Consequently, superflares and its associated CMEs have been gathering
an attention, not only from physical viewpont but also from the perspective of the habitability of exoplanets.
The surface of the Sun can be observed with high spatial resolution, while the surfaces of distant stars cannot be resolved spatially. In recent years, the spatially resolved data of the Sun have been utilized to aid the analysis of stellar data \citep[e.g.,][]{HarraETAL2016, ToriumiETAL2020,VeronigETAL2021,NamekataETAL2022a,NamekataETAL2022b,ToriumiAirapetian2022, XuETAL2022}. For comparison with the stellar data, solar data are integrated spatially, and such an analysis is called “Sun-as-a-star analysis”. \citet{NamekataETAL2022a} performed Sun-as-a-star analyses using H$\alpha$ images of two solar flares accompanied by filament eruption/surge to interpret the H$\alpha$ spectra of a stellar flare. Since both solar and stellar spectra have similar characteristics, the authors concluded that a stellar filament eruption associated with a superflare had been detected. In addition, \citet{NamekataETAL2022c} analyzed the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectrum of an M-class solar flare that exhibited dominant emission from flare ribbons, and they showed that red asymmetry and line broadening can be seen even in a Sun-as-a-star spectrum, providing evidence of chromospheric condensation. This is how Sun-as-a-star analyses of H$\alpha$ spectra are useful for investigating the dynamics of flares and plasmas on a stellar surface. Also, in contrast to extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation that are also useful to study stellar activities, especially stellar CMEs \citep{HarraETAL2016, XuETAL2022} but cannot reach Earth from distant stars due to interstellar absorption \citep{RumphETAL1994}, we can observe H$\alpha$ radiation even coming from distant stars.
It is therefore important to investigate H$\alpha$ spectra by performing Sun-as-a-star analyses not only for flares and filament eruptions/surges but also for various other active phenomena on the Sun.
So far, Sun-as-a-star analyses of H$\alpha$ spectra have been performed for only three solar active events \citep[flares and filament eruptions/surges;][]{NamekataETAL2022a,NamekataETAL2022c}.
In this paper, we report the results of Sun-as-a-star analyses of H$\alpha$ spectra for more various active events on the Sun. In addition to flares and filament eruptions/surges, there is a wide variety of chromospheric plasma phenomena---such as out-of-limb prominence eruptions \citep[e.g.,][]{Parenti2014} and post-flare loops \citep[e.g.,][]{JingETAL2016}---and we have included these phenomena, which have not been analyzed previously from the Sun-as-a-star viewpoint. Our main goal is to clarify the correspondence between various active events and the characteristics of the H$\alpha$ spectra in Sun-as-a-star analyses, for future applications to stellar observations. We have mainly followed the method of Sun-as-a-star analyses described by \citet{NamekataETAL2022a}, while we have incorporated our own calibration method in this paper. We introduce the observational data in Section \ref{s:Ob} and explain the analytical method in Section \ref{s:Me}. In Section \ref{s:Re}, we report the results and discuss them. Finally, we present a summary and implications to stellar observations in Section \ref{s:SD}.
\section{Observations}\label{s:Ob}
The Solar Dynamics Doppler Imager \citep[SDDI;][]{IchimotoETAL2017} is installed on the Solar Magnetic Activity Research Telescope \citep[SMART;][]{UenoETAL2004} at Hida Observatory, Kyoto University . It takes full-disk solar images at 73 wavelengths from the H$\alpha$ line center $-9.0$ {\AA} to the H$\alpha$ line center $+9.0$ {\AA} with a time cadence of 12$-$16 sec and a pixel size of 1.23 arcsec. The SDDI has been observing the Sun routinely since 2016 May and has stored the H$\alpha$ spectral images of various active events.
We have selected relatively prominent events for study in this paper: flares with \textit{GOES} (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites) X-ray classes of $\geq$ C8.0 and plasma eruptions with large spatial scales (on the order of approximately 100 Mm). We excluded some events because of clouds or terribly bad seeing. We ultimately selected nine events. For these events, we summarize in Table\ref{table1} the dates of the observations, the \textit{GOES} peak time, \textit{GOES} class, location, and event features.
We also summarize in Table \ref{table1} the occurrence of CMEs based on the data of the Large Angle and Spectrometric Coronagraph \citep[LASCO;][]{BruecknerETAL1995} on board the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) and the catalogue of filament disappearance in \citet{SekiETAL2019b}.
In addition to the SDDI data, for some events we used data taken with the Atmospheric Imaging Assembly \citep[AIA;][]{LemenETAL2012AIA} on board the Solar Dynamics Observatory \citep[SDO;][]{PesnellETAL2012} to ensure the event scenarios. In the following, we provide observational classifications of the events studied in this paper. Note that this classification is not essential but is just a convenience for explanation. The details of each event are given in Section \ref {s:Re}.
Events (1)$-$(4) were associated with flares ($\geq$ C8.0). Event (1) is the same as that analyzed by \citet{NamekataETAL2022a}. Although this event has already been analyzed in detail, it is included in this paper again with the intent of comparing it to other events.
Events (5)$-$(7) were filament eruptions associated with weak flares (B-class). In these three events, dark filaments were observed on the solar disk in the H$\alpha$ line center images, and they erupted with partial drainage.
Events (8) and (9) were prominence eruptions to the outside of the solar limb. The footpoints of the flares from these events were occulted, and their \textit{GOES} data are therefore not summarized in Table \ref{table1}.
\begin{deluxetable*}{ccccccc}
\label{table1}
\tablenum{1}
\tablecaption{List of events analyzed in this paper}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Event} &
\colhead{Date (UT)} & \colhead{\textit{GOES} Peak Time (UT)}&\colhead{\textit{GOES} Class} & \colhead{Location}&\colhead{Event features}&
\colhead{CME}
}
\decimals
\startdata
(1) & 2017 Apr. 2 & 02:46:00 & C 8.0 & S12 W08 & flare + surge & no ?\\
(2) & 2017 Apr. 2 & 08:02:00 & M 5.3 & N12 W59 & flare + eruption & yes\\
(3) & 2017 Sept. 8 & 07:49:00 & M 8.1 & S09 W70 & flare (two-step) + eruption & no ?\\
(4) & 2021 Apr. 19 -- 20 & Apr. 19 23:42:00 & M 1.1 &
S24 E14 & flare + coronal rain ? & yes\\
(5) & 2016 Nov. 5 & 04:52:00 & B 1.1 & N08 W32 &two-ribbon flare + filament eruption & yes\\
(6) & 2017 Feb. 19 & 05:41:00 & B 3.0 & N11 E15 &two-ribbon flare + filament eruption & yes\\
(7) & 2017 Apr. 23 & 05:55:00 & B 1.8 & N13 E33 &two-ribbon flare + filament eruption & yes\\
(8) & 2017 June 19 & & & NE limb & prominence eruption & yes\\
(9) & 2021 May 5 & & & NE limb &prominence eruption (two-step) & yes\\
\enddata
\tablecomments{The flaring footpoints of event (8) and event (9) were occulted so we did not include the \textit{GOES} class and Peak Time of these two events in Table \ref{table1}.
The occurrence of CMEs for event (1)$-$(4), event (8), and event (9) is based on SOHO/LASCO data , and it for event (5)$-$(7) is referred from \citet{SekiETAL2019b} .
The term “no ?” means that we cannot decide the occurrence of CMEs from SOHO/LASCO data.
Note that although event (4) was not associated with any H$\alpha$ eruptions, it would be followed by a hotter eruption. }
\end{deluxetable*}
\section{Method \label{s:Me}}
Because the brightening of a solar flare is much smaller than the radiation from the full solar disk, it is difficult to identify clear changes in Sun-as-a-star spectra that are simply integrated over the full disk. We therefore integrated the H$\alpha$ spectra over partial target regions (TRs) which that contain the active events we consider. This is equivalent to assuming that there are no other variations except for that in the TR. We converted these spatially integrated spectra in TRs to “virtual” Sun-as-a-star spectra \citep[see][]{NamekataETAL2022a} by normalizing them with the full-disk integrated solar continuum. The details of this method are follows.
First, we define $f(t,\lambda,A)$ as an H$\alpha$ spectrum that is simply integrated over a region denoted by A:
\begin{equation}
f(t,\lambda,A)=\int_{\mathrm{A}}{I(t,\lambda,x,y)}\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y,
\end{equation}
where $I(t,\lambda,x,y)$ is the intensity as a function of the time of the observation $t$, the wavelength $\lambda$, and the spatial position $(x,y)$. In order to suppress intensity fluctuations coming from temperature variations of the SDDI, we normalized $f(t,\lambda,A)$ by its continuum level at each time:
\begin{equation}
\label{F}
F(t,\lambda,A)=\frac{f(t,\lambda,A)}{f(t,\lambda_{cont.},A)}\times f(t_0,\lambda_{cont.},A),
\end{equation}
where $t_0$ is a pre-event time and $\lambda_{cont}$ is a continuum wavelength near the H$\alpha$ line. The next step is normalization by a quiet region (QR). We used Eq. (\ref{F}) to obtain $F(t,\lambda,A=TR)$ and $F(t,\lambda,A=QR)$. We then
calculated the H$\alpha$ spectrum $F_{TR}(t,\lambda)$ integrated over the TR and normalized by the QR data:
\begin{equation}
\label{F_TR}
F_{TR}(t,\lambda)=\frac{F(t,\lambda,A=TR)}{F(t,\lambda,A=QR)}\times F(t_{0},\lambda,A=QR).
\end{equation}
This normalization suppresses influences coming from the observational environment, such as from changes in solar altitudes or from the Earth's atmospheric fluctuations. After the two normalizations given by Eq.(\ref{F}) and Eq.(\ref{F_TR}), we subtracted the pre-event data from $F_{TR}(t,\lambda)$ to obtain the change due to the active events:
\begin{equation}
\Delta F_{TR}(t,\lambda)=F_{TR}(t,\lambda)-F_{TR}(t_{0},\lambda),
\end{equation}
Finally, we normalized $\Delta F_{TR}(t,\lambda)$ by the full-disk solar continuum $F(t_{0},\lambda_{cont.},A=\mathrm{full~disk})$:
\begin{equation}
\label{dS}
\Delta S(t,\lambda)=\Delta F_{TR}(t,\lambda)/F(t_{0},\lambda_{cont.},A=\mathrm{full~disk}),
\end{equation}
The resulting normalized pre-event-subtracted H$\alpha$ spectrum $\Delta S(t,\lambda)$ represents the ratio of the spectral changes coming from active events to the solar irradiance (full-disk continuum). If there is no other variation except for the target event, we can calculate $\Delta S(t,\lambda)$ by using the observational data as if we were observing the Sun as a distant star. Therefore, $\Delta S(t,\lambda)$ can be regarded as a Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectrum.
We also calculated the differenced equivalent width: $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm\Delta \lambda}=\int_{\text{H}\alpha-\Delta\lambda}^{\text{H}\alpha+\Delta\lambda}{\Delta S(t,\lambda)\mathrm~{d}\lambda}$ where $\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm\Delta\lambda$ means the wavelength of H$\alpha$ line center $\pm$ $\Delta\lambda$ [\AA]. The differenced equivalent width corresponds to the total change in the H$\alpha$ spectrum.
\section{Results \& Discussion \label{s:Re}}
Here we introduce the time evolution of each of the nine events in spatially resolved images as well as the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra $\Delta S(t,\lambda)$ of the nine events illustrated as dynamic spectra; i.e., as color maps of $\Delta S(t,\lambda)$. We also show the differenced equivalent widths $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm\Delta \lambda}$ and the \textit{GOES} soft X-ray (SXR) light curves.
We discuss the causes of the H$\alpha$ spectral formations from the Sun-as-a-star viewpoint by referring to the spatially resolved images.
We use the line centers calculated by fitting quadratic functions to the line cores of quiet-region data as the H$\alpha$ line center 6562.8 {\AA} in the dynamic spectra. The absolute wavelengths of the H$\alpha$ spectra observed by SMART/SDDI are not accurate because the Lyot filter, which is the main component of SMART/SDDI, experiences temperature drift. Therefore, corrections to the wavelength zero point are necessary in order to obtain accurate Doppler velocities.
\subsection{Event (1), a C8.0 flare on 2017 April 2}
Figure \ref{IM_C80} shows an overview of event (1). In this event, a C8.0 flare occurred on 2017 April 02:30 UT in NOAA 12645 near the disk center [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_C80} (a)]. This flare was followed by an H$\alpha$ surge [Figure \ref{IM_C80} (b)].
Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this C8.0 flare. In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C} (a)], the emission appears near the H$\alpha$ line center. In the early phase of this emission, it shows line broadening. A strongly shifted absorption---transforming from a blue shift to a red shift---follows this emission.
This strongly shifted absorption in the dynamic spectrum corresponds to the plasma eruption and the downflow on the solar disk, i.e., the surge.
The $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$ also shows strong absorption (on the order of $\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}), and its time evolution deviates from the \textit{GOES} SXR light curve [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C} (b)]. The flaring amplitude is $\sim3\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}, and the amplitude of the absorption is $\sim2\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}.
These results are essentially consistent with the same analysis of the same event by \citeauthor{NamekataETAL2022a} (\citeyear{NamekataETAL2022a}; see their Supplementary Information for a more detailed analysis of this event.). This consistency indicates the robustness of the Sun-as-a-star analysis method.
\subsection{Event (2), an M5.3 flare on 2017 April 2}
Figure \ref{IM_M53} shows an overview of event (2). In this event, an M5.3 flare occurred on 2017 April 2 07:30 UT in NOAA 12644 near the solar limb [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_M53} (a)]. This flare was associated with a filament eruption [Figure \ref{IM_M53} (b)]. After the \textit{GOES} peak time of this flare, a clear cusp-like structure was observed in the SDO/AIA image [Figure \ref{IM_M53} (b), t=60 min].
Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_M5_3} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this M5.3 flare. In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_M5_3} (a)], long-lasting emission appears near the H$\alpha$ line center. This emission extends up to $\pm2$ {\AA}.
Corresponding to the filament eruption on the disk, a blue-shifted absorption appears in the dynamic spectrum. However, even though the spatial scales of the eruptions are the same, $\sim100$ Mm for both event (1) and event (2), the strength of the absorption in event (2) is weaker than that in event (1). This would be the result of cancellation between the emission due to the flare and the absorption by the erupted plasma.
In this event, the filament erupted almost perpendicular to the line-of-sight (LOS) direction, with a very small LOS velocity. When the LOS velocity is very small, the filament appears near the H$\alpha$ line center, which is where the emission due to the flare appears, and absorption from the filament can cancel some of the emission from the flare.
Moreover, near the H$\alpha$ line center, where the background H$\alpha$ intensity is very small, the degree of absorption from the filament is also decreased dramatically compared to cases in which the filament appears in the far wing of the H$\alpha$ line.
Therefore, we also suggest that filament components are not dominant compared to the flare in this case, probably because the filament did not have a large contrast compared to the background due to its small LOS velocity (or possibly small density).
In addition, the $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$ does not show any absorption. The flaring amplitude is $\sim4\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}.
The time evolution of the $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$ is similar to the \textit{GOES} SXR light curve; for example, their time scales are comparable in each of the impulsive rising and gradual decay phases and their peaks are almost simultaneous [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_M5_3} (b)].
The similarity of the H$\alpha$ and the \textit{GOES} SXR light curves is also reported in the Sun-as-a-star analysis of a flare by \citet{NamekataETAL2022c}.
\subsection{Event (3), an M8.1 flare on 2017 September 8}
Figure \ref{IM_M81} shows an overview of event (3). In this event, an M8.1 class flare occurred on 2017 September 8 07:30 UT in NOAA 12673 near the solar limb [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_M81} (a)]. In the decay phase of the flare, a second brightening occurred. The first brightening was associated with a long ribbon-like structure and strong line broadening [Figure \ref{IM_M81} (b) t=18 min], while the second brightening was also associated with two small patches [Figure \ref{IM_M81} (b) t=56, 60 min]. The second brightening was followed by a filament eruption [Figure \ref{IM_M81} (b), t=60 min].
Figure \ref{fig:2017_0908} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this M8.1 flare. In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0908} (a)], two-step emission appears near the H$\alpha$ line center. The first emission has strong line broadening, while the second emission exhibits weaker line broadening weaker than the first one. These emissions in the dynamic spectrum reflect features in the spatially resolved H$\alpha$ images [Figure\ref{IM_M81} (b)].
As shown in the spatially resolved H$\alpha$ image [Figure \ref{IM_M81} (b)] a plasma eruption was indeed occurring, but the dynamic spectrum does not show clear absorption.
This is probably because the filament erupted almost perpendicular to the LOS direction, as in event (2).
The $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$ does not show any absorption, on the other hand, it clearly shows two-step brightening (Figure \ref{fig:2017_0908} (b)). The flaring amplitudes are $\sim4\times10^{-4}$ {\AA} for the first brightening and $\sim2\times10^{-4}$ {\AA} for the second.
\subsection{Event (4), an M1.1 flare on 2021 April 19 - 20}
Figure \ref{IM_M11} shows an overview of event (4). In this event, an M1.1 class flare occurred on 2021 April 19 23:20 UT in NOAA 12816 near the disk center [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_M11} (a),(b)].
Although this flare was not followed by any H$\alpha$ plasma eruption, plasma downflows were observed in H$\alpha$ red-wing images during the decay phase of this flare.
Prior to these downflows, a hot loop was observed in the AIA 171 {\AA} and 131 {\AA} images at the same position [Figure \ref{IM_M11} (b)]. In a typical solar flare occurring on the solar disk, after the appearance of hot flare loops, cooled H$\alpha$ loops (“post-flare loops”) are observed as weak emissions at the H$\alpha$ line center. Moreover, cooled material moves downward along the post-flare loops (“coronal rain”), which is observed as absorption in the red wing of the H$\alpha$ line \citep[e.g.,][]{JingETAL2016}.
Even in this event, the downflows in the flare-decay phase
of event (4) may be coronal rain from the post-flare loop. However, since we cannot resolve the H$\alpha$ loop that is expected to exist in the flare-decay phase, there is another interpretation of these downflows (e.g., partial drainage of ejected hot plasmas).
Figure \ref{fig:2021_0420} shows the result of Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this M1.1 flare. In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2021_0420} (a)], emission with a clear red asymmetry appears near the H$\alpha$ line center. When this emission has almost decayed, a red-shifted absorption appears. This absorption corresponds to the plasma downflows, which may be coronal rain from the post-flare loop occurring during the decay phase of the flare [Figure \ref{IM_M11} (b)]. The $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$ also exhibits the absorption after the peak of the flare [Figure \ref{fig:2021_0420} (b)]. The flaring amplitude is $\sim1.5\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}, and the amplitude of the absorption is $\sim0.5\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}.
\subsection{Event (5), a filament eruption on 2016 November 5}
Figure \ref{IM_FE1} shows an overview of event (5).
This event was analyzed from spatially-resolved viewpoints by \citet{SekiETAL2017}.
In this event, a filament eruption occurred on 2016 November 5 02:41 UT in the solar disk [the orange dashdot region in Figure \ref{IM_FE1} (a)]. The dark filament was observed in the H$\alpha$ image before the eruption. In connection with the filament eruption, a two-ribbon flare also occurred, but it was distant from the filament-eruption region.
In order to model the phenomena that associated with only a filament eruption, we integrated H$\alpha$ spectra over the target region (TR) that included the filament eruption alone [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_FE1} (a), (b)].
In events (5), (6), and (7), dark filaments were visible in the H$\alpha$ spectra before the eruptions. The contribution from the disappearance of such a dark filament to a Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectrum has not previously been investigated.
In event (6) and event (7), the filament and the two-ribbon flare were co-located. Thus it was difficult to separate the contributions from two-ribbon flares and from filament eruptions (the disappearance of the dark filament) to the formation of the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra in these two events.
On the other hand, in event (5), the filament eruption occurred away from the two-ribbon flare (Figure \ref{IM_FE1}).
By using this spatial separation between the filament and the flare in event (5), we have been able to perform the Sun-as-a-star analysis for the filament eruption alone in event (5) and to investigate its contribution to the formation of the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra.
Figure \ref{fig:2016_1105} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of H$\alpha$ spectra of this filament eruption. In the dynamic spectrum
[Figure \ref{fig:2016_1105} (a)], the emission with shifted absorptions appears near the H$\alpha$ line center.
Since the H$\alpha$ spectra were integrated over the target region (TR) that included the filament eruption alone, the emission seen in the H$\alpha$ line center is not due to the distant flare ribbon but instead is produced because the dark filament, which absorbed the background radiation at H$\alpha$ line center before the eruption, had disappeared from the line center. The blue- and red-shifted absorptions correspond, respectively, to upward motions of the plasma and to partial drainage associated with the filament eruption [Figure \ref{IM_FE1} (b)]. The $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$. also shows absorption and emission [Figure \ref{fig:2016_1105} (b)], the amplitudes of which are both $\sim1\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}.
The quantity $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm0.5\text{\AA}}$ is also calculated only over the range that includes the emission. The emission in $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm0.5\text{\AA}}$ appears at the almost same time as the absorption in $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$.
This simultaneity is consistent with the depiction that the emission comes from the disappearance of the dark filament.
How strong is the emission due to the disappearance of the dark filament compared to that from the two-ribbon flare? To address this question, we also calculated the differenced equivalent width for the two-ribbon flare alone. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:2016_1105_FE_FL}, brightening from the disappearance of the dark filament is comparable to that from the two-ribbon flare. This result means that the contribution to the formation of a Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectrum from apparent emission by filament disappearance cannot be negligible compared to that from emission by a two-ribbon flare.
\subsection{Event (6), a filament eruption and a two-ribbon flare on 2017 February 19}
Figure \ref{IM_FE2} shows an overview of event (6). In this event, a filament eruption occurred on 2017 February 19 05:11 UT co-located with a two-ribbon flare [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_FE2} (a)].
Figure \ref{fig:2017_0219} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this filament eruption and two-ribbon flare. In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0219} (a)], emission with shifted absorptions appears near the H$\alpha$ line center. In the same way as event (5), the blue- and red-shifted absorptions correspond, respectively, to the upward motions of the plasma and to partial drainage associated with the filament eruption [Figure \ref{IM_FE2} (b)].
Before the fast blue shifted absorption, a slow blue-shifted absorption appears in the dynamic spectrum. This slow absorption probably comes from the slow upward motions of the filaments before the eruption that was reported in many previous studies from spatially-resolved viewpoints \citep{SterlingMoore2004, IsobeTripathi2006, SekiETAL2017, SekiETAL2019a} .
We also note that the fast blue-shifted absorption is divided into two stripes. The first stripe ends at about $-4$ {\AA} ($\sim-200$ km s$^{-1}$), while the second stripe is decelerated and connected to the red shifted absorption. The first stripe comes from erupted blobs that were accelerated to about $-200$ km s$^{-1}$ and finally faded away in the H$\alpha$ images. The second stripe comes from erupted blobs that eventually fell back into the solar surface.
In this event, we include the two-ribbon flare in the TR. The AIA 304 {\AA} image shows a two-ribbon flare relatively clearly. Its counterparts are also observed in the H$\alpha$ line-center image [Figure \ref{IM_FE2} (b)].
Therefore, the emission near the H$\alpha$ line center is a superposition of contributions from the two-ribbon flare and from the disappearance of the dark filament.
The quantity $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm4.0\text{\AA}}$ also shows the absorption and emission [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0219} (b)], the amplitudes of which are $\sim3\times10^{-4}$ {\AA} and $\sim1\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}, respectively. The quantity $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm0.5\text{\AA}}$ is also calculated only over the range that includes the emission. The absorption in $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm4.0\text{\AA}}$ appears faster than the emission in $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm0.5\text{\AA}}$.
The faster appearance of this absorption may be the result of the slow upward motions of the filament before the fast eruption.
\subsection{Event (7), a filament eruption and a two-ribbon flare on 2017 April 23}
Figure \ref{IM_FE3} shows an overview of event (7). In this event, a filament eruption occurred on 2017 April 23 05:00 UT co-located with a two-ribbon flare [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_FE3} (a)].
Figure \ref{fig:2017_0423} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this filament eruption. In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0423} (a)], the emission with shifted absorptions appears near the H$\alpha$ line center. In the same way as in event (5) and event (6), the blue- and red-shifted absorptions correspond, respectively, to the upward motions of the plasma and partial drainage associated with the filament eruption [Figure \ref{IM_FE3} (b)]. In this event, we include the two-ribbon flare in the TR, as for event (6). The AIA 304 {\AA} image shows the two-ribbon flare relatively clearly, and its counterpart also appears clearly in the H$\alpha$ line-center image [Figure \ref{IM_FE3} (b)].
The emission near the H$\alpha$ line center is therefore a superposition of contributions from the two-ribbon flare and from the disappearance of the dark filament, as in event (6).
The quantity $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$ also exhibits the absorption and emission [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0423} (b)], the amplitudes of which are $\sim3\times10^{-4}$ {\AA} and $\sim1\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}, respectively.
The quantity $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm0.5\text{\AA}}$ is also calculated only over the range that includes the emission.
The time evolution of the $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm0.5\text{\AA}}$ is similar to the \textit{GOES} SXR light curve. This similarity is consistent with the clear two-ribbon flare in the H$\alpha$ line.
\subsection{Event (8), a prominence eruption on 2017 June 19 }
Figure \ref{IM_PE1} shows an overview of event (8). In this event, a prominence eruption to the outside of the solar limb occurred on 2017 June 19 04:30 UT [the orange dashdot region in Figure \ref{IM_PE1} (a)].
We integrated H$\alpha$ spectra over the region outside of the solar disk [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_PE1} (b)]. The H$\alpha$ flare was not seen from Earth, so the footpoints of this event must be on the backside of the solar limb.
Figure \ref{fig:2017_0619} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this prominence eruption.
Note that there are no pre-event data before 2017 June 19 04:30 UT because calibration frames were being taken. We have therefore used post-event data (after this event) in place of the pre-event data in analyzing this event.
In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0619} (a)], strongly shifted emission appears, which transforms from a blue shift to a red shift. In this event, the prominence erupted beyond the solar limb, with the LOS velocity approaching Earth. Part of the erupted plasma subsequently fell into the solar surface, with the LOS velocity moving away from Earth [Figure \ref{IM_PE1} (b)]. The shifted emission corresponds to this series of plasma motions outside the solar limb. The quantity $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm3.0\text{\AA}}$ also shows the emission [Figure \ref{fig:2017_0619} (b)], with an amplitude $\sim3\times10^{-4}$ {\AA}.
\subsection{Event (9), a prominence eruption on 2021 May 5}
Figure \ref{IM_PE2} shows an overview of event (9). In this event, a prominence eruption to the outside of the solar limb occurred on 2021 May 5 22:25 UT [the orange dashdot region in Figure \ref{IM_PE2} (a)].
We integrated H$\alpha$ spectra over the region outside of the solar disk [the red dashed region in Figure \ref{IM_PE2} (b)].
The H$\alpha$ flare ribbon is not seen from Earth, so the footpoints of this event must be on the backside of the solar limb, as for event (8).
Figure \ref{fig:2021_0505} shows the result of the Sun-as-a-star analysis of the H$\alpha$ spectra of this prominence eruption.
In the dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2021_0505} (a)], a blue-shifted emission first appears. When this emission approaches the H$\alpha$ line center, a second emission component appears, drifting from the blue wing to the red wing. In this event, the two successive prominence eruptions occurred, and both erupted with their LOS velocities approaching Earth.
After the second eruption, a part of the prominence fell back into the solar surface, with the LOS velocity moving away from Earth. The successive emissions in the dynamic spectrum come from this series of plasma motions outside the solar limb. Corresponding to these successive emissions, the quantity $\Delta \mathrm{EW}_{\mathrm{H}\alpha\pm9.0\text{\AA}}$ for event (9) shows a two-step brightening [Figure \ref{fig:2021_0505} (b)], with emission amplitudes $\sim1\times10^{-4}$ {\AA} for the first one and $\sim2\times10^{-4}$ {\AA} for the second one.
\section{Summary and Implications to stellar observations
\label{s:SD}}
\begin{deluxetable*}{ccccccc}
\label{table2}
\tablenum{2}
\tablecaption{Summary of the results of Sun-as-a-star analysis}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Event} &
\colhead{Event features} & \colhead{Features in Sun-as-a-star spectra} &
\colhead{$\pm\Delta\lambda$ [{\AA}]}&
\colhead{Em. [{\AA}]}&
\colhead{Abs. [{\AA}]}
}
\decimals
\startdata
(1) & flare + surge &
Em., Shifted abs..&
$\pm3.0$
& $3\times10^{-4}$ & $2\times10^{-4}$\\
(2) & flare + eruption &
Em., Blue shifted abs. (weak)&
$\pm3.0$
& $4\times10^{-4}$ & none\\
(3) & flare (two-step) + eruption &
Em. (two step) &
$\pm3.0$
& $4\times10^{-4}$, $2\times10^{-4}$& none\\
(4) & flare + coronal rain ?&
Em., Red shifted abs. &
$\pm3.0$
& $1.5\times10^{-4}$ & $0.5\times10^{-4}$\\
(5) & filament eruption &
Em., Shifted abs. &
$\pm3.0$
& $1\times10^{-4}$ & $1\times10^{-4}$\\
(6) & two-ribbon flare + filament eruption &
Em., Shifted abs. &
$\pm4.0$
& $1\times10^{-4}$
& $3\times10^{-4}$\\
(7) & two-ribbon flare + filament eruption &
Em., Shifted abs.&
$\pm3.0$
& $1\times10^{-4}$
& $3\times10^{-4}$\\
(8) & prominence eruption &
Shifted em.&
$\pm3.0$
& $3\times10^{-4}$
& none\\
(9) & prominence eruption (two-step)&
Shifted em. (two step) &
$\pm9.0$
& $2\times10^{-4}$, $1\times10^{-4}$
& none\\
\enddata
\tablecomments{In this Table, “Em.” and “Abs.” represent emission and absorption, respectively.
In the columns labeled Em. [{\AA}] and Abs. [{\AA}], the approximate amplitudes of emissions and absorptions in differenced equivalent widths are shown, respectively. In the column labeled $\pm\Delta\lambda$ [{\AA}], we have summarized the integral ranges used for calculating the differenced equivalent widths in the columns of Em. [{\AA}] and Abs. [{\AA}].}
\end{deluxetable*}
We have performed Sun-as-a-star analyses of the H$\alpha$ spectra of the various active events on the Sun; specifically, flares ($\geq$ C8.0), filament eruptions with large spatial scales and eruptions of off limb prominences
. Our aim is to increase the number of samples beyond those provided by \citet{NamekataETAL2022a,NamekataETAL2022c}---who reported Sun-as-a-star analyses of a solar flare, a filament eruption, and a surge---and to clarify the correspondence between various active events and features seen in Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra for future applications to stellar observations. We have summarized our results in Table \ref{table2}. All nine events analyzed in this study show emission relative to the pre-event level. The amplitudes of their differenced equivalent widths are all on the order of $10^{-4}$ {\AA}, regardless of the cause of the emission. On the other hand, the dynamic spectra show different features, depending on the cause of the emission:
(i) Flares show emission at the H$\alpha$ line center with red asymmetry and line broadening as reported in a previous study.
(ii) Filament eruptions with and without flares show emission near the H$\alpha$ line center, together with blue-/red-shifted absorptions.
(iii) Eruptions of off limb prominences show blue-/red-shifted emissions.
If spectral features similar to those of (i) $-$ (iii) are obtained in stellar observations, we will thus be able to identify the phenomena occurring
on those stars. We summarize below the details of the features in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] Flares ($\geq$ C8.0) show emission near the H$\alpha$ line center, with red asymmetry and/or line broadening in their Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra. \citet{NamekataETAL2022c} also reported that the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectrum of an M4.2 solar flare near the disk center showed red asymmetry and line broadening, and they thus suggested that the nature of the chromospheric condensation can be seen even in the Sun-as-a-star spectra. We note that, although event (2) and event (3) are especially energetic events in our study, red asymmetry is not very clear in them. These two events occurred near the solar limbs, and the lack of red asymmetry can be explained as a projection effect, as reported in previous studies \citep[e.g.,][]{SvestkaETAL1962}.
The red asymmetry associated with flares can be interpreted as chromospheric condensation moving downward \citep[e.g.,][]{IchimotoKurokawa1984, AsaiETAL2012}. Therefore, assuming that material moves along a direction radial from the Sun, flares occurring near the solar limb should show a weak red asymmetry. In event (4), a red-shifted absorption appears in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra when the emission due to the M1.1 flare almost decayed. This red-shifted absorption during the flare decay phase is the candidate of coronal rains from post-flare loops.
\item[(ii)] Filament eruptions with sufficient LOS velocity result in both emission at the H$\alpha$ line center and shifted absorptions in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra.
Emissions from flares in Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra have been reported previously by \citet{NamekataETAL2022a,NamekataETAL2022c}, but we found that additional apparent emission at the H$\alpha$ line center due to disappearance of a dark filament.
As shown in Figure \ref{fig:2016_1105_FE_FL}, such apparent emission can be comparable to emission due to a two-ribbon flare and it can contribute to the H$\alpha$ spectral-line formation.
Before fast eruptions, slow blue-shifted absorptions appear in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra [clearly seen in event (6), Figure \ref{fig:2017_0219} (a)]. These absorptions probably come from slow motions of the filaments before the eruptions, as reported in many previous studies with spatially resolved images \citep{SterlingMoore2004,IsobeTripathi2006,SekiETAL2017,SekiETAL2019a}.
In addition to the blue shifted absorption due to upward motions of the filaments, red-shifted absorptions appear together with the emissions in the dynamic spectra. These red-shifted absorptions come from partial drainage of the erupting filaments.
\item[(iii)] Prominence eruptions that erupted outside the solar limb result in shifted emission in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra. It is well known from spatially-resolved viewpoints, that when a prominence erupts beyond the solar limb, emission occurs in the H$\alpha$ spectra because of the absence of background light \citep{Parenti2014}. The prominences of event (8) and event (9) had velocities along the LOS direction, and the shifted emissions therefore appears in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra.
We demonstrate for the first time how the H$\alpha$ spectra of prominence eruption can be seen in the Sun-as-a-star view.
\end{itemize}
We also compared the time evolution of H$\alpha$ differenced equivalent widths and \textit{GOES} soft X-ray data.
In event (1)-(4) [flares], light curves of H$\alpha$ and \textit{GOES} soft X-ray are similar in the time scales of the impulsive phases and the peak times. This similarity is consistent with the standard flare model in which both H$\alpha$ and soft X-ray emissions are related to
chromospheric bombardment. On the other hand, in decay phases H$\alpha$ light curves sometimes show absorption due to line-of-sight motions of plasmas as previously reported by \citet{NamekataETAL2022a} and differ from soft X-ray light curves [especially in Figures \ref{fig:2017_0402_C} (b) and \ref{fig:2021_0420} (b)]. For the same reason, in event (5)-(7) [filament eruptions], H$\alpha$ light curves including both emission and absorption differs from soft X-ray light curves [red circles in Figures \ref{fig:2016_1105} (b), \ref{fig:2017_0219} (b), and \ref{fig:2017_0423} (b)]. In event (8) and (9) [prominence eruption], the peak time of H$\alpha$ delayed that of soft X-ray [Figures \ref{fig:2017_0619} (b) and \ref{fig:2021_0505} (b)]. The flare footpoints were occulted in these two events and H$\alpha$ emissions are purely caused by eruptions of off limb prominences. It takes much time for the prominence to expand to occupy a large area so the H$\alpha$ peak lagged behind the soft X-ray peak. This time lag may be the key to identifying whether H$\alpha$ emission comes from a flare or a prominence eruption but more statistics are needed to confirm its universality.
We highlight another important result: the cancellation between the emission due to an M5.3-class flare that occurred on the solar limb and the absorption due to the filament eruption. Out of the four flare events ($\geq$ C8.0), events (1), (2), and (3) were associated with H$\alpha$ filament eruptions. In the dynamic spectrum of event (1), which occurred near the disk center, clear absorption signals appears that corresponded to a surge. In contrast, the dynamic spectra of event (2) and event (3), which occurred around the limb, do not show clear absorptions.
For event (2), the absorption caused by the eruption on the solar disk was cancelled or decreased by the flare emission near the H$\alpha$ line center because of the small LOS velocity of the filament.
On the other hand, some stellar flares show drastically broad emissions in their H$\alpha$ spectra (e.g., \citealt{NamekataETAL2020b} reported that a superflare on the M dwarf AD Leonis exhibited an H$\alpha$ line width up to 14 {\AA}.).
Such broad emissions can cancel or decrease absorptions from filament eruptions with high LOS velocities.
Thus, we deduce that for some stellar (super-) flares with broad H$\alpha$ emissions,
filament eruptions on the stellar disks may not be detected in the H$\alpha$ spectra, even if filaments have high LOS velocities.
As mentioned in summary (i), relatively prominent flares ($\geq$ C8.0) showed red asymmetry as signatures of chromospheric condensation in their impulsive phases. Such red asymmetry has been observed in other chromospheric lines. For example, \citet{GrahamETAL2020} analyzed the impulsive phase of a X-class solar flare and they reported that multiple chromospheric lines of Fe I, Fe II, Mg II, C I, and Si II all showed red asymmetry. They also performed a radiative hydrodymamical simulation and showed that the red asymmetry can be explained by the collision of the electron beam with the solar chromosphere.
In addition, \citet{TianChen2018} reported that transition-region line of Si IV showed red asymmetry persisting in both impulsive and decay phases of a M-class solar flare. As for the stellar case, \citet{WoodgateETAL1992} reported that a stellar flare on the red dwarf star AU Mic showed red asymmetry in Ly$\alpha$ during the impulsive phase. This stellar observation suggests that chromospheric condensation also occurs during the impulsive phases of stellar flares.
\citet{SekiETAL2019b} provided the catalogue of filament disappearance observed by SMART/SDDI, and they reported that the three filament eruptions in event (4), event (5) and event (6) evolved to become CMEs.
On the other hand, the present study showed that red-shifted absorptions, which come from falling plasmas,
appear in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra of these three events.
This suggests that even if falling plasmas are detected as red-shifted absorptions in the observations of stellar filament eruptions, such filament eruptions may also develop into CMEs.
We need further investigation to clarify whether we can deduce the occurrence of CMEs from spatially integrated H$\alpha$ spectra.
In recent stellar observations, some H$\alpha$ spectra of stellar flares on M/K-dwarfs exhibited emission with blue asymmetry \citep[e.g.,][]{VidaETAL2016,VidaETAL2019, MuhekiETAL2020,MaeharaETAL2021}.
They proposed that a prominence eruption caused the blue asymmetry in their study.
They considered that emission along the H$\alpha$ line center due to the superflare and blue-shifted emission due to the prominence eruption moving toward Earth may overlap to produce such emissions with the blue asymmetry.
In the present study we found that solar prominences erupting toward Earth also resulted in blue shifted emissions in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra. Moreover, the amplitudes of these blue-shifted emissions were comparable to those of solar flares (C8.0 $\leq$ flare class $\leq$ M8.1).
This suggests that if we observe flares with prominence eruptions, such prominence eruptions can make non-negligible contributions to the formation of the H$\alpha$ spectra.
Thus, our results for solar-prominence eruptions support the suggestion that the blue asymmetry may come from a prominence eruptions. In the future, Sun-as-a-star analyses are needed for a solar-prominence eruption with a footpoint flare in order to investigate whether prominence eruptions really can cause the blue asymmetry observed in the stellar cases.
In event (9), the emission with the high velocity up to $-$9.0 {\AA} for the first eruption is fainter than the emission with the small velocity, in the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ dynamic spectrum [Figure \ref{fig:2021_0505} (a)].
We have considered that since the fast plasmas in this event occupied only a small spatial scale, their contributions to the emission in the spatially integrated spectra became much smaller than the contributions from the slow plasmas, which had large spatial scales.
For stellar observations, in which the number of photons is much smaller than that for the Sun, emission from faster but smaller blobs of plasma may become invisible in the spatially integrated observational data.
This suggests that even if high-velocity emission is not recognized in stellar H$\alpha$ spectra, faster plasma may still exist in stellar active phenomena.
The relationship between flare enegy (e.g., X-ray fluence) and CME kinetic energy has been previously investigated \citep[e.g.,][]{YashiroGopalswamy2009}. On the other hand, the relationship between flare energy and kinetic energy of filament eruption is not clear. In the present paper, there is not enough number of data to discuss it, but their relation should be investigated by increasing the number of samples.
As shown in this study, the signals of active events generally survive in spatially integrated H$\alpha$ spectra.
This means that time-resolved H$\alpha$ spectroscopic observations are strong tools for distinguishing what the stellar active events look like. However, the signals of some active events in H$\alpha$ spectra may be suppressed by cancellation between emissions and absorptions, as occurred in event (2).
This suggests that in addition to H$\alpha$ observations, the observations of other wavelengths are necessary to deduce the
stellar activities more accurately.
Also, the comparison of H$\alpha$ line and another wavelength such as EUV is useful to investigate signals of CMEs in spatially integrated H$\alpha$ spectrum \citep{HarraETAL2016, XuETAL2022}.
Multi-wavelength spectroscopy from the Sun-as-a-star viewpoint will be necessary to achieve a deeper understanding of various active events on stars.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors thank the anonymous referee for constructive comments that significantly improved the quality of this paper. We wish to thank Drs. K. Shibata and Y. Notsu for fruitful discussions.
We express our sincere gratitude to the staff of Hida Observatory for development and maintenance of the instrument and daily observation.
We would like to acknowledge the data use from
GOES, SDO, and SOHO.
SDO is a mission for NASA’s Living With a Star program.
This research was carried out by the joint research program of the Institute for Space-Earth Environmental Research, Nagoya University.
This research is supported by JSPS KAKENHI grant numbers 21H01131 (K.I. and A.A.) and 18J20048, 21J00316 (K.N.).
The authors would like to thank Enago for the English language review.
\end{acknowledgments}
\software{astropy \citep{Astropy}}
\newpage
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2017_0402_C_80_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (1), which occurred on 2017 April 2. (a) A full-disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The red dashed region is a target region (TR), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the C8.0 flare on 2017 April 2. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the TR in Figure \ref{IM_C80} (a). In each row,
the images at the times t=15 min, t=17 min, t=30 min and t=40 min measured from 02:30 UT on 2017 April 2 are shown from top to bottom. In each column, the images AIA 171~{\AA}, AIA 131~{\AA}, H$\alpha-1.0$~{\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~ {\AA} are shown from left to right.}
\label{IM_C80}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm
{2017_0402_C_ver2.pdf}
\caption{(a) The time series of the Sun-as-a-star H$\alpha$ spectra (dynamic spectrum) and (b) the light curves of event (1), the C8.0 flare on 2017 April 2. In panel (a), the left vertical axis is the difference in wavelength from the H$\alpha$ line center in units of {\AA}, and the right vertical axis is the corresponding Doppler velocity in units of km s$^{-1}$. The horizontal axis is the time measured from 02:30 UT on 2017 April 2 in units of minutes. The color map shows $\Delta S(t,\lambda)$, where $\Delta S(t,\lambda)$ represents the ratio of the changes in the pre-event-subtracted spatially integrated H$\alpha$ spectra to the full-disk continuum (see Eq. \ref{dS}).
The orange and purple regions correspond to emission and absorption, respectively.
In the gray regions, there is no available data.
Panel (b) shows the differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm3.0$~{\AA} as red circles and the GOES soft X-ray (1$-$8~{\AA}) flux plotted a blue dashed line. The horizontal axis is the same as that in panel (a). The horizontal dashed line represents the zero level of differenced equivalent width.
\label{fig:2017_0402_C}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2017_0402_M5_3_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (2), which occurred on 2017 April 2. (a) A full-disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. The red dashed region is a target region (TR), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled as “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the M5.3 flare on 2017 April 2. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the TR in Figure \ref{IM_M53} (a). In each row,
images at the times t=25 min, t=33 min and t=60 min measured from 07:30 UT on 2017 April 2 are shown from top to bottom. In each column, the images AIA 171~{\AA}, AIA 131~{\AA}, H$\alpha-1.0$~{\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. }
\label{IM_M53}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2017_0402_M5_3.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for event (2), the M5.3 flare on 2017 April 2. We note that only H$\alpha\pm3.0$~{\AA} data were available for performing the Sun-as-a-star analysis in this event.
\label{fig:2017_0402_M5_3}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2017_0908_M81_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (3), which occurred on 2017 September 8. (a) A full-disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The red dashed is a target region (TR), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the M8.1 flare on 2017 September 8. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the TR in Figure \ref{IM_M81} (a). In each row, images at the times t=18 min, t=56 min and t=62 min measured from at 07:30 UT on 2017 September 8 are show from top to bottom. In each column, the images AIA 171~{\AA}, AIA 131~ {\AA}, H$\alpha-1.0$~{\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. The pink arrows indicate plasma eruptions associated with the second brightening. }
\label{IM_M81}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2017_0908.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for event (3), the M8.1 flare on 2017 September 8. We note that only H$\alpha\pm3.0$~{\AA} data were available for performing the Sun-as-a-star analysis in this event.
\label{fig:2017_0908}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2021_0420_M11_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (4), which occurred on 2021 April 19-20. (a)A full disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The orange dashdot region corresponds to the images in Figure \ref{IM_M11} (b), and the inner red dashed region is a target region (TR). The blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the M1.1-class flare on 2021 April 19. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the orange dashdot region in Figure \ref{IM_M11} (a). In each row, images at the times t=17 min, t=35 min and t=66 min measured from 23:30 UT on 2021 April 19 are shown from top to bottom. In each column, the images AIA 171~{\AA}, AIA 131~ {\AA}, H$\alpha-1.0$~{\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. The red dashed region indicated in H$\alpha$ center image at t=17 min is a target region (TR). The pink arrow indicates plasma downflow during the decay phase of this M1.1 flare. }
\label{IM_M11}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2021_0420.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for event (4), the M1.1 flare on 2021 April 19 to 20.
\label{fig:2021_0420}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2016_1105_FE_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (5), which occurred on 2016 November 5. (a) A full-disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The orange dashdot region corresponds to the images in Figure \ref{IM_FE1} (b), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the filament eruption on 2016 November 5. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the orange dashdot region in Figure \ref{IM_FE1} (a). In each row,
images at the times t=9 min, t=54 min and t=90 min measured from 02:41 UT on 2016 November 5 are shown from top to bottom. In each column, the images AIA 304~{\AA}, H$\alpha-1.0$~ {\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. The red dashed region indicated in the H$\alpha$ center image at t=9 min is a target region (TR). The red arrow in the H$\alpha-1.0$~{\AA} image at t=54 min indicates the upward motion of the filament eruption. The red arrow in the H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} image at t=54 min indicates the plasma downflow associated with the filament eruption.}
\label{IM_FE1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2016_1105.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for the event (5), the filament eruption on 2016 November 5. In addition to the differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm3.0$~{\AA}, the differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm0.5$~{\AA} are also plotted as gray triangles in panel (b).
\label{fig:2016_1105}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2016_1105_FE_FL.pdf}
\caption{The contributions to the differenced equivalent widths from the filament eruption and the two-ribbon flare.
The differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm0.5$~{\AA} for the filament eruption are plotted as gray triangles and for the two-ribbon flare as lightgray circles. The \textit{GOES} X-ray (1$-$8{\AA}) flux is also plotted as a blue dashed line.
\label{fig:2016_1105_FE_FL}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2017_0219_FE_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (6), which occurred on 2017 February 19. (a) A full-disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The red dashed region is a target region (TR), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the filament eruption on 2017 February 19. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the TR in Figure \ref{IM_FE2} (a). In each row,
images at the times t=1 min, t=19 min and t=39 min measured from 05:11 UT on 2017 February 19 are shown from top to bottom. In each column, the images AIA 304~{\AA}, H$\alpha-1.0$~ {\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. The pink arrows indicate plasma downflows associated with the filament eruption.}
\label{IM_FE2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2017_0219.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for event (6), the filament eruption and the two-ribbon flare on 2017 February 19.
In addition to the differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm3.0$~{\AA}, the differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm0.5$~{\AA} are also plotted as gray triangles in panel (b), as in Figure \ref{fig:2016_1105} (b).
\label{fig:2017_0219}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2017_0423_FE_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (7), which occurred on 2017 April 23. (a) A full-disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The red dashed region is a target region (TR), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the filament eruption on 2017 April 23. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the TR in Figure \ref{IM_FE3} (a). In each row,
images at the times t=5 min, t=38 min and t=44 min measured from 05:00 UT on 2017 April 23 are shown from top to bottom. In each column, the images AIA 304~{\AA}, H$\alpha-1.0$~ {\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. }
\label{IM_FE3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2017_0423.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for event (7), the filament eruption and the two-ribbon flare on 2017 April 23.
In addition to the differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm3.0$~{\AA}, the differenced equivalent widths of H$\alpha\pm0.5$~{\AA} are also plotted as gray triangles in panel (b), as in Figure \ref{fig:2016_1105} (b) and Figure \ref{fig:2017_0219} (b).
We note that only H$\alpha\pm3.0$~{\AA} data were available for performing the Sun-as-a-star analysis in this event.
\label{fig:2017_0423}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2017_0619_PE_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (8), which occurred on 2017 June 19. (a)A full disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The orange dashdot region corresponds to the images in Figure \ref{IM_PE1} (b). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the filament eruption on 2017 June 19. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the orange dashdot region in Figure \ref{IM_PE1} (a). In each row,
images at the times t=2 min, t=15 min and t=20 min measured from 04:30 UT 2017 June 19 are show from top to bottom. In each column, the images H$\alpha-1.0$~{\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. The red dashed region in the H$\alpha$ center image at t=2 min is a target region (TR), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). }
\label{IM_PE1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2017_0619.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for event (8), the prominence eruption on 2017 June 19. We note that the peak time of \textit{GOES} soft X-ray (1$-$8 {\AA}) is before 2017 June 19 04:30 UT.
\label{fig:2017_0619}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]
{2021_0505_PE_fig.pdf}
\caption{Overview of event (9), which occurred on 2021 May 5. (a) A-full disk solar image at the H$\alpha$-center wavelength observed by SMART/SDDI. Celestial north is up, and west is to the right. The orange dashdot region corresponds to the images in Figure \ref{IM_PE2} (b). The direction of solar north is shown by the white arrow labeled “SN”. (b) The time evolution of the filament eruption on 2021 May 5. The field of view in each panel corresponds to the orange dashdot region in Figure \ref{IM_PE2} (a). In each row,
images at the times t=10 min, t=26 min and t=45 min measured from 22:25 UT on 2021 May 5 are shown from top to bottom. In each column, the images of H$\alpha-1.0$~{\AA}, H$\alpha$ center and H$\alpha+1.0$~{\AA} are shown from left to right. The red dashed region in the H$\alpha$ center image at t=10 min is a target region (TR), and the blue solid region is a quiet region (QR). }
\label{IM_PE2}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]
{2021_0505_wide.pdf}
\caption{The same as Figure \ref{fig:2017_0402_C}, but for event (9), the prominence eruption on 2021 May 5. In order to cover the fast component of the first eruption, we have extended the range of the blue wing to $-9.0$ {\AA} in panel (a). The black arrow in panel (a) indicates a fast component of this eruption.
\label{fig:2021_0505}}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}
Gradient flows are a kind of important models to simulate many physical problems such as the interface behavior of multi-phase materials, the interface problems of fluid mechanics, environmental science and material mechanics. In general, as the highly complex high-order nonlinear dissipative systems, it is a great challenge to construct effective and accurate numerical schemes with physical constraints such as energy dissipation and mass conservation. Many experts and scholars considered some unconditionally energy stable schemes. These numerical schemes preserve the energy dissipation law which does not depend on the time step. Some popular and widely used methods include convex splitting approach \cite{eyre1998unconditionally,shen2012second,shin2016first}, linear stabilized approach \cite{shen2010numerical,yang2017numerical}, exponential time differencing (ETD) approach \cite{du2019maximum,du2021maximum,WangEfficient}, invariant energy quadratization (IEQ) approach \cite{gong2020arbitrarily,yang2016linear,yang2018efficient,zhao2021revisit}, scalar auxiliary variable (SAV) approach \cite{xiaoli2019energy,shen2018scalar,ShenA}, Lagrange multiplier approach \cite{cheng2020new} and so on.
Gradient flow models are generally derived from the functional variation of free energy. In general, the free energy $E(\phi)$ contains the sum of an integral phase of a nonlinear functional and a quadratic term:
\begin{equation}\label{intro-e1}
E(\phi)=\frac12(\phi,\mathcal{L}\phi)+E_1(\phi)=\frac12(\phi,\mathcal{L}\phi)+\int_\Omega F(\phi)d\textbf{x},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}$ is a symmetric non-negative linear operator, and $E_1(\phi)=\int_\Omega F(\phi)d\textbf{x}$ is nonlinear free energy. $F(\textbf{x})$ is the energy density function. The gradient flow from the energetic variation of the above energy functional $E(\phi)$ in \eqref{intro-e1} can be obtained as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{intro-e2}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu,\quad\mu=\displaystyle\mathcal{L}\phi+F'(\phi),
\end{equation}
where $\mu=\frac{\delta E}{\delta \phi}$ is the chemical potential. $\mathcal{G}$ is a positive operator. For example, $\mathcal{G}=I$ for the $L^2$ gradient flow and $\mathcal{G}=-\Delta$ for the $H^{-1}$ gradient flow.
It is not difficult to find that the above phase field system satisfies the following energy dissipation law:
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d}{dt}E=(\frac{\delta E}{\delta \phi},\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t})=-(\mathcal{G}\mu,\mu)\leq0,
\end{equation*}
which is a very important property for gradient flows in physics and mathematics.
Recently, many SAV-type methods are developed to optimize the traditional SAV method. For example, in \cite{yang2020roadmap}, the authors introduced the generalized auxiliary variable method for devising energy stable schemes for general dissipative systems. An exponential SAV approach in \cite{liu2020exponential} is developed to modify the traditional method to construct energy stable schemes by introducing an exponential SAV. In \cite{huang2020highly}, the authors consider a new SAV approach to construct high-order energy stable schemes. In \cite{cheng2020new}, the authors introduce a new Lagrange multiplier approach which is unconditionally energy stable with the original energy. However, the new approach requires solving a nonlinear algebraic equation for the Lagrange multiplier which brings some additional costs and theoretical difficulties for its analysis. Recently, Jiang et al. \cite{jiang2022improving} present a relaxation technique to construct a relaxed SAV (RSAV) approach to improve the accuracy and consistency noticeably.
In this paper, inspired by the new Lagrange multiplier approach and RSAV approach, we propose a novel technique to construct the unconditional energy stable schemes for gradient flows by introducing a zero factor. Compared with the recently proposed SAV-type approach, the numerical schemes based on the new zero-factor (ZF) method dissipate the original energy and do not require the explicitly treated part of the free energy to be bounded from below. The core idea of the zero-factor approach is to introduce a zero factor to modify the solution $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ of the baseline semi-implicit method at each time step. The value of the introduced zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ is controlled by energy stability. To reduce the computation cost and improve the accuracy and consistency, we propose a zero-factor approach with relaxation, which we named the relaxed zero-factor (RZF) method, to design unconditional energy stable schemes for gradient flows. The RZF approach almost preserves all the advantages of the new zero-factor approach. It is unconditionally energy stable with respect to a modified energy that is closer to the original energy, and provides a very simple calculation process. Our main contributions of this paper are:
(i). The new introduced RZF method can keep the original energy in most cases and provides a very simple calculation process;
(ii). We prove that the zero factor schemes with specific $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ lead to the popular SAV-type and Lagrange multiplier methods;
(iii). The variation of the introduced zero factor is highly consistent with the nonlinear free energy which implies that the introduced zero factor is very efficient to capture the sharp dissipation of the nonlinear free energy.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sect.2, we introduce a zero factor to construct a new zero-factor approach to simulate a series of gradient flows. In Sect.3, by using a relaxation technique, we propose a relaxed ZF approach. Then the second-order Crank-Nicloson and BDF2 schemes based on RZF method are constructed. In Sect.4, we briefly illustrate that the RZF approach can be easily applied to simulate the gradient flow with several disparate nonlinear terms. Finally, in Sect.5, various 2D and 3D numerical simulations are demonstrated to verify the accuracy and efficiency of our proposed schemes.
\section{The Zero-Factor Approach}
Introduce a scalar auxiliary function $\eta(t)$ to construct a linear function $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$, and rewrite the gradient flow \eqref{intro-e2} with a zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-e1}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu,\\
\mu=\mathcal{L}\phi+F'(\phi)+\mathcal{P}(\eta)F'(\phi),\\
\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\int_\Omega F(\phi)d\textbf{x}=\displaystyle\int_\Omega F'(\phi)\phi_td\textbf{x}+\mathcal{P}(\eta)\int_\Omega F'(\phi)\phi_td\textbf{x}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Here the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ is a linear zero function which can be chosen flexibly, such as the following $\mathcal{P}_1$ and $\mathcal{P}_2$
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-e2}
\mathcal{P}_1(\eta)=k_1\eta,\quad\mathcal{P}_2(\eta)=k_2\eta_t,
\end{equation}
where $k_1$ and $k_2$ are any non-zero constants.
Set the initial condition for $\eta(t)$ to be $\eta(0)=0$ for $\mathcal{P}_1(\eta)$ or $\eta(0)=c_0$ for $\mathcal{P}_2(\eta)$ where $c_0$ is an arbitrary constant, then it is easy to see that the new system \eqref{ZF-e1} is equivalent to the original system \eqref{intro-e2}, i.e., $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=0$ in \eqref{ZF-e1}.
Taking the inner products of the first two equations in the above equivalent system \eqref{ZF-e1} with $\mu$ and $-\phi_t$, respectively, then summing up the results together with the third equation, we obtain the original energy dissipative law:
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d}{dt}E=-(\mathcal{G}\mu,\mu)\leq0,
\end{equation*}
It means that the linear functional $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ here is to serve as a zero factor to enforce dissipation of the original energy.
\subsection{A second-order Crank-Nicloson ZF scheme}
Before giving a detailed introduction, we let $N>0$ be a positive integer and set
\begin{equation*}
\Delta t=T/N,\quad t^n=n\Delta t,\quad \text{for}\quad n\leq N.
\end{equation*}
In the following, we will consider a second-order Crank-Nicolson scheme for the system \eqref{ZF-e1}. Discretize the nonlinear functional $F'(\phi)$ explicitly and the other items implicitly in \eqref{ZF-e1}, and give the initial values $\phi^0=\phi_0(x)$, $\eta(0)=c_0$, then couple with Crank-Nicolson formula, a second-order energy stable schemes can be constructed as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-e3}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}=\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\\
\displaystyle(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)-(F(\phi^{n}),1)=\displaystyle\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right)+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right),
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}=\frac32\phi^n-\frac12\phi^{n-1}$.
Taking the inner products of first two equation in \eqref{ZF-e3} with $\mu^{n+\frac12}$ and $-\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}$ respectively,
and multiplying the third equation with $\Delta t$, then combining these equations, we obtain the above Crank-Nicolson scheme satisfies the following original energy dissipative law:
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-e4}
\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n})=-\Delta t(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12})\leq0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n})=\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n},\phi^n)+(F(\phi^{n}),1)$.
The Crank-Nicolson scheme \eqref{ZF-e3} is nonlinear for the variables $\phi^{n+1}$ and $\eta^{n+1}$. We now show how to solve it efficiently. Combining the first two equations in \eqref{ZF-e3}, we can obtain the following linear matrix equation
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
(I+\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n+1}=(I-\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n}-\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})-\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Noting that the coefficient matrix $A=(I+\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})$ is a symmetric positive matrix, then we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-e5}
\aligned
\phi^{n+1}
&=A^{-1}\left[(I-\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n}-\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\right]-\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\\
&=\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q^{n+1},
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Here $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ and $q^{n+1}$ can be solved directly by $\phi^n$ and $\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-e6}
\aligned
\overline{\phi}^{n+1}=A^{-1}\left[(I-\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n}-\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\right],\quad q^{n+1}=-\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Combining the equation \eqref{ZF-e5} with the third equation in \eqref{ZF-e3}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-e7}
\aligned
&\left(F(\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q^{n+1}),1\right)-\left(F(\phi^{n}),1\right)\\
&=\displaystyle
\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),p^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q^{n+1}-\phi^n\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
One can see that to solve above nonlinear numerical scheme \eqref{ZF-e7}, we need to solve $\eta^{n+1}$ by the Newton iteration as the initial condition. The computational complexity depends on $F(\phi)$. The computational cost is equal to the Lagrange Multiplier approach which was proposed by Shen et al. \cite{cheng2020new}.\\
\begin{remark}\label{ZF-le1}
In principle one can choose any linear function to be zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ in equation \eqref{ZF-e1}. A special case is $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\eta(t)-1$, then the zero factor method leads to the new Lagrange multiplier approach in \cite{cheng2020new}.
\end{remark}\\
\begin{remark}\label{ZF-le2}
From the equation \eqref{ZF-e5}, we notice that $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ is the solution of the baseline semi-implicit Crank-Nicolson scheme. Hence the core idea of the zero factor approach is to introduce a zero factor to modify the solution $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ at each time step. The value of the zero factor is controlled by energy stability.
\end{remark}
\subsection{A revisit of the SAV-type approach}
In this subsection, we will review the SAV-type approach and prove that the introduced scalar auxiliary variables can be seen as the specific zero factors. Furthermore, we can modify the SAV-type methods to construct new schemes which dissipate the original energy.
The key for the SAV approach is to introduce a scalar variable $r(t)=\sqrt{E_(\phi)+C}$ where $E_1(\phi)=(F(\phi),1)$ is the nonlinear free energy and rewrite the gradient flows \eqref{intro-e2} as the following equivalent system:
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e1}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu,\\
\displaystyle\mu=\mathcal{L}\phi+\frac{r(t)}{\sqrt{E_1(\phi)+C}}F'(\phi),\\
\displaystyle\frac{dr}{dt}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{E_1(\phi)+C}}({F'}(\phi),\phi_t).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
A second-order Crank-Nicloson SAV scheme for above equivalent system is as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e2}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}=\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+\frac{r^{n+\frac12}}{\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\\
\displaystyle\frac{r^{n+1}-r^n}{\Delta t}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Here $r^{n+\frac12}=(r^{n+1}+r^n)/2$.
Combining the first two equations in above second-order scheme, we can obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e3}
\aligned
(I+\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n+1}
&=(I-\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^n-\Delta t\frac{r^{n+\frac12}}{\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\\
&=\left[(I-\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})-\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\right]-\left(\frac{r^{n+\frac12}}{\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}-1\right)\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Using the same definitions of $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ and $q^{n+1}$ in \eqref{ZF-e6}, we can obtain $\phi^{n+1}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e4}
\aligned
\phi^{n+1}
&=A^{-1}\left[(I-\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n}-\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\right]-\left(\frac{r^{n+\frac12}}{\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}-1\right)\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\\
&=\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\left(\frac{r^{n+\frac12}}{\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}-1\right)q^{n+1}.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Compared above equation \eqref{SAV-e4} with \eqref{ZF-e6}, we can obviously obtain that the key for the SAV approach is to introduce a zero factor
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e5}
\aligned
P(r)=\frac{r(t)}{\sqrt{E_1(\phi)+C}}-1.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
It means that the core idea of the SAV scheme \eqref{SAV-e2} is also to introduce a special zero factor to modify the solution $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ which is the solution of the baseline semi-implicit Crank-Nicolson scheme at each time step. The value of the zero factor $P(r)$ is controlled by energy stability.
Inspired by the introduced ZF method, we can obtain a new SAV approach which is unconditionally energy stable with the original energy by changing the third equation in the equivalent system \eqref{SAV-e1}:
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e6}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu,\\
\displaystyle\mu=\mathcal{L}\phi+\frac{r(t)}{\sqrt{E_1(\phi)+C}}F'(\phi),\\
\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}\int_\Omega F(\phi)d\textbf{x}=\displaystyle\frac{r(t)}{\sqrt{E_1(\phi)+C}}\int_\Omega F'(\phi)\phi_td\textbf{x}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
A second-order Crank-Nicloson SAV scheme for above equivalent system \eqref{SAV-e6} is as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e7}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}=\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+\frac{r^{n+\frac12}}{\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\\
\displaystyle(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)-(F(\phi^{n}),1)=\frac{r^{n+\frac12}}{\sqrt{E_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+C}}({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Taking the inner products of first two equation in \eqref{SAV-e7} with $\mu^{n+\frac12}$ and $-\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}$ respectively,
and multiplying the third equation with $\Delta t$, then combining these equations, we obtain the above Crank-Nicolson scheme satisfies the following original energy dissipative law:
\begin{equation}\label{SAV-e8}
\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n})=-\Delta t(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12})\leq0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n})=\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n},\phi^n)+(F(\phi^{n}),1)$.\\
\begin{remark}\label{SAV-le1}
For other SAV-type approaches, the core idea is also to introduce a special zero factor to modify the solution $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$. For example, the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(r)=\frac{r(t)}{\exp(E_1(\phi))}-1$ for ESAV approach in \cite{liu2020exponential}.
\end{remark}
\section{The Relaxed Zero-Factor Approach}
From above analysis, we notice that the scheme based on the zero-factor approach dissipates the original energy but needs to solve a nonlinear algebraic equation which brings some additional costs and theoretical difficulties for its analysis. In general, compared with the baseline SAV scheme, the new algorithm brings some additional costs because it requires solving a nonlinear algebraic equation for $\eta^{n+1}$. To reduce the computation cost and improve the efficiency, inspired by the R-SAV approach described in \cite{jiang2022improving}, we consider a zero-factor approach with relaxation, which we named the relaxed zero-factor (RZF) method, to design unconditional energy stable schemes for gradient flows. It can be proved that the RZF approach not only determines $\eta^{n+1}$ explicitly, but also dissipates an almost original energy.
Firstly, we introduce a new scalar auxiliary function $R(t)=(F(\phi),1)$, and rewrite the equivalent gradient flow \eqref{ZF-e1} as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-e1}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu,\\
\mu=\mathcal{L}\phi+F'(\phi)+\mathcal{P}(\eta)F'(\phi),\\
\displaystyle\frac{dR}{dt}=\displaystyle\int_\Omega F'(\phi)\phi_td\textbf{x}+\mathcal{P}(\eta)\int_\Omega F'(\phi)\phi_td\textbf{x},\\
R(t)=(F(\phi),1).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Taking the inner products of the first two equations in the above equivalent system \eqref{RZF-e1} with $\mu$ and $-\phi_t$, respectively, then summing up the results together with the third and fourth equations, we obtain the original energy dissipative law:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-e2}
\frac{d}{dt}E=\frac12(\phi,\mathcal{L}\phi)+\int_\Omega F(\phi)d\textbf{x}=\frac12(\phi,\mathcal{L}\phi)+R(t)=-(\mathcal{G}\mu,\mu)\leq0,
\end{equation}
For the equivalent system \eqref{RZF-e1}, a Crank-Nicolson scheme based on above zero-factor (ZF-CN) approach can be given as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-CN-e1}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}=\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\\
\displaystyle R^{n+1}-R^n=\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right),\\
\displaystyle R^{n+1}=\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Similar as \eqref{ZF-e6}, introduce $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ and $q^{n+1}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-CN-e2}
\aligned
\overline{\phi}^{n+1}=A^{-1}\left[(I-\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n}-\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\right],\quad q^{n+1}=-\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),
\endaligned
\end{equation}
where $A$ is the coefficient matrix to satisfy $A=(I+\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})$. The baseline ZF-CN scheme \eqref{ZF-CN-e1} can be rewrite as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ZF-CN-e3}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}=\frac12\mathcal{L}\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\\
\displaystyle\phi^{n+1}=\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q^{n+1},\\
\displaystyle R^{n+1}-R^n=\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right),\\
\displaystyle R^{n+1}=\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
It is not difficult to obtain that the above ZF-CN scheme \eqref{ZF-CN-e3} is nonlinear for the variables $\phi^{n+1}$ and $\eta^{n+1}$.
\subsection{A Second-order RZF-CN Scheme}
To reduce the computation cost and improve the efficiency, we consider the following second order Crank-Nicolson scheme based on the relaxed zero-factor approach (RZF-CN): set $R^0=(F(\phi(0,\textbf{x}),1)$, and compute $\phi^{n+1}$, $R^{n+1}$ via the following two steps:
\textbf{Step I}: Compute $\phi^{n+1}$ and $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}$ by the following semi-implicit Crank-Nicolson scheme:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e1}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}=\frac12\mathcal{L}\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\\
\displaystyle\phi^{n+1}=\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q^{n+1},\\
\displaystyle \widetilde{R}^{n+1}-R^n=\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right),\\
\displaystyle \widetilde{R}^{n+1}=\left(F(\overline{\phi}^{n+1}),1\right).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}=\frac32\phi^n-\frac12\phi^{n-1}$.
\textbf{Step II}: Update the scalar auxiliary variable $R^{n+1}$ via a relaxation step as
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e2}
R^{n+1}=\lambda_0\widetilde{R}^{n+1}+(1-\lambda_0)\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right),\quad \lambda_0\in\mathcal{V}.
\end{equation}
Here is $\mathcal{V}$ a set defined by
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e3}
\mathcal{V}=\left\{\lambda|\lambda\in[0,1]~s.t.~R^{n+1}-\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\leq\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right),\ R^{n+1}=\lambda\widetilde{R}^{n+1}+(1-\lambda)\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right\}.
\end{equation}
Here, $\kappa^{n+1}\in[0,1]$ will be given below.
We first show how to solve the scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1}. Substituting the third equation in \eqref{RZF-CN-e1} into the fourth equation to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e4}
\displaystyle\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-R^n=\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q^{n+1}-\phi^n\right),
\end{equation}
Note that $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ is a linear functional of $\eta$, hence, the above equation is a quadratic equation with one unknown for $\eta^{n+\frac12}$. It means we can obtain determine $\eta^{n+\frac12}$ explicitly from \eqref{RZF-CN-e4}, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e5}
\displaystyle\eta^{n+\frac12}=\frac{-b\pm\sqrt{b^2-4ac}}{2a}.
\end{equation}
Here, if we set $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\mathcal{P}_1(\eta)=k_1\eta$, then we have $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})=k_1\eta^{n+\frac12}$. The coefficients $a$, $b$ and $c$ of above quadratic equation \eqref{RZF-CN-e5} will satisfy:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
&a=k_1^2\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&b=k_1\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n\right)+\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&c=-\widetilde{R}^{n+1}+R^n+\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
If we set $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\mathcal{P}_2(\eta)=k_2\eta_t$, then we have $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})=k_2\frac{\eta^{n+1}-\eta^n}{\Delta t}$. The coefficients $a$, $b$ and $c$ of above quadratic equation \eqref{RZF-CN-e5} will satisfy:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
&a=\frac{k_2^2}{\Delta t^2}\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&b=\frac{k_2}{\Delta t}\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n-\frac{k_2}{\Delta t}\eta^nq^{n+1}\right)+\frac{k_2}{\Delta t}(1-\frac{k_2}{\Delta t}\eta^n)\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&c=-\widetilde{R}^{n+1}+R^n+(1-\frac{k_2}{\Delta t}\eta^n)\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n-\frac{k_2}{\Delta t}\eta^nq^{n+1}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}\\
\begin{remark}
The left side of the equation \eqref{RZF-CN-e4} is an approximation of the free energy difference between two adjacent time steps. If this value is less than the round-off error of numerical integration, it might cause the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})$ tends to be -1. To avoid this mistake, if $|\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-R^n|<1e(-15)$ or $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\rightarrow-1$, we can solve the following equation by the Newton iteration to update $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})$:
\begin{equation*}
\displaystyle\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\left(\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-R^n\right)=\displaystyle\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q^{n+1}-\phi^n\right),
\end{equation*}
The similar technique can be seen in \cite{lin2019numerical}.
\end{remark}
Next, we will show that how to obtain the optimal choice for the relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$. The set $\mathcal{V}$ in \eqref{RZF-CN-e3} can be simplified as
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e6}
\mathcal{V}=\left\{\lambda|\lambda\in[0,1] ~s.t.~\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right]\lambda\leq\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right]+
\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right)\right\}.
\end{equation}
Noting the fact $\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}(\mathcal{G}\overline{\mu}^{n+\frac12},\overline{\mu}^{n+\frac12})\geq0$, then we obtain $1\in\mathcal{V}$ which means the set $\mathcal{V}$ is non-empty. We can choose the optimal relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$ as follows: the optimal $\lambda_0$ can be chosen as a solution of the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e7}
\aligned
\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda\quad s.t.~\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right]\lambda\leq\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right]+
\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
The next theorem summarizes the choice of $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$:
\begin{theorem}\label{RZF-CN-th1}
If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\neq0$, setting $\alpha=\frac{
\Delta t\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right)}{\left|\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right|}$, then we can choose the optimal relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$ as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\geq\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, we set $\lambda_0=0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=0$;
\item[2.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\alpha\geq1$, we set $\lambda_0=0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=\frac1\alpha$;
\item[3.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\alpha\in[0,1)$, we set $\lambda_0=1-\alpha$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(1) if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}=\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, any arbitrary parameter $\lambda$ between $0$ and $1$ will satisfy the inequality in \eqref{RZF-CN-e7}. Thus, we have $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=0$.
(2) if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}>\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, the inequality in \eqref{RZF-CN-e7} will be simplified as
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\lambda\leq1+\kappa^{n+1}\alpha.
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Set $\kappa^{n+1}=0$, then $\lambda\leq1$ is always true. Thus, we also have $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=0$.
(3) if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, the inequality in \eqref{RZF-CN-e7} will be simplified as
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\lambda\geq1-\kappa^{n+1}\alpha.
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Firstly, if $\alpha\geq1$, we have $\frac1\alpha\in(0,1]$. Then we set $\kappa^{n+1}=\frac1\alpha$ to obtain that $\lambda\geq1-\kappa^{n+1}\alpha=0$ is always true. It means $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=0$. Secondly, if $\alpha\in[0,1)$, we have $(1-\kappa^{n+1}\alpha)\in(0,1]$ for any $\kappa^{n+1}$. Then we obtain $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=1-\kappa^{n+1}\alpha$. By setting $\kappa^{n+1}=1$, we obtain the optimal solution $\lambda_0=1-\alpha$.
\end{proof}
Next, the following theorem will shown that the above RZF-CN scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1}-\eqref{RZF-CN-e2} is unconditional energy stable with a modified energy that is directly linked to the original free energy.\\
\begin{theorem}\label{RZF-CN-th2}
The second-order Crank-Nicolson scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1}-\eqref{RZF-CN-e2} based on the RZF approach with the above choice of $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$ is unconditionally energy stable in the sense that
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e8}
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n})\leq-\Delta t(1-\kappa^{n+1})(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12})\leq0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})=\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+R^{n+1}$ and more importantly we have
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n}),
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
under the condition of $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\geq\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ or $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ with $\alpha\geq1$. Here $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n})$ is the original energy where $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})=\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)$. If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\alpha\in[0,1)$, we could have
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1}).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The first three equations in the \textbf{Step I} of the RZF-CN scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1} can be rewrite as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e9}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}=\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Taking the inner products of \eqref{RZF-CN-e9} with $\mu^{n+\frac12}$ and $-\frac{\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}$ respectively,
and multiplying the fourth equation with $\Delta t$ in \eqref{RZF-CN-e1}, then combining these equations, we obtain immediately
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e10}
\aligned
\displaystyle \left[\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\right]-\left[\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n},\phi^{n})+R^{n}\right]=-\Delta t(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12})\leq0.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
From the constraint condition in \eqref{RZF-CN-e3}, we could obtain
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e11}
R^{n+1}-\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\leq\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right).
\end{equation}
Substituting the inequality \eqref{RZF-CN-e11} into \eqref{RZF-CN-e10} and noting $\kappa^{n+1}\in[0,1]$, we could have
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e12}
\aligned
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n})
&=\left[\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+R^{n+1}\right]-\left[\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n},\phi^{n})+R^{n}\right]\\
&\leq\left[\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\right]-\left[\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n},\phi^{n})+R^{n}\right]+\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12})\\
&=-\Delta t(1-\kappa^{n+1})(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12})\leq0.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Noting that the original energy $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})=\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)$ and using the \textbf{Step II} of the RZF-CN scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e2}, we could get
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e13}
\aligned
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})
&=R^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\\
&=\lambda_0\widetilde{R}^{n+1}+(1-\lambda_0)\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\\
&=\lambda_0\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\right].
\endaligned
\end{equation}
From the choice of $\lambda_0$ in Theorem \ref{RZF-CN-th1}, if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\geq\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ or $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\alpha\geq1$, we have $\lambda_0=0$. It means $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})=\lambda_0\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\right]=0$. If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\alpha\in[0,1)$, we have $\lambda_0\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\right]\leq0$, then the following inequality will hold:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1}).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
From above analysis, we can obtain that
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n}),\quad \forall n\geq0.
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Combining above inequality with \eqref{RZF-CN-e9}, when $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\geq\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ or $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\alpha\geq1$, we could have
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-CN-e14}
\aligned
\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})=\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})\leq\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n}).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
\end{proof}\\
\begin{remark}\label{RZF-CN-re1}
From Theorem \ref{RZF-CN-th2}, we observe that in most cases, we have $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n})$ which means the RZF-CN scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1}-\eqref{RZF-CN-e2} dissipates the original energy. Only if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\alpha\in[0,1)$, we can not obtain the original energy dissipative law. Hence, by a relaxation technique, the original energy is proved to be dissipative in most situations, which is a significant improvement over the modified ZF-CN scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1}. More importantly, the new proposed RZF-CN scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1}-\eqref{RZF-CN-e2} keeps the advantage of the scheme \eqref{RZF-CN-e1} in calculation.
\end{remark}
\subsection{A Second-order RZF-BDF2 Scheme}
In this subsection, we consider a second-order RZF scheme based on 2-step backward difference formula (BDF2). For gradient flow models, it is usually better to use BDF schemes. The second-order RZF-BDF2 scheme for the equivalent system \eqref{RZF-e1} is as follows: given $R^0=(F(\phi(0,\textbf{x}),1)$, $R^{n-1}$, $R^n$ $\phi^{n-1}$, $\phi^n$, we can update $\phi^{n+1}$ via the following two steps:
\textbf{Step I}: Compute $\phi^{n+1}$ and $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}$ by the following second-order semi-implicit BDF2 scheme:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e1}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}}{2\Delta t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\\
\displaystyle\mu^{n+1}=\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1}+F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1})+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),\\
\displaystyle3\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-4R^n+R^{n-1}=\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})\right]\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right),\\
\displaystyle\widetilde{R}^{n+1}=\left(F(\overline{\phi}^{n+1}),1\right),
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}=2\phi^n-\phi^{n-1}$.
\textbf{Step II}: Update the scalar auxiliary variable $R^{n+1}$ via a relaxation step as
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e2}
R^{n+1}=\lambda_0\widetilde{R}^{n+1}+(1-\lambda_0)\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right),\quad \lambda_0\in\mathcal{V}.
\end{equation}
Here is $\mathcal{V}$ a set defined by
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e3}
\aligned
\mathcal{V}=\left\{\lambda|\lambda\in[0,1]~s.t.~\right. &R^{n+1}-\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\leq\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1}\right)\\
&+\frac14\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right),\\
&\left.R^{n+1}=\lambda\widetilde{R}^{n+1}+(1-\lambda)\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right\}.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Here, $\kappa^{n+1}\in[0,\frac23]$ will be given below.
Firstly, we show how to solve the scheme \eqref{RZF-BDF-e1} efficiently. Combining the first two equations in equation \eqref{RZF-BDF-e1} for the RZF-BDF2 scheme, we can obtain the following linear matrix equation
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\displaystyle(3I+2\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})\phi^{n+1}=4I\phi^n-I\phi^{n-1}-2\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1})-2\Delta t\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
The coefficient matrix $A=(3I+2\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})$ is a symmetric positive matrix, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e4}
\aligned
\phi^{n+1}
&=A^{-1}(4I\phi^n-I\phi^{n-1})-2\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1})-2\Delta t\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})A^{-1}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1})\\
&=\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})q^{n+1}.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Here $\overline{\phi}^{n+1}$ and $q^{n+1}$ can be determined as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e5}
\aligned
\overline{\phi}^{n+1}=A^{-1}(4I\phi^n-I\phi^{n-1}-2\Delta t\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1})),\quad q^{n+1}=-2\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Noting that $\phi^{n+1}=\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})q^{n+1}$, then we can compute $\eta^{n+1}$ by the third and the fourth equations in \eqref{RZF-BDF-e1}:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e6}
\displaystyle3\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-4R^n+R^{n-1}=\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})\right]\left(F'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+3\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})q^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right),
\end{equation}
Similar as the RZF-CN scheme, the above equation is a also quadratic equation with one unknown for $\eta^{n+1}$. It means we can obtain determine $\eta^{n+1}$ explicitly from \eqref{RZF-BDF-e6}, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e7}
\displaystyle\eta^{n+1}=\frac{-b\pm\sqrt{b^2-4ac}}{2a}.
\end{equation}
Here, if we set $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\mathcal{P}_1(\eta)=k_1\eta$, then we have $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})=k_1\eta^{n+1}$. The coefficients $a$, $b$ and $c$ of above quadratic equation \eqref{RZF-BDF-e7} will satisfy:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
&a=3k_1^2\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&b=k_1\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)+3k_1\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&c=-\left(3\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-4R^n+R^{n-1}\right)+\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
If we set $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\mathcal{P}_2(\eta)=k_2\eta_t$, then we have $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})=k_2\frac{3\eta^{n+1}-4\eta^n+\eta^{n-1}}{2\Delta t}$. The coefficients $a$, $b$ and $c$ of above quadratic equation \eqref{RZF-BDF-e7} will satisfy:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
&a=\frac{27k_2^2}{4\Delta t^2}\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&b=\frac{3k_2}{2\Delta t}\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}-\frac{12\eta^n-3\eta^{n-1}}{2\Delta t}k_2q^{n+1}\right)\\
&\quad+\frac{9k_2}{2\Delta t}\left(1-\frac{4\eta^n-\eta^{n-1}}{2\Delta t}k_2\right)\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),q^{n+1}\right),\\
&c=\left(1-\frac{4\eta^n-\eta^{n-1}}{2\Delta t}k_2\right)\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}-\frac{12\eta^n-3\eta^{n-1}}{2\Delta t}k_2q^{n+1}\right)\\
&\quad-\left(3\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-4R^n+R^{n-1}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Next, we will show that how to obtain the optimal choice for the relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$. The set $\mathcal{V}$ in \eqref{RZF-BDF-e3} can be simplified as
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e8}
\aligned
\mathcal{V}=\left\{\lambda|\lambda\in[0,1]~s.t.~\right. &\left(\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\right)\lambda\leq\left(\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\right)+\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1}\right)\\
&\left.+\frac14\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\right\}.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
It is to obtain that $1\in\mathcal{V}$ which means the set $\mathcal{V}$ is non-empty because of the fact $\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1})\geq0$ and $\frac14\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\geq0$. The optimal parameter $\lambda_0$ can be chosen as a solution of the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e9}
\aligned
\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda~s.t.~ &\left(\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\right)\lambda\leq\left(\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-(F(\phi^{n+1}),1)\right)+\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1}\right)\\
&+\frac14\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
The next theorem summarizes the choice of $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$:\\
\begin{theorem}\label{RZF-BDF-th1}
Define $\beta=\frac{
\Delta t\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right)+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)}{\left|\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right|}$ under the condition of $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\neq0$, then we can choose the optimal relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$ as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\geq\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, we set $\lambda_0=0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=0$;
\item[2.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\beta\geq\frac32$, we set $\lambda_0=0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=\frac1\beta$;
\item[3.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and $\beta\in[0,\frac32)$, we set $\lambda_0=1-\frac23\beta$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=\frac23$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(1) if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}=\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, the inequality \eqref{RZF-BDF-e9} is always true for any $\lambda\in[0,1]$. Thus, we have the optimal relaxation parameter $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=0$.
(2) if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}>\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, dividing by $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ for both sides of the inequality \eqref{RZF-BDF-e9}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\lambda\leq1+\kappa^{n+1}\beta.
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Setting $\kappa^{n+1}=0$, then we have $\lambda\leq1$ which means all parameters in $[0,1]$ are satisfy above inequality. Hence, we have $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=0$.
(3) if $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<\left(F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$, the optimization problem \eqref{RZF-BDF-e9} will be simplified as:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda~s.t.~\lambda\geq1-\kappa^{n+1}\beta.
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Noting that $\kappa^{n+1}\in[0,\frac23]$, then if $\alpha\geq\frac32$, we have $\kappa^{n+1}\beta\in[0,1]$. Then we set $\kappa^{n+1}=\frac1\beta$ to obtain that $\lambda\geq1-\kappa^{n+1}\beta=0$ is always true. It means $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=0$. Secondly, if $\beta\in[0,\frac32)$, we have $\kappa^{n+1}\beta<1$ to let $(1-\kappa^{n+1}\beta)\in(0,1]$ for any $\kappa^{n+1}\in[0,\frac23]$. Then we obtain $\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda=1-\beta\max{\kappa^{n+1}}$. Noting that $\max{\kappa^{n+1}}=\frac23$, we obtain the optimal solution $\lambda_0=1-\frac23\beta$.
\end{proof}\\
\begin{theorem}\label{RZF-BDF-th2}
The second-order RZF-BDF2 scheme \eqref{RZF-BDF-e1}-\eqref{RZF-BDF-e2} with the above optimal choice of $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$ is unconditionally energy stable in the sense that
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e10}
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n})\leq-(1-\frac32\kappa^{n+1})\left[\Delta t(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1})+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\right]\leq0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})=\frac14(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(2\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n),2\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right)+\frac32R^{n+1}-\frac12R^n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Firstly, taking the inner product of the first equation in the RZF-BDF2 scheme \eqref{RZF-BDF-e1} with $\Delta t\mu^{n+1}$, we could get
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e11}
\aligned
\displaystyle \frac12\left(3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1},\mu^{n+1}\right)=-\Delta t(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1}).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Secondly, by taking the inner products of the second equation in \eqref{RZF-BDF-e1} with $\frac12\left(3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)$ and using the identity:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\displaystyle 2(a^{k+1},3a^{k+1}-4a^k+a^{k-1})=|a^{k+1}|^2+|2a^{k+1}-a^{k}|^2+|a^{k+1}-2a^k+a^{k-1}|^2-|a^{k}|^2-|2a^{k}-a^{k-1}|^2,
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
one obtains
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e12}
\aligned
&\displaystyle \frac12\left(3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1},\mu^{n+1}\right)\\
&\displaystyle=\frac12\left(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)+\frac12\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})\right]\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\\
&\displaystyle=\frac14(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(2\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n),2\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right)\\
&\quad\displaystyle-\frac14(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n},\phi^{n})-\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(2\phi^{n}-\phi^{n-1}),2\phi^{n}-\phi^{n-1}\right)\\
&\quad\displaystyle+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\\
&\quad\displaystyle+\frac12\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})\right]\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
We rewrite the third equation in \eqref{RZF-BDF-e1} as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e13}
\aligned
\displaystyle\left(\frac32\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\frac12R^{n}\right)-\left(\frac32R^{n}-\frac12R^{n-1}\right)=\frac12\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+1})\right]\left({F'}(\widehat{\phi}^{n+1}),3\phi^{n+1}-4\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Substituting above equation \eqref{RZF-BDF-e13} into \eqref{RZF-BDF-e12} and combining it with \eqref{RZF-BDF-e11}, we could have
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e14}
\aligned
&\frac14(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(2\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n),2\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right)+\frac32\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-\frac12R^n\\
&-\frac14(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n},\phi^{n})-\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(2\phi^{n}-\phi^{n-1}),2\phi^{n}-\phi^{n-1}\right)-\frac32R^{n}+\frac12R^{n-1}\\
&=-\left[\Delta t(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1})+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\right]\leq0
\endaligned
\end{equation}
From the constraint condition in \eqref{RZF-BDF-e3}, we could obtain
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e15}
\aligned
\displaystyle \frac32R^{n+1}-\frac32\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\leq\frac32\kappa^{n+1}\left[\Delta t\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1}\right)
+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\right],
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Adding the above two equations together and noting that $\kappa^{n+1}\in[0,\frac23]$, we could have
\begin{equation}\label{RZF-BDF-e16}
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n})\leq-(1-\frac32\kappa^{n+1})\left[\Delta t(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+1},\mu^{n+1})+\frac14\left(\mathcal{L}(\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}),\phi^{n+1}-2\phi^n+\phi^{n-1}\right)\right]\leq0,
\end{equation}
which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{The Relaxed Multiple Zero-Factor Approach}
The nonlinear free energy of many complex gradient flows contains disparate terms such that schemes with a single zero-factor may require excessively small time steps to obtain correct simulations. In this section, Inspired by the multiple SAV (MSAV) approach in \cite{cheng2018multiple}, we will give a relaxed multiple zero-factor (RMZF) approach to simulate the gradient flow with two disparate nonlinear terms:
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-e1}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu,\\
\mu=\mathcal{L}\phi+F_1'(\phi)+F_2'(\phi),\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}$ is a linear operator, $F_1'(\phi)$ and $F_2'(\phi)$ are nonlinear potential functions, $\mathcal{G}$ is
a positive or semi-positive linear operator. The above system satisfies the following energy dissipation law:
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-e2}
\aligned
\displaystyle\frac{dE}{dt}=-(\mathcal{G}\mu,\mu)\leq0,
\endaligned
\end{equation}
where $\mu=\frac{\delta E}{\delta \phi}$ and the free energy $E(\phi)$ is
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-e3}
E(\phi)=\frac12(\phi,\mathcal{L}\phi)+\int_\Omega F_1(\phi)d\textbf{x}+\int_\Omega F_2(\phi)d\textbf{x}.
\end{equation}
Introducing two linear zero factors $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$, $\mathcal{S}(\eta)$ of a scalar auxiliary function $\eta(t)$ and two SAVs $R_1=\int_\Omega F_1(\phi)d\textbf{x}$, $R_2=\int_\Omega F_2(\phi)d\textbf{x}$, we can rewrite the system \eqref{RMZF-e1} as the following
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-e4}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=-\mathcal{G}\mu,\\
\mu=\mathcal{L}\phi+F_1'(\phi)+F_2'(\phi)+\mathcal{P}(\eta)F_1'(\phi)+\mathcal{S}(\eta)F_2'(\phi),\\
\displaystyle\frac{\partial R_1}{\partial t}=\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta)\right]F_1'(\phi),\\
\displaystyle\frac{\partial R_2}{\partial t}=\left[1+\mathcal{S}(\eta)\right]F_2'(\phi),\\
R_1=(F_1(\phi),1),\\
R_2=(F_2(\phi),1).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Here $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ and $\mathcal{S}(\eta)$ are two linear zero factors. We can choose the following linear functionals with initial conditions:
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-e5}
\aligned
&\displaystyle \mathcal{P}_1(\eta)=k_1\eta \text{~with~} \eta(0)=0,\quad \mathcal{P}_2(\eta)=k_2\eta_t \text{~with~} \eta(0)=c_1,\\
&\displaystyle \mathcal{S}_1(\eta)=k_3\eta \text{~with~} \eta(0)=0,\quad \mathcal{S}_2(\eta)=k_4\eta_t \text{~with~} \eta(0)=c_2,
\endaligned
\end{equation}
where $k_1$, $k_2$, $k_3$, $k_4$ are arbitrary non-zero constants and $c_1$, $c_2$ are any real numbers.
A second order Crank-Nicolson scheme based on the relaxed multiple zero-factor approach (RMZF-CN): set $R_1^0=(F_1(\phi(0,\textbf{x}),1)$, $R_2^0=(F_2(\phi(0,\textbf{x}),1)$ and compute $\phi^{n+1}$, $R^{n+1}$ via the following two steps:
\textbf{Step I}: Compute $\phi^{n+1}$, $\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}$ and $\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}$ by the following semi-implicit Crank-Nicolson scheme:
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-CN-e1}
\begin{array}{lrl}
&\displaystyle\frac{\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n}{\Delta t}&=-\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\\
&\displaystyle\mu^{n+\frac12}&=\left[\frac12\mathcal{L}\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\frac12\mathcal{L}\phi^{n}+F_1'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})++F_2'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})\right],\\
&\displaystyle\phi^{n+1}&=\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q_1^{n+1}+\mathcal{S}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q_2^{n+1},\\
&\displaystyle (\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}-R_1^n)+(\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}-R_2^n)&=\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F_1'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right)\\
&&\quad+\left[1+\mathcal{S}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F_2'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\phi^{n+1}-\phi^n\right),\\
\displaystyle &\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}&=\left(F_1(\overline{\phi}^{n+1}),1\right),\quad\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}=\left(F_2(\overline{\phi}^{n+1}),1\right).
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}=\frac32\phi^n-\frac12\phi^{n-1}$, and
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
q_1^{n+1}=-\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F_1'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\quad q_2^{n+1}=-\Delta tA^{-1}\mathcal{G}F_2'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Here the coefficient matrix $A=(I+\frac12\Delta t\mathcal{G}\mathcal{L})$.
\textbf{Step II}: Update the scalar auxiliary variable $R_1^{n+1}$ and $R_2^{n+1}$ via a relaxation step as
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-CN-e2}
R_1^{n+1}=\lambda_0\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}+(1-\lambda_0)\left(F_1(\phi^{n+1}),1\right),\quad R_2^{n+1}=\lambda_0\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}+(1-\lambda_0)\left(F_2(\phi^{n+1}),1\right),\quad \lambda_0\in\mathcal{V}.
\end{equation}
Here is $\mathcal{V}$ a set defined by
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-CN-e3}
\aligned
\mathcal{V}=\left\{\lambda|\lambda\in[0,1]~s.t.~\right.
&(R_1^{n+1}+R_2^{n+1})-(\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}+\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1})\leq\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right),\\
&\left.R_1^{n+1}=\lambda\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}+(1-\lambda)\left(F_1(\phi^{n+1}),1\right),~ R_2^{n+1}=\lambda\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}+(1-\lambda)\left(F_2(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)\right\}.
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Here, $\kappa^{n+1}\in[0,1]$ will be given below.
Substituting the third equation in \eqref{RMZF-CN-e1} into the fourth equation to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-CN-e4}
\aligned
\displaystyle(\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}-R_1^n)+(\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}-R_2^n)=
&\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F_1'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q_1^{n+1}+\mathcal{S}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q_2^{n+1}-\phi^n\right)\\
&+\displaystyle\left[1+\mathcal{S}(\eta^{n+\frac12})\right]\left(F_2'(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}+\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q_1^{n+1}+\mathcal{S}(\eta^{n+\frac12})q_2^{n+1}-\phi^n\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
Noting that both $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ and $\mathcal{S}(\eta)$ are all linear functionals of $\eta$, we immediately obtain that the above equation is a quadratic equation with one unknown for $\eta^{n+\frac12}$. It means we can obtain determine $\eta^{n+\frac12}$ explicitly from \eqref{RMZF-CN-e4}, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-CN-e5}
\displaystyle\eta^{n+\frac12}=\frac{-b\pm\sqrt{b^2-4ac}}{2a}.
\end{equation}
Here, The values of the coefficients $a$, $b$ and $c$ depend on the choice of the zero factors $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ and $\mathcal{S}(\eta)$. For example, if we set $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\mathcal{P}_1(\eta)=k_1\eta$, and $\mathcal{S}(\eta)=\mathcal{S}_2(\eta)=k_4\eta_t$, then we have $\mathcal{P}(\eta^{n+\frac12})=k_1\eta^{n+\frac12}$ and $\mathcal{S}(\eta^{n+\frac12})=k_4\frac{\eta^{n+1}-\eta^n}{\Delta t}$. The coefficients $a$, $b$ and $c$ can be given as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
&a=\left(k_1{F'}_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}{F'}_2(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),k_1q_1^{n+1}+\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}q_2^{n+1}\right),\\
&b=\left(k_1{F'}_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}{F'}_2(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n-\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}\eta^nq_2^{n+1}\right)\\
&\qquad+\left({F'}_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+(1-\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}\eta^n){F'}_2(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),k_1q_1^{n+1}+\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}q_2^{n+1}\right),\\
&c=-(\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}-R_1^n)-(\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}-R_2^n)+\left({F'}_1(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12})+(1-\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}\eta^n){F'}_2(\widehat{\phi}^{n+\frac12}),\overline{\phi}^{n+1}-\phi^n-\frac{k_4}{\Delta t}\eta^nq_2^{n+1}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
Next, we will show that how to obtain the optimal choice for the relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$. Setting $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}=\widetilde{R}_1^{n+1}+\widetilde{R}_2^{n+1}$, $R^{n+1}=R_1^{n+1}+R_2^{n+1}$ and $E_1(\phi^{n+1})=(F_(\phi^{n+1})+F_2(\phi^{n+1}),1)$, we observe that the optimal relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$ is the solution of the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-CN-e7}
\aligned
\lambda_0=\min\limits_{\lambda\in[0,1]}\lambda\quad s.t.~\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-E_1(\phi^{n+1})\right]\lambda\leq\left[\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-E_1(\phi^{n+1})\right]+
\Delta t\kappa^{n+1}\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right).
\endaligned
\end{equation}
The next theorem summarizes the choice of $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$:\\
\begin{theorem}\label{RMZF-CN-th1}
If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-E_1(\phi^{n+1})\neq0$, setting $\alpha=\frac{
\Delta t\left(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12}\right)}{\left|\widetilde{R}^{n+1}-E_1(\phi^{n+1})\right|}$, then we can choose the optimal relaxation parameter $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$ as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\geq E_1(\phi^{n+1})$, we set $\lambda_0=0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=0$;
\item[2.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<E_1(\phi^{n+1})$ and $\alpha\geq1$, we set $\lambda_0=0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=\frac1\alpha$;
\item[3.] If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<E_1(\phi^{n+1})$ and $\alpha\in[0,1)$, we set $\lambda_0=1-\alpha$ and $\kappa^{n+1}=1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{RMZF-CN-th2}
The second-order Crank-Nicolson scheme \eqref{RMZF-CN-e1}-\eqref{RMZF-CN-e2} based on the RMZF approach with the above choice of $\lambda_0$ and $\kappa^{n+1}$ is unconditionally energy stable in the sense that
\begin{equation}\label{RMZF-CN-e8}
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})-\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n})\leq-\Delta t(1-\kappa^{n+1})(\mathcal{G}\mu^{n+\frac12},\mu^{n+\frac12})\leq0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})=\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+R_1^{n+1}+R_2^{n+1}$ and we further have
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n}),
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
under the condition of $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}\geq E_1(\phi^{n+1})$ or $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<E_1(\phi^{n+1})$ with $\alpha\geq1$. Here $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n})$ is the original energy where $\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1})=\frac12(\mathcal{L}\phi^{n+1},\phi^{n+1})+(F_1(\phi^{n+1}),1)+(F_2(\phi^{n+1}),1)$. If $\widetilde{R}^{n+1}<E_1(\phi^{n+1})$ and $\alpha\in[0,1)$, we could have
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi^{n+1})\leq\mathcal{E}(\phi^{n+1}).
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\section{Examples and discussion}
In this section, we implement the proposed Crank-Nicolson scheme based on the relaxed zero-factor approach (RZF-CN) and BDF2 scheme based on the zero-factor approach with relaxation (RZF-BDF2) and apply them to several classical gradient flow models include the Allen-Cahn model, the Cahn-Hilliard model, and the phase-field crystal model. In all considered examples, we consider the periodic boundary conditions and use a Fourier spectral method in space.
\subsection{Allen-Cahn model}
Consider the following Lyapunov energy functional:
\begin{equation}\label{section5_energy1}
E(\phi)=\int_{\Omega}(\frac{1}{2}|\nabla \phi|^2+\frac{1}{4\epsilon^2}(\phi^2-1)^2d\textbf{x},
\end{equation}
Given $\mathcal{G}=I$, then the gradient flow model in \eqref{intro-e2} reduces to the corresponding Allen-Cahn equation
\begin{equation}\label{section5_AC_model}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=M\left(\Delta \phi-\frac{1}{\epsilon^2}(\phi^3-\phi)\right),\quad(\textbf{x},t)\in\Omega\times [0,T],
\end{equation}
For above Allen-Cahn model, given the following initial condition:
\begin{equation*}
\aligned
\phi(x,y,0)=0.001\cos(x)\cos(y),
\endaligned
\end{equation*}
in domain $\Omega=[0,2\pi]^2$. We use $128^2$ Fourier-spectral modes in space and set model parameters $T=1$, $\epsilon=0.4$, $M=1$. We consider Crank-Nicolson SAV scheme, the proposed second-order RZF-CN and RZF-BDF2 schemes to obtain the numerical error and convergence rates for above example. We set the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\eta_t$ in the RZF method. The results are shown in Table \ref{tab:tab1} which indicate that all convergence rates are consistent with the theoretical results. We also observe that the RZF-CN method is more accurate than the baseline SAV-CN method. The energy curves are plotted for both SAV-CN and RZF-CN schemes with $\Delta t=0.01$ in Figure \ref{fig:fig1}. It can be observed from this figure that the computed energy for both schemes decays with time. Figure \ref{fig:fig1} also indicates that our proposed RZF method is a very efficient way for preserving the consistency between the modified energy and the original energy. In the following, we also give the detailed results of the energy error and the introduced zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$. From Figure \ref{fig:fig2}, we observe that the RZF-CN scheme provides less error between $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}$ and $E(\phi)$ than the RZF-BDF2 schemes. The values of the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ are very close to zero for both RZF-CN and RZF-BDF2 schemes.
\begin{table}[h!b!p!]
\small
\centering
\caption{\small The $L^\infty$ errors, convergence rates at $T=1$ for the second-order RZF-CN and RZF-BDF2 schemes.}\label{tab:tab1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{SAV-CN}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{RZF-CN}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{RZF-BDF2}\\
\cline{1-7}
$\Delta t$&Error&Rate&Error&Rate&Error&Rate\\
\cline{1-7}
$5\times10^{-2}$ &2.1972e-2 &--- &1.2748e-2 &--- &3.0129e-2 &--- \\
$2.5\times10^{-2}$ &6.3229e-3 &1.7970&3.5123e-3 &1.8597&9.7308e-3 &1.6305\\
$1.25\times10^{-2}$ &1.6715e-3 &1.9194&9.1399e-4 &1.9421&2.7363e-3 &1.8303\\
$6.25\times10^{-3}$ &4.2834e-4 &1.9643&2.3249e-4 &1.9750&7.2166e-4 &1.9228\\
$3.125\times10^{-3}$ &1.0859e-4 &1.9798&5.8549e-5 &1.9894&1.8486e-4 &1.9649\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\subfigure[The energy evolution for SAV-CN and RZF-CN schemes]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=8cm]{Energy-SAV-RZF-CN-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\subfigure[The energy error for SAV-CN and RZF-CN schemes]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=8cm]{Energy-SAV-RZF-CN-Error-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\caption{A comparison of the SAV-CN, and RZF-CN methods in solving the Allen-Cahn equation. (a) the numerical energies
using the SAV-CN and the RZF-CN schemes with $\Delta t=0.01$. (b) Numerical results of $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)-E(\phi)$ using the SAV-CN and the RZF-CN schemes with $\Delta t=0.01$.}\label{fig:fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\subfigure[MZF-CN and RZF-BDF2: numerical results of $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)-E(\phi)$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=8cm]{Energy-Error-RZF-CN-BDF-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\subfigure[Numerical results of the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=8cm]{Eta-RZF-CN-BDF-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\caption{A comparison of SAV-CN and RZF-CN methods in solving the Allen-Cahn equation. (a) Numerical results of $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)-E(\phi)$ using the MZF-CN and the MZF-BDF2 schemes with $\Delta t=0.01$. (b) Numerical results of the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ using the RZF-CN and RZF-BDF2 schemes with $\Delta t=0.01$.}\label{fig:fig2}
\end{figure}
We perform the numerical test to the Allen-Cahn equation \eqref{section5_AC_model} with the following initial conditions in 2D and 3D,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\phi(x,y,0)=\tanh\left(\frac{1.7+1.2\cos(6\theta)-\sqrt{x^2+y^2}}{\sqrt{2}\epsilon}\right),\label{AC-initial-e1}\\
&&\phi(x,y,z,0)=\tanh\left(\frac{\sqrt{(x-0.5)^2+(y-0.5)^2+(z-0.5)^2}-R_0}{\sqrt{2}\epsilon}\right),\label{AC-initial-e2}
\end{eqnarray}
For the initial condition \eqref{AC-initial-e1}, we set $\theta=tan^{-1}(y/x)$ for $(x,y)\in[-\pi,\pi]\times[-\pi,\pi]$ and $\epsilon=0.05$.
We choose $256\times256$ Fourier modes to discretize the space and use the time step $\Delta t=0.001$. Figure \ref{fig:fig3-1} shows the numerical test results at $t=0$, $0.2$, $0.4$ and $1$ to the Allen-Cahn model using the RZF-CN method. These results are consistent with
those in \cite{yoon2020fourier}. In Figure \ref{fig:fig3-2}, we present a comparison of energy (a), the nonlinear free energy $(F(\phi),1)$ and $R^{n+1}$ (b) and the zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\eta$ (c) of RZF-CN scheme. It is obvious to see that the proposed RZF method dissipates the almost original energy. From (b) and (c) in Figure \ref{fig:fig3-2}, we observe that the values of the zero factor are essentially zero except at a few time steps for this example. The trend of the value of zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ is highly consistent with the variation of the nonlinear free energy which implies that the introduced zero factor $\mathcal{P}(\eta)$ is essential and very efficient to capture the sharp dissipation of the nonlinear free energy.
For the initial condition \eqref{AC-initial-e2}, we set $\Omega=[0,1]^3$ with $R_0=0.3$, $\epsilon=0.02$, $T=3.5$, $M=0.01$ and give $\Delta t=0.01$. We discretize the space by the Fourier spectral method with $128\times128\times128$ modes. The snapshots of zero level set to the numerical solutions using the RZF-CN method are shown in Figure \ref{fig:fig3-3}. The simulation results depict the motion by mean curvature property and non-conservation of mass very well.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{AC-Star-1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{AC-Star-2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{AC-Star-3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{AC-Star-4-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Snapshots of zero level set to the numerical solutions of Allen-Cahn model with the initial condition \eqref{AC-initial-e1} at t=0, 0.2, 0.4, 1.}\label{fig:fig3-1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\subfigure[Energy of $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)$ and $E(\phi)$]{
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=5cm]{AC-Star-Energy-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\subfigure[$R^{n+1}$ and $\left((F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$]{
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=5cm]{AC-R-E-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\subfigure[Numerical results of $\eta$]{
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=5cm]{AC-Star-Eta-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\caption{(a) the comparisons of numerical energies between $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)$ and the original energy $E(\phi)$, (b) the numerical results of $R^{n+1}$ and $\left((F(\phi^{n+1}),1\right)$ and (c) the evolution of $\eta(t)$ of Allen-Cahn model with the initial condition \eqref{AC-initial-e1}.}\label{fig:fig3-2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{Bubble-3D-1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{Bubble-3D-2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{Bubble-3D-3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{Bubble-3D-4-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Snapshots of zero level set to the numerical solutions of Allen-Cahn model with the initial condition \eqref{AC-initial-e2} at t=0, 2, 3, 3.5.}\label{fig:fig3-3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cahn-Hilliard model}
Consider the following well-known Cahn-Hilliard model:
\begin{equation}\label{section5_CH_model}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=M\Delta\left(-\epsilon^2\Delta\phi+\phi^3-\phi\right),\quad(\textbf{x},t)\in\Omega\times [0,T],
\end{equation}
with the free energy
\begin{equation}\label{section5_CH-e1}
E(\phi)=\int_\Omega\frac{\epsilon^2}{2}|\nabla\phi|^2+\frac14(\phi^2-1)^2d\textbf{x},
\end{equation}
To give a more efficient simulation, we specify $F(\phi)=\frac{1}{4}(\phi^2-1-\beta)^2$. Then the above Cahn-Hilliard equation is obtained as
\begin{equation}\label{section5_CH_e2}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=M\Delta\left(-\epsilon^2\Delta\phi+\beta\phi+F'(\phi)\right),\quad F'(\phi)=\phi(\phi^2-1-\beta),\quad(\textbf{x},t)\in\Omega\times [0,T].
\end{equation}
Next, we investigated the numerical tests by the proposed RZF method to the Cahn-Hilliard model with the following initial conditions:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\phi(x,y,0)=0.01\cos(2\pi x)\cos(2\pi y),\label{CH-initial-e1}\\
&&\phi(x,y,z,0)=1-\sum\limits_{i=1}^2\tanh\left(\frac{\sqrt{(x-x_i)^2+(y-y_i)^2+(z-z_i)^2}-r}{\sqrt{2}\epsilon}\right),\label{CH-initial-e2}\\
&&\phi(x,y,z,0)=0.05\text{rand}(x,y,z),\label{CH-initial-e3}
\end{eqnarray}
where "rand" implies a random number generating function ranged from -1 to 1.
We set the initial condition as in \eqref{CH-initial-e1} to check the convergence rates of our proposed schemes. we adopt uniform meshes $N_x=N_y=128$, and set $T=1$, $\epsilon=0.4$ $M=0.5$, $\beta=2$ and $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\eta$. Figure \ref{fig:fig4} shows the results of the errors and convergence rates for the RZF-CN and RZF-BDF2 schemes. Numerical results demonstrate the accuracy and efficiency of our proposed scheme.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\subfigure[Convergence test of the variable $\phi$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=8cm]{CH-Rates-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\subfigure[Convergence test of the variable $R$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=8cm]{CH-Error-R-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\caption{Convergence test for Cahn-Hilliard equation using RZF-CN and RZF-BDF2 schemes.}\label{fig:fig4}
\end{figure}
Next, we investigate the coarsening dynamics driven by the Cahn-Hilliard equation with the initial conditions \eqref{CH-initial-e2} and \eqref{CH-initial-e3}. We set $\Omega=[0,1]^3$, $\mathcal{P}(\eta)=\eta_t$, $\epsilon=0.01$, $M=1$, $r=0.14$, $(x_1,y_1,z_1)=(0.5,0.4,0.5)$, $(x_2,y_2,z_2)=(0.5,0.7,0.5)$. Here, we use $N_x=N_y=N_z=128$, $h=1/128$, and $\Delta t=1e-3$. Figure \ref{fig:fig5} shows the numerical investigation results at $t=0$, $0.01$, $0.1$ and $0.2$ to the 3D Cahn-Hilliard model with the initial condition \eqref{CH-initial-e2}. One can see that the initially separated spheres connect with each other gradually and finally merge into a big vesicle. The results are also consistent with those presented in \cite{cheng2020global}. Figure \ref{fig:fig6} shows the numerical investigation results at $t=0$, $0.01$, $0.1$ and $0.2$ to the 3D Cahn-Hilliard model with the initial condition \eqref{CH-initial-e3}. The above results represent well the coarsening dynamics of the Cahn-Hilliard equation.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{CH-Bubble-3D-1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{CH-Bubble-3D-2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{CH-Bubble-3D-3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=3.5cm]{CH-Bubble-3D-4-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Snapshots of zero level set to the numerical solutions of Cahn-Hilliard model with the initial condition \eqref{CH-initial-e2} using RZF-CN scheme at t=0, 0.01, 0.1, 0.2.}\label{fig:fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=5cm]{CH-Rand-3D-1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=5cm]{CH-Rand-3D-2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=5cm]{CH-Rand-3D-3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=5cm]{CH-Rand-3D-4-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Snapshots of zero level set to the numerical solutions of Cahn-Hilliard model with the initial condition \eqref{CH-initial-e3} using RZF-CN scheme at t=0.02, 0.1, 0.5, 2.}\label{fig:fig6}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Phase filed crystal model}
Consider the following Swift-Hohenberg free energy:
\begin{equation*}
E(\phi)=\int_{\Omega}\left(\frac{1}{4}\phi^4+\frac{1}{2}\phi\left(-\epsilon+(1+\Delta)^2\right)\phi\right)d\textbf{x},
\end{equation*}
where $\textbf{x} \in \Omega \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$, $\phi$ is the density field, $g\geq0$ and $\epsilon>0$ are constants with physical significance, $\Delta$ is the Laplacian operator.
Considering a gradient flow in $H^{-1}$, one can obtain the following phase field crystal (PFC) model:
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=\Delta\mu=\Delta\left(\phi^3-\epsilon\phi+(1+\Delta)^2\phi\right), \quad(\textbf{x},t)\in\Omega\times Q,
\end{equation*}
which is a sixth-order nonlinear parabolic equation and can be applied to simulate various phenomena such as crystal growth, material hardness and phase transition. Here $Q=(0,T]$, $\mu=\frac{\delta E}{\delta \phi}$ is called the chemical potential.
In the following, we simulate the benchmark simulation for the PFC model. we choose the initial condition $\phi_0(x,y)=\widehat{\phi}_0+0.01\times \text{rand}(x,y)$, where the $\text{rand}(x,y)$ is the random number in $[-1,1]$ with zero mean. In this test, set $\epsilon=0.325$ and adopt uniform meshes $N_x=N_y=128$ in the Fourier spectral method.
We show the phase transition behavior of the density field for different values at various times in Figures \ref{fig:fig7} with different $\widehat{\phi}_0$ and $\Omega$. We observe that for different $\widehat{\phi}_0$, the shape and rate of crystallization of crystals are different. In all cases, the process of the phase transition is qualitative agreement of the density fields. Similar computation results for phase field crystal model can be found in many articles such as in \cite{yang2017linearly}. The energy curves are plotted for PFC model with different initial conditions in Figure \ref{fig:fig8}. It is observed that the computed energy for all cases decays with time.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\subfigure[$\phi$ at t=10,30,50,100 with $\Omega=\text{[}0,100{]}^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0.25$]
{
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-4-eps-converted-to.pdf}
}
\subfigure[$\phi$ at t=10,20,50,100 with $\Omega=\text{[}0,200{]}^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0$]
{
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-9-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-10-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-11-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-12-eps-converted-to.pdf}
}
\subfigure[$\phi$ at t=10,20,30,50 with $\Omega=\text{[}0,200{]}^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0.2$]
{
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-5-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-6-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-7-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=4cm,height=4cm]{PFC-RZF-8-eps-converted-to.pdf}
}
\caption{Crystal growth pattern formation with different initial conditions governed by the PFC model.}\label{fig:fig7}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\subfigure[Energy evolution with $\Omega=\text{[}0,100{]}^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0.1$]{
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=5cm]{PFC-Energy-1-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\subfigure[Energy evolution with $\Omega=\text{[}0,200{]}^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0$]{
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=5cm]{PFC-Energy-2-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\subfigure[Energy evolution with $\Omega=\text{[}0,200{]}^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0.2$]{
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=5cm]{PFC-Energy-3-eps-converted-to.pdf}}
\caption{(a) Energy of $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)$ and $E(\phi)$ with $\Omega=[0,100]^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0.1$, (b) Energy of $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)$ and $E(\phi)$ with $\Omega=[0,200]^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0$, (c) Energy of $\mathcal{\widetilde{E}}(\phi)$ and $E(\phi)$ with $\Omega=[0,200]^2$ and $\widehat{\phi}_0=0.2$.}\label{fig:fig8}
\end{figure}
\section*{Acknowledgement}
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author. We would like to acknowledge the assistance of volunteers in putting together this example manuscript and supplement.
\bibliographystyle{siamplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Network science emerges as a term in the late nineteen-nineties and consists of a series of `content agnostic' ways to analyse structures of various kinds as networks or graphs.~\autocite{newmanStructureDynamicsNetworks2006} The kind of things network scientists work on range from the structure of proteins, to relations between social media posts, to chains of influence in criminal networks. Tools and approaches from network science are also often drawn into other fields, to show connections amongst entities as diverse as members of the ruling class or of criminal trading networks—as developed for instance in the meticulous work of artist Mark Lombardi~\autocite{hobbsMarkLombardiGlobal2004}—or to construct a taxonomic characterisation of the intestinal microbiota in gout.~\autocite{guoIntestinalMicrobiotaDistinguish2016} Work in the field and in the applications of its tools seems to suggest the possibility of finding shared `hidden laws' amongst often very different kinds of formations.
By now, the working vernacular of network visualisations has become a familiar part of contemporary culture. For instance, Figure~\ref{fig:Example_Network} below typifies such images. They are composed of two types of entity, edges or connecting lines and vertices or dots where two or more lines meet. The primary problem this article discusses is essentially what is meant by these patterns of dots and lines and their interactions with other kinds of formation.
In network science, the notion of `community' was coined to grapple with these patterns~\autocite{girvanCommunityStructureSocial2002} and `community detection algorithms' such as the `Louvain algorithm' are used today to discriminate such patterns in large networks with millions of nodes and edges.~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} In particular, community detection algorithms can be interpreted as methods for unsupervised machine learning that are supposed to find patterns in data without given ground truth.~\autocite{hastieElementsStatisticalLearning2009} To delve into these patterns requires asking questions of meaning: what do they stand in for, what do they signify, and what do they create? Further, what are the ways in which these arrangements of dots and lines, and the calculations that produce them, have potential cultural and political effects? To address this means recognising these patterns as a visual articulation of mathematical relationships. In order to hold these two aspects together, recognising their mutual inherence and differentiation, their particular and conjoint epistemic dimensions need to be addressed. One of the ways to do this is by understanding the way in which the notion of community provides in itself something of a conceptual vertex between different modes of analysis and understanding.
Since social media have incorporated the form of the graph, without, oddly enough, giving users actual sight of it, social networks have become part of the everyday furniture of social relations, given for instance in the brute facticity of artifacts like the following to follower ratios on Twitter, the commonplace of `virality'~\autocite{sampsonViralityContagionTheory2012} and the social role of the influencer, a social function that is in some ways predicated upon the operation of graphs.
We move from a society understood, from some disciplinary or technical perspectives, to be composed of individuals in networks that can be analysed by means of reserved or neutral observation to a society of analysis whose givens are networks in which power operations are implemented. In this set-up it should be of scant surprise that the word community appears as capable of interpreting almost every kind of phenomena at the exact point in time when, if it has not entirely vanished, community, in its hitherto understood senses, seems often to have to be mechanised. In this condition, it is perhaps rather wince-inducing to rifle through the techniques of network analysis to try, not only to understand them, but to evaluate the conditions in which they might be worked. Nevertheless, there is something fascinating here, and one of the ways of understanding the way these techniques not only address but compose the present is by delving into them.
\section{Communities}
\subsection{Community in Network Science}\label{sec:CommunityNetworkScience}
We start by approaching the concept of community as imagined by network scientists whose mathematical definitions rely on graph theoretic formalism. For a very comprehensive introduction to network science, the reader is referred to Katharina Zweig's book `Network analysis literacy',~\autocite{zweigNetworkAnalysisLiteracy2016} where the use of mathematical formalism in network science is promoted because it abbreviates statements and makes them less ambiguous. Without interrogating these arguments here, we will comment on the abstract capacities and semantics of mathematics in the next sections. To give a flavour of the network science formalism however, we guide the reader through some of the basic definitions with a running example at hand---a friendship network derived from anonymised Facebook data provided by Julian McAuley and Jure Leskovec.~\autocite{mcauleyDiscoveringSocialCircles2013} We use the Python package `NetworkX' for computations and visualisation,~\autocite{hagbergExploringNetworkStructure2008} and Figure~\ref{fig:Example_Network} depicts the example network that we denote by the symbol $G$. The network consists of $4,039$ Facebook users that are represented by points in the diagram called vertices (or nodes) and of $88,234$ friendships between users represented by lines in the diagram called edges (or links). To formalise this mathematically, each vertex is assigned a unique integer from $1$ to $4,039$ and the collection of all these distinct integers composes the \textit{set of vertices} that we denote by the symbol $V$. For an integer $i$, e.g. $i=1$, the notation $i\in V$ signifies that $i$ is a vertex in the graph $G$ or equivalently, an element of the set of vertices $V$. Accordingly, the symbol $\in$ is read as `element of'. To encode the relations between the vertices, i.e. the social relation of friendships in our example, we define an edge between vertices $i$ and $j$ denoted by the symbol $\{i,j\}$ whenever $i$ and $j$ are `friends' on Facebook. The \textit{set of edges}, i.e. all friendships in our example, is denoted by the symbol $E$. Hence, our network $G$ consists of a finite set of vertices $V$ and a set of edges $E$ and this is often summarised by the notation $G=(V,E)$.\footnote{For the sake of simplicity we only defined the simplest form of networks here, the undirected and unweighted graph, meaning that the edges between nodes have no orientation but are symmetric and all edges have the same importance. However, it is also common to direct the edges and to weight them by a number that signifies the strength or importance of the connection, see~\autocite{zweigNetworkAnalysisLiteracy2016} for further information.}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figures/facebook_network_final.pdf}\caption{\textbf{Community detection in a Facebook friendship network.} We visualise the social network $G=(V,E)$ where vertices $i\in V$ (the points in the diagram) correspond to Facebook users and edges $\{i,j\}\in E$ (the lines in the diagram) are drawn between users that are `friends' on Facebook. Community detection using the Louvain algorithm is applied to the friendship network and nodes are coloured with respect to their assigned community, which network scientists would interpret as a friendship group. The network is derived from annonymised data provided by Julian McAuley and Jure Leskovec~\autocite{mcauleyDiscoveringSocialCircles2013} and we use the Python package `NetworkX' for computations and visualisation.~\autocite{hagbergExploringNetworkStructure2008} We present this visualisation as an example of the diagrams produced in network science.}
\label{fig:Example_Network}
\end{figure}
For network scientists, the term \emph{community} now serves as an abstraction often used to describe a group of vertices that have stronger relations among themselves than to the rest of the network,~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010} e.g. they share a common property or they play similar roles in the network. The usual assumption is that networks can be divided into mutually exclusive or highly differentiated communities, where the number of communities is intrinsic to the network, and hence communities are understood to form the network's building blocks. The collection of these communities as building blocks is also called a network \textit{partition} and algorithms that are designed to find such partitions into communities are called \textit{community detection algorithms}. Figure \ref{fig:Example_Network} visualises community detection with the so called `Louvain algorithm'~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} (see Section~\ref{sec:Louvain}) applied to our example network and the nodes in the figure are coloured with respect to their assigned community. The communities in the social network derived from Facebook could now be interpreted as different groups of friends and as we will see in Section~\ref{sec:Genealogy} on the genealogy of community detection algorithms, the notion of community is indeed motivated by the study of the social in a way that emphasises its interpretation as a concatenation of networks.
Today, community detection algorithms find applications in networked data from disciplines as diverse as biology, computer science, engineering, sociology or politics.~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010} Despite the high interest in community detection, there is---perhaps surprisingly---no generally accepted definition of what a community exactly constitutes in network science and so Michael Schaub et al. suggest that ``community detection should not be considered as a well-defined problem, but rather as an umbrella term with many facets''.~\autocite[p. 1]{schaubManyFacetsCommunity2017} They distinguish four different approaches to the problem of community detection in the literature, whose goals and motivations we summarise briefly and on which we will reply over the course of the article:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item Minimisation of violation constraints: When referred to as partitioning, the goal of community detection is to cut a network into several parts with the least cost, e.g. by breaking the least number of edges.
\item Maximisation of internal density: In computer science, community detection is often treated as a discrete version of the data clustering problem and the goal is to find communities that have a very high internal density of edges but are less strongly connected across different communities. The Louvain algorithm mentioned above follows this perspective and is presented in more detail in Section~\ref{sec:Louvain}.
\item Identification of structurally equivalent vertices: In the social sciences, community detection is often used to identify individuals in social networks that play the same role and so the goal is to find communities that consists of structurally equivalent nodes.
\item Dynamic model reduction: Instead of focusing on the static network structure one can also study diffusion dynamics of e.g. information flows or an epidemic on the network and from a model reduction perspective, community detection then aims to determine a reduced graph that shows the same response to the dynamics as the original graph.
\end{enumerate}
While this summary gives an overview of different trends, there are also other categorisations of community detection, e.g. Santo Fortunato distinguishes `local definitions' of communities from `global definitions' and `definitions based on vertex similarity'~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010} or Tiago Peixoto divides community detection algorithms into `descriptive methods' and `inferential methods'.~\autocite{peixotoDescriptiveVsInferential2022} The persistence of multiple categorisations further underlines the way in which community remains an ambivalent concept in network science and can not be reduced to one precise meaning. Rather than seeing this as a problem however, we see that there are apt reasons for this relatively vague definitional state of the term.
\subsection{Community as a Vague Operator}\label{sec:VagueOperator}
Although the algorithms designed for community detection mostly build on an \emph{ad hoc} and non-committal understanding of a community, the term community also refers to a complex sociological concept that is often politically loaded and whose understanding can abruptly differ between, say, different scholarly or activist traditions, amongst other kinds of uses of the term. The word community might thus serve as a conceptual boundary object that mediates, for instance, between the social and the computational sciences. The way that it does so is however quite idiosyncratically nebulous, in a way that invites discussion.
Key to Susan Leigh Star's and her collaborators' notion of the boundary object as it iterated over time and across different cases, is the idea of \textit{interpretative flexibility}, that the same object can be read in many different ways, or for different purposes. An example would be a map of an area, which can be read, for example, to plan different journeys, or to carry out operations as diverse as strategising a military campaign, allocating goods or services, or retrospectively tracing the possible routes of a vehicle, amongst many others. Key to such examples is the way in which the precision of the boundary object, in some ways like other modern phenomena, an ideal ``writerly text'',~\autocite{barthes1974} or what curator Lawrence Alloway called the ``multi-evocative''~\autocite{allowayEduardoPaolozzi2011} enables multiple non-exclusive acts of interpretation. Star's formulation is aimed at discerning \textit{cooperation without consensus} where an object is shared or generated by users who don't necessarily agree on its nature or what it is for. In related terms, some of the tension between a formalism (like ``community'') and its uses can be found in another context, one perhaps quite similar to that of certain implementations of network science, is the distinction between exchange value and use value.~\autocite{sohn-rethelIntellectualManualLabour1978} In this economic faceting as set out in Alfred Sohn Rethel's work, the political contestation embedded in the epistemic comes to the fore. The exchange of a thing only partially determines or encodes its use or interpretation, and more fundamentally, the epistemic formations that go into the genesis of such an entity. Nevertheless, at times such factors can be entirely determining.
In an article reviewing the way in which the boundary object term has been disseminated—and it has been justly influential~\autocite{starThisNotBoundary2010}—Star notes aspects of the proposal that have been less widely taken up. One of these is for vague uses that as she says are ``NOT interdisciplinary'' that is, that whilst such objects might be mutually used or generated by different disciplines, they are not themselves the direct grounds for interaction.~\autocite[pp. 604-5, capitalisation in original]{starThisNotBoundary2010} Star also notes the vagueness of aspects of some boundary objects as a condition that enables their usefulness in certain contexts~.\autocite[p.607]{starThisNotBoundary2010} It is this aspect that is applicable here. Community is a central yet vague concept in network science, and it is this vagueness that comes to have subtle importance.
In an earlier article on a museum of zoology, Star and James R. Griesemer develop the idea of the boundary object to rework some of Bruno Latour, Michel Callon and John Law's formulations around contests of meaning in the intersection points of `diverse social worlds', where there is competition over the meaning of terms and the establishment of the means by which interpretations and significance can be established.~\autocite{starInstitutionalEcologyTranslations1989} The boundary object becomes more or less fixed but only through what they call ``ecological'' means—dynamic and multi-dimensional—tussles over terms and practices.
By contrast, in the uses of the term community that we encounter in network science, there is a rather different way of operating. There is an indifference to recruiting other users as allies in the same usage of the word. We also note that there is sparse construction of ``obligatory points of passage''~\autocite[p. 111]{lawTechnologyClosureHeterogeneous1987} in a mechanics formed by the interplay of `interests'~\autocite{callonInterestsTheirTransformation1982} since there is no competition on these grounds and no threat of displacement from one meaning to another without the risk of producing `interpretative flexibility' since the object is vague rather than precise. Rather, than being fought over, `community' is used, in this context, as something like an aggregate of hints, none of which necessarily `cash out' as more than an atmospheric term or loose identifier of a broad category. In this sense, community acts as a further kind of boundary object, that could be called, following Star's recognition of vagueness, a `vague operator'.
Vagueness can be useful, that is, put to many uses, some of which are tangential to each other and are not answerable to each other. We aim to map some of these uses, noting the way that as a vague operator, the term `community' allows for different ideational, discursive, technical and mathematical operations to co-exist in an overlapping and mutually indifferent way. Such uses indeed indicate aspects of the nature of a community, but in the sense that they can also cut across and interfere with each other, create detours in meaning and derive different results, so we are also dealing with a community of meanings that may be linked by curious means. As such, a vague operator is different to a boundary object because it may act as a means of inclusively obfuscating the terms of what is being conjoined, in this case, under the term `community'. We do not mean to claim that this is done for nefarious means—although this is likely the case at times with a term as loaded as `community'—but more that by mobilising a term that has multiple simultaneous meanings, uncontested vagueness, rather than a clear boundary or a multidimensional struggle over meaning, may have certain kinds of effects. It is these that come to the fore in the literature under discussion.
At the same time as it is a vague concept, community is one that also has a conceptual allure since whilst it operates as a vague technical description in different scientific idioms, community also has many other dimensions to its meaning. The idea of community as a good, or as a unit of analysis, is also an object of desire in some sense, not as an object, but what is sought after---as a \textit{condition} of value. We will discuss some of these dimensions and how they motivate the graphing of communities over the course of this article. One kind of tension to bear in mind however would be that exemplified in the difference between the data on a social media platform being seen by the platform owners as units of analysis and exchange whilst being understood by the platform's users as elements of use.
Furthermore, the term `community' also mediates between the designers of algorithms and software users who might bring their own equally \emph{ad hoc} and vague understandings of a community. As such, the term community comes with slippage when the computational object is seamlessly replaced with a sociological category in software systems that implement community detection algorithms. The often invisible translation of concepts from the non-digital to the digital world can be problematic as Richard Harper et al. note: ``Boundary objects succeed when they allow both sides to get on with their concerns without interfering with the other. They start to fail when the clarity of this distinction blurs''.\autocite[p. 4]{harperWhatFile2013} Vague operators, by comparison to boundary objects, perhaps start to succeed when the clarity of the distinction blurs, allowing different kinds of claim to be made without too many questions being asked about their nature. This is not to imply that they are to be treated as inherently loaded, or that their use implies a sleight of hand. Rather, that their vagueness is the result of a certain kind of precision available to mathematical description that makes the words associated with it have rather a secondary quality. This factor indeed tilts the axis of our discussion away from that between boundary objects and vague operators to a broader consideration of the nature of mathematical knowledge in action.
In his essay on the Semiotics of Mathematics Brian Rotman points out that mathematics has the unusual property that ``its signs seem to be constructed [...] so as to sever their signifieds, what they are supposed to mean, from the real time and space within which their material signifiers occur''.~\autocite[p. 5]{rotmanSemioticsMathematics2000} This gives mathematics its unique and highly valuable ability to be both about anything at all—in that, one way or another, anything can be described, however partially, by number—and, with equal intensity, it is also able to perpetually rework itself through unlimited terrains of abstraction since the one thing a number can be about most acutely, is other numbers. In the case of community detection this means that the behaviours of physical systems if described in certain limited ways can also produce descriptions that are transferable to or relevant in other contexts, such as social ones.
A further dimension here is that many of the things treated as communities by such approaches do not pre-exist in a non-digital state. They are \textit{natively artificial}, and thus the terms of their artificiality deserve probing, analysis and the recognition that they can perhaps be redesigned. Artificiality means for instance, that in this case, one kind of community is not identical to another, can give the grounds for a work of variation in which the presumptions and determinants of many kinds of communities can be reworked. Indeed, what might well be sought after is not community per se, but a more general class of processual things of which community can said to be an example, that of self-regulating entities, complexes of relation whose parts emergently develop a contingent whole: where sets of relatively simple entities interact to produce a more complex state describable as another kinds of entity or idiom---changing from nodes to networks for instance.
Community detection aims at divining the grammar of such a movement; in turn, numerous kinds of entities, including platforms, attempt to determine the grammar of such emergence and by doing so to harness and entrain them to certain kinds of programme. Creating the right harness for the capacity of self-regulation, of something more complex to come out of the interaction of simpler states of things as they emerge into other states, is, as Alexander Kluge and Oskar Negt argue in ``History and Obstinacy'' something that characterises much of the work of politics, psychology and economy as they work with the sources of labour and numerous capacities in production.\autocite{klugeHistoryObstinacy2014} Their book, in part, is a charting of the ways in which technologies address, grip and reframe human bodily, psychic and social capacities. In the case of the communities detected by the mechanisms discussed here, these are being reworked at several different degrees of abstraction, some of which are emergent, some of which are technically arrived at.
The quality of emergence, which is brought into community detection from those trained in physics as we will see in Section~\ref{sec:Genealogy}, is what is hankered for. The change in state of a thing, of apple juice into cider, a child into an adult, or an implicit collective into a graph marking a movement from a set of connections describing simple transmissions of information to a point at which these might `go viral', are all moments of transition at which value of many different sorts can be gained. The craft of the algorithm writer in this context is to find a way of cleaving to the moment of developing self-regulation or emergence in a way that is meaningful, that allows it to be described, without killing it off through creating something alienating yet whilst---in an echo of another kind of capture of energies, labour and materials that is not without violence and domestication---`milking' it for meaning, or engendering reciprocal exchanges of other kinds in which forms of feedback between the mapped entities and the forms of mapping themselves generate other conditions of emergence.
One of the things effected by this vagueness of the term community, but also its significance as a thing that may refer to value-bearing entities and processes is the distinction between the discrete and continuous typical of digital systems.\autocite{faziContingentComputationAbstraction2018} Here, vagueness facilitates the possibility of the idea that community is based on discrete connection rather than something describable in more continuous terms, or by means of translation, such as overhearing, innuendo or implication, a general sense of something. At the same time, this movement can be reversed; nebulous continuities preceding the possibility of the discrete. The craft of the algorithm designer~\autocite{sennettCraftsman2008} thus has something to do with recognising partiality, the inadequacy of description in a vague operator, as being potentially productive, whilst negotiating the way in which this quality also plays out in relation to other consistencies, such as available computational resource. To this end, an understanding of the development of algorithms involved in community detection is pertinent.
\section{Algorithms}
\subsection{Lineages of Community Detection Algorithms}\label{sec:Genealogy}
Mathematical practices are interwoven with their historical and technological gestation, but are rarely reducible to them. Computation in turn has changed mathematical ideas and modes of calculation in multiple ways. It has for instance introduced pathways to certain kinds of mathematical objects whose development only took off with sufficient capacity of calculation. An example would be the development of a renewed interest in what came to be called fractals, emerging with the PCs of the 1980s.~\autocite{mandelbrotFractalistMemoirScientific2013} Similarly, the uptake of graph theory for network science purposes coincides with the increased availability of network datasets during the 1990s developments of computer networks and the internet~\autocite{newmanStructureDynamicsNetworks2006}---which in some ways become both its metaphor and locus of veridiction, the space where it becomes true as something natively artificial. To say this is not to claim that mathematics is simply on the receiving end of history, nor technical histories. Mathematics, as a means of thinking that has great capacity of abstraction also contains the possibility of thinking outside of historical constraints, of over-leaping them, and in this way may also act as one of their determinants.
Whilst we can take the above considerations into account, the focus of our paper lies on the mathematical practices that shaped the central concept of community in network science and a genealogy of community detection needs to disentangle different lineages that run in parallel across disciplines, mostly the social sciences and statistical physics. We can only approximate this genealogy due to an enormous amount of publications and present one narrative that is influenced by discussions with different practitioners in network science. A certain amount of reticence is therefore present in this account.
As far as we are aware, the physicists Michelle Girvan and Mark Newman were first to use the term `community' for describing a computational object in network science. In a highly influential paper from 2002, Girvan and Newman, who were both working at the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico at that time, coined the term `community detection' and also present what one might call the `founding myth' of community detection:
\begin{quote}
``Consider for a moment the case of social networks---networks of friendships or other acquaintances between individuals. \textit{It is a matter of common experience that such networks seem to have communities in them}: subsets of vertices within which vertex-vertex connections are dense, but between which connections are less dense. [...] Communities in a social network might represent real social groupings, perhaps by interest or background''.~\autocite[p. 7821, our emphasis]{girvanCommunityStructureSocial2002}
\end{quote}
In this description of communities in networks, Girvan and Newman mobilise the reader's intuition for social interactions and friendships to suggest that this metaphorical understanding of community can be seamlessly translated into network science. It appears that the concept of community is almost too mundane to define rigorously. This is of course in contrast to the lack of precise definitions for community in networks as described in Section~\ref{sec:CommunityNetworkScience}. However, we observe that Girvan and Newman follow the clustering perspective~(ii) on community detection as introduced in Section~\ref{sec:CommunityNetworkScience} because they define communities as entities with a high density of edges. It seems surprising that the term `community detection' was first introduced in network science by physicists and not social scientists but even more surprising might be that the term `community' has become hegemonic in network science since then.\footnote{The 2002
article by Girvan and Newman has become very influential in the field with 12,971 citations [as of May 2022] according to Semantic Scholar.~\autocite{ammarConstructionLiteratureGraph2018} Moreover, Santo Fortunato further popularised the term `community' with several reviews on the subject that have `community' in their titles,~\autocite{lancichinettiCommunityDetectionAlgorithms2009,fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010,fortunatoCommunityStructureGraphs2012} where he also justifies the concept of community by referring to social networks as ``paradigmatic examples of graphs with communities''.~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010}}
In sociology, social network analysis has a twentieth century history, admirably given by Katja Mayer in a 2009 article that traces its links to search engine technologies.~\autocite{mayerSociometrySearchEngines2009} Mayer argues that social network analysis or sociometry developed alongside related techniques such as citation analysis approaches which were formulated as means for measuring authority and participation in academic publishing, techniques that soon became extended as a measure for centrality, opportunities for `self-realisation', cultural significance and optimisation amongst other factors. As social network forms become significant in how people understand society, Mayer argues that they effectively become ``behavioural instructions''~\autocite[p. 54]{mayerSociometrySearchEngines2009}
It is these ``instructions'' and their latent form in social structures, before the advent of their machining in social media, that also provides the grounds for work by figures such as Manfred Kochen and Ithiel de Sola Pool's ``Contacts and Influences'', a manuscript circulating from the early 1950s and published in 1978~\autocite{desolapoolContactsInfluence1978}, Stanley Milgram's 1967 direct experimental work~\autocite{milgramSmallWorldProblem1967}, and Mark Granovetter's 1973 article ``The Strength of Weak Ties''~\autocite{granovetterStrengthWeakTies1973}. The notion of ``weak ties'' addressed by these researchers was embraced in mathematical terms by Watts and Strogatz in 1998~\autocite{wattsCollectiveDynamicsSmallworld1998}. One of the aspects of such work that is interesting is the idiomatic kind of movement from the very specific to the general that it stages. This work is predicated on a particular kind of social connection, a friendship, knowledge of or acquaintance with an other, a social link, the passing of information from one entity to another, as the key, indeed sole, unit of analysis. It is predicated on a wager that from this base unit, if precisely logged, something larger can be agglomerated. Whereas other approaches to understanding the social in mathematical terms have often worked on the basis of surveying or assembling a population as a statistics-yielding mass, to be probed by averages and the deviations that yield them, this work starts `from the bottom up' in a certain way by narrowly fixating on the choreography of links. It is this movement from the specific to the general that its enduring attraction also lies, and, it wagers, something like a community can be measured.
Although the term `community' has only been used in network science since 2002, the development of methods for what is called `community detection' today has a longer tradition under different names such as `network partitioning' or `clustering'.~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010} One important predecessor from social network analysis is the mathematically simpler concept of a graph `clique',~\autocite{wassermanSocialNetworkAnalysis1994} defined as a set of nodes of which each pair of nodes is connected in the graph. This concept was used by Duncan Luce and Albert Perry already in 1949 to algorithmically obtain group structures from experimental data about human interactions, arguing ``that a set of more than two people form a clique if they are all mutual friends of one another''.~\autocite[p. 97 f.]{luceMethodMatrixAnalysis1949} Although their matrix-based approach was less prone to errors than a cumbersome manual investigation of the data, the mathematical definition of a clique is often too restrictive in applications. Hence, later concepts in the different lineages of `community' can often be understood as weaker or looser versions of cliques (based on less restrictive mathematical definitions) that allow for sparser relations within groups.
In a review on community detection algorithms, Fortunato traces the origins of community detection back to a 1955 paper from sociometry by Robert Weiss and Eugene Jacobson, who proposed a method to deduce working groups from a matrix of work relationships in a complex government agency.~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010,weissMethodAnalysisStructure1955} Their method of finding groups by reorganizing an the matrix representation of a graph (see Section~\ref{sec:Louvain} for a definition of the `adjacency matrix' of a graph) corresponding to a sociogram was already introduced by Elaine Forsyth and Leo Katz in 1946 who again respond to a famous sociometric approach to groups developed by Jacob Moreno in the 1930s.~\autocite{forsythMatrixApproachAnalysis1946,morenoWhoShallSurvive1934}
We can also trace back origins of community detection in psychology and anthropology. In a 1956 psychological paper, Dorwin Cartwright and Frank Harary used graph theory to introduce the concept of structural balance to describe ``configurations of many different sorts, such as communication networks, power systems, sociometric structures, systems of orientations, or perhaps neural networks''.~\autocite{cartwrightStructuralBalanceGeneralization1956} Harary, who was a mathematician at the University of Michigan, was interested in the translation of social science concepts into graph theory and later also worked on applications in anthropology, where he developed clustering methods for signed graphs to study homophily.~\autocite{hageStructuralModelsAnthropology1984}
Yet another lineage is formed by the use of what are called `stochastic block models' that find their origins in the social science literature from the 1970s. For a review of this very wide field see an overview by Lee and Wilkinson.~\autocite{leeReviewStochasticBlock2019} In general, stochastic block models provide notions of `structural equivalence' in graphs where the `role' of a node is determined by its link structure. Deterministic model were first introduced by a group of sociologists around Ronald Breiger in 1975~\autocite{breigerAlgorithmClusteringRelational1975} and stochastic models by Paul Holland et al. in 1983.~\autocite{hollandStochasticBlockmodelsFirst1983}
A common feature of the techniques developed in the social sciences described above is their shared goal of determining structurally similar nodes in graphs to identify individuals in social networks playing similar roles. This suggests that social scientists often follow perspective~(iii) on community detection as introduced in Section~\ref{sec:CommunityNetworkScience}. However, we want to emphasise that social scientists from the different lineages described above did not use the term `community' themselves but other terms like `cohesive subgroups'~\autocite{wassermanSocialNetworkAnalysis1994} or `balance and clustering phenomena'~\autocite{hageStructuralModelsAnthropology1984} were used instead. Moreover, a limiting factor for the development of community detection algorithms in the social sciences was the missing computational power in the early years of social network analysis, where algorithms had to be performed manually in a cumbersome process.
With the rise of computational power, researchers from statistical physics moved into the field of network science and started to use their own techniques, in particular the statistical modelling of real-world networks, the description of networks as historically evolving structures and a dynamical systems approach for studying dynamic interactions between nodes, leading to a `new science of networks'.~\autocite{newmanStructureDynamicsNetworks2006} This also lead to some amount of re-invention of parts of the social science literature and the relabelling of concepts like `community detection' can thus be understood as a restarting of network science under the influence of physics.
\footnote{The popularity of Mark Granovetter's ``weak-tie argument''~\autocite{granovetterStrengthWeakTies1973}---the hypothesis that large-scale social network cohesion depends on weak links between different communities---among physicists has also contributed to their increased interest in network science and physicists referencing Granovetter ``might be considered
innovators in [the complex network] community''.~\autocite[p. 21 ]{keucheniusAdoptionAdaptationComputational2021} To test Granovetter's hypothesis, physicists analysed community structures of real-world networks and, for example, Jukka-Pekka (JP) Onnela et al. showed that in mobile communication networks ``removal of the weak links will delete the bridges that connect different communities''.~\autocite[p. 7334]{onnelaStructureTieStrengths2007}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figures/citation_graph.png}\caption{\textbf{Bibliographic graph for Girvan and Newman's original paper produced with the `Connected Papers' tool.} A bibliographic similarity graph is obtained for the original paper by Girvan and Newman~\autocite{girvanCommunityStructureSocial2002} placed in the center, using the online tool `Connected Papers'.~\autocite{eitanConnectedPapersFind2022} Nodes in the network represent the most important prior or derivative publications and edges are drawn according to similarity between papers, as determined by the `Connected Papers'. We observe that the influence of the social science literature on the field is not reflected in this bibliographic graph.}
\label{fig:citation_graph}
\end{figure}
After the formulation of the community detection problem, many functions were developed for computationally evaluating the quality of network partitions. One such evaluation function is that of `modularity' proposed by Girvan and Newman, who developed a framework of `modularity optimisation' to quantify the density of edges within communities as compared to a random edge configuration model.~\autocite{newmanFindingEvaluatingCommunity2004,newmanModularityCommunityStructure2006} Since then, a large body of literature has evolved and there are substantial investments in the maintenance and development of techniques for community detection.~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010} However, the field remains contested and recent approaches, such as `inferential methods' drawn from Bayesian statistics, challenge traditional techniques like modularity optimisation, which some authors even depreciate as merely `descriptive'.~\autocite{peixotoDescriptiveVsInferential2022,jacomyTwitterControversyCommunity2021} Despite such controversies, the modularity optimisation based `Louvain algorithm', introduced in 2008~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} and named for the university at which it was developed, remains one of the standard methods for community detection. We provide a short analysis of the operation of this algorithm in the next section.
There is an enormous bibliography associated with community detection which makes a detailed genealogy of the field difficult, especially because of the overlapping historical lineages we described above. Similarly, Fortunato suggests that ``the field has grown in a rather chaotic way, without a precise direction or guidelines''.~\autocite[p. 161]{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010} A network science approach to this task could be to analyse the citation graph of, e.g., all scientific publications that cite the original article by Girvan and Newman and other works in the canon. A rigorous study of such citation graphs could be performed using the Academic Graph API by Semantic Scholar~\autocite{ammarConstructionLiteratureGraph2018} and community detection on this citation graph of community detection papers would be an amusing meta-exercise, although lying beyond the scope of this paper.\footnote{We notice that `friendship networks' are present in the stories of the genealogy of the field. Therefore, a network analysis of the collaboration and institutional affiliation networks of researchers working on community detection would also be illuminating to disentangle the different lineages from physics and the social sciences.} We restrict ourselves here to presenting a bibliographic graph obtained with the `Connected Papers' online tool based on the Academic Graph API that claims to construct a similarity graph consisting of the most important prior and derivative publications starting from a paper specified by the user.~\autocite{eitanConnectedPapersFind2022} Figure~\ref{fig:citation_graph} visualises this bibliographic graph as produced for the original paper by Girvan and Newman,~\autocite{girvanCommunityStructureSocial2002} which is placed at the centre. We observe that the graph over-represents the influence of physics literature on the field and renders the early influences from the social sciences that are outlined above invisible. Hence, the diagram constitutes an interesting cultural artefact that shows the current hegemony of physics in the network science field despite its sublimated origins in the social sciences.
What has transformed over the course of the manifold lineage outlined in this section? Aside from the changes in size of the networks to be graphed and of computational power, the transition has also entailed a general loosening from specific address to ideas of the social. We can say that the techniques move from an abstraction from social groups involving techniques of observation, recording, encoding, and analysis into graphs that offer the production of a more generalisable formal structure. This form then provides a means of addressing many different kind of entity. It also provides a conceptual scaffold and technical substrate for new kinds of social relation to be grown.
\subsection{Case Study: Louvain Algorithm}\label{sec:Louvain}
One popular technique in community detection methods is the so-called `Louvain algorithm' developed by Vincent Blondel and colleagues in Louvain,~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} which we will study in more detail here due to its high status and widespread usage. At the point of its development in 2008, the Louvain algorithm outperformed other popular methods for community detection with fast computational times and unprecedented scalability to extensive networks with more than 100 million nodes.~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} Since then it has been widely used, e.g., For instance, community detection in the popular Gephi software~\autocite{bastianGephiOpenSource2009} for network analysis is implemented with the Louvain algorithm.~\autocite{gephiGephiTutorialQuick2010} Hence, many researchers from the computational social sciences---among whom Gephi is popular due to its accessibility~\autocite{jacomyGephiPaperGets2019}---ubiquitously rely on the Louvain algorithm for their study of social networks.
While the Louvain algorithm remains very popular and has been picked up widely with more than 13,047 citations [as of May 2022] according to Semantic Scholar,~\autocite{ammarConstructionLiteratureGraph2018} there is a plethora of other community detection methods, made available by software projects like the python `Community Discovery Library' (CDlib) that has currently implemented about 100 different methods including Louvain.~\autocite{rossettiCDLIBPythonLibrary2019} Community detection in general, and the Louvain algorithm specifically, are thus moving targets for analysis and, e.g., the recently developed Leiden algorithm has some crucial advantages over the Louvain algorithm in terms of how it evaluates the connection quality within communities.~\autocite{traagLouvainLeidenGuaranteeing2019} The Leiden algorithm has thus gained in popularity among practitioners with Gephi planning to add it to their software.~\autocite{jacomyGephiCodeSustainability2021} Nevertheless, since Louvain is so widely used and so extensively implemented it makes an ideal case study for understanding community detection.
The Louvain algorithm was one of the first algorithms to give an efficient optimisation heuristic for the `modularity' measure developed by Newman and Girvan.~\autocite{newmanFindingEvaluatingCommunity2004,newmanModularityCommunityStructure2006} With the help of modularity---usually denoted by the symbol $Q$---it is possible to compare the quality of different partitions and high modularity signifies good quality. Hence, the goal of a community detection algorithm based on modularity optimisation is to find a partition that maximises achievable modularity. We will introduce the mathematical formalisation of modularity and discuss some of its philosophical assumptions below. For the moment we remark that modularity optimisation follows the clustering perspective~(ii) on community detection as introduced in Section~\ref{sec:CommunityNetworkScience}
The Louvain algorithm is designed as a so called `greedy algorithm', which tries to find an optimal solution for modularity optimisation at each of its iterative steps.~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} We present pseudo-code of the algorithm below and describe its sequence of steps in the following. Note that both modularity and the Louvain algorithm can be applied to more general networks, in particular weighted and directed ones, but for the sake of simplicity we only consider unweighted and undirected networks here, as introduced in Section~\ref{sec:CommunityNetworkScience}. The input of the Louvain algorithm is a graph $G=(V,E)$. After initially assigning each node to a different community (step 1),
the Louvain algorithm consists of two routines. In the first routine, one randomly loops over the nodes and a node $i\in V$ is added to a neighbouring community whenever the modularity $Q$ increases (step 4). After no further increase of modularity is possible with this strategy, a new `meta-network' is generated in the second routine, where the communities are defined as `meta-nodes' and the edges are aggregated (step 10).\footnote{The aggregation of edges in the meta-network is a non-trivial step that we cannot present in full detail here. In principal, edges within communities are aggregated to self-loops of the meta-nodes, where a self-loop refers to an edge starting and ending at the same node, and edges between communities are aggregated to edges between meta-nodes. However, the aggregation requires a weighting of the edges in order to represent the different edge densities correctly. We refer the reader to the original article for more details.~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008}}
After this aggregation, the first routine is again applied to the meta-network (step 11) and the meta-nodes are grouped together in communities by the two routines as before. These two routines are now iteratively repeated in a feedback-loop between input and output until no further increase in modularity is possible and the algorithm terminates (step 8). The resulting partition can be derived from the communities of meta-nodes and corresponds to a local maximum of modularity. The optimal partition determined in this way is the output of the Louvain algorithm. To phrase this in a different way, we set the algorithm out in pseudo-code below.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Louvain algorithm}\label{alg:Louvain}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{Graph $G=(V,E)$}
\Ensure{Partition of $V$ into mutually exclusive communties}
\State Assign each node $i\in V$ to its own community.
\While{further improvement of modularity $Q$ is possible}
\For{randomly selected node $i \in V$}
\State Add $i$ to neighbouring community when modularity $Q$ increases.
\EndFor
\EndWhile
\If{all nodes are assigned to their own community}
\State Output the partition and \textbf{terminate}.
\Else
\State Construct meta-network $G_{\text{new}}$ with communities as meta-nodes and aggregate edges.
\State Set $G=G_{\text{new}}$ and \textbf{return to step 1}.
\EndIf
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Figure~\ref{fig:Example_Network} visualises communities obtained from the application of the Louvain algorithm to our example friendship network, where nodes of the same colour are part of the same community. We used the Fruchterman-Reingold algorithm~\autocite{fruchtermanGraphDrawingForcedirected1991} to draw our network in the two-dimensional plane, which simulates forces of attraction between highly connected nodes and repulsion between disconnected nodes. Note that the close match between the force-directed network layout and community structure is not incidental. In fact, the Fruchterman-Reingold layout can be used to obtain communities via spatial proximity that optimise modularity~\autocite{songForceDirectedLayoutCommunity2013} and it was shown that force-directed layouts based on energy models (depending on parameters) subsume the modularity measure.~\autocite{noackModularityClusteringForcedirected2009}
One could now obtain descriptive statistics to gain a better understanding of the community structure, e.g. the network is partitioned into 16 communities of which the largest (red) consists of 548 nodes and the smallest (light green) of 19.\footnote{We note that the colour gradient used in Figure~\ref{alg:Louvain} is unfortunately very fine due to the high number of communities. This can make the visual distinction of communities challenging.} Note that one of modularity's features is that the number of communities is intrinsic to the network and can be recovered with the modularity optimisation. This is different to other data clustering algorithms like `$k$-means clustering', where the number of clusters has to be specified in advance \emph{a priori}.~\autocite{hastieElementsStatisticalLearning2009} We also remark that modularity optimisation is known to have certain technical limitations that have been well studied in the literature---most strikingly the so called `resolution limit' that prevents modularity finding relatively small community structures~.\autocite{fortunatoCommunityDetectionGraphs2010} Solutions to the different technical drawbacks of modularity optimisation have been proposed in the literature, e.g. the resolution-limit-free `Constant Potts Model',~\autocite{traagNarrowScopeResolutionlimitfree2011} but a review of these techniques lies beyond the scope of this essay.
To deepen our understanding of the Louvain algorithm, we now give an introduction to the modularity measure at its core,~\autocite{newmanFindingEvaluatingCommunity2004,newmanModularityCommunityStructure2006} for which we require more mathematical formalism from graph theory.\footnote{The graph-theoretic formalism used here mainly draws from linear algebra and matrix theory because they allow for an easy description and precise manipulation of graph structures~\autocite{zweigNetworkAnalysisLiteracy2016}} We first introduce the so-called `adjacency matrix' of a graph, which is a very useful tool to encode the graph structure. For a graph $G$ with $N$ different nodes, e.g. our example graph of friendships on Facebook from Section~\ref{sec:CommunityNetworkScience} has 4,039 nodes, we define the adjacency matrix denoted by the symbol $A$ as a quadratic matrix, i.e. a matrix with the same number $N$ of rows as of columns. The entry of the adjacency matrix at row $i$ and column $j$ is denoted by the symbol $A_{ij}$ and represents a binary encoding for the presence or absence of an edge between nodes $i$ and $j$.~\autocite{zweigNetworkAnalysisLiteracy2016} More specifically, we define $A_{ij}=1$ if there is an edge between $i$ and $j$
and $A_{ij}=0$ otherwise.
Next we define the degree $d_i$ of a node $i\in V$ as the number of edges attached to node $i$ and using the adjacency matrix the degree can be computed as:
\[\tikzmarknode{d}{d_i} = \sum^N
_{\tikzmarknode{j}{j=1}}
\tikzmarknode{A}{A_{ij}},
\begin{tikzpicture}[overlay,remember picture,teal,>=stealth,shorten
<=0.2ex,nodes={font=\tiny,align=left,inner ysep=1pt},<-]
\path (j.south) ++ (0,-1.5em) node[anchor=north west] (u)
{\textbf{Summation:}\\ Sum over all nodes $j$ in the graph};
\draw (j.south) |- ([xshift=0.3ex]u.south east);
\path (d.north) ++ (-10em,1em) node[anchor=south west,xshift=1.2ex] (o)
{\textbf{Degree:}\\Number of edges attached to $i$};
\draw (d.north) |- ([xshift=0ex]o.south west);
\path (A.north) ++ (0,1.5em) node[anchor=south west,xshift=-1.2ex] (il)
{\textbf{Adjacency matrix:}\\ Binary encoding for presence of edge between nodes $i$ and $j$};
\draw (A.north) |- ([xshift=0.3ex]il.south east);
\path let \p1=($(o.north)-(u.south)$),\p2=($(j.east)$),\p3=($(d.west)$),\n1={\x2-\x3} in \pgfextra{\xdef\tmpvspace{\y1}\xdef\tmphspace{\n1}};
\end{tikzpicture}\vcenter{\vspace{\tmpvspace}}
\hspace{\tmphspace}
\]
\ \\
\bigskip \\
\noindent
where the mathematical notation $\sum_{j=1}^N$ means that the sum over elements indexed by $j$ ranging from 1 to $N$ is computed. As each entry $A_{ij}$ of the adjacency matrix encodes the presence of an edge attached to $i$ and another node $j$, the sum in the above equation
counts the number of edges attached to $i$ as desired.
Let us further denote the number of edges in the graph by the symbol $M$, e.g. the example friendship network has 88,234 edges. Before we can finally give the formula for the modularity, we need to establish a notation that allows us to compare whether two nodes are part of the same community. On that account, we denote the community of node $i\in V$ by the symbol $C_i$ and if two nodes $i$ and $j$ are in the same community this implies $C_i=C_j$.
For a given partition of the network into different communities, the modularity denoted by the symbol $Q$ then measures the density of edges within communities as compared to a random rewiring of edges. Following the presentation by Blondel et al.~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} and using our notation developed above, we finally define the modularity $Q$ as:
\
\bigskip \\
\[\tikzmarknode{d}{Q} = \sum^N
_{\tikzmarknode{j}{\substack{i,j\\C_i=C_j}}}
\left[
\tikzmarknode{A}{\frac{A_{ij}}{2M}}-\tikzmarknode{p}{\frac{d_i d_j}{4M^2}}\right],
\begin{tikzpicture}[overlay,remember picture,teal,>=stealth,shorten
<=0.2ex,nodes={font=\tiny,align=left,inner ysep=1pt},<-]
\path (j.south) ++ (0,-2em) node[anchor=north west] (u)
{\textbf{Summation:}\\ Sum over all pairs of nodes $i$ and $j$ that are in the same community};
\draw (j.south) |- ([xshift=0.3ex]u.south east);
\path (d.north) ++ (-12em,1em) node[anchor=south west,xshift=1.2ex] (o)
{\textbf{Modularity:} \\ Measure for the quality of a partition};
\draw (d.north) |- ([xshift=0ex]o.south west);
\path (A.north) ++ (0,1.5em) node[anchor=south west,xshift=-1.2ex] (il)
{\textbf{Graph edge density:}\\Ratio of edges between nodes $i$ and $j$ in the graph};
\draw (A.north) |- ([xshift=0.3ex]il.south east);
\path (p.south) ++ (0,-1.2em) node[anchor=north west] (u)
{\textbf{Randomised edge density:}\\ Probability of edge between nodes $i$ and $j$ after random rewiring};
\draw (p.south) |- ([xshift=0.3ex]u.south east);
\path let \p1=($(o.north)-(u.south)$),\p2=($(j.east)$),\p3=($(d.west)$),\n1={\x2-\x3} in \pgfextra{\xdef\tmpvspace{\y1}\xdef\tmphspace{\n1}};
\end{tikzpicture}\vcenter{\vspace{\tmpvspace}}
\hspace{\tmphspace}
\]
\
\bigskip \\
\bigskip \\
\noindent
where the sum is executed over all pairs of nodes that are part of the same community. While the first term in brackets corresponds to the ratio of edges between nodes $i$ and $j$, the second term computes the probability of an edge being present between nodes $i$ and $j$ after a rewiring of the graph that only preserves the node degrees.
We summarise that in the modularity-optimisation approach as realised by the Louvain algorithm, a community constitutes a group of nodes with a high density of internal edges. In particular, neighbouring nodes are said to share a community when their connection is stronger than it would be were links to be simply randomly assigned. Membership in a community is assumed to be objective and inherently described by node attributes such that an inquiry of the underlying entities replaced by nodes in the network framework (e.g. of the people behind the Facebook accounts in our example friendship network) becomes unnecessary. Moreover, in many cases, membership in a community is assumed to be a static and unique node attribute. This leads to an essentialisation of identity as a node feature, where identity is understood as the membership in a particular community. Hence, community detection applied to social networks contrasts with a view of a community as something that emerges from imaginal and material social relations shaped by historical conditions. Community detection for the purpose of finding communities in social networks certainly entails the reduction of complex social relations into sets of discrete edges in a network. Still, community detection is widely appreciated as a `good enough' tool and this leads us to analyse community detection algorithms as heuristics in Section~\ref{sec:Heuristics}.
\subsection{Controversies arising from Community Detection}\label{sec:Problems}
It may seem as if we have earlier identified vague operators as some kind of idyllically woozy and indeterminate form that lends itself to a plurality of interpretation and use in a way that evades some of the problems of identification. However, what might pass as virtues in some contexts, or in another facet of the same broader context, can operate as difficulties in others, by providing different kinds of usefulness.
In this section we briefly identify some of the ambiguous applications of community detection, in particular `recommender systems' and `anomaly detection', and discuss problems arising with them. Here, the epistemic dimension of community detection as an approach to describing and implementing things in the world, creates particular interpretative tensions and imperatives as they interlace with certain kinds of contemporary power in their application. In such cases vague operators can work in another way, as what Alfred Sohn Rethel~\autocite{sohn-rethelIntellectualManualLabour1978} and subsequently Alberto Toscano~\autocite{toscanoOpenSecretReal2008} name `real abstractions'. Real abstractions are a means of making a materialist accounting for ideas and formalisms as they enter into relations, which may be more or less determining with other kinds of stuff, such as goods, persons, and other structures. A crucial form of real abstraction is the instantiation of the split between exchange value and use value mentioned earlier. Marx discusses the almost mystical state of the commodity or of money in its `pure' form, waiting to be exchanged, to be used.~\autocite{marxCapitalVolume1981} We can say that mathematical entities, in the terms that Rotman sets up, have something of the same quality. A number does not take with it any traces of its previous uses, it springs into the world each time afresh. This is what is so pleasing about them, and to connect with another thread of this argument, makes them \textit{useful}, replete with affordances of possible use. Computer systems indeed can be seen as dynamic nested hierarchies of real abstractions.
\paragraph{Recommender Systems}
Community detection is widely used in the design of recommender systems,~\autocite{gasparettiCommunityDetectionSocial2021} i.e. algorithms that recommend products at online market places or prompt actions such as following a person on a social networking site based on a user's history on that site or, via third party means, across others. In particular, community detection is used to obtain groups of users with ``similar social characteristics''~\autocite{gasparettiCommunityDetectionSocial2021} to either directly perform link prediction,~\autocite{javedCommunityDetectionNetworks2018} where a user might be recommended to follow another user analysed as belonging to the same community, or to enable the application of more resource-intensive recommendation algorithms on smaller-scale communities.~\autocite{gasparettiCommunityDetectionSocial2021} Here, community detection tracks a history of relations between entities and connects to other mechanisms, such as cookies, that describe the state of operations: whether an action such as a purchase has been carried out, how long a browser window was open onto certain data, whether there is a return to particular objects or sources such as a playlist of tracks and so on. This poses two problems that have been widely recognised, that of reinforcement or channeling, and that of reduction.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Figures/reinforcing_loop.pdf}\caption{\textbf{Reinforcing loop of community detection and recommender systems.} Community membership leads to new network structure by link recommendation based on recommender systems. From the network structure, new community memberships are deduced using community detection algorithms. Accelerated through this feedback loop, social networks become polarised and community detection might reinforce difference and segregation.}
\label{fig:reinforcing_loop}
\end{figure}
The first aspect of the problem acts as a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy (see Figure~\ref{fig:reinforcing_loop}), or what Dan McQuillan calls ``reinforcing loops'': ~\autocite{mcquillanResistingAIAntifascist2022} ever tightening loops between detection and recommendation that produce the by know well-known effects of filter bubbles and echo-chambers. But these effects also consist at another level in proposals to counter them by ``normative'' means that aim to rework them by a higher level of statistical generality. Bubbles and echo-chambers are anticipated and worked in advance, by approved parameters. The second aspect of this problem occurs through the operation of community as a form of real abstraction with jointly epistemic and material consequences. Here, the biologist CH Waddington's notion of chreodisation or channelling in evolution is useful,~\autocite{waddingtonToolsThought1977} except that we are not discussing variation within a species, but amongst entities that are jointly composed of ideas, understandings and technologies. Herbert Simon's formulation of the evolution of ideas in a society~\autocite{simonRationalityTeleology1983} or organisation being partially determined by their niche and Sohn Rethel's Marxist arguments about the formation of epistemic entities within the dialectical formation of history~\autocite{sohn-rethelIntellectualManualLabour1978} are also relevant in mapping the kinds of processes in play. In all of these cases, a reduction, for instance a sign or token, stands in for the real in order to enable a certain kind of thinking or processing. Over time, or inherently to a process, that reduction is taken for the real and it is then used not only to refer to but to structure reality. As a result, it becomes or replaces the real, depleting it. This is of course a wider problem within modern societies where what might be called a ``reverse schizomogenesis'' occurs leading, for instance, to ecological catastrophe. In this sense, computing tends in some ways towards a monoculture. To follow Yuk Hui's call for ``technodiversity'' we might try to counter such tendencies by recognising the diversities within mathematics and in mathematics as culture.~\autocite{huiQuestionConcerningTechnology2016}
Following Wendy Chun, who identifies `homophily', the principle that ``similarity breeds connection'',~\autocite{mcphersonBirdsFeatherHomophily2001} as one of the main drivers of ``pattern discrimination'' in network science,~\autocite{chunQueeryingHomophily2018} here we consider community detection as another such method for `pattern discrimination'. Similar to homophily, the `performativity' of community is revealed in its capacity to draw boundaries and aggravate echo chambers in social networking sites as argued above. When following clustering perspectives~(ii) presented in Section~\ref{sec:CommunityNetworkScience}, one could interpret `community' as a reciprocal concept to `homophily' because 1) nodes in the same community are more densely connected and thus interpreted as similar and 2) similar nodes are expected to be densely connected and thus clustered in the same community. Community thus becomes a means for critically diagnosing homophily and also for implementing it. As a vague operator, it allows for entities in a network to exist in both of these complementary and mutually reinforcing states simultaneously whilst maintaining the duality of potential interpretations that also pulls them apart somewhat depending upon the interpretative niche or dialectical tension to which they are subject.
\paragraph{Anomaly detection}
An additional problem we want to note is one indicated by an explicitly political use of network science models of community. Matteo Pasquinelli proposes that algorithmic vision has two epistemic poles: of pattern recognition and anomaly detection.~\autocite{pasquinelliAnomalyDetectionMathematization2015} In network analysis, pattern recognition corresponds to community detection as described above. ``On the other side, anomalies are results that do not conform to a norm. The unexpected anomaly can be detected only against a pattern regularity''.~\autocite[p. 6]{pasquinelliAnomalyDetectionMathematization2015} Consequently, anomaly detection in social network analysis can also be performed with community-based network outlier detection methods that identify ambiguous nodes at the border between different communities.~\autocite{akogluGraphbasedAnomalyDetection2014} Moving between the poles of pattern recognition and anomaly detection, algorithmic vision within social network analysis aims to identify important actors in the network, their influence and interactions across different communities or to predict structural weak spots.~\autocite{scottSAGEHandbookSocial2011}
The network structure of digital control societies allows for extensive networked surveillance. Consider as an example the military Anomaly Detection at Multiple Scales (ADAMS) project funded by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with \$35 million that aims to surveille large-scale communication networks of e-mails and text messages for the identification of anomalies and security threats, especially whistleblowers:
\begin{quote}
``Each time we see an incident like a soldier in good mental health becoming homicidal or suicidal or an innocent insider becoming malicious we wonder why we didn’t see it coming. [...] ADAMS aims to rectify this situation by developing technology for the automated support of proactive use of the massive data sets being collected. [...] ADAMS will characterize graphs containing up to billions of nodes by structural feature sets calculated using recent breakthroughs in graph analytic techniques. ADAMS will use these features as the basis for novel anomaly detection algorithms.''~\autocite[p. 2f.]{darpaAnomalyDetectionMultiple2010}
\end{quote}
Here, the network graph is used as part of an apparatus aimed at establishing deep forms of control over behaviours and the graphed entities that exhibit them. Different to the use of such techniques of identification in social media, the phenomena undergoing emergence here is one to be quashed rather than capitalised upon. The reasons for defection from military logics are not examined, but optimised against. There is a further lineage here, that of colonial and imperialist anti-insurgency techniques where populations are grouped and their connections are monitored.~\autocite{leporeIfThenHow2020} In both cases control over the identification and calculation of variation within what is established as a networked social form are key. Convergences of the two forms are not improbable.
These controversies exemplify some of the tensions in the computation of culture and society. The push to forms of what are judged to be optimisation that they epitomise risks depleting the capacity for difference— in a form of devastation~\autocite{fullerBleakJoysAesthetics2019} via logical restructuring—that chains the much prized emergence that is sometimes limned by network analysis to a monotonous kind of ordering.
\subsection{Algorithms as Heuristics}\label{sec:Heuristics}
Blondel et al. call the Louvain algorithm a ``heuristic method that is based on modularity optimization''~\autocite[p. 1]{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} by following a `greedy strategy' of local optimisation at each step. In the discussion of their paper they also suggest other `heuristics' (like thresholding for early stopping or excluding nodes with only one link from the analysis) to speed up their algorithm.~\autocite{blondelFastUnfoldingCommunities2008} Heuristics are used because the problem of community detection is `hard' and, in fact, it was shown by Brandes et al. that the task of modularity optimisation is indeed NP-complete in the strong sense and thus NP-hard.~\autocite{brandesModularityClustering2008} This means that there is no polynomial-time algorithm for exact modularity optimisation (unless P=NP, which is widely believed to be false) and this serves as a ``justification to use approximation algorithms and heuristics to cope with the problem''.~\autocite[p. 9]{brandesMaximizingModularityHard2006} In that sense, the Louvain algorithm is an `approximation algorithm' that gives an efficient heuristic for the actually very hard problem of community detection with modularity optimisation for which exact solutions cannot be found in polynomial time.
These considerations of the Louvain algorithm as a heuristic serve as an impetus to study the deeper connections between algorithms and heuristics. The term heuristics first arises in the 1950s in the work of economist and artificial intelligence researcher Herbert Simon.~\autocite{simonModelsManSocial1957} In its early incarnation it describes the kinds of economic decisions that can be made with limited information in the condition of what Simon called `bounded rationality'. A choice or decision always happens in some particular context, that of an organisation or administration, one of available data and the means to evaluate it, or a social context that drives and imposes certain notions of what is satisfactory. The question of what is satisfactory also prompts the development of another related term, `satisficing', where `satisfying' concerns finding a ``good enough move'',~\autocite[p. 205]{simonModelsManSocial1957} since, ``an organism that satisfices has no need of estimates of joint probability distributions, or of complete and consistent preference orderings of all possible alternatives of action.''~\autocite[p. 205]{simonModelsManSocial1957}
The need for heuristics or techniques of satisficing in this area of research is set out negatively by the philosopher and pioneer of machine translation Yehoshua Bar-Hillel in comments on an early model of `common sense' in AI, where he states, ``I do not think there could possibly exist a programme [sic] which would, given any problem, divide all facts in the universe into those which are and those which are not relevant for that problem.''~\autocite[p. 14]{mccarthyProgramsCommonSense1959} This comment encapsulates the challenges encountered in symbolic AI and the often infinitely regressive logical work it required and complements Simon's work on economic behaviour where he counters ``Olympian'' models of human reasoning~\autocite{simonReasonHumanAffairs1983} that aim to act from the possession of all facts. Heuristics are a way of working round this requirement for an absolute formal foundation, by making a more of less arbitrary `cut'. The problem for a heuristic is to find an appropriate cut between smaller and larger amounts of information and information about that information. Approaches based in heuristics allowed for approximate rather than absolute information to be the basis of a decision. It is important to note that the use of heuristics is not a question of being anti-reductivist. Rather, the question is one of developing an effective technique that acknowledges the inevitability of reduction in the development of an abstraction or formalism and thus lowers the expectations of it from an Olympian scale, to a more pragmatic one. In a sense, heuristics could thus be understood as ``humble reductions''. This formulation however returns the question of the scope and nature of the pragmatics involved and how it plays out in specific contexts and set-ups.
In military-funded work designed to address the construction of the automatic proof of logical statements Simon writes with Allen Newell to affirm that, ``all we are concerned with is that we have some criteria that `work' ''.~\autocite[p. 69]{newellLogicTheoryMachine1956} The pair further reinforce the position by arguing that, ``The method is a heuristic one, for it employs cues, based on the characteristics of the theorem to be proved, to limit the range of its search; it does not systematically enumerate all proofs. This use of cues represents a great saving in search, but carries the penalty that a proof may not in fact be found. The test of a heuristic is empirical: does it work?''~\autocite[p. 71]{newellLogicTheoryMachine1956} A crucial part of the context within which satisficing must occur are the available quantities of computational resource and time, but also of the problem of trying to get something done to push forward a research agenda in a generally productive direction.
By the beginning of the 1960s, the term `heuristic' had become a feature of the literature in quantitative social science and more substantially in artificial intelligence. In ``Steps Toward Artificial Intelligence'', Marvin Minsky sets out the two meanings of the term:
\begin{quote}
``The adjective `heuristic,' as used here and widely in the literature, means related to improving problem-solving performance; as a noun it is also used in regard to any method or trick used to improve the efficiency of a problem-solving system. A `heuristic program,' to be considered successful, must work well on a variety of problems, and may often be excused if it fails on some. We often find it worthwhile to introduce a heuristic method, which happens to cause occasional failures, if there is an over-all improvement in performance. But imperfect methods are not necessarily heuristic, nor vice versa. Hence `heuristic' should not be regarded as opposite to `foolproof'; this has caused some confusion in the literature.''\autocite[p. 2]{minskyStepsArtificialIntelligence1961}
\end{quote}
This articulation of heuristics is useful since it both sets out a definition, and amusedly ponders its limits, limits that are both integral to the scale of the heuristic and of the wider scope of its interpretation.
As Celia Lury has argued in a recent discussion of his work,~\autocite{luryProblemSpacesHow2021} Herbert Simon was particularly alert to the wider ways in which the construction of the form of efficacy has consequences for the formation of understanding.
In common with many researchers working in frameworks developed after cybernetics, Simon experiments with linguistic and conceptual moves that seem to toy with both naturalising technologies and technologising natural entities and processes, such as organisms; the concern is to tease out abstractions that work across these registers. Entities, whether ants, humans, organisations or societies are viewed as dynamic structuress whose behaviour may be traced and modelled. These behaviours are seem as produced at the interface between the internal state of a system and its environment.~\autocite[Chapter 2]{simonSciencesArtificial1996} It may not be possible to fully describe all possible states of the interaction between such an entity and its environment, but approximation to them may be drawn up. Lury sets this work up as part of a disposition towards problems, drawing on the epistemological discussion of the problematic, but looking at the particularities of the co-constitution of research methods and the material that they treat.
Algorithms of course don't work or even exist on their own. They are manifest in different modes, as formulae or as pseudo-code for instance, and as something written into specific pieces of code running on particular systems at particular moments in time. They are further worked into and compose things such as social processes, database formats, and file structures amongst other things and in different contexts are something more or less indirectly experienced or undergone. They are worked through servers, by business plans and institutions, and are steeped in different kinds of politics of access. In turn, what is returned by an algorithm producing a graph in a mathematical form requires further software to be visualised. Layout algorithms embedded in particular applications or libraries, are used, for instance, the Fruchterman-Reingold algorithm~\autocite{fruchtermanGraphDrawingForcedirected1991} mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:Louvain} to place a diagram with intersecting edges on a two-dimensional plane.
The account of the Louvain algorithm offered here attempts to show this variation by articulating it in different forms, as too does the use here of different kinds of graphing embedded in specific libraries or particular informational products. Each carries with it and sets-up different kind of imaginary and capacity to register or entail.
Here, Lury's formulations become particularly useful in that problematics are also intricately formed in techniques. The history of different rules of thumb or methods of approximation will themselves play out variably in different environments. Their particular acuities or fallibilities may become more marked, fraught, or less significant in different contexts. The relative size, granularity and qualities of data sets, the terms of the approximation, their fine detail and so on may provide significant aspects of such an environment, as might the more or less explicitly political dimensions of the milieus in which they form. Amidst all of this, the great usefulness of vague operators is partly in reworking the tensions between such scales and terms.
\section{Gesticulations towards a critical heuristics of community detection}
When a beetle topples over and lies upon its back waving its legs to the world, the arcs its limbs make in the air may have meaning, perhaps to the beetle, perhaps to entities in its environment, but those limbs may not meet resistance. Applied mathematics or network science, when its world is too easy, to readily arranged for its interpretation, may remind us of a beetle upon its back. This resemblance is due to conventionalisation, the too apparent applicability of many computing tools makes them verge on the edge of the illusory. Traction on significant problems, by contrast, is one way of achieving a certain amount of resistance. Work too on the movement of the legs that recognises them as artefacts of a certain idea of ease and functionality, may provide another route into the condition.
The moment when things begin to appear to be achievable with great ease, is the moment one should suspect that network science is lying on its back, reproducing the same gesticulations. Computational ease tends to align with existing formations of power and concentrations of data-wealth that render certain things more possible than others, despite the great potential plasticity of computing.~\autocite{fullerPraisePlasticityUnderspecification2020} In a sense, we are back to Rotman's note on numbers as `severed signifiers' and the alternation between the grasp and construction of things by different forms of evaluation in Lury or in Sohn-Rethel. At the same time, such signifiers are immensely potent when they are not ``de-severed'', but plugged into problems that can be addressed by their capacity for abstraction. Network science can both contribute to setting up the conditions by which a population can be treated as tokens in a game of behavioural psychological warfare in advertising or political machinations as illustrated in Section~\ref{sec:Problems}, but it can also work to test the spread of an epidemic.~\autocite{brockmannHiddenGeometryComplex2013} Both of these are immensely useful, in certain ways, but simple facility is insufficient to judge their wider validity.
As we move towards the end of this argument we want to draw on heuristics as a means of mediation between a formalism or an abstraction and those things such as data, or various forms of real on which it gains traction or resistance. A heuristic is supposed to be a pragmatic cut, the result of a process of parlaying between the possible and the probable it is a `reasonable adjustment' subject to more or less equally reasonable doubt. In the sense that Blondel et al.~use it, heuristics are used in a way that acknowledge their own limits as a limited and contextualised exercise. What if a heuristic could also become speculative or critical rather than primarily pragmatic? Some of the existing literature in network science and related fields prompts us to talk about this.
In their text, ``Clustering: Science or Art?''~\autocite{luxburgClusteringScienceArt2012} Ulrike von Luxburg, Robert C. Williamson and Isabelle Guyon suggest that clustering should be evaluated according to the downstream task where there are clearer-cut criteria for suitability. Similarly, in their article, ``Community Structure in Graphs'',~\autocite{fortunatoCommunityStructureGraphs2012} Santo Fortunato and Claudio Castellano argue that there is no silver bullet in community detection. In other words, no perfect algorithm exists for the task. This is formalised by Leto Peel, Daniel Larremore and Aaron Clauset who prove a `free lunch theorem' stating that community detection algorithms perform equally well when averaged over all possible problems and only on a subset of problems can one algorithm be preferred.~\autocite{peelGroundTruthMetadata2017} These different formulations all draw similar conclusions, if you want to do more than exploratory data analysis you have to tailor to the specific system at hand, or attend to the problem being addressed by producing more specialised algorithms. The criteria for this evaluation might come from the problem, but also from what counts in understanding the gestation of the problem and what counts as adequate means to formulate some kind of its knowing.
One mode would be to attempt to formulate a provisional ``quasi-universal'' in which the problem can be subsumed, to aggregate more information to dissolve the specificities of the problem in a conceptual substance supple and granular enough to absorb and rework its specificities in an enquiry driven by these. Another, is to separate out the problem, and only treat the immediate point in the established pipeline at which one is positioned through mental compartmentalisation and technical segmentation. Another is to both critically engage with the epistemic and political dimensions of the problem at the same time as humbly and playfully working with heuristics. It is the latter option that we aim to gesticulate toward in four ways to imagine a `critical heuristics' that embraces partiality, works by means of epistemic humbleness, and offers capacities of reflexivity and artificiality.
\paragraph{Partiality}
It is worth teasing out some possible use of the heuristic mode. One way is to recognise the terms network and community themselves as forms of heuristic descriptor or rough approximation, both as heuristics and as vague operators with the different valences of interpretation that these terms imply. Often, in application, the term community can only be partially relevant, but as a vague operator it is more or less adequate, and it is that partiality that is interesting. It is sometimes a partiality that does the work of convincing users that in some contexts it is a `good enough' description of a community as such, or at other times, the partiality that does the work of articulating sets of certain kinds of relations in something that is not quite a community, but that can be more or less usefully described as such.
What is interesting here then is the generative deployment of partiality: partiality as a form of productive discrepancy, partiality as constructive misreading, partiality as mistranslation layered upon others, partiality as a retraining of social forms into something `more computable'. In applied mathematics it is generally understood that such partialities are produced by idealisations or representations that to some extent always mistranslate. Partiality introduces the possibility for recursive operations of misplaced concreteness, as something that more or less maps onto something that has already been mediated into a graph.
Such partialities or approximations can make for a certain kind of forgiving or playful conviviality, but they have to be tuned into; as when Annie Ernaux talks of the ``approximate'' quality of conversations between lovers whose linguistic terrains only partially overlap.~\autocite[p.25]{ernauxSimplePassion2021} One can say this about such things as the different figures, formulae, analyses and modes of encoding that jostle together in this article. Here, the romantic formulation of the illusory nature of exactitude (as for instance in Schopenhauer or Nietzsche) and its more recent reworkings comes into play. Partiality, being partial to something, can then be the grounds for congenial relations. The patterns of intereference between different modes and sample-rates of such partialities are also the grounds for a micro-politics, of the recognition of cruelties in what is rendered inexpressible, or what is sheared off.
\paragraph{Epistemic humbleness}
The vertex and the line act as forms of index, they refer to something such as a relation or an entity. The idea of the index, even by something as severed as a number is a problem of representation. To establish this, we can ask, ``What would the movement of the beetle's legs look like in a frictionless medium?'' In other words, can we imagine an absolutely isomorphic mapping of an entity in a way that is only describable in the terms of edges and vertices, an object of enquiry that literally calls for such graphing because it can have no other manifestation? A critical heuristics would pay attention to what is rendered mute in such a condition, that which is lost, relations that are inexpressible or set to invisible, what is sloughed off as defiant of reason, rule or representability. It would recognise the crudeness of the abstractions it offers and work with them as a kind of Art Brut rather than as a revelation of Platonic verity or an unfortunate condition of ``things as they are''. Due to their ability to map relations only in one-to-one terms, one node to another, such graphs, find relations between individuals and collectives difficult to express. Such a relationship might include that between a person and a state or one class and another, since they cannot see such larger formations. Graphs also cannot sense relations based upon exclusions, voids or devastations, what is not there.
A critical heuristics enquires into what entities warrant transubstantiation into nodes, which relations are describable as vertices, whose data is rendered accessible, what data is legible to which systems. It works as part of an enquiry into what is rendered economically interoperable through the perspectival operations of what is rendered as a perdurable glitch~\autocite{russellGlitchFeminismManifesto2020} It looks incessantly for what is deemed to be outside the scope of the problem, that can provide resistance or footholds in terrains that may be social or political, ecological, conceptual or mathematical. (In this way concern with the ecological costs of computing might prompt a return to the proper veneration of terse and elegant algorithms and sparse use of computational resources for instance.) A critical heuristics might, in making propositions, subtly shift out of what can be the sometimes overly reactive trap of the critical mode. It would also shift the game of heuristics. One of the implicit claims of a heuristic is that it is a humble mode of thought and action. Heuristics are humble because they acknowledge the reduction they make and recognise its provisionality and partiality. Too often, this humbleness passes off as an excuse not to think as users bracket the provisionality of heuristics off when employing them. Might we imagine an actually humble heuristics?
\paragraph{Reflexivity}
Instead of means to recognise the wider dimensions of relationality suggested in the note on humbleness we live amidst social graphs or office graphs that use similar graphing structures not to bring more things into account in recognising the complexity of an event or a person, but to accumulate more kinds of things under the same representational regime. If we return to the use of heuristics in the case of the Louvain algorithm, whilst Louvain is described as a heuristic by its authors, its use might be quite different. The communities it graphs might be taken to be frictionlessly real, rather than something at least partially brought into being by the contact with and provision of resistance to the algorithm and the systems through which it operates. When communities are taken as simple reals it is tempting to forget the heuristic nature of their manifestation.
In order to interrogate this forgetting, often integral to the segmentation of a problem within modernity, there can be intuitively imagined a `pipeline' between different stages of the development of a technique. This pipeline, say, for an algorithm for network analysis, would run through: mathematics, where the approach is posed; computer science, where it is formalised; software engineering, where it is implemented; the domain of users, where it is deployed in software that they use to work on specific cases; finally, one end of the pipeline that occasionally appears is very much its last dribble, and is composed of critical readers or those who are seen as `complainers' who try to evaluate or `undermine' the entire effort, but whose work can be safely ignored at any stage of the pipeline.\footnote{This image of the pipeline should not be taken in an ethnographic sense, or one that endorses any hierarchy of knowledge or practices, but simply as an illustration of another kind of diagram, of socio-technical relations and practices. Actual conditions can involve more branching and looping, returning to a means to recognise the way a calculation comes into being through what it comes into composition with in the condition of emergence of a graph.} Our intent with this article is to suggest a closing of the loop of this piped construction and to work the epistemic and political analysis in with the mathematical, with software and its uses and interpretations. A critical heuristics might be helpful in making this line into a loop by introducing reflexivity into the pipeline such that practices are de-segmented and epistemically evaluated throughout, leading to a gurgling cascade rather than a streamlined flow.
Further, reflexivity can also be found in the form that, since social network analysis has become a 'fact of life', through the various implementations of social media, or through dubious tools of control such as the London Metropolitan Police's "gang matrix" or its successor systems, and citation analyses such as the H-Index for academics, reflexivity is to be found simply in peoples' navigation of a social and informational domain in which these are operative and structurally significant factors. There is scant opportunity for 'naive' behaviour under such conditions, so network analysis can be said to map only those behaviours that are given under conditions of network analysis. Reflexivity thus may also be found in the irony and cynicism induced by a metricised society of analysis.
\paragraph{Artificiality}
The problem of describing communities per se is not simply one of applying numbering techniques to something that naturally elides them. Numbers and numbering practices are not simply thin shadows of something already in the world that is more robust, meaningful and concrete, although they may sometimes be so. Nor are they automatically reducible themselves to certain functions such as reification, this depends on the particular conjunction. Rather, they can also be recognised as something artificial and novel existing and working in the world irreducibly~\autocite{latourPasteurizationFrance1993}. Numbers have their own specific qualities, the uses and implications of which vary across, cultures, polities, technologies and implementation, in other words in historical terms.
Calculative practices and technologies can be inventive, arranging new entities and novel conjunctures. They also exist amidst thousands of other such things, allowing for the formation of computations traversing assemblages of different kinds. For instance, in this context the connection between modularity and community is one of these expressive conjunctions in that modularity is a function that is hard to operationalise since it is NP hard, whilst community is much vaguer. The overlap between these terms is slippy, a vague operation, the simultaneously ideational and material play in which offers itself to numerous kinds of use, a condition that demands epistemic and political work that embraces artificiality.~\autocite{simonSciencesArtificial1996} A heuristics that is able to play with and to speculate through this condition of artificiality is also one that is able to work through the pluralities of artificiality, including those that are deemed to be perverse, unwholesome, too recondite, obscure or geeky, that is, perhaps of decadent as well as inventive kinds. It may also provide the grounds for testing the ways in which it is too readily put to work, to reclaim the productive fragility of precise knowledge in its dance with vagueness.
\section{Conclusion}
We propose that a paradoxically expanded heuristics can provide a route to reflecting on the limits and wider dispositions of algorithmic knowledge. This motivates us to focus on community detection as a set of mathematical heuristics that can be used in ways that are potentially attuned to their limitations. Building on this, we propose a \textit{critical heuristics} in network science that has the capacity to both recognise and profit from its constructed nature and to proceed via humble epistemological claims. A heuristics that is more tactical, provisional and contingent may also offer a recognition of the tensions and absences involved in such kinds of knowledge and real abstraction. In a sense we want to suggest that a `no free lunch' argument, in which every algorithm has its idiosyncratic costs and predelictions, can also be made at an epistemological level. Here, the various kinds of interplay between the hyper-precise and the vague that are embodied in the conjuncture of particular algorithms and specific problems to be worked on are to be kept in mind as well as being implicitly mobilised in techniques.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank the Centre for Digital Inquiry at Warwick University and the Digital Democracies Institute at Simon Fraser University for giving us the opportunity to present parts of this article in their respective seminars.
\setlength\bibitemsep{0pt}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
A Mach-Zehnder interferometer gives an interference pattern which depends on the phase shift between two paths taken by a beam-split signal. Optical Mach-Zehnder interferometers have a long history~\cite{Born2019}. Taking advantage of the absence of backscattering resulting from the unidirectional electron motion in the edge states of the two-dimensional integer quantized Hall effect, a Mach-Zehnder interferometer could also be realized in a two-dimensional electron gas \cite{Ji2003a,Neder2007}. In this case, the electronic equivalent of a ``beam splitter'' is formed by a point contact, which allows for the controllable coupling of modes at different sample edges.
One-dimensional electron modes without backscattering also exist at the hinges of a three-dimensional second-order topological insulator~\cite{Volovik2010,Sitte2012,Zhang2013b,Benalcazar2017a,Langbehn2017,Song2017,Schindler2018,Fang2019,Trifunovic2021,Xie2021}. Signatures of such hinge modes have been seen in pure Bismuth \cite{Schindler2018a,Nayak2019}, in Bi-based compounds \cite{Noguchi2021,Aggarwal2021}, and in Fe-based superconductors~\cite{Gray2019,Zhang2019d}. Interference effects involving pairs of counter-propagating (``helical'') \cite{Niyazov2018} or unidirectional (``chiral'') \cite{Luo2021,Li2021} hinge modes were proposed theoretically. In these proposals, the beam splitter is formed by the point contact between an idealized single-channel normal-metal lead and the topological insulator. In this article, we show how a crystal hinge supporting multiple chiral modes naturally forms a beam splitter between adjacent hinges with only a single mode. This way, a Mach-Zehnder interferometer can be realized with Ohmic source and drain contacts placed over a crystal hinge.
The setup we consider is shown schematically in Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic}. It consists of a second-order topological insulator with hinges that have one or two chiral modes, as indicated in the figure. The crystal hinges with two co-propagating chiral modes serve as beam splitters. Ohmic source and drain contacts are placed at selected crystal edges with a single chiral hinge mode, such that there are two paths connecting each pair of source and drain contacts along the crystal hinges. By controlling the phase difference between the interfering paths with a magnetic field one thereby obtains a Mach-Zehnder interferometer.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{Figure_1a_Schematic.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{Figure_1b_Network.pdf}
\caption{(a) A schematic of the system considered in this article. It consists of a second-order topological insulator with hinges that have one or two chiral states. Ohmic contacts, which pairwise serve as source (S1, S2) and drain (D1, D2) contacts, are attached to four of the hinges with one chiral mode. A pair of interfering paths connecting contacts S1 and D1 is indicated in blue. (b): Effective network diagram indicating the same interfering paths between contacts S1 and D1.}
\label{fig:schematic}
\end{figure}
Like the chiral edge states of the integer quantized Hall effect, the hinge modes of a higher-order topological insulator are topologically protected. One distinguishes ``intrinsic'' hinge modes, which are protected by the topology of the bulk band structure and ``extrinsic'' modes, for which the nontrivial topology resides in the surface band structure, whereas the bulk may be topologically trivial \cite{Geier2018,Trifunovic2018,Trifunovic2021}. Whereas intrinsic higher-order phases require crystalline symmetries for their protection, extrinsic topological phases do not have additional symmetry requirements. For the realization of an interferometer, all that matters is the existence of the chiral hinge modes, not where they derive their protection from. For that reason, in this article we seek a (theoretical) realization of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer in an extrinsic second-order topological insulator.
A particularly simple and controllable model of an extrinsic second-order topological insulator was proposed by Sitte {\em et al.} in Ref.\ \cite{Sitte2012}. It consists of a (first-order) topological insulator placed in a magnetic field $\vec{B}_0$ at a generic direction with respect to the crystal faces, see Fig.\ \ref{fig:model}. Without the magnetic field, there are Dirac-cone surface states at the crystal surfaces. The magnetic field $\vec{B}_0$ gaps these out. This effectively turns the crystal surfaces into two-dimensional quantized Hall systems with a (half-integer) filling fraction that depends on the perpendicular component of the magnetic field and the position of the Fermi level with respect to the Dirac point of the surface band structure. The former can be controlled by the applied magnetic field, the latter by a gate voltage applied locally at the surface. The number of hinge states then follows as the difference of the filling fractions of the two adjacent surfaces. To bring about the interference pattern, one considers a small change $\delta \vec{B}$ of the magnetic field. If $|\delta \vec{B}| \ll \vec{B}_0$, $\delta \vec{B}$ changes the phases which electrons pick up while propagating along the hinges, while not affecting the number of hinge states and their properties.
The remainder of this article is organized as follows: In Sec.\ \ref{sec:2} we present a simple lattice model of an extrinsic second-order topological insulator as discussed above and establish that it has the phenomenology shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic} for a suitable choice of parameters. In Sec.\ \ref{sec:3} we add Ohmic contacts to crystal edges with a single chiral mode, as indicated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic}, and theoretically describe the resulting interferometer setup using scattering theory. In Sec.\ \ref{sec:4} we consider a two-terminal Aharonov-Bohm interferometer based on the same model system. We conclude in Sec.\ \ref{sec:5}. Further details and supporting material can be found in the appendices.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.995\columnwidth]{Figure_2_Schematic.pdf}
\caption{(a): An extrinsic second-order topological insulator with chiral hinge modes can be realized by placing a first order topological topological insulator in a uniform magnetic field $\vec{B}_0$. The direction of $\vec{B}_0$ is chosen such that there is a nonzero flux through all crystal surfaces. As a result, the Dirac-cone surface states form an integer quantized Hall effect with a filling fraction that depends on the magnetic flux density and the electron density at the surface. The latter can be controlled capacitively by a metal gate, one is shown explicitly on surface $x+$. (b): Labeling of surfaces and hinges. The surfaces on the sides are labelled by $x\pm$ and $y\pm$ analogously to $z\pm$, labelled here in red.}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure}
\section{Lattice model of an extrinsic second-order topological insulator}
\label{sec:2}
We theoretically describe the extrinsic second-order topological insulator using a four-band lattice model with nearest-neighbor hopping~\cite{Sitte2012}. It has the Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\hat H = \sum_{\langle i, j\rangle} \hat c_i^{\dagger} t(\vr_i,\vr_j) \hat c_j + \sum_{i}
\hat c_i^{\dagger} u(\vr_i) \hat c_i,
\end{equation}
where the indices $i$ and $j$ run over all neighboring sites of a three-dimensional simple cubic lattice, $\vr_i$ and $\vr_j$ are the corresponding position vectors, $\hat c_{i}$, $\hat c_{j}$ and $\hat c_{i}^{\dagger}$, $\hat c_{j}^{\dagger}$ are four-component spinor annihilation and creation operators, and $t(\vr_i,\vr_j)$ and $u(\vr_i)$ are $4 \times 4$ matrices. We consider a lattice of size $L_x \times L_y \times L_z$, with surfaces perpendicular to the coordinate axes, shown schematically in Fig.\ \ref{fig:model}. For the nearest-neighbor term $t$ we take
\begin{align}
t(\vr,\vr') =&\, -\frac{t}{2} \left[ \sigma_3 \tau_0 + \frac{i}{a} \sigma_1 \mbox{\boldmath $\tau$} \cdot (\vr - \vr') \right]
\nonumber \\ &\, \ \ \mbox{} \times
e^{i e (\vec{A}(\vr) + \vec{A}(\vr')) \cdot (\vr - \vr')/2 \hbar c},
\end{align}
where $a$ is the lattice constant, $t$ a hopping amplitude (with the dimension of energy), $\sigma_{\alpha}$ and $\tau_{\alpha}$, $\alpha = 1,2,3$, are Pauli matrices, and $\vec{A}(\vr)$ is the vector potential corresponding to the uniform applied magnetic field $\vec{B}$. The on-site term $u$ is
\begin{align}
u(\vr) = (3 + m) t \sigma_3 \tau_0 + V(\vr) \sigma_0 \tau_0,
\end{align}
where $m$ is a parameter governing the bulk band structure and $V(\vr)$ a scalar potential, which is nonzero in the vicinity of the crystal boundaries only.
Without applied magnetic field, the system has time-reversal symmetry. It is in a topological phase with gapless Dirac-cone surface states for $-2 < m < 0$. The surface Dirac nodes are at zero energy if the scalar potential $V$ is zero, but they may be pushed away from zero by application of uniform potential at the surface. We take a scalar potential of the form
\begin{equation}
V(\vr) = \sum_{s} V_s e^{-r_{s,\perp}/\xi_s},
\label{eq:VrVs}
\end{equation}
where the summation index $s$ runs over all six surfaces of the crystal, $V_s$ is a gate voltage at surface $s$, $r_{s,\perp}$ is the distance to the surface $s$, and $\xi_s$ a decay length. In our calculations, we set $m = -1$ and $\xi_s = 5 a$ throughout.
A uniform magnetic field at a direction such that there is a finite flux penetrating all six crystal surfaces, gaps out the surface Dirac cones and effectively turns the surfaces into gapped quantized Hall effects. The filling fractions of the different surfaces $s$ can be tuned by varying the surface gate voltages $V_s$ of Eq.\ \eqref{eq:VrVs}.
To establish that the model describes an extrinsic second-order topological insulator \cite{Sitte2012} with the configuration of hinge states shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic}, we consider a system that is infinite along each one of the coordinate axes and calculate the corresponding band structure. Examples of such band structures in the vicinity of the Fermi energy are shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:bandstructures}. In Fig.\ \ref{fig:bandstructures} one easily recognizes the flat surface bands of the Landau levels and the dispersing one-dimensional hinge states. For these numerical calculations, the magnetic field $\vec{B}_0$ was set to $\vec{B}_0 = ({h c}/{60 e a^2}) (2 \sqrt{2} \cos 67^\circ, 2 \sqrt{2} \sin 67^\circ, 3)$ and the Fermi energy was set to $\varepsilon_{\rm F} = 0.05 t$ (indicated by the horizontal dashed line in Fig.\ \ref{fig:bandstructures}). The gate voltages are $V_{x+} = 0.2t $, $V_{x-} = -0.2t $, $V_{y+} = -0.7t $, $V_{y-} = 0.8t $, $V_{z+} = -0.03t $, $V_{z-} = 0.3t $, where we used the convention of Fig.\ \ref{fig:model} (right) to label the surfaces. Whereas the detailed band structures shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:bandstructures} depend on the gauge choice made for the vector potential $\vec{A}_0(\vr)$ used to describe the uniform magnetic field $\vec{B}_0$, the numbers of hinge modes at each crystal edge, their velocities, and, if applicable, the momentum difference between co-propagating hinge modes at the same hinge do not depend on it. Band structures covering a larger range of energies are shown in App.\ \ref{app:bandstructures}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_3_Dispersion_x.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_3_Dispersion_y.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_3_Dispersion_z.pdf}
\caption{Band structure of a lattice infinite along the $x$ axis (top), $y$ axis (middle), and $z$ axis (bottom) and with a finite size in the other two coordinate directions. The flat bands correspond to the surface Landau levels. The dispersing bands are hinge states. The hinge modes are labelled by which hinge they appear on, and bulk surface modes by their surface, following the convention of Fig.\ \ref{fig:model} (right panel). Parameter values are described in the main text. The lattice sizes in the directions in which they are finite are $L_x = 50a$, $L_y = 80a$, and $L_z = 80a$. The horizontal dashed line indicates the Fermi energy $\varepsilon_{\rm F} = 0.05t$. The zeroth Landau level for the $z-$ surface is at $\varepsilon=0.3t$, which is outside the range shown in the figure.
\label{fig:bandstructures}}
\end{figure}
\section{Mach-Zehnder Interferometer}
\label{sec:3}
To construct a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, Ohmic contacts S1, S2, D1, and D2 are added to four of the crystal edges that support only a single chiral hinge mode, see Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic}. Using the labeling convention of Fig.\ \ref{fig:model} (right), these are the edges $x1$, $x3$, $y1$, and $y3$. The effective network diagram of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic} (right) is reproduced in Fig.\ \ref{fig:network}, with the labels of the individual edges added.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Figure_4_Network.pdf}
\caption{Effective network diagram for the Mach-Zehnder interferometer of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic} with labeling of the crystal edges following the convention of Fig.\ \ref{fig:model}. The interfering paths from source contact S1 to drain contact D1 are indicated in blue. The edges with two co-propagating hinge modes serve as the beam splitters, as indicated by the blue ovals.}
\label{fig:network}
\end{figure}
A bias voltage $V$ is applied to the source contact S1, whereas the other three contacts are kept grounded. The current $I$ in response to the bias voltage is measured in drain contact D1. Using the Landauer-B\"uttiker formalism \cite{Buttiker1986}, the conductance $G = I/V$ may be expressed in terms of the $4 \times 4$ scattering matrix $S$ of the system,
\begin{equation}
G = \frac{e^2}{h} |S_{D1,S1}|^2.
\label{eq:G}
\end{equation}
We note that $S$ is a $4 \times 4$ matrix even for Ohmic contacts, which have many channels, because the number of channels coupling to the system is limited by the number of chiral modes at the hinge connected to the Ohmic contacts.
The scattering matrix $S$ may be expressed in terms of $2 \times 2$ scattering matrices of the eight crystal corners and in terms of scattering phases accumulated along the crystal edges. Hereto we first construct $2 \times 2$ scattering matrices of the four edges $z\alpha$ with two co-propagating hinge modes, $\alpha=1,2,3,4$, which serve as beam splitters in the interferometer network, see Fig.\ \ref{fig:network}. (We refer to Fig.\ \ref{fig:model} (right) for the labeling convention for the hinges.) The beam-splitter scattering matrices are denoted $t_{z\alpha}$, $\alpha=1,2,3,4$. Each of these is the product of $2 \times 2$ scattering matrices $t_{z\alpha}^+$ and $t_{z\alpha}^-$ of the crystal corners of the crystal edge $z\alpha$ and a diagonal matrix containing the phases $\phi_{z\alpha,1}$ and $\phi_{z\alpha,2}$ accumulated by the two chiral modes at the edge $z\alpha$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:tz}
t_{z\alpha} = &\, \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
t_{z\alpha}^- \mbox{diag}\, (e^{i\phi_{z\alpha,1}},e^{i\phi_{z\alpha,2}}) t_{z\alpha}^+ & \alpha = 1,3, \\
t_{z\alpha}^+ \mbox{diag}\, (e^{i\phi_{z\alpha,1}},e^{i\phi_{z\alpha,2}}) t_{z\alpha}^- & \alpha = 2,4. \end{array} \right.
\end{align}
Arranging the rows and columns of the $2 \times 2$ matrices $t_{z\alpha}$ such that the first (second) row/column corresponds to an outgoing/incoming state at an edge parallel to the $x$ ($y$) axis, we then find
\begin{align}
\label{eq:S}
|S_{D1,S1}|^2 =& |t_{z3,12} e^{i \phi_{y2}} t_{z2,21} e^{i \phi_{x2}} t_{z1,11} \nonumber \\ &\, \ \ \mbox{} +
t_{z3,11} e^{i \phi_{x4}} t_{z4,12} e^{i \phi_{y4}} t_{z1,21}|^2.
\end{align}
We write the propagation phases $\phi_{z\alpha,1}$ and $\phi_{z\alpha,2}$ for propagation along the edges with two co-propagating hinge modes as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:dz}
\phi_{z\alpha,1} =&\, \phi_{z\alpha} + \frac{1}{2} \Delta k_{z\alpha} L_z,\nonumber \\
\phi_{z\alpha,2} =&\, \phi_{z\alpha} - \frac{1}{2} \Delta k_{z\alpha} L_z,
\end{align}
where $L_z$ is the crystal size in the $z$ direction ({\em i.e.}, along the crystal edges with two co-propagating hinge modes) and $\Delta k_{z\alpha}$ is the momentum difference between the two co-propagating hinge modes at the edge $z\alpha$. The momentum difference $\Delta k_{z\alpha}$ is gauge independent and can be obtained from the one-dimensional band structures shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:bandstructures}. It does not change under the small changes $\delta \vec{B}=(B_x,B_y,B_z)$ of the applied magnetic field required to observe the interference pattern, because this field scale is proportional to the sample cross section, whereas the field dependence of $\Delta k_{z\alpha}$ is on a scale proportional to the sample length $L_z$.
The phases $\phi_{z\alpha}$, $\alpha=1,2,3,4$, $\phi_{x2}$, $\phi_{x4}$, $\phi_{y2}$, and $\phi_{y4}$ are gauge dependent. However, the conductance $G$ depends on the combination $\phi = \phi_{x2} + \phi_{z2} + \phi_{y2} - \phi_{x4} - \phi_{z4} - \phi_{y4}$ only, which is gauge independent and depends linearly on the total magnetic flux $\Phi$ enclosed between the two interfering paths,
\begin{equation}
\phi = 2 \pi \Phi/\Phi_0 + \mbox{const}.,
\label{eq:phi}
\end{equation}
where $\Phi_0 = 2 \pi \hbar c/e$ is the flux quantum. For the geometry of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic}, one has
\begin{equation}
\Phi = B_z L_x L_y+B_x L_y L_z+B_y L_z L_x,
\label{eq:Fluxdef}
\end{equation}
where $L_x$ and $L_y$ are the system dimensions in the $x$ and $y$ directions, respectively. Substituting Eqs.\ \eqref{eq:tz}--\eqref{eq:phi} into Eq.\ \eqref{eq:G} one obtains the sinusoidal magnetic-field dependence of the conductance characteristic of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer.
In App.\ \ref{app:kwant} we describe how the eight scattering matrices $t_{z\alpha}^{\pm}$ of individual corners can be calculated for the lattice model of Sec.\ \ref{sec:2} using the kwant software \cite{Groth2014}, up to two magnetic-field independent over-all phase factors that can be absorbed into the propagation phases $\phi_{x\beta}$ and $\phi_{y\beta}$ of the crystal edges with single chiral modes. With this knowledge, the full interference pattern for the conductance $G$ can be calculated for the model of Sec.\ \ref{sec:2}. Examples of interference patterns for different Fermi energies and values of $L_z$ are shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:cond}.
In a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, the interference contrast is determined by the properties of the beam splitter. For the interferometer considered here, the scattering matrices $t_{z\alpha}$ of the ``beam splitters'' can be manipulated externally via the momentum difference $\Delta k_{z\alpha}$, see Eqs.\ \eqref{eq:tz} and \eqref{eq:dz}. Small variations of $\Delta k_{z\alpha}$ may have a large effect on $t_{z\alpha}$ because of the presence of the macroscopic factors $L_{z}$ in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:dz}. The momentum difference $\Delta k_{z\alpha}$ depends on the Fermi energy $\varepsilon_{\rm F}$ and on the gate voltages applied to the adjacent surfaces. Indeed, Fig.\ \ref{fig:cond} shows different interference patterns for interferometers with different Fermi energy $\varepsilon_{\rm F}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_5_G_MZI.pdf}
\caption{Differential conductance $G$ versus magnetic flux $\Phi = B_z L_x L_y$ for the Mach-Zehnder geometry of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic} (left) with $B_y=B_x=0$. Curves are shown for two different values of the Fermi energy $\varepsilon_{\rm F}$ and two different values of the system size $L_z$, as indicated in the figure.}
\label{fig:cond}
\end{figure}
\section{Two-terminal Aharonov-Bohm interferometer}
\label{sec:4}
It is the presence of four Ohmic contacts in the geometry of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic} that limits the number of interfering paths between a given pair of source and drain contacts to two and, hence, leads to the characteristic sinusoidal interference pattern characteristic of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. A two-terminal geometry, with only a single source and a single drain contact, allows for multiple interference paths and, hence, has a more complicated interference pattern. In this Section, we discuss results obtained for such a two-terminal interferometer.
A schematic of the two-terminal interferometer is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic2}, together with an effective network diagram. In the two-terminal geometry, the conductance $G$ is still given by Eq.\ \eqref{eq:G}, but $S$ now is a $2 \times 2$ matrix and its calculation in terms of the scattering matrices $t_{z\alpha}^{\pm}$ of the crystal corners and the phases accumulated along the hinges without Ohmic contacts is more involved than in the four-terminal case considered in Sec.\ \ref{sec:3}. We refer to App.\ \ref{app:twoterminal} for details.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{Figure_6a_Schematic.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{Figure_6b_Network.pdf}
\caption{Two-terminal Aharonov-Bohm interferometer constructed from a second-order topological insulator with hinges that have one or two hinge states (left) and equivalent network diagram (right).}
\label{fig:schematic2}
\end{figure}
In contrast to the Mach-Zehnder interferometer of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic}, for which the interference pattern depends on a single component of the magnetic field variation $\delta \vec{B}$ only, the interference pattern of the two-terminal interferometer involves the full vector $\delta \vec{B}$. In Fig.\ \ref{fig:condarb} we show exemplary data for the conductance $G$ vs.\ $\delta \vec{B}$ for a magnetic field variation of the form $\delta \vec{B} \propto (\cos \theta,0,\sin \theta)$, for different angles $\theta$. For $\delta \vec{B}$ along a coordinate axis, {\em i.e.}, $\theta = 0$ or $\theta = \pi/2$, the interference pattern of the two-terminal interferometer is periodic, but not sinusoidal. For generic $\theta$ the interference pattern is generically aperiodic, because periods corresponding to different interference loops are incommensurate. For a more detailed discussion, which also includes a Fourier analysis of the interference patterns, we refer to App.\ \ref{app:twoterminal}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2\columnwidth]{Figure_7_MZI_AB.pdf}
\caption{Differential conductance $G$ versus magnetic flux $\Phi$ for the two-terminal geometry of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic2} (red curves) and for the four-terminal geometry of Fig.\ \ref{fig:schematic} (orange curves). The three panels correspond to three directions of the magnetic field variation: $\delta \vec{B} \propto (\cos \theta,0,\sin \theta)$, with $\theta = 0$ (left), $\theta = 0.2 \pi$, (center), and $\theta = \pi/2$ (right). System parameters are $L_x=L_y=L_z=50a$ and $\varepsilon_{\rm F}=0.06t$. The magnetic flux $\Phi$ is the sum of the fluxes through the three crystal faces, see Eq.\ \eqref{eq:Fluxdef}.}
\label{fig:condarb}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusions and discussion}
\label{sec:5}
In this article we have demonstrated how to make both a Mach-Zehnder interferometer and an Aharonov-Bohm interferometer using the chiral hinge states of a three dimensional higher order topological insulator. A distinctive feature of our setup is the presence of a pair of co-propagating modes on some of the hinges, which allows the creation of beam splitters for this purpose. Ohmic contacts along specific hinges are used for the incoming and outgoing modes and, in the case of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer, for ensuring that only a single loop is available for the propagating modes.
We introduced a minimal model of the system, and solved the scattering problem for the incoming and outgoing modes at each vertex. The minimal model consists of a four band cubic system with topologically protected surface states. The application of a magnetic field and gate voltages gap out the surfaces and enable tuning of the surface topology to generate the desired configuration of hinge states. The interference patterns are calculated from the network diagram of the paths through the set-up, with scattering matrices calculated for each corner separately. This allows us to consider arbitrary system sizes, without having to sacrifice the accuracy of our numerical calculations. We performed detailed tests and comparisons of two-corner and composite single corner set-ups numerically to ensure the calculations are fully converged and under control.
The Mach-Zehnder interferometer demonstrates the expected oscillations as a function of the magnetic flux through the sample, and we further checked its dependence on applied magnetic field angle and system size. For the Aharonov-Bohm interferometer the path of the particles through the system allows for many additional loops, giving rise to very distinctive interference patterns as a function of applied magnetic field strength and direction, which serve as an experimental test of the phenomenon.
Our modeling of the interferometer involves an {\em extrinsic} higher-order topological insulator. For an extrinsic higher-order phase, the presence of chiral hinge modes relies solely on the crystal termination. In contrast, for an intrinsic higher-order topological insulator, the presence of hinge modes is imposed by the topology of the bulk band structure. Nevertheless, for intrinsic higher-order topological insulators the bulk band structure only partially fixes the number of hinge modes, so that a certain degree of control of the crystal termination remains necessary if higher-order topological insulators are to be used for interferometry purposes \cite{Sitte2012,Geier2018,Trifunovic2018}. The advantage of the fully extrinsic scheme we employ here (first proposed by Sitte {\em et al}.\ \cite{Schindler2018}) is that the the hinge modes originate from the Dirac-cone surface states of a parent first-order topological insulator state and, hence, can be controlled by standard means such as an applied magnetic field and electrostatic gate voltages.
\acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange (NAWA) under the grant 2019/35/B/ST3/03625 (NS) and by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) - Project Number 277101999 - CRC TR 183 (project A03) (AYC and PWB).
|
\section{Acknowledgement}
I am grateful to Alex Scott, who found an error in an earlier version of this manuscript.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
The knowledge of atomic fundamental parameters (FP) such as the fluorescence yield, the photoionization cross section and the Coster-Kronig transition probabilities is of great importance for any quantitative analysis involving X-ray fluorescence (XRF). The majority of the available experimental and theoretical FP values for different elements were obtained more than forty years ago. For some chemical elements and some FPs, the tabulated data is based solely on interpolations as no experimental or theoretical data exists. Unfortunately, the uncertainties of most tabulated FP data often are not available or only estimated. As this is certainly an improvable situation, the International initiative on X-ray fundamental parameters \cite{FPI} and others are working on revisiting and updating FP databases with new experiments and calculations employing state-of-the-art techniques.\\
In this work, the tantalum L-shell fundamental parameters, namely the fluorescence yields and the Coster-Kronig factors, are being experimentally redetermined. Tantalum is a key element in microelectronics\cite{Shoki2003, Choi_2004}, solar industry\cite{Yang2018}, medicine and more. On the other hand, the availability of experimentally determined Ta-L shell FPs is rather scarce. The majority of the available experimental data is older than 30 years and the uncertainties as estimated for the most common tabulations\cite{Krause1979, T.Schoonjans2011} are only estimated.
In this work, we apply the reference-free XRF equipment of PTB\cite{Beckhoff2008} and dedicated transmission and fluorescence measurements\cite{M.Kolbe2012} using to revisit these parameters for tantalum.
\section{Experimental}
\label{sec:exp}
\subsection{Photon-in/photon-out experiment}
The experiments were performed at the wavelength-shifter beamline BAMline\cite{Goerner2001} at the BESSY II electron storage ring. This beamline provides hard monochromatic X-ray synchrotron radiation in the photon energy range from 5 keV up to 60 keV. Usually, the double crystal monochromator (DCM, with Si(111) crystals, d$E/E = ~0.2$\% between 8 and 50 keV) is used for applications comparable to the one in this study. The experiments were carried out using an in-house developed vacuum chamber\cite{M.Kolbe2005a} equipped with calibrated photodiodes and an energy-dispersive silicon drift detector (SDD) with experimentally determined response functions and radiometrically calibrated detection efficiency\cite{F.Scholze2009}. The sample was placed into the center of the chamber by means of an x-y scanning stage and the incident angle $\theta_{in}$ between the surface of the sample and the incoming beam was set to 45$^\circ$. As a sample, we have obtained a nominally 250 nm thick Ta deposition on a Si$_3$N$_4$-membrane. The membrane has a thickness of nominally 1000 nm. Furthermore, a blank Si$_3$N$_4$-membrane deposition was used to subtract the membrane contribution.
For both samples, transmission experiments were performed in the vicinity of the Ta-L absorption edges between 7 keV and 13 keV. In addition, the X-ray fluorescence emission from the coated sample was measured for photon energies ranging from about 10 keV to 13 keV. From these experiments, the Ta L-shell fluorescence yields and the Coster-Kronig factors can be determined as follows.
The procedure to determine L-shell fluorescence yields, as well as Coster-Kronig factors using physically calibrated instrumentation for reference-free X-ray spectrometry of PTB is already quite well established\cite{M.Kolbe2012, P.Hoenicke2014, M.Kolbe2015,Menesguen2018}. Here, Sherman’s equation\cite{Sherman1955} provides the basis for the calculation of fluorescence intensities of thin foils. It is a product of the incident monochromatic photon flux, a fluorescence production factor for a given shell $\sigma_S$, an instrumentation factor containing the solid angle of detection and the detection efficiency and the self-attenuation correction factor. This factor considers the attenuation of the photons on their way through the sample: For the incoming photons $\Phi_0(E_0)$ the attenuation on their way to the point of interaction is considered, for the fluorescence photons $\Phi^d_i(E_0)$ the attenuation on their way from the point of interaction to the detector is considered. Employing tunable photon sources or as recently shown also employing energy dispersive detectors\cite{Huang_2021}, this factor can be easily determined by transmission measurements for the relevant photon energies.
The fluorescence production factor $\sigma_{Li}$ is defined as follows:
\begin{align}
\sigma_{L3}(E_0) &= \omega_{L3} (\tau_{L3}(E_0) + f_{23}\tau_{L2}(E_0) + [f_{13} + f_{12} f_{23}] \tau_{L1}(E_0)) \\
\sigma_{L2}(E_0) &= \omega_{L2} (\tau_{L2}(E_0) + f_{12}\tau_{L1}(E_0)) \\
\sigma_{L1}(E_0) &= \omega_{L1} \tau_{L1}(E_0)
\end{align}
It is depending on the photon energy $E_0$ and is calculated employing the respective subshell fluorescence yield $\omega_{Li}$, the subshell photoionization cross sections $\tau_{Li}(E_0)$ as well as the Coster-Kronig factors $f_{ji}$. The latter are irrelevant for photon energies below the edge energy of the respective subshell as the photoelectric cross section is zero for energies below the corresponding subshell threshold energy. Thus, for photon energies between $E_{L3}$ and $E_{L2}$, $\sigma_{L3}(E_0)$ is simply the product of fluorescence yield and photoionization cross section so that the fluorescence yield $\omega_{L3}$ can be derived. By further employing this selective excitation to the other edges, also the $L_2$ and $L_1$ subshell fluorescence yields as well as the Coster-Kronig factors can be determined.
In other words, if $E_{L3} \leq E_0 \le E_{L2}$, the fluorescence production factor for $L_3$ reduces to
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{L3}(E_0)\rho d = \omega_{L3} \tau_{L3}(E_0)\rho d = \frac{\Phi^d_i(E_0)M_{i,E_0}}{\Phi_0(E_0)\frac{\Omega}{4\pi}}
\label{eq:prodCS}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
M_{i,E_0} = \frac{(\frac{\mu_S(E_0)\rho d}{\sin \theta_{in}}+\frac{\mu_S(E_i)\rho d}{\sin \theta_{out}})}{(1-\exp[-(\frac{\mu_S(E_0)\rho d}{\sin \theta_{in}}+\frac{\mu_S(E_i)\rho d}{\sin \theta_{out}})])},
\label{eq:M}
\end{equation}
where $\theta_{in}$ and $\theta_{out}$ are incident and exit angles respectively.
Due to the use of PTB's physically calibrated instrumentation for reference-free X-ray spectrometry, all of the relevant measures can be accessed. The fluorescence photon flux $\Phi^d_i(E_0)$ is derived from the recorded fluorescence spectra by means of a spectral deconvolution procedure. Here, the detector response functions for all relevant fluorescence lines as well as relevant background contributions, e.g. bremsstrahlung, originating from photo-electrons are included. In addition, we determine and apply fixed line sets for each of the three L-shells in order to stabilize the deconvolution\cite{M.Kolbe2012}. An exemplary spectrum including the deconvolution is shown in fig. \ref{fig:fig1}. The incident photon flux $\Phi_0(E_0)$ and the solid angle of detection $\frac{\Omega}{4\pi}$ are known due to the use of calibrated instrumentation \cite{Beckhoff2008}. The sample specific attenuation correction factor $M_{i,E_0}$ for the incident ($E_0$) -- as well as the fluorescence radiation ($E_i$) is calculated according to Eq. \ref{eq:M} using the experimentally determined sample specific attenuation coefficients $\mu_S(E_0)\rho d$ and $\mu_S(E_i) \rho d$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=13cm]{Spek_12800eV_noMP.png}
\caption{Exemplary fluorescence spectrum recorded on the Ta film at $E_0 = 12.8$ keV in blue together with the overall deconvolution (orange) as well as selected response functions for the fixed $L_i$ linesets. For comparison, the single fluorescence lines of the $L_1$ lineset are also plotted as dashed lines.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{figure}
Employing the experimental $\mu_S(E_0)\rho d$ and $\mu_S(E_i) \rho d$ values, one can calculate the total sample specific photoionization cross sections $\tau_S(E_0)\rho d$ and $\mu_S(E_i) \rho d$ by removing the scattering contributions. For this purpose, we derive the relative scattering contribution at each photon energy from a database (e.g. X-raylib) and use this data to determine $\tau_S(E_0)\rho d$. The thereby obtained photoionization cross sections are shown in figure \ref{fig:fig2} as blue dots. For the determination of the subshell fluorescence yields as well as the Coster-Kronig factors, one needs to isolate the subshell photoionization cross sections $\tau_{Li}(E_0)\rho d$. This is performed by scaling the Ebel polynomials \cite{H.Ebel2003} for the lower bound shells as well as the three L-subshells to the $\tau_S(E_0)\rho d$ as shown in the figure.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Tau-Zerlegung_Tantalum.png}
\caption{Experimentally determined $\tau(E_0)\rho d$ (blue dots) for the employed tantalum thin film and its separation into the
lower bound shells (orange line) as well as the L$_3$ (green), L$_2$ (red) and L$_1$ (purple) contributions.
}
\label{fig:fig2}
\end{figure}
With the $\tau_{Li}(E_0)\rho d$, all relevant parts of eq. \ref{eq:prodCS} are known and it can be solved for the fluorescence yield. The same procedure is applied for the $L_2$ and $L_1$ shells. By applying the same procedure for incident energies above the subsequent absorption edges, the Coster-Kronig factors can be derived. In figure \ref{fig:CKs}, this is shown for the case of $\omega_{L3}$ and $\omega_{L2}$. Here, the derived fluorescence yield values marked with a star, for example $\omega^*_{L3}(E_{i})$ are being calculated by only taking into account the normalized fluorescence intensity of the $L_3$ shell as well as the derived $\tau_{L3}(E_i)\rho d$ (red line in figure \ref{fig:CKs}). If the incident photon energy is above the subsequent absorption edge (marked as grey dashed vertical lines), the $\omega^*_{L3}$ jumps due to the additional Coster-Kronig related contributions to the total effective photoionization cross section, namely the term $f_{23}\tau_{L2}(E_0)$ in the case shown in figure \ref{fig:CKs} as red crosses. As the fluorescence yield value must be constant and not dependent on the incident photon energy, the Coster-Kronig factor can be determined so that the Coster-Kronig corrected $\omega_{L3}(E_{L2})$ matches the one determined for an excitation below the $L_2$ absorption edge.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{CK_Bestimmung_L3.png}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{CK_Bestimmung_L2.png}
\caption{Experimentally determined Ta-L$_3$ (left image) and Ta-L$_2$ (right image) fluorescence yield versus excitation photon energy without taking into account the Coster-Kronig transitions (red or green symbols), as well as the mean value for CK transitions turned off (horizontal dashed lines). The CK factors are chosen in order to match the average corrected fluorescence yields with the dashed lines (blue and purple symbols and lines). The vertical dashed lines mark the L$_2$ and L$_1$ absorption edge above which the respective CK transition appears.}
\label{fig:CKs}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Validation measurement with combined XRR and GIXRF}
As an independent validation of the experimentally determined L$_3$ fluorescence yield, a combined reference-free GIXRF-XRR measurement {\cite{Hoenicke_2019}} was carried out on two different tantalum layer samples. These experiments have been carried out employing an in-house build ultrahigh vacuum chamber dedicated to reference-free XRS\cite{J.Lubeck2013} at PTB’s four-crystal-monochromator (FCM) beamline \cite{Krumrey1998}. The two layer samples employed consist of pure Ta layers on silicon wafers with nominal thicknesses of 30 nm and 50 nm.
The energy of the incident beam was set to 10\,keV to only excite the L3 shell of tantalum. For both samples, the incident angle dependent Ta-L$_3$ fluorescence emission as well as the reflected incident radiation have been recorded. The experimental data including a basic evaluation (spectra deconvolution, normalization to incident photon flux and solid angle of detection) are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:GIXRF-XRR}.\\
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{Ta_GIXRF-XRR.png}
\caption{Comparison of measured and calculated data: reflectance (top) and the normalized fluorescence intensity (bottom)}
\label{fig:GIXRF-XRR}
\end{figure}
To determine the FPCS (fluorescence production cross section) from the experimental data, a quantitative combined modeling of the GIXRF-XRR data was performed as shown in ref.\cite{Hoenicke2022}. For this purpose, a model based on a thin carbonaceous contamination layer on tantalum oxide on tantalum on native oxide covered silicon was used. For each layer, with the exception of the substrate, the thickness and relative density were used as model parameters. In addition, the top surface roughness as well as the tantalum layer roughness were modeled. The roughness of the tantalum oxide layer was set to be the same as the previous. Experimental parameters such as the beam divergence or the photodiode's dark current were modeled as well. The modeling process is realized using the Sherman equation \cite{Sherman1955} which is shown below, for the GIXRF measurement and using the matrix method \cite{Abel_s_1950} for the XRR measurement.
\begin{align}
\frac{4\pi\sin\theta_i}{\Omega(\theta_i)}\frac{F(\theta_i,E_i)}{\Phi_0\epsilon_{E_f}} &= W_i \rho \tau(E_i) \omega_{L3} dz \cdot \sum_{z} P(z) \cdot I_{XSW}(\theta_i,E_i,z) \cdot \exp\left[-\rho\mu_{E_f}z\right]\textrm{.}
\label{eq:sherman}
\end{align}
Here, the experimentally derived fluorescence count rate $F(\theta_i,E_i)$ of the lineset related to the Ta-L$_3$-edge, excited using photons of energy $E_i$ at an incident angle $\theta_i$ is the essential measurand. A normalization on the effective solid angle of detection $\frac{\Omega(\theta_i)}{4\pi}$, the incident photon flux $\Phi_0$, and the detection efficiency of the used fluorescence detector $\epsilon_{E_f}$ is also required. By calculating the X-ray standing wave field intensity distribution $I_{XSW}(\theta_i,E_i,z)$, a numerical integration in conjunction with the depth distribution $P(z)$ of the tantalum distribution and an attenuation correction factor, the experimental data can be reproduced. For a quantitative modeling, the atomic fundamental parameters, namely the L$_3$-subshell photoionization cross section $\tau(E_i)$ and the fluorescence yield $\omega_{L3}$, and material-dependent parameters, e.g. the weight fraction $W_i$ of element $i$ within the matrix as well as the density $\rho$ of the matrix must also be considered. For the latter, we have adopted the density of the 50 nm Ta layer (14.2 $\frac{g}{cm^3}$) from a previous study of the same sample\cite{Ciesielski_2022} in order to reduce the degrees of freedom. The ratio of this density with respect to the Ta bulk density was applied to both the Ta$_2$O$_5$ and the Ta layers of both samples.
The relevant optical constants were taken from X-raylib \cite{T.Schoonjans2011} using the respective $\rho_{bulk}$ and are also scaled using each material's relative density. The FPCS for the Ta-L$_3$ shell was also taken from X-raylib and is scaled employing a factor during the modeling. The optimization was performed using a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm \cite{Foreman_Mackey_2013}.
The final model calculations are also shown in Fig. \ref{fig:GIXRF-XRR} and agree very well with the experimental data. The determined layer thickness of the Ta layers is about 28.9 nm or 46.9 nm and thus reasonably in line with the nominal values.
\section{Results}
The results derived for the Ta-L subshell fluorescence yields are shown in figure \ref{fig:YieldL3} as well as in table \ref{tab:table} in comparison to selected data from the literature. They were averaged from the values derived at the different excitation photon energies below the subsequent absorption edge as indicated in figure \ref{fig:CKs}. The uncertainty budget of the determined fluorescence yields is calculated using the relative uncertainty contributions of the involved parameters. The main contributors to the total uncertainty budget are the determined subshell photoionization cross sections (~2.5 \% for L$_3$, ~6 \% for L$_1$) and the uncertainty contribution of the spectral deconvolution (~2 \%). The uncertainty budget one can achieve by employing PTB's reference-free XRF approach for the determination of atomic fundamental parameters is discussed in more detail in ref. \cite{Unterumsberger2018}.
In general, our experimental values agree reasonably well with commonly used X-raylib\cite{T.Schoonjans2011} data and the theoretical predictions of Puri et al.\cite{S.Puri1993}. Significant deviations larger than the uncertainty are observed for the L$_2$-shell yield with respect to X-raylib and the L$_1$-shell yield with respect to Puri. The agreement to the shown older experimental data is good considering the stated respective uncertainties. It should be noted, that there are more published values for the L-subshell fluorescence yields of Ta with different origins (experimental or interpolated). They are nicely summarized in a recent work by Sahnoune et al.\cite{Y.Sahnoune2016}.
From the GIXRF-XRR modeling, Ta-L$_3$ fluorescence yield values of 0.239(27) (sample A, 30nm Ta) and 0.231(32) (sample B, 50nm Ta) assuming that the L$_3$-subshell photoionization cross section for Ta from X-raylib at the employed excitation photon energy of 10 keV is correct. These results are also shown in tab. \ref{tab:table} and figure \ref{fig:YieldL3} in combination with the other data. The uncertainty of the GIXRF determined value is estimated based on the confidence interval of the modeling and an estimated uncertainty of the tabulated L$_3$-subshell photoionization cross section. Unfortunately, the uncertainties are too large in order to reliably judge which fluorescence yield is more accurate. For such small deviations between the determined experimental value and the tabulated value, the sensitivity of the GIXRF-XRR approach is not sufficient. This is mainly due to the strong parameter correlation with the layer densities. If the densities could be determined independently and thus kept fixed for the modeling, it would significantly improve the sensitivity for the fluorescence production cross section.
The experimentally determined Coster-Kronig factors are also shown in table \ref{tab:table} in comparison to selected data from the literature. For $f_{23}$ also a graphical comparison is shown in figure \ref{fig:CK23}. The derived value for $f_{23}$ is in good agreement with the data from the literature, even when considering a much lower uncertainty budget. A similar behaviour can be found for $f_{13}$, where the observed differences are much lower than our stated uncertainty. Only for $f_{12}$, the deviations with respect to the commonly used database values are somewhat large but still within our stated uncertainty.
The determined relative uncertainties of the Coster-Kronig factors are higher than those of the fluorescence yields because of the required error propagation. For the Coster-Kronig factors, the relation between the different subshell photoionization cross sections increases the total relative uncertainty. Hence, a reliable uncertainty budget for
the determined Coster-Kronig factors leads to large uncertainties in the order of the values itself\cite{M.Kolbe2012}. But as can be seen by the non-agreeing values by Mohan and Werner, our uncertainty seems more reasonable and is more reliable.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14.8cm]{Omega_Comparison.png}
\caption{Experimentally determined Ta-L fluorescence yields in comparison to selected literature data from other experimental works of Mohan\cite{Mohan_1970} and Werner\cite{Werner_1988} (blue), theoretical calculations by Puri \cite{S.Puri1993} (orange) or commonly used compilations\cite{Krause1979, T.Schoonjans2011, S.T.Perkins1991} (black). The experimental uncertainties of our values are plotted as grey boxes for easier comparison. For the Ta-L$_3$ fl. yield, both the XRF result and the GIXRF-XRR values are shown.}
\label{fig:YieldL3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=13cm]{Yield_results_CK23.png}
\caption{Experimentally determined Coster-Kronig factor $f_{23}$ for Ta-L fluorescence in comparison to selected literature data from other experimental works of Mohan\cite{Mohan_1970} and Werner\cite{Werner_1988} (blue), theoretical calculations by Puri \cite{S.Puri1993} (orange) or commonly used compilations\cite{Krause1979, T.Schoonjans2011} (black). The experimental uncertainty of our value is plotted as a grey box for easier comparison.}
\label{fig:CK23}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{Overview of the experimentally determined Ta-L subshell fluorescence yields and Coster-Kronig factors as well as a comparison to the most commonly used database \cite{T.Schoonjans2011} and selected values from the literature. For the GIXRF-XRR results, the value marked with A refers to the 30 nm Ta sample and the other to the 50 nm sample.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c}
\toprule
\toprule
& Ta $\omega_{L3}$ & Ta $\omega_{L2}$ & Ta $\omega_{L1}$ \\
\midrule
this work (XRF) & 0.247(12) & 0.278(15) & 0.157(12) \\
this work (GIXRF-XRR) & 0.239(27) (A), 0.231(32) (B) & & \\
X-raylib \cite{T.Schoonjans2011} & 0.243 & 0.258 & 0.144 \\
Puri et al. \cite{S.Puri1993} & 0.251 & 0.28 & 0.131 \\
Werner et al. \cite{Werner_1988} & 0.233(9) & 0.262(15) & \\
\toprule
\toprule
& Ta $f_{23}$ & Ta $f_{13}$ & Ta $f_{12}$ \\
\midrule
this work (XRF) & 0.123(84) & 0.328(152) & 0.14(11) \\
X-raylib \cite{T.Schoonjans2011} & 0.135 & 0.351 & 0.186 \\
Puri et al. \cite{S.Puri1993} & 0.139 & 0.351 & 0.186 \\
Werner et al. \cite{Werner_1988} & 0.111(10) & 0.339(20) & 0.104(15) \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:table}
\end{table}
\FloatBarrier
\section{Conclusion}
The tantalum L-shell fluorescence yields and Coster-Kronig factors have been experimentally determined employing the radiometrically calibrated instrumentation of PTB using Ta coated Si$_3$N$_4$-membranes. The determined fluorescence yields are agreeing well with the commonly used X-raylib tables except for the L$_2$-shell. Here, our value is slightly larger than the tabulated value. The achieved experimental uncertainties for the three fluorescence yields are in the same order as the Krause estimates\cite{Krause1979}. This not only puts the estimated uncertainties on more solid grounds, it also allows to conclude with reasonable reliability that the estimated uncertainties for the L-shell yields of neighbouring elements are in the right order of magnitude as well.
Considering both the determined fluorescence yields and the Coster Kronig factors, we can conclude that the X-raylib table gives a relatively good collection of the relevant Ta-FPs. This is also in line with observations from earlier FP determinations from our group\cite{Hoenicke2022, Unterumsberger2018, P.Hoenicke2016a}. Thus, the X-raylib tables are a very good starting point if a consistent database is needed.
\FloatBarrier
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This project has received funding from the ECSEL Joint Undertaking (JU) IT2 under grant agreement No 875999. The JU receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France, Austria, Hungary, United Kingdom, Romania and Israel.
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
\section{Introduction}
\lipsum[2]
\lipsum[3]
\section{Headings: first level}
\label{sec:headings}
\lipsum[4] See Section \ref{sec:headings}.
\subsection{Headings: second level}
\lipsum[5]
\begin{equation}
\xi _{ij}(t)=P(x_{t}=i,x_{t+1}=j|y,v,w;\theta)= {\frac {\alpha _{i}(t)a^{w_t}_{ij}\beta _{j}(t+1)b^{v_{t+1}}_{j}(y_{t+1})}{\sum _{i=1}^{N} \sum _{j=1}^{N} \alpha _{i}(t)a^{w_t}_{ij}\beta _{j}(t+1)b^{v_{t+1}}_{j}(y_{t+1})}}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Headings: third level}
\lipsum[6]
\paragraph{Paragraph}
\lipsum[7]
\section{Examples of citations, figures, tables, references}
\label{sec:others}
\lipsum[8] \cite{kour2014real,kour2014fast} and see \cite{hadash2018estimate}.
The documentation for \verb+natbib+ may be found at
\begin{center}
\url{http://mirrors.ctan.org/macros/latex/contrib/natbib/natnotes.pdf}
\end{center}
Of note is the command \verb+\citet+, which produces citations
appropriate for use in inline text. For example,
\begin{verbatim}
\citet{hasselmo} investigated\dots
\end{verbatim}
produces
\begin{quote}
Hasselmo, et al.\ (1995) investigated\dots
\end{quote}
\begin{center}
\url{https://www.ctan.org/pkg/booktabs}
\end{center}
\subsection{Figures}
\lipsum[10]
See Figure \ref{fig:fig1}. Here is how you add footnotes. \footnote{Sample of the first footnote.}
\lipsum[11]
\begin{figure}
\centering
\fbox{\rule[-.5cm]{4cm}{4cm} \rule[-.5cm]{4cm}{0cm}}
\caption{Sample figure caption.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Tables}
\lipsum[12]
See awesome Table~\ref{tab:table}.
\begin{table}
\caption{Sample table title}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Part} \\
\cmidrule(r){1-2}
Name & Description & Size ($\mu$m) \\
\midrule
Dendrite & Input terminal & $\sim$100 \\
Axon & Output terminal & $\sim$10 \\
Soma & Cell body & up to $10^6$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:table}
\end{table}
\subsection{Lists}
\begin{itemize}
\item Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
\item consectetur adipiscing elit.
\item Aliquam dignissim blandit est, in dictum tortor gravida eget. In ac rutrum magna.
\end{itemize}
\section{Conclusion}
Your conclusion here
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This was was supported in part by......
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Black holes are now known to exist, and their properties are being studied via gravitational waves from binary black hole mergers and directly via photons emitted from their accretion disks.
Beyond these solar mass and supermassive black holes, much lighter black holes could exist in the universe. For example, primordial black holes may have been produced in the early universe~\cite{
Carr:1975qj,
Ivanov:1994pa,
GarciaBellido:1996qt,
Silk:1986vc,
Kawasaki:1997ju,
Yokoyama:1995ex,
Pi:2017gih,
Hawking:1987bn,
Polnarev:1988dh,
MacGibbon:1997pu,
Rubin:2000dq,
Rubin:2001yw,
Brandenberger:2021zvn,
Cotner:2016cvr,
Cotner:2019ykd,
Crawford:1982yz,
Kodama:1982sf,
Moss:1994pi,
Freivogel:2007fx,
Hawking:1982ga,
Johnson:2011wt,
Cotner:2018vug,
Kusenko:2020pcg,
Baker:2021nyl,
Baker:2021sno}. Those with masses around $10^{15}\,\text{g}$ would have been continually losing mass via Hawking radiation and would be reaching their final stages of evaporation today (see, e.g., refs.~\cite{Carr:2016drx,Sasaki:2018dmp,Green:2020jor,Carr:2020xqk,Carr:2020gox,Villanueva-Domingo:2021spv} for recent reviews of primordial black holes). There are currently a range of experiments searching for both the explosive final stages of black hole evaporation, e.g.,~ref.~\cite{Albert:2019qxd}, and indirect signatures from a population of low-mass black holes, e.g.,~refs.~\cite{1976ApJ...206....1P,1977ApJ...212..224P,Lehoucq:2009ge,Abe:2011nx,Carr:2020gox}.
In this work we emphasise that the observation of an exploding black hole would provide definitive information on the particles present in nature, and that this in turn could provide evidence for, or rule out, a wide range of models Beyond the Standard Model (BSM). A broad range of BSM models have been proposed and are widely studied. These models usually aim to address a question not answered by the Standard Model (SM), such as the gauge hierarchy problem, the nature of dark matter, the strong-$CP$ problem, etc. We first survey contemporary BSM models and identify those which are widely studied and would have a significant and calculable impact on the signal seen from a black hole explosion. These are supersymmetry (for a recent review see, e.g., ref.~\cite{Workman:2022ynf}), $N$naturalness \cite{Arkani-Hamed:2016rle}, models inspired by string theory (for a recent review, see, e.g.,~ref.~\cite{Cvetic:2022fnv}) and dark sectors (e.g., refs.~\cite{Kobzarev:1966qya,Blinnikov:1982eh,Foot:1991bp,Hodges:1993yb,Berezhiani:1995am,Strassler:2006im,Cvetic:2012kj,Foot:2014uba}). We then define representative benchmark parameter points for these models and determine the relevant particle mass spectra and decay properties. This allows us to compute the mass evolution of the black hole and the primary and secondary photon spectra. We use this to characterise the range of behaviours seen in this set of BSM models, and briefly discuss experimental strategies to distinguish between the SM and BSM scenarios.
Conversely, we emphasise that assumptions about the particles present in nature will impact experimental limits on the rate-density of exploding black holes. While searches for evaporating black holes typically assume the SM particles, we demonstrate that BSM models can dramatically alter the expected black hole evolution and the associated photon signatures. This means that if a BSM model is realised in nature, then the direct and indirect limits could be drastically altered. Similarly, existing gamma-ray bursts of unknown origin could potentially be attributed to evaporating black holes. These may currently be missed in searches that assume only the SM particles. The benchmark models we propose could therefore be used as a framework for a wider interpretation in future searches.
Previous work on black holes and BSM physics has mainly focused on BSM particle production in the early universe, e.g., refs.~\cite{hep-ph/9810456, astro-ph/9812301, astro-ph/9903484, hep-ph/0001238, astro-ph/0406621, Doran:2005mf, 0801.0116, 1401.1909, 1712.07664, Johnson:2018gjr, 1812.10606, 1905.01301, 1910.07864, 2004.00618, 2004.04740, 2004.14773, Johnson:2020tiw, 2008.06505, 2010.01134, 2012.09867}.
Ref.~\cite{Ukwatta:2015iba} considers the impact of a single $5\,\text{TeV}$ squark on the observation of an evaporating black hole and suggests that a deviation from the SM could be seen if a black hole explodes within $\sim 0.015\,\text{pc}$.
In ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk} we demonstrated that if the HAWC observatory observed $\sim 200$ photons from an exploding black hole it could probe dark sector models containing one or more copies of the SM particles with any mass scale up to $100\,\text{TeV}$.
\section{Beyond the Standard Model of Particle Physics}
\label{sec:models}
There are a wide variety of motivations for proposing new fundamental degrees of freedom (dof) beyond those present in the standard model of particle physics. The standard model was chiefly developed and verified using particle colliders, and this is the environment where it is most applicable. As such, the SM can not describe gravity, dark matter, dark energy, neutrino masses, or the matter-antimatter asymmetry. There are also theoretical problems within the SM. Those which have been most widely studied are the gauge hierarchy problem (why the Higgs boson has a mass at the weak scale and not at a higher scale) and the strong-$CP$ problem (which is related to the absence of $CP$ violation in the strong sector). Furthermore, the SM has many unexplained features (such as three gauge groups, three generations, etc) and many unrelated parameters, which motivate the search for a deeper unified model. There are also experimental results which are in tension with SM predictions, such as the flavour anomalies in $B$ physics and the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon.
To guide our identification of the most promising models to probe via black hole evaporation, we recap some of the conclusions from refs.~\cite{Ukwatta:2015iba,Baker:2021btk}. Both ref.~\cite{Ukwatta:2015iba} and ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk} demonstrate potential sensitivity to models of new physics. One of the significant differences between the studies is that while the single squark analysed in ref.~\cite{Ukwatta:2015iba} produces extra secondary photons, the models considered in ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk} do not. However, even without extra secondary photons, `dark' degrees of freedom still take energy from the evaporating black hole and lead to an increased rate of mass loss, which is detectable in the photon signal originating from purely SM processes. As such, it is not essential to consider only models that produce extra photons. We also emphasise that Hawking radiation is independent of all non-gravitational couplings. As such, the increased rate of mass loss induced by new degrees of freedom depends only on the particle mass and spin, and an observation can probe models that are essentially decoupled from the SM.
The BSM models that will have the largest impact on the signal from an evaporating black hole are those with a large number of new degrees of freedom, at a mass scale that is not too high. For example, ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk} shows that the observation of 200 photons from an evaporating black hole at the HAWC observatory would be able to probe a dark sector containing one copy of the SM, around 100 new degrees of freedom, at any mass scale below $10^5\,\text{GeV}$. The observation of 10 photons would be enough to probe ten copies of the SM (around 1000 new dof) up to a similar mass scale. This provides an initial indication that we should first focus on models with $\gtrsim 100$ new degrees of freedom.
We will also focus on models that have standard black hole evaporation at black hole temperatures below $\sim10^7\,\text{GeV}$. Models with a fundamental Planck scale below $\sim10^7\,\text{GeV}$ would lead to a striking signature where the black hole evaporation suddenly stops when the fundamental Planck scale is reached. This would be the case in the large $N$ species and extra-dimensional models discussed below. However, modelling of the final burst requires some assumptions about the effects of quantum gravity. Furthermore, some BSM scenarios, such as extra-dimensional models, modify black hole dynamics below the fundamental Planck scale. These scenarios require detailed, model-specific study which we defer to future work. Ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk} demonstrates that it is unlikely that searches will be sensitive to physics above $\sim10^7\,\text{GeV}$, so we will still consider BSM scenarios which modify black hole dynamics above this scale (such as $N$naturalness).
Astrophysical observations will typically only be sensitive to photons above a certain energy cutoff. HAWC, for example, only has a significant effective area at $E_\gamma \gtrsim 10^2\,\text{GeV}$. Furthermore, an analysis may only want to select higher energy events for effective background reduction. This means that while these observations will be able to infer the presence of new dof with masses below these energies, it will not be sensitive to their precise mass scales. While this is a reasonable cutoff for HAWC-like experiments, where an exploding black hole would likely first be seen, a lower cutoff may be more appropriate for exploding black holes seen using other experimental techniques or for attempts to probe BSM models using an integrated flux of lower energy photons from a more distant population of evaporating black holes. For this reason, we consider new particles to be `massless' if, for a black hole exploding today, they could have been produced by the black hole shortly after the Big Bang.
We now survey contemporary models in BSM physics, with an emphasis on those that are widely studied and/or are expected to have a significant impact on the photon signal from a nearby evaporating black hole:
\begin{itemize}
\item Supersymmetry -- From the 1980's to the mid-2010's supersymmetry was very widely studied as it could address the gauge hierarchy problem, gauge coupling unification and dark matter, it is a necessary ingredient of string theory, and it was widely expected to lead to new TeV scale particles (for a recent review, see, e.g., ref.~\cite{Workman:2022ynf}). Although these particles have not been seen at the LHC or in dark matter direct detection experiments, supersymmetry is still studied and certain regions of parameter space remain viable. In contrast to the other models we highlight, most of these new particles will produce secondary photons.
\item Large $N$ Species Solution to the Hierarchy Problem~\cite{Dvali:2007hz,Dvali:2007wp,Calmet:2008tn,Dvali:2009ne} and $N$naturalness~\cite{Arkani-Hamed:2016rle} -- These models relax the hierarchy problem since the apparent Planck mass $M_\text{Pl}$ is related to the scale at which gravity becomes strongly coupled, $M_\ast$, by $M_\text{Pl}^2 \gtrsim N M_\ast^2$. In refs.~\cite{Dvali:2007hz,Dvali:2007wp,Calmet:2008tn,Dvali:2009ne} the hierarchy problem can be solved when gravity becomes strongly coupled at the TeV scale, which can be achieved for $N \sim 10^{32}$ copies of the SM. However, this would mean that black hole evaporation stops at the TeV scale, rather than continuing above $10^7\,\text{GeV}$, so we do not consider this scenario in this work. $N$naturalness~\cite{Arkani-Hamed:2016rle} solves the hierarchy problem while introducing fewer copies, and can retain a Planck scale above $10^7\,\text{GeV}$. This is the scenario that we will focus on.
\item String Inspired Models -- String theory is the most promising approach for combining general relativity and quantum field theory, to provide a quantum theory of gravity (for a recent review, see, e.g.,~ref.~\cite{Cvetic:2022fnv}). In string theory, the fundamental particles of quantum field theory are replaced by fundamental one-dimensional strings. While this class of theories is not yet well understood and a realistic model (in the sense of containing the SM particles) is yet to be constructed, some properties of the theory are relatively well understood. One generic prediction is an abundance of particles, called \textit{moduli}, which are naively very light and which must obtain a mass through some mechanism to satisfy cosmological constraints. These moduli may be light enough to impact the signal from an evaporating black hole, and we study two `string inspired' scenarios containing these moduli fields.
\item Dark Sectors and Hidden Valleys -- The presence of dark matter is perhaps the strongest direct evidence for new particles beyond the SM. The simplest and most widely studied models introduce just a few new degrees of freedom, and as such have a relatively small impact on the signal from an evaporating black hole. However, dark matter could be part of a richer dark sector containing multiple new particles and dark gauge forces. Hidden valley models~\cite{Strassler:2006im} similarly introduce a rich sector that only weakly communicates with the SM. A representative class of dark sector models was studied in ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk} and we include these models here for comparison.
\item Extra-Dimensional Models -- These models were initially introduced to address the gauge hierarchy problem and are widely studied alternatives to supersymmetry. In contrast to the other models we consider, extra-dimensional models alter the space-time geometry and so fundamentally change the black holes themselves, making the situation more complicated. The main classes of models are large extra-dimensional models~\cite{Kaluza:1921tu,Klein:1926tv,Arkani-Hamed:1998jmv,Antoniadis:1998ig} and warped extra-dimensional models~\cite{Rubakov:1983bz,Rubakov:1983bb,Randall:1999ee,Randall:1999vf}. Large extra-dimensional models lower the Planck scale, so these models suggest that black holes could be produced at colliders~\cite{Dimopoulos:2001hw,Cavaglia:2003hg} or in cosmic ray collisions~\cite{Feng:2001ib,Anchordoqui:2001ei,Emparan:2001kf,Ringwald:2001vk} (although none have yet been observed). While this would significantly alter the signature, since the black hole would reach the end-point of its evaporation at a temperature $\ll 10^{18}\,\text{GeV}$, it would likely do so in a way that depends on the details of quantum gravity \cite{Harris:2003eg,Kanti:2004nr,Carr:2004kgc,Cardoso:2005vb,Cardoso:2005mh,Draggiotis:2008jz,Kanti:2014vsa,Johnson:2020tiw}. While this may produce a signature quite obviously different from the SM expectation, quantitative analysis requires detailed study which we leave to future work.
While warped extra-dimensional models maintain a larger Planck scale~\cite{Randall:1999ee,Randall:1999vf,Csaki:2004ay}, no analytical solution exists for a five-dimensional asymptotically anti-de Sitter black hole localised on the brane and therefore the impact of the extra-dimension on the black hole evaporation is not well understood~\cite{Kanti:2014vsa}.
As such we also do not consider these models in this work.
\end{itemize}
There are a host of other motivated models which could potentially be probed through the observation of an evaporating black hole. However, since they require dedicated study or will only produce small deviations from the SM signal, we do not propose benchmarks for:
\begin{itemize}
\item Composite Higgs Models -- These models also address the gauge hierarchy problem and are widely studied alternatives to supersymmetry and extra-dimensional models. Although warped extra-dimensional models are in some ways dual to a wide class of composite Higgs models, this is not true for black hole evaporation. While this could provide an intriguing way of distinguishing between these models in the event of more conventional evidence for these theories, confinement in the models makes the situation very complicated. In the same way that Hawking evaporation near the QCD scale is beset with difficulties which are debated in the literature~\cite{MacGibbon:1990zk,MacGibbon:1991tj,Coogan:2020tuf,Arbey:2021mbl}, similar problems would emerge at the new confinement scale. We also do not expect a very large number of fundamental degrees of freedom in these theories, so we do not expect their impact to be particularly large.
\item Grand Unified Theories -- While GUT theories are strongly motivated and aim to unify the gauge forces into one structure, they typically have new degrees of freedom at around $10^{16}\,\text{GeV}$, the expected unification scale. Since this scale is so high, these models will only impact an evaporating black hole in the very last moments of its life and so will be very hard to probe via black hole explosion.
\item Light Dark Matter, Axions, ALPs, Dark Photons -- Despite an intensive, dedicated search for WIMP dark matter, no convincing signal has yet been observed. As such, the theoretical and experimental communities are broadening their approach. Light dark matter and axions, as well as axion like particles (ALPs) and dark photons, have recently received a lot of attention. These particles are typically lighter than $\sim 1\,\text{GeV}$ and are very weakly coupled to the SM particles, which could make them good models to consider in an exploding black hole search. However, these models typically only introduce a few degrees of freedom, so many photons would need to be observed to probe them. In ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk}, for example, around $10^5$ photons would need to be observed in HAWC to detect the presence of a light Dirac fermion dark matter candidate. Since the black hole would need to evaporate very close to the Earth for this many photons to be detected (closer than $10^{-3}\,\text{pc}$), we would need to be very lucky to see one.
\item Neutrino Masses -- While there are a range of models which explain the neutrino masses, perhaps the simplest explanation of the neutrino masses is the type-I see-saw, which introduces right-handed neutrinos at a high scale (typically around $10^{15}\,\text{GeV}$). Since this scale is so high, it is very hard to probe and will only impact an exploding black hole in the very last instants of its life. While there is interest in lower scale mechanisms, these typically only introduce a few new particles and the spectrum is very model dependent.
\item Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry -- The main classes of models which aim to explain this asymmetry are electroweak baryogenesis and leptogenesis. While electroweak baryogenesis requires a strongly first-order electroweak phase transition, which implies new degrees of freedom around the weak scale, relatively few new degrees of freedom are typically introduced. Leptogenesis models also introduce relatively few new degrees of freedom and typically around $10^{15}\,\text{GeV}$ to tie in to seesaw explanations of the neutrino masses.
\item Inflation -- While models of inflation are well motivated by cosmological data, they again typically only introduce a few new degrees of freedom.
\item Models Motivated by Experimental Anomalies -- While a wide range of models have been proposed to explain existing experimental anomalies such as the $B$-physics anomalies and the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, typically only one or two new particles are strictly required to explain the anomalies. While some approaches also introduce a wide range of new particles, it is difficult to sensibly define `representative' models of this class given the wide range of approaches considered.
\end{itemize}
We now return to the models we consider to be of particular interest in the event of an observation of an exploding black hole. We will summarise the particle content of these classes of models and define exemplary benchmarks.
\subsection{Supersymmetry}
In supersymmetry (SUSY), at least one new copy of the SM particles, with fermions interchanged with bosons, is introduced, along with a second Higgs doublet. Since no supersymmetric particles have yet been discovered, they must be somewhat heavier than the SM particles, which can be achieved through a variety of soft SUSY breaking mechanisms. While the mass scale of the supersymmetric particles could in principle be as high as the Planck scale, there has been significant interest in low-scale supersymmetric models since as well as potentially providing a resolution to the gauge hierarchy problem, they can also improve gauge coupling unification and provide a thermal dark matter candidate. Due to these theoretical successes, the prediction of new coloured states at the energy scale probed by the LHC, and the fact that sectors of the model can resemble a wide range of BSM theories, supersymmetry has been very widely studied. Recent LHC searches mean that new uncoloured particles are likely all heavier than a few hundred GeV while coloured particles are likely all heavier than a TeV~\cite{ATLAS:2022rcw}. Maintaining a solution to the hierarchy problem while passing these collider bounds leads to a little hierarchy problem, which can be somewhat ameliorated via, e.g., neutral naturalness~\cite{Batell:2022pzc} (where the top partner is uncoloured, so can be lighter than a TeV).
The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) introduces over 100 new degrees of freedom, along with around 100 new fundamental parameters. There are several approaches taken to tackle this large parameter space: fixing relations between couplings at a high scale (such as the cMSSM and mSUGRA); choosing benchmark planes, lines and points (in high-scale or low-scale parameters); and using simplified topologies, where minimal assumptions on SUSY productions and decays are used to study certain new particles while other particles are taken to be heavy or weakly coupled. While much of the MSSM parameter space remains viable, we here choose an illustrative benchmark point with all new particles at a similar mass scale. Since we do not expect a dramatic difference between the signatures from an evaporating black hole when the particle masses are altered by a factor of a few, we focus on one benchmark point here and leave a more detailed study of a wider range of parameters for future work. Beyond the MSSM, models with extra superfields are studied, such as the NMSSM (which aims to address the $\mu$-problem) and the $\nu$MSSM (which addresses neutrino masses). However, since these typically only introduce a few extra degrees of freedom, they are expected to alter the signature of an evaporating black hole in a similar way to the MSSM. Models like Split SUSY~\cite{Wells:2003tf,Arkani-Hamed:2004ymt,Giudice:2004tc,Arkani-Hamed:2004zhs} have widely separated mass scales, but then do not address the gauge hierarchy problem. As such these models are less theoretically motivated than weak scale SUSY models.
As a benchmark we choose the $M_h^{125}$ benchmark of ref.~\cite{Bagnaschi:2018ofa} with $M_A = 2\,\text{TeV}$ and $\tan\beta = 20$ (see fig 1.~of~\cite{Bagnaschi:2021jaj}). For this benchmark the squarks and the gluino (which are coloured so have a large LHC production cross-section) are safely above the current LHC bounds and all superpartners are chosen to be heavy so production and decay of the $125\,\text{GeV}$ Higgs boson is only mildly affected. We use \texttt{SPheno}~\cite{Porod:2003um,Porod:2011nf} to generate the spectrum and we provide an overview of the new particles introduced in their mass basis in \cref{tab:susy-model}, noting which particles lead to additional secondary photons. In the SM it is not yet known whether the neutrinos are Dirac or Majorana fermions. To be concrete, we choose them to be Majorana so that the SM contains 118 degrees of freedom. Since this can result from a type I see-saw with right-handed neutrinos heavier than $10^7\,\text{GeV}$, this choice does not necessarily significantly impact the observed signature of a black hole explosion. We then use \texttt{pythia8} \cite{Sjostrand:2014zea} to compute their showering and hadronisation at various energies (detailed below), and make the secondary spectra as a function of black hole mass available at \href{https://github.com/PhysicsBaker/SecondarySpectra}{github.com/physicsbaker/secondaryspectra}. We do not include the graviton or gravitinos because, as we will see in \cref{sec:particle-emission}, their emission is suppressed.
\begin{table}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{c @{\extracolsep{\fill}} cccc}
\hline
Particle & Spin & \# dof & Mass & Secondary Photons \\
\hline
\hline
SM & 0, 1/2, 1 & 118 & $M_\text{SM}$ & \checkmark\\
\hline
$\widetilde{g}$ & 1/2 & 16 & $\sim 2.5\,\text{TeV}$ & \checkmark\\ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$, $\widetilde{\chi}^0_3$, $\widetilde{\chi}^0_4$, $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$, $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_2$ & 1/2 & 14 & $\sim 1\,\text{TeV}$ & \checkmark\\
$\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$ & 1/2 & 2 & $\sim 1\,\text{TeV}$ & $\times$\\
$H^0$, $A^0$, $H^\pm$ & 0 & 4 & $\sim2\,\text{TeV}$ & \checkmark\\
\parbox{0.3\textwidth}{$\widetilde{d}_{L,R}$, $\widetilde{u}_{L,R}$,
$\widetilde{s}_{L,R}$, $\widetilde{c}_{L,R}$,\\
$\widetilde{e}_{L,R}$, $\widetilde{\mu}_{L,R}$,
$\widetilde{\tau}_{1,2}$,$\widetilde{\nu}_{eL}$, $\widetilde{\nu}_{\mu L}$, $\widetilde{\nu}_{\tau L}$}$\biggl\}$ & 0 & 66 & $\sim 2\,\text{TeV}$ & \checkmark
\\
$\widetilde{b}_{1,2}$, $\widetilde{t}_{1,2}$ & 0 & 24 & $\sim 1.5\,\text{TeV}$ & \checkmark\\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\caption{Particle content of the benchmark MSSM Model with masses less than $\sim 10^7\,\text{GeV}$ and spin less than $3/2$, see text.}
\label{tab:susy-model}
\end{table}
\subsection{Large $N$ Species Solutions to the Hierarchy Problem}
Large $N$ species solutions to the hierarchy problem were developed in refs.~\cite{Dvali:2007hz,Dvali:2007wp,Calmet:2008tn,Dvali:2009ne} as an alternative to supersymmetric, composite Higgs and extra-dimensional models. They introduce $N \sim 10^{32}$ species beyond the SM in order to reduce the scale of gravity. The apparent Planck scale, $M_\text{Pl}$, is related to the true scale where gravity becomes strongly coupled, $M_\ast$, via the relation $M_\text{Pl}^2 \gtrsim N M_\ast^2$. The new species are at or below the weak scale and couple only gravitationally. In this scenario, black holes can form at the TeV scale and could be produced and probed at the LHC. The signature of an exploding black hole in models with $M_\ast \ll M_\text{Pl}$ would be strikingly different to models with $M_\ast$ above experimental sensitivity. Evaporation would stop at $M_\ast$ and could allow us to infer the true scale of gravity. We leave a detailed discussion of this scenario to future work.
\begin{table}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2}
\begin{tabular*}{0.75\textwidth}{c @{\extracolsep{\fill}} ccccc}
\hline
Particle & Spin & \# dof & Mass & Secondary Photons \\
\hline
\hline
SM & 0, 1/2, 1 & 118 & $M_\text{SM}$ & \checkmark\\
\hline
Reheaton & 0 or 1/2 & 1 or 2 & weak scale & \checkmark\\
Higgs & 0 & $5 \times 10^{15}$ & $\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ & $\times$\\
Photons & 1 & $2 \times 10^{16}$ & 0 & $\times$\\
Gluons & 1 & $16\times 10^{16}$ & ${}^\ast\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ & $\times$\\
$W^\pm$/$Z$ & 1 & $9 \times 5 \times 10^{15}$ & $\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ & $\times$\\
Neutrinos & 1/2 & $3 \times 2\times 5 \times 10^{15}$ & $<100\,$eV & $\times$\\
Charged leptons & 1/2 & $3\times 4 \times 5 \times 10^{15}$ & $<100\,$eV & $\times$\\
Quarks & 1/2 & $6\times 12 \times 5 \times 10^{15}$ & ${}^\ast\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ & $\times$\\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\caption{Particle content of the $N$naturalness benchmark model (with $N=10^{16}$) with masses less than the weak scale. We omit SM copies with a vev above the weak scale, see text. ${}^\ast\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ denotes coloured particles with a mass below $\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ which we assume are only emitted above $\Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$, see text in \cref{sec:particle-emission}.
Assuming $N$naturalness, black holes evaporating today would have a temperature around $100\,\text{eV}$ shortly after the Big Bang, so we treat particles with masses below this scale as massless.
}
\label{tab:$N$naturalness-model}
\end{table}
Here we focus on $N$naturalness \cite{Arkani-Hamed:2016rle}, a model which reduces $N$ (and raises $M_\ast$) while simultaneously solving the gauge hierarchy problem. $N$naturalness introduces $N-1$ new sectors with the same particle content as the SM. In half of the SM copies electroweak symmetry is broken at the QCD scale, while the other half contains particles which are heavier than the weak scale. In the simplest scenario, the Higgs mass parameter in all $N$ sectors is given by
\begin{equation}
(m_H^2)_i = (2i+1) (m_H^2)_\text{SM} , \qquad -\frac{N}{2} < i < \frac{N}{2} \,,
\end{equation}
where $(m_H^2)_{\text{SM}} = -(88\,\text{GeV})^2$ (so $i=0$ corresponds to the SM particles). Sectors with $(m_H^2)_i < 0$ (for $i>0$) are similar to the SM, but the Higgs vacuum expectation value (vev) and all associated particle masses are rescaled by $\sqrt{(2i+1)}$ (or $\sim i$ in the case of Majorana neutrinos). In sectors with $(m_H^2)_i > 0$ (for $i<0$) the electroweak symmetry is broken by QCD condensates and all fermionic and gauge degrees of freedom have masses $\lesssim \Lambda_\text{QCD}$.
In this scenario the hierarchy problem is solved with cosmological dynamics which ensure that only (or almost only) the $i=0$ copy of the SM is populated by reheating. A reheaton is introduced which, in the simplest models, is taken to be a real scalar or a Majorana fermion and couples to two Higgses or with a Yukawa-like coupling to each of the $i$ sectors. The reheaton has a branching ratio of $\text{BR}_i \sim (m_H)^{-\alpha}_i$ with $\alpha > 0$ which ensures that most of the reheaton's energy is deposited into the SM sector, i.e., the sector with $i=0$. A black hole would, however, radiate particles from all $i$ sectors via Hawking radiation.
For our benchmark model we require the black hole to be SM-like up to a scale of $10^7\,\text{GeV}$. Taking $M_\ast \gtrsim 10^7\,\text{GeV}$ implies that $N \lesssim 10^{22}$. We also require that no further unknown, unspecified new physics exists below $10^7\,\text{GeV}$, since we need the model to be calculable up to this scale. This leads to $N\gtrsim 10^{10}$. Both conditions are satisfied for the benchmark we choose, $N=10^{16}$, where $M_\ast \sim 10^{10}\,\text{GeV}$. This model has $5\times 10^{15}$ SM copies with masses $\lesssim \Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$ but only $5\times 10^{9}$ SM copies with masses between the SM masses and $10^7\,\text{GeV}$. We can therefore neglect the massive copies. The particle spectrum of the light sectors is summarised in \cref{tab:$N$naturalness-model}.
To simplify our analysis, we further neglect the effect of the reheaton. The one or two degrees of freedom of the reheaton will be negligible compared to the $N$ SM copies, and it gives a subdominant contribution to the secondary spectra (compared to the SM particles). This assumption decouples the $N$ sectors from each other and from the SM, so only the SM particles produce a significant flux of secondary photons. This assumptions also avoids introducing any model dependence, through the specific mass dependent couplings of the reheaton.
\subsection{String Inspired Models}
String theory is only self-consistent in higher dimensional space-times.\footnote{In contrast to large extra-dimensional models, the extra dimensions are very small, so black hole dynamics significantly below the Planck scale are not dramatically affected.}
Compactification of the underlying space-time manifold typically leads to many massless scalars (moduli). These are typically made massive via a variety of mechanisms to evade cosmological bounds and fifth-force constraints (this process is known as moduli stabilisation). The two main classes of moduli stabilisation techniques are KKLT~\cite{Kachru:2003aw} and the Large Volume Scenario (LVS)~\cite{Balasubramanian:2005zx}. KKLT typically results in moduli heavier than $10^6$ GeV, so we will here focus on the LVS.
\begin{table}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2}
\begin{tabular*}{0.75\textwidth}{c @{\extracolsep{\fill}} cccc}
\hline
Particle & Spin & \# dof & Mass & Secondary Photons \\
\hline
\hline
SM & 0, 1/2, 1 & 118 & $M_\text{SM}$ & \checkmark\\
\hline
$a_b$ & 0 & 3 & $\ll \text{GeV}$ & $\times$\\
$\tau_b$ & 0 & 3 & $M_\text{Pl}/\mathcal{V}^{3/2}$ & $\times$\\
$\widetilde{G}$, $T$, $U$, $S$ & $0,\,3/2$ & $\sim 400$ & $M_\text{Pl}/\mathcal{V}$ & $\times$\\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\caption{Particle content of the string theory inspired models with masses less than $\sim 10^7\,\text{GeV}$. The volume $\mathcal{V}$ is a dimensionless number which we take to be in the range $10^{12} - 10^{15}$.}
\label{tab:string-model}
\end{table}
The masses of the lightest moduli scale with the volume of the internal manifold, $\mathcal{V}$, which is dimensionless when expressed in units of the string length, as shown in \cref{tab:string-model}~\cite{Cicoli:2012aq}. While volumes in the range $10^5 \lesssim \mathcal{V} \lesssim 10^{15}$ are typically considered, we will focus on scenarios with $\mathcal{V} \gtrsim 10^{12}$ so that new degrees of freedom appear below $10^6\,\text{GeV}$. As benchmarks we will choose $\mathcal{V} = 10^{15}$ and $\mathcal{V} = 10^{13}$. The lightest modulus is the volume axion, $a_b$, which typically has a mass much lower than the GeV scale and which we will treat as massless. The next lightest is the volume modulus, $\tau_b$, which has a mass around $10^{-4}\,(10^{-1})\,\text{GeV}$ for $\mathcal{V} = 10^{15}\,(10^{13})$. The K\"ahler moduli, $T$, the complex structure moduli, $U$ and the axiodilaton, $S$, all have similar masses to the gravitino, $\widetilde G$, which is around $2\times 10^3\,(2\times 10^5) \,\text{GeV}$ for $\mathcal{V} = 10^{15}\,(10^{13})$. Since there are significantly more degrees of freedom in the moduli than in the gravitino, we neglect the gravitino contribution.
String theory may also give rise to hundreds or thousands of sub-eV axions~\cite{Arvanitaki:2009fg,Cvetic:2022fnv}. While the details are quite model dependent, these would have a significant impact on black hole evaporation and would be a prime candidate for future work.
\subsection{Dark Sectors}
In ref.~\cite{Baker:2021btk} we studied dark sector models motivated by Mirror Dark Matter~\cite{Foot:1991bp}. In that work we introduced $N$ copies of the SM degrees of freedom, but all with a common mass scale $\Lambda_\text{DS}$. We label these models DS$(N,\Lambda_\text{DS})$. The particle content of these models is given in \cref{tab:dark-sector-model}. The new particles are taken to only interact weakly with the SM particles, so that no (or an insignificant number of) secondary photons are produced. In this work we study three concrete benchmarks: DS$(10,10^2\,\text{GeV})$, DS$(2,2\times10^3\,\text{GeV})$ and DS$(1,10^4\,\text{GeV})$.
\begin{table}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2}
\begin{tabular*}{0.75\textwidth}{c @{\extracolsep{\fill}} cccc}
\hline
Particle & Spin & \# dof & Mass & Secondary Photons \\
\hline
\hline
SM & 0, 1/2, 1 & 118 & $M_\text{SM}$ & \checkmark\\
\hline
DS & 0, 1/2, 1 & $118\, N$ & $\Lambda_\text{DS}$ & $\times$\\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\caption{Particle content of the Dark Sector Models.}
\label{tab:dark-sector-model}
\end{table}
\section{Particle Emission from an Evaporating Black Hole}
\label{sec:particle-emission}
Black holes radiate particles of type $i$ with energy $E$ via Hawking radiation at the rate~\cite{Hawking:1974rv,Hawking:1974sw}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:d2NdEdt}
\frac{d^2 N^i_\text{p}}{dtdE} =&\, \frac{n^i_\text{dof} \, \Gamma^i}{2\pi(e^{E/T}\pm 1)} \,,
\end{align}
where $n^i_\text{dof}$ is the number of degrees of freedom of particle $i$, $+$ $(-)$ corresponds to fermions (bosons), $\Gamma^i$ is a greybody factor, $T =1/(8\pi \, G M)$ is the temperature of the black hole in units where $\hbar=c=\kappa_\text{B}=1$, $G$ is the gravitational constant and $M$ is the black hole mass. For the SM particles, $n_q = 12$ for each quark, $n_\ell = 4$ for each charged lepton, $n_\nu = 2$ for each neutrino (assuming Majorana neutrinos), $n_g = 16$ for the gluon, $n_\gamma = 2$ for the photon, $n_Z = 3$ for the $Z$ boson, $n_{W^\pm} = 6$ for the $W$ boson and $n_h = 1$ for the Higgs boson. In general the greybody factors depend on the emitted particle's energy, mass and spin and the black hole's mass, spin and charge. However, black holes emit angular momentum and charge faster than mass~\cite{Page:1976ki,Zaumen:1974,Carter:1974yx,Gibbons:1975kk,Page:1976df,Page:1977um} so near the end of their life they will be approximately Schwarzschild (zero angular momentum and no charge). While the emission in general depends on the mass of the emitted particle, emission of particles with $E < m$ is heavily suppressed at significant distances from the black hole~\cite{Jannes:2011qp} and any mass corrections when $E\sim m$ only affect very few particles, so we set the greybody factor to zero when $E < m$ and use the massless expression for $E > m$. Then, the greybody factor only depends on the ratio of $E$ to the black hole's mass, with a threshold at the particle's mass. We take the greybody factors from the publicly available \texttt{BlackHawk} code~\cite{Arbey:2019mbc,Arbey:2021mbl}. The exponential factor in the emission rate, \cref{eq:d2NdEdt}, ensures that the emission rate for particles with $E \gg T$ is heavily suppressed. It is important to note that the emission rate is independent of any non-gravitational interactions. As such, all particles present in nature will be emitted according to \cref{eq:d2NdEdt}, even if they are only coupled gravitationally to the SM particles.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{primary-spectra-crop.pdf}
\caption{Representative primary spectra for particles of spin 0 (the Higgs boson, $h$), spin $1/2$ (the up quark, $u$), spin 1 (the photon, $\gamma$) and spin 2 (the graviton, $G$) for a black hole of mass $10^8\,\text{g}$. The dashed lines show the spectra per degree of freedom while the solid lines include the factors
$n_\text{dof}^h = 1$, $n_\text{dof}^u = 12$, $n_\text{dof}^\gamma = 2$ and $n_G = 2$, respectively.
}
\label{fig:primary}
\end{figure}
In \cref{fig:primary} we show the primary spectra for Higgs bosons (spin 0), up quarks (spin 1/2) and photons (spin 1) for a black hole with a mass of $10^8\,\text{g}$.\footnote{Since we plot on a log scale in energy, we in fact plot the spectra multiplied by the energy so that the number of photons at different energies can be easily compared by eye.} The solid lines show the total rate for that species when the number of degrees of freedom are taken into account ($n_\text{dof}^h = 1$, $n_\text{dof}^u = 12 = 2 \,\text{(spin)} \times 2 \,\text{(particle/anti-particle)} \times 3 \,\text{(colour)}$, $n_\text{dof}^\gamma = 2$), while the dashed lines show the rate per degree of freedom. We see that particles of higher spin have a smaller emission rate at energies $E \lesssim T$. The suppression is greater for particles of higher spin, and lead to the spectra peaking at higher energies for higher spin particles. Since the graviton rate is so suppressed, we omit it from our analysis. Similarly, in the MSSM case we omit the gravitino.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{alpha-1.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{alpha-2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{The function $\alpha(M)$ which accounts for all directly emitted particle species, for our benchmark models excluding (left) and including (right) $N$naturalness.
}
\label{fig:alpha}
\end{figure}
Neglecting accretion due to gas, light, dark matter, etc, energy conservation implies that as particles are emitted from the black hole, its mass evolves according to~\cite{Page:1976df}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:dMdt}
\frac{dM}{dt} =&\, -\frac{\alpha(M)}{M^2} \,,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\alpha(M) =&\, M^2 \sum_i \int_{m_i}^\infty\frac{d^2 N_\text{p}}{dtdE}(M,E) \,E \, dE\,,
\end{align}
and the sum is over all particles present in the theory. We explicitly show that we take the integral to be over $m_i < E$ as a reminder that we set the greybody factor to zero when $m_i > E$. The function $\alpha(M)$ is shown in \cref{fig:alpha} for the benchmark models we consider. We see that $\alpha(M)$ is constant away from particle thresholds, but increases in steps when the temperature of the black hole becomes higher than the mass of the particles. The curve for the SM is the smallest that $\alpha(M)$ can be, since the SM contains only those particles that are known to exist (for minimality we consider the SM neutrinos to be Majorana states). We see that the string theory inspired models have a larger $\alpha(M)$ than the SM at temperatures lower than the QCD scale, due to the light volume axion, $\theta_b$, and the volume modulus, $\tau_b$, which has a mass around $10^{-4}\,\text{GeV}$ when $\mathcal{V}=10^{15}$. Around and below $0.1\,\text{GeV}$ QCD is strongly coupled, so perturbation theory cannot be used to calculate QCD effects. Furthermore, there is debate in the literature as to whether black holes can emit free quarks below the QCD scale or only above the pion mass scale, the lightest colourless QCD bound state~\cite{MacGibbon:1990zk,MacGibbon:1991tj,Coogan:2020tuf,Arbey:2021mbl}. We assume that only colourless states such as the pion can be emitted, and use an effective mass of $m_i = \Lambda_\text{QCD} \sim 0.2\,\text{GeV}$ for the gluon and the $u$, $d$ and $s$ quarks in the SM and for the light coloured states in our $N$naturalness benchmark model.
Above the QCD scale, the first model to show a step is the dark sector DS$(10,10^2\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark, where we assume a dark sector scale of $\Lambda_\text{DS} = 100\,\text{GeV}$ and 10 copies of the SM degrees of freedom. The $\mathcal{V}=10^{15}$ string inspired model, the MSSM benchmark and DS$(2,2\times10^3\,\text{GeV})$ all feature a rise just below $T\sim 1\,$TeV, when particles of this mass begin to be emitted. The step for the $\mathcal{V}=10^{15}$ string inspired model is larger than the MSSM and DS$(2,2\times10^3\,\text{GeV})$ benchmarks due to the greater number of new degrees of freedom. The dark sector DS$(1,10^4\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark features a step between $10^3$ and $10^4\,\text{GeV}$ while the $\mathcal{V}=10^{13}$ string theory inspired model has the same number of new degrees of freedom as the $\mathcal{V}=10^{15}$ string inspired model, but which turn on at a higher temperature, around $10^5\,\text{GeV}$. In \cref{fig:alpha} (right) we also show $\alpha(M)$ for the $N$naturalness benchmark. We see that it is many orders of magnitude larger than the other benchmarks, due to the huge number of new degrees of freedom introduced. It increases by an order of magnitude, from $8\times 10^{41}\,\text{g}^3 \text{s}^{-1}$ below the QCD scale to $4\times 10^{42}\,\text{g}^3 \text{s}^{-1}$ above the QCD scale (as the coloured particles, the electroweak gauge bosons and the Higgs of the copies where electroweak symmetry is broken at the QCD scale begin to be emitted).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{m-tau-log.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{m-tau-Ratio.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{m-tau-1.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{m-tau-2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Top left: the black hole temperature and mass as a function of the remaining black hole life time, $\tau$, for our benchmark models. Top right: the ratio of the black hole temperature to the SM expectation at the same $\tau$ for our benchmark models.
Bottom row: the back hole temperature and mass on a linear scale, excluding (bottom left) and including (bottom right) the $N$naturalness benchmark model.
}
\label{fig:m-tau}
\end{figure}
Once $\alpha(M)$ has been computed for a given theory, \cref{eq:dMdt} determines the evolution of the black hole temperature (or equivalently, its mass) with time (neglecting any accretion onto the black hole). The result can be seen in \cref{fig:m-tau} for our benchmark scenarios, where time is parameterised in terms of the time remaining before the end point of the black hole explosion, $\tau$. The top panels show the behaviour in log $\tau$, while the lower panels show it linear in $\tau$ for the final $10^3\,\text{s}$ of the black hole's life. If $\alpha(M)$ is constant, then \cref{eq:dMdt} shows that $M \propto \tau^{1/3}$. This is reflected in the general slope of the evolution seen in the top left panel. We see that when $T \sim 10\,\text{GeV}$ and $M_\text{BH} \sim 10^{12}\,\text{g}$ the slope temporarily becomes less steep for the DS$(10,10^2\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark. This is because this model has new degrees of freedom that start to be emitted at this temperature, as seen in \cref{fig:alpha}. While it may seem counter-intuitive that the temperature is only lower at later times, this is a something of an artefact due to plotting on a log scale. In the DS$(10,10^2\,\text{GeV})$ scenario the black hole is cooler and heavier than in the SM scenario at the same $\tau$, but the disparity only becomes appreciable when the difference in mass is of a similar size to the mass itself. Similarly, other benchmark models have an increased rate of mass loss when $T \gtrsim 100\,\text{GeV}$. We see that the large number of new degrees of freedom in the $N$naturalness benchmark leads to a much greater rate of mass loss, and as such a lower black hole temperature and a larger black hole mass over the majority of the lifetime of the black hole.
In the top right panel of \cref{fig:m-tau} we show the ratio of the black hole temperature at a given time to the temperature expected assuming the SM, at the same time. This shows more clearly the temperature deviations from the SM expectation. Shortly after the Big Bang, the string inspired benchmarks have a temperature that is $\sim 10 - 15\%$ lower, due to the new light degrees of freedom in these models. The gap closes somewhat by $10^{16}\,\text{s}$ as the large number of degrees of freedom that become available around the QCD scale begin to be emitted, reducing the impact of the light string degrees of freedom. After that, the benchmarks move to lower temperatures than the SM expectation when the temperature rises above the mass thresholds. We see that once the thresholds are passed, the black hole temperature is $\sim 25 - 55\%$ cooler than would be expected under the SM scenario. This is a significant deviation.
In the lower panels of \cref{fig:m-tau}, we see the temperature (and mass) evolution in the last 1000 seconds of a black hole's life. Under the assumption of the SM, the black hole would have a temperature around $800\,\text{GeV}$ when $\tau = 1000\,\text{s}$. The benchmarks which have significant numbers of new degrees of freedom at approximately this scale have a significantly higher rate of mass loss with time. The DS$(1,10^4\,\text{GeV})$ and $\mathcal{V}=10^{13}$ string benchmarks only have many new degrees of freedom at scales $\gg 1\,\text{TeV}$, so the evolution is not markedly different from the SM scenario over the last $1000\,\text{s}$ (although they do diverge significantly on shorter time scales). In the lower right panel we see that the temperature is around five orders of magnitude smaller in the $N$naturalness benchmark, as the rate of mass loss is many orders of magnitude larger.
Assuming only the particles present in the SM, a black hole with a mass of $5.6\times10^{14}\,\text{g}$ produced shortly after the Big Bang would be evaporating today. This is not significantly changed in models which only introduce new degrees of freedom above the GeV scale (DS$(1,10^4\,\text{GeV})$, DS$(2,2\times 10^3\,\text{GeV})$, DS$(10,10^2\,\text{GeV})$, and the MSSM benchmark) since the black hole spends most of its life with a temperature around 100 MeV. The string theory inspired benchmarks introduce three sub-GeV degrees of freedom, which lift the initial mass (assuming a primordial origin) to $6.5\times10^{14}\,\text{g}$ and $6.2\times10^{14}\,\text{g}$ for $\mathcal{V}=10^{15}$ and $10^{13}$, respectively. The $N$naturalness model introduces a very large number of sub-GeV degrees of freedom. As such, the evaporation of the black hole differs significantly: in this scenario, a black hole with a primordial mass of $1.0\times10^{20}\,\text{g}$ would be evaporating today.
\section{The Primary and Secondary Photon Spectra}
\label{sec:photon-spectra}
Of all the particles emitted by an evaporating black hole, the most important one from an observational point of view is the photon. These are emitted both as primary particles, as seen in \cref{fig:primary}, but also as secondary particles as other particles decay, shower and/or hadronise. In this section we discuss the primary and secondary photon spectra in the various benchmark models.
The primary photon spectra for a Schwarzschild black hole of a given mass is given by \cref{eq:d2NdEdt} with $n_\text{dof} = 2$ and where $\Gamma^\gamma$ is the greybody factor for a spin 1 particle, see \cref{fig:primary}. Given the mass evolution computed in the previous section, we can then find the primary photon spectrum at any time. In \cref{fig:Ep-tau} we show the position of the peak of the primary photon spectra as a function of $\tau$ for the benchmark models. As there is a one-to-one correlation between the black hole temperature, mass and the position of the peak, the features are very similar to those seen in \cref{fig:m-tau}. For models with more degrees of freedom, the black hole is significantly cooler at later times, and so emits photons of lower energies at later times. The $N$naturalness benchmark only emits photons above $0.1\,\text{GeV}$ in the last 100 seconds. We will return to this point in \cref{sec:sm-bsm}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{Ep-tau-crop.pdf}
\caption{The peak energy of the primary photons as a function of the remaining black hole life time for our benchmark models.
}
\label{fig:Ep-tau}
\end{figure}
As well as the primary photons, all SM particles that are directly emitted from the black hole produce secondary photons as they decay, shower and/or hadronise. This is a complicated process to calculate and we use \texttt{pythia8}~\cite{Sjostrand:2014zea} to compute the secondary photon spectra for each SM particle for a wide range of energies ($1\,\text{GeV}$ to $10^7\,\text{GeV}$). Since it was developed for a collider environment, \texttt{pythia} loses precision above $10^7\,\text{GeV}$, and it does not compute particle evolution below $1\,\text{GeV}$. We show the secondary spectra for the SM particles at two primary energies in \cref{fig:secondaries}. In the top row we show the secondary photon spectra for SM particles of initial energy $10^4\,\text{GeV}$, with fermions on the left and boson on the right. For fermions, we see that the quarks emit a large number of low energy photons, mostly produced by pion decay in the hadronisation process. While there is not a great difference between the flavours, the top quark produces more photons at lower energies while the light quarks produce more high energy secondary photons. The spectra for electrons and muons are approximately flat while taus produce an increased number of mid and high energy photons, due to their hadronic decays. The neutrinos emit more low and mid energy photons, but significantly fewer high energy photons. A small enhancement for tau neutrinos can be seen at high energies, as they have a higher chance of producing taus. The plots are not smooth at low fluxes due to Monte-Carlo error, but since these regions do not significantly contribute to the final flux, the final photon spectra we calculate are smooth.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{fermion-secondaries-1.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{boson-secondaries-1.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{fermion-secondaries-2.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{boson-secondaries-2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{The secondary photon spectra per primary particle for the SM fermions (left) and bosons (right) at a primary energy of $10^4\,\text{GeV}$ (top) and $10^7\,\text{GeV}$ (bottom). The artefacts are Monte Carlo error for rare processes and do not lead to a significant error in the total secondary spectra.}
\label{fig:secondaries}
\end{figure}
For the bosons at $10^4\,\text{GeV}$ (top right panel of \cref{fig:secondaries}), we see that the gluon produces more low energy photons than the quarks, but fewer high energy photons than the lightest quarks. The $W^\pm$, $Z$ and $h$ produce more low and mid energy photons than the charged leptons, due to their hadronic decays, but fewer high energy photons. While the photon produces secondary photons via final state radiation, this is subdominant to all the other contributions. Rather than introduce errors by using the secondary peak $\sim 10^4\,\text{GeV}$, we instead use the primary spectra for the photon and neglect the secondary photon spectrum. This overestimates the high energy photon flux by at most 5\%.
The lower panels of \cref{fig:secondaries} show the secondary photon spectra for primary particles of energy $10^7\,\text{GeV}$. Of the fermions, the quarks again give the largest flux, and the differences between the flavours is reduced because the mass effects are less relevant at these high energies. The neutrinos again produce more low energy photons than the charged leptons, and high energy peaks are seen in the flux from taus and tau neutrinos. The behaviour for the bosons is similar to that at $10^4\,\text{GeV}$, although we can now see that $W^\pm$ produces more photons at the lowest energies than the neutral $Z$ and $h$.
We similarly use \texttt{pythia8} to generate the secondary spectra for our MSSM benchmark, after creating a spectrum file using \texttt{spheno}~\cite{Porod:2003um,Porod:2011nf} with the $M_h^{125}$ parameter values from ref.~\cite{Bagnaschi:2018ofa} with $M_A = 2\,\text{TeV}$ and $\tan\beta = 20$. We show the spectra for the individual MSSM particles in \cref{sec:mssm-secondaries}. Since the decays of the $125\,\text{GeV}$ Higgs boson differ slightly from the SM Higgs boson in this model, we recompute its secondary spectra. All other SM particles (including the top) are unaffected. We make the spectra for both the SM and our MSSM benchmark publicly available at \href{https://github.com/PhysicsBaker/SecondarySpectra}{github.com/physicsbaker/secondaryspectra}.
\texttt{Pythia} was designed to model showering and hadronisation at colliders, so focuses on the GeV to the TeV scale. At higher scales the results become less accurate. For instance, it does not include triple gauge couplings, which become increasingly important at higher scales. We compared our \texttt{pythia8} results to \texttt{HDMSpectra}~\cite{Bauer:2020jay}, which is explicitly designed to accurately model showering and hadronisation up to the Planck scale. We found, as noted in ref.~\cite{Bauer:2020jay}, small corrections to the secondary photon spectra for coloured particles and larger corrections for uncoloured particles, exceeding an order of magnitude at some secondary photon energies. Nevertheless, we opted to use \texttt{pythia8} for two reasons. Firstly, at energies greater than a GeV, secondary photon emission is dominated by the contribution from coloured particles, which is well modelled by \texttt{pythia8}. Secondly, \texttt{pythia8} can be used to compute the secondary spectra for BSM particles, such as those in the MSSM, while \texttt{HDMSpectra} cannot. We thus chose to compute both secondary spectra on the same footing. In models where \texttt{pythia} is not expected to give sufficient accuracy at high scales, the \texttt{pythia} plug-in \texttt{vincia}~\cite{Fischer:2016vfv} could be used.
Now we have calculated the secondary spectra for primary particles of a given energy, $d N^{i\to\gamma}/dE_\text{s}(E_\text{p},E_\text{s})$, we can integrate this against the primary spectra, $d^2 N^i_\text{p}/dt dE_\text{p}(M,E_\text{p})$, to find the secondary spectra for a Schwarzschild black hole of a given mass. Summing over all emitted particle species we find the total secondary photon flux:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:d2NdEdt-secondaries}
\frac{d^2 N^{\gamma}_\text{s}}{dt dE_\text{s}} =&\,
\sum_{i} \int_0^\infty
\frac{d^2 N^i_\text{p}}{dt dE_\text{p}}(M,E_\text{p})
\frac{d N^{i\to\gamma}}{ dE_\text{s}}(E_\text{p},E_\text{s})
dE_\text{p} \,.
\end{align}
As discussed above we use a delta function for $d N^{\gamma\to\gamma}/dE_\text{s}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{primary-secondary-1.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{primary-secondary-2.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{primary-secondary-3.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{primary-secondary-4.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Primary and secondary photon spectra for the SM and MSSM for $M = 10^{12}, 10^{10}, 10^8\,\text{g}$ (top left) and $\tau = 10^8, 10^4, 10^0, 10^{-4}\,\text{s}$ (top right). In the lower panels we show the same but without multiplying the flux, $d^2N^\gamma/dtdE$, by the energy, $E$.
}
\label{fig:primary-secondary}
\end{figure}
The secondary spectra for all particles excluding the photon (which from now on we will simply call the secondary spectra), and the primary photon spectra, are shown in \cref{fig:primary-secondary}. In the top left panel we show $E\, d^2 N^\gamma / dtdE$ for black holes of a given mass. For most of the BSM models we consider, there are no new particles which produce a significant number of secondary photons. As such, these models will have the same spectra as in the SM scenario. However, in the MSSM benchmark there are many new particles which produce secondary photons, as discussed in \cref{sec:mssm-secondaries}. We see from the dashed lines in \cref{fig:primary-secondary} (top left) that at black holes masses of $10^8\,\text{g}$ and $10^{10}\,\text{g}$ there are significantly more secondary photons produced, particularly at low energies. However, at $10^{12}\,\text{g}$ the secondary spectrum is identical to the SM case. This is because a $10^{12}\,\text{g}$ black hole has a temperature around $10\,\text{GeV}$, so it is not yet hot enough to emit a significant number of MSSM particles, which all have masses above $\sim 1\,\text{TeV}$. Note that the secondary spectra are now smooth and do not suffer from the Monte-Carlo errors seen at low fluxes in the individual channels. We also make these spectra publicly available at \href{https://github.com/PhysicsBaker/SecondarySpectra}{github.com/physicsbaker/secondaryspectra}.
In \cref{fig:primary-secondary} (top right) we show the primary and secondary photon spectra at fixed times, given by $\tau$, for the SM and MSSM scenarios. We see that at $\tau = 10^8\,\text{s}$ the spectra are identical. This is because at this $\tau$ the black hole is not yet hot enough to emit the heavy MSSM particles. At $\tau \sim 10^4\,\text{s}$ the black hole becomes hot enough to emit a significant flux of heavy MSSM particles and, at the same $\tau$, the black hole in the MSSM scenario is cooler than the SM case (since the extra degrees of freedom mean that the subsequent mass loss of the black hole will be faster). We see that from this time on the peak of the MSSM primary photon spectrum occurs at lower energies than in the SM case. On the other hand, the MSSM scenario still results in a greater number of low energy secondary photons. These two effects pull in opposite directions and it is not \textit{a priori} clear whether the MSSM scenario results in more or less photons than the SM scenario overall. Integrating these spectra, we find that the SM emits more total photons above $10^4\,\text{GeV}$ than our benchmark MSSM scenario ($3.6\times10^{27}$ to $1.5\times10^{27}$) in the time window $10^{-6}\,\text{s} < \tau < 10^4\,\text{s}$, and more total photons above $10^2\,\text{GeV}$ in the same time window ($7.0\times10^{30}$ to $5.0\times10^{30}$). This is in contrast to the conclusion reached in ref.~\cite{Ukwatta:2015iba}, which added a single squark to the SM and neglected the change in the mass loss rate. In that case, more photons were expected to be released in the final burst than in the SM scenario.
In the lower panels of \cref{fig:primary-secondary} we show the same information, without multiplying the flux, $d^2N^\gamma/dtdE$, by the energy, $E$. We see that the peak of the primary spectra no longer rises as the black hole heats up. Even though more photons are emitted per second, this is accounted for by the changing scale of the $x$-axis. This presentation gives a clearer connection to the features seen in \cref{fig:contour-1,fig:contour-2}, discussed below.
\section{Distinguishing the SM From BSM Scenarios}
\label{sec:sm-bsm}
If an evaporating black hole is detected, some of the key questions to answer are (i) is there any evidence of new degrees of freedom in nature and (ii) if so, do those new degrees of freedom produce secondary photons. These two questions would give us very important information on (i) the fundamental particles present in nature and (ii) how best to look for them in other experiments. To best answer these questions an alternative presentation to \cref{fig:primary-secondary} is perhaps preferable.
\subsection{Models without Extra Secondary Photons}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{sm-DS2.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{sm-string-1.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Contours of the total photon flux as a function of remaining time, $\tau$, and photon energy, $E$. We show the SM expectation with solid contours and in dashed contours we show the DS$(2,2\times10^3\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark (left), the string inspired benchmarks (right).
}
\label{fig:contour-1}
\end{figure}
As noted in \cref{sec:particle-emission}, models which do not produce significant numbers of secondary photons can still alter the signature of an evaporating black hole, by changing its evaporation rate. In the left panel of \cref{fig:contour-1} we show the total photon spectra for the SM and the DS$(2,2\times10^3\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark as a contour plot in time and photon energy. We see that before $\tau \sim 10^5\,\text{s}$ the two spectra are identical. This is the period when the black hole is not yet hot enough to emit the dark sector particles, which have a mass scale of $2\times10^3\,\text{GeV}$. At smaller $\tau$, these new degrees of freedom begin to be emitted, leading to the black hole to lose mass at a higher rate. This leads to it being substantially cooler than the SM scenario for $\tau \lesssim 10^5\,\text{s}$, and a reduction in the photon flux across the entire range of energies. The DS$(1,10^4\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark similarly deviates from the SM at $\tau \sim 10^3\,\text{s}$, when the temperature increases above the mass threshold, and reduces the photon flux less than DS$(2,2\times 10^3\,\text{GeV})$, as there is now only one copy of the SM dof. DS$(10,10^2\,\text{GeV})$ decreases the photon flux even more significantly from $\tau \sim 10^9\,\text{s}$ up to the end of the evaporation as it introduces many more new dof.
\Cref{fig:contour-1} (right) shows a similar plot for the SM and the string inspired benchmarks. We see that the deviations now start at $\tau \sim 10^5\, (10^{-1})\,\text{s}$ for $\mathcal{V} = 10^{15}\, (10^{13})$ and that the reduction in the photon flux is larger than the DS$(2,2\times10^3\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark. This is because the string inspired benchmarks introduce more new degrees of freedom than the DS$(2,2\times10^3\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark, and the $\mathcal{V} = 10^{15}\,(10^{13})$ scenario introduces them at a scale of $2\times10^3\, (2\times10^5)\,\text{GeV}$. We can imagine that the results are analogous for other models where no extra photons are produced: there will be a reduction in the flux at energies where new fundamental particles begin to be emitted. In the $N$naturalness benchmark the photon flux is reduced by many orders of magnitude compared to the SM.
\subsection{Models with Extra Secondary Photons}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{sm-mssm-log.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{sm-mssm-lin.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Contours of the total photon flux as a function of remaining time, $\tau$, and photon energy, $E$. We show the SM expectation with solid contours and in dashed contours we show the MSSM benchmark. We show the flux on a logarithmic scale (left) and a linear scale (right).
}
\label{fig:contour-2}
\end{figure}
Other models, such as our MSSM benchmark, contain new particles which produce a significant secondary photon spectrum. In \cref{fig:contour-2} we show contour plots in time and photon energy for the MSSM benchmark. In the left panel we see that there is no deviation at $\tau \gtrsim 10^5\,\text{s}$, again because for these times the black hole is too cool to produce the MSSM particles, which have a mass greater than $\sim 10^3\,\text{GeV}$. For $\tau \lesssim 10^5\,\text{s}$ we see that at the highest energies there is a reduction in the photon flux, but that at the lowest energies there is an increase. This is the result of two competing effects: the new degrees of freedom produce many low energy photons, but they also speed up the mass loss of the black hole, leading to lower temperatures before the end of explosion. We see that the two effects approximately cancel out along the $d^2N^\gamma /dtdE = 10^{26}\,\text{GeV}^{-1}\text{s}^{-1}$ contour. As noted at the end of \cref{sec:photon-spectra}, the SM produces more total photons above $100\,\text{GeV}$. As a comparison, we see from \cref{fig:alpha} that the MSSM benchmark and the DS$(2, \times 10^3\,\text{GeV})$ benchmark have very similar $\alpha(M)$'s, so will have very similar time evolution of the black hole mass. Comparing the left panel of \cref{fig:contour-1}and the left panel of \cref{fig:contour-2} we see that the flux of the highest energy photons is very similar between these models, but that the MSSM has a greater flux for energies lower than $d^2N^\gamma/dtdE = 10^{22}\,\text{GeV}^{-1}\text{s}^{-1}$, and that this behaviour is independent of time for $\tau \gtrsim 10^5\,\text{s}$.
It should also be noted that the overall effect, in all models, is not as modest as it appears on a log plot. In the right panel of \cref{fig:contour-2} we show a portion of the spectrum for the MSSM benchmark on a linear plot, where we see that the effect is significant.
\subsection{Analysis Strategies}
We have seen in the previous sections that the photon spectra, as a function of time, encodes crucial information about the fundamental particles present in nature. New particles beyond the SM change both the mass evolution with time, and the secondary photon spectra at a given mass. Huge numbers of new particles or changes to the nature of space-time could also mean that the fundamental Planck scale is much lower than currently thought, leading to a much earlier evaporation end-point.
However, whether we can probe nature via an evaporating black hole depends on whether one will be observed. This depends both on the experiments that are built and run, and on the population of exploding black holes within $\sim 1\,\text{pc}$. While the direct limits on the population are not discouraging (the strongest direct limit is $3400 \,\text{pc}^{-3}\,\text{yr}^{-1}$~\cite{Albert:2019qxd}, which corresponds to a probability of the HAWC experiment observing at least one event in the next five years at a distance less than $0.05$ $(0.01)\,\text{pc}$ of $\sim 83\%$ $(1.4\%)$), indirect limits due to galactic and extra-galactic $100\,\text{MeV}$ photons and anti-protons seem significantly stronger~\cite{1976ApJ...206....1P,1977ApJ...212..224P,Lehoucq:2009ge,Abe:2011nx,Carr:2020gox,Auffinger:2022khh}. These limits, however, rely on a variety of assumptions, such as degree of clustering~\cite{1976ApJ...206....1P,1977ApJ...212..224P,Carr:2020gox}, anti-proton production and propagation models~\cite{Abeysekara:2013ska}, details of emission near the QCD scale ($\Lambda_\text{QCD} \sim 200\,\text{MeV}$)~\cite{MacGibbon:1990zk,MacGibbon:1991tj,Coogan:2020tuf,Carr:2020gox,Arbey:2021mbl}, and the presence of new degrees of freedom. Indeed, we see from \cref{fig:Ep-tau} that in an $N$naturalness framework, an evaporating black hole would only have a temperature around $100\,\text{MeV}$ in the last $100\,\text{s}$ of its life. This demonstrates that, in principle, new fundamental particles beyond the SM can significantly alter the signature from an exploding black hole, and it is clear that this would directly impact the current direct and indirect limits. As such, we take the view expressed in ref.~\cite{Carr:2020gox} and, accepting that our understanding is currently incomplete, focus on the empirical aspects of an observation. We therefore briefly turn to possible analysis strategies for BSM physics following an observation.
The optimal experimental analysis following an observation would depend on the total number of photons observed, as well as the energy and time resolutions and thresholds, and the backgrounds of the particular experiment. However, prior to an observation we can make some general suggestions, assuming that the signal is broadly SM-like. We can expect that relatively few photons would be received in a first observation, perhaps $\mathcal{O}(10-1000)$, since there is a greater probability of observing an exploding black hole from further away if they are uniformly distributed in the region $\sim 1 \,\text{pc}$ away from the Earth. As such, it may be preferable to bin the events in just a few bins, to reduce statistical errors. An analysis strategy for models which do not produce significant numbers of secondary photons, such as those shown in \cref{fig:contour-1}, could be to fix a mass scale of interest, $\widetilde\Lambda$, find the $\tau$ in the SM scenario where $T(\tau)\sim\widetilde\Lambda$, and then calculate the ratio of photons observed before and after that $\tau$ value. That is, to use the ratio of photons observed in region $A$ to those observed in region $B$ of \cref{fig:analyses} (left) as the key discriminating observable.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{analysis-1.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{analysis-2.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Possible binning regions for models with new particles which only interact weakly with photons (left), in this case the DS$(1,10^4)$ benchmark with the same contours as \cref{fig:contour-1} (left), and models which produce a significant number of secondary photons (right), in this case our MSSM benchmark.}
\label{fig:analyses}
\end{figure}
For analyses probing BSM models which produce a significant number of secondary photons, it could be beneficial to separate the region of low energy photons along a contour of constant photon flux in the SM, as shown in \cref{fig:analyses} (right). That is, to use the ratio of the number of photons observed in regions $C$ to $D$, the ratio of $C$ to $E$ and the ratio of $D$ to $E$. In this way the region where the BSM model predicts fewer photons is separated from the region where it predicts more photons. Since the flux where the SM contour matches the BSM contour will depend on the details of the BSM model, separate analyses could target different assumptions.
\subsection{Impact of an Observation}
An observation of an evaporating black hole would have a profound impact on our understanding of a wide range of BSM theories, and of the fundamental nature of the universe. Firstly, we see that models which introduce a huge number of light particles would radically alter the signature from an evaporating black hole. The $N$naturalness benchmark would lose mass at such a huge rate that it would not produce $100\,\text{MeV}$ photons until its last $100\,\text{s}$, and would only produce photons above $10\,\text{GeV}$ in the last $10^{-5}\,\text{s}$. This scenario would call for a radically different analysis strategy than the ones currently employed and would require a complete re-evaluation of the existing limits. Conversely, observation of a reasonably SM-like evaporation process would immediately and conclusively rule out the whole class of models with a large number of light or massless particles.
Secondly, as noted above and in \cref{sec:models}, models which change the nature of space-time, such as extra-dimensional models, or which drastically reduce the fundamental Planck scale, as would be the case if there were $10^{32}$ copies of the SM particles~\cite{Dvali:2007hz,Dvali:2007wp,Calmet:2008tn,Dvali:2009ne}, would lead to an endpoint of the explosion at much lower energies than usually envisioned. These scenarios would similarly drastically alter the photon signature and would require new analysis strategies. In this case, an observation of a reasonably SM-like evaporation process would imply that the fundamental Planck scale is at least as high as the highest energy photon observed, potentially above $10^7\,\text{GeV}$. This is orders of magnitude larger than the current limits and would be very general, applying to a very broad range of models (e.g., both extra-dimensional models and those that lower the Planck scale with many new heavy degrees of freedom).
Finally, for more commonly studied extensions of the SM, such as dark sectors and the MSSM, we have seen how both the evaporation rate and the secondary photon spectra can be affected. Models containing new particles which only couple weakly to the photon all have a similar impact on the observational signature: the black hole evaporation is sped up once its temperature reaches the particle mass, leading the black hole remaining cooler for longer before the end of its explosion. The increase in evaporation rate is greater for particles of lower spin and more internal degrees of freedom. While we have focused on benchmarks with a common mass scale, more complicated behaviour is expected when there are several new particles at different mass scales. Nonetheless, the behaviour will be similar: the evaporation rate will speed up every time a new particle threshold is crossed. If an evaporating black hole signature which differs from the SM expectation is seen, then it would tell us where these thresholds appear, providing information on the mass and spin of new fundamental particles which must be present in nature. Conversely, observation of a SM-like evaporation would put stringent limits on the possible number of new degrees of freedom present in nature. Limits of this kind can not be placed in any other way.
While models with new particles which couple strongly to the photon, like the MSSM, produce more photons at a given temperature, we have seen that in the case of our MSSM benchmark fewer photons are produced overall. This is because the black hole stays cooler for longer, leading to a lower total flux. We may expect this behaviour to hold in many other models, since the MSSM has a large number of coloured particles which copiously produce secondary photons. However, we have not yet determined that this is the case for all MSSM parameter points, or for all models in general. Nonetheless, we have identified possible strategies for extracting information about the new particles masses, using the highest energy photons, and about whether new fundamental particles interact significantly with photons, using the lower energy photons. Observation of a non-SM-like signal would provide crucial information on the scale and nature of, e.g., new supersymmetric particles.
Conversely, we see that BSM physics can significantly alter the signature of an evaporating black hole. There is therefore the possibility that existing gamma-ray bursts of unknown origin could actually be the signatures of evaporating black holes, but that the correct particle models are not used to interpret them. This is a very interesting future direction that may be fruitful to investigate.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
The observation of an evaporating black hole would provide definitive information on the elementary particles present in nature. It could discover or exclude widely studied models of BSM physics, particularly those with a large number of new degrees of freedom. In many cases, the models cannot, or are very difficult, to probe in any other way. In this work we have surveyed a broad range of motivated and widely studied scenarios beyond the standard model of particle physics, discussing in broad terms how these models would affect black hole evaporation. The models that would have the largest impact are those with a large number of new degrees of freedom, such as supersymmetry, large $N$ solutions to the hierarchy problem, some string inspired models and some dark sector models, as well as those that drastically reduce the fundamental Planck scale, such as large extra-dimensional models and some large $N$ models. To study the first class of models in greater detail, we defined representative benchmark scenarios.
Since photons provide the most promising experimental avenue for evaporating black hole searches, we calculated the primary and secondary photon spectra as a function of black hole mass and as a function of time for the benchmark scenarios. Models with many new degrees of freedom below 100 MeV significantly alter the evolution of a primordial black hole from production to today, while models which only introduce new heavy degrees of freedom (above the TeV scale) only impact the final $10^5\,\text{s}$. Models with new degrees of freedom that produce secondary photons, as they decay, shower and/or hadronise, produce a larger flux of low energy photons, but we found that for the MSSM benchmark scenario the black hole still emits less photons above $100\,\text{GeV}$ overall, since the new degrees of freedom lead to a faster evaporation rate so the black hole stays cooler for longer.
Finally, we presented the photon spectra in the time-energy plane. After discussing some general aspects relating to experimental observation, we suggest some methods which use this presentation to identify discriminating observables and discuss the profound impact of an potential observation.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
It is a pleasure to thank Martin Bauer for discussions on extra-dimensional models, Veronica Guidetti for useful discussions on string phenomenology, Joachim Kopp and Raymond Volkas for comments on the manuscript, Werner Porod for advice on using \texttt{SPheno}, and Peter Skands for advice on using \texttt{Pythia}.
We would also like to thank the IPPP at Durham University and the Mainz Institute for Theoretical Physics (MITP) of the Cluster of Excellence PRISMA+ (Project ID 39083149) for their hospitality and partial support during this work.
This work was supported by the Australian Government through the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Dark Matter Particle Physics (CDM, CE200100008).
|
\section{Introduction}
Throughout the paper, we shall always use the following standard notation: $\mathbb{Z}$ is the set of all integers, $\mathbb{N}$ is the set of all non-negative integers, and $\mathbb{P}$ is the set of all positive integers.
Let $A=(a_1, a_2, ..., a_n)$ be a positive integer vector. Sylvester \cite{J. J. Sylvester} defined the function $d(a_0;A)$, called the denumerant of $a_0$ with respect to $A$, by
$$d(a_0;A)=d(a_0;a_1, a_2, ..., a_n)=\#\lbrace (x_1, ..., x_n)\in \mathbb{N}^n \mid \sum_{i=1}^n a_ix_i=a_0\rbrace.$$
That is, $d(a_0;A)$ is the number of non-negative integer representations of $a_0$ by $a_1, a_2, ..., a_n$.
We say $a_0$ is representable by $A$ if $d(a_0;A)>0$ and not representable by $A$ if otherwise. For relevant definitions and descriptions, see \cite{Ramrez Alfonsn}.
If $\gcd(A)=1$, then there are only finite number of $a_0$ with
$d(a_0;A)=0$, i.e., not representable by $A$. Frobenius studied
$$g(A) = \max \{a_0 \in \mathbb{N} \mid d(a_0;A)=0 \}, $$
which is now called the Frobenius number of $A$.
The Frobenius problem is also known as the Coin Exchange Problem. It refers to two
problems: compute the Frobenius number $g(A)$; for a given $m$, determine if $m$ is representable by $A$, and find a representation if possible. The Frobenius problem belongs to Combinatorial Number Theory, which is very rich in methods.
For a very detailed introduction to Frobenius problem, see \cite{Ramrez Alfonsn, D. Einstein}.
In algorithmic aspect, Kannan \cite{R. Kannan} gave a theoretical method that solved the Frobenius problem in
polynomial time for fixed number of variables using the concept of covering radius, and
Ramírez Alfonsín \cite{J. L. Ramrez Alfonsn} showed that the problem is NP-hard under Turing reduction. D. Einstein, D. Lichtblau, A. Strzebonski and S. Wagon \cite{D. Einstein} gave a fast algorithm for computing the Frobenius number $g(A)$ for up to $n=11$ parameters.
For $n=2$, it is well known that $g(a_1, a_2)=a_1a_2-a_1-a_2$. This case was studied as early as in 1882 by Sylvester \cite{J. J. Sylvester1}. For $n=3$, Amitabha Tripathi found its formula in \cite{A. Tripathi1}. For $n=4$, no general formula for $g(A)$ is known, but many formulas for special cases have been determined.
For example: Hujter \cite{M. Hujter} gave the formula $g(A)$ for $A=(a, a^2+1, a^2+a), a>2$; Brauer \cite{A. Brauer} computed the case for $A=(a, a+1, ..., a+k)$, Roberts \cite{Roberts1} extended this result to numbers in arithmetic progression, and Selmer \cite{E. S. Selmer} (also see \cite{A. Tripathi2}) further generalized to the case $A=(a, ha+d, ha+2d, ..., ha+kd), \ (a, d)=1$; Dulmage and Mendelsohn \cite{A. L. Dulmage} obtained some formulas for $A=(a, a+1, a+2, a+4)$, $A=(a, a+1, a+2, a+5)$, $A=(a, a+1, a+2, a+6)$. For more formulas, see \cite{Ramrez Alfonsn}.
In this paper the solution of Frobenius formula for $A=(a, ha+dB)$ will be converted to solving certain optimization problems $O_B(M)$ and $N_{dr}$. For some special sequence, this optimization problem $O_B(M)$ is easy to solve, and we may further analysis to obtain desired formula of $g(A)$.
The Frobenius formula of the square sequence $A=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, ..., a+k^2)$ is always an open problem proposed in \cite{D. Einstein} by D. Einstein, D. Lichtblau, A. Strzebonski and S. Wagon. In 2007, Einstein et al. studied the cases for $k\in \{1,2,3,4,5,6,7\}$ using their geometric algorithms, and come up with the conjecture that this Frobenius formula is of the form $\dfrac{1}{k^2}(a^2+ca)-d$ for some integers $c, d$ which depend on $k$ and the residue class of $a$ modulo $k^2$.
In this paper we first extend it to infinite square sequences, i.e. $A^{\prime}=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, ...)$. By using some conclusions in number theory, we could calculate the formula $g(A^{\prime})$. Similarly, we could calculate the Frobenius formula about infinite prime sequence i.e. $A^{\prime}=(a, a+1, a+p_1, a+p_2, ...)$, where $(p_1, p_2, ...)$ is the prime sequence $(2, 3, 5, 7, ...)$. Secondly, using our optimization method, combined with the
``Four-Square Theorem" in number theory, we will solve this open problem about square sequence. Finally, we use the same idea to find a formula for cubic and high power sequences.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 1 is this introduction.
In Section 2, we use A. Brauer and J. E. Shockley's conclusion in \cite{J. E. Shockley} to get a crude formula about $N_r$. Once we get the formula of $N_r$, it is easy to compute $g(A)$. When $A=(a, a+B)$, we transform $N_r$ into a much simpler optimization problem $O_B(M)$. In Sections 3 and 4, we consider
Frobenius number of two infinite sequence, namely $A^{\prime}=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, ...)$, and $A^{\prime}=(a, a+1, a+p_1, a+p_2, ...)$. The corresponding optimization problems $O_B(M)$ have explicit solution in number theory. This allows us to give Frobenius formulas in these cases.
In Section 5, we use the same idea to settle the conjecture of D. Einstein et al. on $g(a, a+1, a+2^2, ..., a+k^2)$ by using generating functions and Lagrange's Four-Square Theorem.
In Section 6, we generalize the above sequence to cubic and high power sequence and discuss its formula. We are further extending it to the general case. For example $A=(a,a+1, a+2^3, ...., a+k^3)$, $A=(a, ha+d, ha+2^2d, ..., ha+k^2d)$, etc.
\section{crude formula of Frobenius number}
This paper focus on the computation of $g(A)$ for some special $A$.
It is convenient to use the short hand notation
$A:=(a, B)=(a, b_1, b_2, ..., b_m)$, so $a=a_1, b_i=a_{i+1}, \ m=n-1$. A. Brauer and J. E. Shockley gave the following results, which are widely used.
\begin{thm}{\em \cite{J. E. Shockley}}
Let $N_r:=N_r(a, B)=\min\lbrace a_0\mid a_0\equiv r\mod a, \ d(a_0;B)>0\rbrace$. Then the Frobenius number is:
$$g(A)=g(a, B)=\mathop{\max}\limits_{r\in \lbrace 0, 1, ..., a-1\rbrace} \lbrace N_r\rbrace -a.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By definition, $N_r-a$ is not representable by $B=(b_1, ..., b_m)$. We need to show that $N_r-a$ cannot be represented by $A$ and $N_r+ka\ (k\geq 0)$ can be represented by $A$. The latter is obvious. For the former, assume $N_r-a=k_1a+k_2b_1+\cdots +k_nb_m, \ k_i\in \mathbb{N}$. Then we have
$N_r-a-k_1a=k_2b_1+\cdots +k_nb_m$, i.e.,
$N_r-(k_1+1)a$ can be represented by $B$. This contradicts the definition of $N_r$. Therefore
$g(A)=\mathop{\max}\limits_{r\in \lbrace 0, 1, ..., a-1\rbrace} \lbrace N_r\rbrace -a.$
\end{proof}
Note that $N_0=0$ for all $A$, so we need only consider $N_r$ for $1\leq r\leq a-1$. Also note that $N_r=N_{r+ka}$, so in the formula, we can let $r$ ranges over any set whose remainders are $\{0, 1, \dots, a-1\}$. More precisely, we will use the following result.
\begin{prop}\label{0201}
Let $A=(a, b_1, ..., b_m)$, $\gcd(a, d)=1, \ d\in \mathbb{P}$. Then we have
\begin{equation}
g(A)=\mathop{\max}\limits_{r\in \lbrace 0, 1, ..., a-1\rbrace} \lbrace N_r\rbrace -a
=\mathop{\max}\limits_{r\in \lbrace 0, 1, ..., a-1\rbrace} \lbrace N_{dr}\rbrace -a.\label{0402}
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
When $r$ takes one of the remaining classes of $a$, so does $dr$. The proposition follows by the proof of the above theorem.
\end{proof}
We study the case $A=(a, ha+dB)=(a, ha+db_1, ..., ha+db_k)$. We find
$g(a, ha+dB)$ is closely related to a much simpler minimization problem defined by:
$$O_B(M):=\min\{\sum_{i=1}^kx_i \mid \sum_{i=1}^k b_ix_i=M, \ x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k\}.$$
For the sake of convenience, in what follows we shall always assume $x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k$ unless specified otherwise. We have
\begin{lem}\label{0202}
Let $A=(a, ha+db_1, ..., ha+db_k)$, $k, h, d\in\mathbb{P}$ and $\gcd(A)=1$, $m\in\mathbb{N}$, $\gcd(a, d)=1$. For a given $ 0\leq r\leq a-1$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{0203}
N_{dr}=\min_m \{O_B(ma+r) \cdot ha+(ma+r)d\}.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We have the following equations:
\begin{align*}
N_{dr}&=\min\lbrace a_0\mid a_0\equiv dr\mod a;\ d(a_0;B)>0\rbrace
\\&=\min\{\sum_{i=1}^k(ha+db_i)x_i\mid \sum_{i=1}^k(ha+db_i)x_i\equiv dr\mod a, \ x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k \}
\\&=\min\{(\sum_{i=1}^kx_i)\cdot ha+d\cdot\sum_{i=1}^kb_ix_i\mid d\sum_{i=1}^kb_ix_i\equiv dr\mod a, \ x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k \}
\\&=\min\{(\sum_{i=1}^kx_i)\cdot ha+d\cdot\sum_{i=1}^kb_ix_i\mid \sum_{i=1}^kb_ix_i\equiv r\mod \frac{a}{(a, d)}, \ x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k \}
\\&=\min\{(\sum_{i=1}^kx_i)\cdot ha+d(ma+r)\mid \sum_{i=1}^kb_ix_i=ma+r, \ m, x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k \}.
\end{align*}
Now for fixed $m$, and hence fixed $M=ma+r$,
$\sum_{i=1}^kx_i$ is minimized to $O_B(ma+r)$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
Note that the argument in the proof also works for $h=0$. This leads to a simple proof of the following result.
\begin{thm}{\em \cite{J. E. Shockley}}
Let $A=(a, dB)=(a, db_1, db_2, ..., db_m)$, with $d\in \mathbb{P}$ and $\gcd(A)=1$. Then:
\begin{equation}
g(a, db_1, ..., db_m)=dg(a, b_1, ..., b_m)+(d-1)a. \label{0401}
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By the definition of $N_{dr}$, for a given $r$, we have
\begin{align*}
N_{dr}(a, dB)&=\min \{ \sum_{i=1}^mx_i(db_i)\mid \sum_{i=1}^mx_i(db_i)\equiv dr \mod a, x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq m\}
\\&=d\cdot \min \{\sum_{i=1}^mx_ib_i\mid \sum_{i=1}^mx_ib_i\equiv r \mod a, x_i\in\mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq m\}
\\&=d\cdot N_{r}(a, B).
\end{align*}
It follows that
\begin{align*}
g(a, dB)+a =\mathop{\max}\limits_{r\in \lbrace 0, 1, ..., a-1\rbrace} \lbrace N_{dr}(a, dB)\rbrace = d\mathop{\max}\limits_{r\in \lbrace 0, 1, ..., a-1\rbrace} \lbrace N_{r}(a, B)\rbrace =d (g(a, B)+a).
\end{align*}
The theorem then follows.
\end{proof}
Note: This proof is quite simple, compared with existing proofs. See, e.g., \cite{Ramrez Alfonsn}. Moreover, we do not require $d=\gcd(db_1, db_2, ..., db_m)$.
For the convenience of the following discussion and by Lemma \ref{0202}, we can define an intermediate function with respect to $m$, namely:
$$N_{dr}(m):=O_B(ma+r) \cdot ha+(ma+r)d.$$
Lemma \ref{0202} suggests the following strategy for $g(A)$ where
$A=(a, ha+dB)$:
We first try to solve $O_B(M)$ for general $M$. If we have a formula that is nice enough, then we can analyze $N_{dr}(m)$ and obtain $g(A)$.
This strategy succeeds in many situations, with the help of the following easy fact.
\begin{prop}
If $\frac{a}{b}>0$, then $f(x)=\frac{ax}{b}$, $g(x)=\lfloor\frac{ax}{b}\rfloor$ and $h(x)=\lceil\frac{ax}{b}\rceil$ are increasing with respect to $x$.
\end{prop}
We can use Lemma \ref{0202} to find the formula of Frobenius number $g(A)$ for some special sequence $A=(a, b_1, ..., b_m)$.
We first consider the almost arithmetic sequence formula for $A=(a, ha+d, ha+2d, ..., ha+kd)$. The formula $g(A)$ (in Theorem \ref{lsf} below) was first obtained in \cite{A. L. Dulmage}, and was given a very simple proof in \cite{A. Tripathi2} by A. Tripathi. The proof is essentially to solve an optimization problem. To familiarize readers with our method, we re-prove the theorem.
\begin{thm}{\em \cite{A. L. Dulmage}}\label{lsf}
Let $A=(a, ha+d, ha+2d, ..., ha+kd)$, $(a, d)=1$, $a, h, d, k\in \mathbb{P}$ and $1\leq k\leq a-1$. Then
$$g(A)=ha(\lfloor\dfrac{a-2}{k}\rfloor+1)+(d-1)(a-1)-1.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{0202}, for a given $r$, we have
\begin{align*}
N_{dr}=\min_{m\in\mathbb{N}} \{O_B(ma+r)\cdot ha+d(ma+r)\},
\end{align*}
where $O_B(M)=\min\{\sum_{i=1}^kx_i \mid \sum_{i=1}^ki\cdot x_i=M\}$.
If $M=s\cdot k+t$ with $1\leq t\leq k$, then $O_B(M)=s+1$, which
minimizes at $x_k=s, x_t=1, x_i=0, (i\neq k, t)$ when $k\neq t$,
and minimizes at $x_k=s+1, x_i=0, (i\neq k)$ when $k=t$.
Now $N_{dr}(m)=(s+1)ha+d(ma+r)=ha\lceil \frac{ma+r}{k} \rceil +d(ma+r) $ is increasing with respect to $m$. It follows that
$$N_{dr}=N_{dr}(0)=ha\lceil \frac{r}{k} \rceil +dr, $$
which is increasing with respect to $r$,
and hence
$$\mathop{\max}\limits_{r\in \lbrace 0, 1, ..., a-1\rbrace} \lbrace N_{dr}\rbrace =N_{d(a-1)}= ha(\lfloor \dfrac{a-2}{k}\rfloor+1)+d(a-1).$$
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{infinite square sequence formula}
The Frobenius formula for square sequences is still open. We first discuss variants of this problem in this section, this is a relatively simple case, and then address this open problem in later section.
\begin{prob}{\em (see \cite{D. Einstein})}\label{hahaha3}
Let $A=(a, a+1, a+4, ..., a+k^2)$, where $k\in \mathbb{P}$, $a>2$. How to characterize $g(A)$?
\end{prob}
Einstein et al. \cite{D. Einstein} conjectured that this Frobenius number is of the form $\dfrac{1}{k^2}(a^2+ca)-d$ for some integers $c, d$ which depend on $k$ and the residue class of $a$ modulo $k^2$. And by using a geometric algorithm,
they proved the cases for $k= (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)$ and corresponding $a\geq (1, 1, 16, 24, 41, 67, 136)$.
In this section, we will
mainly discuss the Frobenius number
$g(A)$ for $k\to \infty$, i.e., let $A=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, a+3^2, ...)$.
Indeed, larger $k$ satisfying $a+k^2\ge g(a, a+1)$ can be omitted,
but keeping them seems easier for analyzing.
To calculate $g(A)$, we need to following definition.
\begin{dfn}\label{0504}
For any $n\in \mathbb{P}$, we use the symbol $\iota(n)$ to denote
$$\iota(n)=\min\{s\mid n=a_1^2+a_2^2+\cdots +a_s^2, \ a_i\in \mathbb{P}, 1\leq i\leq s\}.$$
That is, $\iota(n)$ is the minimum number of squares used when $n$ is expressed as the sum of squares.
\end{dfn}
The characterization of $\iota(n)$ relies on some well-known results in Number Theory. For their proofs, interested readers can refer to \cite{G. H. Hardy}.
The well-known ``Four-Square Theorem" gives an upper bound of $\iota(n)$.
\begin{lem}[Lagrange theorem]{\em \cite{G. H. Hardy}}\label{0502}
Every positive integer is the sum of four squares.
\end{lem}
To obtain the exact value of $\iota(n)$, we need more results and notations. For $n\in\mathbb{P}$, the Standard Form of $n$ is the unique factorization of $n$ into primes: $n=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}\cdots p_k^{e_k}$, where $p_i>1$ are distinct primes, $e_i>0$, for $1\leq i\leq k$.
\begin{lem}{\em \cite{G. H. Hardy}}\label{0501}
A number $n\in\mathbb{P}$ is the sum of two squares if and only if in the Standard Form of $n$, all prime factors of the form $4m+3, m\in\mathbb{N}$ have even exponents.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}{\em \cite{G. H. Hardy}}\label{0503}
A number $n\in\mathbb{P}$ is the sum of three squares if and only if $n\neq 4^r(8t+7)$, $r, t\in\mathbb{N}$.
\end{lem}
Now we can determine $\iota(n)$ as follows.
\begin{thm}\label{0505}
For any $n\in \mathbb{P}$, if the Standard Form of $n$ is $n=p_1^{e_1}p_2^{e_2}\cdots p_k^{e_k}$, then we have four types for $n$ as follows:
1): For any $1\leq i\leq k$, $e_i$ is even, i.e. $n=a^2$ is a square number.
2): There is a $1\leq j\leq k$ such that $e_j$ is odd, and if $p_i\equiv3\mod4$, then $e_i$ is even, $1\leq i\leq k$.
3): $4^r(8t+7), \ r, t\in \mathbb{N}$.
4): otherwise.
We have
$$\begin{aligned}
\iota(n)=
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
1\ \ & if & n\in type 1) \\
2\ \ & if & n\in type 2) \\
4\ \ & if & n\in type 3) \\
3\ \ & if & n\in type 4) \\
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{aligned}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{0502}, \ref{0501} and \ref{0503}. The proof of this theorem is obvious.
\end{proof}
To characterize $g(A)$, we need the following lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{0506}
Let $A=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, a+3^2, ...)$, for $1\leq r\leq a-1$, we have
$$N_r=\min \{\iota(ma+r)\cdot a+ma+r\mid m\in \mathbb{N}\}.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Appropriate generalize the definition of $N_r$ and modify the proof of Lemma \ref{0202}. We have
\begin{align*}
N_r&=\min \{ \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}x_i(a+i^2)\mid \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}x_i(a+i^2)\equiv r\mod a, \ x_i\in \mathbb{N}, i\geq 1\}
\\&=\min \{ (\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}x_i)\cdot a+ma+r\mid \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}x_i\cdot i^2=ma+r, \ m, x_i\in \mathbb{N}, i\geq 1\}
\\&=\min \{\iota(ma+r)\cdot a+ma+r\mid m\in \mathbb{N}\}.
\end{align*}
(Note: there are only a finite number of $x_i$ that are not 0.)
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{0507}
Let $A=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, a+3^2, ...)$. For $1\leq r\leq a-1$, if there is an $r$ such that $\iota(r)=4, \ \iota(a+r)\geq 3, \ \iota(2a+r)\geq 2$, then
$$g(A)=3a+\max\{r\mid \iota(r)=4, \ \iota(a+r)\geq 3, \ \iota(2a+r)\geq 2\}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{0506} and $g(A)=\max\{N_r\}-a$, this is obvious.
\end{proof}
If the above theorem does not apply, then we have the following.
\begin{thm}\label{0508}
Let $A=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, a+3^2, ...)$. For $1\leq r\leq a-1$, Suppose the condition in Theorem \ref{0507} does not hold, and at least one of the following three conditions is satisfied:
1): there is an $r$ such that $\iota(r)=4, \iota(a+r)=2$;
2): there is an $r$ such that $\iota(r)=4, \iota(a+r)\geq3, \iota(2a+r)=1$;
3): there is an $r$ such that $\iota(r)=3, \iota(a+r)\geq 2$.
Then
$$g(A)=2a+\max\{r\mid \text{the r in conditions 1), 2), or 3)}\}.$$
\end{thm}
In order to better understand the above theorem, we give Table \ref{tab-B} in the appendix. Next we prove that when $a$ is sufficiently large, Theorem \ref{0507} must apply. In order to do so, we need some lemmas.
Let $p_k$ be the $k$-th prime number. It is well-known that
$p_k\geq k\log(k)$ for $k=2, 3, \dots$ (\cite{J. B. Rosser} and \cite{L. Schoenfeld}). Define
$S_n^{\alpha}=\sum_{k=1}^{n} p_k^{\alpha}$.
The partial sum
$S_n^{\alpha}$ was studied in \cite{Z. W. Sun} for $\alpha\geq 1$. Here we need an upper bound for $S_n^{-1/2}$.
\begin{lem}\label{0512}
Let $\alpha<0, \alpha\neq-1$, and $n\in \{2, 3, 4, \dots\}$. We have
$$S_n^{\alpha} < \frac{1}{\alpha+1}
(n^{\alpha+1}-3^{\alpha+1})+2^{\alpha}+3^{\alpha}+5^{\alpha}.$$
Consequently, when $n$ and $N$ are sufficiently large, $p$ is prime, we have
$$ \sum_{k=1}^{n} \frac{1}{\sqrt{p_k}} < \frac{1}{18} (n\log(n))^{1/2}\ \ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \ \ \sum_{p\leq N}\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}<\frac{1}{18}\sqrt{N}.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We have
\begin{align*}
S_n^{\alpha}-2^{\alpha}-3^{\alpha}-5^{\alpha} & =\sum_{k=4}^{n} p_k^{\alpha} \leq \sum_{k=4}^{n} (k\log(k))^{\alpha} \\
& < \sum_{k=4}^{n} \int_{k-1}^{k} (x\log(x))^{\alpha} dx =\int_{3}^{n} (x\log(x))^{\alpha} dx\\
& < \int_{3}^{n} x^{\alpha} dx =\left.\frac{1}{\alpha+1} x^{\alpha+1}\right|_{3}^{n} = \frac{1}{\alpha+1} (n^{\alpha+1}-3^{\alpha+1}).
\end{align*}
If $\alpha=-1/2$, we have $S_n^{-1/2}<2\sqrt{n}-2\sqrt{3}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}<2\sqrt{n}$.
When $n$ is sufficiently large (exactly: when $n>e^{36^2}$), we have $S_n^{-1/2}<2\sqrt{n}<\frac{1}{18}(n\log(n))^{\frac{1}{2}}$. By $p_n\geq n\log(n)$,
$$\sum_{p\leq n\log(n)}\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}\leq \sum_{p\leq p_n}\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}=\sum_{k=1}^n\frac{1}{\sqrt{p_k}}<\frac{1}{18}(n\log(n))^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
Let $N:=n\log(n)$, we have $\sum_{p\leq N}\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}<\frac{1}{18}\sqrt{N}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{0511}
Let $\bar{P}$ be consisting of all primes $p$ with $p\not\equiv 3 \pmod 4$, $m\in \mathbb{P}$. Then we have
\begin{align*}
\# \{ k \leq m: \iota(k)=1\} & \leq \sqrt{m}; \\
\# \{ k \leq m: \iota(k)=2\} & \leq \sqrt{m}\sum_{p\in \bar{P}, p\leq m} \sqrt{1/p}.
\end{align*}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The first inequality is trial since $\iota(k)=1$ only when $k$ is a perfect square, i.e., $k=i^2$ for some positive integer $i$.
For the second inequality, notice that $\iota(k)=2$ implies that there is at least one prime $p$, with $p\not\equiv 3 \pmod 4$ and $p\leq k$, such that $k=p i^2$ for some positive integer $i$. Then
$$\# \{ k \leq m: \iota(k)=2\} \leq \sum_{p\in \bar{P}, p\leq m}\sqrt{\frac{m}{p}}$$
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{0510}
Let $A=(a, a+1^2, a+2^2, a+3^2, ..., )$. If $a$ is sufficiently large, then Theorem \ref{0507} always applies to give
$$g(A)=3a+\max\{r\mid \iota(r)=4, \ \iota(a+r)\geq 3, \ \iota(2a+r)\geq 2\}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We have several counts as follows.
$$\# \{1\le r\le a-1: \iota(r)=4\} \ge (a-6)/8, $$
which is the number of $r=8t+7$. We can have a larger bound by considering $r=4^k (8t+7)$, but this bound is sufficient.
Thus we have at least $(a-6)/8$ candidates.
It is sufficient to show that there is not enough bad guys.
Firstly, by Lemma \ref{0511},
$$W_1:=\# \{ a+1\le a+r \le 2a-1 : \iota(a+r)=1 \}, $$
$$W_2:=\# \{ 2a+1\le 2a+r \le 3a-1 : \iota(2a+r)=1 \}.$$
$$W_1+W_2\le \lfloor\sqrt{3a-1}\rfloor-\lfloor\sqrt{a}\rfloor \le \sqrt{3a-1}-\sqrt{a}+1.$$
Secondly, by Lemma \ref{0512},
\begin{align*}
W_3:&=\# \{a+1\le a+r \le 2a-1 : \iota(a+r)=2\}
\\&\le \sqrt{2a-1}\sum_{p\in \bar{P}, p\leq 2a-1} \sqrt{1/p}-(\sqrt{a}-1)\sum_{p\in \bar{P}, p\leq a} \sqrt{1/p}
\\&\le \frac{1}{18}(2a-1).
\end{align*}
When $a$ is sufficiently large, it is easy to see that
$$W_1+W_2+W_3<\sqrt{3a-1}+\frac{a}{9}<\frac{a-6}{8}.$$
\end{proof}
\begin{cnj}\label{0509}
In Theorem \ref{0510}, as long as $a>30$, we have
$$g(A)=3a+\max\{r\mid \iota(r)=4, \ \iota(a+r)\geq 3, \ \iota(2a+r)\geq 2\}.$$
\end{cnj}
By observing Tables \ref{tab-B} in the appendix, we intuitively find that Conjecture \ref{0509} is likely to be correct. Theorem \ref{0508} seems only to be valid for 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 19, 21, 22, 30. On the other hand, the first numbers of $4^r(8t+7), (r, t\in \mathbb{N})$ are $7, 15, 23, 28, 31, 39, 47, ...$. To disprove Conjecture \ref{0509}, we need to find a number $a>30$ such that $\iota(a+4^r(8t+7))\leq2$ or $\iota(2a+4^r(8t+7))=1$ holds for any $4^r(8t+7)<a$. We guess it's impossible.
\section{infinite Prime sequence formula}
In this section, we first propose the Frobenius formula related to prime sequences. Similarly, we study formulas for infinite sequences.
Let $A=(a, a+p_0, a+p_1, ..., a+p_m, ....)$, where $a\in \mathbb{P}$, $a>2, p_0=1$, and $p_1, ..., p_m, ...$ is the prime sequences, i.e., 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, .... Then how to characterize the formula $g(A)$?
In solving the above problem, we make use of the well-known Goldbach Conjecture in Number Theory.
\begin{cnj}[Goldbach Conjecture]{\em \cite{P. Ribenboim}}\label{0601}
Every even counting number greater than 2 is equal to the sum of two prime numbers.
\end{cnj}
This conjecture is also called the strong Goldbach conjecture.
We can give a similar result without using it, but with larger bounds.
For this we state the next proposition. It is called the weak Goldbach conjecture,
and has been completely proved by H.A. Helfgott in 2013.
\begin{prop}{\em \cite{H. A. Helfgott}}\label{0602}
Every odd counting number greater than 7 is equal to the sum of three odd prime numbers.
\end{prop}
\begin{dfn}\label{0603}
Let $PN$ be a set of all primes, i.e., $PN =\{2, 3, 5, 7, 11, ....\}$.
For any $n\in \mathbb{P}$, we use the symbol $\tau(n)$ to denote
$$\tau(n)=\min\{s\mid n=p_1+p_2+\cdots +p_s, \ p_i\in PN\cup \{1\}, 1\leq i\leq s\}.$$
Obviously we have $\tau(n)\leq 3$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{thm}\label{0604}
For any $n\in \mathbb{P}$, we have
$$\begin{aligned}
\tau(n)=
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
1\ \ \ \ & if & n\in PN\cup \{1\}\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\
3\ \ \ \ & if & n\ \text{is odd, and }n, n-2\not\in PN\cup \{1\} \\
2\ \ \ \ & if & otherwise\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{aligned}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By the Proposition \ref{0602} and Definition \ref{0603}, the proof of this theorem is obvious.
\end{proof}
Similarly, for $A=(a, a+p_0, a+p_1, ..., a+p_m, ....)$,
by appropriate generalizing the definition of $N_r$ and modifying the proof of Lemma \ref{0202}, we have
\begin{align*}
N_r&=\min \{ \sum_{i=0}^{\infty}x_i(a+p_i)\mid \sum_{i=0}^{\infty}x_i(a+p_i)\equiv r\mod a, \ x_i\in \mathbb{N}, i\geq 0\}
\\&=\min \{ (\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}x_i)\cdot a+ma+r\mid \sum_{i=0}^{\infty}x_i\cdot p_i=ma+r, \ m, x_i\in \mathbb{N}, i\geq 0\}
\\&=\min \{\tau(ma+r)\cdot a+ma+r\mid m\in \mathbb{N}\}.
\end{align*}
There are only a finite number of $x_i$ that are not 0. And $g(A)=\max\{N_r\}-a$. As with the discussion of square sequences, we have the following theorem:
\begin{thm}\label{0605}
Let $A=(a, a+p_0, a+p_1, ..., a+p_m, ....)$, where $a\in \mathbb{P}$, $a>2, p_0=1$, and $p_1, ..., p_m, ...$ is the prime sequences. For $1\leq r\leq a-1$, if there is an $r$ such that it meets $\tau(r)=3, \ \tau(a+r)\geq 2$, then
$$g(A)=2a+\max\{r\mid \tau(r)=3, \ \tau(a+r)\geq 2\}.$$
\end{thm}
Similarly, it is easy to have
\begin{thm}\label{0606}
Let $A=(a, a+p_0, a+p_1, ..., a+p_m, ....)$, where $a\in \mathbb{P}$, $a>2, p_0=1$, and $p_1, ..., p_m, ...$ is the prime sequences. For $1\leq r\leq a-1$, if the condition in Theorem \ref{0605} does not hold. And at least one of the following three conditions is satisfied:
1): there is an $r$ such that $\tau(r)=3, \tau(a+r)=1$,
2): there is an $r$ such that $\tau(r)=2$,
then
$$g(A)=a+\max\{r\mid \text{the r in conditions 1), 2)}\}.$$
\end{thm}
In order to better understand the above theorem, we give the Table \ref{tab-D} in the appendix, which suggest the following result.
\begin{thm}\label{0607}
Let $A=(a, a+p_0, a+p_1, ..., a+p_m, ....)$, where $a\in \mathbb{P}$, $a>2, p_0=1$, and $p_1, ..., p_m, ...$ is the prime sequences. If $a>44$, then the formula $g(A)$ in Theorem \ref{0605} is the formula of Frobenius sequence $A$, i.e., for any $1\leq r\leq a-1$,
$$g(A)=2a+\max\{r\mid \tau(r)=3, \ \tau(a+r)\geq 2\}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi(x)$ be the number of primes not exceeding $x$. When $a>44$, there exists $r<a$ such that $\tau(r)=3$. For example, $r=27=7+7+13$, $r=35=5+7+23$. We need to show there exists an $r<a$ such that $\tau(r)=3$ and $a+r\not\in PN$. If $a$ is odd, then $a+r$ is even and hence not a prime. If $a$ is even and sufficiently large, then among the numbers less than $a$: there are $a/2$ odd numbers ($1$ is odd, $2$ is prime); the number of $r$ satisfying $r\in PN$ and $r-2\in PN$ is at most $2\pi(a)$; the number of $r$ satisfying $a+r\in PN$ does not exceed $\pi(2a)-\pi(a)$. Therefore we only need to prove
$$\frac{a}{2}-2\pi(a)-(\pi(2a)-\pi(a))>0.$$
For a given $a$, there exists $k>2$ such that $(k-1)\log(k-1)\leq a\leq k\log(k)$.
By $p_k\geq k\log(k)$, we only need to prove
$$\frac{(k-1)\log(k-1)}{2}-k-2k>0, $$
which is easily seen to be equivalent to $k>411$. Thus the above inequality always holds for $a\geq 2467$.
Finally, for even numbers $a$ with $44< a< 2467$, we used a computer to confirm the theorem. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{square sequence formula}\label{hahaha24}
In this section we mainly focus on Open Problem \ref{hahaha3}. We will prove the conjecture of Einstein et al. \cite{D. Einstein} with the aid of the well-known ``Four-Square Theorem" in number theory.
Our starting point is Lemma \ref{0202}, which says that we need to solve the following question:
$$N_r=\min\big\{O_B(ma+r) \cdot a+(ma+r) | \sum_{i=1}^kx_ii^2=ma+r, \ \ m,x_i\in \mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k\big\},$$
where
$$O_B(M)=\min\big\{\sum_{i=1}^kx_i | \sum_{i=1}^kx_ii^2=M, \ \ M,x_i\in \mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k\big\}.$$
It is necessary to define $\iota_k(M)=O_B(M)$ as follows.
\begin{dfn}
For any $n\in \mathbb{P}$, we use the symbol $\iota_k(n)$ to denote
$$\iota_k(n)=\min\{s\mid n=a_1^2+a_2^2+\cdots +a_s^2, \ a_i\in \{1, 2, 3, ..., k\}, 1\leq i\leq s\}.$$
That is, $\iota_k(n)$ is the minimum number of squares used when $n$ is expressed as the sum of the squares $1^2, 2^2, 3^2, ..., k^2$. A representation of $n$ by exactly $\iota_k(n)$ squares is said to be \emph{optimal}.
\end{dfn}
For example, if $k=6$, $n=79$, then $\iota_k(79)=4=\iota(79)$ (by Lemma \ref{0503}) with optimal representation $n=6^2+5^2+3^2+3^2$.
Note that the greedy algorithm gives $n=2\cdot 6^2 + 2^2+3\cdot 1^2$, which is not optimal.
In summary, we need to study how to calculate $\iota_k(M)$ efficiently. This is done in the next subsection by using generating functions.
\subsection{Generating Function for $\iota_k(M)$}
Our main objective in this subsection is to prove the following result.
\begin{thm}\label{t-OBM}
There is a polynomial time algorithm for computing $\iota_k(r)$
for all $r\in \P$.
\end{thm}
By definition,
\begin{equation}
\iota_k(r)=\min\big\{\sum_{i=1}^kx_i | \sum_{i=1}^kx_ii^2=r, \ \ r,x_i\in \mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k\big\}. \label{hahaha4}
\end{equation}
It is natural to consider the complete generating function:
$$CF(t; q) =\prod_{i=1}^k \frac{1}{1-t_i q^{i^2}} = \sum_{n\ge 0} \Big( \sum_{ x_1+2^2x_2+\cdots+k^2x_k=n} t_1^{x_1}\cdots t_k^{x_k} \Big) q^n ,$$
which encodes all information of nonnegative representations. Setting $t_i=t$ for all $i$ gives
$$ F(t, q) =\prod_{i=1}^k \frac{1}{1-t q^{i^2}} = \sum_{n\ge 0} \Big( \sum_{ x_1+2^2x_2+\cdots+k^2x_k=n} t^{x_1+x_2+\cdots +x_k} \Big) q^n .$$
If we call a solution $(x_1,x_2,...,x_k)$ for \eqref{hahaha4} satisfying $x_1+\cdots +x_k=\iota_k(r)$ \emph{optimal}, then
the generating function $f(t,q) =\sum_{n\ge 0} t^{\iota_k(n)} q^n$ extracts only one optimal representation, weighted by $t^{\iota_k(n)}$,
for each $n$.
It is easy to see that
$$f(t,q) =\sum_{n\ge 0} t^{\iota_k(n)} q^n := \circledast F(t,q),$$
where $\circledast$ is the operator defined as follows.
\begin{dfn}\label{hahaha12}
For a power series $G(t,q)$ in $t,q$ with nonnegative coefficients, define
$\circledast G(t,q)$ to be the power series obtained from $G(t,q)$ by picking a minimum degree (in $t$) term in each coefficient (in $q$).
\end{dfn}
The basic fact $\circledast F(t,q) G(t,q) = \circledast (\circledast F(t,q)) (\circledast G(t,q))$ allows Maple to compute the first $M+1$ terms of $f(t,q)$ quickly for any given reasonably large $M$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Start with $f_1:=\sum_{n= 0}^M t^n q^n$.
\item Suppose $f_{i-1}$ has been obtained. Then $f_i$ is obtained by: first compute $\circledast f_{i-1} \cdot \sum_{n=0}^{h_i} t^n q^{i^2 n}$
where $h_i= \lfloor M/i^2 \rfloor$ will be optimized,
and then remove all terms with degree in $q$ larger than $M$.
\item Set $f(t,q)=f_k$.
\end{enumerate}
Thus we have proved the following result.
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha10}
Let $k$ be a fixed positive integer. For a given $M$, the first $M+1$ term $f(t,q)|_{q^{\leq M}}$ of $f(t,q)$ can be computed in polynomial time in $M$. Consequently, $\iota_k(r), \ r\leq M$ can be computed in polynomial time.
\end{lem}
To completely determine $\iota_k(M)$ for all $M$, we need two bounds obtained from the ``Four-Square Theorem".
\begin{prop}\label{hahaha1}
If $M\in \mathbb{N}$, then $\lceil \frac{M}{k^2}\rceil \leq \iota_k(M)\leq \lfloor \frac{M}{k^2}\rfloor+4$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $M=sk^2+r_1$, $s\geq 0$, $0\leq r_1\leq k^2-1$. If $r_1=0$, then
clearly $\iota_k(M)=s$; If $1\le r_1\le k^2-1$,
$$\lceil \frac{M}{k^2}\rceil= s+1\leq \iota_k(M)\leq s+ \iota_k(r_1)\leq s+ 4=\lfloor \frac{M}{k^2}\rfloor+4.$$
The third inequality comes from the ``Four-Square Theorem".
\end{proof}
The following lemma says that $\iota_k(r)$ is stable in some sense, and hence reduce the computation of $\iota_k(r), \ r\in \mathbb{N}$
for only bounded $r$.
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha9}
Given $k\in\mathbb{P}$, for any $r\geq (\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-2)k^2$, $r\in \mathbb{P}$, we have $$\iota_k(k^2+r)=\iota_k(r)+1.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Obviously $\iota_k(k^2+r)\leq \iota_k(r)+1$ always holds true. If $k^2+r$ has an optimal representation including a $k^2$, then
removing the $k^2$ leads to the other side inequality $\iota_k(r)\leq \iota_{k}(k^2+r)-1$ and hence $\iota_k(k^2+r)= \iota_k(r)+1$.
Thus assume to the contrary that $\iota_k(k^2+r)<\iota_k(r)+1$. Then $k^2+r$ cannot have an optimal representation using $k^2$.
We prove that this is impossible.
Let $r=mk^2+j$, where $0\leq j\leq k^2-1$. By the Four-Square Theorem, we have $j=a^2+b^2+c^2+d^2$, $a,b,c,d\in \mathbb{N}$ and $a,b,c,d<k$.
By the assumption for $r$, we have $m\geq \lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-2$. The $m$ is chosen so that $mk^2\geq (m+3)(k-1)^2$. For such $m$, the following formula holds:
$$mk^2+j=mk^2+a^2+b^2+c^2+d^2\geq (m+3)(k-1)^2.$$
This implies that without using $k^2$, $\iota_k(k^2+r)$ is at least $m+5$. Then we have $m+5\leq \iota_k(k^2+r)< \iota_k(r)+1\leq m+5$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}\label{hahaha6}
If $k=3$, $M=50$, then we have $h_2=12, h_3=5$ and $f_1=\sum_{n= 0}^{50} t^n q^n$.
Therefore we have
$$\begin{small}\begin{aligned}
f_2&=\circledast (f_1 \cdot \sum_{n=0}^{12} t^n q^{4 n})\big |_{q^{\leq 50}}
\\&={q}^{50}{t}^{14}+{q}^{49}{t}^{13}+{q}^{47}{t}^{14}+{q}^{48}{t}^{12}+{q
}^{46}{t}^{13}+{q}^{45}{t}^{12}+{q}^{43}{t}^{13}+{q}^{44}{t}^{11}+{q}^
{42}{t}^{12}+{q}^{41}{t}^{11}+{q}^{39}{t}^{12}
\\&\ \ +{q}^{40}{t}^{10}+{q}^{
38}{t}^{11}+{q}^{37}{t}^{10}+{q}^{35}{t}^{11}+{q}^{36}{t}^{9}+{q}^{34}
{t}^{10}+{q}^{33}{t}^{9}+{q}^{31}{t}^{10}+{q}^{32}{t}^{8}+{q}^{30}{t}^
{9}+{q}^{29}{t}^{8}
\\&\ \ +{q}^{27}{t}^{9}+{q}^{28}{t}^{7}+{q}^{26}{t}^{8}+{q
}^{25}{t}^{7}+{q}^{23}{t}^{8}+{q}^{24}{t}^{6}+{q}^{22}{t}^{7}+{q}^{21}
{t}^{6}+{q}^{19}{t}^{7}+{q}^{20}{t}^{5}+{q}^{18}{t}^{6}+{q}^{17}{t}^{5
}
\\&\ \ +{q}^{15}{t}^{6}+{q}^{16}{t}^{4}+{q}^{14}{t}^{5}+{q}^{13}{t}^{4}+{q}^
{11}{t}^{5}+{q}^{12}{t}^{3}+{q}^{10}{t}^{4}+{q}^{9}{t}^{3}+{q}^{7}{t}^
{4}+{q}^{8}{t}^{2}+{q}^{6}{t}^{3}+{q}^{5}{t}^{2}
\\&\ \ +{q}^{3}{t}^{3}+{q}^{4}t+{q}^{2}{t}^{2}+qt+1,
\end{aligned}\end{small}$$
and
$$\begin{small}\begin{aligned}
f(t, q)&=f_3=\circledast (f_2\cdot \sum_{n=0}^{5} t^n q^{9 n})\big |_{q^{\leq 50}}
\\&={q}^{50}{t}^{7}+{q}^{49}{t}^{6}+{q}^{48}{t}^{7}+{q}^{47}{t}^{7}+{q}^{
46}{t}^{6}+{q}^{45}{t}^{5}+{q}^{44}{t}^{6}+{q}^{43}{t}^{7}+{q}^{42}{t}
^{7}+{q}^{41}{t}^{6}+{q}^{40}{t}^{5}+{q}^{39}{t}^{6}
\\&\ \ +{q}^{38}{t}^{6}
+{q}^{37}{t}^{5}+{q}^{36}{t}^{4}+{q}^{35}{t}^{5}+{q}^{34}{t}^{6}+{q}^{33
}{t}^{6}+{q}^{32}{t}^{5}+{q}^{31}{t}^{4}+{q}^{30}{t}^{5}+{q}^{29}{t}^{
5}+{q}^{28}{t}^{4}+{q}^{27}{t}^{3}
\\&\ \ +{q}^{26}{t}^{4}+{q}^{25}{t}^{5}
+{q}^{24}{t}^{5}+{q}^{23}{t}^{4}+{q}^{22}{t}^{3}+{q}^{21}{t}^{4}+{q}^{20}{
t}^{4}+{q}^{19}{t}^{3}+{q}^{18}{t}^{2}+{q}^{17}{t}^{3}+{q}^{16}{t}^{4}
+{q}^{15}{t}^{4}
\\&\ \ +{q}^{14}{t}^{3}+{q}^{13}{t}^{2}+{q}^{12}{t}^{3}
+{q}^{11}{t}^{3}+{q}^{10}{t}^{2}+{q}^{7}{t}^{4}+{q}^{9}t+{q}^{8}{t}^{2}+{q}^
{6}{t}^{3}+{q}^{5}{t}^{2}+{q}^{3}{t}^{3}+{q}^{4}t
\\&\ \ +{q}^{2}{t}^{2}+qt+1.
\end{aligned}\end{small}$$
For instance, the coefficient $[q^{13}] f_2 =t^4$ while $[q^{13}] f_3=t^2$. These means: i) if using only $1,4$, the best way to represent $13$ is a sum of four squares, i.e., $13=4+4+4+1$;
if using $1,4,9$, the best way to represent $13$ is a sum of two squares, i.e., $9+4$. Of course,
it is not easy to find an explicit representation for complicated examples.
Lemma \ref{hahaha9} says that we need only compute $\iota_k(r)$ for
$r\le u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2$. Indeed, the actual bound maybe smaller. For instance, if $k=3$, then our bound suggest that we need only compute $\iota_3(r)$ for $r\le 36$. Actually, the stable property
$\iota_3(r+9)=\iota_3(r)+1$ holds for all $r\geq 8
$.
To see the stable property clearly, we divide by $f(t,q)=\sum_{i=0}^8 f^i$, where $f^i$ extract all terms corresponding to $q^{9s+i}$. We also bold faced all terms not implied by the stable property.
$$\begin{small}\begin{aligned}
f^0&=\mathbf{1}+tq^{9}+{t}^{2}{q}^{18}+{t}^{3}{q}^{27}+{t}^{4}{q}^{36}+{t}^{5}{q}^{45}\\
f^1&=\mathbf{tq}+{t}^{2}q^{10}+{t}^{3}{q}^{19}+{t}^{4}{q}^{28}+{t}^{5}{q}^{37}+{t}^{6}{q}^{46}\\
f^2&=\mathbf{{t}^{2}q^2}+{t}^{3}q^{11}+{t}^{4}{q}^{20}+{t}^{5}{q}^{29}+{t}^{6}{q}^{38}+{t}^{7}{
q}^{47}\\
f^3&=\mathbf{{t}^{3}q^3+{t}^{3}q^{12}}+{t}^{4}{q}^{21}+{t}^{5}{q}^{30}+{t}^{6}{q}^{39}+{t}^{7}{
q}^{48}\\
f^4&=\mathbf{tq^4}+{t}^{2}q^{13}+{t}^{3}{q}^{22}+{t}^{4}{q}^{31}+{t}^{5}{q}^{40}+{t}^{6}{q}^{49}\\
f^5&=\mathbf{{t}^{2}q^5}+{t}^{3}q^{14}+{t}^{4}{q}^{23}+{t}^{5}{q}^{32}+{t}^{6}{q}^{41}+{t}^{7}{
q}^{50}\\
f^6&=\mathbf{{t}^{3}q^6}+{t}^{4}q^{15}+{t}^{5}{q}^{24}+{t}^{6}{q}^{33}+{t}^{7}{q}^{42}\\
f^7&=\mathbf{{t}^{4}q^7+{t}^{4}q^{16}}+{t}^{5}{q}^{25}+{t}^{6}{q}^{34}+{t}^{7}{q}^{43}\\
f^8&=\mathbf{{t}^{2}q^8}+{t}^{3}q^{17}+{t}^{4}{q}^{26}+{t}^{5}{q}^{35}+{t}^{6}{q}^{44}.
\end{aligned}\end{small}$$
Any $\iota_3(r)$ can be deduced from the bold faced terms.
For example $\iota_3(52)=\iota_3(16+4\cdot 9)=\iota_3(16)+4=8$.
\end{exa}
Next we explain that $h_i$ can be much smaller by the following result.
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha7}
Suppose $(x_1,\dots, x_k)$ is optimal for $\iota_k(r)$ where $r=\sum_{i=1}^k x_i i^2$. Then
$x_i\le 3$ for $i\le \lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor$, and
$x_i \le \lfloor \frac{4k^2}{k^2-i^2}\rfloor $ for $\lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor < i\leq k-1$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For $i\le \lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor$, since $4i^2$ can be replaced by $(2i)^2$, we conclude that $x_i\le 3$.
For $\lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor < i\leq k-1$, suppose to the contrary that $(x_1, x_2, \dots, x_k)$ is optimal and $x_i> m_i:=\lfloor \frac{4k^2}{k^2-i^2}\rfloor$. We consider $\iota_k((m_i+1) i^2)$, By
\begin{align*}
m_i+1=\lfloor \frac{4k^2}{k^2-i^2}\rfloor+1>\frac{4k^2}{k^2-i^2}&\Longleftrightarrow \frac{(m_i+1)(k^2-i^2)}{k^2}>4
\\&\Longleftrightarrow \lceil \frac{(m_i+1)(k^2-i^2)}{k^2}\rceil >4
\\&\Longleftrightarrow (m_i+1)-\lfloor \frac{(m_i+1)i^2}{k^2}\rfloor >4
\\&\Longleftrightarrow \lfloor \frac{(m_i+1)i^2}{k^2}\rfloor +4< m_i+1.
\end{align*}
Since $\iota_k((m_i+1) i^2) \le \lfloor \frac{(m_i+1)i^2}{k^2}\rfloor +4< m_i+1$, we can replace $m_i+1$ copies of $ i^2$ by a better representation
with only $\iota_k((m_i+1) i^2)$ squares.
This is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
By Lemma \ref{hahaha7}, we could set $h_i=3$ for $i\le \lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor$ and $h_i=\lfloor \frac{4k^2}{k^2-i^2}\rfloor $ for $\lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor < i\leq k-1$.
At this time, $h_i$ is obviously relatively small. For example if $k=3$, we have $h_1=3, h_2=7$. Readers can compare with Example \ref{hahaha6}. Note that now we should set $f_1:=\sum_{n= 0}^3 t^n q^n$ (since $h_1=3$) in the first step.
We conclude this subsection by the following proof.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{t-OBM}]
By Lemma \ref{hahaha9}, when $r\geq (\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-2)k^2$, we have $\iota_k(k^2+r)=\iota_k(r)+1$ and $\iota_k(sk^2+r)=\iota_k(r)+s$ for $s\in \mathbb{N}$.
Thus we only need to calculate $\iota_k(r)$ for $r \leq u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2$.
Therefore we can require $x_k\leq \lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1$ in the optimal representation. This allows us to set $h_k:=\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1$ and $M:=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2$.
By Lemma \ref{hahaha10}, $\iota_k(r),\ r\le M$ can be computed in polynomial time in $M$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Frobenius Formula for Square Sequence}
Firstly, we show that $N_r$ behave nicely when $a$ is large. More precisely, we have the following result.
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha2}
If $a\geq 3k^2$, then for a given $r$, we have $N_r=N_r(0)$, i.e., $N_r$ achieves the minimum when $m=0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For a given $r$ and any $m\geq 0$, let $ma+r=sk^2+r_1$, where $0\leq r_1<k^2$. By $a\geq 3k^2$, we have $(m+1)a+r=sk^2+a+r_1\geq (s+3)k^2+r_1$. By Proposition \ref{hahaha1}, we have $\iota_k(ma+r)=s+d$ and $\iota_k((m+1)a+r)\geq (s+3)$ for a certain $0\leq d \leq 4$. Therefore we have
\begin{align*}
N_r(m+1)&\geq (s+3)a+(m+1)a+r
\\&=(s+4)a+ma+r
\\&\geq (s+d)a+ma+r
\\&=N_r(m).
\end{align*}
Then $N_r(m)$ is increasing, and hence minimizes at $m=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha11}
Let $k\ge 2$ and $u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1)k^2$. Then for any $a\geq u$ we have
$$\mathop{\max}\limits_{0\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^2\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{hahaha2} and $u\geq 3k^2$, we have $N_r=N_r(0)$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha9}, for a given $r\geq (\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-2)k^2$, $\iota_k(sk^2+r)$ is increasing with respect to $s\geq 0$. There might be exceptions for small $r$. For example, if $k=5$, we have $\iota_k(7)=4, \iota_k(5^2+7)=2, \iota_k(2\times 5^2+7)=3,$ etc.
Let $y=mk^2+j$ with $1\le j \le k^2-1$. Then by the Four-Square Theorem we have $\iota_k(y)\leq m+4$. We also have
$\iota_k(y+3k^2)\ge \lceil \frac{y+3k^2}{k^2} \rceil=m+4$.
It follows that if $r\geq (\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-2)k^2+2k^2$, then we must have $\iota_k(r)\geq \iota_k(r-3k^2)$. Combining with the stable property, we conclude that $\iota_k(r)\geq \iota_k(r-sk^2)$ holds for all $s\geq 0$. Therefore when $a\geq u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-2)k^2+3k^2$, we have $\mathop{\max}\limits_{0\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^2\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}$.
\end{proof}
The following theorem will show that the Frobenius formula for square sequence is a
``congruence class function" about $k^2$, i.e., divide it into $k^2$ classes according to $\mod k^2$ residue of $a$. Like the conjecture of Einstein et al. \cite{D. Einstein}, our function is also part of $k^2$.
\begin{thm}\label{hahaha8}
Let $k$ be a fixed positive integer and $A(a)=(a, a+1, a+2^2, ..., a+k^2)$. There exists two nonnegative integer sequences $t_k=(t_{k,j})_{0\le j\le k^2-1}$ and $r_k=(r_{k,j})_{0\le j \le k^2-1}$, such that for all $a\geq u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1)k^2$, we have
$$g(A(a))=(t_{k,j}\cdot a+r_{k,j})+(a+k^2)(\lfloor \frac{a}{k^2}\rfloor -\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1),\ \ \textrm{where } a\equiv j\mod k^2.$$
Moreover, $t_{k}$ and $r_{k}$ are both increasing, and $t_{k,k^2-1}-t_{k,0}\le 1$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $a=sk^2+j\geq u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1)k^2$, where $s\geq \lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1$ and $0\leq j\leq k^2-1$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha11}, we have
$$\mathop{\max}\limits_{0\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^2\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}.$$
Now $N_r=\iota_k(r)\cdot a+r$ is dominated by the coefficient $\iota_k(r)$. This suggest that we shall first find
$\iota=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^2\leq r\leq a-1} \iota_k(r)$
and then find the largest $a-k^2\leq \widehat{r} \leq a-1$ satisfying $\iota_k(\widehat{r})=\iota$. Then $\max \{N_r\} = \iota_k(\widehat{r})\cdot a +\widehat{r}$, and the Frobenius number is $(\iota_k(\widehat{r})-1)\cdot a +\widehat{r}$.
Now, let $u\leq a\leq u+k^2-1$ and $a\equiv j\mod k^2$, so $j$ can take all the numbers in $\{0,1,2,...,k^2-1\}$. For a certain $j$, according to the above discussion, there is an $a-k^2\leq r_{k,j}\leq a-1$ such that we can get $g(A)=\max\{N_r\}-a=t_{k,j}\cdot a+r_{k,j}$, where $t_{k,j}, r_{k,j}\in \mathbb{N}$ and $t_{k,j}=\iota_k(r_{k,j})-1$.
For the same $j$, if $a=sk^2+j$, $s>\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1$, then $a=(s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2+u+j$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha9}, we have $\overline{r}=(s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2+r_{k,j}$ such that $\max\{N_r\}=N_{\overline{r}}$. Then
$$\begin{small}
g(A(a))=(t_{k,j}+s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)\cdot a+(s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2+r_{k,j} =(t_{k,j}\cdot a+r_{k,j})+(a+k^2)(\lfloor \frac{a}{k^2}\rfloor -\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1).
\end{small}$$
Therefore for any $0\leq j\leq k^2-1$, all $t_{k,j}$ and $ r_{k,j}$ form the sequences $t_{k}$ and $r_{k}$ respectively.
By the calculation process of $t_{k,j}$ and $r_{k,j}$, it is easy to see that $u-k^2\leq r_{k,j}< u+k^2$. When $a=u$, let $\widehat{r}$ be the largest number such that
$$u-k^2\leq \widehat{r}\leq u-1\ \ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \ \ \iota_k(\widehat{r})=\mathop{\max}\limits_{u-k^2\leq r\leq u-1} \iota_k(r) .$$
In the next period $u$ to $u+k^2-1$ corresponding to $a=u+k^2$, $\widehat{r}^{\prime}=\widehat{r}+k^2$ satisfies
$$u\leq \widehat{r}^{\prime}\leq u+k^2-1\ \ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \ \ \iota_k(\widehat{r}^{\prime})=\iota_k(\widehat{r})+1=\mathop{\max}\limits_{u\leq r\leq u+k^2-1} \iota_k(r) .$$
Therefore, in any interval of length $k^2$ starting with $a\equiv j \mod k^2$ that lies between $u-k^2$ and $u+k^2-1$, we have two cases: i) If the interval contains $\widehat{r}^{\prime}$, then
$r_{k,j}=\widehat{r}^{\prime}$; ii) If the interval contains $\widehat{r}$, then $r_{k,j}$ lies between $\widehat{r}$
and $\widehat{r}^{\prime}$ and $\iota_k(r_{k,j})$ is either
$\iota_k(\widehat{r})$ or $\iota_k(\widehat{r})+1$. Moreover,
$r_{k,j}$ is increasing with respect to $j$. Obviously, from the above discussion, we can know that $t_{k}$ is increasing and $t_{k,k^2-1}-t_{k,0}\le 1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Essentially, when $a\geq u(k)$ ($u(k)$ is a function related to $k\in \mathbb{P}$), the Frobenius formula for $A=(a, a+1, a+2^2, ..., a+k^2)$ is a ``congruence class function" with $k^2$ classes. And each segment is a quadratic polynomial in $a$ with leading coefficient $\frac{1}{k^2}$.
\end{cor}
Now we give an example to intuitively experience the above proof process.
\begin{exa}\label{hahaha22}
Let $k=3$. Then our bound is $a\geq u=54$ and we know $45\leq r_{k,j}< 63$. By Example \ref{hahaha6}, we have
\begin{align*}
\circledast F(t,q)= \cdots &+{t}^{5}{q}^{45}+{t}^{6}{q}^{46}+{t}^{7}{
q}^{47}+{t}^{7}{q}^{48}+{t}^{6}{q}^{49}+{t}^{7}{q}^{50}+{t}^{8}{q}^{51}+\underline{{t}^{8}{q}^{52}}+{t}^{7}{q}^{53}
\\&+{t}^{6}{q}^{54}+{t}^{7}{q}^{55}+\mathbf{{t}^{8}{q}^{56}}+\mathbf{{t}^{8}{q}^{57}}+{t}^{7}{q}^{58}+\mathbf{{t}^{8}{q}^{59}}+
\mathbf{{t}^{9}{q}^{60}}+\underline{{t}^{9}{q}^{61}}+{t}^{8}{q}^{62}+\cdots,
\end{align*}
where we only displayed the necessary part in our proof: i) The first row corresponds to $u-k^2\le r<u-1$;
ii) The second row corresponds to $u\le r \le u+k^2-1$; iii) Multiplying the first row by $tq^9$ gives the second row.
The terms for $\widehat{r}$ and $\widehat{r}'$ are underlined in the two rows with
$$\iota_k(\widehat{r})=\mathop{\max}\limits_{45\leq r\leq 53} \iota_k(r)=\iota_k(52)=8 \quad \text{ and } \quad
\iota_k(\widehat{r}^{\prime})=9.$$
We discuss how to find $r_{3,j}$ from the above formula.
For $a=u=54$, $r_{3,0}=52$ is just $\widehat{r}$ and consequently
$t_{3,0}=\iota_3(52)-1=7$, $g(A)=7a+52=430$. Furthermore we conclude that if $a\equiv 0 \mod k^2$ and $a\geq54$,
then $g(A(a))=(7a+52)+(a+9)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6).$
For $a=55$, since $6=\iota_k(54)<\iota_k(52)=8$, we have $r_{3,1}=52$. Similarly for
$a=56$, we have $r_{3,2}=52$.
For $a=57$, the situation is different and we have $r_{3,3}=56$. This is because we meet the bold faced term, which corresponds to
$8=\iota_k(56)\ge \iota_k(52)=8$. The bold faced terms are left-to-right maximums with respect to the power of $t$.
By a similar reasoning, we obtain $r_{3,4}=r_{3,5}= 57$, $r_{3,6}=59, $ $r_{3,7}=60$, $r_{3,8}=61$.
In summary, we have $t_{3}=[7,7,7,7,7,7,7,8,8]$ and $r_{3}=[52,52,52,56,57,57,59,60,61]$, from which we can build the following Frobenius formula for $k=3$:
$$\begin{aligned}
g(A(a))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
(7a+52)+(a+9)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 0,1,2 \mod 3^2;\\
(7a+56)+(a+9)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 3 \mod 3^2;\ \ \ \ \ \\
(7a+57)+(a+9)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 4,5 \mod 3^2;\ \ \\
(7a+59)+(a+9)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 6 \mod 3^2;\ \ \ \ \ \\
(8a+60)+(a+9)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 7 \mod 3^2;\ \ \ \ \ \\
(8a+61)+(a+9)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 8 \mod 3^2.\ \ \ \ \
\end{array}
\right.
\end{aligned}$$
In the same way, for $k=1,2,4,5$, we can obtain the following results:
$$\begin{small}\begin{aligned}
\bullet\ \ \ t_{1}&=[1], r_{1}=[2].\\
\bullet\ \ \ t_{2}&=[5,5,5,5], r_{2}=[15,15,15,18].\\
\bullet\ \ \ t_{4}&=[8,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9],\\
r_{4}&=[101,101,101,101,115,115,117,118,119,119,119,119,119,124,124,126].\\
\bullet\ \ \ t_{5}&=[10,10,10,10,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11],\\
r_{5}&=[224,224,224,227,228,228,228,231,231,231,231,231,231,237,237,237,240,240,240,\\
&\ \ \ 240,244,244,246,247,247].
\end{aligned}\end{small}$$
One can verify that our results are consistent with those of Einstein et. al.
(in \cite{D. Einstein}).
\end{exa}
Our bound $a\geq u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1)k^2$ in Lemma \ref{hahaha9} and \ref{hahaha11} is not tight. For example, when $k=3$, the above formula holds for $a\geq 16$.
For a specific $k$, by calculating $\iota_k(r)$ and observing the process of this ``stable", we can obtain the exact lower bound of $a$ so that the Frobenius formula in Theorem \ref{hahaha8} still holds. We get the following result with the help of Maple.
\begin{cor}\label{hahaha5}
Let the exact lower bound of $a$ be $\widehat{u}$. Then we have
\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline \hline
$k$ &1&2&3&4&5&6&7&8&9&10&11&12&13&$\cdots$ \\
\hline
$\widehat{u}$ &1&1&16&24&41&68&137&168&379&558&451&709&987&$\cdots$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{cor}
Now, we have resolved the Open Problem \ref{hahaha3} on square sequence about Frobenius number. According to the above theorems and corollary, we see that our methods have the following similarities and differences with the conjecture of Einstein et. al.
1. We combined the Four-Square Theorem and solved the optimization problem $\iota_k(M)$ to obtain the Frobenius formula for the general $k$. However, Einstein et al. obtained the formula for $k\in\{1,2,3,4,5,6,7\}$ through their geometric algorithm.
2. Our formulas are consistent with the result of Einstein et al. The essence is that it is a ``congruence class function" with $k^2$ classes. And each segment is a quadratic polynomial in $a$ with the leading coefficient $\frac{1}{k^2}$.
3. The general range of values for $a$ in our proof is $a\geq u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1)k^2$. The exact bound given by Einstein et al. is $(1,1,16,24,41,67,136)$ for $k$ being $(1,2,3,4,5,6,7)$ respectively. For a given $k$, we can obtain the exact lower bound on $a$ by computing $\iota_k(r)$ with the aid of a computer. The lower bounds for $k\leq 13$ are given in Corollary \ref{hahaha5}. Note that when $k=6,7$, the result given by Einstein et al. is $a\geq 67, 136$, but our result is $a\geq 68, 137$. We think it's just a typo in \cite{D. Einstein}.
4. In the proof of Theorem \ref{hahaha8}, by calculating $\iota_k(r)$, we provide a general method for computing the coefficients $t_{k,j}, r_{k,j}$. In Example \ref{hahaha22}, we give some coefficients for $1\leq k\leq 5$. For other cases, interested readers can try to calculate them.
\section{Cubic and High Power Sequence Formulas}
After studying square sequence, it is natural to consider cubic sequence, whose Frobenius formula have never been given an exact expression.
More precisely, let $A=(a, a+1, a+8, ..., a+k^3)$, where $k\in \mathbb{P}$, $a>2$. We will characterize $g(A)$.
The idea for square sequence applies in this case, but the computation is much more complicated.
We will recycle most of the notations in Section \ref{hahaha24} for square sequence, and carry out some of the details. From this, we are convinced that
our approach also works for high power sequence.
By Lemma \ref{0202}, we need to solve the following question:
$$N_r=\min\big\{(\sum_{i=1}^kx_i)\cdot a+(ma+r) | \sum_{i=1}^kx_ii^3=ma+r, \ \ m,x_i\in \mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k\big\}.$$
$$O_B(M)=\min\big\{\sum_{i=1}^kx_i | \sum_{i=1}^kx_ii^3=M, \ \ M,x_i\in \mathbb{N}, 1\leq i\leq k\big\}.$$
For convenience, we let $\theta_k(M)=O_B(M)$.
\subsection{Generating Function for $\theta_k(M)$}
Similar to the previous results, we have the following theorem.
\begin{thm}\label{hahaha16}
There is a polynomial time algorithm for computing $\theta_k(r)$ for all $r\in \P$.
\end{thm}
Again, we need $\circledast G(t,q)$ in Definition \ref{hahaha12}, and the associated program, the only difference is that we replace the $i^2$ with $i^3$. We also get that Lemma \ref{hahaha10} hold in the case of cubic sequence. To completely determine $\theta_k(r)$ for all $r$, we need the following result.
\begin{lem}{\em \cite{G. H. Hardy}}\label{hahaha13}
Every positive integer is the sum of $9$ cubic numbers.
\end{lem}
For example, $9=2^3+1$, $23=2\times 2^3+7\times 1^3$, etc.
\begin{prop}\label{hahaha18}
If $M\in \mathbb{N}$, then $\lceil \frac{M}{k^3}\rceil\leq \theta_k(M)\leq \lfloor \frac{M}{k^3}\rfloor+9$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $M=sk^3+r_1$, $s\geq 0$, $0\leq r_1\leq k^3-1$, then
$$\lceil \frac{M}{k^3}\rceil= s\leq \theta_k(M)\leq s+ \theta_k(r_1)\leq s+ 9=\lfloor \frac{M}{k^3}\rfloor+9.$$
The third inequality comes from Lemma \ref{hahaha13}.
\end{proof}
The following lemma says that $\theta_k(r)$ is stable in some sense, and hence reduce the computation of $\theta_k(r), \ r\in \mathbb{N}$ for only bounded $r$.
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha17}
Given $k\in\mathbb{P}$, for any $r\geq (\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-8)k^3$, $r\in \mathbb{P}$, we have $$\theta_k(k^3+r)=\theta_k(r)+1.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Obviously $\theta_k(k^3+r)\leq \theta_k(r)+1$ always holds true. If $k^3+r$ has a minimal representation including a $k^3$, then
removing the $k^3$ leads to the other side inequality $\theta_k(r)\leq \theta_{k}(k^3+r)-1$ and hence $\theta_k(k^3+r)= \theta_k(r)+1$.
Thus assume to the contrary that $\theta_k(k^3+r)<\theta_k(r)+1$. Then $k^3+r$ cannot have a minimal representation using $k^3$.
We prove that this is impossible.
Let $r=mk^3+j$, where $0\leq j\leq k^3-1$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha13}, we have $j=\sum_{i=1}^9 w_i^3$, $w_i\in \mathbb{N}$ and $w_i<k$ for $1\leq i\leq 9$.
By the assumption for $r$, we have $m\geq \lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-8$. The $m$ is chosen so that $mk^3\geq (m+8)(k-1)^3$. For such $m$, the following formula holds:
$$r=mk^3+j=mk^3+\sum_{i=1}^9 w_i^3 \geq (m+8)(k-1)^3.$$
This implies that without using $k^3$, $\theta_k(k^3+r)$ is at least $m+10$. Then we have $m+10\leq \theta_k(k^3+r)< \theta_k(r)+1\leq m+9+1$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
Similar to the discussion of the squaring sequence, we give an example to illustrate the process of ``stable" above in Appendix.
Next we explain that $h_i$ can be much smaller by the following result.
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha14}
Suppose $(x_1,\dots, x_k)$ is optimal for $\theta_k(r)$ where $r=\sum_{i=1}^k x_i i^3$. Then
$x_i\le 7$ for $i\le \lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor$, and
$x_i \le \lfloor \frac{9k^3}{k^3-i^3}\rfloor $ for $\lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor < i\leq k-1$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For $i\le \lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor$, since $8i^3$ can be replaced by $(2i)^3$, $x_i\le 7$.
For $\lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor < i\leq k-1$, suppose to the contrary that $(x_1, x_2, \dots, x_k)$ is optimal and $x_i> m_i:=\lfloor \frac{9k^3}{k^3-i^3}\rfloor$. We consider $\theta_k((m_i+1) i^3)$, By
\begin{align*}
m_i+1=\lfloor \frac{9k^3}{k^3-i^3}\rfloor+1>\frac{9k^3}{k^3-i^3}&\Longleftrightarrow \frac{(m_i+1)(k^3-i^3)}{k^3}>9
\\&\Longleftrightarrow \lceil \frac{(m_i+1)(k^3-i^3)}{k^3}\rceil >9
\\&\Longleftrightarrow (m_i+1)-\lfloor \frac{(m_i+1)i^3}{k^3}\rfloor >9
\\&\Longleftrightarrow \lfloor \frac{(m_i+1)i^3}{k^3}\rfloor +9< m_i+1.
\end{align*}
Since $\theta_k((m_i+1) i^3) \le \lfloor \frac{(m_i+1)i^3}{k^3}\rfloor +9< m_i+1$, we can replace $m_i+1$ copies of $ i^3$ by a better representation
with only $\theta_k((m_i+1) i^3)$ cubic.
This is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
By Lemma \ref{hahaha14}, we could set $h_i=7$ for $i\le \lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor$ and $h_i=\lfloor \frac{9k^3}{k^3-i^3}\rfloor $ for $\lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor < i\leq k-1$.
At this time, $h_i$ is obviously relatively small. For example if $k=3$, we have $h_1=7, h_2=12$. The reader can compare Example \ref{hahaha15}. Note that now we should set $f_1:=\sum_{n= 0}^7 t^n q^n$ (since $h_1=7$) in the first step.
We conclude this subsection by the following proof.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{hahaha16}]
By Lemma \ref{hahaha17}, when $r\geq (\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-8)k^3$, we have $\theta_k(k^3+r)=\theta_k(r)+1$ and $\theta_k(sk^3+r)=\theta_k(r)+s$ for $s\in \mathbb{N}$.
Thus we only need to calculate $\theta_k(r)$ for $r \leq u=(\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-7)k^3$.
Therefore we can require $x_k\leq \lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-7$ in the optimal representation. This allows us to set $h_k:=\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-7$ and $M:=(\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-7)k^3$.
By Lemma \ref{hahaha10}, $\theta_k(r),\ r\le M$ can be computed in polynomial time in $M$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Frobenius Formula for Cubic Sequence}
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha19}
If $a\geq 8k^3$, then for a given $r$, we have $N_r=N_r(0)$, i.e., $N_r$ achieves the minimum at $m=0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For a given $r$ and any $m\geq 0$, let $ma+r=sk^3+r_1$, where $0\leq r_1<k^3$. By $a\geq 8k^3$, we have $(m+1)a+r=sk^3+a+r_1\geq (s+8)k^3+r_1$. By Proposition \ref{hahaha18}, we have $\theta_k(ma+r)=s+d$ and $\theta_k((m+1)a+r)\geq (s+8)$ for a certain $0\leq d \leq 9$. Therefore we have
\begin{align*}
N_r(m+1)&\geq (s+8)a+(m+1)a+r
\\&=(s+9)a+ma+r
\\&\geq (s+d)a+ma+r
\\&=N_r(m).
\end{align*}
Then $N_r(m)$ is increasing, and hence minimizes at $m=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{hahaha20}
Let $a\geq u=(\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)k^3$. Then we have
$$\mathop{\max}\limits_{0\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^3\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{hahaha19} and $u\geq 8k^3$, we have $N_r=N_r(0)$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha17}, obviously for a given $r\geq (\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-8)k^3$, $\theta_k(sk^3+r)$ is increasing with $s\geq 0$. But for $r\leq (\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-8)k^3$, there will be exceptions. For example, if $k=3$, we have $\theta_k(22)=8, \theta_k(22+27)=7, \theta_k(22+2\times 27)=8,$ etc.
Now, we consider the following case. If $y=mk^3+\sum_{i=1}^9w_i^3$ where $m\geq 0$, and $w_i\in \mathbb{N}$ are not all $0$ for $1\leq i\leq 9$. we have $\theta_k(y)\leq m+9$, $\theta_k(y+k^3)\geq m+2$, ..., $\theta_k(y+8k^3)\geq m+9$. So for a given $r\geq (\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-8)k^3+7k^3$, we must have $\theta_k(r)\geq \theta_k(r-8k^3)$. and more general, we have $\theta_k(r)\geq \theta_k(r-sk^3), s\geq 0$. Therefore when $a\geq u=(\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil-8)k^3+8k^3$, we have $\mathop{\max}\limits_{0\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^3\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}$.
\end{proof}
The following theorem will show that the Frobenius formula for cubic sequence is a ``congruence class function" with $k^3$ classes.
\begin{thm}\label{hahaha21}
Let $k$ be a fixed positive integer and $A(a)=(a, a+1, a+2^3, ..., a+k^3)$. There exists two nonnegative integer sequences $t_k=(t_{k,j})_{0\le j\le k^3-1}$ and $r_k=(r_{k,j})_{0\le j \le k^3-1}$, such that for all $a\geq u=(\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)k^3$, we have
$$g(A(a))=(t_{k,j}\cdot a+r_{k,j})+(a+k^3)(\lfloor \frac{a}{k^3}\rfloor -\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil),\ \ \textrm{where } a\equiv j\mod k^3.$$
Moreover, $t_{k}$ and $r_{k}$ are both increasing, and $t_{k,k^3-1}-t_{k,0}\le 1$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $a=sk^3+j\geq u=(\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)k^3$, where $s\geq \lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil$ and $0\leq j\leq k^3-1$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha20}, we have
$$\mathop{\max}\limits_{0\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^3\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_r\}.$$
Now $N_r=\theta_k(r)\cdot a+r$ is dominated by the coefficient $\theta_k(r)$. This suggest that we shall first find
$\theta=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^3\leq r\leq a-1} \theta_k(r)$
and then find the largest $a-k^3\leq \widehat{r} \leq a-1$ satisfying $\theta_k(\widehat{r})=\theta$. Then $\max \{N_r\} = \theta_k(\widehat{r})\cdot a +\widehat{r}$, and the Frobenius number is $(\theta_k(\widehat{r})-1)\cdot a +\widehat{r}$.
At this time, let $u\leq a\leq u+k^3-1$ and $a\equiv j\mod k^3$, so $j$ can take all the numbers in $\{0,1,2,...,k^3-1\}$. For a certain $j$, according to the above discussion, there is an $a-k^3\leq r_{k,j}\leq a-1$ such that we can get $g(A)=\max\{N_r\}-a=t_{k,j}\cdot a+r_{k,j}$, where $t_{k,j}, r_{k,j}\in \mathbb{N}$ and $t_{k,j}=\theta_k(r_{k,j})-1$.
For the same $j$, if $a=sk^3+j$, $s>\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil$. We have $a=(s-\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)k^3+u+j$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha17}, we have $\overline{r}=(s-\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)k^3+r_{k,j}$ such that $\max\{N_r\}=N_{\overline{r}}$. Then
\begin{small}
\begin{align*}
g(A)&=(t_{k,j}+s-\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)\cdot a+(s-\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)k^3+r_{k,j}
\\&=(t_{k,j}\cdot a+r_{k,j})+(a+k^3)(\lfloor \frac{a}{k^3}\rfloor -\lceil\frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil).
\end{align*}\end{small}
Therefore for any $0\leq j\leq k^3-1$, all $t_{k,j}$ and $ r_{k,j}$ form the vectors $t_{k}$ and $r_{k}$ respectively.
As in the previous discussion, we can easily know that $t_{k}$ and $r_{k}$ is increasing, $t_{k,k^3-1}-t_{k,0}\le 1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Essentially, when $a\geq u(k)$ ($u(k)$ is a function related to $k\in \mathbb{P}$), the Frobenius formula for $A=(a, a+1, a+2^3, ..., a+k^3)$ is a ``congruence class function" with $k^3$ classes. And each segment is a quadratic polynomial in $a$ with the leading coefficient $\frac{1}{k^3}$.
\end{cor}
\begin{exa}
Let $k=3$, Then we have $a\geq u=324$. Similarly, we can compute the Frobenius numbers for $a=324,325,...,350$, and we obtain the following Frobenius formula:
$$\begin{aligned}
g(A(a))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
(17a+320)+(a+27)(\lfloor \frac{a}{27}\rfloor -12) & if\ \ a\equiv 0,1,...,15 \mod 3^3;\ \ \ \\
(17a+339)+(a+27)(\lfloor \frac{a}{27}\rfloor -12) & if\ \ a\equiv 16,17,...,20 \mod 3^3; \\
(17a+344)+(a+27)(\lfloor \frac{a}{27}\rfloor -12) & if\ \ a\equiv 21,22 \mod 3^3;\ \ \ \ \ \ \\
(17a+346)+(a+27)(\lfloor \frac{a}{27}\rfloor -12) & if\ \ a\equiv 23 \mod 3^3;\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\
(18a+347)+(a+27)(\lfloor \frac{a}{27}\rfloor -12) & if\ \ a\equiv 24,25,26 \mod 3^3.\ \ \\
\end{array}
\right.
\end{aligned}$$
\end{exa}
As in the case of the square sequence, in the above proof and calculation, we set $a\geq u=(\lceil \frac{8k^3}{3k^2-3k+1}\rceil)k^3$. But for a given $k$, the value of $u$ can be reduced appropriately. Because in Lemma \ref{hahaha17} and \ref{hahaha20}, the condition about the lower bound of $a$ is only a sufficient condition.
Further more, we know that every number can be represented by up to $9$ cubes, but in fact, except $23=2\times 2^3+7\times 1^3$ and $239=2\times 4^3+4\times 3^3+3\times 1^3$, every number can be represented by up to $8$ cubes. And only $15$ numbers need $8$ cubic numbers to represent, the largest of which is $454$, that is, after $454$, only $7$ cubic numbers are enough. This fact should also be used to reduce $u$.
For a specific $k$, by calculating $\theta_k(r)$ and observing the process of this ``stable", we can obtain the exact lower bound of $a$ so that the Frobenius formula in Theorem \ref{hahaha21} still holds. The details of which we omit, interested readers can try the calculation.
\subsection{High Power Sequences Formula}
For the case of four and more, we can also discuss similarly, but it needs to rely on some results from the Waring's Problem (for details see references in \cite{G. H. Hardy} and its notes). Waring's problem is that of the representation of $a\in \mathbb{P}$ as sums of a fixed number $m$ of non-negative $n$th powers. A number representable by $m$ $n$th powers is obviously representable by any larger number. Therefore, if all numbers $a\in \mathbb{P}$ are representable by $m$ $n$th powers, there is a least value of $s$ for which this is true. This least value of $m$ is denoted by $\Psi(n)$.
\begin{thm}{\em (see in \cite{G. H. Hardy} and its references)}
For the Waring's Problem, we have $\Psi(2)=4, \Psi(3)=9, \Psi(4)=19, \Psi(5)=37,$
\end{thm}
\begin{cnj}{\em (see in \cite{G. H. Hardy} and its references)}
For the Waring's Problem, we have
$$\Psi(n)=2^n+\big\lfloor \big(\frac{3}{2}\big)^n\big\rfloor-2.$$
For $6<n<471600000$ this formula has been verified as correct by computer.
\end{cnj}
As in the previous discussion, we can obtain the following result. The proof be omitted.
\begin{thm}\label{hahaha23}
When $a\geq u(k)$ ($u(k)$ is a function related to $k\in \mathbb{P}$), and $1\leq n<471600000$, the Frobenius formula for $A=(a, a+1, a+2^n, ..., a+k^n)$ is a
``congruence class function" with $k^n$ classes. And each segment is a quadratic polynomial in $a$ with the leading coefficient $\frac{1}{k^n}$.
\end{thm}
Note that Theorem \ref{hahaha23} also holds for $n=1$, which is the result of Theorem \ref{lsf} for $h=d=1$. However, in Theorem \ref{lsf} we require $k\leq a-1$. At this point, a natural idea is to calculate the following Frobenius formula:
\begin{thm}
Let $k$ be a fixed positive integer and $A(a)=(a, ha+d, ha+2^2d, ..., ha+k^2d)$, where $h,d\in \mathbb{P}$, $(a,d)=1$ and $h\geq d$. There exists two nonnegative integer sequences $w_k=(w_{k,j})_{0\le j\le k^2-1}$ and $r_k=(r_{k,j})_{0\le j \le k^2-1}$, such that for all $a\geq u=(\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1)k^2$, we have
$$g(A(a))=((w_{k,j}h-1)a+r_{k,j}d)+(ha+k^2d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{k^2}\rfloor -\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1),\ \ \textrm{where } a\equiv j\mod k^2.$$
Moreover, $w_{k,j}=t_{k,j}+1=\iota_k(r_{k,j})$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Combining the proof process of Theorem \ref{lsf} and Theorem \ref{hahaha8}, it is not difficult to give a proof of this theorem, and we only give a outline of the proof.
By Lemma \ref{0202}, for a given $r$, we have
\begin{align*}
N_{dr}=\min_{m\in\mathbb{N}} \{O_B(ma+r)\cdot ha+d(ma+r)\},
\end{align*}
where $\iota_k(M)=O_B(M)=\min\{\sum_{i=1}^kx_i \mid \sum_{i=1}^ki^2\cdot x_i=M\}$.
By $N_{dr}(m)=\iota_k(ma+r)\cdot ha+(ma+r)d$ and $a\geq u$, it is easy to see that $N_{dr}(m)$ is increasing with respect to $m$. Therefore for a given $r$, we have $N_{dr}=N_{dr}(0)=\iota_k(r)\cdot ha +rd$ and
$$g(A(a))=\mathop{\max}\limits_{0\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_{dr}\}-a=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^2\leq r\leq a-1}\{N_{dr}\}-a=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^2\leq r\leq a-1}\{\iota_k(r)\cdot ha +rd \}-a.$$
The second ``$=$" in the above equation is obvious from $h\geq d$. This suggest that we shall first find
$\iota=\mathop{\max}\limits_{a-k^2\leq r\leq a-1} \iota_k(r)$
and then find the largest $a-k^2\leq \widehat{r} \leq a-1$ satisfying $\iota_k(\widehat{r})=\iota$.
Now, let $u\leq a\leq u+k^2-1$ and $a\equiv j\mod k^2$, so $j$ can take all the numbers in $\{0,1,2,...,k^2-1\}$. For a certain $j$, according to the above discussion, there is an $a-k^2\leq r_{k,j}\leq a-1$ such that we can get
$$g(A(a))=\iota_k(r_{k,j})\cdot ha +r_{k,j}d-a=(w_{k,j}h-1)a+r_{k,j}d,$$
where $w_{k,j}, r_{k,j}\in \mathbb{N}$ and $w_{k,j}=\iota_k(r_{k,j})=t_{k,j}+1$.
For the same $j$, if $a=sk^2+j$, $s>\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil+1$. We have $a=(s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2+u+j$. By Lemma \ref{hahaha9}, we have $\overline{r}=(s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2+r_{k,j}$ such that $\max\{N_{dr}\}=N_{d\overline{r}}$. Then
\begin{align*}
g(A(a))&=(s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1+w_{k,j})ha+((s-\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1)k^2+r_{k,j})d-a
\\&=(w_{k,j}h-1)a+r_{k,j}d+(ha+k^2d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{k^2}\rfloor -\lceil\frac{3k}{2}\rceil-1).
\end{align*}
Therefore for any $0\leq j\leq k^2-1$, all $w_{k,j}$ and $ r_{k,j}$ form the sequences $w_{k}$ and $r_{k}$ respectively.
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}
Let $k=3$, $(a,d)=1, h\geq d$. Then our bound is $a\geq u=54$ and we know $45\leq r_{k,j}< 63$. Therefore we obtain the following Frobenius formula for $k=3$:
$$\begin{aligned}
g(A(a))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
(8h-1)a+52d+(ha+9d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 0,1,2 \mod 3^2;\\
(8h-1)a+56d+(ha+9d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 3 \mod 3^2;\ \ \ \ \ \\
(8h-1)a+57d+(ha+9d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 4,5 \mod 3^2;\ \ \\
(8h-1)a+59d+(ha+9d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 6 \mod 3^2;\ \ \ \ \ \\
(9h-1)a+60d+(ha+9d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 7 \mod 3^2;\ \ \ \ \ \\
(9h-1)a+61d+(ha+9d)(\lfloor \frac{a}{9}\rfloor -6) & if\ \ a\equiv 8 \mod 3^2.\ \ \ \ \
\end{array}
\right.
\end{aligned}$$
From the above equation, we have $w_{3}=[8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9,9]$, $r_{3}=[52,52,52,56,57,57,59,60,61]$.
\end{exa}
More generally, we can generalize it to high power sequences cases, thus:
\begin{thm}
When $a\geq u(k)$ ($u(k)$ is a function related to $k\in \mathbb{P}$), and $1\leq n<471600000$, $h,d\in \mathbb{P}$, $(a,d)=1$ and $h\geq d$, the Frobenius formula for $A=(a, ha+d, ha+2^nd, ..., ha+k^nd)$ is a ``congruence class function" with $k^n$ classes. And each segment is a quadratic polynomial in $a$ with the leading coefficient $\frac{h}{k^n}$.
\end{thm}
\section{Concluding Remark}
Our main result is Theorem \ref{hahaha8}, which settles Einstein et al.'s conjecture on Frobenius number of the square sequence. Similar idea can be used to work on the high power sequence case.
The method used in this paper can work on larger class of Frobenius formulas of the form $g(a, ha +d B)$.
Lemma \ref{0202} suggests that if there is a nice formula for $O_B(M)$, then we will be able to analyze $N_{dr}(m)$ and obtain $g(A)$.
This idea will be further explored in an upcoming paper \cite{Liu-Xin}. Indeed, once we have a formula for $N_{dr}$, then it is possible to
study other related statistics.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
In this work, we revisit self-supervised learning (SSL) for low-compute neural networks.
Previous research has shown that applying SSL methods to low-compute architectures leads to comparatively poor performance \citep{seed2020, disco2021, boi_ssl_iclr22}, i.e. there is a large performance gap between fully-supervised and self-supervised pre-training on low-compute networks.
For example, the linear probe vs supervised gap of MoCo-v2~\citep{mocov2} on ImageNet1K is $5.0\%$ for ResNet50 ($71.1\%$ vs $76.1\%$), while being $17.3\%$ for ResNet18 ($52.5\%$ vs $69.8\%$) \citep{seed2020}.
More importantly, while SSL pre-training for large models often exceeds supervised pre-training on a variety of downstream tasks, that is not the case for low-compute networks.
Most prior work attribute the poor performance to the capacity bottleneck of the low-compute networks and resort to the use of knowledge distillation \citep{compress2020,seed2020,disco2021,boi_ssl_iclr22,simreg2021}.
While achieving significant gains over the stand-alone SSL models, distillation-based approaches mask the problem rather than resolve it.
In this work, we re-examine the performance of SSL low-compute pre-training, aiming to diagnose the potential bottleneck.
We find that the performance gap could be largely filled by the training recipe introduced in the recent self-supervised works~\citep{swav2020, dino2021} that leverages multiple views of the images.
Comparing multiple views of the same image is the fundamental operation in the latest self-supervised models.
For example, SimCLR~\citep{simclr} learns to distinguish the positive and negative views by a contrastive loss.
SwAV~\citep{swav2020} learns to match the cluster assignments of the views.
We revisit the process of creating and comparing the image views in prior works and observe that the configurations for high-capacity neural networks, e.g. ResNet50/101/152~\citep{resnet2016} and ViT~\citep{vit2021}, are sub-optimal for low-capacity models as they typically lead to matching views in diverse spatial \textit{scales} and \textit{contexts}.
For over-parameterized networks, this may not be as challenging, as verified in our experiments (sec.~\ref{subsec:abl_backbones}), but could even be considered as a manner of regularization.
For light-weight networks, it results in performance degradation.
This reveals a potentially overlooked issue for self-supervised learning: the trade-off between the model complexity and the regularization strength.
With these findings, we further perform a systematic exploration of what aspects of the view creation process lead to well-performing self-supervised models in the context of low-compute networks.
We benchmark and ablate our new training paradigm in a variety of settings with different model architectures (MobileNet-V2~\citep{mnv2}, ResNet18/34/50~\citep{resnet2016}, ViT-Ti/S~\citep{vit2021}), and different self-supervised signals (MoCo-v2~\citep{mocov2}, SwAV~\citep{swav2020}, DINO~\citep{dino2021}).
We report results on downstream visual recognition tasks, e.g. semi-supervised visual recognition, object detection, instance segmentation.
Our method outperforms the previous state-of-the-art approaches despite not relying on knowledge distillation.
Our contributions are summarized as follows:
(1) We revisit SSL for low-compute pre-training and demonstrate that, contrary to prior belief, efficient networks can learn high quality visual representations from self-supervised signals alone, rather than relying on knowledge distillation;
(2) We experimentally show that SSL low-compute pre-training can benefit from a weaker self-supervised target that learns to match \textit{views} in more comparable spatial scales and contexts, suggesting a potentially overlooked aspect in self-supervised learning that the pretext supervision should be adaptive to the network capacity;
(3) With a systematic exploration of the view sampling mechanism, our new training recipe consistently improves multiple self-supervised learning approaches (e.g. MoCo-v2, SwAV, DINO) on a wide spectrum of low-size networks, including both convolutional neural networks (e.g. MobileNetV2, ResNet18, ResNet34) and the vision transformer (e.g. ViT-Ti), even surpassing the state-of-the-arts distillation-based approaches.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related_work}
\textbf{Self-supervised Learning.}
The latest self-supervised models typically rely on contrastive learning, consistency regularization, and masked image modeling.
Contrastive approaches learn to pull together different views of the same image (positive pairs) and push apart the ones that correspond to different images (negative pairs). In practice, these methods require a large number of negative samples.
SimCLR \citep{simclr} uses negative samples coexisting in the current batch, thus requiring large batches, and MoCo~\citep{mocov1} maintains a queue of negative samples and a momentum encoder to improve the consistency of the queue. Other attempts show that visual representations can be learned without discriminating samples but instead matching different views of the same image.
Among these approaches, BYOL~\citep{byol2020} and DINO~\citep{dino2021} start from an augmented view of an image and train the online network (a.k.a student) to predict the representation of another augmented view of the same image obtained from the target network (a.k.a teacher).
In such approaches, the target (teacher) network is updated with a slow-moving average of the online (student) network.
SwAV~\citep{swav2020} introduces an online clustering-based approach that enforces the consistency between cluster assignments produced from different views of the same sample.
Most recently, masked token prediction, originally developed for natural language processing, has been shown to be an effective pretext task for vision transformers.
BEiT~\citep{beit_iclr22} adapts BERT~\citep{bert} for visual recognition by predicting the visual words~\citep{dalle} of the masked patches.
SimMIM~\citep{simmim} extends BEiT by reconstructing the masked pixels directly.
MAE~\citep{mae2022} simplifies the pre-training pipeline by only encoding a small set of visible patches.
\textbf{Self-supervised Learning for efficient networks.}
Recent works have shown that the performance of self-supervised pre-training for low-compute network architectures trails behind standard supervised pre-training by a large margin, barring self-supervised learning from making an impact on models that are deployed on devices.
One natural choice to address this problem is incorporating Knowledge Distillation (KD) \citep{kd_arxiv15} to transfer knowledge from a larger network (teacher) to the smaller architecture (student).
To this end, SEED~\citep{seed2020} and CompRess~\citep{compress2020} transfer knowledge from the teacher in terms of similarity distributions over a dynamically maintained queue.
Instead, SimReg~\citep{simreg2021} and DisCo~\cite{disco2021} utilize extra MLP heads to transfer the knowledge from teacher model to student model by regression.
BINGO~\cite{boi_ssl_iclr22} proposes to leverage the teacher to group similar samples into ``bags'', which are then used to guide the optimization of the student. While these are reasonable design choices to reduce the gap between supervised and self-supervised learning for low-compute architectures, the reason behind this gap is still poorly understood and largely unexplored.
Recently, an empirical study~\citep{effssl_aaai22} seeks to interpret the behavior of self-supervised low-compute pre-training from the perspective of over-clustering, along with examining a number of assumptions to alleviate this problem.
Unlike~\citet{effssl_aaai22}, we study instead from the angle of view sampling and achieve superior performance compared to the best methods with knowledge distillation.
\section{Revisiting Self-supervised Low-compute Training.}
\label{sec:method}
The main goal of this work is to diagnose the performance bottleneck of SSL methods when using light-weight networks, and to offer a solution to alleviate the problem.
We start by re-examining the performance of the state-of-the-art SSL approaches in the absence of a knowledge distillation loss.
\subsection{Pilot experiments}
\label{sec:pilot}
We focus on representative SSL approaches for the contrastive loss, MoCo-v2~\citep{mocov2}, clustering loss, SwAV~\citep{swav2020} and feature
matching loss, DINO~\citep{dino2021}, as they all demonstrate strong performance on large neural networks.
\begin{wraptable}{r}{4.9cm}
\vspace{-2mm}
\input{tables/pilot_experiments}
\caption{Performance of different self-supervised methods with MobileNetV2.}
\label{tab:pilot}
\end{wraptable}
We pre-train these methods on ImageNet1K~\citep{imagenet2015} using MobileNetV2~\citep{mnv2} as the backbone. Note that all these methods learn to compare different views of the same image.
For SwAV and DINO, we consider the setting with local views, using for each image two global views sampled from a scale range $\mathtt{(0.14, 1.0)}$ and six local views sampled from scale range $\mathtt{(0.05, 0.14)}$.
The global and local views are resized to resolutions of $\mathtt{224^2}$ and $\mathtt{96^2}$ respectively.
MoCo-v2 does not use multiple crops by default.
Following~\citep{revisit2021}, we re-implement a variant of MoCo-v2 with multiple crops, noted as MoCo-v2$^\star$.
All models are trained for 200 epochs by the LARS optimizer~\citep{lars2017}, with a batch size of 1024.
In Table~\ref{tab:pilot}, we compare the performance of the SSL methods against the supervised pre-training, as well as the distillation-based model SimReg~\citep{simreg2021}, which is the current state-of-the-art method. For the SSL models, we use the linear evaluation protocol~\citep{mocov1}.
\noindent \textbf{Discussion.}
Current state-of-the-art self-supervised methods consistently under-perform the supervised model and the distillation-based model by a non-negligible margin.
The performance gap between MoCo-v2 and the supervised model is the largest. This is also reported in previous literature \citep{seed2020,boi_ssl_iclr22}.
Incorporating multiple crops largely fills the gap, improving MoCo-v2 by $\mathtt{6.8\%}$ in top-1 accuracy.
While using multiple crops is reported to also boost the performance of large networks, the improvement when using MobileNetV2 is more significant.
The latest SwAV and DINO models further reduce the self-supervised and supervised gap to $\mathtt{6.7\%}$ and $\mathtt{5.7\%}$ respectively.
However, the distillation based approach achieves a top-1 accuracy of $\mathtt{69.1\%}$, which is $\mathtt{2.9\%}$ better than the best self-supervised model.
We can draw the following conclusions. For self-supervised learning on low-compute networks 1) the use of multiple views has an oversized effect and 2) learning with knowledge distillation still outperforms the best SSL method by a wide margin, showing that light-weight networks can effectively learn the self-supervised knowledge given a suitable supervisory signal. These two facts point to the optimization signal being the cause of the performance bottleneck.
\subsection{Model complexity vs regularization strength trade-off: from the view sampling perspective}
\label{sec:complexity_vs_regularization}
We note that in conventional supervised learning there is a well-known direct relation between the amount of regularization required for optimal performance and the capacity of the network~\citep{howtovit}.
Small networks require less aggressive regularization and typically perform optimally under weaker data augmentation.
In self-supervised learning, the regularization itself is the optimization target.
This poses the question of whether the underlying problem with self-supervised low-compute networks is not a lack of capacity, but rather a lack of modulation of the augmentation strength.
In the following we study whether this is the case, concluding in the affirmative.
We investigate the problem from the view sampling perspective as it is the fundamental operation in the latest SSL methods and due to the large performance boost seen in Sec.~\ref{tab:pilot} when using local views.
However, given the standard parametrization of the view generation, it is difficult to disentangle the factors that make view matching challenging and, at the same time, interpretable. This is compounded by the use of local views. It is thus not clear how to design experiments with a controlled and progressive variation of the view matching difficulty.
To unearth the underlying factors, we observe that view matching becomes increasingly harder when
(i) views share little support. This can be caused by (i.a) views representing different parts of the image (e.g. head vs legs of a dog) or (i.b) views having crop scale discrepancy (e.g. full dog vs head of dog); (ii) views have similar support, but different pixel scales (e.g. a global and a local view of a dog at $224\times 224$ and $96 \times 96$ pixels respectively). Note here that previous research suggests that neural networks have difficulties modeling patterns at multiple \textit{pixel scales}~\citep{snip2018}.
We design four different axes to explore the parametric space.
In Sec.\ref{sec:scale}, we focus on the relative \textit{crop scale} to explore the impact of view support.
In Sec.\ref{sec:sample_rate}, we focus on the relative \textit{pixel scale} to explore the impact of the discrepancy in \textit{pixel-size}.
In Sec.\ref{sec:nviews}, we study the impact of the number of views, as more views mean higher likelihood of some pairs having good intersection and thus result in healthier supervisory signals.
In Sec.\ref{sec:balance}, we further examine ways to lower the impact of pairs without shared support through the modulation of the SSL loss function.
\noindent \textbf{Setting.} We use DINO as it provides the best performance in Sec.~\ref{sec:pilot}. We follow the same experimental setting and train on ImageNet1K using MobileNetV2. We reserve a random subset of 50,000 images from the training split of ImageNet1K, i.e. 50 per category, and report the linear probe accuracy on this subset to avoid over-fitting, only using the ImageNet1K validation set on the final experiments in Sec.~\ref{sec:experiments}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/scale.pdf}
\caption{Experiments on the scale ranges of the image crops. \textbf{Left:} performance of different $S_g$ when $S_l$ is set to $0.14$, \textbf{Right:} performance of different $S_l$ when $S_g$ is set to $0.3$. The performance of the default setting is circled in \textcolor{red}{Red}. The best performance in each experiment is circled in {\color{Plum} Plum}.}
\label{fig:scale_ablation}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Relative crop scale.}
\label{sec:scale}
We first examine the ranges of the random scales for the global and local views. The global and local crops are created by sampling image regions from the scale ranges of $(\mathtt{S_g}, \mathtt{1.0})$ and $(\mathtt{0.05}, \mathtt{S_l})$. The crops are then resized to $\mathtt{224}$ and $\mathtt{96}$. We hypothesize that view matching difficulty depends on an interplay between these two scales. To explore this, we examine the impact of the scale range for the global views by varying $\mathtt{S_g}$ while fixing $\mathtt{S_l}$ to $\mathtt{0.14}$, the default value, and then searching $\mathtt{S_l}$ with the obtained $\mathtt{S_g}$.
Here we decouple the search for $\mathtt{S_g}$ and $\mathtt{S_l}$ for simplicity.
Fig.~\ref{fig:scale_ablation} confirms that training is sensitive to the relative crop scale.
Making $\mathtt{S_g}$ too large or too small hurts performance.
A larger $\mathtt{S_g}$ reduces the variance of the global crops. This makes the matching of global views trivial and increases the discrepancy between global and local views, making their matching challenging.
On the other hand, values of $\mathtt{S_g}$ smaller than $\mathtt{S_l}$ may lead to the mismatch in \textit{pixel-scale} between views: the two views of the same scale are resized to different resolutions (see Sec.~\ref{sec:sample_rate}).
The best performance is achieved by setting both $\mathtt{S_g}$ and $\mathtt{S_l}$ to $\mathtt{[0.3, 0.4]}$.
\subsubsection{Relative pixel scale}
\label{sec:sample_rate}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/sample_rate.pdf}
\caption{Left: \textit{Pixel Scale}, i.e., the relative area between the crop in the original image and its resized area. Right: different settings and resulting performance. It is clear from the graph that optimal performance is achieved when both local and global crops have similar \textit{PS}s ($mean(\mathtt{PS_g}/\mathtt{PS_l}) \approx 1.0$).}
\label{fig:sample_rate}
\end{figure}
Even if two views have similar semantic meanings, they might not correspond to the same \textit{pixel scale}. We define the \textit{pixel scale} of a view as $\mathtt{PS}=\frac{\mathtt{final~size}}{\mathtt{cropped~size}}$, which can be considered an indication of the ``\textit{size of the pixel}''.
For each image, the global views $\{g_i\}$ and local views $\{l_i\}$ are resized to different resolutions ($\mathtt{GC}=224$ and $\mathtt{LC}=96$ respectively).
Thus, the \textit{pixel scale} of a global view $g$ ($\mathtt{PS_g}$) and a local view $l$ ($\mathtt{PS_l}$) are:
\begin{equation}
\mathtt{PS_g} = \frac{\mathtt{GC} \times \mathtt{GC}}{\mathtt{Area}(g)};~~~~~~\mathtt{PS_l} = \frac{\mathtt{LC} \times \mathtt{LC}}{\mathtt{Area}(l)}
\end{equation}
Fig.~\ref{fig:sample_rate}(A) provides an example.
The ratio $\mathtt{PS_g}/\mathtt{PS_l}$ indicates the discrepancy in \textit{pixel scale} between the global and local views.
We investigate if such discrepancy has any impact on the self-supervised training.
To do this, we control $\mathtt{PS_g}/\mathtt{PS_l}$ by varying the final resolution of the local view, $\mathtt{LC}$.
To avoid resizing views of the same scale to different resolutions, we keep $\mathtt{S_g}=\mathtt{S_l}=\mathtt{S}$.
We perform experiments with $\mathtt{S}$ equals to
$\mathtt{0.14}$, which is the default value, and $\mathtt{0.3}$, the optimal value we obtain in Sec.\ref{sec:scale}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:sample_rate}(B) shows that matching views of different \textit{pixel scales} results in inferior performance.
Here, the optimal resolution for the local views ($\mathtt{LC}$) is not a golden value but depends on $mean(\mathtt{PS_g}/\mathtt{PS_l})$, which is the mean ratio of the \textit{pixel scales} between the global and local views over the training set.
With $\mathtt{S}$ set to either $\mathtt{0.14}$ or $\mathtt{0.3}$, the best accuracy is achieved when $mean(\mathtt{PS_g}/\mathtt{PS_l}) \approx 1.0$, i.e. $\mathtt{LC}=\mathtt{103}$ when $\mathtt{S}=\mathtt{0.14}$, $\mathtt{LC}=\mathtt{128}$ when $\mathtt{S}=\mathtt{0.3}$.
\subsubsection{Number of local views.}
\label{sec:nviews}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/nl_and_alpha.pdf}
\caption{Left: number of local views ($x$ axis) vs performance ($y$ axis). Performance improves for more local views but saturates quickly. Right: experiments of re-balancing $\mathcal{L}_g$ and $\mathcal{L}_l$ by varying $\alpha$.}
\label{fig:nl_and_alpha}
\end{figure}
The relative crop and relative pixel scales play a fundamental role, yet they are randomly sampled at every iteration. Intuitively, one could increase the number of views sampled to improve the likelihood of each image having at least some good pairs that would keep the supervisory signal healthy.
We perform experiments in different settings with different $\mathtt{LC}$ and $\mathtt{S}$.
However, as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:nl_and_alpha} (left), increasing the number of local views leads to marginal improvements which also saturate quickly.
We posit that randomly sampling local views may include redundant crops that provide no extra knowledge.
Given the extra overhead of more local views and the limited benefit, we maintain the default number of views.
\subsubsection{Re-balancing the loss.}
\label{sec:balance}
The loss function in SSL models with local views typically includes two terms:
given $N_g$ global views $\{g_i\}_{i=1}^{N_g}$ and $N_l$ local views $\{l_i\}_{i=1}^{N_l}$, the loss is computed as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L} = \frac{\mathcal{L}_g + \mathcal{L}_l}{P_{gg}+P_{gl}}
\end{equation}
$\mathcal{L}_g=\sum_{i\neq j}\mathtt{SL}(g_i, g_j)$ aggregates losses between global views (i.e. \textit{global-global} pairs), $\mathcal{L}_l=\sum_{i,j} \mathtt{SL}(g_i, l_j)$ aggregates losses between global and local views (i.e. \textit{global-local} pairs), $\mathtt{SL}$ is
the self-supervised loss, which could be contrastive loss, clustering loss, or feature matching loss, etc, $P_{gg} = N_g \times (N_g-1)$ is the number of \textit{global-global} pairs, whereas $P_{gl} = N_g \times N_l$ is the number of \textit{global-local} pairs.
As $N_g$ is usually smaller than $N_l$, $\frac{P_{gg}}{P_{gl}} \ll 1$.
For example, with the default $N_g=2$, $N_l=6$, $\frac{P_{gg}}{P_{gl}} = \mathtt{0.167}$.
In other words, the loss $\mathcal{L}$ is dominated by $\mathcal{L}_l$. On the other hand, aligning \textit{global-local} pairs is also more difficult than aligning \textit{global-global} pairs, especially when the net capacity is low.
Therefore, we re-balance the loss by re-weighting $\mathcal{L}_g$ and $\mathcal{L}_l$:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L} = \alpha \cdot \frac{\mathcal{L}_g}{P_{gg}} + (1-\alpha) \cdot \frac{\mathcal{L}_l}{P_{gl}}
\end{equation}
Here $\alpha$ is a hyper-parameter that re-weights the contributions of $\mathcal{L}_g$ and $\mathcal{L}_l$.
Note that, with the default numbers of views (i.e. two global, six local), the original formulation is equivalent to setting $\alpha$ to $0.143$. Fig.\ref{fig:nl_and_alpha} (right) depicts that re-balancing $L_g$ and $L_l$ improves the performance. The optimal $\alpha$ falls in the range $[\mathtt{0.3}, \mathtt{0.4}]$. We believe using $\alpha$ further helps modulate the crucial trade-off between the strength of the self-supervision and the model capacity.
With the findings discussed, our best pre-trained model with MobileNetV2 achieves a top-1 linear accuracy of $68.3\%$ on the ImageNet1K validation set, a gain of $2.1\%$ over the DINO model.
Note that the exploration is not exhaustive as different axes may correlate. We conjecture that a larger scale search in the design space could lead to further improvement.
\section{Evaluation}
\label{sec:experiments}
In this section we evaluate our method across three dimensions; i) different self-supervised methods; ii) different low-compute architectures; iii) different downstream tasks. We further compare our pre-trained model to the current state-of-the-art methods.
Our experiments follow the benchmarks set forth by prior works on the topic. However, we also include results for ViT-Ti and ViT-S~\citep{vit2021}, which while they have not been covered in prior work we believe offer an important data point.
We re-use the best view sampling recipe from Sec.~\ref{sec:complexity_vs_regularization}, found for DINO with MobileNetV2 through linear probing on ImageNet1K, and apply it to all architectures and SSL methods. We remark that the positive and consistent results show conclusively the generality of the findings.
Dedicated studies for different models/tasks could lead to even further improvement.
\subsection{Implementation}
All the models are pre-trained on the training set of ImageNet1K~\citep{imagenet2015} for 200 epochs, without using the labels.
Following~\citet{dino2021}, for the convolution-based network, we use the LARS optimizer~\citep{lars2017} with a base learning rate of $0.48 \times \mathtt{batch size}/256$.
The depth-wise convolution layers and bias terms are excluded from layer-wise LR scaling.
For the vision transformer based network, we use the AdamW optimizer~\citep{adamw} with a base learning rate of $0.0005 \times \mathtt{batch size}/256$.
We use a batch size of 1024 and a linear learning rate warm-up in the first 10 epochs.
After the warm-up, the learning rate decays using a cosine schedule~\citep{loshchilov2016sgdr}.
All the other hyper-parameters are inherited from the original literature.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:abl_ssl} and \ref{subsec:abl_backbones}, the pretrained models are mainly evaluated under the linear probe protocol~\citep{mocov1}.
This classifier is trained on the training set of ImageNet1K for 100 epochs, while the pre-trained backbone is frozen. We report top-1/5 accuracy on the validation set.
\subsection{Experiments on different self-supervised Methods.}
\label{sec:abl_ssl}
\begin{wraptable}{r}{6.9cm}
\vspace{-4mm}
\centering
\scalebox{0.8}{
\input{tables/ablation_ssl_methods}
}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{Experiments on MoCo-v2, SwAV, DINO with MobileNetV2. The {\textcolor{ForestGreen}{green} numbers depict the improvement over the baseline model.}}
\label{tab:abl_methods}
\end{wraptable}
We start by verifying if the new training paradigm could be transferred to different self-supervised approaches.
Here we perform experiments on representative methods as discussed in Sec.\ref{sec:pilot}: MoCo-v2$^\star$~\citep{mocov2}, SwAV~\citep{swav2020}, and DINO~\citep{dino2021}.
The visual backbone used in these experiments is MobileNetV2.
The results are reported in Table~\ref{tab:abl_methods}.
All self-supervised methods consistently improve under the proposed training regime, confirming the findings extend to SSL approaches that rely on contrastive learning, clustering and feature matching.
The performance gap between the self-supervised and fully-supervised methods is reduced to $\mathtt{3.6}\%$ in the top-1 accuracy, and $\mathtt{2.5}\%$ in the top-5 accuracy, significantly lower than what has been reported in previous literature.
The models presented here are pre-trained for only 200 epochs with a batch size of 1024, while the state-of-the-art self-supervised training is shown to perform best on large settings, e.g. 800 epochs with a batch size of 4096. We conjecture the self-supervised and fully-supervised gap could be further reduced by scaling up the experiments.
\subsection{Experiments on different low-compute architectures.}
\label{subsec:abl_backbones}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{1.0}{
\input{tables/ablation_backbone}
}
\caption{Experiments on the convolutional networks and the vision transformers using DINO~\citep{dino2021} as the base model. The results of the supervised vision transformers are from DeiT~\citep{deit}.
The {\textcolor{ForestGreen}{green} numbers depict the improvement over the DINO baseline.}}
\label{tab:abl_backbones}
\end{table*}
We perform experiments on other light-weight architectures that were widely evaluated in prior literature~\citep{compress2020,seed2020, disco2021, boi_ssl_iclr22}.
We include both the convolution based networks, e.g. ResNet18 and ResNet34 as well as the vision transformers, e.g. ViT-Ti/16~\citep{vit2021}, and use DINO as the base model.
Note that the DINO baseline uses a different setting with $S=0.25$ and $\mathtt{LC}=10$ for the vision transformers (ViTs).
For the baseline model, we re-use this setting for fair comparison.
Results of medium-capacity networks, ResNet50 and ViT-S/16~\citep{vit2021}, are also included.
For the medium-capacity networks we use a batch size of 640 instead of 1024 due to hardware limitations.
Table~\ref{tab:abl_backbones} reports the evaluations under the linear probe protocol.
Our pre-trained models consistently outperform the DINO baseline on all low-compute networks: a gain of $\mathtt{3.5}\%$,$\mathtt{2.0}\%$,$\mathtt{2.8}\%$ in top-1 for ResNet18, ResNet34, and ViT-Ti/16.
It shows that the low-compute networks can all benefit from the new view-sampling recipe.
For the ResNet-like architectures, we observe that the smaller the network the larger the improvement.
On the other hand, our model performs on par with DINO on ResNet50.
For ViT-S/16, the improvement also drops to $\mathtt{0.7}\%$.
We believe the results confirm that the best performance is achieved by modulating the views in accordance to the model capacity.
\subsection{Finetuning for object detection/instance segmentation.}
\label{ssec:exp_on_downstream_tasks}
We demonstrate the transfer capacity of our pre-trained models on the COCO object detection and instance segmentation task~\citep{coco2014}.
Following~\citet{mocov1}, we train the Mask R-CNN FPN model~\citep{maskrcnn} using the pre-trained MobileNetV2, ResNet18, ResNet34 as the feature backbones.
We re-use all the hyper-parameters in~\citet{mocov1}.
The models are finetuned for $1\times$ schedule (i.e. 12 epochs) by SGD~\citep{loshchilov2016sgdr} on an 8-GPU server.
We train the models on the COCO 2017 training set (117k samples) and report the mean average precision score ($\mathtt{mAP@100}$) on the COCO 2017 validation set (5000 samples).
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:abl_detections}, our pre-trained models achieve consistent improvements over DINO on all light-weight backbones for both the box and mask predictions.
Similar to the evaluation on ImageNet1K (sec. \ref{subsec:abl_backbones}), we observe larger improvements on smaller backbones.
Compared to the fully-supervised backbone, our pretrained $\mathtt{ResNet18/34}$ models perform comparably in general, even slightly better on the mask prediction task: $+0.5\%$ $\mathtt{AP^{mk}}$ for $\mathtt{ResNet34}$.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{1.0}{
\input{tables/ablation_detection}
}
\caption{Experiments on the COCO object detection/instance segmentation task. $\mathtt{AP_*^{bb}}$ is the mean average precision of the bounding boxes, $\mathtt{AP_*^{mk}}$ is the mean average precision of the instance masks. Numbers in parenthesis indicate the performance \textcolor{ForestGreen}{gain} compared to the DINO baseline.}
\label{tab:abl_detections}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Comparison to the state-of-the-art on ImageNet1K}
\label{sec:sota_im1k}
In Table~\ref{tab:sota_im1k}, we benchmark our pre-trained models with the state-of-the-art low-compute pretraining works on ImageNet1K, under the linear probe protocol.
We compare to both the standalone self-supervised methods, e.g. \citet{effssl_aaai22} and ReSSL~\citep{ressl_neurips21}, as well as the KD based methods, e.g. CompRess~\citep{compress2020}, SimReg~\citep{simreg2021}, SEED~\citep{seed2020}, DisCo~\citep{disco2021}, and BINGO~\citep{boi_ssl_iclr22}.
Our models perform significantly better than the standalone self-supervised approaches, e.g. $\textcolor{ForestGreen}{\mathtt{+10.0\%}}$/$\textcolor{ForestGreen}{\mathtt{+7.6\%}}$ compared to \citet{effssl_aaai22} and ReSSL on $\mathtt{ResNet18}$. When pre-trained for similar numbers of epochs, our models perform on par with the best KD based models on all the low-compute backbones, e.g. $\textcolor{darkred}{\mathtt{-0.8\%}}$/$\textcolor{darkred}{\mathtt{-0.2\%}}$/$\textcolor{ForestGreen}{\mathtt{+0.6\%}}$ in the top-1 accuracy for MobileNetV2/ResNet18/ResNet34.
Note that these latest approaches all rely on knowledge distillation (KD), where the teacher models (i.e. ResNet50/50x2/152) are significantly larger than the target low-compute network (i.e. MobileNetV2) and are pre-trained in significantly larger settings (batch size of 4096 for 400/800 epochs).
On the other hand, our models are pre-trained \textit{from scratch} in a smaller setting (batch size of 1024 for 200 epochs) without using any distillation signals.
When pre-trained for 400 epochs with the same batch size (1024), the performance of our models is further improved, even surpassing the state-of-the-art methods on ResNet18 ($\textcolor{ForestGreen}{\mathtt{+0.9\%}}$ in Top-1) and ResNet34 ($\textcolor{ForestGreen}{\mathtt{+1.7\%}}$ in Top-1).
We believe these results show the feasibility of applying self-supervised pretraining on low-compute networks.
On COCO, our model outperforms the best competitor when using MobileNetV2 by $\mathtt{1.7\%}$ in $\mathtt{mAP}$ for object detection, and by $\mathtt{1.6\%}$ for object segmentation. While Sec.~\ref{ssec:exp_on_downstream_tasks} showed that the gains of the proposed method also transfer to downstream tasks, the current results show that it actually \textit{transfers better} than that of competing methods. In fact, this is the first time that an SSL method on low-compute networks roughly bridges the gap with supervised pre-training for downstream tasks. Complete object detection and semantic segmentation results on COCO are shown in the Appendix.
Finally, we provide comparisons to the state-of-the-art methods on semi-supervised learning on ImageNet1K. Our model outperforms the best existing approach with ResNet18 by $\mathtt{1.3\%}$ and $\mathtt{2.5\%}$ for $\mathtt{1\%}$ and $\mathtt{10\%}$ labeled data respectively. Again, more complete results are included in the Appendix.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{0.74}{
\input{tables/sota_im1k}
}
\caption{Comparison to the state-of-the-art methods on ImageNet1K under the linear evaluation protocol. The best number is in
\textbf{bold}. The best number from the \textit{baseline} models is \underline{underlined}. The \textcolor{ForestGreen}{green}/\textcolor{darkred}{red} text indicates the performance \textcolor{ForestGreen}{gain} or \textcolor{darkred}{gap} compared to the best state-of-the-art model.}
\label{tab:sota_im1k}
\end{table*}
\section{Semi-supervised Evaluation on ImageNet1K}
Following CompRress~\citep{compress2020}, SEED~\citep{seed2020}, DisCo~\citep{disco2021}, and BINGO~\citep{boi_ssl_iclr22},
we perform semi-supervised evaluations on ImageNet1K~\citep{imagenet2015} by finetuning the pre-trained models on the $\mathtt{1\%}$ and $\mathtt{10\%}$ labeled data defined in SimCLR~\cite{simclr}\footnote{\url{https://www.tensorflow.org/datasets/catalog/imagenet2012_subset}}.
Recall that for linear probing, the classifier is applied on top of the spatially pooled features of the convolutional networks.
For the semi-supervised evaluation however, we apply the classifier on the second layer of the MLP head~\citep{dino2021}), similar to SimCLR~\citep{simclr, simclrv2}), PAWS~\citep{paws2021}.
We find this significantly improves the classification accuracy under low-data/label regime.
During training, only random cropping and horizontal flipping are used for pre-processing, the images are then resized to $\mathtt{224\times224}$.
During inference, the images are first resized to have a minimum edge of $\mathtt{256}$ then cropped in the center to $\mathtt{224\times224}$.
All models are optimized by the SGD (w. Nesterov) optimizer with a batch size of 1024 and a momentum of 0.9.
The initial learning rate is set to $\mathtt{0.03 \times \mathtt{batchsize}/256}$ and decay to $\mathtt{1e}$-$\mathtt{6}$ by a cosine schedule~\citep{loshchilov2016sgdr}.
For the experiment with $\mathtt{10\%}$ labeled data, we finetune for 30 epochs.
For the experiment with $\mathtt{1\%}$ labeled data, we finetune for 60 epochs.
\begin{table*}[h]
\centering
\scalebox{1.0}{
\input{tables/ablation_semi}
}
\caption{Semi-supervised evaluation on ImageNet1K, with MobileNetV2, ResNet18, ResNet34 as backbones. The \textcolor{ForestGreen}{green} numbers depict the improvement over the baseline model.}
\label{tab:abl_semi}
\end{table*}
Table~\ref{tab:abl_semi} shows that our pre-training paradigm significantly improves the semi-supervised performance in all settings.
For example, with $\mathtt{1\%}$ labeled data, we improve the DINO baseline~\citep{dino2021} by $\mathtt{2.8\%}$/$\mathtt{5.3\%}$/$\mathtt{2.7\%}$ on MobileNetV2/ResNet18/ResNet34.
Note that the performance gain in semi-supervised learning is larger than that in linear probing, demonstrating further advantages of our model under low-data/label regime.
In Table~\ref{tab:sota_semi}, we compare to the state-of-the-art approaches on semi-supervised ImageNet1K recognition, using ResNet18 as the backbone.
Recall that the baseline models are all optimized by knowledge distillation.
Our models are pre-trained \textit{from scratch} without using any teacher.
With the same number of pre-trained epochs (i.e. 200 epochs), our model performs on par with (i.e. \textcolor{darkred}{-0.5}) the best baseline for $\mathtt{1\%}$ labeled data, favorably (i.e. \textcolor{ForestGreen}{+1.8}) for $\mathtt{10\%}$ labeled data.
With more pre-trained epochs (i.e. 400 epochs), our model outperforms the best state-of-the-art method by \textcolor{ForestGreen}{+1.3}/\textcolor{ForestGreen}{+2.5} for $\mathtt{1\%}$/$\mathtt{10\%}$ labeled data.
Note that, compared to the large-scale pre-training of the teacher models used in the baselines, the overhead of the extra epochs for our model is marginal.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{1.0}{
\footnotesize
\input{tables/sota_semi}
}
\caption{Comparison to the state-of-the-art methods on semi-supervised ImageNet1K recognition, using ResNet18 as the backbone. The best number is in
\textbf{bold}. The best number from the \textit{baseline} models is \underline{underlined}. The \textcolor{ForestGreen}{green}/\textcolor{darkred}{red} text indicates the performance \textcolor{ForestGreen}{gain} or \textcolor{darkred}{gap} compared to the best state-of-the-art model.}
\label{tab:sota_semi}
\end{table*}
\section{Extra experiments on COCO}
We compare our model to the state-of-the-art self-supervised low-compute methods on COCO Instance Segmentation(\cite{coco2014}).
While similar evaluations have been reported in previous literature~\citep{seed2020, disco2021, boi_ssl_iclr22}, the detail
configuration is not made public.
For fair comparison, we use the pre-trained weights released by the baseline approaches \citep{simreg2021, seed2020, disco2021} and finetune all the models in the Mask R-CNN FPN framework(\cite{maskrcnn}), using the default configuration defined in Detectron2~\citep{detectron2}.
Our models used in this experiment are pre-trained for 400 epochs.
All models are evaluated under both the $1\times$ and $2\times$ schedules.
For the MobileNetV2 backbone that is not supported in Detectron2(\cite{detectron2}), we re-implement the Torchvision Instance Segmentation framework\footnote{\scriptsize{\url{https://pytorch.org/vision/stable/models.html\#object-detection-instance-segmentation-and-person-keypoint-detection}}} in Detectron2(\cite{detectron2}).
Code for the pre-training and evaluation will be made public.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}{
\footnotesize
\input{tables/sota_coco_mnv2}
}
\caption{Comparison to the state-of-the-art method, SimReg~\citep{simreg2021}, on COCO Instance Segmentation, using MobileNet-V2 as the backbone. The best number is in
\textbf{bold}. The \textcolor{ForestGreen}{green} numbers depict the improvement over the SimReg model.}
\label{tab:sota_coco_mnv2}
\end{table*}
Table~\ref{tab:sota_coco_mnv2} shows the comparison to the SimReg model~\citep{simreg2021} on COCO Instance Segmentation, using MobileNetV2 as the backbone.
We use the best model released by the SimReg authors, which is trained with MoCo-v2 R50~\citep{mocov2} as the teacher and achieves a top-1 accuracy of $69.1$ under linear evaluation (see Sec.\ref{sec:sota_im1k} in the main paper). Our models consistently outperform SimReg over all settings.
In Table~\ref{tab:sota_coco_r18}, we further compare our model to the state-of-the-art approaches using ResNet18 as the backbone.
Note that the SimReg baseline used in this experiment is pre-trained with BYOL R50~\citep{byol2020} as the teacher. It is shown to be the best model for ResNet18.
Our model demonstrates better performance over the best state-of-the-art method in all settings, especially for the mask prediction task. However, the improvements are smaller (i.e. $0.0\% \sim 1.0\%$) than the linear/semi-supervised tasks in general.
We conjecture that, with more in-domain data/labels as in COCO, the advantage of good pre-trained models becomes marginal.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}{
\footnotesize
\input{tables/sota_coco_r18}
}
\caption{Comparison to the state-of-the-art methods on COCO Instance Segmentation, using ResNet18 as the backbone. The best number is in
\textbf{bold}. The best number from the \textit{baseline} models is \underline{underlined}. The \textcolor{ForestGreen}{green} text indicates the performance \textcolor{ForestGreen}{gain} compared to the best state-of-the-art model.}
\label{tab:sota_coco_r18}
\end{table*}
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we investigate the feasibility of self-supervised low-compute pre-training, seeking to diagnose the performance bottleneck reported in previous literature.
We reveal the previously overlooked problem of the trade-off between the model complexity and the regularization strength for self-supervised learning and demonstrate the importance of the design choices for view sampling.
We show that by learning with proper image views, self-supervised models could achieve strong performance without knowledge distillation.
We hope that these encouraging results could motivate more interesting research on efficient representation learning for low-compute models/devices.
|
\section{Introduction}
\emph{Paging} (also known as \emph{caching}) is a classical online problem, and an important special case of several other online problems~\cite{BE98}, which can be motivated through resource management in operating systems. You are given a fast cache memory with capacity to simultaneously store at most a constant number, $k$, of pages. Requested pages, according to a sequence of \emph{page requests}, have to be loaded into the cache to be served by the operating system. More specifically, pages are requested one by one in an online fashion, and each request needs to be immediately served upon its arrival. Serving a page is done at zero cost if the requested page currently resides in the cache. If this is not the case, then a \emph{page fault} occurs and the page has to first be loaded into the cache (after potentially evicting some other page to make space). This incurs a fixed cost. The underlying algorithmic question is to decide which page to evict each time a page has to be loaded into the cache, with the goal to minimize the total incurred cost, i.e., the total number of page faults.
Paging has been extensively studied and is well-understood. There exists an optimal offline algorithm, $\ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace$ (\emph{longest forward distance}), that simply follows the so-called \emph{Belady's rule:} always evict the page that will be requested again the furthest in the future. Note that Belady's rule can only be applied to the offline variant of the problem, where all future page requests are known to the algorithm. With respect to online algorithms, no deterministic online algorithm can obtain a competitive ratio\footnote{Competitive ratio is the standard performance metric for online algorithms, see Section~\ref{sec:contrib} for a definition.} smaller than $k$~\cite{ST85}. Two simple deterministic algorithms that are $k$-competitive~\cite{ST85} exist: FIFO (evict the oldest page in the cache) and LRU (evict the least recently used/requested page from the cache). Fiat et al.~\cite{FKLMSY91} developed a randomized algorithm called \emph{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace} that is $(2H_k -1)$-competitive\footnote{$H_k=\sum_{i=1}^k1/i$ is the $k$'th harmonic number. Recall that $\ln k \leq H_k\leq 1+ \ln k$.}~\cite{ACN00}. Furthermore this is tight, up to a constant factor of $2$, since no randomized algorithm can obtain a competitive ratio better than $H_k$~\cite{FKLMSY91}. Later, optimal $H_k$-competitive randomized algorithms were discovered~\cite{ACN00,MS91}.
The above results are tight in the worst case, although inputs encountered in many practical situations may allow for a better performance. The novel research area of \emph{learning-augmented algorithms} attempts to take advantage of such opportunities and ameliorate shortcomings of worst-case analysis by assuming that the algorithm has black-box access to a set of (e.g., machine-learned) predictions regarding the input. Naturally, the quality of these predictions is not known a priori, hence the goal is to design algorithms with a good performance on the following parameters:
{\em robustness}, which is the worst-case performance guarantee that holds independently of the prediction accuracy;
{\em consistency}, which is the competitive ratio under perfect predictions;
and {\em smoothness}, which describes the rate at which the competitive ratio deteriorates with increasing prediction error.
Given the central role of paging within online algorithms, it is no surprise that learning-augmented paging has been extensively studied as well, and actually a significant number of papers in the area are either directly or indirectly linked to the paging problem. Examples include the seminal paper by Lykouris and Vassilvitskii~\cite{LV21}, who studied \emph{reoccurence predictions}, i.e., along with each page request the algorithm obtains a prediction on the timepoint of the next request of that page. Their results were later refined by Rohatgi~\cite{R20} and Wei~\cite{W20}. Jiang et al.~\cite{JiangP020} investigated the setting in which all requests until the next request of the currently requested page are predicted, whereas Bansal et al.~\cite{BansalCKPV22} considered predictions regarding the relative order in which the pages are requested. Antoniadis et al.~\cite{ACE0S20} looked into so-called \emph{state predictions} that predict the cache-contents of an optimal algorithm.
Although the above algorithms have been analyzed with respect to their consistency, robustness and smoothness, no consideration has been made regarding the total amount of predicted information. Given that the predicted information needs to be computed through a separate black-box algorithm and also communicated to the actual paging algorithm for each request, a learning-augmented algorithm that is based on a large amount of predicted information may be impractical in a real-world application.
In this paper we study learning-augmented paging while taking a new approach, requiring a minimal amount of predicted information. We assume that the predictions must be encoded in only one bit per request. This is indeed the least possible amount of predicted information (up to a constant) since any (deterministic or randomized) algorithm that receives perfect predictions that can be encoded in sublinearly many bits (in the length of the request sequence) cannot be better than $H_k$-competitive~\cite{M16}. Moreover, there are binary classifiers producing one-bit predictions for paging~\cite{JainL16,ShiHJL19} which have great performance in practice (see Section~\ref{sec:related-work} for more details) and it is desirable to use them in learning-augmented algorithms.
We study two natural such {\emph{setups},} with one-bit predictions, which we call \emph{discard predictions} and \emph{phase predictions}. The predicted bit in discard predictions denotes whether LFD would evict the current page before it gets requested again.
In phase predictions, the bit denotes whether the current page will be requested again in the following $k$-phase (the notion of a $k$-phase is based on marking algorithms, such as \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace and LRU, and it is formally defined in Section~\ref{sec:prelim}). Both of these new setups can be interpreted as condensing the relevant information from the previously existing setups into one bit per request.
We develop algorithms for each of the two setups that satisfy all three desirable properties of learning-augmented algorithms -- that is, they are consistent, robust and smooth -- despite being limited to a one-bit prediction per request. We also present lower bounds establishing that our algorithms are essentially best possible.
\subsection{Our contribution}
\label{sec:contrib}
An important preliminary observation is that there is an asymmetry regarding prediction errors:
Wrongly evicting a page will generally only lead to one page-fault once that page is requested again, however keeping a page which should be evicted in the cache can lead to multiple page-faults while the algorithm keeps evicting pages that will be requested again soon.
For this reason we distinguish between two types of prediction errors. For a sequence of $n$ page requests, let $p\in\{0,1\}^n$ be the vector of predictions and $p^*\in\{0,1\}^n$ be the ground truth, where, intuitively, a value of $0$ means (in both setups) that, according to the prediction, the page requested should stay in cache.
We define $\eta_0$ and $\eta_1$ as the numbers of incorrect
predictions $0$ and $1$, respectively, usually leaving out the parameters $p$ and $p^*$ when they are understood:
\[\eta_h(p,p^*) = | \{ i \in [n] \mid p_i = h, p^*_i = 1-h\}|\,, \quad \text{for } h\in\{0,1\}.\]
In order to capture how different types of errors affect the cost of an algorithm, we generalize the notion of competitive ratio to what we call \emph{$(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness}.
\begin{definition}
A learning-augmented online paging algorithm \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace is called $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-com\-pe\-ti\-tive if there exists a constant $b$ (possibly depending on $k$) such that for any instance $I$ with ground truth $p^*$ and any predictions $p$,
\[
\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace(I,p) \leq \alpha \cdot \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace(I) + \beta \cdot \eta_0(p,p^*) + \gamma \cdot \eta_1(p,p^*) + b\,,
\]
where $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace(I,p)$ and $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace(I)$ denote\footnote{Following a standard practice in online algorithms literature, in what follows, we abuse the notation and use \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace to denote both the algorithms and their respective costs incurred on the implicitly understood instance that we are currently reasoning about.} costs incurred on this instance by
the online algorithm and the offline optimal algorithm, respectively,
and $\eta_0, \eta_1$ denote the two types of error of predictions provided
to the online algorithm.
\end{definition}
{Note that the notion of $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness generalizes that of the (classical) competitive ratio: an algorithm is $c$-competitive if and only if it is $(c,0,0)$-competitive.} Furthermore, it is easy to see that $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness directly implies a consistency of $\alpha$; it also quantifies the smoothness of the algorithm. We can achieve robustness as follows: any deterministic $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitive algorithm for paging can be combined with LRU or FIFO through the result of Fiat et al.~\cite{FKLMSY91} to give a deterministic algorithm with a consistency of $(1+\epsilon)\alpha$ and a robustness\footnote{Actually, Fiat et al.~\cite{FKLMSY91} show the more general result that one can combine $m$ algorithms such that for any input instance $I$ this combination incurs a cost that is within a factor $c_i$ from the cost of each corresponding algorithm $i$ on $I$. The constants $c_i$ can be chosen arbitrarily as long as they satisfy $\sum_{i=1}^m 1/c_i \le 1$.} of $\frac{1+\epsilon}{\epsilon} k$, for any $\epsilon > 0$. Similarly, any randomized $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitive algorithm for paging can be combined (see~\cite{ACE0S20} and~\cite{BB00}) with an $H_k$-competitive algorithm~\cite{ACN00,MS91} to give a $((1+\epsilon )\alpha)$-consistent and $((1+\epsilon )H_k)$-robust algorithm.
Both of these combination approaches work independently of the considered prediction setup. We therefore focus the rest of the paper on giving upper and lower bounds for the $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness.
As explained at the beginning of this section, the two types of prediction errors have significantly different impact: keeping a page in cache while it was safe to evict is potentially much more costly than evicting a page that should have been kept. Hence, $\beta$ will intuitively be much larger than $\gamma$ in our results. Our lower bounds also show that $\alpha+\beta$ {cannot be} smaller than the best classical competitive ratio.
We remark that previous papers on learning-augmented paging (e.g., \cite{LV21,R20,W20})
analyze smoothness by expressing the (classical) competitive ratio as a function of the normalized prediction error $\frac{\eta}{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace}$, and that our results could also be stated in that manner because every $(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)$-competitive algorithm is also $(\alpha + \beta \cdot \frac{\eta_0}{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace} + \gamma \cdot \frac{\eta_1}{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace})$-competitive in the classical sense.
\paragraph{Discard-predictions setup upper bounds.} In Section~\ref{sec:ub-discard} we develop a deterministic and a randomized algorithm for the discard-predictions setup:
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ThmDiscardDeterministicUb}
\label{thm:discard-deterministic-ub}
There is a deterministic~$(1,k-1,1)$-competitive algorithm for the discard-predictions setup.
\end{restatable}
The algorithm realizing Theorem~\ref{thm:discard-deterministic-ub} is very simple and natural: On each page-fault, evict a page that is predicted as safe to evict, if such a page exists. If it does not exist, then just flush the cache, i.e., evict all pages that it contains. The analysis is based on deriving appropriate bounds on the page-faults for both \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace and \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace within any two consecutive flushes, as well as the respective prediction error.
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ThmDiscardRandomizedUb}
\label{thm:discard-randomized-ub}
There is a randomized $(1,2H_k, 1)$-competitive algorithm for the discard-predictions setup.
\end{restatable}
Compared to the deterministic algorithm above,
the algorithm from Theorem~\ref{thm:discard-randomized-ub}
uses an approach resembling the classical \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace algorithm
when evicting pages predicted 0.
However, we note that it does not fall into the class of so-called \emph{marking algorithms} (see Section~\ref{sec:prelim}),
as pages predicted 1 are evicted sooner. This is essential
for achieving $\alpha=1$ but requires a different definition
of phases and a novel way of charging evictions of pages predicted 0.
\paragraph{Phase-predictions setup upper bounds.}
For phase-predictions, in Section~\ref{sec:ub-phase} we design an algorithm called \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace
which can be seen as a modification of the classical \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace algorithm
giving priority to pages predicted 1 when choosing a page to evict.
We prove two bounds for this algorithm.
The first one is sharper for small $\eta_1$
and, in fact, it holds even with deterministic evictions of
pages predicted 1.
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ThmMarkRandA}
\label{thm:markrand1}
\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace is a randomized~$(2,H_k,1)$-competitive algorithm for the phase-predictions setup.
\end{restatable}
The second bound exploits the random eviction of pages predicted 1
and gives a much stronger result if $\eta_1$ is relatively large.
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ThmMarkRandB}
\label{thm:markrand2}
\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace is a randomized $\big(2, H_k, \gamma(\eta_1/\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace)\big)$-competitive algorithm for the phase-predictions setup, where
\[ \gamma(x) = 2x^{-1} \left( \ln (2x+1) + 1\right). \]
\end{restatable}
In other words, the (expected) cost of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace is at most
\[2\left(\ln\left(\frac{2\eta_1}{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace}+1\right) + 2\right) \cdot \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace + H_k \cdot \eta_0.\]
Note that this expression should not be considered when $\eta_1\leq\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$ as $\gamma(1)>1$ so the guarantee of the previous theorem would then be stronger. For $\eta_1>\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$, multiple possibilities exist to phrase the above expression into our $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness notion, so we chose the one matching the previously established value of $\alpha$.
To illustrate the gain over the previous bound, with $\eta_1/\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace = \Omega(k)$, we obtain $\gamma(\eta_1/\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace) = O\left(\frac{\log k}{k}\right)$, thus matching the lower bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:randlowerbound}.
\paragraph{Lower bounds.}
In Section~\ref{sec:lower-bounds}, we give lower bounds that show that the upper bounds above are essentially tight. More specifically, we prove the following for the two considered setups.
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ThmDeterministicLowerBound}
\label{thm:deterministiclowerbound}
In both the discard-predictions and phase-predictions setups, there is no deterministic $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitive algorithm such that
either $\alpha+\beta < k$ or $\alpha+(k-1)\cdot\gamma < k$.
\end{restatable}
This directly implies that if $\alpha$ is a constant independent of $k$, then $\beta=\Omega(k)$ and $\gamma=\Omega(1)$. A special case is that any $1$-consistent deterministic algorithm must have $\beta$ at least $k-1$ and $\gamma$ at least 1, matching the upper bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:discard-deterministic-ub}, or, more precisely:
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:detlower}
In both setups, no deterministic paging algorithm is $(1,k-1-\epsilon,\gamma)$- or $(1,\beta, 1-\epsilon)$-competitive, for any constant $\epsilon>0$ and any value of $\beta$ and $\gamma$.
\end{corollary}
An analogous lower bound can be obtained for randomized algorithms as well.
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ThmRandLowerBound}
\label{thm:randlowerbound}
In both the discard-predictions and phase-predictions setups, there is no $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitive randomized algorithm such that either $\alpha+\beta < H_{k}$ or $\alpha+(k-1)\cdot\gamma < H_k$, where $H_i= \ln i + O(1)$ is the $i$-th harmonic number.
\end{restatable}
This result implies that, in the upper bounds of Theorems~\ref{thm:markrand1} and \ref{thm:markrand2} for \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace, the value of $\beta$ is tight up to an additive term of $2$ and the asymptotic value of $\gamma$, when $\eta_1/\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$ is large, cannot be improved by more than a constant factor in Theorem~\ref{thm:markrand2}.
\begin{corollary}
In both setups, no randomized paging algorithm is $(2,H_k-2-\epsilon,\gamma)$- or $(2,\beta, \frac{H_k-2}{k-1}-\epsilon)$-competitive, for any constant $\epsilon>0$ and any value of $\beta$ and $\gamma$.
\end{corollary}
The previous theorem implies a subconstant lower bound ($\approx \frac1k\log k$) on $\gamma$ for a value of $\alpha$ up to $O(\log k)$. We complement it by showing that $\gamma$ is lower bounded by a constant if we want to achieve $\alpha=1$.
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ThmRandLowerBoundB}
\label{thm:randlowerbound2}
There is no $(1,\beta,\gamma)$-competitive randomized algorithm such that
$\gamma < 1/7$ for the discard-predictions setup or $\gamma<1/2$ for the phase-predictions setup.
\end{restatable}
The last two theorems imply that, in the upper bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:discard-randomized-ub}, the values of $\beta$ and $\gamma$ cannot be improved by more than a constant factor.
\begin{corollary}
In the discard-predictions setup, no randomized paging algorithm is $(1,H_k-1-\epsilon,\gamma)$- or $(1,\beta, \frac 17-\epsilon)$-competitive, for any constant $\epsilon>0$ and any value of $\beta$ and $\gamma$.
\end{corollary}
Similarly to the lower bounds known for classical paging, all three of our lower bound results are based on instances coming from a universe of $k+1$ many pages. However, in order to achieve the desired bounds we need to carefully define the prediction sequence. Somewhat surprisingly, in each of our lower bound results, we are able to use the same prediction sequence for both prediction setups.
\subsection{Further related work}
\label{sec:related-work}
\paragraph{Paging with few predictions.}
In a very recent paper~\cite{Im0PP22}, Im et al.\ consider a different approach to limiting the amount of predicted information within learning-augmented paging. The algorithm has access to an ML-oracle which can be at any time queried about the reoccurrence prediction for any page in the cache. They analyze the trade-offs between the number of queries, the prediction error and algorithm performance. Furthermore, the competitive ratio of the obtained algorithms is $O(\log_{b+1} k)$, where $b$ is the number of queries per page fault. Thus, the consistency of the algorithm would generally be quite far from those of the algorithms presented in this paper.
\paragraph{Other learning-augmented online algorithms.}
In addition to the already mentioned results on learning-augmented paging, several exciting learning-augmented algorithms have been developed for various online problems, including among others weighted paging~\cite{BansalCKPV22}, k-server~\cite{LindermayrMS22}, metrical task systems~\cite{ACE0S20}, ski-rental~\cite{PurohitSK18,ACEPS21}, non-clairvoyant scheduling~\cite{PurohitSK18,LindermayrM22}, online-knapsack~\cite{ImKQP21,Zeynali0HW21,BoyarFL22}, secretary and matching problems~\cite{DuttingLLV21,AntoniadisGKK20}, graph exploration~\cite{EberleLMNS22}, as well as energy-efficient scheduling~\cite{BamasMRS20,AntoniadisGS22,ACEPS21}. Machine- learned predictions have also been considered for designing offline algorithms with an improved running time, see for instance the results of
Dinitz et al.~\cite{DinitzILMV21} on matchings,
Chen et al.~\cite{chen22v} on graph algorithms,
Ergun et al.~\cite{ErgunFSWZ22} on $k$-means clustering,
Sakaue and Oki~\cite{SO22} on discrete optimization, and
Polak and Zub~\cite{PZ22} on maximum flows. An extensive list of results in the area can be found on~\cite{website}. We would also like to point the reader to the surveys~\cite{MV20,MV22} by Mitzenmacher and Vassilvitskii.
We note that, although our work is closer in spirit to the aforementioned results on learning-augmented paging, our notion of $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness is an extension of the $(\rho,\mu)$-competitiveness from~\cite{ACEPS21}. While $(\rho,\mu)$-competitiveness captures the tradeoff between the dependence on the optimal cost and the prediction error, $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness captures the three-way tradeoff between the dependence on the optimal cost and the two kinds of prediction errors.
\paragraph{Advice complexity.}
An inspiration for considering paging with succinct predictions is that ideas from the research area of \emph{advice complexity} could possibly be applied to learning-augmented algorithms; in particular, the advice from~\cite{DKP09} for the paging problem. The goal, when studying online algorithms with advice, is to determine for online problems how much information about the future is necessary and sufficient to perform optimally or to achieve a certain competitive ratio. This is formalized in different computational models, all of which assume that the online algorithm is given some number of bits of advice~\cite{DKP09,HKK10,BKKKM17,EFKR11}. (See the survey on online algorithms with advice~\cite{BFKLM17}.) The difference from learning-augmented algorithms is that the advice is always correct, so robustness is not a consideration, and the emphasis is on the number of bits the algorithms use, rather than if one could realistically expect that the advice could be obtained.
The advice-complexity result that is probably the closest to our work is by Dobrev et al.~\cite{DKP09} who studied advice that is equivalent to the ground truth for our discard predictions. Their result implies for our setting that when the predictions are guaranteed to be perfect (as one assumes in advice complexity),
then one can obtain a simple $1$-competitive algorithm, with predictions of just one bit per request. However, it does not immediately imply a positive result in our setting when the predictions are of unknown quality.
\paragraph{Discard predictions in practice.}
Previous research suggests the practicality of the succinct predictions presented in this paper.
Jain and Lin~\cite{JainL16} proposed Hawkeye, an SVM-based binary classifier whose goal is to predict whether a requested page is likely to be kept in cache by the optimal Belady's algorithm. The classifier labels each page as either \emph{cache-friendly} or \emph{cache-averse}, which directly correspond to zero and one, respectively, in our discard-prediction setup. Hawkeye's predictions were accurate enough for wining the 2nd Cache Replacement Championship. Later, Hawkeye was outperformed by Shi et al.'s Glider~\cite{ShiHJL19}, a deep learning LSTM-based predictor that solves the same binary classification problem.
On the other hand, machine-learning models capable of producing reoccurrence predictions and state predictions only recently started being developed, and, while they also have a surprisingly high accuracy, they are prohibitively large and slow to evaluate for performance-critical applications~\cite{LiuHSRA20}.
\subsection{Open problems}
\paragraph{Better dependence on $\eta_1$ in discard-predictions setup.}
For the case of large $\eta_1$, we provide a stronger guarantee for \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace in
Theorem~\ref{thm:markrand2}.
However, we were not able to obtain a comparable result for the discard-predictions setup, and it would be interesting to further close the gap for the case of large $\eta_1$ as well.
Somewhat surprisingly, an important challenge towards that direction seems to be that of recognizing the presence of an incorrect $0$-prediction early enough.
This can be easily done in the phase-predictions setup; and we do actually properly account for all incorrect
$0$-predictions (see Observation~\ref{obs:phase-error}).
On the other hand, our criterion in the discard-predictions setup
(see Observation~\ref{obs:discard-error}) may overlook some of them.
This in turn may lead an algorithm to keep the cache full with pages associated with $0$-predictions, forcing it to evict all pages with $1$-predictions, implying $\gamma\geq 1$.
\paragraph{Other online problems with succinct predictions.} For many online problems, the possibility of obtaining good succinct predictions might be more realistic than obtaining more precise, lengthy predictions. It would be interesting to see if such predictions still allow for effective learning-augmented algorithms. Prior results on advice complexity give meaningful lower bounds with respect to the size of such predictions and may provide guidance on what to predict.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:prelim}
\paragraph{Classical paging.}
In paging, we have a (potentially large) universe~$U$ of pages and a~cache of size~$k$.
At each time step~$i=1, \dotsc, n$, we receive a request~$r_i$ {to a page in} $U$ which needs to be
satisfied by {loading the page associated to}~$r_i$ to the cache {(if it is not in the cache already)}. {This may require} evicting some other page to make
space for the requested page. The {goal of an algorithm is to serve the whole request sequence at minimal \emph{cost}}. The cost of an algorithm is the number of page loads (and therefore also the number of page faults)
performed to serve the request sequence.
Note that this number is within an additive term~$k$ from the number of page evictions.
In our analyses, we can choose to work with whichever of these two quantities is easier to estimate, because of the additive constant in the definition of competitiveness.
When making space for {the page associated to}~$r_i$, \emph{online} algorithms have to decide which page to evict
without knowledge of~$r_{i+1}, \dotsc, r_n$, while \emph{offline} algorithms have this information.
\paragraph{Marking algorithms.}
For the purpose of designing marking algorithms,
we partition the request sequence into~\emph{$k$-phases}.
A~$k$-phase is a maximal subsequence of at most~$k$ distinct pages.
The first~$k$-phase starts at the first request, and any subsequent $k$-phase $i$ starts at the first request following the last request of~$k$-phase~$i-1$.
The following automatic procedure helps designing algorithms for caching:
at the beginning of each~$k$-phase, we unmark all pages. Whenever a page is requested for the
first time in a~$k$-phase, we mark it. We say that an algorithm belongs to the class
of \emph{marking algorithms}, if it never evicts a marked page.
All marking algorithms are (at most) $k$-competitive \cite{T98} and they have the same cache content
at the end of each~$k$-phase: the~$k$ marked pages which were requested during that~$k$-phase.
Algorithm \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace~\cite{FKLMSY91} evicts an unmarked page chosen uniformly at random.
In the~$i$th~$k$-phase, with~$c_i$ pages requested that were not requested in~$k$-phase~$i-1$
(we call such pages {\em new}, the others are called {\em old}),
it has in expectation $\sum_{j=1}^{k-c_i}\frac{c_i}{k-(j-1)}\leq c_i(H_k - H_{c_i} +1)$ page faults.
One can show that~$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace \geq \frac12\sum_{i=1}^m c_i$, where~$m$ is the total number of~$k$-phases in the request sequence,
and hence \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace is at most~$2H_k$-competitive. We refer to \cite{BE98} for more details.
\paragraph{Receiving predictions.}
Each request~$r_i$ comes with a \emph{prediction},~$p_i\in\SET{0,1}$.
If a request comes with a prediction of~$0$ (resp.~$1$), we call it a~$0$-prediction (resp.~$1$-prediction), and the requested page a~$0$-page (resp.~$1$-page) until the next time it is requested.
Throughout the paper, we use $r_i$ to refer both to the request and to the page associated with that request.
\paragraph{Discard-predictions setup.}
In this setup, we fix an optimal offline algorithm, say \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace.
When a requested page is not in cache, \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace evicts any page that will never be
requested again, if such a page exists, and otherwise evicts the unique
page of the~$k$~pages in cache that will be requested again furthest out
in the future.
Prediction $p_i$ for request $r_i$ is supposed to predict the ground truth $p_i^*$ defined as:
\[p_i^* = \begin{cases}
0, & \text{if \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace keeps~$r_i$ in cache until it is requested again,} \\
1, & \text{if \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace evicts~$r_i$ before it is requested again.}
\end{cases}\]
For a page~$r_i$ that \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace retains in cache until the end of the request sequence, $p_i^*=0$.
For simplicity, we define $p^*$ with respect to a fixed optimal algorithm. However, if the prediction vector $p$ happens to predict well the behavior of any other (good but not necessarily optimal) algorithm, then our upper bounds hold also with respect to the performance of that algorithm in place of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace.
\paragraph{Phase-predictions setup.}
In this setup, we partition the request sequence into $k$-phases, as described above in the paragraph on marking algorithms.
We define the ground truth $p_i^*$ for request~$r_i$ in some $k$-phase~$j$ as follows:
\[p_i^* = \begin{cases}
0, & \text{if $r_i$ is requested in $k$-phase~$j+1$,} \\
1, & \text{if $r_i$ is not requested in $k$-phase~$j+1$.}
\end{cases}\]
Note that, in both setups, at the point where a decision is made as to which page to evict, the algorithms only consider the most recent prediction for each page, the one from the most recent request to the page. In the discard-predictions setup, this is the only logical possibility. In the phase-predictions setup, there could theoretically be a page,~$p$, requested more than once in phase~$i$, where the prediction (as to whether or not it will be requested in phase~$i+1$) is inconsistent within phase~$i$. We assume that the last prediction is the most relevant, so only {this one} is used by our algorithms, and only this one contribute towards a possible error in~$\eta_0$ or $\eta_1$.
In fact, if convenient for implementation, we could avoid running
the predictor at repeated requests by producing predictions at once for each
page in the cache at the end of phase~$i$.
In addition, in the phase-predictions setup, predictions in the last phase do not count at all, and in particular, do not count in~$\eta_h$.
In a given phase, the pages that are in cache at the beginning of the phase are called {\em old} pages.
Pages requested within a phase that are not old are called {\em new} pages.
Thus, all requests in the first phase are to new pages.
\section{Algorithms with discard-predictions}
\label{sec:ub-discard}
{We first investigate the discard-predictions setup.}
The following simple observation is useful in the analyses of our algorithms.
\begin{observation}
\label{obs:discard-error}
Consider a moment
when there is a set~$S$ of $0$-pages
(whose most recent prediction is~$0$)
of size~$k+c-1$ and a page~$r\notin S$ is
requested. Then, at least~$c$ pages from~$S$ have incorrect prediction.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
Page~$r$ surely has to be in cache.
Each~$\rho \in S$ has prediction~$0$ by the definition of~$S$.
Since the cache has size~$k$, any algorithm needs to have evicted at least~$1+|S| - k= c$ pages from~$S$.
In particular this is true for \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace. Therefore at least~$c$ pages from~$S$ have incorrect predictions.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Deterministic algorithm}
Our first algorithm is deterministic, and, despite being very simple, it attains the best possible $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness for 1-consistent deterministic algorithms (see the lower bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:deterministiclowerbound}).
\ThmDiscardDeterministicUb*
\begin{proof}
Consider the deterministic algorithm, \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace, that on a fault evicts an arbitrary $1$-page, if there is such a page in cache, and flushes the cache otherwise.
We count evictions, and note that up to an additive constant (depending on~$k$), this is the same as the number of faults.
We divide the request sequence into \emph{stages}, starting a new stage when \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace flushes the cache (i.e., when it is full and contains only $0$-pages).
We assume an integer number of stages (an assumption that also only adds up to an additive constant; again, depending on~$k$) and consider one stage at a time.
First consider $0$-pages that are evicted. {By definition}, \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace evicts~$k$ such pages in the stage. Since~$k$ $0$-pages have arrived in the stage, and a new page must arrive for \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace to flush,
at least one of the $0$-pages has an incorrect prediction
(obvious here, but captured more generally by Observation~\ref{obs:discard-error})
and \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace must have evicted at least one of these $k+1$ pages.
Letting a superscript,~$s$, denote the values of just this stage, and a subscript denote $0$-pages and $1$-pages, respectively, since both~$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace^s_0$ and~$\eta^s_0$ are at least one,~$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace^s_0 \leq \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace^s_0 + (k-1)\eta^s_0$.
Considering $1$-pages, \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace clearly obtains the same result as \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace, except when there is a misprediction, which adds a cost of~$1$. Thus,~$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace^s_1 \leq \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace^s_1 + \eta^s_1$.
Summing over both predictions and all stages,~$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace \leq \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace + (k-1)\eta_0 + \eta_1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In Theorem~\ref{thm:discard-deterministic-ub}, the choices $\alpha=1$ and $\beta=k-1$ can be generalized, showing that the algorithm is $(\alpha,k-\alpha,1)$-competitive, for $1\leq \alpha \leq k$ (compare with Theorem~\ref{thm:deterministiclowerbound}).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Randomized algorithm}
Now, we present \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace, a randomized algorithm that evicts all~$1$-pages immediately. Therefore, whenever the cache is
full and eviction is needed, all the pages in the cache must be~$0$-pages and this situation
signals a presence of an incorrect $0$-prediction.
Since we cannot know which~$0$-page has incorrect prediction, we evict a random unmarked
one in order to make sure that such evictions can be charged to $\eta_0$ in the analysis.
\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace is described in Algorithm~\ref{alg:mark-0}.
\begin{algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State $S := \emptyset$
\State evict all~$1$-pages
\For {$i = 1$ \textbf{to}~$n$}
\If {$r_i$ is not in cache}
\If {cache is full and all pages from~$S$ in cache are marked}
\State $S:=$ current cache content
\State unmark all pages
\label{alg3:new-phase}
\EndIf
\If {$r_i \in S$ is unmarked and cache contains some unmarked page from~$S$}
\State evict an unmarked page from~$S$ chosen uniformly at random
\label{alg3:S-replace}\\
\algorithmiccomment{We perform this eviction even if the cache is not full}
\EndIf
\If {cache is full}
\State evict an unmarked page from~$S$ chosen uniformly at random
\label{alg3:new-error}
\EndIf
\State bring~$r_i$ to cache
\EndIf
\State mark~$r_i$
\If {$p_i = 1$}
\State evict~$r_i$
\label{alg3:evict-1-page}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace Eviction Strategy}
\label{alg:mark-0}
\end{algorithm}
Before proving the competitive ratio of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace, we state a few observations, starting by a simple bound on the evictions of $1$-pages.
\begin{observation}
\label{obs:alg3-1evict}
The number of $1$-pages that \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace evicts is at most $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace + \eta_1$.
\end{observation}
Therefore it is enough to count evictions of 0-pages.
We call a period between two executions of line~\ref{alg3:new-phase} a phase. Phases are similar to $k$-phases in marking algorithms, with the difference being that $1$-pages are directly evicted by the algorithm, even though such a page is still marked.
Phase 1 starts the first time that the cache is full
and a page-fault occurs (recall that this implies that there has been an incorrect prediction on a $0$-page), since~$S=\emptyset$ and the condition on all pages from~$S$ in cache
being marked is vacuously true.
We define phase 0 to be the time from the beginning of the request sequence
until the start of Phase 1.
The following observation bounds the number of evictions of~$0$-pages based on the number of times an eviction is caused by a full cache. An eviction caused by a full cache leads to an unmarked page from~$S$ being evicted. A classical probabilistic argument is then used to bound the number of times a randomly evicted unmarked page is requested again in the phase.
\begin{observation}
\label{obs:alg3-0evict}
Consider a phase with~$c$ executions of line~\ref{alg3:new-error}.
The expected number of evictions of~$0$-pages is at most
$c H_k$.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
Note that the number of evictions of $0$-pages is equal to the number of evictions
in lines~\ref{alg3:new-error} and~\ref{alg3:S-replace}.
There are~$c$ evictions made in line~\ref{alg3:new-error} and we just need to count
evictions made in line~\ref{alg3:S-replace}.
In each execution of line~\ref{alg3:new-error}, we evict a page from~$S$.
In each execution of line~\ref{alg3:S-replace}, one previously evicted page from~$S$ replaces another page from $S$ in the cache (which is evicted). The former increases the number of evicted unmarked pages from~$S$ by one, while the latter maintains the number of evicted unmarked pages from~$S$.
Consider the first time,~$t$,
when there are no unmarked pages from~$S$ contained in the cache.
Until~$t$, whenever an unmarked page from~$S$ is loaded to the cache, it is marked and another
unmarked page from~$S$ is evicted. Therefore, there are precisely~$c$ unmarked pages from~$S$
which are not present in cache at time~$t$: the pages evicted at line~\ref{alg3:new-error} or the ones these have replaced at line~\ref{alg3:S-replace}.
Afterwards, no more evictions of~$0$-pages are made
and such pages are only loaded to the cache until it becomes full and a new phase starts.
To count evictions made in line~\ref{alg3:S-replace}, we need to estimate the probability
of a requested unmarked page from~$S$ being missing from the cache.
We use an approach similar to the classical analysis of the algorithm \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace.
Since it makes the situation only more costly for the algorithm, we can assume that all the evictions in line~\ref{alg3:new-error} are performed in the beginning of the phase and the evictions in line~\ref{alg3:S-replace}
are all performed afterwards.
When the~$j$th page from~$S$ is being marked, it is present in the cache with probability
$\frac{k-c-(j-1)}{k-(j-1)}$ (the numerator is the number of unmarked pages from~$S$ present in the cache at that moment and the denominator is the total number of unmarked pages in~$S$)
and the probability of a page fault is~$\frac{c}{k-(j-1)}$.
Therefore, the expected number of evictions in line~\ref{alg3:S-replace} until time~$t$
is
\[
\sum_{j=1}^{k-c} \frac{c}{k-(j-1)} = c(H_k - H_c).
\]
The total expected number of evictions of~$0$-pages during this phase is then
\[ c + c(H_k - H_c) \leq cH_k.\qedhere\]
\end{proof}
We observe that as a consequence of how the phases are defined, every page residing in the cache at the timepoint between two consecutive phases must have received its prediction during the phase that just ended. More formally,
\begin{observation}
\label{obs:alg3-eta0-overlap}
Let~$S(i)$ be the content of the cache when phase~$i-1$
ends and phase~$i$ starts.
Then all the pages in~$S(i)$ received their predictions during phase~$i-1$.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
This is a consequence of marking:
Every page requested during phase~$i-1$ received a new prediction.
The only pages from~$S(i-1)$ which did not, are the unmarked ones. Yet,
such pages are not present in the cache at the end of phase~$i-1$.
And all pages from~$S(i)\setminus S(i-1)$ must have been
requested and loaded during phase~$i-1$.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to analyze the $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness of the algorithm. It combines the previous results and uses the fact that evictions caused by a full cache can be charged to an erroneously predicted $0$-page, as trusting the predictions would require keeping more than~$k$ pages in cache. An additional factor is required in the dependency on~$\eta_0$ as a wrong prediction may impact both the current phase and the following one.
\ThmDiscardRandomizedUb*
\begin{proof}
Let us show that \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace is~$(1,2H_k, 1)$-competitive.
Consider a request sequence with optimum cost, \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace, during which \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace
performs~$m$ phases and
receives~$\eta_0$ incorrect predictions~$0$ and~$\eta_1$ incorrect predictions~$1$.
Let~$c_i$ denote the number of executions of line~\ref{alg3:new-error}
during phase~$i$.
Combining Observations~\ref{obs:alg3-1evict} and~\ref{obs:alg3-0evict},
the expected cost of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark0}}}\xspace is at most
\[ OPT + \eta_1 + \sum_{i=1}^m c_i H_k.\]
It is enough to show that~$\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \leq 2\eta_0$ holds.
Consider the moment during phase~$i$ when line~\ref{alg3:new-error} is executed for the
$c_i$th time. At this moment, there are~$k$~$0$-pages in cache:
some of them belong to~$S(i)$, others were loaded during this phase.
Moreover, there are~$c_i-1$ unmarked pages from~$S(i)$ already evicted,
these are also~$0$-pages.
By Observation~\ref{obs:discard-error},
at least~$c_i$ of these pages must have an incorrect prediction of~$0$.
This prediction was received either during phase~$i-1$ (if it is an unmarked page from~$S(i)$),
or during phase~$i$ (all other cases).
Therefore, denoting~$\eta_0(i)$ the number of incorrect predictions 0 received during phase~$i$,
we have
\[ \sum_i c_i \leq \sum_{i=1}^m \big(\eta_0(i-1) + \eta_0(i)\big) \leq 2\eta_0, \]
which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Algorithm with phase-predictions}
\label{sec:ub-phase}
In this section, we consider the phase-predictions setup and give a randomized algorithm, \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace. The idea of this algorithm is to follow the classical \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace algorithm except that, instead of evicting a page uniformly at random among the set of unmarked pages, we select a 1-page if the cache contains one. We provide two analyses on the performance of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace, which differ on the bound of the $\gamma$ parameter, the second bound providing an improvement for large values of $\eta_1$.
\begin{algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State mark all pages in cache
\For {$i = 1$ \textbf{to}~$n$}
\If {$r_i$ is not in cache}
\If {all pages in cache are marked} \algorithmiccomment{Start of a new phase}
\State unmark all pages
\label{algline:phase-start}
\EndIf
\If {there is an unmarked~$1$-page}
\State evict an unmarked~$1$-page chosen uniformly at random \label{algline:evict1}
\Else
\State evict an unmarked~$0$-page chosen uniformly at random
\label{algline:evict0}
\EndIf
\State bring~$r_i$ into cache
\EndIf
\State mark~$r_i$
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace Eviction Strategy}
\label{alg:markandpredict}
\end{algorithm}
The following observation is used in both proofs to estimate the value of $\eta_0$.
\begin{observation}
\label{obs:phase-error}
Consider a phase with $c$ new pages.
If $\ell\leq c$ of the $1$-pages present at the beginning of the phase were not requested during the phase,
then precisely
$z = c-\ell$ pages had incorrect $0$-predictions at the beginning
of the phase.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
Let $S$ denote the set of $0$-pages and $L$ the set of $1$-pages that were present at the beginning of the phase.
Denote by $z$ the number of pages in $S$ which were not requested during
this phase, so their predictions at the beginning of the phase were
incorrect.
During the phase $k = c + (|L|-\ell) + (|S|-z)$ distinct pages were requested.
Since $|S|+|L|=k$, we get $z = c-\ell$.
\end{proof}
We first provide an analysis which also holds if an arbitrary 1-page is evicted at Line~\ref{algline:evict1}, in a deterministic manner, say using LRU.
\ThmMarkRandA*
\begin{proof}
We use standard arguments for the competitive analysis of the randomized paging algorithm, MARK~\cite{FKLMSY91}, using terminology from the textbook by Borodin and El-Yaniv~\cite{BE98}. We first consider the case where all predictions are correct. Pages that arrive are always marked, so they are never evicted in the current~$k$-phase. Thus, the number of~$1$-pages that arrive in the current phase will be the number of~$1$-pages in cache at the beginning of the next phase. If all predictions in a phase are correct, the number of new pages in the next~$k$-phase equals the number of~$1$-pages at the beginning of that phase, and the new pages will replace those~$1$-pages. There will be no faults on the~$0$-pages. Let~$c_i$ be the number of new pages in the~$i$th~$k$-phase and~$m$ be the total number of phases. Since the algorithm faults only on new pages, it faults~$\sum_{i=1}^m c_i$ times. We now turn to \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace. During the~$i-1$st and~$i$th~$k$-phases, at least~$k+c_i$ distinct pages have been requested. Since \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace cannot have had more than~$k$ of them in cache at the beginning of phase~$i-1$, it must have at least~$c_i$ faults in these two phases. Considering the even phases and the odd phases separately and taking the maximum, \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace must fault at least~$\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^m c_i$ times. This proves~$2$-consistency.
As long as $1$-pages are evicted, the faults are charged to \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace (if it is a correct prediction) or to~$\eta_1$ (if the prediction is incorrect). Since \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace is at least~$1/2$ times the total number of new pages, this gives a contribution of at most~$2 \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace + \eta_1$.
If the algorithm runs out of pages with~$1$-predictions to evict, there are only~$0$-pages from the previous phase remaining. For each new page processed after this point, there is an incorrect~$0$-prediction. Let~$z_i$ be the number of new pages causing a~$0$-page to be evicted in Phase~$i$. These new pages, causing evictions of pages with~$0$-predictions, arrive after the new pages that evicted pages with~$1$-predictions.
The number of~$1$-pages present in the cache at the start of phase~$i$ is~$c_i-z_i$.
We can assume that all new pages arrive before any of the old pages, as this only increase the algorithm's cost.
When the first new page evicting a~$0$-page arrives, there are~$k-(c_i-z_i)$ pages from the previous phase still in cache and these~$k-(c_i-z_i)$ pages are all~$0$-pages.
When the first old page arrives, there are~$k-c_i$ pages from the previous phase in cache, so the arriving page has a probability of~$\frac{k-c_i}{k-(c_i-z_i)}$ of still being in the cache.
Consider the probability that the~$j$th old page (in the order they arrive in this phase) is in cache the first time it is requested in the~$i$th phase. This probability is~$\frac{k-c_i-(j-1))}{k-(c_i-z_i)-(j-1)}$, so the probability that there is a fault on it is~$\frac{z_i}{k-(c_i-z_i)-(j-1)}$. Hence the expected number of faults in Phase~$i$ due to incorrect~$0$-predictions is at most
\[z_i + \sum_{j=1}^{k-c_i} \frac{z_i}{k-(c_i-z_i)-(j-1)} = z_i(1+H_{k-c_i+z_i}-H_{z_i})\leq z_i H_{k-c_i+z_i}.\]
By Observation~\ref{obs:phase-error}, the number of pages with incorrect $0$ prediction at the beginning
of the phase $i$ is $z_i$. So, this sum over all phases is at most~$H_k\eta_0$.
The total number of faults is at most~$2 \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace + H_k\eta_0 +\eta_1$.
\end{proof}
We provide another analysis of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace which exploits the uniformly-random selection of an unmarked $1$-page to evict in line~\ref{algline:evict1}, and improves on the bound from Theorem~\ref{thm:markrand1} for larger values of~$\eta_1$.
\begin{lemma}
Consider a phase with~$c$ new pages, such that \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace
starts with~$\eta_0$ and~$\eta_1$ pages with incorrect predictions~$0$ and~$1$ in its cache.
The expected cost incurred by \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace is at most
\[ c \big(H_{\eta_1 + c} - H_c + 1\big) + H_k\,\eta_0. \]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Each phase starts at line~\ref{algline:phase-start} by unmarking all pages.
We denote~$L$ the set of 1-pages contained in the cache at this moment.
Note that any unmarked 1-page evicted at line~\ref{algline:evict1}
always belongs to~$L$.
We analyze two parts of the phase separately: (a) the first part when
there are still unmarked 1-pages in the cache and evictions are done
according to line~\ref{algline:evict1} and (b) when all unmarked 1-pages are evicted
and evictions are done by line~\ref{algline:evict0}.
\paragraph{\normalsize \sl Part (a)}
Marked pages are always in cache, therefore we only need to count page faults
when an unmarked page~$r_i$ is requested.
Let~$c_a\leq c$ denote the number of new pages to arrive during the part (a).
Without loss of generality, we can assume that all of them arrive in the beginning.
There are three possibilities:
\begin{itemize}
\item $r_i$ is new:~$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace$ incurs a cost of $1$.
\item $r_i$ is {not new and was} a~$0$-page {({\it i.e.}, the previous prediction on the page $r_i$ is $0$)}: \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace incurs a cost of 0 (all such pages are in cache now)
\item $r_i$ is {not new and was} a~$1$-page:~\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace incurs a cost of~$\zeta_i$ in expectation,
\end{itemize}
where~$\zeta_i = c_a/(|L| - (j-1))$ if this was the~$j$-th page from~$L$ being marked.
This follows by an argument similar to the classical analysis of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark}}}\xspace, as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:markrand1}:
The probability that~$r_i$ is in cache is~$\frac{|L|-c_a-(j-1)}{|L|-(j-1)}$,
implying that the probability that~$r_i$ is missing from the cache is
$c_a/(|L|-(j-1))$.
Therefore, our expected cost during part (a) is at most
\[ c_a + \sum_{j=1}^{|L|-c_a} \frac{c_a}{|L|-(j-1)}
= c_a (1 + H_{|L|} - H_{c_a}).
\]
At the end of the part (a), we have precisely~$c_a$ pages in $L$ that are no longer in the cache,
because part (b) starts only if there are more new pages in the phase than pages in $L$ that are never marked.
All the pages from~$L$ that are marked at the end of the phase had incorrect predictions, so we have
$\eta_1 \geq |L|-c_a$ implying~$|L| \leq \eta_1 + c_a$. Therefore,
our expected cost is at most
\[ c_a ( H_{\eta_1 + c_a} - H_{c_a} + 1)
\leq c ( H_{\eta_1 + c} - H_c + 1).
\]
\paragraph{\normalsize\sl Part (b)}
This part never happens if~$c$ is the number of pages in~$L$ with correct prediction 1,
i.e., those left unmarked until the end of the phase.
If~$c$ is higher,
then there must have been some pages with incorrect prediction 0.
Without loss of generality, we can assume that all~$c-c_a$ new pages are requested
in the beginning of part (b).
Again, we only need to count page faults due to requests~$r_i$ where~$r_i$ is unmarked.
We have the following cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item~$r_i$ is new:~\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace incurs a cost of 1,
\item~$r_i\in L$:~\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace incurs a cost of 1 because all unmarked pages from~$L$
are evicted by the end of part (a),
\item~$r_i \notin L$:~\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace incurs a cost of~$\zeta_i$.
\end{itemize}
Similar to the previous case, we have~$\zeta_i = (c-c_a)/(k-|L| - (j-1))$ if
this is the~$j$th~$0$-page being marked, because the phase starts with~$k-|L|$~$0$-pages
in cache and they are not evicted during part (a).
By Observation~\ref{obs:phase-error},
each arrival of a new page and each request to
a further unmarked page in~$L$ increases~$\eta_0$ by 1. Moreover,
we have~$c-c_a \leq \eta_0$.
Therefore, our cost is at most
\[ \eta_0 + \sum_{j=1}^{k-|L|-(c-c_a)} \frac{\eta_0}{k-|L|-(j-1)}
\leq \eta_0 (H_k - H_{\eta_0} + 1) \leq \eta_0 H_k. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
We next give a second upper bound on the $(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitiveness of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace, which is stronger for large values of $\eta_1$.
\ThmMarkRandB*
\begin{proof}
Let~$c_i, \eta_1(i), \eta_0(i)$ be the numbers of new pages,~$1$-errors, and~$0$-errors in~$i$th phase,
respectively. We have~$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace \geq \frac12 \sum_i c_i$.
Then, by the preceding lemma,
the cost of the algorithm is at most
\[ \sum_i \bigg(c_i \big(H_{\eta_1(i) + c_i} - H_{c_i} + 1\big) + H_k\,\eta_0(i) \bigg)
\leq \sum_i c_i \bigg(\ln \big(\frac{\eta_1(i)}{c_i} + 1\big)+2 \bigg) + H_k\,\eta_0,
\]
where the sum is over all phases.
The inequality above holds because~$H_{\eta+c} - H_c\leq \log(\frac{\eta+c}{c}) + 1$.
By the concavity of logarithm, the worst case happens when~$\eta_1(i)/c_i$ is the same
in all the phases, i.e.,~$\eta_1(i)/c_i = 2\eta_1/\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$ for all~$i$.
Therefore, the expected cost of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Mark\&Predict}}}\xspace is at most
\[
2\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace \left(\ln(\frac{2\eta_1}{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace}+1) + 2\right) + H_k\eta_0\,
\leq 2\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace + H_k\,\eta_0
+ \bigg(\ln(\frac{2\eta_1}{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace}+1)+1\bigg)\frac{2\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace}{\eta_1}\eta_1. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
\section{Lower bounds}
\label{sec:lower-bounds}
In this section, we provide lower bounds on the possible values of $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ for
$(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)$-competitive algorithms, in both setups. {These bounds imply that the results of the previous two sections are essentially tight.}
We first consider deterministic algorithms.
\ThmDeterministicLowerBound*
\begin{proof}
Consider any deterministic paging algorithm \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace, and the following two paging problem instances on a universe of $k+1$ pages, each with $n$ requests, where $n>k$ can be arbitrarily large. When there are only $k+1$ pages used, the concept of $k$-phases for marking algorithms~\cite{T98} is used to show that \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace faults on the first occurrence of each of the first $k$ pages requested in the first phase and on the first page in each phase after that, for a total of $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace\leq k+\CEIL{\frac{n-k}{k}}$ faults. Ignoring the first and last phases, \ensuremath{\operatorname{{LFD}}}\xspace always evicts the only page not present in that phase, so correct predictions in the discard-predictions and phase-predictions setups are identical, with zeros for every request, except for the last occurrence of the page not requested in the next phase. (If the last phase contains fewer than $k$ different pages, there could be more than one correct $1$-prediction in the next to last phase, but one is sufficient. In the last phase, the correct predictions would all be zeros.)
In both instances, after $k$ requests, one to each of $k$ different pages, the unique page absent in the cache of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace is always requested. This leads to a cost of $n$ for \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace, since it faults on all requests.
In the first instance, all predictions are $0$. Thus, $\eta_0 \leq \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace-k$ and $\eta_1=0$. Writing $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace \leq \alpha\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace +\beta \eta_0+\gamma\eta_1$, we obtain that
\[
n=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace \leq \alpha\cdot \left(k+\CEIL{\frac{n-k}{k}}\right) +\beta \cdot \CEIL{\frac{n-k}{k}}.
\]
Taking the limit as $n$ goes to infinity, one must have
\[
\alpha+\beta \geq k.
\]
In the second instance, all predictions are $1$. Thus, $\eta_0 = 0$ and $\eta_1 \leq n- (s-k)$. Writing $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace \leq \alpha\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace +\beta \eta_0+\gamma\eta_1$, we obtain that
$$n= \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace \leq \alpha\cdot s +\gamma \cdot (n-(s-k)).$$
Since $\alpha\geq 1$, $\alpha\geq \gamma$. Then, $s\leq k+\CEIL{\frac{n-k}{k}}$ implies that
$$n=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace \leq \alpha\cdot \left(k+\CEIL{\frac{n-k}{k}}\right) +
\gamma \cdot \left(n-\CEIL{\frac{n-k}{k}}\right).$$
Taking the limit as $n$ goes to infinity, one must have
\[
\alpha+(k-1)\cdot\gamma \geq k. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
We now focus on randomized algorithms. The next result first considers a single instance with different predictions to exhibit two trade-offs on the possible competitive ratios, and the second trade-off is then improved using a different adversarial strategy.
\ThmRandLowerBound*
\begin{proof}
Consider any randomized paging algorithm \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace, and two paging problem instances on a universe of $k+1$ pages. In order to simplify the mathematical expressions, we assume that the instance starts with a full cache with predictions associated to each page. Since there is an additive constant in the definition of the competitive ratio, this does not affect the result.
In the first instance, for each request, one of the $k+1$ pages is chosen uniformly at random, with a prediction of $0$. This leads to an expected cost of approximately $n/(k+1)$ for \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace, as the probability that the requested page is the only one absent from the cache of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace is $1/(k+1)$.
The expected optimal cost is equal to the expected number of {\it $k$-phases} in the instance. The expected length of a phase is, by the Coupon Collector problem, $(k+1)H_{k+1}-1=(k+1)H_k$, where $H_i$ is the $i$-th harmonic number. So $\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace] = n/((k+1)H_{k})$.
For the discard-predictions setup, this means that $\eta_0 = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$ and $\eta_1=0$ as each optimal eviction is equivalent to a prediction error.
For the phase-predictions setup, this also means that $\eta_0 = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$ and $\eta_1=0$ as each phase contains a single erroneous prediction, on the last request of the page not requested in the following phase.
Hence, we obtain that, for both setups,
\[
\frac n {k+1}=\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace] \leq \alpha\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace] +\beta \mathbb{E}[\eta_0]+\gamma\eta_1 \leq (\alpha+\beta)\cdot \frac n{(k+1)H_{k}},
\]
so
\[
\alpha+\beta \geq H_{k}.
\]
We note below that replacing the predictions from 0 to 1 does not lead to the target bound.
Indeed, consider an instance such that, at each round, one of the $k+1$ pages is requested at random, with a prediction of $1$. This again leads to an expected cost of $n/(k+1)$ for \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace and $n/((k+1)H_{k})$ for \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace. This means that $\eta_1 \leq n$ and $\eta_0=0$ for both setups.
Hence, we obtain that, for both setups,
\[
\frac n {k+1}=\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace] \leq \alpha\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace] +\beta \eta_0+\gamma\mathbb{E}[\eta_1] \leq (\alpha+(k+1)H_{k}\cdot\gamma)\cdot \frac n{(k+1)H_{k}},
\]
so
\[
\alpha+(k+1)H_{k}\cdot\gamma \geq H_{k}.
\]
In order to improve this bound, we keep a universe of $k+1$ pages and build an instance phase by phase, based on the cache $C$ of an optimal solution before the start of the phase. The first request is the page $p_0$ not in $C$. Then, we consider a uniformly random permutation $\sigma_1,\dots,\sigma_{k-1}$ of $k-1$ among the $k$ elements of $C$. The phase will then be described as a composition of \emph{blocks} of requests, where the $i$th block contains $i+1$ page requests: $p_0$ and the $\sigma_j$ for $j\leq i$.
For instance, if the permutation is $(a,b,c,d,e)$, the blocks will be:
\[
p_0a,p_0ab,p_0abc,p_0abcd,p_0abcde.
\]
Each block is furthermore repeated several times before requesting the next block to ensure that the cache of any sensible algorithm contains the pages inside a block afterwards.
We now compute a lower bound on the expected cost of any algorithm on such a sequence. Before the first block, $p_0$ is contained in the cache, so the probability that requesting $a$ incurs a cache miss is $1/k$, as, except $p_0$, one of the $k$ other pages in the universe incurs a cache miss. Similarly, the probability that the second block incurs a cache miss is $1/(k-1)$, and the total expected number of cache misses after the last block is $H_k-1$. We now notice that we can also charge one eviction for $p_0$ at the start of the phase. Indeed, after the previous phase was finished, the algorithm cache must contain the $k$ pages of the last block, to avoid suffering too many evictions. Therefore, its cache at the start of the phase matches the one of \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace so does not contain $p_0$. So the algorithm cost is at least $H_k$ per phase while $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$'s is one per phase.
We now describe predictions: all requests come with a prediction $0$ except the last iteration of the last block where all $k$ requests have a prediction $1$.
For the discard-predictions setup, the zero-prediction are correct as these pages are requested again in the same phase, and $k-1$ one-predictions are wrong on the last iteration as only a single page should be evicted, so $\eta_0=0$ and $\eta_1=k-1$ per phase.
For the phase-predictions setup, only the last iteration counts towards the error, and a single page will not appear in the next phase so we also have $\eta_0=0$ and $\eta_1=k-1$ per phase.
Therefore, generalizing to all phases, we have
\[ H_k=\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace] \leq \alpha\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace] +\beta \eta_0+\gamma\mathbb{E}[\eta_1] \leq \alpha+(k-1)\cdot\gamma. \qedhere \]
\end{proof}
The previous result shows a subconstant lower bound on $\gamma$ ($\approx \frac 1k\ln k$) for a logarithmic value of $\alpha$ (up to $O(\log k)$), and we complement it by showing that $\gamma$ is lower bounded by a constant if we want to achieve $\alpha=1$.
\ThmRandLowerBoundB*
\begin{proof}
We consider a universe of $k+1$ pages. We construct an instance composed of $m$ rounds of $k-1$ requests, $m$ being a large integer.
At the start of each round, request the page 1, 2 or 3 with equal probability associated to a prediction 1. Then, all pages from 4 to $k+1$ are requested with a prediction 0.
An optimal algorithm never evicts the pages 4 to $k+1$ and needs to evict a single page per phase, where phases are defined as for marking algorithms. Any online algorithm has a probability at least $1/3$ to perform an eviction at each round: either one page among $\{1,2,3\}$ is not in the cache at the start of the round, or another page is absent which enforces an eviction.
The expected number of rounds in a phase is equal to the expected length of a phase of a uniformly random request sequence over 3 pages and $k=2$, which is $3H_2=4.5$. So $\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace] = m/4.5$.
We now focus on the prediction errors.
First, note that $\eta_0=0$ in both setups: the pages predicted 0 are requested in every phase and should never be evicted by an optimal algorithm.
Then, we have $\mathbb E[\eta_1] = m-\mathbb E[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace] = 3.5m/4.5 $ in the discard-predictions setup. Indeed, the pages 1, 2 and 3 combined are predicted 1 a total of $m$ times, are never predicted 0 and \ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace only evicts these three pages. So there is an error when such a page is not evicted by $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace$ before its subsequent request.
In the phase-predictions setup, there is one error per phase, for the last prediction of the unique page among $\{1,2,3\}$ which is both requested in that phase but not the following one. Therefore, $\mathbb{E}[\eta_1] = m/3H_2 = m/4.5 $.
Therefore, we have:
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace] &\leq 1 \cdot \mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace] + \gamma \mathbb{E}[\eta_1]\\
\gamma &\geq \frac{\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace]-\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Opt}}}\xspace]}{\mathbb{E}[\eta_1]}\\
\gamma &\geq \frac m {\mathbb{E}[\eta_1]} \cdot \left({\frac{1}{3}-\frac{1}{3H_2}}\right)
\geq \frac m {\mathbb{E}[\eta_1]} \cdot \left({\frac{1.5-1}{4.5}}\right) \geq \frac m{9\mathbb{E}[\eta_1]}
\end{align*}
So, in the discard-predictions setup, we get $\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace] \geq 1/7$ and for the phase-predictions setup, we obtain $\mathbb{E}[\ensuremath{\operatorname{\textsc{Alg}}}\xspace] \geq 1/2$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
The $\rm{\Lambda}CDM$ model, i.e., the cosmological constant plus cold dark matter model is so far the simplest and most natural model that could fit the observations of type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) \citep{Riess07,Alam17}, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) \citep{Ade16}, and strong gravitational lensing \citep{cao2012SL,cao2014cosmic,Cao:2015qja}. However, it is still puzzled by several problems such as the coincidence problem and the fine-tuning problem \citep{cao2010testing}. Meanwhile, there exists some huge observational discrepancies if one tries to motivate $\Lambda$ as a zero-point quantum vacuum energy, regarding the estimations of different cosmological parameters in the framework of $\rm{\Lambda}CDM$ model. One of the major issues is the inconsistency between the Hubble constant ($H_0$) inferred from a
$\Lambda$CDM fit to the CMB data (temperature and polarization) from \textit{Planck} satellite \citep{Aghanim:2018eyx} and the local direct $H_0$ measurement by using so-called standard candles (SNe Ia and Cepheid variables) from the \textit{Supernova $H_0$ for the Equation of State} collaboration (SH0ES) \citep{Riess:2019cxk}. Such tension now has reached 4$\sigma$-6$\sigma$ with the accumulation of precise astrophysical observations. Since there is no evidence for considerable systematic errors in the Planck observation and the local measurements \citep{Riess:2019cxk,DiValentino:2018zjj,Follin:2017ljs,Leandros}, increasing attention is focusing on alternative cosmological models beyond $\rm{\Lambda}CDM$, e.g., the Early Dark Energy models \citep{Tanvi} and interacting dark energy models considering the interaction between dark energy and dark matter \citep{Gabriela,Valiviita,ZXG,Li17}. Some recent works suggested that the tension between the CMB and local determinations of the Hubble constant could be greatly reduced, within the generalized Chaplygin gas model \citep{Yang}. In the recent of \citet{Liam19}, a Phenomenologically Emergent Dark Energy (PEDE) model was introduced to shift the constraints on $H_0$, which demonstrated its potential in addressing the Hubble constant problem \citep{Liam19}. In addition, modifications to General Relativity (GR) theory \citep{Cruz,Hashim1,Hashim2,Briffa,Ren} or the well-known Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati (DGP) model physically motivated by possible multidimensionality in the brane theory provides another way to deal with the cosmological constant problem and alleviate the Hubble tension \citep{Cao:2017ivt,Xu10,Xu14,Giannantonio08}. Note that all of these models could not only explain the late-time cosmic acceleration from different mechanisms, but also describe the large-scale structure distribution of the Universe (see \citet{Koyama16} for recent reviews). In this paper, we will explore the validity of three spatially flat and non-flat cosmological models ($\Lambda$CDM, PEDE and DGP), focusing on the time delay measurements from strongly lensed quasars and the angular size measurements of ultra-compact structure in radio quasars. Specially, the Hubble constant, spatial curvature and dark energy dynamics will be revisited with with such a newly compiled quasar sample.
It is well known that the time-delays from strong gravitational lensing systems provide an independent method to measure the Hubble constant (time-delays are inversely proportional to the $H_0$). For a specific strong gravitational lensing system, a distant active galactic nucleus (AGN), which usually acts as the background source, is gravitationally lensed into multiple images by a foreground early-type galaxy. Meanwhile, the light emitted from background sources at the same time will arrive at the Earth at different time. Due to the variable nature of quasars, the precise measurements of time-delays between multiple images are realizable by monitoring flux variations of the lens. Actually, the time-delays are directly related to the so-called "time-delay distance", a combination of three angular diameter distances
of the lensed quasar systems (from observer to lens, from observer to source, and from lens to source). Such idea was recently realized by the $H_0$ Lenses in COSMOGRAIL's Wellspring (H0LiCOW) collaboration \citep{Wong:2019kwg}, which presented the fits on the Hubble constant and other cosmological parameters using a joint analysis of six gravitationally lensed quasars. In the framework of six different cosmological models, their results showed that the derived Hubble constant is in agreement with local distance ladder measurement in the spatially flat $\Lambda$CDM model. However, the measured time-delays from lensed quasars, which is only primarily sensitive to $H_0$, whereas demonstrate their relatively weak constraints on other cosmological parameters. For instance, the determined value of the matter density parameter in the flat $\Lambda$CDM model, $\Omega_m=0.30^{+0.13}_{-0.13}$, would shift to $\Omega_m=0.24^{+0.16}_{-0.13}$ in the non-flat $\Lambda$CDM model. Moreover, the drawback of this method is that the fits on the Hubble constant are strongly model dependent, i.e. the value of $H_0$ would shift to $H_0=81.6^{+4.9}_{?5.3} \mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ when the dynamics of dark energy is taken into consideration \citep{Wong:2019kwg}. For the discussions about model-independent measurements of $H_0$, we refer the reader to see the following works \citep{Liao19a,Liao20a,Lyu2020,Collett:2019hrr,Wei:2020suh,Qi2020arx,Tau19}.
On the other hand, the angular-size/redshift relation of the ultra-compact structures in unlensed radio quasars was also proposed for cosmological applications \citep{Kellermann93}. In the subsequent analysis, based on the milliarcsecond angular size measurements from very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI) technique, \citet{Cao:2017ivt} demonstrated the possibility of using
intermediate-luminosity quasars as standard rulers for cosmological inference, covering the redshift range of $0.462<z< 2.73$. In the framework of such a reliable cosmological standard ruler extended to higher redshifts, great efforts have been made in the recent studies to set observational limits on different cosmologies \citep{Li17,ZXG}, which shows that radio quasars could provide quite stringent constraints on cosmological parameters. However, one issue which should be discussed is the strong degeneracy between the Hubble constant $H_0$, the matter density parameter $\Omega_m$ \citep{Cao:2017ivt}, the cosmic curvature $\Omega_k$ \citep{Qi:2018aio}, and the equation of state of dark energy $\omega$ \citep{DiValentino:2019qzk,DiValentino:2020hov,2019arXiv190809139H}. Therefore, one may expect that the combination of the latest observations of quasars, i.e., the angular size of compact structure in radio quasars as standard rulers and the time delays from gravitationally lensed quasars, would break the degeneracy between the Hubble constant and other cosmological parameters, in the framework of different cosmological models of interest.
This paper is organized as follows: In Sec.~\ref{sec:models}, we summarize the cosmological models to be analyzed. In Sec.~\ref{sec:data}
we briefly describe the quasar data and the corresponding analysis method. In Sec.~\ref{sec:res} we report the results of constraints on
the Hubble constant, spatial curvature and dark energy dynamics with the latest quasar data. Finally, we give our discussion and conclusions in Sec.~\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Cosmological models} \label{sec:models}
Let us now describe the models we are going to analyse in the next section with the data sets. In this paper, we concentrate on three classes of cosmological models in a spatially non-flat and flat universe, including the standard $\Lambda$CDM model, the Phenomenologically Emergent Dark Energy (PEDE) model, and the Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati (DGP) model.
Assuming the Friedmann-Lematre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) metric, with the non-flat universe filled with ordinary pressureless matter (cold dark matter plus baryons), dark energy, and negligible radiation, the Friedmann equation reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
H^2(z)=H_0^2[\Omega_m(1+z)^3+{\widetilde{\Omega}_{DE}}(z)
+\Omega_k(1+z)^2],
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Omega_{m}$ and $\Omega_{k}$ are the present values of the density parameters of dust matter and spatial curvature, respectively. The dark energy component of $\widetilde{\Omega}_{DE}(z)$ takes the following form of
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\Omega}_{DE}(z)=\Omega_{DE}\exp\big\{3\int^z_0\frac{1+\omega(z')}{1+z'}dz'\big\},
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_{DE}$ is the present value of the dark energy density parameter, and the equation of state of dark energy is defined as $\omega(z)=p_{DE}/\rho_{DE}$, with $p_{DE}$ and $\rho_{DE}$ the pressure and energy density of dark energy, respectively. When $\omega(z)=-1$ this so-called XCDM parameterization reduces to the concordance $\Lambda$CDM model, with $\widetilde{\Omega}_{DE}(z)=1-\Omega_{m}-\Omega_{k}$. Recently, another kind of Phenomenologically Emergent Dark Energy (PEDE) model proposed in \citet{Liam19,Liam20} has attracted a lot of attention. In this cosmological scenario, the density of dark energy, which has no effective presence in the past and emerges in the later times, is written as
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\Omega}
_{DE}(z)=\Omega_{DE}\times[1-\tanh(\log_{10}(1+z))].
\end{equation}
Note that compared with $\Lambda$CDM cosmology, the PEDE model has no extra degree of freedom. For the third scenario, our idea of modifying the gravity is based on the assumption that our universe is embedded in a higher dimensional space-time, arising from the braneworld theory \citep{Dvali00a}. In the DGP model, the cosmic acceleration is reproduced by the leak of gravity into the bulk at large scales, which
result in the accelerated expansion of the Universe without the need of dark energy \citep{Dvali00b}. In the framework of a non-flat DGP model, the Friedman equation is modified as \citep{Deffayet02a,Deffayet02b,Tuomas03}
\begin{eqnarray}
H^2(z)=H_0^2[(\sqrt{\Omega_m(1+z)^3+\Omega_{r_c}}+\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}})^2
+\Omega_k(1+z)^2],
\end{eqnarray}
where the density parameter $\Omega_{r_c}=1/(4r_c^2H_0^2)$ is associated with the length of $r_c$ where the leaking occurs. Based on the normalization condition, $\Omega_{r_c}$ is also related to $\Omega_m$ and $\Omega_k$ as $(\sqrt{\Omega_m+\Omega_{r_c}}+\sqrt{\Omega_{r_c}})^2+\Omega_k=1$.
Summarizing, the Friedmann equations of the all the models presented in the this section will be used to calculate the angular diameter distance
\begin{eqnarray}
D_A(z;\mathbf{p})=\frac{c}{1+z}\int^z_0\frac{1}{H(z')}dz',
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbf{p}$ denotes relevant cosmological model parameters, i.e., $\mathbf{p}\,=\,[H_0,\Omega_m]$ for flat cosmological models and
$\mathbf{p}\,=\,[H_0,\Omega_m,\Omega_k]$ for non-flat cosmological models.
\section{Observational quasar data and Methodology} \label{sec:data}
Here we work with large-scale data, selecting and combining complete samples of quasars to investigate the late-time Universe. In this section, we describe each data set and the methodology used for the cosmological analyses. These are carried out using the probes separately, followed by the joint analysis.
\textit{Distance measurements from lensed quasars.---}
In strong lensing systems with quasars acting as background sources, the time difference (time delay) between two images of the source depends on the time-delay distance $D_{\mathrm{\Delta t}}$ and the gravitational potential of the lensing galaxy by \citep{1990CQGra1319P,1990CQGra1849P,2016A&ARv..24...11T}
\begin{equation}
\Delta t_{i,j} = \frac{D_{\mathrm{\Delta t}}}{c}\Delta \phi_{i,j}(\mathbf{\xi}_{lens}).
\label{relation}
\end{equation}
Here $c$ is the speed of light, and $\Delta\phi_{i,j}=[(\mathbf{\theta}_i-\mathbf{\beta})^2/2-\psi(\mathbf{\theta}_i)-(\mathbf{\theta}_j-
\mathbf{\beta})^2/2+\psi(\mathbf{\theta}_j)]$ represents the Fermat potential difference between the image $i$ and image $j$, which is determined by the lens model parameters $\mathbf{\xi}_{lens}$ inferred from high resolution imaging of the host arcs. $\mathbf{\theta}_{i}$ and $\mathbf{\theta}_{j}$ are the angular positions of the image $i$ and $j$ in the lens plane. It is worth noting that the line-of-sight (LOS) mass distribution to the lens could also affect the Fermat potential inference, the contribution of which requires deep and wide field imaging of the area around the lens system. The two-dimensional lensing potential at the image positions, $\psi(\mathbf{\theta}_i)$ and $\psi(\mathbf{\theta}_j)$, and the unlensed source position $\mathbf{\beta}$ can be determined by the lens mass model. The time-delay distance $D_{\mathrm{\Delta t}}$ is a combination of three angular diameter distances expressed as
\begin{equation}
D_{\mathrm{\Delta
t}}\equiv(1+z_d)\frac{D^A_{\mathrm{d}}(z;\mathbf{p})
D^A_{\mathrm{s}}(z;\mathbf{p})}{D^A_{\mathrm{ds}}(z;\mathbf{p})},
\end{equation}
where the superscript ($A$) denotes the angular diameter distance, while the subscripts ($d$ and $s$) represent the deflector (or lens) and the source, respectively.
Moreover, the angular diameter distance to the deflector (or lens) can be independently inferred from the kinematic modeling with additional information of the lensing galaxy. The measured velocity dispersion provides the depth of gravitational potential at the lensing position, while the time delay provides the mass of the lensing galaxy enclosed within the position at which images are formed. Therefore, the combination of the above two quantities will generate the physical size of the system, on the base of which one could obtain the measurement of $D_d$ at the lens position divided by the angular separation of lensed images. More specifically, by choosing a suitable mass density profile (such as the power-law lens distribution) and combine it with the kinematic information of the lensing galaxy (the light distribution function $\mathbf{\xi}_{light}$, the projected stellar velocity dispersion $\sigma_P$, and the anisotropy distribution of the stellar orbits $\beta_{ani}$), one can obtain the angular diameter distance to the lens
\begin{equation}
D_{d}=\frac{1}{1+z_d}D_{\Delta t}\frac{c^2H(\mathbf{\xi}_{lens},\mathbf{\xi}_{light},\beta_{ani})}{\sigma^2_P},
\end{equation}
where the function $H$ captures all of the model components calculated from the sky angle (from the imaging data) and the anisotropy distribution of the stellar orbit (from the spectroscopy). Here, we summarise the crucial points required by the present work and one could refer to \citet{Birrer16,Birrer19} for more details. Note that the cosmological constraints obtained from the $D_d$ sample are generally weaker than those from the $D_{\Delta t}$ sample. However, the previous analysis has also demonstrated its potential in breaking the possible degeneracies among cosmological parameters, particularly those between cosmic curvature and the redshift-varying equation of state of dark energy in some non-flat dark energy models \citep{Jee16}.
The latest sample of strong-lensing systems with time-delay observations, recently released by the H0LiCOW collaboration consist of six lensed quasars covering the redshift range of $0.654<z_s<1.789$ \citep{Wong:2019kwg}: B1608+656 \citep{Suyu10,Jee19}, RXJ1131-1231 \citep{Suyu13,Suyu14,Chen19}, HE0435-1223 \citep{Wong17,Chen19}, SDSS1206+4332 \citep{Birrer19}, WFI2033-4723 \citep{Rusu20}, and PG1115+080 \citep{Chen19}. The redshifts of both lens and source, the time-delay distances, and the angular diameter distance to the lenses for these lensed quasar systems are summarized in Table 2 of \citet{Wong:2019kwg}. Note that for the lens of B1608+656, its $D_{\Delta t}$ measurement is given in the form of skewed log-normal distribution (due to the absence of blind analysis of relevant cosmological quantities), while the derived $D_{\Delta t}$ for other five lenses are given in the form of Monte Carlo Markov chains (MCMC). As for the measurements of the angular diameter distance to the the lens $D_d$, only four strong lensing systems (B1608+656, RXJ1131-1231, SDSS1206+4332, and PG1115+080) are used in our statistical analysis, which are provided in the form of MCMC. We remark here that a kernel density estimator is used to compute the posterior distributions of $\mathcal{L}_{(D_{\Delta t}, D_{d})}$ or $\mathcal{L}_{D_{d}}$ from chains, which allows to account for any correlations between $D_{\Delta t}$ and $D_{d}$ in $\mathcal{L}_{(D_{\Delta t}, D_{d})}$. The distances posterior distributions for six time delay distances (denoted as "$6D_{\Delta t}$" for simplicity) and four angular diameter distances to the lenses (denoted as "$4D_{d}$" for simplicity) are available on the website of H0LiCOW \footnote{http://www.h0licow.org}. For more works in cosmology by using strong lensing time delays, we refer the reader to see the literature \citep{2021MNRAS.503.1096D,2022ApJ...927..191B,2021A&A...656A.153S,2021ApJ...906...26L,
2015A&A...580A..38R}.
\textit{Distance measurements from radio quasars.---} Being the brightest sources in the universe, quasars have considerable potential to be used as useful cosmological probes \citep{Liu20AJ,LiuT21a}, despite of the extreme variability in their luminosity and high observed dispersion. For instance, \citet{Risaliti18} attempted to use quasars as standard candles through the non-linear relation between their intrinsic UV emission from an accretion disk and the X-ray emission from hot corona, through the analysis and refinement of the quasar sample with well-measured X-ray and UV fluxes. In this work, we focus on the "angular size-distance" relation of ultra-compact structure in radio quasars that can be observed up to high redshifts, with milliarcsecond angular sizes measured by the very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI). Specially, with the the signal received at multiple radio telescopes across Earth's surface, together with the registered correlated intensities considering the different arrival times at various facilities, the characteristic angular size of a distant radio quasar is defined as
\begin{equation}
\theta={2\sqrt{-\ln\Gamma \ln 2} \over \pi B} \label{thetaG}
\end{equation}
where $B$ is the interferometer baseline measured in wavelengths and the visibility modulus $\Gamma=S_c/S_t$ is the ratio between the
total and correlated flux densities. With gradually refined selection technique and the elimination of possible systematic errors, \citet{Cao:2017abj} compiled a sample of 120 intermediate-luminosity radio quasars ($10^{27}W/Hz < L < 10^{28} W/Hz$) with reliable measurements of the angular size of the compact structure from updated VLBI observations. It is now understood that the dispersion in linear size is greatly mitigated \citep{Cao:2016dgw}, i.e., the linear sizes of these standard rulers show negligible dependence on both redshifts and intrinsic luminosity. Our quasar data come from a newly compiled sample of these standard rulers from observations of 120 intermediate-luminosity quasars with angular sizes $\theta(z)$ and redshifts $z$ listed in Table 1 of \citet{Cao:2017ivt}, which extend the Hubble diagram to a redshift range $0.46<z<2.76$ currently inaccessible to the traditional resorts.
The corresponding theoretical predictions for the angular sizes of the compact structure can be written as
\begin{equation}
\theta(z)=\frac{l_m}{D^A(z;\mathbf{p})},
\end{equation}
where $D^A(z)$ is the angular diameter distance at redshift $z$, which is related to different combinations of cosmological parameters $\mathbf{p}$ (Hubble constant and the dimensionless expansion rate expansion rate). The intrinsic length $l_m$ needs to be calibrated with external indicators such SNe Ia. In this analysis, we adopt the calibration results of such quantity $l_m=11.03\pm0.25$ pc through a new cosmology-independent technique, by using the Gaussian Process to reconstruct the expansion
history of the Universe from 24 cosmic chronometer measurements \citep{Cao:2017abj}. The data of ultra-compact structures in radio quasars, which is denoted as "QSO" in this work, has been extensively used for cosmological applications in the literature \citep{Li17,Cao:2017abj,Qi17,Ma17,Cao:2016dgw}.
Now the posterior likelihood $\mathcal{L}_{QSO}$ for can be constructed by
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}_{QSO}=\prod_{i=1}^{120}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi(\sigma_{i}^2+\sigma_{sys}^2)}}
\times\exp\bigg\{
-\frac{\left[\theta(z_{i};\mathbf{p})
- \theta_{obs,i}\right]^{2}}{2(\sigma_{sta}^{2}+\sigma_{sys}^2)}\bigg\},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\theta_{obs,i}$ is the observed angular size for the \textit{i}th data point in the sample, $\sigma_{sta}$ is the observational statistical uncertainty for the \textit{i}th quasar. According
to the error strategy proposed in \citet{Cao:2017ivt}, an additional $10\%$ systematic uncertainty ($\sigma_{sys}=0.1\theta_{obs}$) in the observed angular sizes is also considered, accounting
for the intrinsic spread in the linear size \citep{Cao:2016dgw,Qi2020arx}. Such strategy has been extensively applied in the subsequent cosmological studies with such standard ruler data, which extended our understanding of the evolution of the Universe to $z\sim3$ \citep{Ryan21,Vavry20,Melia18}.
Summarizing, we use different combinations of lensed and unlensed quasars by adding the log-likelihood of cosmological parameters $H_0$, $\Omega_m$ and $\Omega_k$ (if available) for the posterior distributions of six lens time-delay distances $\mathcal{L}_{D_{\Delta t}}$, four angular diameter distances to the lenses $\mathcal{L}_{D_{d}}$, and 120 angular diameter distances to the radio quasars $\mathcal{L}_{QSO}$.
The final log-likelihood
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{ln} {\cal L}= \mathrm{ln} ({\cal L}_{\rm{QSO}})+\mathrm{ln}
({\cal L}_{(D_{\Delta t},D_{d})}),
\end{equation}
is sampled in the framework of Python MCMC module EMCEE \citep{Foreman_Mackey_2013}. Meanwhile, in this analysis we introduce the DIC to evaluate which model is more consistent with the observational data, focusing on the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC) to compare the goodness of fit on models with different numbers of parameters \citep{Spiegelhalter03}. The DIC is defined as
\begin{equation}
DIC=D(\bar{\theta})+2p_D=\overline{D(\theta)}+p_D,
\end{equation}
where $D(\theta)=-2\mathrm{ln}{\cal L(\theta)}+C$, $C$ is a normalized constant depending only on the data that disappears from ant derived quantity, and $p_D=\overline{D(\theta)}-D(\bar{\theta})$ is the effective number of model parameters, with the deviance of the likelihood $D$. Specially, when we use $\chi^2=-2\mathrm{ln}{\cal L(\theta)}$ to describe the $p_D$, it can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
p_D=\overline{\chi^2(\theta)}-\chi^2(\bar{\theta}).
\end{equation}
Compared with the widely-used Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) or Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), the advantage of DIC lies in the fact that it is determined by the qualities which can be easily obtained from Monte Carlo posterior samples. Moreover, parameters that are unconstrained by the data would also be appropriately treated in the framework of DIC \citep{Liddle07}.
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.5}
\caption{The best-fit values and 1$\sigma$ uncertainties for the parameters ($H_0$, $\Omega_m$, $\Omega_{r_c}$ (if available), and $\Omega_k$) in each cosmological model and quasar data set. The $\chi^2$ and DIC values for all models are also added for comparison.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l| c c c c c c c}
\hline
\hline
Model & Data set & $H_0 (\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}})$ &$\Omega_m$ & $\Omega_k$ & $\Omega_{r_c}$ & $\chi^2$ & DIC
\\
\hline
Flat $\Lambda$CDM & 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & $ 73.26^{+1.74}_{-1.84}$ & $0.297^{+0.133}_{-0.127}$ & $ -$& $ -$& 39.98 &42.6
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & $73.51^{+1.73}_{-1.82}$ & $0.281^{+ 0.050}_{-0.041}$ & $ -$& $ -$&358.99 &364.21
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_d$+QSO & $73.42^{+1.74}_{-1.84}$ & $0.285^{+0.049}_{-0.041}$ & $ -$& $ -$& 385.38 &$ 391.33$
\\
\hline
Flat PEDE & 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & $74.94^{+1.89}_{-2.03}$ & $0.259^{+0.173}_{-0.137}$ & $-$& $ -$ & 39.57 &42.7
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & $ 75.13^{+1.87}_{-2.07}$ & $0.294^{+0.046}_{-0.040}$ & $-$& $ -$& 358.34 &363.81
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_d$+QSO & $75.08^{+1.83}_{-2.05}$ & $0.297^{+0.046}_{-0.038}$ & $ -$& $-$&384.53 &390.68
\\
\hline
Flat DGP & 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & $67.75^{+2.43}_{-3.95}$ & $0.251^{+ 0.184}_{-0.137}$ & $ -$& $ 0.140^{+0.056}_{-0.059}$&40.43 &45.7
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & $67.84^{+ 1.12}_{-1.19}$ & $ 0.243^{+ 0.043}_{-0.037}$ & $-$& $ 0.143^{+0.015}_{-0.016}$&360.02 &367.72
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_d$+QSO & $ 67.84^{+1.10}_{-1.12}$ & $0.246^{+ 0.043}_{-0.037}$ & $ -$& $ 0.142^{+0.014}_{-0.016}$&386.42 &393.6
\\
\hline
Non-flat $\Lambda$CDM & 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & $74.38^{+2.12}_{-2.34}$ & $0.242^{+0.164}_{-0.129}$ & $ 0.258^{+ 0.167}_{-0.253}$& $ -$&39.80 &44.6
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & $73.39^{+ 2.06}_{-2.11}$ & $ 0.274^{+0.083}_{-0.080}$ & $ 0.036^{+ 0.223}_{-0.214}$& $ -$&358.31 &366.8
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_d$+QSO & $73.78^{+1.99}_{-2.17}$ & $0.254^{+0.083}_{-0.074}$ & $0.100^{+0.214}_{-0.213}$ & $ -$& 384.69 & 393.8
\\
\hline
Non-flat PEDE & 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & $74.84^{+15.81}_{-8.72}$ & $ 0.247^{+0.180}_{-0.131}$ & $ -0.027^{+ 0.340}_{-0.306}$& $ -$&39.49 &44.2
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & $71.67^{+ 16.75}_{-7.38}$ & $ 0.315^{+0.094}_{-0.106}$ & $ -0.089^{+ 0.365}_{-0.276}$& $ -$ &357.82 &366.3
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_d$+QSO & $75.05^{+2.01}_{-2.19}$ & $0.275^{+0.081}_{-0.077}$ & $0.076^{+0.222}_{-0.201}$ & $ -$& 383.81 & 393.45
\\
\hline
Non-flat DGP & 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & $68.31^{+ 15.37}_{-10.45}$ & $0.251^{+ 0.186}_{-0.142}$ & $ 0.023^{+ 0.316}_{-0.345}$& $ 0.135^{+0.143}_{-0.116}$&40.31 &46.2
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & $66.26^{+ 13.57}_{-8.04}$ & $ 0.253^{+0.089}_{-0.081}$ & $ -0.050^{+ 0.328}_{-0.305}$& $ 0.151^{+0.107}_{-0.101}$ &359.47 & 367.7
\\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_d$+QSO & $ 66.35^{+14.92}_{-8.10}$ & $0.253^{+0.086}_{-0.083}$ & $-0.047^{+0.348}_{-0.311}$& $ 0.150^{+0.110}_{-0.104}$&385.19 &395.2
\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}\label{tab:res_models}
\iffalse
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c| c c c c c c c}
\hline
\hline
Quantity & Data set &Flat $\Lambda$CDM &Flat PEDE &Flat DGP &Non-flat $\Lambda$CDM &Non-flat PEDE &Non-flat DGP \\
\hline
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & 0.49 & 0.08& 0.94& 0.31&0.00 & 1.05 \\
$\Delta \chi^2$ & 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & 0.37 & 0.00 & 0.93 & 0.63&0.28 & 0.81 \\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_L$+QSO & 0.39 & 0.00 & 0.96 & 0.57&0.17 & 0.84 \\
&6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_L$+QSO+BAO & 2.85 & 2.45 & 15.13& 2.18&1.84 & 0.00\\
\hline
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & 0.41 & 0.00 & 0.86& 2.23&1.92 & 2.97\\
$\Delta AIC$ & 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & 0.37 &0.00 & 0.93 & 2.63&2.28 & 2.81 \\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_L$+QSO & 0.39 & 0.00 & 0.96 & 2.57&2.17 & 2.84 \\
\hline
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$ & 0.41 & 0.00 & 0.87 & 2.02&1.71& 2.76 \\
$\Delta BIC$ & 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO & 0.37 & 0.00 & 0.93 & 5.47&5.12 & 5.65 \\
& 6$D_{\Delta t}$+$4D_L$+QSO &0.39 & 0.00 & 0.96& 5.44&5.04 & 5.68 \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The values of $\Delta \chi^2$, $\Delta AIC$, and $\Delta BIC$.} \label{SIE_table}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\fi
\section{Results and discussion} \label{sec:res}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{FLCDM.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{FPEDE.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{FDGP.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The 2-D plots and 1-D marginalized distributions with 1-$\sigma$ and 2-$\sigma$ contours of cosmological parameters ($H_0$ and $\Omega_m$) in the framework of flat $\Lambda$CDM (upper), flat PEDE (lower left) and flat DGP (lower right) models with lensed quasars ($6D_{\Delta t}$, $4 D_d$) and radio quasars (QSO).
}
\label{fig:flat_contours}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{NLCDM.pdf}
\\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{NPEDE.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{NDGP.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The 2-D plots and 1-D marginalized distributions with 1-$\sigma$ and 2-$\sigma$ contours of cosmological parameters ($H_0$, $\Omega_m$ and $\Omega_k$) in the framework of non-flat $\Lambda$CDM (upper), non-flat PEDE (lower left) and non-flat DGP (lower right) models with lensed quasars ($6D_{\Delta t}$, $4 D_d$) and unlensed quasars (QSO). }
\label{fig:nonflat}
\end{figure*}
In order to demonstrate the constraining power of the latest observations of quasars, we use different data combinations (6$D_{\Delta t}$, 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO, and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_{d}$+QSO) to place constraints on cosmological parameters in $\Lambda$CDM, PEDE and DGP models both in flat and non-flat cases. The posterior one-dimensional (1-D) probability distributions and two-dimensional (2-D) confidence regions of the cosmological parameters for the six flat and non-flat models are shown in Figs.~1-2. We list the marginalized best-fitting parameters and $1\sigma$ uncertainties for all models and data combinations in Table 1. The corresponding $\chi^2$ and DIC values are also listed in Table 1.
\textit{Flat cases.---} The constraint results for three flat cosmological models are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:flat_contours}, in which we show the 2-D confidence regions (with 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ limits) as well as 1-D marginalized distributions from different data combinations. Our findings show that the constraints we obtain from the combination of the latest observations of quasars are more reliable than the those derived from independent quasar sample. Fortunately, the results in Fig.~2 show that the radio quasar data place remarkable constraints on all parameters of the three cosmological models, and the degeneracy among different model parameters are well broken. When combined with 120 unlensed quasar data, the 6 time-delay lensed quasars would produce tighter constraints on the matter density parameter in all of the three cosmological scenarios. The measured $\Omega_m$ range from a low value of $ 0.243^{+ 0.043}_{-0.037}$ (flat DGP) to a high value of $0.294^{+0.046}_{-0.040}$ (flat PEDE). In particular, for flat $\Lambda$CDM the derived matter density parameter from 120 unlensed quasars and 6 time-delay lensed quasars $\Omega_m=0.297^{+0.133}_{-0.127}$ shows a perfect agreement with the TT, TE, EE+lowE+lensing results of Planck Collaboration ($\Omega_{m}=0.3103 \pm0.0057$) \citep{Aghanim:2018eyx}. Such findings are different from the those obtained from the latest compilation of X-ray+UV quasars acting as standard candles, which favors a larger value of the matter density parameter at higher redshifts \citep{Risaliti18}. See also \citet{Lian21} for more discussion about this issue. In spite of the low mean values of $\Omega_m$ in the flat DGP model, the constraints on $\Omega_m$ obtained with 6$D_{\Delta t}$, 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO, and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO+4$D_{d}$ data are mutually consistent with those obtained from other astrophysical probes \citep{Xu10,Xu14,Giannantonio08}. For comparison, the corresponding fits on the parameter of $\Omega_{r_c}$ in flat DGP model are also displayed in Table 1. Finally, our analysis demonstrates that the matter density parameter plays an important role in the determination of the Hubble constant, which can be clearly seen from the anti-correlation between $\Omega_m$ and $H_0$ in Fig.~1.
The constraints on the Hubble constant are between $H_0=67.75^{+2.43}_{-3.95}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (DGP) and $H_0=74.94^{+1.89}_{-2.03}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (PEDE) with 6 time-delay lensed quasars, which shift to $H_0=67.84^{+ 1.12}_{-1.19}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (DGP) and $H_0=75.13^{+1.87}_{-2.07}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (PEDE) with the combined 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO data. Specially, for the flat $\Lambda$CDM and PEDE model, the mean values of $H_0$ obtained with 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO data are more consistent with
the recent determinations of $H_0$ from the Supernovae H0 for the SH0ES collaboration \citep{Riess:2019cxk}. However, in the framework of flat DGP model, the measured value of $H_0$ with 1$\sigma$ uncertainty ($67.84^{+ 1.12}_{-1.19}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$), which is 3.6$\sigma$ lower than the statistical estimates of the SH0ES results, demonstrates a perfect agreement with that derived from the recent Plank CMB observations \citep{Aghanim:2018eyx}. In addition, relative to the 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO constraints, the Hubble constant derived from the combined 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_L$+QSO data are a little higher than those values measured from the 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO case. However, these differences are not statistically significant given the error bars, as can be seen from the numerical results summarized in Table.~\ref{tab:res_models}.
\textit{Non-flat cases.---} As was revealed in the recent studies of
\citet{DiValentino:2019qzk,DiValentino:2020hov,2019arXiv190809139H}, the discrepancy between the Hubble constant and cosmic curvature measured locally and inferred from Planck highlights the importance of considering non-flat cosmological models in this work. The constraint results for three flat cosmological models are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:nonflat}, in which we show the 2-D confidence regions(with 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ limits) as well as 1-D marginalized distributions from different data combinations. The numerical results are also summarized in Table~1. One can see from the upper panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:nonflat} that, in the concordance $\rm{\Lambda}CDM$ cosmology a stringent constraint on the Hubble constant could be obtained from 6 time-delay quasar data $D_{\Delta t}$ ($H_0=74.38^{+2.12}_{-2.34}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$). However, the MCMC chains failed to converge for the other two model parameters, i.e., matter density and cosmic curvature parameters ($\Omega_m$, $\Omega_k$). Such issue could be appropriately addressed with stringent constraints produced by the combination of 120 QSO sample and 6 time-delay lensed quasars, with the best-fitting values with 68.3\% confidence level for the three parameters: $H_0=73.39^{+ 2.06}_{-2.11}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$, $\Omega_m=0.274^{+0.083}_{-0.080}$, and $\Omega_k=0.036^{+ 0.223}_{-0.214}$. With the combined data sets 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO+4$D_{d}$, we also get stringent constraints on the model parameters
$H_0=73.78^{+1.99}_{-2.17}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$, $\Omega_m=0.254^{+0.083}_{-0.074}$, and $\Omega_k=0.100^{+0.214}_{-0.213}$. Compared with the previous results obtained in other model-independent methods \citep{Qi:2018aio}, our analysis results also demonstrate the strong degeneracy between the Hubble constant, the matter density parameter and cosmic curvature, which would be effectively broken by the combination of the latest observations of quasars, i.e., the angular size of compact structure in radio quasars as standard rulers and the time delays from gravitationally lensed quasars. The combination of the quasar data sets, justified by their consistency within $1\sigma$, retains the same correlation between $H_0$ and $\Omega_k$ as distinct samples of quasars. For the determination of Hubble constant, our constraint in the framework of non-flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmology is well consistent with the local Hubble constant measurement from SH0ES collaboration \citep{Riess:2019cxk}. The determination of $\Omega_k$ suggests no significant deviation from flat spatial hypersurfaces, although favoring a somewhat positive value in the non-flat $\Lambda$CDM case.
In the case of non-flat PEDE model, it can be clearly seen from the comparison plots presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:nonflat} that there is a consistency between 6$D_{\Delta t}$, 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO, and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO data sets.
Our results confirm that the combination of compact structure in radio quasars and angular diameter distances to the lenses (4$D_d$) could break the degeneracy between cosmological parameters and lead to a more stringent constraints on all of the cosmological parameters, which is the most unambiguous result of the current lensed + unlensed quasar data set. Interestingly, the 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO data generate a higher matter density parameter $\Omega_m=0.315^{+0.094}_{-0.106}$ compared with other quasar samples ($\Omega_m= 0.247^{+0.180}_{-0.131}$ for 6$D_{\Delta t}$ and $\Omega_m=0.275^{+0.081}_{-0.077}$ for 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO). For the Hubble constant inferred from 6$D_{\Delta t}$, 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO, and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO data sets, it's obvious that the combination of 6$D_{\Delta t}$ with 120 unlensed quasar data will result in a lower $H_0$, but adding 4$D_d$ data to the combination would increase the median value of $H_0$ comparing to the $H_0$ values obtained from 6$D_{\Delta t}$ alone. The estimated values of the Hubble constant in the non-flat PEDE model are between $H_0=71.67^{+ 16.75}_{-7.38}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ and $H_0=75.05^{+2.01}_{-2.19}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ with 6$D_{\Delta t}$ and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO data, which
in broad terms agree very well with the standard ones reported by the SH0ES collaboration \citep{Riess:2019cxk}. For the determination of cosmic curvature in the non-flat PEDE model, our results show that there is no significant evidence indicating its deviation from zero (spatially flat geometry). More specifically, the two quasar samples of 6$D_{\Delta t}$ and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO favor closed geometry ($\Omega_k=-0.027^{+ 0.340}_{-0.306}$, $\Omega_k=-0.089^{+ 0.365}_{-0.276}$), while an open universe is favoured by 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO data sets with $\Omega_k= 0.076^{+0.222}_{-0.201}$.
Finally, we perform a comparative analysis of the current lensed+unlensed
quasar data set in the non-flat DGP model. The $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence level contours for parameter estimations are shown in Fig.~2, with
the marginalized best-fitting parameters and $1\sigma$ uncertainties summarized in Table~1. Let us note that for such modified gravity model gravity arising from the braneworld theory, the best-fitting matter density parameter will be considerably shifted to a lower value. Our final assessments of the matter density with the corresponding 1$\sigma$ uncertainties ($\Omega_m=0.251^{+ 0.186}_{-0.142}$, $\Omega_m=0.253^{+0.089}_{-0.081}$, and $\Omega_m=0.253^{+0.086}_{-0.083}$ with 6$D_{\Delta t}$, 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO, and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO data sets) are consistent with the standard ones reported by other astrophysical probes, such as growth factors combined with CMB+BAO+SNe Ia observations \citep{Xia09}, Hubble parameter combined with CMB+SNe Ia data \citep{Fan08}, statistical analysis of strong gravitational lensing systems \citep{Cao2011b,Cao2012b,Ma2019,LiuT20b}, and the observations of compact structure in intermediate-luminosity radio quasars \citep{Cao:2017ivt,LiuAPJ19,LiuT21b}. For comparison, the corresponding fits on the parameter of $\Omega_{r_c}$ are also displayed in Table 1. We remark here that the DGP model will reduce to the concordance $\Lambda$CDM model when $\Omega_{rc}=0$. Considering its non-vanishing value revealed in this analysis and previous works ($\Omega_{r_c}\sim 0.14$), our fitting result shows
the DGP model fails to recover and is only a bit worse than the $\Lambda$CDM under the current observational tests (see also \citet{Fan08,Cao2011b}). We also investigate how sensitive our results on $H_0$ and $\Omega_k$ are on the choice of this cosmological model. On the one hand, the measured value of $H_0$ with 1$\sigma$ uncertainty derived from the latest quasar sample, $H_0=68.31^{+ 15.37}_{-10.45}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (6$D_{\Delta t}$) and $H_0=66.26^{+ 13.57}_{-8.04}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO) shows a perfect consistency with that derived from the recent Planck CMB observation \citep{Aghanim:2018eyx}. On the other hand, our final assessments of the cosmic curvature with corresponding 1$\sigma$ uncertainty are $\Omega_k=0.023^{+0.316}_{-0.345}$ and $\Omega_k=-0.050^{+0.328}_{-0.305}$ with the two quasar samples (6$D_{\Delta t}$ and 6$D_{\Delta t}$+QSO), which are more consistent with flat spatial hypersurfaces than what \citet{Qi:2018aio} found. From the joint analyses with lensed+unlensed quasar data, we find that the Hubble constant and the spatial curvature parameter are constrained to be $H_0=66.35^{+14.92}_{-8.10}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ and $\Omega_k=-0.047^{+0.348}_{-0.311}$, which furthermore confirms the above conclusions.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.94\linewidth]{fig4.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Determination of Hubble constant from the combined data of lensed quasars ($6D_{\Delta t}$ and $4 D_d$) and unlensed radio quasars (QSO), in the framework of six spatially flat (F) and non-flat (NF) cosmological models ($\Lambda$CDM, PEDE and DGP). }
\label{fig:H0}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.92\linewidth]{fig3.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Graphical representation of the DIC values for six spatially flat (F) and non-flat (NF) cosmological models ($\Lambda$CDM, PEDE and DGP), based on the combined data of lensed quasars ($6D_{\Delta t}$ and $4 D_d$) and unlensed radio quasars (QSO).}
\label{fig:DIC}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.92\linewidth]{fig5.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Cosmological constraints on the flat PEDE model from the combined quasar data, with different systematical uncertainties in the angular size measurements of unlensed radio quasars (QSO).}
\label{fig:sys}
\end{figure}
Now let us remark on the $H_0$ and $\Omega_k$ measurements from the newly compiled sample of ultra-compact structure in radio quasars and strong gravitational lensing systems with quasars acting as background sources. The $H_0$ determination from six spatially flat and non-flat cosmological models ($\Lambda$CDM, PEDE and DGP) are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:H0}. A joint analysis of the quasar sample (the time-delay measurements of six strong lensing systems, four angular diameter distances to the lenses and 120 intermediate-luminosity quasars calibrated as standard rulers) provides model-independent estimations of the Hubble constant $H_0$, which is strongly consistent with that derived from the local distance ladder by SH0ES collaboration in the $\Lambda$CDM and PEDE model. However, in the framework of a DGP cosmology (especially for the flat universe), the measured Hubble constant is in good agreement with that derived from the the recent Planck 2018 results. Meanwhile, our results also demonstrate that zero spatial curvature is supported by the current lensed and unlensed quasar observations and there is no significant deviation from a flat universe. Finally, our results have provided independent evidence for the accelerated expansion of the Universe, with the existence of dominant dark energy density ($\Omega_m \sim 0.30$) in the framework of six cosmologies classified into different categories. These are the most unambiguous result of the current quasar data sets.
\textit{Model comparison.---} The values of DIC for all models are reported in Table 1. According to the number of model parameters, these six cosmological models can be divided into two classes: the two-parameter models including the flat $\Lambda$CDM, flat PEDE and flat DGP; and the three-parameter models including non-flat $\Lambda$CDM, non-flat PEDE and non-flat DGP. For the two-parameter models, the flat PEDE provides the smallest information criterion result (DIC=390.68) among all of the flat cosmological models. However, we note that the difference of DIC between the flat PEDE and flat $\Lambda$CDM model is only $\Delta$DIC=0.65, which means these two models are comparable to each other according to this criterion. The flat DGP model is the worst one to explain the current lensed and unlensed quasar observations, since the DIC value it yields is the largest among the two-parameter models ($\Delta$DIC=2.99). As for the three-parameter models, the DIC results show that the non-flat $\Lambda$CDM model is still not the best one. The non-flat PEDE model, which is a little bit better than non-flat $\Lambda$CDM, performs best in explaining the quasar data (DIC=393.45), with positive evidence against non-flat DGP ($\Delta$DIC$=1.82$).
We also provide a graphical representation of the DIC results in Fig.~4 which directly shows the results in the IC test for each model. Out of all the candidate models, it is obvious that the flat PEDE and flat $\Lambda$CDM are the two most favored models in the data combination of lensed+unlensed quasars, Following them are the flat DGP, non-flat $\Lambda$CDM, and non-flat PEDE that give comparable fits to the data. According to the DIC results, the most disfavored model is non-flat DGP, with strong evidence against such cosmological scenario among the six models we study here.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we analyze six spatially flat and non-flat cosmological models ($\Lambda$CDM, PEDE and DGP) using a newly compiled sample of ultra-compact structure in radio quasars and strong gravitational lensing systems with quasars acting as background sources. This study is strongly motivated
by the need for revisiting the Hubble constant, spatial curvature and dark energy dynamics in the framework of different cosmological models of interests, and searching for implications for the non-flat Universe and extensions of the standard cosmological model (the spatially flat $\Lambda$CDM). The inclusion of such a newly compiled quasar sample in the cosmological analysis is crucial to this aim as it will extend the Hubble diagram to a high-redshift range, in which predictions from different cosmological models can be distinguished \citep{Capozziello}. From the constraints derived using the updated observations of quasars, we can identify some relatively model-independent features.
In all cosmological models, the cosmological parameters obtained from distinct quasar samples are consistent and the combination of the latest observations of quasars, i.e., the time-delay measurements of six strong lensing systems, four angular diameter distances to the lenses and 120 intermediate-luminosity quasars calibrated as standard rulers, would break the degeneracy between the Hubble constant and other cosmological parameters. The lensed quasar ($6D_{\Delta t}$ and $4 D_d$) and unlensed radio quasar (QSO) data combination produces the most reliable constraints. In particular, for most of cosmological model we study (the flat $\Lambda$CDM, non-flat $\Lambda$CDM, flat PEDE, and non-flat PEDE models), the derived matter density parameter is completely consistent with $\Omega_m\sim 0.30$ in all the data sets, as expected by the latest cosmological observations \citep{Wong:2019kwg,Cao:2017ivt,LiuAPJ19,Li17,Cao20MN,Lian21} and Planck Collaboration results ($\Omega_{m}=0.3103 \pm0.0057$) \citep{Aghanim:2018eyx}. Nevertheless, the DGP model in both flat and non-flat cases shows a deviation from this prediction, with statistical lower values of $\Omega_m=0.246^{+ 0.043}_{-0.037}$ and $\Omega_m=0.253^{+0.086}_{-0.083}$ for the combined sample of 6$D_{\Delta t}$+4$D_d$+QSO. A joint analysis of the quasar sample provides model-independent estimations of the Hubble constant $H_0$, which is strongly consistent with that derived from the local distance ladder by SH0ES collaboration \citep{Riess:2019cxk} in the $\Lambda$CDM and PEDE model. However, in the framework of a DGP cosmology (especially for the flat universe), the measured value of $H_0$ with 1$\sigma$ uncertainty, which is 3.6$\sigma$ lower than the statistical estimates of the SH0ES results, demonstrates a perfect agreement with that derived from the recent Plank CMB observations \citep{Aghanim:2018eyx}. Our findings also confirm the flatness of our universe \citep{Collett:2019hrr,Wei:2020suh,Qi2020arx}, i.e., the most unambiguous result of the current lensed and unlensed quasar observations, although there is some room for a little spatial curvature energy density in the non-flat $\Lambda$CDM, non-flat PEDE and non-flat DGP cases. Finally, we statistically evaluate which model is more consistent with the observational quasar data. Concerning the ranking of competing dark energy models, the flat PEDE is the most favored model out of all the candidate models, while the non-flat DGP is substantially penalized by the DIC criteria. However, our analysis still does not rule out dark energy being a cosmological constant and non-flat spatial hypersurfaces.
Considering the possible controversy around the systematics of the observed angular sizes of compact radio quasars \citep{Kellermann93}, the other reasonable strategy to quantify the such effect of systematics is taking $\sigma_{sys}$ as an additional free parameter, which should be fitted simultaneously with the cosmological parameters of interest. Such strategy has been extensively applied in the derivation of quasar distances based on the non-linear relation between their UV and X-ray fluxes, based on the largest quasar sample consists of 12,000 objects with both X-ray and UV observations \citep{Risaliti18}. In this paper, we perform a sensitivity
analysis by introducing an overall 5\% and 20\% systematical uncertainty to the angular size measurements of compact radio quasars, in order to investigate how the cosmological constraints on flat PEDE is altered by different choices of systematics. In the framework of such error strategy in the construction of posterior likelihood $\mathcal{L}_{QSO}$, the matter density parameter and Hubble constant respectively change to $\Omega_m=0.300^{+0.040}_{-0.034}$, $H_0=74.82^{+1.81}_{-2.04}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (5\% systematical uncertainty), and $\Omega_m=0.331^{+0.048}_{-0.040}$, $H_0=74.93^{+1.83}_{-2.05}$ $\mathrm{~km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}$ (20\% systematical uncertainty). The comparison of the resulting constraints on $\Omega_m$ and $H_0$ based on different systematical uncertainties is shown in Fig.~5. In general, one can easily check that the derived value of $\Omega_m$ is more sensitive to the systematical uncertainties of angular size measurements, i.e., a larger systematical uncertainties will shift the matter density parameter to a relatively higher value. This illustrates the importance of a larger quasar sample from future VLBI observations based on better uv-coverage \citep{Pushkarev2015}. As a final remark, from the observational point of view, one can see that the 120 unlensed radio quasars have perfect coverage of source redshifts in six strong lensing systems ($z\sim3$). Given the usefulness of compact radio quasars and strongly lensed quasars acting as standard rulers at high redshifts, we pin our hopes on a large amount of intermediate-luminosity radio quasars detected by future VLBI surveys at different frequencies \citep{Pushkarev2015}, and strongly lensed quasars with well-measured time delays discovered by future surveys of Large Synoptic Survey Telescope \citep{Collett2015}.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants Nos. 12203009, 12021003, 11690023, 11920101003 and A2020205002; the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Grant No. XDB23000000; the Interdiscipline Research Funds of Beijing Normal University; the China Manned Space Project (Nos. CMS-CSST-2021-B01 and CMS-CSST-2021-A01); and the CAS Project for Young Scientists in Basic Research under Grant No. YSBR-006. X. Li was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants No. 1200300, Hebei NSF under Grant No. A2020205002 and the fund of Hebei Normal University under Grants No. L2020B02.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods \citep[see, e.g.,][for an overview] {brooks2011handbook} sample from the posterior distribution without evaluating the normalising constant, also known as the marginal likelihood. However, in some settings, the likelihood function itself contains an additional normalising constant that depends on the model parameters and the resulting so-called doubly intractable posterior distribution falls outside the standard MCMC framework. To distinguish these normalisation quantities, we refer to the first as a normalising constant and the latter as a normalising function.
Many well-known models have doubly intractable posteriors, such as the exponential random graph models for social networks \citep{hunter2006inference} and non-Gaussian Markov random field models in spatial statistics, including the Ising model and its variants \citep{lenz1920beitrvsge,ising1925beitrag, hughes2011autologistic}.
Several algorithms are available to tackle the doubly intractable problem in Bayesian statistics; see \cite{park2018bayesian} for a review. These algorithms are classified into two main categories, with some overlap between them. The first category of methods introduce cleverly chosen auxiliary variables that cancel the normalising function when carrying out the MCMC sampling and standard MCMC such as the Metropolis-Hastings (MH) algorithm
\citep{metropolis1953equation, hastings1970monte} can thus be applied. This approach is model dependent and cannot always be applied. The second category of methods, which applies more generally, approximates the likelihood function (including the normalising function) and substitutes the approximation in place of the exact likelihood in the estimation procedure. The
pseudo-marginal (PM) method \citep{beaumont2003estimation,andrieu2009pseudo} is often used when a positive and unbiased estimator of the likelihood is available through Monte Carlo simulation. However, in some problems, including doubly intractable models, forming an unbiased estimator that is almost surely positive is prohibitively expensive \citep{jacob2015nonnegative}.
The so-called Russian roulette (RR) estimator \citep{lyne2015russian} is an example of a method that can be used to unbiasedly estimate the likelihood function in doubly intractable models, although the estimate is not necessarily positive.
We propose a method for exact inference on posterior expectations in doubly intractable problems based on the approach in \cite{lyne2015russian}, where an unbiased, but not necessarily positive, estimator of the likelihood function is used. The algorithm targets a posterior density that uses the absolute value of the likelihood, resulting in iterates from a perturbed target density. We follow \cite{lyne2015russian} and reweight the samples from the perturbed target density using importance sampling to obtain simulation-consistent estimates of the expectation of any function of the parameters with respect to the true posterior density. While our method does not sample from the target of interest, we refer to it as exact due to its simulation-consistent property.
Our main contribution is to explore the use of the block-Poisson (BP) estimator \citep{quiroz2021block} in the context of estimating doubly intractable models using the signed PMMH approach. Our method provides the following advantages over the Russian roulette method. First, the BP estimator has a much simpler structure and is more computationally efficient. Second, the block form of our estimator makes it possible to correlate the estimators of the doubly intractable posterior at the current and proposed draws in the MH algorithm. Introducing such correlation dramatically improves the efficiency of PM algorithms \citep{tran2016block, deligiannidis2018correlated}. Finally, under simplifying assumptions, some statistical properties of the logarithm of the absolute value of our estimator are derived and used to obtain heuristic guidelines to optimally tune the hyperparameters of the estimator. We demonstrate empirically that our method outperforms \cite{lyne2015russian} when estimating the Ising model. To the best of our knowledge, our method, that of \cite{lyne2015russian} and its extensions are the only alternatives in the PM framework to perform exact inference (in the sense of consistent estimates of posterior expectations) for general doubly intractable problems. Compared with algorithms which use auxiliary variables to avoid evaluating the normalising function, signed PMMH algorithms are more widely applicable and generic as they do not require exact sampling from the likelihood.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. Section \ref{sec:Doubly_intractable} formally introduces the doubly intractable problem and discusses previous research. Section \ref{sec: method} introduces our methodology and establishes the guidelines for tuning the hyperparameters of the estimator. Section \ref{sec: demo} demonstrates the proposed method in two simulation studies: the Ising model and the Kent distribution. Section \ref{sec: empirical study} analyses four real-world datasets using the Kent distribution. Section \ref{sec: discussion} concludes and outlines future research. The paper has an online supplement that contains all proofs and details of the simulation studies. The supplement also contains an additional example applying our method to a constrained Gaussian process ($\mathcal{GP}$), where the normalising function arises from the $\mathcal{GP}$ prior.
\section{Doubly intractable problems}\label{sec:Doubly_intractable}
\subsection{Doubly intractable posterior distributions\label{sec: doubly intract prob}}
Let $p(\By|\Btheta) $ denote the density of the data vector $\By$, where $\Btheta$ is the vector of model parameters. Suppose $p(\By |\Btheta) = f(\By |\Btheta)/Z(\Btheta) $, where $f(\By |\Btheta)$ is computable while the normalising function $Z(\Btheta)$ is not. The reason that $Z(\Btheta)$ is intractable may be that it is prohibitively expensive to evaluate numerically, or lacks a closed form. Two examples are given below to demonstrate the intractability for both discrete and continuous observations $\By$.
\begin{example}[The Ising model \citep{ising1925beitrag}]\label{Ex: Ising}
Consider an $L \times L$ lattice with binary observation $y_{ij}\in \{ -1,1\}$ in row $i$ and column $j$. The likelihood of $\theta \in \mathbb{R}$ is
\begin{align} \label{eq: Ising}
p(\By|\theta) &= \frac{1}{Z(\theta)}\exp ( \theta S(\By)) ; \quad
S(\By) = \sum_{i=1}^{L} \sum_{j=1}^{L-1} y_{i,j} y_{i,j+1} + \sum_{i=1}^{L-1} \sum_{j=1}^L y_{i,j} y_{i+1,j};\\
\mbox{with }
Z(\theta) &= \sum_{\By} \exp(\theta S(\By))\notag.
\end{align}
The normalising function $Z(\theta)$ in the Ising model is a sum over $2^{L^2}$ terms of the form $S(\By)$, making it computationally intractable even for moderate values of $L$. See Section \ref{sec: ising model} for a further discussion.
\end{example}
\begin{example} [The Kent distribution \citep{kent1982fisher}] \label{Ex: Kent}
The density of the Kent distribution
for $\By \in \mathbb{R}^3, \norm{\By} = 1$, is
\begin{align} \label{eq: Kent}
f(\By|\boldsymbol{\gamma_1},\boldsymbol{\gamma_2},\boldsymbol{\gamma_3},\beta,\kappa) &= \frac{1}{c(\kappa,\beta)} \exp\left\{\kappa \boldsymbol{\gamma_1}^\top \cdot \By + \beta \left[(\boldsymbol{\gamma_2}^\top \cdot\By)^2 - (\boldsymbol{\gamma_3}^\top \cdot\By)^2\right]\right\};\\
\mbox{with } c(\kappa, \beta) &= 2\pi \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{\Gamma(j+0.5)}{\Gamma(j+1)} \beta^{2j} (0.5\kappa)^{-2j-0.5} I_{2j+0.5}(\kappa),\; \notag
\end{align}
where $I_\nu(.)$ is the modified Bessel function of the first kind and $\boldsymbol{\gamma_1},\boldsymbol{\gamma_2},\boldsymbol{\gamma_3}$ form a set of 3-dimensional orthonormal vectors. The normalising function $c(\kappa,\beta)$ is an infinite sum. See Section \ref{subsec: kent_dist} for further analysis.
\end{example}
The doubly intractable posterior density of $\Btheta$ is
\begin{align}\label{eq:target_doubly_intractable}
\pi(\Btheta|\By) = \dfrac{f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)}{Z(\Btheta) p(\By)},
\end{align}
where $\pi(\Btheta)$ is the prior for $\Btheta$ and \begin{align}\label{eq:normalising_const}
p(\By) & =\int \dfrac{f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)}{Z(\Btheta)} d\Btheta
\end{align}
is the normalising constant. Suppose we devise a Metropolis-Hastings algorithm to sample from \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable} with a proposal density $q(\cdot|\Btheta)$. The probability of accepting a proposed sample $\Btheta'$ is
\begin{align}\label{eq:MH_accept}
\alpha(\Btheta',\Btheta) = \min \left\{1,
\dfrac{\pi(\Btheta')f(\By|\Btheta')/Z(\Btheta')}{\pi(\Btheta)f(\By|\Btheta))/Z(\Btheta)}\times \dfrac{q(\Btheta|\Btheta')}{q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)}\right\}.
\end{align}
The marginal likelihood in \eqref{eq:normalising_const} cancels in \eqref{eq:MH_accept}, but the normalising function does not. Since $Z(\Btheta)/Z(\Btheta')$ is computationally intractable, \eqref{eq:MH_accept} cannot be evaluated and thus MCMC sampling via the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm is impossible.
\subsection{Previous research} \label{sec: previous research}
Previous research on doubly intractable problems is mainly divided into the auxiliary variable approach and the likelihood approximation approach; see \cite{park2018bayesian} for an excellent review of both approaches.
The auxiliary variable approach cleverly chooses the joint transition kernel of the parameters and the auxiliary variables so that the normalising function cancels in the resulting MH acceptance ratio. The most well-known algorithms are the exchange algorithm \citep{murray2006mcmc} and the auxiliary variable method \citep{moller2006efficient}. Both algorithms are model dependent and rely on the sampling technique used to draw observations from the likelihood function. Perfect sampling \citep{propp1996exact} is often used to generate data samples from the model without knowing the normalising function. However, for some complex models, such as the Ising model on a large grid, perfect sampling is prohibitively expensive. To overcome this issue, \cite{liang2010double} and \cite{liang2016adaptive} relax the requirement of exact sampling and propose the double MH sampler and the adaptive exchange algorithm. However, the former generates inexact inference results and the latter suffers from memory issues as many intermediate variables need to be stored within each iteration.
The likelihood approximation approach are often simulation consistent. \cite{atchade2013bayesian} directly approximate $Z(\Btheta)$ through multiple importance sampling. Their approach also depends on an auxiliary variable, but does not require perfect sampling. The downside is similar to that of the adaptive exchange algorithm; a large memory is usually required to store the intermediate variables generated in each iteration. An alternative method is to approximate $1/Z(\Btheta)$ directly using the signed PMMH algorithm to replace the likelihood function by its unbiased estimator as proposed in \cite{lyne2015russian}. To obtain the unbiased estimator, $1/Z(\Btheta)$ is expressed as a geometric series which is truncated using an RR approach. The RR method first appeared in the physics literature \citep{carter1975particle} and is useful for obtaining an unbiased estimator through a finite stochastic truncation of an infinite series. To implement RR, a tight upper bound for $Z(\Btheta)$ is required, otherwise the convergence of the geometric series is slow and makes the algorithm inefficient. In practice, an upper bound is usually unavailable, which may lead to negative estimates of the likelihood and thus a signed PMMH approach is necessary, although it inflates the asymptotic variance of the MCMC chain \citep{andrieu2016establishing} compared to a standard PM approach, especially if the estimator produces a significant proportion of negative estimates \citep{lyne2015russian}. It is therefore crucial to quantify the probability of a negative estimate when tuning the hyperparameters of the estimator, which is difficult for the RR estimator. In contrast, our estimator is more tractable and the probability of a positive estimate is analytically derived under simplifying assumptions. Besides the upper bound, a few other hyperparameters of the RR estimator need to be determined for which guidelines are unavailable due to its intractability. \cite{wei2017markov} combine RR with Markov chain coupling to produce an estimator with lower variance and a larger probability of producing positive estimates. However, their estimator is insufficiently tractable to guarantee a positive estimate with a smaller variance, making it difficult to derive optimal tuning guidelines. \cite{caimulti} propose a multi-fidelity MCMC method to approximate the doubly intractable target density which, like the Russian roulette method, stochastically truncates an infinite series and uses slice sampling \citep{murray2016pseudo}. However, similarly to \cite{lyne2015russian}, the method lacks guidelines for tuning the hyperparameters.
\section{Methodology} \label{sec: method}
\subsection{The block-Poisson estimator}\label{sec: blockPois}
The block-Poisson estimator \citep{quiroz2021block} is useful for estimating the likelihood unbiasedly given an unbiased estimator of the log-likelihood obtained by data subsampling. The block-Poisson estimator consists of blocks of Poisson estimators \citep{papaspiliopoulos2011monte}. The Poisson estimator, like the block-Poisson estimator, is useful for estimating $\exp(B)$ unbiasedly, assuming that there exists an unbiased estimator $\widehat{B}$ of $B$, i.e.\ $E(\widehat{B}) = B$. The idea behind using blocks of Poisson estimators is to allow for correlation between successive iterates in the PM algorithm as described in Section \ref{sec: signed PMMH}. Similarly to the likelihood approximation approaches discussed above, the BP estimator is implemented in combination with an auxiliary variable $\nu$, and an estimator of the normalising function. Omitting details of the auxiliary variable method that are explained in Section \ref{sec: signed PMMH}, assume $B(\Btheta) = -\nu Z(\Btheta)$. Given $\nu$ and an unbiased estimator of $Z(\Btheta)$, the BP estimator produces an unbiased estimator of $\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$. The BP estimator requires a lower bound for $B(\Btheta)$ to guarantee its positiveness. The BP estimator is more likely to be positive than the RR estimator, because we can derive the probability of the estimator being positive and tune the hyperparameters to control this probability.
Definition \ref{def: BP} describes the BP estimator $\widehat{L}_B$.
Lemma \ref{lemma: block poisson est} gives the expectation and variance of $\widehat{L}_B$. Lemmas \ref{lemma: positive prob} and \ref{lemma: log variance} establish useful results for tuning the hyperparameters of the estimator (see Section \ref{sec: tuning para}). Section \ref{app: BPproof} in the supplement contains the proofs.
\begin{definition} \label{def: BP}
The block-Poisson estimator \citep{quiroz2021block} is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq: block_pois_est}
\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) := \prod_{l=1}^{\lambda} \exp(\xi_l(\Btheta)), \,\,
\exp(\xi_l(\Btheta)) =\exp(a/ \lambda + m) \prod_{h=1}^{\chi_l} \dfrac{\widehat{B}^{(h,l)}(\Btheta)-a}{m\lambda},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is the number of blocks, $\chi_l \sim \mathrm{Pois}(m)$, a Poisson distribution with mean $m$, $a$ is an arbitrary constant and $m$ is the expected number of estimators used within each block.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: block poisson est}
Denote $\sigma^2_B :=\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{B}(\Btheta))$, and assume $\sigma^2_B < \infty$ and $E(\widehat{B}(\Btheta)) = B(\Btheta)$. The following properties hold for $\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)$ in \eqref{eq: block_pois_est}:
\begin{itemize}[label={}]
\item(i) $E(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)) = \exp(B(\Btheta))$.
\item(ii) $
\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)) = \exp\bigg[ \dfrac{(B(\Btheta)-a)^2 + \sigma^2_B}{m\lambda } + 2a + m\lambda \bigg] - \exp(2B(\Btheta)) $.
\item(iii) $\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta))$ is minimised at $a = B(\Btheta) - m\lambda$, given fixed $m$ and $\lambda$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
Part (i) of Lemma \ref{lemma: block poisson est} shows that given an unbiased estimator $\widehat{B}(\Btheta)$ of $B(\Btheta)$, the BP estimator is unbiased for $\exp(B(\Btheta))$. Part (iii) of Lemma \ref{lemma: block poisson est} suggests that we can choose the lower bound $a = \widehat{B}(\Btheta) - m\lambda$, as $B(\Btheta)$ is unknown. Similarly to the RR estimator, the BP estimator is not necessarily positive. By choosing a relatively large $m\lambda$, the sufficient condition for $\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)\geq 0$, i.e.\ $\widehat{B}(\Btheta)-a>0$, is likely to be satisfied; however, it is computationally costly as a large $m\lambda$ value implies many products in the BP estimator. We follow \cite{quiroz2021block} and advocate the use of a soft lower bound, i.e.,\ one that may lead to negative estimates, but still gives a $\Pr(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) \geq 0)$ close to one. Lemma \ref{lemma: positive prob} shows that the probability $\Pr(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) \geq 0)$ is analytically tractable. It is crucial to have this probability close to one for the algorithm to be efficient.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: positive prob}
\[ \Pr(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) \geq 0) = \dfrac{1}{2}\bigg( 1 + (1-2 \mathsf{\Psi}(a,m,M))^\lambda \bigg), \]
with $\Psi(a,m,M) = Pr (\xi < 0) = \dfrac{1}{2} \sum_{j=1}^\infty \left( 1 - (1-2 \Pr(A_m \leq 0))^j \right) \Pr(\chi_l = j)$, $\chi_l \sim \mathrm{Pois}(m)$ and $A_m = [\widehat{B}(\Btheta) - B(\Btheta)]/ (m\lambda) + 1$.
\end{lemma}
Lemma \ref{lemma: log variance} derives the variance of the logarithm of the absolute value of the block-Poisson estimator by assuming a normal distribution for $\widehat{B}^{(h,l)}(\Btheta)$. Section \ref{sec: tuning para} tunes the hyperparameters using this result.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: log variance}
If $\widehat{B}^{(h,l)}(\Btheta) \stackrel{\mathrm{iid}}{\sim} N(B(\Btheta), \sigma_B^2)$ for all $h$ and $l$, when $a = B(\Btheta) - m\lambda$, then the variance of $\log |{\widehat{L}_B}|$ is
\[ \sigma^2_{\log \abs*{\widehat{L}_B}} = m\lambda (\nu_B^2 + \eta_B^2),\]
where
\[ \eta_B = \log(\sigma_B/(m\lambda)) + 0.5 \left( \log 2 + E_J(\psi^{(0)} (0.5 + J)) \right) \]
and
\[\nu_B^2 = 0.25 \left( E_J(\psi^{(1)} (0.5 +J)) + \mathrm{Var}_J(\psi^{(0)}(0.5+J)) \right), \]
with $J \sim \mathrm{Pois}( (m\lambda)^2/(2\sigma_B^2))$ and $\psi^{(q)}$ is the polygamma function of order $q$.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Signed block PMMH with the BP estimator}\label{sec: signed PMMH}
\cite{lyne2015russian} use an auxiliary variable $\nu$ to cancel the reciprocal of the normalising function in \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable} and end up with $\exp(\nu Z(\Btheta))$ instead. Specifically,
assume that $\nu \sim \text{Expon}(Z(\Btheta))$. The joint density of $\Btheta$ and the auxiliary variable $\nu$ is
\begin{align}
\pi(\Btheta, \nu|\By) &= Z(\Btheta) \exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) \dfrac{f(\By| \Btheta)}{Z(\Btheta)} \pi(\Btheta) \dfrac{1}{p(\By)} \nonumber \\
&\propto \exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta) \label{eq:augmented_posterior}.
\end{align}
We can use the BP estimator to obtain an unbiased estimator of the augmented posterior in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior}, up to a normalising constant. Denote the unbiased estimator of $\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$ by $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$. To emphasise the source of randomness in the estimator, let $\Bu$ be a set of random numbers with density $p(\Bu)$ and write the estimator (with a small abuse of notation) as $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)$. The unbiasedness of the estimator is with respect to the density $p(\Bu)$, i.e.\
\begin{align}\label{eq:unbiased_estimator}
\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) & = \int_{\Bu} \widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu) p(\Bu) d\Bu.
\end{align}
The augmented version of the posterior density in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior} is
\begin{align}\label{eq:augmented_posterior_u}
\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta,\Bu, \nu| \By) & = \widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu) p(\Bu) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)\frac{1}{p(\By)}.
\end{align}
It is easy to show that, under the unbiasedness condition in \eqref{eq:unbiased_estimator}, integrating out $\Bu$ in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior_u} gives the marginal density of interest in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior} for $\Btheta, \nu$. However, we cannot sample from \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior_u} using a pseudo-marginal algorithm as the BP estimates may be negative and hence it is not a valid density. We follow \cite{lyne2015russian} and consider the target density
\begin{align}\label{eq:absolute_target}
|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta,\Bu, \nu|\By)| = |\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)| p(\Bu) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)\frac{1}{p(\By)}.
\end{align}
Integrating out $\Bu$ in \eqref{eq:absolute_target} does not give the marginal density of interest in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior} because $|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)|$ is biased. \cite{lyne2015russian} propose reweighting the MCMC iterates using importance sampling to obtain a simulation consistent estimate of the expectation of an arbitrary function $\psi(\Btheta)$ with respect to the posterior density $\pi(\Btheta|\By)$, i.e.\
\begin{align}\label{eq:expectation_doubly_intractable}
E_{\pi} (\psi(\Btheta)|\By) = \int_{\Btheta} \psi(\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta|\By) d\Btheta,
\end{align}
which we now outline in some detail. We can write
\begin{align*}
E_{\pi} (\psi(\Btheta)|\By)
&= \int_{\Btheta}\psi(\Btheta)\int_{\nu} \pi(\Btheta,\nu|\By) d\nu d\Btheta\\
&= \int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\psi(\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta,\nu|\By) d\nu d\Btheta\\
&= \frac{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\psi(\Btheta) \exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta}{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta) d\nu d\Btheta} \\
&= \frac{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\psi(\Btheta) \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}( \Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)\right| f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta}{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)\right| f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta} \\
& = \frac{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\psi(\Btheta) \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}( \Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right|d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta}{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right| d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta},
\end{align*}
i.e.\ a ratio of expectations with respect to $\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right|$,
where $\mathrm{sign}(x) = 1$ if $x >0$, or $\mathrm{sign}(x) = -1$ if $x < 0$. Thus,
we can sample from $\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right|$ by a pseudo-marginal MH algorithm to compute the expectations in the ratio. Since the function $\psi(\Btheta)$ is independent of $\nu$, we only store $\Btheta^{(i)}$ and the sign of the likelihood estimate evaluated at the accepted $\Btheta^{(i)}, \Bu^{(i)}, \nu^{(i)}$ at the $i$th iterate. The estimate of the expectation in \eqref{eq:expectation_doubly_intractable} with respect to the true doubly intractable posterior in \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable} is
\begin{equation}\label{eq: final_est}
\widehat{E}_{\pi}(\psi(\Btheta)) = \dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^N \psi(\Btheta^{(i)}) s^{(i)}}{\sum_{i=1}^N s^{(i)}},
\end{equation}
where $s^{(i)} = \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))$.
Finally, to make the pseudo-marginal algorithm for sampling from \eqref{eq:absolute_target} more efficient, we correlate the estimators at the current and proposed draws to decrease the variability of the difference of the log likelihoods. This provides a substantial advantage over the standard pseudo-marginal method that proposes $\Bu$ independently in each iteration \citep{deligiannidis2018correlated, tran2016block}. We follow the approach in \cite{tran2016block}, where the correlation is induced by blocking the random numbers and updating one of the blocks in evaluating the likelihood at the proposal, while keeping the rest of the blocks fixed.
In the BP estimator, we use the random number $u_l$ to sample $\xi_l$, $l=1,\dots,\lambda$ and group them as $\Bu = (u_1,\dots,u_\lambda) = u_{1:\lambda}$. Note that each $u_l$ may include random numbers of different sizes depending on the realised $\chi_l \sim \mathrm{Pois}(m)$. If the number of blocks $\lambda$ is sufficiently large, the correlation $\rho$ between the logs of the likelihood estimators evaluated at the current and proposed draws is approximately $1-1/\lambda$ \citep{quiroz2021block}. We can adjust the number of blocks $\lambda$ to achieve a pre-specified correlation between the log of likelihood estimates.
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{One iteration of the signed block PMMH update with the BP estimator.}\label{algo: PMMH_DI}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State \textbf{Input:} Current values of $\nu,\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}$.
\State \textbf{Output:} Updated values of $\nu,\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}$ and $\mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}, \nu |\By))$.
\State Generate $u'_{1:\lambda} \gets u_{1:\lambda}$ by updating one block of random numbers.
\State Generate $\Btheta'$ from $q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)$.
\State Compute the unbiased estimates $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta')$s and use them to construct the BP estimator via \eqref{eq: block_pois_est}. The proposal distribution of the auxiliary variable $\nu'$ is an exponential distribution with mean $\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')$ : $$q(\nu'|\Btheta') = \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta') \exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')),$$ where $\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')$ is the average of the $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta')$s used in the BP estimator.
\State Set $\Btheta \gets \Btheta'$, $\nu \gets \nu'$ and $u_{1:\lambda} \gets u'_{1:\lambda}$ with probability
\begin{equation} \label{eq: ar_PMMH}
\min \left\{1,
\frac{\lvert \widehat{\pi}(\Btheta', \nu'|\By,u'_{1:\lambda}) \rvert}{\lvert \widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \nu|\By, u_{1:\lambda}) \rvert}
\dfrac{q(\Btheta| \Btheta')}{q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)}
\dfrac{\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta)}{\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')}
\dfrac{\exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta))}{\exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta'))} \right\},
\end{equation}
where $$\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta,\nu|\By,u_{1:\lambda}) = \widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda}) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta) p^{-1}(\By),$$ and $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda})$ is obtained by the BP estimator.
\State Record $s = \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}, \nu|\By))$ which is also the sign of $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda})$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Algorithm \ref{algo: PMMH_DI} outlines one iteration of our method. Rewriting equation
\eqref{eq: ar_PMMH} as
\begin{align}
\frac{\pi(\Btheta') f(\By|\Btheta')}{\pi(\Btheta) f(\By|\Btheta)} \times \dfrac{q(\Btheta|\Btheta')}{q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)} \times \frac{\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta')}{\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta)} \times \dfrac{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu' Z(\Btheta')|u'_{1:\lambda})| / \exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta'))}{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda} )| / \exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta))} \notag,
\end{align}
we observe that $$\frac{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu' Z(\Btheta')|u'_{1:\lambda})| / \exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta'))}{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda} )| / \exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta))}$$
acts as a bias-correction for the bias induced when estimating $Z^{-1}(\Btheta')/Z^{-1}(\Btheta)$ by $\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta')/\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta)$. When forming the $\widehat{Z}_P$ estimators, we recommend using the average of the corresponding $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$s used in the BP estimator. This does not affect the unbiasedness property of the BP estimator and is computationally efficient, as the $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$s have already been computed and the extra cost in obtaining the average is negligible.
Equation \eqref{eq: final_est} computes the estimate of $\psi(\Btheta)$. \cite{lyne2015russian} show that having a significant proportion of negative likelihood estimates inflates the asymptotic variance. The worst case occurs when half of the estimates are negative, as the expectation is then unbounded because of the zero in the denominator.
\subsection{Tuning the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator}\label{sec: tuning para}
\cite{pitt2012some} provide guidelines to tune the number of particles (number of random numbers to use in the estimate of the likelihood) in a pseudo-marginal algorithm with a positive unbiased estimator to achieve an optimal trade-off between computing time and MCMC efficiency as measured by the integrated autocorrelation time (IACT), also known as the inefficiency factor (IF). Suppose that $\theta^{(j)}$, $j=1,2,\dots$, are the iterates after convergence of the MCMC and let $\vartheta^{(j)} = \psi(\theta^{(j)})$ be a scalar function of the iterates. Let $r_\tau$ be the correlation between $\vartheta^{(j)}$ and $\vartheta^{(j+\tau)}$. In pseudo-marginal algorithms, $r_\tau$ depends on the variance of the log of the likelihood estimator $\widehat{L}$, which we denote by $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$. The inefficiency factor is defined as
$$\mathrm{IF}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}) = 1 + 2\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty r_\tau(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}).$$
A larger $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$ results in a stickier chain and thus $\mathrm{IF}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}})$ is an increasing function of $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$; see \cite{pitt2012some} for details. To also take the computing time into account when determining the number of particles to use, \cite{pitt2012some} show that the expected number of particles is inversely proportional to $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$ and define the computational time $\mathrm{CT}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}})=\mathrm{IF}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}})/\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$. This measure takes into account both the mixing of the chain (through IF) and the cost of computing the estimator (through the number of particles which is inversely proportional to $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$). \cite{pitt2012some} show that, under certain simplifying assumptions, $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}\approx 1$ is optimal, and thus the guideline is to choose the number of particles to achieve this.
\cite{quiroz2021block} extend the guidelines in \cite{pitt2012some} to cases when the likelihood estimator is not necessarily positive. The derivation of our guidelines follow those in \cite{quiroz2021block}, with modifications that account for a different estimator. Following Section 4.3 of \cite{quiroz2021block}, the optimal hyperparameters, given below, minimise the following computational time (CT)
\begin{equation}\label{eq: CT}
\mathrm{CT} = m\lambda M \frac{\mathrm{IF}_{\abs{\widehat{\pi}} ,\psi s}\left( \sigma^2_{\log |\widehat{L}_B|} (m, \lambda, M |\gamma)\right)}{(2\tau(m,\lambda,M) -1)^2}.
\end{equation}
The first term $m\lambda M$ is proportional to the expected cost per iteration since there are $\lambda$ blocks in total and each block includes $m$ estimates on average with $M$ Monte Carlo samples in each. The numerator in \eqref{eq: CT} is the inefficiency factor, which measures the MCMC sampling efficiency of drawing $\psi$'s from the targeted distribution $|\widehat{\pi}|$.
The IF is implicitly determined by the variance of the log of the absolute likelihood estimate $\sigma^2_{\log \abs{\widehat{L}_B}}$ (recall the discussion for a positive likelihood estimator above), which in turn depends on the hyperparameters $m,\lambda, M$. Section S2 of \cite{quiroz2021block} provides more details and derives the form of the IF.
Evaluating IF in \eqref{eq: CT} requires $\gamma(\Btheta):= M \mathrm{Var}(-\nu \widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta)),$ provided that the estimator of $Z(\Btheta)$ is obtained by Monte Carlo integration using $M$ particles. Note that $\gamma(\Btheta)$ is the intrinsic variance of the population $\nu\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$, and does not depend on $M$. The term $\gamma(\Btheta)$ is decomposed as
\begin{align}\label{eq: gamma_expression}
\gamma(\Btheta) &= M\mathrm{Var}(-\nu \widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta)) = M \mathrm{Var} \left( - \frac{\log(u)}{Z(\Btheta)}\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta) \right) \nonumber \\
& = M \log(u)^2 \frac{\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta))}{Z(\Btheta)^2}.
\end{align}
For the second equality in \eqref{eq: gamma_expression} we use that $\nu \sim \mathrm{Expon}(Z(\Btheta))$ is equivalent to $\nu = -\log(u)/Z(\Btheta),$ with $u \sim \mathrm{Uniform}(0,1)$. This decomposition is useful in tuning the hyperparameters.
The denominator in \eqref{eq: CT} contains $\tau(m,\lambda,M) = \Pr(\widehat{L}_B>0)$, with the expression given by Lemma \ref{lemma: positive prob}.
Equation~ \eqref{eq: CT} shows that it is important to have a large proportion of estimates of the same sign, while having close to half of the estimates being negative increases CT.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\subfloat[][\centering $\rho =0$]
{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/dependence_CT_rho_0.png}}
\qquad
\subfloat[][\centering $\rho = 0.99$]
{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/dependence_CT_rho_99.png}}
\caption{The effect of the number of blocks $\lambda$ on the logarithm of CT, $\tau$ and $\sigma^2_{\log\left|\widehat{L}_B\right|}$. The Poisson parameter $m$ is fixed at 1 for each set of panels (a,b). The correlation term is set to $\rho = 0$ (upper panel), 0.99 (bottom panel). Columns from left to right, correspond to three different settings of $\gamma = 10^2$, $100^2$, and $500^2$. The top, middle and last rows of each panel show log CT \eqref{eq: CT}, the probability of obtaining a positive estimator $\tau(m,\lambda,M)$ (see Lemma \ref{lemma: positive prob}) and the variance of log of the absolute value of the likelihood estimate. The vertical line on each plot represents $\lambda_{\mathrm{opt}}$, the optimal $\lambda$, which minimises the logarithm of CT among three settings.}\label{fig:CT_dependence}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:CT_dependence} shows the effects of the number of blocks ($\lambda$) and Monte Carlo samples ($M$) on the logarithm of CT, $\tau$ and $\sigma^2_{\log \abs{\widehat{L}_B}}$. We consider the three cases $\gamma = 10^2, 100^2, 500^2$ (left to right columns respectively) which show that
the optimal $\lambda$ (corresponding to minimal CT) varies with different values of $M$ and increases with $\gamma$ (top row).
The minimum CT is associated with a high probability of a positive estimator ($\tau$) (middle row). The last row indicates that $\sigma^2_{\log \abs{\widehat{L}_B}}$ decreases as a function of $\lambda$. Comparing the top nine panels with the bottom nine, a high correlation $\rho = 0.99$, reduces $\lambda_{\mathrm{opt}}$ from 295 (no correlation, $\rho=0$) to 195 for $\gamma = 500^2$. Conversely, $\rho = 0.99$ requires at least 100 blocks. So when the variance $\gamma$ is small, introducing a high correlation increases the CT as more blocks are required compared to the uncorrelated case. Our implementation follows the approach in \cite{tran2016block} which sets the correlation $\rho$ to a value close to 1. Comparing the first row of the top panel (a) in Figure \ref{fig:CT_dependence} with that of the bottom (b), shows that a high correlation significantly reduces the CT per iteration for large $\gamma$.
The conclusion is that the optimal tuning depends on $\gamma$ in \eqref{eq: gamma_expression}, which is the intrinsic variability of the population $\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$. For conservative tuning, in our applications we set $\gamma$ to a large value $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}$ by using a grid search over possible $\Btheta$. The tuning process starts with fixed values of $\lambda$ and $m$ to find the optimal value for $M$ that minimises \eqref{eq: CT}. In Figure \ref{fig:optimal_M}, we fix the values of $\lambda$ and $m$, with $\lambda = 50, 100$ (the corresponding $\rho$ are 0.98 and 0.99 respectively), and $m = 1$. A standard optimiser is used to find the optimal value $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ for each of the $\gamma$. The scattered dots in the left panel of Figure \ref{fig:optimal_M} plot various values of $\sqrt{\gamma}$ and the corresponding $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$. The figure shows that $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ increases as a function of $\sqrt{\gamma}$ and similarly for the logarithm of CT as the right panel shows. To estimate the relationship between $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ and $\sqrt{\gamma}$, a quadratic polynomial is fitted to the points in the left panel.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/optimal_M_CT.png}
\caption{Left panel: The optimal value $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ as a function of $\sqrt{\gamma}$. The lines are quadratic polynomials fitted to the scattered dots. The horizontal dashed line represents the threshold $M=50$, which is the minimal number of blocks required in the algorithm. Right panel: The minimised CT as a function of $\sqrt{\gamma}$. }
\label{fig:optimal_M}
\end{figure}
The following tuning strategy is based on $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}$, leading to a conservative choice of $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item [1] Have a general idea of the posterior distribution of $\Btheta$. This can be accomplished by conducting an exact method for a few iterations, optimising the posterior distribution by plugging the biased estimator ($1/\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$), or applying an available approximate method.
\item [2] Estimate the corresponding $\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta))/Z^2(\Btheta)$ using a grid search over possible $\Btheta$ values based on results from Step 1. The estimator $\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta)$ can be plugged into \eqref{eq: gamma_expression} to replace the unknown $Z(\Btheta)$. The variability induced by $\nu$ needs to be considered here. A conservative choice is $\gamma(\Btheta) = 2M \mathrm{Var}(\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta))/\widehat{Z_M}^2(\Btheta)$. Section \ref{sec: discussion of algo} in the supplement discusses this in more detail.
\item [3] Obtain the maximum value $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}(\Btheta)$ of $\gamma(\Btheta)$ from Step 2. A good starting point is to set $\lambda = 100, m= 1, \rho = 0.99$ and $M_{\mathrm{opt}} = \max \{50, 0.0012 \times \gamma_{\max}(\Btheta) \}$.
When $\gamma_{\max}(\Btheta)$ is small or moderately large, e.g.\ $\gamma_{\max}(\Btheta) < 100^2$, having many blocks increases CT. A weaker correlation also produces an efficient algorithm with smaller CT. Another suitable setting is $\lambda = 50, m = 1, \rho = 0.98$ and $M_{\mathrm{opt}}=\max\{50, 0.0042 \times \gamma_{\max}(\Btheta)\}$.
For an even smaller $\gamma(\Btheta)$, the correlation can be relaxed further. In the Ising model example, setting $\lambda = 10$ is sufficient when the variability is low; see Section \ref{sec: ising model} and Section \ref{app: ising model} in the supplement.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{An alternative pseudo-marginal approach under strong assumptions}\label{subsec:bias_corrected}
If the estimator $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$ is normally distributed with a known variance, then an unbiased almost surely positive estimator may be derived using the penalty method in \cite{ceperley1999penalty}.
Suppose that $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta) \sim N(Z(\Btheta),\sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)})$, where $\sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)}$ is the variance of $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$. Then $\exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta))$ is log-normally distributed with expected value
$$E(\exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta)))=\exp\left(-\nu Z(\Btheta)+\frac{1}{2}\nu^2 \sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)}\right);$$
hence
\begin{equation}
\exp\left(-\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta)-\frac{1}{2}\nu^2 \sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)}\right)
\end{equation}
is a positive unbiased estimator of $\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$. Thus, under the idealised assumptions that $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$ is normal with a known variance, we can use a pseudo-marginal algorithm to obtain samples from \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable}. However, in practice, $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$ is rarely normal and the variance must be estimated, so this method provides approximate samples in practice. It is outside the scope of this paper to study the resulting perturbation error.
The advantage of this method is that it is much faster than the BP estimator, because it only requires a single estimate of the normalising function. However, unlike our method, it is not simulation consistent. Section \ref{sec: ising model} implements this method as a fast alternative to our exact approach.
\section{Simulation studies} \label{sec: demo}
We demonstrate the algorithm on three examples. The first is an Ising model, which is the usual benchmark example for doubly intractable problems as perfect sampling is available for this model on small grids. The example compares the signed PMMH with the BP estimator to other methods, including methods that sample from the exact posterior \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable}. The signed PMMH with the BP estimator generates simulation consistent results with less computing time for this example. The second example considers
the Kent distribution, where the intractable normalising function is an infinite sum. To the best of our knowledge, exact Bayesian inference has not been considered for the Kent distribution due to its intractability. We show that, under certain settings, the Bayesian estimate obtained by our method outperforms those obtained by the maximum likelihood method and the method of moments with respect to the mean squared error. Finally, Section \ref{sec: GP} in the supplement contains a third example considering a constrained Gaussian process, where the normalising function arises from constraining the process to be positive. We show that not accounting for the constraint, i.e.\ not taking into account the normalising function, leads to erroneous inference. The constrained Gaussian process and the Kent distribution are two examples of models where the non-pseudo methods (the auxiliary variable approaches that require perfect sampling) cannot be easily applied.
\subsection{The Ising model} \label{sec: ising model}
The Ising model \citep{lenz1920beitrvsge, ising1925beitrag} has widespread applications, such as understanding phase transitions in thermodynamic systems \citep{fredrickson1984kinetic}, interactive image segmentation in vision problems \citep{kolmogorov2004energy} and modelling small-world networks \citep{herrero2002ising}. It is the typical benchmark example in the literature to evaluate methods for tackling the doubly intractable problem; see e.g.\ \cite{moller2006efficient, lyne2015russian, atchade2013bayesian, park2018bayesian}. However, most of the existing methods use auxiliary variable approaches, as it is feasible to draw observations from the likelihood function perfectly, so-called perfect sampling. The pseudo-marginal methods such as RR and our approach do not require perfect sampling, which makes them applicable to more general problems. We implement and compare the results from the BP estimator, the bias-corrected estimator in Section \ref{subsec:bias_corrected} and the RR method for the Ising model.
Example \ref{eq: Ising} in Section \ref{sec: doubly intract prob}: consider an $L \times L$ lattice with binary observations $y_{ij}$ of row $i$ and column $j$ ($y_{ij} \in \{ -1,1\})$. The model is
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}
p(\By|\theta) &= \frac{1}{Z(\theta)}\exp ( \theta S(\By)),\\
\text {with } S(\By) &= \sum_{i=1}^{L} \sum_{j=1}^{L-1} y_{i,j} y_{i,j+1} + \sum_{i=1}^{L-1} \sum_{j=1}^L y_{i,j} y_{i+1,j}\\
\text{and } Z(\theta) &= \sum_{\By} \exp(\theta S(\By));\notag
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
$\theta$ is a scalar parameter and $S(\By)$ imposes spatial dependence; a stronger interaction between observations is associated with a larger $\theta$. Obtaining $Z(\theta)$ is computationally expensive with a sum over $2^{L^2}$ possible configurations.
The data simulations are conducted using perfect sampling \citep{propp1996exact}, which samples exactly without evaluating the normalising function. Perfect sampling uses coupling to guarantee that the samples are generated from a Markov chain which has already converged to its equilibrium distribution. Following the settings in \cite{park2018bayesian}, two scenarios are considered on a $10 \times 10$ grid, with $\theta = 0.2$ and $ 0.43$; see Figure \ref{fig:ising model demo} for an illustration.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/ising_demon.png}
\caption{Illustrating an Ising model on a $10\times 10$ grid. The samples are drawn using perfect sampling with $\theta=0.2$ (left) and $\theta=0.43$ (right). The light and dark blue squares correspond to the values 1 and $-1$. }
\label{fig:ising model demo}
\end{figure}
For all the algorithms considered, a uniform distribution on $[0,1]$ is selected as the prior for $\theta$. We adopt a random walk proposal centred at the current $\theta$ with a step size 0.07. The pseudo-marginal methods (RR, BP, and the bias-corrected estimator) require an unbiased estimator for $Z(\theta)$. We use annealed importance sampling (AIS) \citep{neal2001annealed} to obtain the estimate of $Z(\theta)$. The method starts by sampling from a tractable distribution (the prior) and ends at the intractable target (the posterior) via a sequence of intermediate distributions. The transitions between the distributions are completed via Gibbs updates and the weights associated with the transitions finally constitute the normalising function of interest; see \cite{neal2001annealed} for details of AIS in general and Section \ref{app: ising model} in the supplement for its implementation for the Ising model.
To obtain the ``gold'' standard to evaluate the accuracy of the results, we follow \cite{park2018bayesian}, where an exchange algorithm with 1{,}010{,}000 iterations is performed. The first 10{,}000 iterations are discarded for burn-in and the remaining iterates are thinned so that 10{,}000 posterior samples remain.
\begin{table}[ht!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{rccccccc}
\toprule
\multicolumn{7}{c}{$\theta_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.2}\\
\midrule
Method & Mean & 95\%HPD & IACT & Time(sec) & ESS/sec &$\lambda$ & $\#$ particles \\
\midrule
Gold & 0.205 & (0.075, 0.337) & 1 & -& - & - & - \\
BP & 0.203 & (0.066, 0.328) & 7.43 & 676 & 4.0& 10 & 100 \\
Approx & 0.204 & (0.077, 0.331) & 7.09 & 62 &45.5 & - & 100 \\
RR & 0.202 & (0.062, 0.328) & 11.65 & 853 & 2.0 & - & 100 \\
\midrule
\multicolumn{7}{c}{$\theta_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.43}\\
\midrule
Method & mean & 95\%HPD & IACT & time(sec) & ESS/sec &$\lambda$ & $\#$ particles \\
\midrule
Gold & 0.433 & (0.330, 0.533) & 1.04 & - & - & - &-\\
BP & 0.435 & (0.332, 0.545) & 6.91 & 5877 & 0.5 &50 & 100 \\
Approx & 0.441 & (0.331, 0.549) & 7.78 & 745 & 3.5 &- & 500 \\
RR & 0.432 & (0.334, 0.549) & 10.77 & 9134 & 0.2 &- & 500 \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Inference results for the Ising model. All the chains, except for the ``gold standard'', ran for 20{,}000 iterations using the algorithms described (Gold=exchange algorithm, BP= block-Poisson, Approx = bias-corrected estimator, RR = Russian roulette). For BP and RR, the mean estimates are corrected for the negative estimates using \eqref{eq: final_est}. The highest posterior density (HPD) intervals are calculated by the \texttt{coda} package in \texttt{R}. The IACT calculation is based on all the samples as the chains start at the true value. For BP and RR, the calculation of the IACT accounts for the negative estimates via \eqref{eq: CT}. ESS/sec is the effective sample size per second. For BP, $\lambda$ refers to the number of blocks; $\#$ particles is the number of particles used in the AIS. } \label{table: ising inference}
\end{table}
Table \ref{table: ising inference} summarises the simulation results. When $\theta=0.2$, all the estimates are close to that of the gold standard. The bias-corrected method has the smallest computing time and the best IACT. In the implementation, both the bias-corrected and BP methods exploit the block structure used in the signed block PMMH to control the variability in the log of the likelihood estimates between the current and the proposed value. As suggested in Section \ref{sec: tuning para}, the target correlation is set to no less than 0.98 with at least 50 blocks. We find that when $\theta = 0.2$, the AIS method already gives a sufficiently low value for $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}$. Hence, we reduced the number of blocks as per the tuning guidelines in Section \ref{sec: tuning para} and set $\lambda = 10$. When $\theta = 0.43$, the strong dependence leads to a higher variability in $\widehat{Z}(\theta)$ (see Section \ref{app: ising model} in the supplement). We increased the number of blocks to 50 for the BP estimator. To ensure a fair comparison, we also increased the number of particles in the importance samplers of AIS from 100 to 500 for the RR method to bring down the variance. The results of the BP and RR methods match well with that of the gold standard, whereas the bias-corrected method slightly overestimates the parameter. This may be due to the violation of the normality assumption of the bias-corrected estimator when $\theta$ is large. The bias-corrected method is 8 times faster than BP and 12 times faster than RR. Comparing the two exact methods with respect to ESS/sec, the BP estimator is around twice as efficient as the RR method.
To summarise, both the BP and the RR methods provide exact inference on the Ising model, with our method being about twice as efficient. We also propose the faster bias-corrected estimator in Section \ref{subsec:bias_corrected}; however, this estimator is only unbiased if $\widehat{Z}(\theta)$ is normally distributed with known variance. The normality assumption is unlikely to hold for large $\theta$; see Figure \ref{fig:histogram_Ztheta} in the supplement, which shows that a large $\theta$ results in a heavily skewed distribution of $\widehat{Z}(\theta)$. This explains the bias incurred when $\theta_{\mathrm{true}}=0.43$.
\subsection{The Kent distribution}\label{subsec: kent_dist}
Directional statistics involves the study of density functions defined on unit vectors in the plane or sphere. The Kent distribution, also known as the 5-parameter Fisher-Bingham distribution ($\mathrm{FB}_5$), is an analogue to the bivariate normal distribution to model asymmetrically distributed data on a spherical surface \citep{kent1982fisher}. It has 5 parameters: $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_1, \boldsymbol{\gamma}_2,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_3,\beta$, and $\kappa$, where $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_1,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_2,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_3$ form a 3-dimensional orthonormal basis, representing the mean, major and minor axes; $\kappa$ is the concentration parameter, and $\beta$ is a measure of its ovalness, with the constraint $0 \leq \beta < \kappa/2$ to ensure that the distribution is unimodal.
Recall Example \ref{Ex: Kent} in Section \ref{sec: doubly intract prob}: the density of the Kent distribution is
\begin{equation*}
f(\By|\boldsymbol{\gamma_1},\boldsymbol{\gamma_2},\boldsymbol{\gamma_3},\beta,\kappa) = \frac{1}{c(\kappa,\beta)} \exp\left\{\kappa \boldsymbol{\gamma_1}^\top \cdot \By + \beta \left[(\boldsymbol{\gamma_2}^\top \cdot \By)^2 - (\boldsymbol{\gamma_3}^\top \cdot\By)^2\right]\right\},
\end{equation*}
where $\By \in \mathbb{R}^3, \| \By\| = 1$. The normalising function is
\begin{equation*}
c(\kappa, \beta) = 2\pi \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{\Gamma(j+0.5)}{\Gamma(j+1)} \beta^{2j} (0.5\kappa)^{-2j-0.5} I_{2j+0.5}(\kappa),
\end{equation*}
where $I_\nu(\cdot)$ is the modified Bessel function.
The normalising function is an intractable infinite sum. Due to the complex form of the density function, \cite{kent1982fisher} proposes a consistent moment estimator of the parameters. The moment estimation of $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_i, i =1,2,3, $ is independent of $\beta$ and $\kappa$. Estimating $\beta$ and $\kappa$ requires an approximation that utilises the limiting case when $2\beta/\kappa$ is small or $\kappa$ is large, provided that the moment estimates of the $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_i$ are available. Alternatively, $\kappa$ and $\beta$ can be obtained numerically. \cite{kume2005saddlepoint} adopt saddle point techniques to obtain the approximation for the normalising function. \cite{kasarapu2015modelling} uses the Bayesian framework to model a mixture of $\mathrm{FB}_5$ distributions. The infinite sum in $c(\kappa,\beta)$ is truncated in the sense that the successive term to be added is less than a prefixed threshold. However, this approach results in inexact Bayesian inference. In contrast, the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator provides exact Bayesian inference for the parameters.
We use the approach proposed by \cite{papaspiliopoulos2011monte} to obtain an unbiased estimator for $c(\kappa,\beta)$. Rewrite $c(\kappa,\beta) $ as $ \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \phi_j (\kappa,\beta)$; then the estimator $\widehat{c}(\kappa,\beta) = \phi_k/q_k$ is unbiased, where $k$ is a non-negative discrete random variable with probability mass function $q_k$. Either a Poisson or a geometric distribution is suitable, as $k$ is a non-negative integer. It is straightforward to verify that $E(\widehat{c}(\kappa,\beta)) = \sum_k \phi_k/q_k \times q_k = c(\kappa,\beta)$. As $\phi_j(\kappa,\beta)$ is a decreasing function in $j$, to reduce the variability, we compute the first $K$ terms exactly and perform a truncation of the remaining terms. Specifically, $c(\kappa,\beta)$ is decomposed as $$\sum_{j=0}^{K-1} \phi_j (\kappa,\beta) + \sum_{j=K}^{\infty} \phi_j (\kappa,\beta). $$
The first sum is evaluated, and the second is estimated via the truncation procedure described above.
We apply the parameterisation in \cite{kasarapu2015modelling}, where the orthonormal basis $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_1,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_2,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_3$ is reparameterised as $\psi \in [0,\pi], \alpha \in [0,2\pi], \eta \in [0,\pi]$. An adaptive Gaussian random walk proposal is used for all the parameters with the optimal covariance matrix proposed in \cite{garthwaite2016adaptive}. To accommodate such a proposal, we further transform $\psi,\alpha,\eta$ into $\psi^*, \alpha^*, \eta^*$ which take unconstrained values using the following transformations:
$$\psi^* = \log\left( \frac{\psi}{\pi - \psi} \right); \alpha^* = \log \left( \frac{\alpha}{2\pi - \alpha} \right) \quad {\rm and} \quad \eta^* = \log \left( \frac{\eta}{\pi - \eta }\right).$$
We also work with the logarithms of $\beta$ and $\kappa$ as they are unconstrained.
We follow \cite{dowe1996mml} and set the prior for $\kappa$ as $4\kappa^2/\pi(1+\kappa^2)^2$. For a given $\kappa$, the prior for $\beta $ is uniform on $[0,\kappa/2)$. The priors for $\psi$, $\alpha$ and $\eta$ follow \cite{kasarapu2015modelling}. The joint prior on all the parameters, $\psi,\alpha,\eta,\beta$ and $\kappa$ is
\begin{equation*}
\pi(\psi,\alpha,\eta,\beta,\kappa) = \dfrac{2\kappa \sin \alpha}{\pi^3 (1+\kappa^2)^2} \mathbbm{1}(0\leq 2\beta/\kappa < 1).
\end{equation*}
In the simulation, we generate $n$ observations from $\mathrm{FB}_5,$ with different settings for $\beta$ and $\kappa$. The data generation is performed by the R package \texttt{Directional}, which implements the acceptance-rejection method in \cite{kent2013new}. We set $n = $ 10, 100, 1{,}000 in combination with $\beta/\kappa = $ 0.01, 0.25, 0.49, with $\kappa$ fixed as 5. The lower and the upper bounds for $\beta/\kappa$ are 0 and 0.5 to ensure unimodality of the data \citep{kent1982fisher}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccccccc}
\toprule
& &\multicolumn{3}{c}{$n=10$} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{$n=100$} &\multicolumn{3}{c}{$n=1{,}000$}\\
$\beta/\kappa$ &Method &$\beta$& $\kappa$& $\beta/\kappa$ &$\beta$& $\kappa$& $\beta/\kappa$ &$\beta$& $\kappa$& $\beta/\kappa$ &\\
\cmidrule(lr){3-5}\cmidrule(lr){6-8}\cmidrule(lr){9-12}
$0.01$&Bayesian& \textbf{1.33} & \textbf{2.40} & 0.22 & 0.45 &\textbf{0.50} & 0.09 & 0.11 & 0.17 & 0.02 & \\
&Moment& 1.48 & 4.01 & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.25} & 0.55 & \textbf{0.05} & \textbf{0.05} & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.01} & \\
&MLE& 2.29 & 4.30 & 0.26 & 0.47 & 0.57 & 0.09 & 0.11 & 0.17 & 0.02 & \\
\midrule
$0.25$&Bayesian& \textbf{0.64} & \textbf{2.20} & \textbf{0.04} & 0.38 & 0.55 & 0.07 & \textbf{0.11} & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.02} & \\
&Moment& 1.01 & 3.69 & 0.09 & 0.63 & \textbf{0.54} & 0.13 & 0.65 & 0.17 & 0.13 & \\
&MLE& 2.00 & 4.18 & 0.16 & \textbf{0.36} & 0.60 & \textbf{0.06} & 0.35 & 0.24 & 0.07 & \\
\midrule
$0.49$&Bayesian& \textbf{1.28 }& \textbf{1.99} & 0.22 & \textbf{0.42} & \textbf{0.57} & \textbf{0.06} & \textbf{0.14} & \textbf{0.19} & \textbf{0.02} & \\
&Moment& 1.38 & 3.27 & 0.27 & 1.48 & 0.59 & 0.28 & 1.50 & 0.46 & 0.28 & \\
&MLE& 1.73 & 3.79 & \textbf{0.17} & \textbf{0.42} & 0.60 & \textbf{0.06} & 0.98 & 0.59 & 0.19 & \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{ Simulation results for 100 independent replications of a $\mathrm{FB}_5$ distribution. The numbers are the RMSEs with respect to the true values. Boldface numbers identify the lowest RMSE among the three methods (Bayesian, Moment, MLE). }
\label{tab:FB5_simulation}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:FB5_simulation} shows the RMSE with regard to the true values for the three methods based on 100 independent replicates. ``Bayesian'' refers to the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator algorithm. The selected hyperparameters are $\lambda = 20$ (number of blocks), $m = 1$ (Poisson mean value of BP), and $K = 10$ (the number of truncated terms computed exactly in the estimation of the normalising function). A Poisson distribution with mean value 1 is used for the truncation. ``Moment'' refers to the moment estimates and ``MLE'' is based on our modification of the function \texttt{kent.mle} of the R package \texttt{Directional}, where the original version uses the moment estimates of $\gamma$'s. We use an optimiser on the transformed parameters to obtain the MLE of all the parameters in the modified version. For the Bayesian method, the RMSE is calculated using the posterior mean with the sign correction in \eqref{eq: final_est}. For a small number of observations ($n=10$), our method yields the smallest RMSE amongst all three methods.
Comparing the results of different $\beta /\kappa$ combinations, the moment estimator gives the best RMSE for $\beta/\kappa = 0.01,$ and our method is superior to the other two when the ratio approaches 0.49, where the assumption underlying the moment estimator is almost violated. The MLE method uses the saddle point technique \citep{kume2005saddlepoint} to approximate the likelihood. Unlike the moment estimation, the MLE method does not assume the limiting case where $2\beta/\kappa$ is small or $\kappa$ is large. Its performance gets closer to the Bayesian method for $\beta/\kappa = 0.01$ with many observations. However, MLE has the worst performance on small data sets ($n=10$) due to a large standard error. As $\beta/\kappa $ increases, it outperforms the moment estimator, but is inferior to the Bayesian method.
The simulation study shows that the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator performs the best when the sample size is small. It also has the lowest RMSE when $\beta/\kappa $ approaches the limiting value 0.5. We conclude that the Bayesian approach using our method is a competitive alternative to the standard methods used for the Kent distribution in the literature.
\section{An empirical study on spherical data} \label{sec: empirical study}
We now analyse four real spherical datasets using the Kent distribution and our method. Recall that the non-pseudo marginal approaches cannot be applied to this model. Each dataset contains samples from two groups, which are formed naturally from the sample collection process. Figure \ref{fig:FB5_data} plots the spherical datasets.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Palaeomagnetic} (Palaeo) \citep{wood1982bimodal}: Thirty three estimates of previous magnetic pole positions were obtained using palaeomagnetic techniques. Each estimate is associated with a different site in Tasmania. The data is originally from \cite{schmidt1976non} and the author points out that the data is likely to fall mainly into two groups of distinct geographical regions. Following \cite{figueiredo2009discriminant}, the first group contains the observation indices 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 23, 24, 30.
\item \textbf{Magnetic} \cite[Table B8]{fisher1993statistical}: Measurements of magnetic remanence from a set of 62 specimens is obtained. The specimens are from Mesozoic Dolerite from Prospect, New South Wales, after successive partial demagnetisation stages ($200^{\circ}$ and $350^{\circ}$).
An experiment was conducted to determine the blocking temperature spectrum of the magnetisation components.
\item \textbf{Sandstone} \cite[Table B23]{fisher1993statistical}: Measurements of natural remanent magnetisation in Old Red Sandstone rocks in Pembrokeshire, Wales. The measurements consist of specimens from two sites with the number of observations 35 and 13, respectively.
\item \textbf{Stone} \cite[Table B25]{fisher1993statistical}: Measurements of the longest axis and shortest axis (101 observations) orientations of tabular stones on a slope at Windy Hills, Scotland.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figure/FB5_dataset1.jpg}
\caption{Illustration of the datasets. Green points and red points refer to the observations from groups 1 and 2, respectively.}
\label{fig:FB5_data}
\end{figure}
The two groups are modelled separately by assuming a non-hierarchical structure on the prior for all the parameters. The data is modelled in the same way as in Section \ref{subsec: kent_dist} using the density function in \eqref{eq: Kent}.
Table \ref{tab:FB5_wholedata} summarises the results. We first note that the three methods estimate the same quantity. The gap between the Bayesian and ML estimates is narrower for the bigger datasets (Magnetic, Stone). The moment estimates are far from the MLE and the Bayesian results, even for the bigger datasets. Since $\beta/\kappa$ is close to 0.5 for the Magnetic dataset, the moment estimate is unreliable. This result is supported by the simulation results in Section \ref{subsec: kent_dist}. The second result is that the confidence intervals for the moment estimates and the MLE, especially for small datasets (Palaeo, Sandstone), are wider than the Bayesian intervals. The Bayesian credible interval is constructed using the posterior distribution. For the MLE and moment estimates, we obtain the confidence intervals using the non-parametric bootstrap \citep{efron1992bootstrap}.
By construction, the intervals have different interpretations (frequentist vs Bayesian); however, both intervals are expected to be close when the number of observations is sufficiently large. Table \ref{tab:FB5_wholedata} confirms this for the bigger dataset Stone, where the MLE and Bayesian intervals are close to each other.
The moment estimates again seem to be less reliable for $\beta$. A larger $\kappa$ indicates the observations are more concentrated. For small datasets, the non-parametric bootstrap is likely to draw the same observation multiple times, resulting in a concentrated data pattern and a correspondingly large estimate of $\kappa$.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccc}
\toprule
Palaeo & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=9$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=24$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 2.78 & 18.25 & 0.16 & 3.86 & 33.89 & 0.11 & \\
&(0.20,11.64)&(7.92,38.55)&(0.01,0.41)&(0.27,12.76)&(21.33,50.48)&(0.01,0.32)& \\
Moment& 4.03 & 26.54 & 0.15 & 5.88 & 39.84 & 0.15 & \\
&(1.11,98.84)&(18.96,223.76)&(0.05,0.46)&(1.24,30.51)&(28.16,92.60)&(0.04,0.35)& \\
MLE& 4.55 & 26.65 & 0.17 & 6.44 & 40.02 & 0.16 & \\
&(0.78,106.84)&(18.96,223.02)&(0.04,0.50)&(1.06,34.34)&(28.25,96.38)&(0.03,0.38)& \\
\midrule
Magnetic & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=62$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=62$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 7.32 & 15.23 & 0.49 & 15.77 & 32.04 & 0.49 & \\
&(5.28,10.03)&(11.18,20.34)&(0.43,0.50)&(11.17,21.58)&(22.95,43.29)&(0.46,0.50)& \\
Moment& 4.55 & 12.99 & 0.35 & 8.87 & 23.22 & 0.38 & \\
&(2.58,10.73)&(8.21,26.72)&(0.31,0.40)&(5.28,20.53)&(14.77,49.06)&(0.35,0.42)& \\
MLE& 8.24 & 16.49 & 0.50 & 15.57 & 31.13 & 0.50 & \\
&(4.76,16.95)&(9.57,34.04)&(0.49,0.50)&(9.82,33.12)&(19.65,66.23)&(0.49,0.50)& \\
\midrule
Sandstone & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=36$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=13$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 1.48 & 20.31 & 0.07 & 8.54 & 47.08 & 0.19 & \\
&(0.08,5.68)&(14.51,28.33)&(0.00,0.23)&(0.70,27.20)&(24.69,89.95)&(0.02,0.39)& \\
Moment& 2.07 & 22.36 & 0.09 & 18.45 & 68.94 & 0.27 & \\
&(0.70,16.37)&(13.38,64.33)&(0.04,0.30)&(8.76,67.07)&(54.64,188.26)&(0.11,0.41)& \\
MLE& 2.42 & 22.44 & 0.11 & 20.15 & 70.18 & 0.29 & \\
&(0.00,17.93)&(13.41,65.55)&(0.00,0.36)&(7.90,76.18)&(55.30,199.75)&(0.09,0.44)& \\
\midrule
Stone & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=101$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=101$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 0.52 & 4.19 & 0.13 & 1.06 & 2.18 & 0.49 & \\
&(0.05,1.32)&(3.37,5.12)&(0.01,0.30)&(0.79,1.34)&(1.64,2.72)&(0.44,0.50)& \\
Moment& 0.23 & 4.29 & 0.05 & 0.41 & 1.99 & 0.21 & \\
&(0.08,0.54)&(3.33,6.23)&(0.02,0.11)&(0.30,0.52)&(1.79,2.30)&(0.15,0.24)& \\
MLE& 0.60 & 4.32 & 0.14 & 1.10 & 2.19 & 0.50 & \\
&(0.15,1.91)&(3.38,6.31)&(0.03,0.50)&(0.92,1.30)&(1.85,2.61)&(0.50,0.50)& \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results for the Bayesian, moment and MLE approaches for all the datasets. The Bayesian estimate is the posterior mean. The numbers in brackets are the 95\% confidence (credible for Bayesian) intervals. For the moment estimates and MLE, the confidence intervals are obtained using the bootstrap \citep{efron1992bootstrap} with 1{,}000 repetitions for each. }
\label{tab:FB5_wholedata}
\end{table}
We use 5-fold cross validation to test the models' performance. To avoid sampling bias, the splitting is done for both groups. Denote the training and test sets as $\By_{\mathrm{train},g}$ and $ \By_{\mathrm{test},g},$ with $g$ the group membership $g\in \{1,2\}$. After fitting the models using $\By_{\mathrm{train},g}$, the prediction for an observation $\By_i$ averaged over the posterior distribution of $\Btheta_g = \{ \beta, \kappa, \psi, \alpha, \eta\} $ is
\begin{align*}
p(\By_i|\By_{\mathrm{train},g}) = \int_{\Btheta} p(\By_i|\Btheta_g) p (\Btheta_g|\By_{\mathrm{train},g}) d\Btheta_g.
\end{align*}
If $p(\By_i|\By_{\mathrm{train},1}) > p(\By_i|\By_{\mathrm{train},2})$, $\By_i$ is classified as being in group 1, and conversely if the inequality is reversed. Section \ref{app: kent distr} in the online supplement provides more details.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccccc}
\toprule
& & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Train accuracy} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Test accuracy} \\
\cmidrule(lr){4-6}\cmidrule(lr){7-9}
data& grp1 &grp2 & Bayesian & Moment & MLE & Bayesian & Moment & MLE \\
\midrule
Palaeo & 9 & 24 & 0.985 & 0.985 & 0.985 & 0.943 & 0.943 & 0.943 & \\
& & & (0.008) &(0.008) &(0.008) &(0.031) &(0.031) &(0.031) & \\
Magnetic & 62 & 62 & 0.554 & \textbf{0.561} & 0.548 & \textbf{0.507} & 0.502 & 0.501 & \\
& & & (0.011) &(0.014) &(0.015) &(0.006) &(0.034) &(0.037) & \\
Sandstone & 36 & 13 & 0.943 & \textbf{0.953} & \textbf{0.953} & \textbf{0.920} & \textbf{0.920} & 0.880 & \\
& & & (0.013) &(0.014) &(0.014) &(0.072) &(0.052) &(0.066) & \\
Stone & 101 & 101& \textbf{0.892} & 0.877 & 0.890 & 0.886 & 0.861 & \textbf{0.896} & \\
& & & (0.002) &(0.003) &(0.001) &(0.005) &(0.011) &(0.005) & \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{ Results of 5-fold cross validation on the four datasets. ``grp1'',``grp2'' are the number of observations for the corresponding group. Accuracy on the training and test data is the average value of the 5 folds, with the standard error in brackets. ``Train accuracy'' and ``Test accuracy'' state the proportion of correct predictions in all predictions made for the corresponding dataset. The boldface numbers represent the method(s) with the highest accuracy.}
\label{tab:FB5_result}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:FB5_result} shows the prediction accuracy on the training and test datasets. There is no notable difference in terms of the prediction accuracy between the methods across the datasets. One possible reason is that the parameters of one group are distinct from that of the other group, so that minor differences in parameter estimates do not affect the classification.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec: discussion}
We propose the signed block PMMH with the block-Poisson estimator to carry out exact inference in general doubly intractable problems. Our method requires only an unbiased estimator of the normalising function, which makes it applicable to a wider range of problems than its competitors, which often require perfect sampling from the model.
Compared with the Russian roulette method in \cite{lyne2015russian}, the block-Poisson estimator achieves a smaller variance of the
logarithmic difference in the likelihood estimates in the MH acceptance ratio by its use of correlated pseudo-marginal updates. Moreover, the Russian roulette method lacks guidelines on how to tune its hyperparameters. We derive heuristic guidelines based on analytical statistical properties of our estimator. The Ising model example in Section \ref{sec: ising model} suggests that our approach is about twice as efficient as the Russian roulette method.
Despite its wide applicability, the signed PMMH algorithm (with both block-Poisson and Russian roulette methods) is computationally costly when unbiasedly estimating the normalising function. The Ising model example shows that AIS is required multiple times during each iteration for both the block-Poisson and Russian roulette methods. This prevents the computing time of the PM methods being competitive with other methods which do not require estimating the normalising function. However, the algorithm gives exact inference with minimal assumptions on the structure of the model and therefore applies to a wider range of problems.
When the normalising function is an infinite sum as in the Kent distribution, the block-Poisson estimator can be obtained relatively cheaply, making the signed block PMMH with the block-Poisson estimator computationally efficient. Our proposed method enables the first exact Bayesian analysis on the Kent distribution. Moreover, for some settings of the Kent distribution, we show that the Bayesian estimator is superior to the maximum likelihood and method of moments estimators.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
Yu Yang was financially supported by a University International Postgraduate Award from UNSW Sydney. Robert Kohn was partially supported by the Australian Research Council (IC190100031, DP210103873)
Scott Sisson is supported by the Australian Research Council (FT170100079).
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
\section{Introduction}
Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods \citep[see, e.g.,][for an overview] {brooks2011handbook} sample from the posterior distribution without evaluating the normalising constant, also known as the marginal likelihood. However, in some settings, the likelihood function itself contains an additional normalising constant that depends on the model parameters and the resulting so-called doubly intractable posterior distribution falls outside the standard MCMC framework. To distinguish these normalisation quantities, we refer to the first as a normalising constant and the latter as a normalising function.
Many well-known models have doubly intractable posteriors, such as the exponential random graph models for social networks \citep{hunter2006inference} and non-Gaussian Markov random field models in spatial statistics, including the Ising model and its variants \citep{lenz1920beitrvsge,ising1925beitrag, hughes2011autologistic}.
Several algorithms are available to tackle the doubly intractable problem in Bayesian statistics; see \cite{park2018bayesian} for a review. These algorithms are classified into two main categories, with some overlap between them. The first category of methods introduce cleverly chosen auxiliary variables that cancel the normalising function when carrying out the MCMC sampling and standard MCMC such as the Metropolis-Hastings (MH) algorithm
\citep{metropolis1953equation, hastings1970monte} can thus be applied. This approach is model dependent and cannot always be applied. The second category of methods, which applies more generally, approximates the likelihood function (including the normalising function) and substitutes the approximation in place of the exact likelihood in the estimation procedure. The
pseudo-marginal (PM) method \citep{beaumont2003estimation,andrieu2009pseudo} is often used when a positive and unbiased estimator of the likelihood is available through Monte Carlo simulation. However, in some problems, including doubly intractable models, forming an unbiased estimator that is almost surely positive is prohibitively expensive \citep{jacob2015nonnegative}.
The so-called Russian roulette (RR) estimator \citep{lyne2015russian} is an example of a method that can be used to unbiasedly estimate the likelihood function in doubly intractable models, although the estimate is not necessarily positive.
We propose a method for exact inference on posterior expectations in doubly intractable problems based on the approach in \cite{lyne2015russian}, where an unbiased, but not necessarily positive, estimator of the likelihood function is used. The algorithm targets a posterior density that uses the absolute value of the likelihood, resulting in iterates from a perturbed target density. We follow \cite{lyne2015russian} and reweight the samples from the perturbed target density using importance sampling to obtain simulation-consistent estimates of the expectation of any function of the parameters with respect to the true posterior density. While our method does not sample from the target of interest, we refer to it as exact due to its simulation-consistent property.
Our main contribution is to explore the use of the block-Poisson (BP) estimator \citep{quiroz2021block} in the context of estimating doubly intractable models using the signed PMMH approach. Our method provides the following advantages over the Russian roulette method. First, the BP estimator has a much simpler structure and is more computationally efficient. Second, the block form of our estimator makes it possible to correlate the estimators of the doubly intractable posterior at the current and proposed draws in the MH algorithm. Introducing such correlation dramatically improves the efficiency of PM algorithms \citep{tran2016block, deligiannidis2018correlated}. Finally, under simplifying assumptions, some statistical properties of the logarithm of the absolute value of our estimator are derived and used to obtain heuristic guidelines to optimally tune the hyperparameters of the estimator. We demonstrate empirically that our method outperforms \cite{lyne2015russian} when estimating the Ising model. To the best of our knowledge, our method, that of \cite{lyne2015russian} and its extensions are the only alternatives in the PM framework to perform exact inference (in the sense of consistent estimates of posterior expectations) for general doubly intractable problems. Compared with algorithms which use auxiliary variables to avoid evaluating the normalising function, signed PMMH algorithms are more widely applicable and generic as they do not require exact sampling from the likelihood.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. Section \ref{sec:Doubly_intractable} formally introduces the doubly intractable problem and discusses previous research. Section \ref{sec: method} introduces our methodology and establishes the guidelines for tuning the hyperparameters of the estimator. Section \ref{sec: demo} demonstrates the proposed method in two simulation studies: the Ising model and the Kent distribution. Section \ref{sec: empirical study} analyses four real-world datasets using the Kent distribution. Section \ref{sec: discussion} concludes and outlines future research. The paper has an online supplement that contains all proofs and details of the simulation studies. The supplement also contains an additional example applying our method to a constrained Gaussian process ($\mathcal{GP}$), where the normalising function arises from the $\mathcal{GP}$ prior.
\section{Doubly intractable problems}\label{sec:Doubly_intractable}
\subsection{Doubly intractable posterior distributions\label{sec: doubly intract prob}}
Let $p(\By|\Btheta) $ denote the density of the data vector $\By$, where $\Btheta$ is the vector of model parameters. Suppose $p(\By |\Btheta) = f(\By |\Btheta)/Z(\Btheta) $, where $f(\By |\Btheta)$ is computable while the normalising function $Z(\Btheta)$ is not. The reason that $Z(\Btheta)$ is intractable may be that it is prohibitively expensive to evaluate numerically, or lacks a closed form. Two examples are given below to demonstrate the intractability for both discrete and continuous observations $\By$.
\begin{example}[The Ising model \citep{ising1925beitrag}]\label{Ex: Ising}
Consider an $L \times L$ lattice with binary observation $y_{ij}\in \{ -1,1\}$ in row $i$ and column $j$. The likelihood of $\theta \in \mathbb{R}$ is
\begin{align} \label{eq: Ising}
p(\By|\theta) &= \frac{1}{Z(\theta)}\exp ( \theta S(\By)) ; \quad
S(\By) = \sum_{i=1}^{L} \sum_{j=1}^{L-1} y_{i,j} y_{i,j+1} + \sum_{i=1}^{L-1} \sum_{j=1}^L y_{i,j} y_{i+1,j};\\
\mbox{with }
Z(\theta) &= \sum_{\By} \exp(\theta S(\By))\notag.
\end{align}
The normalising function $Z(\theta)$ in the Ising model is a sum over $2^{L^2}$ terms of the form $S(\By)$, making it computationally intractable even for moderate values of $L$. See Section \ref{sec: ising model} for a further discussion.
\end{example}
\begin{example} [The Kent distribution \citep{kent1982fisher}] \label{Ex: Kent}
The density of the Kent distribution
for $\By \in \mathbb{R}^3, \norm{\By} = 1$, is
\begin{align} \label{eq: Kent}
f(\By|\boldsymbol{\gamma_1},\boldsymbol{\gamma_2},\boldsymbol{\gamma_3},\beta,\kappa) &= \frac{1}{c(\kappa,\beta)} \exp\left\{\kappa \boldsymbol{\gamma_1}^\top \cdot \By + \beta \left[(\boldsymbol{\gamma_2}^\top \cdot\By)^2 - (\boldsymbol{\gamma_3}^\top \cdot\By)^2\right]\right\};\\
\mbox{with } c(\kappa, \beta) &= 2\pi \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{\Gamma(j+0.5)}{\Gamma(j+1)} \beta^{2j} (0.5\kappa)^{-2j-0.5} I_{2j+0.5}(\kappa),\; \notag
\end{align}
where $I_\nu(.)$ is the modified Bessel function of the first kind and $\boldsymbol{\gamma_1},\boldsymbol{\gamma_2},\boldsymbol{\gamma_3}$ form a set of 3-dimensional orthonormal vectors. The normalising function $c(\kappa,\beta)$ is an infinite sum. See Section \ref{subsec: kent_dist} for further analysis.
\end{example}
The doubly intractable posterior density of $\Btheta$ is
\begin{align}\label{eq:target_doubly_intractable}
\pi(\Btheta|\By) = \dfrac{f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)}{Z(\Btheta) p(\By)},
\end{align}
where $\pi(\Btheta)$ is the prior for $\Btheta$ and \begin{align}\label{eq:normalising_const}
p(\By) & =\int \dfrac{f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)}{Z(\Btheta)} d\Btheta
\end{align}
is the normalising constant. Suppose we devise a Metropolis-Hastings algorithm to sample from \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable} with a proposal density $q(\cdot|\Btheta)$. The probability of accepting a proposed sample $\Btheta'$ is
\begin{align}\label{eq:MH_accept}
\alpha(\Btheta',\Btheta) = \min \left\{1,
\dfrac{\pi(\Btheta')f(\By|\Btheta')/Z(\Btheta')}{\pi(\Btheta)f(\By|\Btheta))/Z(\Btheta)}\times \dfrac{q(\Btheta|\Btheta')}{q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)}\right\}.
\end{align}
The marginal likelihood in \eqref{eq:normalising_const} cancels in \eqref{eq:MH_accept}, but the normalising function does not. Since $Z(\Btheta)/Z(\Btheta')$ is computationally intractable, \eqref{eq:MH_accept} cannot be evaluated and thus MCMC sampling via the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm is impossible.
\subsection{Previous research} \label{sec: previous research}
Previous research on doubly intractable problems is mainly divided into the auxiliary variable approach and the likelihood approximation approach; see \cite{park2018bayesian} for an excellent review of both approaches.
The auxiliary variable approach cleverly chooses the joint transition kernel of the parameters and the auxiliary variables so that the normalising function cancels in the resulting MH acceptance ratio. The most well-known algorithms are the exchange algorithm \citep{murray2006mcmc} and the auxiliary variable method \citep{moller2006efficient}. Both algorithms are model dependent and rely on the sampling technique used to draw observations from the likelihood function. Perfect sampling \citep{propp1996exact} is often used to generate data samples from the model without knowing the normalising function. However, for some complex models, such as the Ising model on a large grid, perfect sampling is prohibitively expensive. To overcome this issue, \cite{liang2010double} and \cite{liang2016adaptive} relax the requirement of exact sampling and propose the double MH sampler and the adaptive exchange algorithm. However, the former generates inexact inference results and the latter suffers from memory issues as many intermediate variables need to be stored within each iteration.
The likelihood approximation approach are often simulation consistent. \cite{atchade2013bayesian} directly approximate $Z(\Btheta)$ through multiple importance sampling. Their approach also depends on an auxiliary variable, but does not require perfect sampling. The downside is similar to that of the adaptive exchange algorithm; a large memory is usually required to store the intermediate variables generated in each iteration. An alternative method is to approximate $1/Z(\Btheta)$ directly using the signed PMMH algorithm to replace the likelihood function by its unbiased estimator as proposed in \cite{lyne2015russian}. To obtain the unbiased estimator, $1/Z(\Btheta)$ is expressed as a geometric series which is truncated using an RR approach. The RR method first appeared in the physics literature \citep{carter1975particle} and is useful for obtaining an unbiased estimator through a finite stochastic truncation of an infinite series. To implement RR, a tight upper bound for $Z(\Btheta)$ is required, otherwise the convergence of the geometric series is slow and makes the algorithm inefficient. In practice, an upper bound is usually unavailable, which may lead to negative estimates of the likelihood and thus a signed PMMH approach is necessary, although it inflates the asymptotic variance of the MCMC chain \citep{andrieu2016establishing} compared to a standard PM approach, especially if the estimator produces a significant proportion of negative estimates \citep{lyne2015russian}. It is therefore crucial to quantify the probability of a negative estimate when tuning the hyperparameters of the estimator, which is difficult for the RR estimator. In contrast, our estimator is more tractable and the probability of a positive estimate is analytically derived under simplifying assumptions. Besides the upper bound, a few other hyperparameters of the RR estimator need to be determined for which guidelines are unavailable due to its intractability. \cite{wei2017markov} combine RR with Markov chain coupling to produce an estimator with lower variance and a larger probability of producing positive estimates. However, their estimator is insufficiently tractable to guarantee a positive estimate with a smaller variance, making it difficult to derive optimal tuning guidelines. \cite{caimulti} propose a multi-fidelity MCMC method to approximate the doubly intractable target density which, like the Russian roulette method, stochastically truncates an infinite series and uses slice sampling \citep{murray2016pseudo}. However, similarly to \cite{lyne2015russian}, the method lacks guidelines for tuning the hyperparameters.
\section{Methodology} \label{sec: method}
\subsection{The block-Poisson estimator}\label{sec: blockPois}
The block-Poisson estimator \citep{quiroz2021block} is useful for estimating the likelihood unbiasedly given an unbiased estimator of the log-likelihood obtained by data subsampling. The block-Poisson estimator consists of blocks of Poisson estimators \citep{papaspiliopoulos2011monte}. The Poisson estimator, like the block-Poisson estimator, is useful for estimating $\exp(B)$ unbiasedly, assuming that there exists an unbiased estimator $\widehat{B}$ of $B$, i.e.\ $E(\widehat{B}) = B$. The idea behind using blocks of Poisson estimators is to allow for correlation between successive iterates in the PM algorithm as described in Section \ref{sec: signed PMMH}. Similarly to the likelihood approximation approaches discussed above, the BP estimator is implemented in combination with an auxiliary variable $\nu$, and an estimator of the normalising function. Omitting details of the auxiliary variable method that are explained in Section \ref{sec: signed PMMH}, assume $B(\Btheta) = -\nu Z(\Btheta)$. Given $\nu$ and an unbiased estimator of $Z(\Btheta)$, the BP estimator produces an unbiased estimator of $\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$. The BP estimator requires a lower bound for $B(\Btheta)$ to guarantee its positiveness. The BP estimator is more likely to be positive than the RR estimator, because we can derive the probability of the estimator being positive and tune the hyperparameters to control this probability.
Definition \ref{def: BP} describes the BP estimator $\widehat{L}_B$.
Lemma \ref{lemma: block poisson est} gives the expectation and variance of $\widehat{L}_B$. Lemmas \ref{lemma: positive prob} and \ref{lemma: log variance} establish useful results for tuning the hyperparameters of the estimator (see Section \ref{sec: tuning para}). Section \ref{app: BPproof} in the supplement contains the proofs.
\begin{definition} \label{def: BP}
The block-Poisson estimator \citep{quiroz2021block} is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq: block_pois_est}
\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) := \prod_{l=1}^{\lambda} \exp(\xi_l(\Btheta)), \,\,
\exp(\xi_l(\Btheta)) =\exp(a/ \lambda + m) \prod_{h=1}^{\chi_l} \dfrac{\widehat{B}^{(h,l)}(\Btheta)-a}{m\lambda},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is the number of blocks, $\chi_l \sim \mathrm{Pois}(m)$, a Poisson distribution with mean $m$, $a$ is an arbitrary constant and $m$ is the expected number of estimators used within each block.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: block poisson est}
Denote $\sigma^2_B :=\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{B}(\Btheta))$, and assume $\sigma^2_B < \infty$ and $E(\widehat{B}(\Btheta)) = B(\Btheta)$. The following properties hold for $\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)$ in \eqref{eq: block_pois_est}:
\begin{itemize}[label={}]
\item(i) $E(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)) = \exp(B(\Btheta))$.
\item(ii) $
\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)) = \exp\bigg[ \dfrac{(B(\Btheta)-a)^2 + \sigma^2_B}{m\lambda } + 2a + m\lambda \bigg] - \exp(2B(\Btheta)) $.
\item(iii) $\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta))$ is minimised at $a = B(\Btheta) - m\lambda$, given fixed $m$ and $\lambda$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
Part (i) of Lemma \ref{lemma: block poisson est} shows that given an unbiased estimator $\widehat{B}(\Btheta)$ of $B(\Btheta)$, the BP estimator is unbiased for $\exp(B(\Btheta))$. Part (iii) of Lemma \ref{lemma: block poisson est} suggests that we can choose the lower bound $a = \widehat{B}(\Btheta) - m\lambda$, as $B(\Btheta)$ is unknown. Similarly to the RR estimator, the BP estimator is not necessarily positive. By choosing a relatively large $m\lambda$, the sufficient condition for $\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta)\geq 0$, i.e.\ $\widehat{B}(\Btheta)-a>0$, is likely to be satisfied; however, it is computationally costly as a large $m\lambda$ value implies many products in the BP estimator. We follow \cite{quiroz2021block} and advocate the use of a soft lower bound, i.e.,\ one that may lead to negative estimates, but still gives a $\Pr(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) \geq 0)$ close to one. Lemma \ref{lemma: positive prob} shows that the probability $\Pr(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) \geq 0)$ is analytically tractable. It is crucial to have this probability close to one for the algorithm to be efficient.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: positive prob}
\[ \Pr(\widehat{L}_B(\Btheta) \geq 0) = \dfrac{1}{2}\bigg( 1 + (1-2 \mathsf{\Psi}(a,m,M))^\lambda \bigg), \]
with $\Psi(a,m,M) = Pr (\xi < 0) = \dfrac{1}{2} \sum_{j=1}^\infty \left( 1 - (1-2 \Pr(A_m \leq 0))^j \right) \Pr(\chi_l = j)$, $\chi_l \sim \mathrm{Pois}(m)$ and $A_m = [\widehat{B}(\Btheta) - B(\Btheta)]/ (m\lambda) + 1$.
\end{lemma}
Lemma \ref{lemma: log variance} derives the variance of the logarithm of the absolute value of the block-Poisson estimator by assuming a normal distribution for $\widehat{B}^{(h,l)}(\Btheta)$. Section \ref{sec: tuning para} tunes the hyperparameters using this result.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: log variance}
If $\widehat{B}^{(h,l)}(\Btheta) \stackrel{\mathrm{iid}}{\sim} N(B(\Btheta), \sigma_B^2)$ for all $h$ and $l$, when $a = B(\Btheta) - m\lambda$, then the variance of $\log |{\widehat{L}_B}|$ is
\[ \sigma^2_{\log \abs*{\widehat{L}_B}} = m\lambda (\nu_B^2 + \eta_B^2),\]
where
\[ \eta_B = \log(\sigma_B/(m\lambda)) + 0.5 \left( \log 2 + E_J(\psi^{(0)} (0.5 + J)) \right) \]
and
\[\nu_B^2 = 0.25 \left( E_J(\psi^{(1)} (0.5 +J)) + \mathrm{Var}_J(\psi^{(0)}(0.5+J)) \right), \]
with $J \sim \mathrm{Pois}( (m\lambda)^2/(2\sigma_B^2))$ and $\psi^{(q)}$ is the polygamma function of order $q$.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Signed block PMMH with the BP estimator}\label{sec: signed PMMH}
\cite{lyne2015russian} use an auxiliary variable $\nu$ to cancel the reciprocal of the normalising function in \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable} and end up with $\exp(\nu Z(\Btheta))$ instead. Specifically,
assume that $\nu \sim \text{Expon}(Z(\Btheta))$. The joint density of $\Btheta$ and the auxiliary variable $\nu$ is
\begin{align}
\pi(\Btheta, \nu|\By) &= Z(\Btheta) \exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) \dfrac{f(\By| \Btheta)}{Z(\Btheta)} \pi(\Btheta) \dfrac{1}{p(\By)} \nonumber \\
&\propto \exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta) \label{eq:augmented_posterior}.
\end{align}
We can use the BP estimator to obtain an unbiased estimator of the augmented posterior in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior}, up to a normalising constant. Denote the unbiased estimator of $\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$ by $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$. To emphasise the source of randomness in the estimator, let $\Bu$ be a set of random numbers with density $p(\Bu)$ and write the estimator (with a small abuse of notation) as $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)$. The unbiasedness of the estimator is with respect to the density $p(\Bu)$, i.e.\
\begin{align}\label{eq:unbiased_estimator}
\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) & = \int_{\Bu} \widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu) p(\Bu) d\Bu.
\end{align}
The augmented version of the posterior density in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior} is
\begin{align}\label{eq:augmented_posterior_u}
\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta,\Bu, \nu| \By) & = \widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu) p(\Bu) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)\frac{1}{p(\By)}.
\end{align}
It is easy to show that, under the unbiasedness condition in \eqref{eq:unbiased_estimator}, integrating out $\Bu$ in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior_u} gives the marginal density of interest in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior} for $\Btheta, \nu$. However, we cannot sample from \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior_u} using a pseudo-marginal algorithm as the BP estimates may be negative and hence it is not a valid density. We follow \cite{lyne2015russian} and consider the target density
\begin{align}\label{eq:absolute_target}
|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta,\Bu, \nu|\By)| = |\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)| p(\Bu) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)\frac{1}{p(\By)}.
\end{align}
Integrating out $\Bu$ in \eqref{eq:absolute_target} does not give the marginal density of interest in \eqref{eq:augmented_posterior} because $|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)|$ is biased. \cite{lyne2015russian} propose reweighting the MCMC iterates using importance sampling to obtain a simulation consistent estimate of the expectation of an arbitrary function $\psi(\Btheta)$ with respect to the posterior density $\pi(\Btheta|\By)$, i.e.\
\begin{align}\label{eq:expectation_doubly_intractable}
E_{\pi} (\psi(\Btheta)|\By) = \int_{\Btheta} \psi(\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta|\By) d\Btheta,
\end{align}
which we now outline in some detail. We can write
\begin{align*}
E_{\pi} (\psi(\Btheta)|\By)
&= \int_{\Btheta}\psi(\Btheta)\int_{\nu} \pi(\Btheta,\nu|\By) d\nu d\Btheta\\
&= \int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\psi(\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta,\nu|\By) d\nu d\Btheta\\
&= \frac{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\psi(\Btheta) \exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta}{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta)) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta) d\nu d\Btheta} \\
&= \frac{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\psi(\Btheta) \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}( \Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)\right| f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta}{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|\Bu)\right| f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta)d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta} \\
& = \frac{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\psi(\Btheta) \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}( \Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right|d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta}{\int_{\Btheta}\int_{\nu}\int_{\Bu}\mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right| d\Bu d\nu d\Btheta},
\end{align*}
i.e.\ a ratio of expectations with respect to $\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right|$,
where $\mathrm{sign}(x) = 1$ if $x >0$, or $\mathrm{sign}(x) = -1$ if $x < 0$. Thus,
we can sample from $\left|\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By)\right|$ by a pseudo-marginal MH algorithm to compute the expectations in the ratio. Since the function $\psi(\Btheta)$ is independent of $\nu$, we only store $\Btheta^{(i)}$ and the sign of the likelihood estimate evaluated at the accepted $\Btheta^{(i)}, \Bu^{(i)}, \nu^{(i)}$ at the $i$th iterate. The estimate of the expectation in \eqref{eq:expectation_doubly_intractable} with respect to the true doubly intractable posterior in \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable} is
\begin{equation}\label{eq: final_est}
\widehat{E}_{\pi}(\psi(\Btheta)) = \dfrac{\sum_{i=1}^N \psi(\Btheta^{(i)}) s^{(i)}}{\sum_{i=1}^N s^{(i)}},
\end{equation}
where $s^{(i)} = \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \Bu, \nu|\By))$.
Finally, to make the pseudo-marginal algorithm for sampling from \eqref{eq:absolute_target} more efficient, we correlate the estimators at the current and proposed draws to decrease the variability of the difference of the log likelihoods. This provides a substantial advantage over the standard pseudo-marginal method that proposes $\Bu$ independently in each iteration \citep{deligiannidis2018correlated, tran2016block}. We follow the approach in \cite{tran2016block}, where the correlation is induced by blocking the random numbers and updating one of the blocks in evaluating the likelihood at the proposal, while keeping the rest of the blocks fixed.
In the BP estimator, we use the random number $u_l$ to sample $\xi_l$, $l=1,\dots,\lambda$ and group them as $\Bu = (u_1,\dots,u_\lambda) = u_{1:\lambda}$. Note that each $u_l$ may include random numbers of different sizes depending on the realised $\chi_l \sim \mathrm{Pois}(m)$. If the number of blocks $\lambda$ is sufficiently large, the correlation $\rho$ between the logs of the likelihood estimators evaluated at the current and proposed draws is approximately $1-1/\lambda$ \citep{quiroz2021block}. We can adjust the number of blocks $\lambda$ to achieve a pre-specified correlation between the log of likelihood estimates.
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{One iteration of the signed block PMMH update with the BP estimator.}\label{algo: PMMH_DI}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State \textbf{Input:} Current values of $\nu,\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}$.
\State \textbf{Output:} Updated values of $\nu,\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}$ and $\mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}, \nu |\By))$.
\State Generate $u'_{1:\lambda} \gets u_{1:\lambda}$ by updating one block of random numbers.
\State Generate $\Btheta'$ from $q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)$.
\State Compute the unbiased estimates $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta')$s and use them to construct the BP estimator via \eqref{eq: block_pois_est}. The proposal distribution of the auxiliary variable $\nu'$ is an exponential distribution with mean $\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')$ : $$q(\nu'|\Btheta') = \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta') \exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')),$$ where $\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')$ is the average of the $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta')$s used in the BP estimator.
\State Set $\Btheta \gets \Btheta'$, $\nu \gets \nu'$ and $u_{1:\lambda} \gets u'_{1:\lambda}$ with probability
\begin{equation} \label{eq: ar_PMMH}
\min \left\{1,
\frac{\lvert \widehat{\pi}(\Btheta', \nu'|\By,u'_{1:\lambda}) \rvert}{\lvert \widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, \nu|\By, u_{1:\lambda}) \rvert}
\dfrac{q(\Btheta| \Btheta')}{q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)}
\dfrac{\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta)}{\widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta')}
\dfrac{\exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta))}{\exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta'))} \right\},
\end{equation}
where $$\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta,\nu|\By,u_{1:\lambda}) = \widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda}) f(\By|\Btheta) \pi(\Btheta) p^{-1}(\By),$$ and $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda})$ is obtained by the BP estimator.
\State Record $s = \mathrm{sign}(\widehat{\pi}(\Btheta, u_{1:\lambda}, \nu|\By))$ which is also the sign of $\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda})$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Algorithm \ref{algo: PMMH_DI} outlines one iteration of our method. Rewriting equation
\eqref{eq: ar_PMMH} as
\begin{align}
\frac{\pi(\Btheta') f(\By|\Btheta')}{\pi(\Btheta) f(\By|\Btheta)} \times \dfrac{q(\Btheta|\Btheta')}{q(\Btheta'|\Btheta)} \times \frac{\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta')}{\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta)} \times \dfrac{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu' Z(\Btheta')|u'_{1:\lambda})| / \exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta'))}{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda} )| / \exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta))} \notag,
\end{align}
we observe that $$\frac{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu' Z(\Btheta')|u'_{1:\lambda})| / \exp(-\nu' \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta'))}{|\widehat{\exp}(-\nu Z(\Btheta)|u_{1:\lambda} )| / \exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}_P(\Btheta))}$$
acts as a bias-correction for the bias induced when estimating $Z^{-1}(\Btheta')/Z^{-1}(\Btheta)$ by $\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta')/\widehat{Z}_P^{-1}(\Btheta)$. When forming the $\widehat{Z}_P$ estimators, we recommend using the average of the corresponding $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$s used in the BP estimator. This does not affect the unbiasedness property of the BP estimator and is computationally efficient, as the $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$s have already been computed and the extra cost in obtaining the average is negligible.
Equation \eqref{eq: final_est} computes the estimate of $\psi(\Btheta)$. \cite{lyne2015russian} show that having a significant proportion of negative likelihood estimates inflates the asymptotic variance. The worst case occurs when half of the estimates are negative, as the expectation is then unbounded because of the zero in the denominator.
\subsection{Tuning the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator}\label{sec: tuning para}
\cite{pitt2012some} provide guidelines to tune the number of particles (number of random numbers to use in the estimate of the likelihood) in a pseudo-marginal algorithm with a positive unbiased estimator to achieve an optimal trade-off between computing time and MCMC efficiency as measured by the integrated autocorrelation time (IACT), also known as the inefficiency factor (IF). Suppose that $\theta^{(j)}$, $j=1,2,\dots$, are the iterates after convergence of the MCMC and let $\vartheta^{(j)} = \psi(\theta^{(j)})$ be a scalar function of the iterates. Let $r_\tau$ be the correlation between $\vartheta^{(j)}$ and $\vartheta^{(j+\tau)}$. In pseudo-marginal algorithms, $r_\tau$ depends on the variance of the log of the likelihood estimator $\widehat{L}$, which we denote by $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$. The inefficiency factor is defined as
$$\mathrm{IF}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}) = 1 + 2\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty r_\tau(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}).$$
A larger $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$ results in a stickier chain and thus $\mathrm{IF}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}})$ is an increasing function of $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$; see \cite{pitt2012some} for details. To also take the computing time into account when determining the number of particles to use, \cite{pitt2012some} show that the expected number of particles is inversely proportional to $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$ and define the computational time $\mathrm{CT}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}})=\mathrm{IF}(\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}})/\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$. This measure takes into account both the mixing of the chain (through IF) and the cost of computing the estimator (through the number of particles which is inversely proportional to $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}$). \cite{pitt2012some} show that, under certain simplifying assumptions, $\sigma^2_{\log \widehat{L}}\approx 1$ is optimal, and thus the guideline is to choose the number of particles to achieve this.
\cite{quiroz2021block} extend the guidelines in \cite{pitt2012some} to cases when the likelihood estimator is not necessarily positive. The derivation of our guidelines follow those in \cite{quiroz2021block}, with modifications that account for a different estimator. Following Section 4.3 of \cite{quiroz2021block}, the optimal hyperparameters, given below, minimise the following computational time (CT)
\begin{equation}\label{eq: CT}
\mathrm{CT} = m\lambda M \frac{\mathrm{IF}_{\abs{\widehat{\pi}} ,\psi s}\left( \sigma^2_{\log |\widehat{L}_B|} (m, \lambda, M |\gamma)\right)}{(2\tau(m,\lambda,M) -1)^2}.
\end{equation}
The first term $m\lambda M$ is proportional to the expected cost per iteration since there are $\lambda$ blocks in total and each block includes $m$ estimates on average with $M$ Monte Carlo samples in each. The numerator in \eqref{eq: CT} is the inefficiency factor, which measures the MCMC sampling efficiency of drawing $\psi$'s from the targeted distribution $|\widehat{\pi}|$.
The IF is implicitly determined by the variance of the log of the absolute likelihood estimate $\sigma^2_{\log \abs{\widehat{L}_B}}$ (recall the discussion for a positive likelihood estimator above), which in turn depends on the hyperparameters $m,\lambda, M$. Section S2 of \cite{quiroz2021block} provides more details and derives the form of the IF.
Evaluating IF in \eqref{eq: CT} requires $\gamma(\Btheta):= M \mathrm{Var}(-\nu \widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta)),$ provided that the estimator of $Z(\Btheta)$ is obtained by Monte Carlo integration using $M$ particles. Note that $\gamma(\Btheta)$ is the intrinsic variance of the population $\nu\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$, and does not depend on $M$. The term $\gamma(\Btheta)$ is decomposed as
\begin{align}\label{eq: gamma_expression}
\gamma(\Btheta) &= M\mathrm{Var}(-\nu \widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta)) = M \mathrm{Var} \left( - \frac{\log(u)}{Z(\Btheta)}\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta) \right) \nonumber \\
& = M \log(u)^2 \frac{\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta))}{Z(\Btheta)^2}.
\end{align}
For the second equality in \eqref{eq: gamma_expression} we use that $\nu \sim \mathrm{Expon}(Z(\Btheta))$ is equivalent to $\nu = -\log(u)/Z(\Btheta),$ with $u \sim \mathrm{Uniform}(0,1)$. This decomposition is useful in tuning the hyperparameters.
The denominator in \eqref{eq: CT} contains $\tau(m,\lambda,M) = \Pr(\widehat{L}_B>0)$, with the expression given by Lemma \ref{lemma: positive prob}.
Equation~ \eqref{eq: CT} shows that it is important to have a large proportion of estimates of the same sign, while having close to half of the estimates being negative increases CT.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\subfloat[][\centering $\rho =0$]
{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/dependence_CT_rho_0.png}}
\qquad
\subfloat[][\centering $\rho = 0.99$]
{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/dependence_CT_rho_99.png}}
\caption{The effect of the number of blocks $\lambda$ on the logarithm of CT, $\tau$ and $\sigma^2_{\log\left|\widehat{L}_B\right|}$. The Poisson parameter $m$ is fixed at 1 for each set of panels (a,b). The correlation term is set to $\rho = 0$ (upper panel), 0.99 (bottom panel). Columns from left to right, correspond to three different settings of $\gamma = 10^2$, $100^2$, and $500^2$. The top, middle and last rows of each panel show log CT \eqref{eq: CT}, the probability of obtaining a positive estimator $\tau(m,\lambda,M)$ (see Lemma \ref{lemma: positive prob}) and the variance of log of the absolute value of the likelihood estimate. The vertical line on each plot represents $\lambda_{\mathrm{opt}}$, the optimal $\lambda$, which minimises the logarithm of CT among three settings.}\label{fig:CT_dependence}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:CT_dependence} shows the effects of the number of blocks ($\lambda$) and Monte Carlo samples ($M$) on the logarithm of CT, $\tau$ and $\sigma^2_{\log \abs{\widehat{L}_B}}$. We consider the three cases $\gamma = 10^2, 100^2, 500^2$ (left to right columns respectively) which show that
the optimal $\lambda$ (corresponding to minimal CT) varies with different values of $M$ and increases with $\gamma$ (top row).
The minimum CT is associated with a high probability of a positive estimator ($\tau$) (middle row). The last row indicates that $\sigma^2_{\log \abs{\widehat{L}_B}}$ decreases as a function of $\lambda$. Comparing the top nine panels with the bottom nine, a high correlation $\rho = 0.99$, reduces $\lambda_{\mathrm{opt}}$ from 295 (no correlation, $\rho=0$) to 195 for $\gamma = 500^2$. Conversely, $\rho = 0.99$ requires at least 100 blocks. So when the variance $\gamma$ is small, introducing a high correlation increases the CT as more blocks are required compared to the uncorrelated case. Our implementation follows the approach in \cite{tran2016block} which sets the correlation $\rho$ to a value close to 1. Comparing the first row of the top panel (a) in Figure \ref{fig:CT_dependence} with that of the bottom (b), shows that a high correlation significantly reduces the CT per iteration for large $\gamma$.
The conclusion is that the optimal tuning depends on $\gamma$ in \eqref{eq: gamma_expression}, which is the intrinsic variability of the population $\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$. For conservative tuning, in our applications we set $\gamma$ to a large value $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}$ by using a grid search over possible $\Btheta$. The tuning process starts with fixed values of $\lambda$ and $m$ to find the optimal value for $M$ that minimises \eqref{eq: CT}. In Figure \ref{fig:optimal_M}, we fix the values of $\lambda$ and $m$, with $\lambda = 50, 100$ (the corresponding $\rho$ are 0.98 and 0.99 respectively), and $m = 1$. A standard optimiser is used to find the optimal value $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ for each of the $\gamma$. The scattered dots in the left panel of Figure \ref{fig:optimal_M} plot various values of $\sqrt{\gamma}$ and the corresponding $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$. The figure shows that $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ increases as a function of $\sqrt{\gamma}$ and similarly for the logarithm of CT as the right panel shows. To estimate the relationship between $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ and $\sqrt{\gamma}$, a quadratic polynomial is fitted to the points in the left panel.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/optimal_M_CT.png}
\caption{Left panel: The optimal value $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$ as a function of $\sqrt{\gamma}$. The lines are quadratic polynomials fitted to the scattered dots. The horizontal dashed line represents the threshold $M=50$, which is the minimal number of blocks required in the algorithm. Right panel: The minimised CT as a function of $\sqrt{\gamma}$. }
\label{fig:optimal_M}
\end{figure}
The following tuning strategy is based on $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}$, leading to a conservative choice of $M_{\mathrm{opt}}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item [1] Have a general idea of the posterior distribution of $\Btheta$. This can be accomplished by conducting an exact method for a few iterations, optimising the posterior distribution by plugging the biased estimator ($1/\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$), or applying an available approximate method.
\item [2] Estimate the corresponding $\mathrm{Var}(\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta))/Z^2(\Btheta)$ using a grid search over possible $\Btheta$ values based on results from Step 1. The estimator $\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta)$ can be plugged into \eqref{eq: gamma_expression} to replace the unknown $Z(\Btheta)$. The variability induced by $\nu$ needs to be considered here. A conservative choice is $\gamma(\Btheta) = 2M \mathrm{Var}(\widehat{Z_M}(\Btheta))/\widehat{Z_M}^2(\Btheta)$. Section \ref{sec: discussion of algo} in the supplement discusses this in more detail.
\item [3] Obtain the maximum value $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}(\Btheta)$ of $\gamma(\Btheta)$ from Step 2. A good starting point is to set $\lambda = 100, m= 1, \rho = 0.99$ and $M_{\mathrm{opt}} = \max \{50, 0.0012 \times \gamma_{\max}(\Btheta) \}$.
When $\gamma_{\max}(\Btheta)$ is small or moderately large, e.g.\ $\gamma_{\max}(\Btheta) < 100^2$, having many blocks increases CT. A weaker correlation also produces an efficient algorithm with smaller CT. Another suitable setting is $\lambda = 50, m = 1, \rho = 0.98$ and $M_{\mathrm{opt}}=\max\{50, 0.0042 \times \gamma_{\max}(\Btheta)\}$.
For an even smaller $\gamma(\Btheta)$, the correlation can be relaxed further. In the Ising model example, setting $\lambda = 10$ is sufficient when the variability is low; see Section \ref{sec: ising model} and Section \ref{app: ising model} in the supplement.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{An alternative pseudo-marginal approach under strong assumptions}\label{subsec:bias_corrected}
If the estimator $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$ is normally distributed with a known variance, then an unbiased almost surely positive estimator may be derived using the penalty method in \cite{ceperley1999penalty}.
Suppose that $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta) \sim N(Z(\Btheta),\sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)})$, where $\sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)}$ is the variance of $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$. Then $\exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta))$ is log-normally distributed with expected value
$$E(\exp(-\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta)))=\exp\left(-\nu Z(\Btheta)+\frac{1}{2}\nu^2 \sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)}\right);$$
hence
\begin{equation}
\exp\left(-\nu \widehat{Z}(\Btheta)-\frac{1}{2}\nu^2 \sigma^2_{\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)}\right)
\end{equation}
is a positive unbiased estimator of $\exp(-\nu Z(\Btheta))$. Thus, under the idealised assumptions that $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$ is normal with a known variance, we can use a pseudo-marginal algorithm to obtain samples from \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable}. However, in practice, $\widehat{Z}(\Btheta)$ is rarely normal and the variance must be estimated, so this method provides approximate samples in practice. It is outside the scope of this paper to study the resulting perturbation error.
The advantage of this method is that it is much faster than the BP estimator, because it only requires a single estimate of the normalising function. However, unlike our method, it is not simulation consistent. Section \ref{sec: ising model} implements this method as a fast alternative to our exact approach.
\section{Simulation studies} \label{sec: demo}
We demonstrate the algorithm on three examples. The first is an Ising model, which is the usual benchmark example for doubly intractable problems as perfect sampling is available for this model on small grids. The example compares the signed PMMH with the BP estimator to other methods, including methods that sample from the exact posterior \eqref{eq:target_doubly_intractable}. The signed PMMH with the BP estimator generates simulation consistent results with less computing time for this example. The second example considers
the Kent distribution, where the intractable normalising function is an infinite sum. To the best of our knowledge, exact Bayesian inference has not been considered for the Kent distribution due to its intractability. We show that, under certain settings, the Bayesian estimate obtained by our method outperforms those obtained by the maximum likelihood method and the method of moments with respect to the mean squared error. Finally, Section \ref{sec: GP} in the supplement contains a third example considering a constrained Gaussian process, where the normalising function arises from constraining the process to be positive. We show that not accounting for the constraint, i.e.\ not taking into account the normalising function, leads to erroneous inference. The constrained Gaussian process and the Kent distribution are two examples of models where the non-pseudo methods (the auxiliary variable approaches that require perfect sampling) cannot be easily applied.
\subsection{The Ising model} \label{sec: ising model}
The Ising model \citep{lenz1920beitrvsge, ising1925beitrag} has widespread applications, such as understanding phase transitions in thermodynamic systems \citep{fredrickson1984kinetic}, interactive image segmentation in vision problems \citep{kolmogorov2004energy} and modelling small-world networks \citep{herrero2002ising}. It is the typical benchmark example in the literature to evaluate methods for tackling the doubly intractable problem; see e.g.\ \cite{moller2006efficient, lyne2015russian, atchade2013bayesian, park2018bayesian}. However, most of the existing methods use auxiliary variable approaches, as it is feasible to draw observations from the likelihood function perfectly, so-called perfect sampling. The pseudo-marginal methods such as RR and our approach do not require perfect sampling, which makes them applicable to more general problems. We implement and compare the results from the BP estimator, the bias-corrected estimator in Section \ref{subsec:bias_corrected} and the RR method for the Ising model.
Example \ref{eq: Ising} in Section \ref{sec: doubly intract prob}: consider an $L \times L$ lattice with binary observations $y_{ij}$ of row $i$ and column $j$ ($y_{ij} \in \{ -1,1\})$. The model is
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}
p(\By|\theta) &= \frac{1}{Z(\theta)}\exp ( \theta S(\By)),\\
\text {with } S(\By) &= \sum_{i=1}^{L} \sum_{j=1}^{L-1} y_{i,j} y_{i,j+1} + \sum_{i=1}^{L-1} \sum_{j=1}^L y_{i,j} y_{i+1,j}\\
\text{and } Z(\theta) &= \sum_{\By} \exp(\theta S(\By));\notag
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
$\theta$ is a scalar parameter and $S(\By)$ imposes spatial dependence; a stronger interaction between observations is associated with a larger $\theta$. Obtaining $Z(\theta)$ is computationally expensive with a sum over $2^{L^2}$ possible configurations.
The data simulations are conducted using perfect sampling \citep{propp1996exact}, which samples exactly without evaluating the normalising function. Perfect sampling uses coupling to guarantee that the samples are generated from a Markov chain which has already converged to its equilibrium distribution. Following the settings in \cite{park2018bayesian}, two scenarios are considered on a $10 \times 10$ grid, with $\theta = 0.2$ and $ 0.43$; see Figure \ref{fig:ising model demo} for an illustration.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/ising_demon.png}
\caption{Illustrating an Ising model on a $10\times 10$ grid. The samples are drawn using perfect sampling with $\theta=0.2$ (left) and $\theta=0.43$ (right). The light and dark blue squares correspond to the values 1 and $-1$. }
\label{fig:ising model demo}
\end{figure}
For all the algorithms considered, a uniform distribution on $[0,1]$ is selected as the prior for $\theta$. We adopt a random walk proposal centred at the current $\theta$ with a step size 0.07. The pseudo-marginal methods (RR, BP, and the bias-corrected estimator) require an unbiased estimator for $Z(\theta)$. We use annealed importance sampling (AIS) \citep{neal2001annealed} to obtain the estimate of $Z(\theta)$. The method starts by sampling from a tractable distribution (the prior) and ends at the intractable target (the posterior) via a sequence of intermediate distributions. The transitions between the distributions are completed via Gibbs updates and the weights associated with the transitions finally constitute the normalising function of interest; see \cite{neal2001annealed} for details of AIS in general and Section \ref{app: ising model} in the supplement for its implementation for the Ising model.
To obtain the ``gold'' standard to evaluate the accuracy of the results, we follow \cite{park2018bayesian}, where an exchange algorithm with 1{,}010{,}000 iterations is performed. The first 10{,}000 iterations are discarded for burn-in and the remaining iterates are thinned so that 10{,}000 posterior samples remain.
\begin{table}[ht!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{rccccccc}
\toprule
\multicolumn{7}{c}{$\theta_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.2}\\
\midrule
Method & Mean & 95\%HPD & IACT & Time(sec) & ESS/sec &$\lambda$ & $\#$ particles \\
\midrule
Gold & 0.205 & (0.075, 0.337) & 1 & -& - & - & - \\
BP & 0.203 & (0.066, 0.328) & 7.43 & 676 & 4.0& 10 & 100 \\
Approx & 0.204 & (0.077, 0.331) & 7.09 & 62 &45.5 & - & 100 \\
RR & 0.202 & (0.062, 0.328) & 11.65 & 853 & 2.0 & - & 100 \\
\midrule
\multicolumn{7}{c}{$\theta_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.43}\\
\midrule
Method & mean & 95\%HPD & IACT & time(sec) & ESS/sec &$\lambda$ & $\#$ particles \\
\midrule
Gold & 0.433 & (0.330, 0.533) & 1.04 & - & - & - &-\\
BP & 0.435 & (0.332, 0.545) & 6.91 & 5877 & 0.5 &50 & 100 \\
Approx & 0.441 & (0.331, 0.549) & 7.78 & 745 & 3.5 &- & 500 \\
RR & 0.432 & (0.334, 0.549) & 10.77 & 9134 & 0.2 &- & 500 \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Inference results for the Ising model. All the chains, except for the ``gold standard'', ran for 20{,}000 iterations using the algorithms described (Gold=exchange algorithm, BP= block-Poisson, Approx = bias-corrected estimator, RR = Russian roulette). For BP and RR, the mean estimates are corrected for the negative estimates using \eqref{eq: final_est}. The highest posterior density (HPD) intervals are calculated by the \texttt{coda} package in \texttt{R}. The IACT calculation is based on all the samples as the chains start at the true value. For BP and RR, the calculation of the IACT accounts for the negative estimates via \eqref{eq: CT}. ESS/sec is the effective sample size per second. For BP, $\lambda$ refers to the number of blocks; $\#$ particles is the number of particles used in the AIS. } \label{table: ising inference}
\end{table}
Table \ref{table: ising inference} summarises the simulation results. When $\theta=0.2$, all the estimates are close to that of the gold standard. The bias-corrected method has the smallest computing time and the best IACT. In the implementation, both the bias-corrected and BP methods exploit the block structure used in the signed block PMMH to control the variability in the log of the likelihood estimates between the current and the proposed value. As suggested in Section \ref{sec: tuning para}, the target correlation is set to no less than 0.98 with at least 50 blocks. We find that when $\theta = 0.2$, the AIS method already gives a sufficiently low value for $\gamma_{\mathrm{max}}$. Hence, we reduced the number of blocks as per the tuning guidelines in Section \ref{sec: tuning para} and set $\lambda = 10$. When $\theta = 0.43$, the strong dependence leads to a higher variability in $\widehat{Z}(\theta)$ (see Section \ref{app: ising model} in the supplement). We increased the number of blocks to 50 for the BP estimator. To ensure a fair comparison, we also increased the number of particles in the importance samplers of AIS from 100 to 500 for the RR method to bring down the variance. The results of the BP and RR methods match well with that of the gold standard, whereas the bias-corrected method slightly overestimates the parameter. This may be due to the violation of the normality assumption of the bias-corrected estimator when $\theta$ is large. The bias-corrected method is 8 times faster than BP and 12 times faster than RR. Comparing the two exact methods with respect to ESS/sec, the BP estimator is around twice as efficient as the RR method.
To summarise, both the BP and the RR methods provide exact inference on the Ising model, with our method being about twice as efficient. We also propose the faster bias-corrected estimator in Section \ref{subsec:bias_corrected}; however, this estimator is only unbiased if $\widehat{Z}(\theta)$ is normally distributed with known variance. The normality assumption is unlikely to hold for large $\theta$; see Figure \ref{fig:histogram_Ztheta} in the supplement, which shows that a large $\theta$ results in a heavily skewed distribution of $\widehat{Z}(\theta)$. This explains the bias incurred when $\theta_{\mathrm{true}}=0.43$.
\subsection{The Kent distribution}\label{subsec: kent_dist}
Directional statistics involves the study of density functions defined on unit vectors in the plane or sphere. The Kent distribution, also known as the 5-parameter Fisher-Bingham distribution ($\mathrm{FB}_5$), is an analogue to the bivariate normal distribution to model asymmetrically distributed data on a spherical surface \citep{kent1982fisher}. It has 5 parameters: $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_1, \boldsymbol{\gamma}_2,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_3,\beta$, and $\kappa$, where $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_1,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_2,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_3$ form a 3-dimensional orthonormal basis, representing the mean, major and minor axes; $\kappa$ is the concentration parameter, and $\beta$ is a measure of its ovalness, with the constraint $0 \leq \beta < \kappa/2$ to ensure that the distribution is unimodal.
Recall Example \ref{Ex: Kent} in Section \ref{sec: doubly intract prob}: the density of the Kent distribution is
\begin{equation*}
f(\By|\boldsymbol{\gamma_1},\boldsymbol{\gamma_2},\boldsymbol{\gamma_3},\beta,\kappa) = \frac{1}{c(\kappa,\beta)} \exp\left\{\kappa \boldsymbol{\gamma_1}^\top \cdot \By + \beta \left[(\boldsymbol{\gamma_2}^\top \cdot \By)^2 - (\boldsymbol{\gamma_3}^\top \cdot\By)^2\right]\right\},
\end{equation*}
where $\By \in \mathbb{R}^3, \| \By\| = 1$. The normalising function is
\begin{equation*}
c(\kappa, \beta) = 2\pi \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \dfrac{\Gamma(j+0.5)}{\Gamma(j+1)} \beta^{2j} (0.5\kappa)^{-2j-0.5} I_{2j+0.5}(\kappa),
\end{equation*}
where $I_\nu(\cdot)$ is the modified Bessel function.
The normalising function is an intractable infinite sum. Due to the complex form of the density function, \cite{kent1982fisher} proposes a consistent moment estimator of the parameters. The moment estimation of $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_i, i =1,2,3, $ is independent of $\beta$ and $\kappa$. Estimating $\beta$ and $\kappa$ requires an approximation that utilises the limiting case when $2\beta/\kappa$ is small or $\kappa$ is large, provided that the moment estimates of the $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_i$ are available. Alternatively, $\kappa$ and $\beta$ can be obtained numerically. \cite{kume2005saddlepoint} adopt saddle point techniques to obtain the approximation for the normalising function. \cite{kasarapu2015modelling} uses the Bayesian framework to model a mixture of $\mathrm{FB}_5$ distributions. The infinite sum in $c(\kappa,\beta)$ is truncated in the sense that the successive term to be added is less than a prefixed threshold. However, this approach results in inexact Bayesian inference. In contrast, the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator provides exact Bayesian inference for the parameters.
We use the approach proposed by \cite{papaspiliopoulos2011monte} to obtain an unbiased estimator for $c(\kappa,\beta)$. Rewrite $c(\kappa,\beta) $ as $ \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \phi_j (\kappa,\beta)$; then the estimator $\widehat{c}(\kappa,\beta) = \phi_k/q_k$ is unbiased, where $k$ is a non-negative discrete random variable with probability mass function $q_k$. Either a Poisson or a geometric distribution is suitable, as $k$ is a non-negative integer. It is straightforward to verify that $E(\widehat{c}(\kappa,\beta)) = \sum_k \phi_k/q_k \times q_k = c(\kappa,\beta)$. As $\phi_j(\kappa,\beta)$ is a decreasing function in $j$, to reduce the variability, we compute the first $K$ terms exactly and perform a truncation of the remaining terms. Specifically, $c(\kappa,\beta)$ is decomposed as $$\sum_{j=0}^{K-1} \phi_j (\kappa,\beta) + \sum_{j=K}^{\infty} \phi_j (\kappa,\beta). $$
The first sum is evaluated, and the second is estimated via the truncation procedure described above.
We apply the parameterisation in \cite{kasarapu2015modelling}, where the orthonormal basis $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_1,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_2,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_3$ is reparameterised as $\psi \in [0,\pi], \alpha \in [0,2\pi], \eta \in [0,\pi]$. An adaptive Gaussian random walk proposal is used for all the parameters with the optimal covariance matrix proposed in \cite{garthwaite2016adaptive}. To accommodate such a proposal, we further transform $\psi,\alpha,\eta$ into $\psi^*, \alpha^*, \eta^*$ which take unconstrained values using the following transformations:
$$\psi^* = \log\left( \frac{\psi}{\pi - \psi} \right); \alpha^* = \log \left( \frac{\alpha}{2\pi - \alpha} \right) \quad {\rm and} \quad \eta^* = \log \left( \frac{\eta}{\pi - \eta }\right).$$
We also work with the logarithms of $\beta$ and $\kappa$ as they are unconstrained.
We follow \cite{dowe1996mml} and set the prior for $\kappa$ as $4\kappa^2/\pi(1+\kappa^2)^2$. For a given $\kappa$, the prior for $\beta $ is uniform on $[0,\kappa/2)$. The priors for $\psi$, $\alpha$ and $\eta$ follow \cite{kasarapu2015modelling}. The joint prior on all the parameters, $\psi,\alpha,\eta,\beta$ and $\kappa$ is
\begin{equation*}
\pi(\psi,\alpha,\eta,\beta,\kappa) = \dfrac{2\kappa \sin \alpha}{\pi^3 (1+\kappa^2)^2} \mathbbm{1}(0\leq 2\beta/\kappa < 1).
\end{equation*}
In the simulation, we generate $n$ observations from $\mathrm{FB}_5,$ with different settings for $\beta$ and $\kappa$. The data generation is performed by the R package \texttt{Directional}, which implements the acceptance-rejection method in \cite{kent2013new}. We set $n = $ 10, 100, 1{,}000 in combination with $\beta/\kappa = $ 0.01, 0.25, 0.49, with $\kappa$ fixed as 5. The lower and the upper bounds for $\beta/\kappa$ are 0 and 0.5 to ensure unimodality of the data \citep{kent1982fisher}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccccccc}
\toprule
& &\multicolumn{3}{c}{$n=10$} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{$n=100$} &\multicolumn{3}{c}{$n=1{,}000$}\\
$\beta/\kappa$ &Method &$\beta$& $\kappa$& $\beta/\kappa$ &$\beta$& $\kappa$& $\beta/\kappa$ &$\beta$& $\kappa$& $\beta/\kappa$ &\\
\cmidrule(lr){3-5}\cmidrule(lr){6-8}\cmidrule(lr){9-12}
$0.01$&Bayesian& \textbf{1.33} & \textbf{2.40} & 0.22 & 0.45 &\textbf{0.50} & 0.09 & 0.11 & 0.17 & 0.02 & \\
&Moment& 1.48 & 4.01 & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.25} & 0.55 & \textbf{0.05} & \textbf{0.05} & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.01} & \\
&MLE& 2.29 & 4.30 & 0.26 & 0.47 & 0.57 & 0.09 & 0.11 & 0.17 & 0.02 & \\
\midrule
$0.25$&Bayesian& \textbf{0.64} & \textbf{2.20} & \textbf{0.04} & 0.38 & 0.55 & 0.07 & \textbf{0.11} & \textbf{0.16} & \textbf{0.02} & \\
&Moment& 1.01 & 3.69 & 0.09 & 0.63 & \textbf{0.54} & 0.13 & 0.65 & 0.17 & 0.13 & \\
&MLE& 2.00 & 4.18 & 0.16 & \textbf{0.36} & 0.60 & \textbf{0.06} & 0.35 & 0.24 & 0.07 & \\
\midrule
$0.49$&Bayesian& \textbf{1.28 }& \textbf{1.99} & 0.22 & \textbf{0.42} & \textbf{0.57} & \textbf{0.06} & \textbf{0.14} & \textbf{0.19} & \textbf{0.02} & \\
&Moment& 1.38 & 3.27 & 0.27 & 1.48 & 0.59 & 0.28 & 1.50 & 0.46 & 0.28 & \\
&MLE& 1.73 & 3.79 & \textbf{0.17} & \textbf{0.42} & 0.60 & \textbf{0.06} & 0.98 & 0.59 & 0.19 & \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{ Simulation results for 100 independent replications of a $\mathrm{FB}_5$ distribution. The numbers are the RMSEs with respect to the true values. Boldface numbers identify the lowest RMSE among the three methods (Bayesian, Moment, MLE). }
\label{tab:FB5_simulation}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:FB5_simulation} shows the RMSE with regard to the true values for the three methods based on 100 independent replicates. ``Bayesian'' refers to the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator algorithm. The selected hyperparameters are $\lambda = 20$ (number of blocks), $m = 1$ (Poisson mean value of BP), and $K = 10$ (the number of truncated terms computed exactly in the estimation of the normalising function). A Poisson distribution with mean value 1 is used for the truncation. ``Moment'' refers to the moment estimates and ``MLE'' is based on our modification of the function \texttt{kent.mle} of the R package \texttt{Directional}, where the original version uses the moment estimates of $\gamma$'s. We use an optimiser on the transformed parameters to obtain the MLE of all the parameters in the modified version. For the Bayesian method, the RMSE is calculated using the posterior mean with the sign correction in \eqref{eq: final_est}. For a small number of observations ($n=10$), our method yields the smallest RMSE amongst all three methods.
Comparing the results of different $\beta /\kappa$ combinations, the moment estimator gives the best RMSE for $\beta/\kappa = 0.01,$ and our method is superior to the other two when the ratio approaches 0.49, where the assumption underlying the moment estimator is almost violated. The MLE method uses the saddle point technique \citep{kume2005saddlepoint} to approximate the likelihood. Unlike the moment estimation, the MLE method does not assume the limiting case where $2\beta/\kappa$ is small or $\kappa$ is large. Its performance gets closer to the Bayesian method for $\beta/\kappa = 0.01$ with many observations. However, MLE has the worst performance on small data sets ($n=10$) due to a large standard error. As $\beta/\kappa $ increases, it outperforms the moment estimator, but is inferior to the Bayesian method.
The simulation study shows that the signed block PMMH with the BP estimator performs the best when the sample size is small. It also has the lowest RMSE when $\beta/\kappa $ approaches the limiting value 0.5. We conclude that the Bayesian approach using our method is a competitive alternative to the standard methods used for the Kent distribution in the literature.
\section{An empirical study on spherical data} \label{sec: empirical study}
We now analyse four real spherical datasets using the Kent distribution and our method. Recall that the non-pseudo marginal approaches cannot be applied to this model. Each dataset contains samples from two groups, which are formed naturally from the sample collection process. Figure \ref{fig:FB5_data} plots the spherical datasets.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Palaeomagnetic} (Palaeo) \citep{wood1982bimodal}: Thirty three estimates of previous magnetic pole positions were obtained using palaeomagnetic techniques. Each estimate is associated with a different site in Tasmania. The data is originally from \cite{schmidt1976non} and the author points out that the data is likely to fall mainly into two groups of distinct geographical regions. Following \cite{figueiredo2009discriminant}, the first group contains the observation indices 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 23, 24, 30.
\item \textbf{Magnetic} \cite[Table B8]{fisher1993statistical}: Measurements of magnetic remanence from a set of 62 specimens is obtained. The specimens are from Mesozoic Dolerite from Prospect, New South Wales, after successive partial demagnetisation stages ($200^{\circ}$ and $350^{\circ}$).
An experiment was conducted to determine the blocking temperature spectrum of the magnetisation components.
\item \textbf{Sandstone} \cite[Table B23]{fisher1993statistical}: Measurements of natural remanent magnetisation in Old Red Sandstone rocks in Pembrokeshire, Wales. The measurements consist of specimens from two sites with the number of observations 35 and 13, respectively.
\item \textbf{Stone} \cite[Table B25]{fisher1993statistical}: Measurements of the longest axis and shortest axis (101 observations) orientations of tabular stones on a slope at Windy Hills, Scotland.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figure/FB5_dataset1.jpg}
\caption{Illustration of the datasets. Green points and red points refer to the observations from groups 1 and 2, respectively.}
\label{fig:FB5_data}
\end{figure}
The two groups are modelled separately by assuming a non-hierarchical structure on the prior for all the parameters. The data is modelled in the same way as in Section \ref{subsec: kent_dist} using the density function in \eqref{eq: Kent}.
Table \ref{tab:FB5_wholedata} summarises the results. We first note that the three methods estimate the same quantity. The gap between the Bayesian and ML estimates is narrower for the bigger datasets (Magnetic, Stone). The moment estimates are far from the MLE and the Bayesian results, even for the bigger datasets. Since $\beta/\kappa$ is close to 0.5 for the Magnetic dataset, the moment estimate is unreliable. This result is supported by the simulation results in Section \ref{subsec: kent_dist}. The second result is that the confidence intervals for the moment estimates and the MLE, especially for small datasets (Palaeo, Sandstone), are wider than the Bayesian intervals. The Bayesian credible interval is constructed using the posterior distribution. For the MLE and moment estimates, we obtain the confidence intervals using the non-parametric bootstrap \citep{efron1992bootstrap}.
By construction, the intervals have different interpretations (frequentist vs Bayesian); however, both intervals are expected to be close when the number of observations is sufficiently large. Table \ref{tab:FB5_wholedata} confirms this for the bigger dataset Stone, where the MLE and Bayesian intervals are close to each other.
The moment estimates again seem to be less reliable for $\beta$. A larger $\kappa$ indicates the observations are more concentrated. For small datasets, the non-parametric bootstrap is likely to draw the same observation multiple times, resulting in a concentrated data pattern and a correspondingly large estimate of $\kappa$.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccc}
\toprule
Palaeo & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=9$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=24$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 2.78 & 18.25 & 0.16 & 3.86 & 33.89 & 0.11 & \\
&(0.20,11.64)&(7.92,38.55)&(0.01,0.41)&(0.27,12.76)&(21.33,50.48)&(0.01,0.32)& \\
Moment& 4.03 & 26.54 & 0.15 & 5.88 & 39.84 & 0.15 & \\
&(1.11,98.84)&(18.96,223.76)&(0.05,0.46)&(1.24,30.51)&(28.16,92.60)&(0.04,0.35)& \\
MLE& 4.55 & 26.65 & 0.17 & 6.44 & 40.02 & 0.16 & \\
&(0.78,106.84)&(18.96,223.02)&(0.04,0.50)&(1.06,34.34)&(28.25,96.38)&(0.03,0.38)& \\
\midrule
Magnetic & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=62$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=62$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 7.32 & 15.23 & 0.49 & 15.77 & 32.04 & 0.49 & \\
&(5.28,10.03)&(11.18,20.34)&(0.43,0.50)&(11.17,21.58)&(22.95,43.29)&(0.46,0.50)& \\
Moment& 4.55 & 12.99 & 0.35 & 8.87 & 23.22 & 0.38 & \\
&(2.58,10.73)&(8.21,26.72)&(0.31,0.40)&(5.28,20.53)&(14.77,49.06)&(0.35,0.42)& \\
MLE& 8.24 & 16.49 & 0.50 & 15.57 & 31.13 & 0.50 & \\
&(4.76,16.95)&(9.57,34.04)&(0.49,0.50)&(9.82,33.12)&(19.65,66.23)&(0.49,0.50)& \\
\midrule
Sandstone & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=36$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=13$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 1.48 & 20.31 & 0.07 & 8.54 & 47.08 & 0.19 & \\
&(0.08,5.68)&(14.51,28.33)&(0.00,0.23)&(0.70,27.20)&(24.69,89.95)&(0.02,0.39)& \\
Moment& 2.07 & 22.36 & 0.09 & 18.45 & 68.94 & 0.27 & \\
&(0.70,16.37)&(13.38,64.33)&(0.04,0.30)&(8.76,67.07)&(54.64,188.26)&(0.11,0.41)& \\
MLE& 2.42 & 22.44 & 0.11 & 20.15 & 70.18 & 0.29 & \\
&(0.00,17.93)&(13.41,65.55)&(0.00,0.36)&(7.90,76.18)&(55.30,199.75)&(0.09,0.44)& \\
\midrule
Stone & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 1 ($n=101$)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{group 2 ($n=101$)} \\
& $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ & $\beta$ & $\kappa$ & $\beta/\kappa$ \\ \cmidrule(lr){2-4}\cmidrule(lr){5-7}
Bayesian& 0.52 & 4.19 & 0.13 & 1.06 & 2.18 & 0.49 & \\
&(0.05,1.32)&(3.37,5.12)&(0.01,0.30)&(0.79,1.34)&(1.64,2.72)&(0.44,0.50)& \\
Moment& 0.23 & 4.29 & 0.05 & 0.41 & 1.99 & 0.21 & \\
&(0.08,0.54)&(3.33,6.23)&(0.02,0.11)&(0.30,0.52)&(1.79,2.30)&(0.15,0.24)& \\
MLE& 0.60 & 4.32 & 0.14 & 1.10 & 2.19 & 0.50 & \\
&(0.15,1.91)&(3.38,6.31)&(0.03,0.50)&(0.92,1.30)&(1.85,2.61)&(0.50,0.50)& \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results for the Bayesian, moment and MLE approaches for all the datasets. The Bayesian estimate is the posterior mean. The numbers in brackets are the 95\% confidence (credible for Bayesian) intervals. For the moment estimates and MLE, the confidence intervals are obtained using the bootstrap \citep{efron1992bootstrap} with 1{,}000 repetitions for each. }
\label{tab:FB5_wholedata}
\end{table}
We use 5-fold cross validation to test the models' performance. To avoid sampling bias, the splitting is done for both groups. Denote the training and test sets as $\By_{\mathrm{train},g}$ and $ \By_{\mathrm{test},g},$ with $g$ the group membership $g\in \{1,2\}$. After fitting the models using $\By_{\mathrm{train},g}$, the prediction for an observation $\By_i$ averaged over the posterior distribution of $\Btheta_g = \{ \beta, \kappa, \psi, \alpha, \eta\} $ is
\begin{align*}
p(\By_i|\By_{\mathrm{train},g}) = \int_{\Btheta} p(\By_i|\Btheta_g) p (\Btheta_g|\By_{\mathrm{train},g}) d\Btheta_g.
\end{align*}
If $p(\By_i|\By_{\mathrm{train},1}) > p(\By_i|\By_{\mathrm{train},2})$, $\By_i$ is classified as being in group 1, and conversely if the inequality is reversed. Section \ref{app: kent distr} in the online supplement provides more details.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccccc}
\toprule
& & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Train accuracy} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Test accuracy} \\
\cmidrule(lr){4-6}\cmidrule(lr){7-9}
data& grp1 &grp2 & Bayesian & Moment & MLE & Bayesian & Moment & MLE \\
\midrule
Palaeo & 9 & 24 & 0.985 & 0.985 & 0.985 & 0.943 & 0.943 & 0.943 & \\
& & & (0.008) &(0.008) &(0.008) &(0.031) &(0.031) &(0.031) & \\
Magnetic & 62 & 62 & 0.554 & \textbf{0.561} & 0.548 & \textbf{0.507} & 0.502 & 0.501 & \\
& & & (0.011) &(0.014) &(0.015) &(0.006) &(0.034) &(0.037) & \\
Sandstone & 36 & 13 & 0.943 & \textbf{0.953} & \textbf{0.953} & \textbf{0.920} & \textbf{0.920} & 0.880 & \\
& & & (0.013) &(0.014) &(0.014) &(0.072) &(0.052) &(0.066) & \\
Stone & 101 & 101& \textbf{0.892} & 0.877 & 0.890 & 0.886 & 0.861 & \textbf{0.896} & \\
& & & (0.002) &(0.003) &(0.001) &(0.005) &(0.011) &(0.005) & \\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{ Results of 5-fold cross validation on the four datasets. ``grp1'',``grp2'' are the number of observations for the corresponding group. Accuracy on the training and test data is the average value of the 5 folds, with the standard error in brackets. ``Train accuracy'' and ``Test accuracy'' state the proportion of correct predictions in all predictions made for the corresponding dataset. The boldface numbers represent the method(s) with the highest accuracy.}
\label{tab:FB5_result}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:FB5_result} shows the prediction accuracy on the training and test datasets. There is no notable difference in terms of the prediction accuracy between the methods across the datasets. One possible reason is that the parameters of one group are distinct from that of the other group, so that minor differences in parameter estimates do not affect the classification.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec: discussion}
We propose the signed block PMMH with the block-Poisson estimator to carry out exact inference in general doubly intractable problems. Our method requires only an unbiased estimator of the normalising function, which makes it applicable to a wider range of problems than its competitors, which often require perfect sampling from the model.
Compared with the Russian roulette method in \cite{lyne2015russian}, the block-Poisson estimator achieves a smaller variance of the
logarithmic difference in the likelihood estimates in the MH acceptance ratio by its use of correlated pseudo-marginal updates. Moreover, the Russian roulette method lacks guidelines on how to tune its hyperparameters. We derive heuristic guidelines based on analytical statistical properties of our estimator. The Ising model example in Section \ref{sec: ising model} suggests that our approach is about twice as efficient as the Russian roulette method.
Despite its wide applicability, the signed PMMH algorithm (with both block-Poisson and Russian roulette methods) is computationally costly when unbiasedly estimating the normalising function. The Ising model example shows that AIS is required multiple times during each iteration for both the block-Poisson and Russian roulette methods. This prevents the computing time of the PM methods being competitive with other methods which do not require estimating the normalising function. However, the algorithm gives exact inference with minimal assumptions on the structure of the model and therefore applies to a wider range of problems.
When the normalising function is an infinite sum as in the Kent distribution, the block-Poisson estimator can be obtained relatively cheaply, making the signed block PMMH with the block-Poisson estimator computationally efficient. Our proposed method enables the first exact Bayesian analysis on the Kent distribution. Moreover, for some settings of the Kent distribution, we show that the Bayesian estimator is superior to the maximum likelihood and method of moments estimators.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
Yu Yang was financially supported by a University International Postgraduate Award from UNSW Sydney. Robert Kohn was partially supported by the Australian Research Council (IC190100031, DP210103873)
Scott Sisson is supported by the Australian Research Council (FT170100079).
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
|
\section{Introduction}
Search is a fundamental endeavor to survival ranging from human search \cite{bell2012searching}
to rescue operations \cite{shlesinger2009random} to animal foraging \cite{bartumeus2009optimal,
benichou2006two}
to protein binding on DNA \cite{coppey2004kinetics}, transcription factors searching for
a specific DNA \cite{von2007simple, gorman2008visualizing}, to mention a few. A useful search
strategy involves intermittent phases of slow motion aiding the searcher in target
detection and fast motion allowing the searcher to cover maximal ground in minimal
time \cite{benichou2011intermittent}. Restarting a search process at intermittent intervals,
aka stochastic resetting, has been extensively shown to expedite search
\cite{evans2020stochastic}.
Stochastic resetting has been a very active topic of research within the realm of
nonequilibrium statistical physics over the past decade \cite{evans2020stochastic}. The basic
essence of stochastic resetting is that in any kind of search process, the search
is rarely successful in the first attempt. Following which the search is restarted again
and again until the process culminates with success. This property is common to
a wide variety of search processes. Now
it is almost always true that if sufficient amount of time is devoted,
then any search shall meet success. The question of value is, however,
whether an intermittent restart of the search process tends to reduce the time of
completion? Answer to this question is affirmative. At least in the case of
stochastic algorithms it has been shown that a simple restart
might expedite completion \cite{luby1993optimal, tong2008random, avrachenkov2013markov}.
Not only in endeavors of human interest, nature also employs restarts in many processes, for example
enzymatic reactions following the Michaelis-Menten reaction scheme \cite{michaelis1913kinetik}.
The idea of stochastic resetting to Brownian search problem was first applied in the seminal
work of Evans and Majumdar \cite{evans2011diffusion}. They showed that restarting
a Brownian particle to its initial location at a constant rate renders the mean first
passage time (MFPT) finite. The process of restarting a stochastic process at a
constant rate is termed as Poissonian resetting. In addition to Brownian motion, Poissonian
resetting has been applied to run and tumble particles \cite{evans2018run}, fluctuating interfaces
\cite{gupta2014fluctuating}, dynamical phase transitions \cite{majumdar2015dynamical,
singh2022general}, resetting transitions \cite{ahmad2019first, ahmad2022first},
telegraphic processes \cite{masoliver2019telegraphic}, comb-like
structures \cite{domazetoski2020stochastic, singh2021backbone}, multiple
Brownian searchers \cite{evans2014diffusion}, etc.
However, Poissonian resetting is not exclusive and other protocols like power-law
distributed resetting times \cite{nagar2016diffusion}, resetting rates depending
on space \cite{evans2011JPA} and time \cite{pal2016diffusion} have also been extensively
studied. This raises an interesting question: given the wide class of resetting
protocols, does there exist a reset mechanism under which MFPT is minimal?
This question is difficult to answer in its full generality. However, when resetting
is renewal, then sharp resetting in which the time interval between two resets is
fixed serves as the best strategy \cite{pal2017first,chechkin2018random}.
In other words, ``if there exists a stochastic resetting protocol
that improves search process, then there exists a deterministic restart protocol that
performs as good or better'' \cite{eliazar2020mean}.
Poissonian and sharp restarts lie at the two extremes of renewal resetting,
former being memoryless and the latter retaining its entire memory. Both these
protocols were compared against each other for a system of Brownian particles
searching for a target in Ref.~\cite{bhat2016stochastic} and it was shown that
sharp resetting typically leads to a lower search cost than that in Poissonian
resetting. This study was taken further for a system of Brownian
particles where interactions are relevant, for example, in population genetics
\cite{da2021diffusion}. Inclusion of interactions further allows to consider
more nontrivial forms of resetting mechanisms such as those which are driven by the
interactions between the constituent particles \cite{falcao2017interacting} or
space dependent resetting in interacting Brownian particles \cite{bertin2022stochastic}.
One of the most important examples which involves interacting random walks is the
well known prey predator model which culminates when the prey is captured by
the predator \cite{krapivsky1996kinetics}. An exactly solvable prey predator
model with resetting was recently considered by Evans and co-workers
\cite{evans2022exactly} where the prey on its encounter with a predator can either
perish or be reset to its initial location.
In the present work we consider the prey predator model within the realm of vicious
random walks which annihilate each other the moment their trajectories cross
\cite{bray2013persistence}. The concept was first introduced by Fisher in the context of
interfacial wetting in 1+1 dimensions \cite{fisher1984walks,huse1984commensurate} and
has since been applied to Coulomb gas \cite{forrester1989vicious} and random matrices
\cite{baik2000random}. The survival probability for vicious
random walkers in one dimension exhibits power law decaying tails \cite{bray2004vicious},
and any two such walkers shall certainly meet each other as a random walk in one dimension
is recurrent \cite{klafter2011first,weiss1983random}. The problem of reunion of
two vicious random walks corresponds to the following chemical reaction: $A + A
\rightarrow \phi$ \cite{cardy1996theory} and is one of the most classic problems in nonequilibrium
statistical physics \cite{fisher1988reunions, schehr2008exact, kundu2014maximal}.
The annihilating nature of the vicious walkers makes them suitable for studying
directed polymer brushes wherein the viciousness captures the role of the non-intersecting
property of polymers \cite{essam1995vicious}. Vicious random walks have also been
applied to breathing DNA with the collapse of the bubbles viewed as an annihilation
of two vicious walkers moving in opposite potentials \cite{pedersen2009bubble}.
Furthermore, the distribution of the location of coalescence makes it relevant
to study the location where the trajectories of two vicious walkers cross. In the context
of the capture problem where a hungry lion pursues a lamb \cite{redner1999capture},
the location of intersection tells us how far the hunt is made from the home.
The scenario also makes the concept of resetting very natural \cite{reuveni2016optimal}.
This is because either the lamb shall every now and then return to
its home, or the lion to its den, or both. The reason that such a thing might happen
as the lion pursues the lamb but could not catch it and gets tired eventually
getting back in its cave. On the other hand, the freely roaming lamb might spot the lion
and run away from it. This makes the study of vicious random walks under resetting very
natural. In other words, if we have two vicious Brownian particles we want to know how
long do they survive without crossing each other's paths? And if their
trajectories cross, what is the nature of the distribution of such a point? Do the answers
to these questions depend on the resetting protocol employed? We address these questions
in the following sections by studying the system of two vicious Brownian particles under
resetting. The particles are reset identically to their respective initial positions either
at constant rates (Poissonian resetting) or after fixed time intervals (sharp resetting).
\section{Two vicious random walkers}
Consider two Brownian particles:
\begin{subequations}
\label{dyn}
\begin{align}
\dot{x}_1 &= \eta_1(t),\\
\dot{x}_2 &= \eta_2(t)
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $\eta_1(t), \eta_2(t)$ are independent Gaussian random deviates with mean zero and
delta correlated variance, that is, $\langle \eta_1(t) \eta_1(t') \rangle = 2
D_1\delta(t-t')$ and $\langle \eta_2(t) \eta_2(t') \rangle = 2
D_2\delta(t-t')$. At $t = 0$ the two walkers are at $x_1 = 0$ and $x_2 = L$.
The two walkers annihilate each other as soon as their paths cross, that is,
$x_1(t) = x_2(t)$. The problem is readily transformed to the motion of the center of
mass $x_c = \frac{x_1+x_2}{2}$ and relative separation of the two particles
$x_r = x_1 - x_2$. In terms of the new coordinates, the center of mass moves as
a free Brownian particle as
\begin{align}
\dot{x}_c(t) = \eta_c(t)
\end{align}
where $\langle \eta_c(t) \rangle = 0$ and $\langle \eta_c(t) \eta_c(t') \rangle = 2
D_c\delta(t-t')$ with $D_c = \frac{D_1+D_2}{4}$. On the other hand, the relative coordinate
$x_r$ moves like a Brownian particle on line
\begin{align}
\dot{x}_r(t) = \eta_r(t)
\end{align}
where $\langle \eta_r(t) \rangle = 0$ and $\langle \eta_r(t) \eta_r(t') \rangle = 2
D_r\delta(t-t')$ with $D_r = D_1+D_2$. Before the trajectories of the two particles
cross, the center of mass exhibits a Brownian motion centered at $x_c = L/2$ with a
diffusion coefficient $D_c$ and the relative coordinate is a Brownian particle starting
at $x_r = -L$ with an absorbing wall at $x_r = 0$. The first passage time distribution
(FPTD) of the relative coordinate to the absorbing wall at $x_r = 0$ is
$F(t) = \frac{L}{\sqrt{4\pi D_r t^3}}\exp\Big(
-\frac{L^2}{4D_r t}\Big)$ and the probability density function (PDF) of the center of
mass motion is $p(x_c,t) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi D_c t}}\exp\Big[-\frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}
{4D_c t}\Big]$ \cite{gardiner1985handbook,redner2001guide}. From the FPTD
it is evident that the mean time to the annihilation of the two vicious
walkers $\langle t \rangle = \int^\infty_0 dt ~t ~F(t)$ is infinite. The recurrence
of a Brownian motion in one dimension, however, implies that the two walkers will
eventually collide, and the PDF of the location of intersection is
\begin{align}
\label{cauchy}
h(x_c) &= \int^\infty_0 dt ~F(t) p(x_c,t)\nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{\pi}\frac{L/\sqrt{D_r D_c}}{\frac{L^2}{D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{D_c}},
\end{align}
which is a Cauchy distribution centered at $x_c = L/2$. Similar to the MFPT,
there is no well defined mean location
of the intersection of the two vicious walkers. This is because even though the two walkers
shall certainly meet, they may take really long time to do so by venturing out in opposite
directions resulting in the divergence of MFPT and a well defined mean location of annihilation.
In other words, the hungry lion may keep pursuing the lamb forever and might eventually die
of hunger. And this is where resetting comes in to prevent the hungry lion from dying.
\section{Resetting to initial configuration}
With the vector $(x_1,x_2)$ defining the system, define a resetting protocol:
after an interval of reset time $\tau$ the system is reverted back to
its initial configuration. The time $\tau$
is either an exponentially distributed random variable (Poissonian resetting) or a
fixed quantity (sharp resetting). For simplicity let us assume that
the two walkers are reset via identical resetting protocols at exact
same time. The reason for this choice is the following: let us assume that the two
walkers are reset at different times
$\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$, then a scenario is possible in
which $\tau_1 < \tau_2$ and $x_1(\tau_1) < x_2(\tau_2) < 0$ just before reset has
taken place. The moment after the reset we have $x_1(\tau_1) > x_2(\tau_2)$ which
apparently means that the two trajectories have crossed paths. Such crossing of two walkers
is, however, erroneous as at the time of reset the first particle is removed from
its current location and put back to its initial location instantaneously. This
makes intersection point an ill-defined quantity simply for the reason that
actual trajectories did not cross. We avoid such a pathological situation
by requiring that the two particles be reset at exact same time. Furthermore,
restarting the two walkers identically retains the advantage that the two particle system
is still described by the motion of the center of mass and motion about the center of
mass. Next we consider the two resetting protocols one by one.
\subsection{Poissonian resetting}
Let the two walkers be reset to their respective initial locations at a rate $R$. Then
the FPTD of the relative coordinate under Poissonian resetting is \cite{reuveni2016optimal}
\begin{align}
\label{F_ex}
\tilde{F}_R(s) = \frac{\tilde{F}(s+R)}{\frac{s}{s+R} + \frac{R}{s+R}\tilde{F}(s+R)},
\end{align}
where $\tilde{F}(s) = \int^\infty_0 dt~e^{-st} F(t) = \exp(-\sqrt{sL^2/D_r})$ is
the Laplace transform of the FPTD without resetting \cite{oberhettinger2012tables}.
From this follows the MFPT under Poissonian resetting as:
$\langle \mathscr{T}_R \rangle = \frac{e^{\sqrt{RL^2/D_r}}-1}{R}$. This result has been previously derived in
\cite{evans2011diffusion} via the backward Fokker-Planck equation and many works following
it. Here we state the result as a reminder that MFPT under Poissonian resetting
is finite.
In order to study the effect of resetting on the PDF of intersection
of the two trajectories, we need the FPTD $F_R(t)$ given in terms of
the Bromwich integral \cite{arfken1999mathematical}
\begin{align}
F_R(t) &= \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int^{\gamma+i\infty}_{\gamma-i\infty}ds~
\frac{(s+R)e^{-\alpha L}}{s+Re^{-\alpha L}}~e^{st},\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{\text{large}~t}{\approx} \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int^{\gamma+i\infty}_{\gamma-i\infty}ds~
\frac{Re^{-z}}{s+Re^{-\alpha L}}~e^{st}
\end{align}
where $\alpha = \sqrt{\frac{s+R}{D_r}}$ and $z = \sqrt{R/D_r}L$. This integral is
easily evaluated from the residue of $\tilde{F}_R(s)$ at the pole closest to
$s = 0$. The pole of $\tilde{F}_R(s)$ is given by the solution of $s+Re^{-\alpha L} = 0$
which in terms of $s = R(u-1)$ reads \cite{evans2011diffusion}
\begin{align}
u = 1 - e^{-\sqrt{u}z},
\end{align}
and has a unique nonzero solution $u_0 \in (0,1)$. Thus, the FPTD at large times is
\cite{evans2011diffusion}
\begin{align}
F_R(t) &\stackrel{\text{large}~t}{\approx} \lim_{s \to s_{0,R}} e^{st}(s-s_0)\tilde{F}_R(s),\nonumber\\
&= \frac{2R\sqrt{u_0}e^{-z}}{2\sqrt{u_0} - z(1-u_0)}e^{s_{0,R} t},
\end{align}
where $s_{0,R} = R(u_0 - 1) < 0$ implying that at large times the FPTD under resetting
possesses exponentially decaying tails.
This result is verified numerically and a good agreement is found for the
characteristic decay exponent $s_{0,R}$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{rate}(a).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{rate_FPTD.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{rate_PDF.eps}
\caption{(a) Survival probability $q(t)$ for the two vicious walkers
following Eq.~(\ref{dyn}) to not cross paths upto time $t$ reset to their initial
positions at a constant rate $R$. Red solid line represents
numerically estimated $q(t)$ while the black dashed line represents the
analytical form: $q(t) \sim \exp(-|s_{0,R}|t)$. (b) Numerically estimated PDF of
the location of intersection $h_R(x_c)$ (green circles) is compared against the
approximate form in Eq.~(\ref{app_hR}) (black solid line). Yellow squares denote the contribution
to $h^t_R$ for $|x_c-L/2|>L/2$ and red triangles $h^c_R$ for $|x_c-L/2|<L/2$.
We have used a factor $b$ such that $h_R \sim b h^c_R$ to demonstrate that
$h^c_R$ indeed captures the center of $h_R$ (upto a scale). Parameter values are:
$D_1, ~D_2 = 1,~L = 1,~R = 1$ and $b = 2$.}
\label{rate}
\end{figure}
Next, we estimate the PDF of the center of mass motion under resetting, following
the renewal equation \cite{evans2020stochastic}
\begin{align}
\label{renewal}
p_R(x_c,t) = e^{-Rt}p(x_c,t) + \int^t_0 d\tau ~Re^{-R\tau} p(x_c,\tau),
\end{align}
where the first term gives the contribution from the trajectories which have not been
reset at all, while the second term describes the effect of resetting. As a result,
the PDF of the intersection point of the two vicious walkers under
Poissonian resetting annihilating each other with FPTD $F_R(t)$ is
\begin{align}
\label{exp_Poisson}
h_R(x_c) &= \int^\infty_0 dt ~F_R(t)p(x_c,t)e^{-Rt}\nonumber\\
&+ \int^\infty_0 dt ~F_R(t)\int^t_0 d\tau ~R e^{-R\tau} p(x_c,\tau)\nonumber\\
&\equiv h^c_R(x_c) + h^t_R(x_c),
\end{align}
where $h^c_R$ denotes the single integral and $h^t_R$ denotes the double
integral. In what follows we shall see that $h^c_R$ having the contribution of
intersection points without reset captures the central part
of the PDF $h_R$. While $h^t_R$ describes the tails consisting the intersection
points with reset, hence the usage of the
superscripts $c$ and $t$ respectively.
Let us now proceed to evaluate the two integrals in (\ref{exp_Poisson}) one by one.
For the single integral in Eq.~(\ref{exp_Poisson}), $F_R(t) = F(t) = \frac{L}
{\sqrt{4\pi D_r t^3}}\exp\Big(-\frac{L^2}{4D_r t}\Big)$, since the
system behaves like the one without resetting. Furthermore, if we look at the
FPTD under Poissonian resetting, that is, $\tilde{F}_R(s) = \frac{(s+R)e^{-\alpha L}}
{s+Re^{-\alpha L}}$, then at small times $\tilde{F}_R(s) \stackrel{\text{large}~s} \approx
\exp\Big[-L\sqrt{\frac{s+R}{D_r}}\Big] \Rightarrow F_R(t) \stackrel{\text{small}~t}
{\approx} F(t)e^{-Rt}$, which is exactly the same quantity as appearing in
the first integral in (\ref{exp_Poisson}).
In other words, the probability of crossing of two trajectories without being reset is $e^{-Rt}$,
effectively modifying the FPTD entering in
the evaluation of $h^c_R(x_c)$. Hence, we have
\begin{align}
\label{first_int}
&h^c_R(x_c)\nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{\pi}\sqrt{\frac{RL^2}{L^2 D_c+(x_c-L/2)^2D_r}}K_1\Big[
\sqrt{R\Big\{\frac{L^2}{D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{D_c}\Big\}}\Big]
\end{align}
where $K_1$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind and it
enters while evaluating the Laplace transform of $e^{-1/t}$
\cite{oberhettinger2012tables}. The double integral in (\ref{exp_Poisson})
is similarly evaluated
\begin{align}
\label{second_int}
&h^t_R(x_c)\approx \int^\infty_0 dt ~A(s_{0,R}) e^{s_{0,R} t}
\int^t_0 d\tau ~Re^{-R\tau}p(x_c,t),\nonumber\\
&= \frac{RA(s_{0,R})}{\sqrt{4\pi D_c}}\int^\infty_0 d\tau~\frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau}}
e^{-R\tau-a/\tau}\int^\infty_\tau dt~e^{-|s_{0,R}|t},\nonumber\\
&= \frac{RA(s_{0,R})/|s_{0,R}|}{\sqrt{4D_c(|s_{0,R}|+R)}}
\exp\Big(-\sqrt{\frac{|s_{0,R}|+R}{D_c}}\Big|x_c-\frac{L}{2}\Big|\Big),
\end{align}
where $a = \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4D_c}$ and $A(s_{0,R}) = \frac{2R\sqrt{u_0}e^{-z}}
{2\sqrt{u_0} - z(1-u_0)}$. Combining the results in (\ref{first_int}) and
(\ref{second_int}) we have
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\label{app_hR}
h_R(x_c) \approx \frac{1}{\pi}\sqrt{\frac{RL^2}{L^2 D_c+(x_c-L/2)^2D_r}}K_1\Big[
\sqrt{R\Big\{\frac{L^2}{D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{D_c}\Big\}}\Big]
+ \frac{RA(s_{0,R})/|s_{0,R}|}{\sqrt{4D_c(|s_{0,R}|+R)}}
\exp\Big[-\sqrt{\frac{|s_{0,R}|+R}{D_c}}\Big|x_c-\frac{L}{2}\Big|\Big].
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
From Eq.~(\ref{app_hR}), it is evident that $h^c_R$ describes the center and $h^t_R$ the tails
of the PDF $h_R$. This is due to the rapid decay of the modified Bessel function
as compared to exponential. Furthermore, for small arguments $K_1$ decays
algebraically, that is, $K_1(w) \stackrel{\text{small}~w}{\sim}1/w$
\cite{abramowitz1988handbook}, from where it follows that
$h^c_R(x_c)$ behaves like a Cauchy distribution. Thus, when the two walkers
are reset to their initial locations at a constant rate, the PDF $h_R$
exhibits a Cauchy distributed center and exponentially
decaying tails. In other words, Poissonian resetting of the two walkers reduces
the fat tails of the PDF to the center
and the far tails are modified to exponential. In summary,
\begin{align}
h_R(x_c)\approx\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{\pi}\frac{L/\sqrt{D_r D_c}}{\frac{L^2}{D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{D_c}},~\text{center},\\
\frac{RA(s_{0,R})/|s_{0,R}|}{\sqrt{4D_c(|s_{0,R}|+R)}}
\exp\Big[-\sqrt{\frac{|s_{0,R}|+R}{D_c}}\Big|x_c-\frac{L}{2}\Big|\Big]~\text{tails}.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
We compare the analytically estimated PDF $h_R$ in Eq.~(\ref{app_hR}) (black solid
line) with numerical calculations (green circles) in Fig.~\ref{rate}(b) and find
that they are in close proximity.
The contribution to the PDF coming from
$h^c_R$ in the range $|x_c-L/2|<L/2$ is scaled by a factor $b$ to match
the numerically estimated $h_R$. The reason for doing this is to show that $h^c_R$
indeed captures the shape of the center of the PDF.
The tail part $h^t_R$ in region $|x_c-L/2|>L/2$ matches well with numerically estimated
$h_R$ as following the similar decay rate as shown in Fig.~\ref{rate}(b).
Here, we refer to the region $|x_c-L/2|<L/2$
as the central part. The simple reason for the usage of this terminology is that
the center of mass is midway between the two vicious particles and an annihilation
taking place within this region would simply mean that the center of mass has not
ventured far from its mean position.
\subsection{Sharp resetting}
In sharp resetting, the two walkers are reset to their respective initial locations after
fixed intervals of time $T$. In order to estimate the FPTD under sharp resetting, we
use the results derived by Pal and Reuveni in Ref.~\cite{pal2017first}. They show
that if $\tau$ is the time of completion of a stochastic process without restart, and $\rho$
is the time interval of restart, then the FPTD under restart reads \cite{pal2017first}
\begin{align}
\label{F_res}
\tilde{F}_{res}(s) = \frac{\text{Pr}(\tau<\rho)\tilde{\tau}_\text{min}(s)}
{1-\text{Pr}(\rho\le\tau)\tilde{\rho}_\text{min}(s)},
\end{align}
where $\rho_\text{min} = \{\rho | \rho = \text{min}(\rho,\tau)\}$ is the random restart
time given restart occurred before completion and $\tau_\text{min} = \{\tau | \tau =
\text{min}(\rho,\tau)\}$ is the random completion time without any restarts. For Poissonian
resetting when $\rho$ is an exponentially distributed random variable, that is,
$f_\rho(t) = Re^{-Rt}$,
Eq.~(\ref{F_res}) reduces to (\ref{F_ex}) (see SM in Ref.~\cite{pal2017first}).
For sharp resetting at fixed intervals of time $T$, the distribution of restart
times $\rho$ is $f_\rho(t) = \delta(t-T)$. As a result,
\begin{align}
\label{nr}
&\text{Pr}(\tau<\rho)\tilde{\tau}_\text{min}(s) = \langle e^{-s\tau} \rangle,\nonumber\\
&= \int^\infty_0 dt~f_\tau(t) \int^\infty_t dt'~f_\rho(t') e^{-st},\nonumber\\
&= \Big(\int^T_0 + \int^\infty_T\Big)dt~f_\tau(t)e^{-st}\int^\infty_t dt'~\delta(t'-T),\nonumber\\
&= \int^T_0 dt~f_\tau(t)e^{-st}.
\end{align}
The $\int^\infty_T$ integral in the third line does not contribute anything as the
limits of integration do not contain the point $t' = T$. In a similar manner
\begin{align}
\label{dr}
\text{Pr}(\rho\le\tau)\tilde{\rho}_\text{min}(s) = e^{-sT}\int^\infty_\tau dt~f_T(t).
\end{align}
Using (\ref{nr}) and (\ref{dr}) in Eq.~(\ref{F_res}) we find that the FPTD of a
stochastic process under sharp restart is given by
\begin{align}
\label{fptd_sh}
\tilde{F}_T(s) = \frac{\int^T_0 dt~f_\tau(t)e^{-st}}{1-e^{-sT}\int^\infty_T dt~f_\tau(t)},
\end{align}
where $f_\tau(t)$ is the FPTD without restart and the subscript $T$ on the lhs denotes
the time of sharp restart $T$. From the FPTD in (\ref{fptd_sh}) follows the MFPT under
sharp restart
\begin{align}
\label{mfpt_s}
\langle \mathscr{T}_T \rangle = -\frac{d}{ds}\tilde{F}_T(s)\Big|_{s=0} = \frac{\int^T_0 dt~q_\tau(t)}{\int^T_0 dt~f_\tau(t)},
\end{align}
which has been earlier derived in Ref.~\cite{eliazar2020mean} in an alternative
manner with $q_\tau(t)$ denoting the survival probability.
For the system of two vicious random walkers $f_\tau(t) = F(t)
= \frac{L}{\sqrt{4\pi D_r t^3}}\exp\Big(-\frac{L^2}{4D_r t}\Big) \Rightarrow q_\tau(t) = \text{erf}\Big(
\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r t}}\Big)$ \cite{redner2001guide}. Using these in (\ref{mfpt_s}) we have
the MFPT to annihilation under sharp resetting
\begin{align}
\langle \mathscr{T}_T \rangle = \frac{\sqrt{\frac{L^2 T}{\pi D_r}}e^{-\frac{L^2}{4D_r T}} - \frac{L^2}{2D_r}
\text{erfc}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)+T\text{erf}\Big(\frac{L^2}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}
{\text{erfc}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}.
\end{align}
The integral of $q_\tau(t)$ above has been evaluated using the integral representation of
the error function and related Laplace transforms \cite{oberhettinger2012tables,gradshteyn2014table}.
Once again it is evident that resetting gives a finite MFPT. Next we look at the PDF
of the intersection point.
In order to evaluate the PDF of the intersection point under sharp resetting, we need
the time domain representation of FPTD in Eq.~(\ref{fptd_sh}). Using
$F(t) = \frac{L}{\sqrt{4\pi D_r t^3}}\exp\Big(-\frac{L^2}{4D_r t}\Big)$ we have
\begin{align}
F_T(t) &= \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int^{\gamma+i\infty}_{\gamma-i\infty}ds~
\Big[\frac{\int^T_0 dt~F(t)e^{-st}}{1-e^{-sT}\int^\infty_T dt~F(t)}\Big]~e^{st},\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{\text{large}~t}{\approx} \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int^{\gamma+i\infty}_{\gamma-i\infty}ds~
\Big[\frac{\int^T_0 dt~F(t)}{1-e^{-sT}\int^\infty_T dt~F(t)}\Big]~e^{st},\nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int^{\gamma+i\infty}_{\gamma-i\infty}ds~
\frac{\text{erfc}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}{1-e^{-sT}\text{erf}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}
\Big)}e^{st}
\end{align}
where we have used the approximation $\int^T_0 dt~F(t)e^{-st} \approx \int^T_0 dt~F(t)$
in the limit of large times $t$ (small $s$ behavior). The integral is now straightforwardly
evaluated from the
pole in the complex plane located at $s_{0,T} = \frac{1}{T}\log \text{erf}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}
\Big)$. As a result
\begin{align}
F_T(t) \stackrel{\text{large}~t}{\approx} \frac{1}{T}\frac{\text{erfc}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}
{\text{erf}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}e^{s_{0,T}(t+T)}
\end{align}
which implies that at large times $F_T(t)$ decays exponentially as $s_{0,T} < 0$, since
$\text{erf}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)<1~\forall~T>0$. We numerically estimate
the characteristic decay time in Fig.~\ref{sharp_fig}(a) and find good agreement with
the analytical result.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{sharp_FPTD.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{sharp_PDF.eps}
\caption{(a) Survival probability $q(t)$ for the two vicious walkers
following Eq.~(\ref{dyn}) to not cross paths upto time $t$ sharply reset to their
initial positions after time $T$. Red solid line represents
numerically estimated $q(t)$ while the black dashed line represents the
analytical form: $q(t) \sim \exp(-|s_{0,T}|t)$. (b) Numerically estimated PDF of
the location of intersection $h_T(x_c)$ (green circles) is compared against the
approximate form in Eq.~(\ref{sharp}) (black solid line). Yellow squares denote the contribution
to $h^t_R$ for $|x_c-L/2|>L/2$ and red triangles $h^c_R$ for $|x_c-L/2|<L/2$.
We have used a factor $b$ such that $h_R \sim b h^c_R$ to demonstrate that
$h^c_R$ indeed captures the center of $h_R$ (upto a scale).
Parameter values are: $D_1, ~D_2 = 1,~L = 1,~T = 1$ and $b = 0.4$.}
\label{sharp_fig}
\end{figure}
Now we estimate the PDF of the center of mass under sharp resetting. When the
two vicious walkers are reset to their initial locations regularly after interval $T$,
the number of renewals taking place upto time
equals $\lfloor \frac{t}{T} \rfloor$ ($\lfloor \rfloor$ denotes the
floor function). Furthermore, since the center of mass starts afresh after every
reset, its PDF at time $t$ is given by
\begin{align}
p_T(x_c,t) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi D_c \Big(t-\lfloor \frac{t}{T} \rfloor T\Big)}}
\exp\Big[-\frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4 D_c \Big(t-\lfloor \frac{t}{T} \rfloor T\Big)}\Big].
\end{align}
For $t < T$ we have $\lfloor \frac{t}{T} \rfloor = 0$ and the center of mass evolves
with the PDF $p(x_c,t)$. If the trajectories of the two walkers cross before
any restart, then the time of their annihilation follows the FPTD $F(t)$. As a
result, similar to the case of Poissonian resetting, the PDF of the
intersection point is composed of two parts: one coming from the trajectories
which annihilate each other at $t < T$, and the remaining ones which undergo
at least one reset event before crossing their paths. Thus, the PDF of the
intersection point under sharp resetting is
\begin{align}
\label{sharp}
h_T(x_c) &= \int^T_0 dt~F(t) p(x_c,t) + \int^\infty_T dt~F_T(t)p_T(x_c,t)\nonumber\\
&\equiv h^c_T(x_c) + h^t_T(x_c),
\end{align}
where $h^c_T$ and $h^t_T$ denote the integrals in the intervals $[0,T]$
and $[T,\infty)$ respectively and are defined analogous to their Poissonian
counterparts. The first integral is relatively straightforward and evaluates to
\begin{align}
\label{sharp_first}
&h^c_T(x_c)\nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{\pi}\frac{L/\sqrt{D_rD_c}}{\frac{L^2}{4D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4D_c}}
\exp\Big[-\frac{1}{T}\Big\{\frac{L^2}{4D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4D_c}\Big\}\Big].
\end{align}
This implies that under sharp resetting the fat tails of the Cauchy distribution
are tamed to an effective Gaussian. It becomes even more interesting
once we realize that here we are considering those trajectories which
have not even reset once. In other words, the fact that a restart is set to
take place at $t = T$, forces a certain fraction of trajectories to cross their
paths, thus introducing Gaussian cutoffs in the tails. In addition,
the central part of the PDF close to the initial location of
the center of mass is Gaussian. Now coming to the second
integral in (\ref{sharp}), we have
\begin{align}
\label{sharp_sec}
&h^t_T(x_c)\nonumber\\
&\approx \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi D_c T^2}} \frac{\text{erfc}\Big(\frac{L}
{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}{\text{erf}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)} e^{-|s_{0,T}|T}\nonumber\\
&\times \int^\infty_T dt~\frac{\exp\Big[-\frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4 D_c \Big(t-\lfloor
\frac{t}{T} \rfloor T\Big)} -|s_{0,T}|t\Big]}{\sqrt{t-\lfloor \frac{t}{T} \rfloor T}},
\end{align}
where the limits of integration are kept from $T$ to $\infty$ for reasons stated
above. The integral in (\ref{sharp_sec}) can be evaluated by decomposing the interval
of integration into subintervals of length $T$. This helps us to reduce the integral
on the real line $[T,\infty)$ to an integration over the interval $[0,T]$. The
reason we can do this is that the floor function turns $t-\lfloor \frac{t}{T}
\rfloor T$ into a periodic function. As a result
\begin{align}
\label{intl}
&\int^\infty_T dt~\frac{\exp\Big[-\frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4 D_c \Big(t-\lfloor
\frac{t}{T} \rfloor T\Big)} -|s_{0,T}|t\Big]}{\sqrt{t-\lfloor \frac{t}{T} \rfloor T}}\nonumber\\
&= \sum^\infty_{m=1} e^{-|s_{0,T}|mT}\int^T_0 dw \frac{1}{\sqrt{w}}e^{-\frac{a}{w}-|s_{0,T}|w}\nonumber\\
&= \frac{\sqrt{\pi/|s_{0,T}|}}{e^{|s_{0,T}|T}-1}\Big[e^{-2\sqrt{a|s_{0,T}|}}
-\frac{e^{-2\sqrt{a|s_{0,T}|}}}{2}\text{erfc}
\Big(\frac{T\sqrt{|s_{0,T}|}-\sqrt{a}}{\sqrt{T}}\Big)\nonumber\\
&-\frac{e^{2\sqrt{a|s_{0,T}|}}}{2}\text{erfc}
\Big(\frac{T\sqrt{|s_{0,T}|}+\sqrt{a}}{\sqrt{T}}\Big)\Big]
\end{align}
where $a = \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4D_c}$ and the integral is evaluated using MAXIMA.
This implies that the PDF of
the intersection point has exponentially decaying tails for large $a$. Using (\ref{intl})
in (\ref{sharp_sec}) and then along with (\ref{sharp_first}) in Eq.~(\ref{sharp})
we have
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
h_T(x_c)\approx\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{\pi}\frac{L/\sqrt{D_rD_c}}{\frac{L^2}{4D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4D_c}}
\exp\Big[-\frac{1}{T}\Big\{\frac{L^2}{4D_r} + \frac{(x_c-L/2)^2}{4D_c}\Big\}\Big],~\text{center},\\
\frac{\sqrt{\pi/|s_{0,T}|}}{\sqrt{4\pi D_c T^2}} \frac{\text{erfc}\Big(\frac{L}
{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}{\text{erf}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T}}\Big)}
\frac{e^{-|s_{0,T}|T}}{e^{|s_{0,T}|T}-1}\Big[e^{-2\sqrt{a|s_{0,T}|}}
-\frac{e^{-2\sqrt{a|s_{0,T}|}}}{2}\text{erfc}
\Big(\frac{T\sqrt{|s_{0,T}|}-\sqrt{a}}{\sqrt{T}}\Big)
-\frac{e^{2\sqrt{a|s_{0,T}|}}}{2}\text{erfc}
\Big(\frac{T\sqrt{|s_{0,T}|}+\sqrt{a}}{\sqrt{T}}\Big)\Big],~\text{tails}.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
We numerically study the PDF of the intersection point in Fig.~\ref{sharp_fig}(b)
and find that Eq.~(\ref{sharp}) agrees well with numerical calculations. Furthermore,
the PDFs $h^c_T$ (with a scale factor $b$) and $h^t_T$ also individually agree
with the numerically estimated $h_T$ in their respective ranges (as stated above
in case of Poissonian resetting). While it
may not be apparent from Fig.~\ref{sharp_fig}
(b), the tails of $h_T$ are indeed exponential. This follows from the fact that in Eq.~(\ref{intl})
the second erfc term describing the tails approaches a constant for large fluctuations,
while the third term approaches zero. As a consequence, $h^t_T \sim e^{-2\sqrt{a|s_{0,T}|}}$
for large $|x_c-L/2|$.
\section{Comparing Poisson resetting and sharp resetting}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{tau_function.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{orr_pdf.eps}
\caption{(a) MFPT $\langle \mathscr{T} \rangle$ for the system of
two vicious walkers under Poisson and sharp resetting. The location
of the minima are marked indicating the optimal resetting rate $R_0$
and the optimal time of sharp reset $T_0$. (b) The PDF of the location
of annihilation $h(x_c)$ for the two resetting protocols at their
optimal values. Parameter values are:
$D_1, ~D_2 = 1,~L = 1,~R_0 = 5.079$ and $T_0 = 0.229$.}
\label{compare}
\end{figure}
So far we have studied the dynamics of two vicious walkers under Poissonian and
sharp resetting, but in separate scenarios. It thus becomes interesting to comparing
the two protocols against each other. Answer to this question is known partly
in that sharp resetting wins over Poissonian resetting in renewal resetting
scenario \cite{pal2017first}. Hence we compare the minima of the MFPTs under
the two resetting protocols. For this purpose let us choose $D_1, ~D_2 = 1$
and $L = 1$. As a result we have
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\langle \mathscr{T}_R \rangle &= \frac{\exp(\sqrt{R/2})-1}{R},\\
\langle \mathscr{T}_T \rangle &= \sqrt{\frac{T}{2\pi}}\frac{\exp(-1/8T)}{\text{erfc}(1/\sqrt{8T})}
+T\frac{\text{erf}(1/\sqrt{8T})}
{\text{erfc}(1/\sqrt{8T})} - \frac{1}{4}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
From the above equations, the minima of the MFPT $\langle \mathscr{T}_R \rangle$ occurs at $R=R_0$ where
$\frac{d}{dR}\langle \mathscr{T}_R \rangle|_{R=R_0} = e^{\sqrt{R_0/2}}/\sqrt{8R^3_0} - \langle \mathscr{T}_{R_0}
\rangle/R_0 = 0 \Rightarrow R_0 \approx 5.079$. For this value of the resetting
rate $\langle \mathscr{T}_{R_0} \rangle \approx 0.772$. Similarly, $\langle \mathscr{T}_T \rangle$ has a
global minima at $T_0 \approx 0.229$ which implies $\langle \mathscr{T}_{T_0}
\rangle \approx 0.668$.
To get a perspective of these numbers, the diffusive time scale of the relative
coordinate to cover a distance $L$ is $\langle \mathscr{T}_D \rangle = L^2/2D_r
= 0.25$ for $L = 1$. On this time scale, the MFPT for the two vicious walkers to
annihilate each other is $\langle \mathscr{T}_R \rangle \approx \langle \mathscr{T}_T \rangle \approx 3\langle \mathscr{T}_D
\rangle$. Furthermore, the relative advantage of sharp resetting over Poissonian
resetting is $|\langle \mathscr{T}_T \rangle-\langle \mathscr{T}_R \rangle|/\langle \mathscr{T}_T \rangle \approx 0.16$ which is significant.
In other words, while it is suitable for the lion to quickly hunt that both
the lion and the lamb return to their homes after fixed time intervals, for the
lamb Poissonian resetting is better as it might survive a little longer. We
compare the two resetting protocols graphically in Fig.~\ref{compare}(a) and
see the relative advantage of sharp resetting over Poisson resetting.
Let us now look at the tail behavior of the PDF $h^t$ of the intersection point
for Poisson and sharp resetting at their optimal levels respectively. From
Eq.~(\ref{second_int}) it is clear that for Poissonian resetting $h^t_{R_0} \sim
\exp\Big(-\sqrt{\frac{|s_{0,{R_0}}|+R_0}{D_c}}\Big|x_c-\frac{L}{2}\Big|\Big) \approx
\exp(-1.78|x_c-1/2|)$. On the other hand, for sharp resetting we have
$s_{0,T_0} = \frac{1}{T_0}\log\text{erf}\Big(\frac{L}{\sqrt{4D_r T_0}}\Big) \approx
-1.5332$. As a result, the tail part of the PDF of the location of intersection
is $h^t_{T_0} \sim \exp\Big(-\sqrt{\frac{|s_{0,T_0}|}{D_c}}|x_c-L/2|\Big) \approx
\exp(-1.75|x_c-1/2|)$. This implies that at optimal resetting, the tails of
the PDF decay faster for sharp resetting as compared to Poissonian resetting.
This also follows from the fact that at optimal resetting
$\langle \mathscr{T}_{T_0} \rangle < \langle \mathscr{T}_{R_0} \rangle$, as a
result both the lion and the lamb do not venture far from their homes at
the time of capture under sharp resetting as compared to Poissonian resetting.
We compare the two PDFs both numerically and analytically in Fig.~\ref{compare}
(b) and find the PDF for Poissonian resetting has a higher spread as compared
to that for sharp resetting.
\section{Conclusions}
In the realm of nonequilibrium statistical physics vicious random walkers are
used to model interfacial wetting in $1+1$ dimensions and non-intersecting polymers.
In these contexts the survival probability and the distribution of the location
of coalescence are relevant quantities to address. Within the domain of capture problems,
vicious random walks translate to the capture of a prey by a predator. Motivated by
these examples, in this paper we study the annihilation properties of two vicious
random walkers under Poissonian and sharp resetting protocols. In absence of resetting
the mean time of capture is divergent while the location of annihilation follows
a Cauchy distribution. Introduction of resetting in the system renders finite MFPT
due to the fact that the FPTD tails now decay exponentially as compared to algebraically
in absence of resetting. Furthermore, tails of the PDF of annihilation location
now decay exponentially. This
is independent of the exact nature of resetting protocol. The central part of the
PDF, however, depends on the way system is reset to its initial location. For
Poissonian resetting the central part of the PDF is a Cauchy distribution, while
for sharp resetting it is a Gaussian.
We have reset the two walkers identically so that we can reduce the two particle
system as to be described by the motion of the center of mass and motion about the
center of mass. We have also assumed that restarts are instantaneous, but in any
realistic scenario bringing back the system to its initial state takes a finite amount
of time. Even within the realm of instantaneous resetting, we chose
the particles to be identical. What would happen if we include inertia and assign
different masses to different particles? We explore these and other interesting
possibilities in future works.
\textit{Acknowledgments}: RKS thanks the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities (IASH)
and the Council of Higher Education (CHE) Fellowship. SS acknowledges the HPC facility at Ben-Gurion
University.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{Acknowledgements}
The support from the ANID--Millennium Program--ICN2019\_044 is acknowledged.
The support from the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Innovative Training Network Fellow-ship of the European Commissions Horizon 2020 Programme under contract number 765710 INSIGHTS is acknowledged. This research was
carried out in the frame of Programme STAR Plus, financially supported
by UniNA and Compagnia di San Paolo.
\section{Commissioning}
\label{sec:commissioning}
Commissioning of electronic detectors and target mechanics largely took place in the autumn of 2021 in the North Area of the SPS.
These tests included a test beam campaign of the hadronic calorimeter and muon system with hadrons using the H8 beamline as well as commissioning of all the electronics detectors with parasitic muons using the H6 beamline.
The first is necessary to tune Monte Carlo simulations for accurate shower reconstruction.
The commissioning in H6 was used to evaluate the performance of all electronic sub-detectors when read out together.
In addition, part of the floor in the H6 beamline was inclined to reproduce the angle of the floor in TI18, to allow the commissioning of the mechanical support.
\subsection{Pion test beam in H8}
\label{subsubsec:h8}
During test beam campaign in H8, all five US station and two DS stations, including passive iron blocks, were tested.
A wall of iron \SI{80}{cm} wide, \SI{60}{cm} tall and \SI{29.5}{cm} thick was placed \SI{20}{cm} upstream of the first US iron block, reproducing the target region in terms of hadronic interaction lengths.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{images/muon_h8.jpg}
\caption{Picture of the second test beam configuration seen in H8 at the SPS. }
\label{fig:muon_h8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textheight]{images/SiPM_signal_h8.png}
\caption{An example of the charge in ADC counts recorded by a single SiPM in a DS station at \SI{300}{GeV} fitted with a convolution of a Landau and a Gaussian function.}
\label{fig:sipm_signal}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/tot_charge_h8_1.jpg}
\caption{The distribution of total charge per SiPM at a QDC gain of \num{2.50} in the first two US stations recorded for different beam energies including background events from halo and cosmic muons.}
\label{fig:charge}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.459\textwidth]{images/h8_mu_event_1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.531\textwidth]{images/h8_pi_event_1.pdf}
\caption{Event display from the second test beam at \SI{300}{GeV} at a gain setting of \num{3.65} with the location of the detector superimposed as seen from above (top) and the side (bottom). The left shows a single particle event with a fitted track while the right shows a multiple particle event.}
\label{fig:event_h8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/ds_attenuation.pdf}
\caption{The average signal amplitude as a function of position along the DS bars used to determine the attenuation length. The number in the labels corresponds to the station ID, while R, L and V represent the right, left and vertical PCBs, respectively. Note the attenuation length for the vertical bars is nearly double the value for the horizontal bars due to the larger signal from collecting the additional light reflected from the bottom of the bars.}
\label{fig:att}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/ds_speed_1.png}
\caption{The time difference in the signal between the left and right side of a DS horizontal bar, as a function of the position. The $x$ position is determined from the position of the DS vertical plane right behind the horizontal plane. The slope is used to extract the light propagation speed.}
\label{fig:prop_speed}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.6\textheight]{images/SiPM_resp.pdf}
\caption{The sum of signals for each bar in the US planes showing the different response between the large (top) and small (bottom) SiPMs at \SI{300}{GeV} and a gain setting of \num{3.65}.}
\label{fig:shower}
\end{figure}
Besides an energy calibration measurement, the test beam served to investigate the appropriate DAQ settings for data taking. Three different gain settings of the QDC were investigated, \num{1.00}, \num{2.50} and \num{3.65}. Calibration was performed for each gain setting before the beginnings of data taking. Subsequent tests on a spare PCB with a tuneable laser found that a gain setting of \num{2.50} provided the most linear behavior of the recorded signal as a function of injected charge.
The system, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:muon_h8}, was exposed to 140 and \SI{180}{GeV} positive pions and 240 and \SI{300}{GeV} negative pions.
Additional runs were taken with cosmic muons when the SPS beam was off and with halo muons when a beam dump was placed upstream to obstruct the beamline.
During both test beam campaigns, the beam spot was about \SI{1}{cm} in diameter and the particle rate ranged from \SI{100}{Hz} to \SI{2}{kHz}.
Analysis of the test beam results is ongoing, with initial studies focusing on signal distributions, light attenuation lengths of the bars, detection efficiency, spatial and time resolution, timing calibration, signal propagation speed in the bar, event displays, saturation effects of the SiPMs, MC/data comparison, background estimation and hadronic shower evolution.
Some preliminary results from the test beams are presented here. The average signal size (in ADC counts) in each SiPM follows the distribution of a Landau distribution convoluted with a Gaussian one, as seen in Figure~\ref{fig:sipm_signal}. A comparison of the total charge in the first two US stations for different energies is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:charge}. Example events at \SI{300}{GeV} and at a QDC gain setting of \num{3.65} are displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:event_h8}. The signal as a function of position along the DS bars is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:att} and the measured attenuation length
of $3.6 \pm 0.1$ \SI{}{m} is consistent with the value given by the manufacturer (\SI{3.8}{m}) \cite{ej200}. The time difference between signals collected on opposite ends of a bar, as seen for a DS horizontal plane in Figure~\ref{fig:prop_speed}, can be used to calculate signal propagation speed along the bar which, at about \SI{15}{cm/ns}, closely matches the literature value \cite{betancourt:2017}. The response of the different SiPM types at \SI{300}{GeV} and the highest gain setting for the US can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:shower}, with the small SiPM response indicating that hadronic showers are mainly contained in the first three layers. The drop seen in Figure~\ref{fig:shower} for the fourth US station is presumed to be due to dead channels on the PCB, although this is still under investigation
\subsection{Muon test beam in H6}
\label{subsec:commissioning_h6}
All electronic detectors have been accurately tested before being installed in the TI18 tunnel.
An important part of these tests has been performed in the H6 beamline of the CERN SPS, where all electronic subdetectors have been operated together for the first time.
A picture of the setup installed in H6 is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:setup_h6}.
Due to space constraints, the order of the detectors was not the same as in its TI18 configuration: the veto is placed right in front of the hadronic calorimeter, while the SciFi is located behind the hadronic calorimeter and muon system.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/commissioning/setup_h6_labels.pdf}
\caption{The setup used for the commissioning in H6. The veto planes are visible in the foreground, followed by the hadronic calorimeter and muon system, and finally the SciFi tracker.}
\label{fig:setup_h6}
\end{figure}
The measurements performed in H6 focused on the study of the performance and alignment of all subsystems.
Several runs at different settings have been collected.
The details for each sub-system are given in the following sections.
\subsubsection{Veto, hadronic calorimeter and muon system results}
Commissioning of the veto and muon systems were carried out in two phases, before and after the test beam in H8. The commissioning tests in H6 represented the first test of the veto and its electronics.
During the first commissioning phase, five US and two DS stations of the hadronic calorimeter and muon system were tested along with the SciFi. Ground loops were also discovered, leading to a significant noise increase and difficulties with DAQ calibration.
This led to the introduction of a grounding cable between the ground of the HV and ground of LV, which were ready in the second phase of commissioning. During this phase, dimensions and spacing of the veto system within the target structure mechanics were also checked.
In the second phase, the target structure mechanics was removed and the veto was placed directly in front of the muon system, with the SciFi placed further downstream.
A third DS station was also added. It was discovered that PCBs on three US stations and two DS stations displayed a number of missing channels, which were then removed from the experimental hall for repair.
The remaining stations were then tested along with the veto and SciFi, with the addition of grounding cables to the veto and muon system as mentioned before.
An example of an event display including all electronic sub-systems is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:h6_event}.
Preliminary analysis of the data also indicated missing channels in two PCBs of the veto system, which were sent for repair at the end of the commissioning phase.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/commissioning/h6_event.png}
\caption{Event display showing the veto, muon system and SciFi as taken in H6.}
\label{fig:h6_event}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{SciFi results}
\label{subsubsec:commissioning_scifi_result}
Several runs in different conditions were collected: the T1 and T2 thresholds, described in Section~\ref{subsec:tofpet}, were varied, while the E threshold was not used.
T1 is lower and determines the timestamp of the hit, so its influence on the time resolution was studied, while T2 is higher, and determines whether a hit is collected or not.
It was studied to find the optimal compromise between dark-count rate and efficiency.
In addition, data were collected at three different QDC gain values: \num{1.00}, \num{2.50} and \num{3.65}.
The alignment of the SciFi stations, both their relative position and the inner degrees of freedom within one station, were studied by performing track reconstruction using four of the five stations, extrapolating the reconstructed tracks on the fifth one and minimizing the residuals, i.e. the difference between the track extrapolation and the corresponding cluster position.
Results obtained for one station are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:residual-scifi}.
They show that the alignment procedure works as expected, as the residuals distribution is peaked at 0 and that the spatial resolution of the SciFi system is below \SI{100}{\micro m}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{images/commissioning/v3-scifiRes-run23_withfitresults_h30.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{images/commissioning/v3-scifiRes-run23_withfitresults_v31.pdf}
\caption{Track-cluster residuals along the $x$-axis (left) and $y$-axis (right). The standard deviation of the fitted gaussian distribution is the spatial resolution of SciFi.}
\label{fig:residual-scifi}
\end{figure}
The particle detection efficiency of the SciFi detector was studied at two different T2 thresholds (a higher one, producing \SI{\sim 2}{Hz} of dark rate per channel and a lower one, producing \SI{\sim 20}{Hz}).
The efficiency was studied similarly to the alignment, by reconstructing tracks using four stations, extrapolating them to the fifth one and looking for an associated cluster within a radius of \SI{1}{cm}.
The efficiency is calculated as the ratio between the tracks with associated cluster (in the $x$ plane, $y$ plane or both) and the total number of tracks.
The result for one SciFi station at low threshold, requiring an associated cluster on both the $x$ and $y$ plane, is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:scifi-eff}.
At this threshold, the efficiency is \SI{97}{\percent} over the whole station, while it drops down to \SI{\sim 65}{\percent} at the higher threshold.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/commissioning/eff-scifi.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of the efficiency for one SciFi station at the lower T2 threshold value.}
\label{fig:scifi-eff}
\end{figure}
These results indicate that the front-end thresholds in the SciFi subsystem should be kept as low as possible, as their effect on the efficiency is significant.
However, lowering the threshold increases the dark count rate, and therefore the amount of data that the DAQ server needs to process: a balance must be found between data rate capabilities and particle detection efficiency.
It is expected that the SciFi threshold can be set at even lower values than the ones used during the commissioning in H6, as the software has been optimized to accept higher data rates and the computer used for the online event processing will be more powerful.
The study of time and energy resolution is currently ongoing.
\subsubsection{Commissioning of the target structure}
In order to perform the commissioning of the target mechanical structure, the upstream section of the floor in H6 was inclined by \SI{4}{\degree} to reproduce the floor inclination in the TI18 tunnel. The whole structure was assembled and installed on the three alignment feet, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:structure_comm}.
A test of the transportation along the slope of the wall box with the trolley, of the insertion and extraction of the wall box inside the structure, as well as of the fixation of the SciFi plane was successfully performed.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{images/commissioning/structure_comm.png}
\caption{Commissioning of the target mechanical structure in H6.}
\label{fig:structure_comm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Target wall commissioning}
The commissioning of the target wall was performed in November 2021 at the Emulsion Facility at CERN.
A test with a first batch of \SI[product-units=power]{192 x 192}{mm} emulsion films was conducted in order to test the chemical compatibility of tungsten plates with emulsions, the light tightness of the wall box, the uniformity of track reconstruction in different bricks and in different positions within the brick.
A full wall made of four bricks, each consisting of 58 tungsten plates, was assembled in dark room conditions.
30 emulsion films were used for the test, disposed in two bricks (B1 and B4) as reported in the schematic drawings in Figure~\ref{fig:wall_comm}. Steel plates with a surface of \SI[product-units=power]{10x10}{cm} and a thickness of \SI{300}{\micro m} were used to replace emulsion films in the remaining part of the walls.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{images/commissioning/wall_comm.png}
\caption{Top: picture taken during the wall assembly and schematic drawing of the wall structure. Bottom: schematic drawing of the position of emulsion films within in the bricks used for the commissioning.}
\label{fig:wall_comm}
\end{figure}
After the assembly, the wall box was exposed to cosmic radiation for \SI{48}{h}.
Then emulsion films were developed and scanned with automated optical microscopes in one of the emulsion scanning laboratories of the Collaboration. During the scanning, aligned grains in adjacent emulsion layers are recorded by a camera and stored as digital pixels.
After the scanning, an image processor recognized aligned clusters, formed by groups of pixels.
These clusters need to be separated from a background of thermally excited grains, which get developed even if not exposed to radiation.
This background is usually referred to as \textit{fog}, and its density was measured by counting the number of grains per unit volume in both emulsion layers.
An average grain density of $4.5 \pm 0.2$ per \SI{1000}{\cubic \um} was measured, compatible with that of reference ($i.e.$ not exposed) emulsion films, showing that contact of the films with neither the tungsten plates nor the internal coating of the wall had chemically contaminated the emulsion.
The grain density was measured in different points of the emulsion surface and for different positions of emulsion films within the brick, demonstrating the light tightness of the wall box.
After the scanning, the reconstruction process was performed, as described in Section~\ref{sec:offline}.
The position and angular distributions of reconstructed base-tracks in an emulsion film are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:emu_distributions}.
A good alignment between consecutive films was obtained, proving that the distortion of the emulsion films is negligible.
The tracks are distributed uniformly on the surface, as expected.
Since the target was placed horizontally during the exposure, the cosmic rays crossed the emulsion films perpendicularly to their surface, leading to a peak of reconstructed tracks at low angles.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/commissioning/p059_positions_colz.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/commissioning/p059_angles.pdf}
\caption{ Reconstructed segments on a single emulsion film used in the target wall commissioning. Left: segments position in the transverse plane; the color palette represents the number of reconstructed segments per mm$^2$. Right: Distribution of the slopes of reconstructed segments in the $zx$ plane and $zy$ plane.}
\label{fig:emu_distributions}
\end{figure}
Finally, track reconstruction in the whole target is performed, with a \textit{Kalman filter} seeded on the base-tracks recorded in the single emulsion films. Comparing the position and angle of each base-track with a linear fit on the $xz$ and $yz$ planes leads to an estimation of the tracking resolution. The results are reported in Figure~\ref{fig:emutrack_resolution}, with Gaussian fits leading to $\sigma_\text{X} \sim \SI{9}{\micro m}$ for the position and $\sigma_\text{TX}\sim \SI{8}{mrad}$ for the slope as the tangent of track angle in the $zx$ plane ($T_X \equiv Tan(\theta_{zx}$).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{images/commissioning/linearfit_posres_60bins_Xonly.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{images/commissioning/linearfit_angres_60bins_TXonly.pdf}
\caption{Tracking resolution in $x$ position (left) and slope as the tangent of track angle in the $zx$ plane ($T_X \equiv Tan(\theta_{zx})$) (right).}
\label{fig:emutrack_resolution}
\end{figure}
The average surface density amounts to $(1.5 \pm 0.1) \times 10^3$ tracks/cm$^2$, reconstructed in the angular range from 0 to 1 rad. Over a total exposure time of 48 hours, this density corresponds to a flux of $(0.52 \pm 0.03)$ muons per \SI{}{\square \cm}, in agreement with the expected cosmic-ray flux.
Track reconstruction was performed on both the upstream section (five emulsion films) and downstream section (ten emulsion films) of the two exposed ECC bricks. As an example, a display of the reconstructed tracks in the downstream section of one brick is reported in Figure~\ref{fig:emutrack_display}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{images/commissioning/ricostrtaglio_ang_10.png}
\caption{Display of reconstructed tracks (red lines) in ten consecutive films in one brick used for the target wall commissioning. Yellow segments represent base-tracks reconstructed in emulsion films.}\label{fig:emutrack_display}
\end{figure}
\section{Online system}
\label{sec:daq}
The SND@LHC online system includes all components involved in operating the experiment, i.e. the timing and the data acquisition hardware and software that realise the data flow from the detector to the storage, the detector control system (DCS) that controls and monitors the detector services, such as power supplies, cooling system, etc, and the data quality monitoring (DQM) and real-time analysis (RTA) system, necessary to ensure a good quality of the collected data.
Globally, the top-level software, the experiment control system (ECS), encompasses all the sub-components above, together with the system of logs and databases in order to store information about the state, configuration and conditions of the data taking.
The ECS is constructed to allow full automation of the data taking.
The different components, shown in the scheme in Figure~\ref{fig:daq-scheme}, and the readout system are described in more details in the following sections.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{images/daq/snd-daq-scheme.pdf}
\caption{Simplified scheme of the SND@LHC online system.}
\label{fig:daq-scheme}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Readout system}
\label{subsec:readout}
As discussed in Sections~\ref{sec:veto}, \ref{sec:scifi} and~\ref{sec:muon}, the SND@LHC experiment features two types of electronic detector systems: scintillator bars read out by SiPMs in the Veto, the hadronic calorimeter and muon system, and scintillating fibres read out by SiPMs in the Target Tracker.
These sub-systems are read out with the same data acquisition (DAQ) electronics, consisting of front-end (FE) boards, described in Section~\ref{subsec:tofpet}, and DAQ readout boards, described in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-electronics}.
They read out the signals from the SiPMs, digitize them and send the recorded data to a DAQ server.
The detector uses in total 37 DAQ boards, each of which is connected to four FE boards.
The system runs synchronously with the LHC bunch crossing clock, and operates in a trigger-less fashion, i.e.\ all hits recorded by each board are transmitted to the DAQ server.
Noise reduction is performed at the front-end level by setting an appropriate threshold for each channel, and on the DAQ server after event building.
A trigger timing control (TTC) crate, described in Section~\ref{subsec:lhc-signals}, is responsible for receiving the LHC clock and the orbit signals from the LHC beam synchronous timing (BST) system and distribute them to the DAQ boards.
The detector is powered using CAEN A2519 modules for the DAQ readout boards power, requiring \SI{12}{V} and \SI{2}{A} each, and A1539B modules for the bias voltage of the SiPMs, requiring up to \SI{60}{V} and up to \SI{300}{\micro A} per channel.
These modules are hosted in two SY5527 mainframes.
The control of power supplies is performed by the detector control system discussed in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-dcs}, which also monitors the voltages and currents drawn on both the LV and HV channels and monitors the presence of alarms.
The online system includes two servers located on the surface.
One of them receives data from the DAQ readout boards, combines the data into events, and performs the online processing of the detector data, as described in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-events}, before saving the data to disk.
The other one runs the ECS and the other elements of the online system.
\subsubsection{Timing system}
\label{subsec:lhc-signals}
The LHC clock (\SI{40.079}{MHz} bunch crossing frequency) and orbit clock (\SI{11.245}{kHz} revolution frequency of the LHC) signals are obtained from the LHC BST system via optical fibres based on the TTC system
A scheme of the system used in SND@LHC is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ttc-vme-scheme}.
The BST signal is received by a dedicated board, BST-TTC, that extracts the clock and orbit signals, cleans the clock using a Phase Lock Loop, and distributes them to the detector using the TTC system.
The board is the same that is used for the read-out of the detector, described in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-electronics}, with the addition of a mezzanine card to generate the correct signal levels for the TTC modules.
The clock and synchronous commands are distributed to the DAQ boards using the TTCvi and TTCex modules~\cite{ttc_web}, housed in a VME crate.
The TTCvi receives the clock and orbit signals, and generates the A-channel (trigger) and B-channel (synchronous and asynchronous commands) signals, which are encoded and transmitted by the TTCex.
The TTCvi module can be programmed and controlled using the VME bus.
A USB-to-VME converter allows it to be programmed from the computer server.
Variations of several nanoseconds in the phase of the clock are to be expected due to temperature changes. For this reason, the absolute timing offset will be calibrated with the timestamps of the muons generated by $pp$ collisions at the ATLAS interaction point and detected in SND@LHC.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/daq/ttc-vme-scheme.pdf}
\caption{Simplified scheme of the SND@LHC TTC system.}
\label{fig:ttc-vme-scheme}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Front-end electronics}
\label{subsec:tofpet}
The front-end (FE) boards, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fe-board}, are based on the TOFPET2 ASIC by PETsys~\cite{tofpet2_url}.
The TOFPET2 is a 64-channels readout and digitization ASIC designed for time of flight positron emission tomography systems~\cite{tofpet2_datasheet}.
It incorporates signal amplification circuitry, discriminators, charge integrators, analog-to-digital converters (ADC, in this case QDCs as in charge-to-digital converters) and time-to-digital converters (TDC).
The ASIC has been found to be perfectly suitable to measure signals produced by SiPMs, and to record their timestamp and charge. The FE boards contain two TOFPET2 ASICs each for a total of 128 channels, and has temperature monitoring capabilities of both the SiPMs and the boards themselves.
Each channel of the TOFPET2 features a preamplifier and two amplifiers, one optimized for the timing measurement and the second for the charge measurement.
A combination of up to three discriminators with configurable thresholds can be used. The first one is mainly used for timing measurements, and normally has the lowest threshold, while the other two are used to reject low amplitude pulses and to start charge integration.
The TDCs feature a time binning of \SI{\sim 40}{ps} and the QDCs have a linear response up to \SI{1500}{pC} input charge.
In addition, the gain of the QDC branch can be selected to have a value between \num{1.00} and \num{3.65} to achieve the best resolution and dynamic range, depending on the signal generated by the SiPMs~\cite{tofpet2_datasheet}.
The TOFPET2 ASIC requires calibration in a three-step procedure. The first two steps include adjusting the input level of each amplifier just above the electronic noise produced by the detector, and then calibrating the TDCs and QDCs with the help of pulses with known duration and phase relative to the clock injected from the FPGAs. This is performed with the bias voltage of the SiPMs below the breakdown. Last, the dark count rats of the SiPMs are measured as a function of the thresholds of the three discriminators in each TOFPET2 to determine the best settings to achieve an optimal efficiency and data rate. The last step is performed at the nominal operating voltage of the SIPMs. The calibration procedure has been implemented in an automated way, and the parameters obtained from it are stored in configuration files
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{images/daq/TOFPET.jpg}
\caption{The FE board. The two TOFPET2 ASICS (centre) and the SiPM connectors (left) are visible.}
\label{fig:fe-board}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{DAQ electronics}
\label{subsec:daq-electronics}
The DAQ readout boards, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:daq-board}, are based on the Mercury SA1 module from Enclustra~\cite{enclustra_mercury_sa1}, featuring an Altera Cyclone~V FPGA.
This board is equipped with four high-speed connectors for the FE boards, a TTCrx ASIC~\cite{ttc_web} with an optical fibre receiver to receive the clock and synchronous signals from the TTC system, a \SI{1}{Gb} Ethernet port used for data and command transmission, and a coaxial LEMO connector to deliver the bias voltage to SiPMs.
Each DAQ board collects the data digitized by four FE boards, i.e. 512 channels, and transmits it to the DAQ computer server located on the surface.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/daq/daq_board.jpg}
\caption{Photo of the DAQ board. The four FE board connectors are visible on the left, the TTCrx and optical receiver on the bottom-right, and the Enclustra Mercury SA 1 module in the centre.}
\label{fig:daq-board}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Readout software}
\label{subsec:daq-events}
Each DAQ board transmits all the recorded hits to the DAQ computer server, where event building is performed.
The hits are grouped into events based on their timestamp, and saved to disk as a ROOT file.
The DAQ boards also transmit periodic triggers received from the TTC system. These heartbeat triggers are used by the event building software in the DAQ server to verify that all the boards are running synchronously, and operating properly even when there is no data.
The readout process from starting servers to starting the data taking, sending periodic triggers, monitoring the status of each element, etc, is fully controlled by the ECS, described in Section~\ref{subsec:ecs}.
The event building process is structured in three main steps, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:evt-builder}. In the first step, hits collected by each board and belonging to the same event, i.e.\ with time stamps within \SI{25}{ns}, are grouped into ``board events''. In the next step, board events that have time stamps within \SI{25}{ns} are grouped into ``events''. The final event timestamp corresponds to the timestamp of the earliest board event. The events are then filtered and processed online, before being written to disk. The details of the processing depend on the chosen settings, but it always contains an online noise filter, described below.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/daq/daq-evt-builder.pdf}
\caption{Schematic view of the event builder process. The colored rectangles represent queues of data being processed and the numbers identify the steps of event building, discussed in the text.}
\label{fig:evt-builder}
\end{figure}
The noise filtering is performed in two steps. In the first one, events are required to have a minimum number of DAQ boards that have detected a certain number of hits. This is fast and eliminates all the events generated by single noise hits. In the second step, the hits are grouped by the plane that generated them. This allows more advanced requirements on the topology of the events to be imposed.
The system includes a number of additional configurable data processors, such as the FE calibration that may be applied during the data acquisition.
The DAQ server writes the recorded data to a local disk. At the end of each run the data is transferred to a permanent storage and converted to the format used by the reconstruction software.
\subsection{Experiment control}
\subsubsection{Detector control and safety monitoring}
\label{subsec:daq-dcs}
The detector control system (DCS) controls and monitors the status of all the detector services, i.e.\ the detector and electronics power supplies, the cooling system and the environmental sensors within the neutron-shielded box surrounding the target system, as well as the safety system. The voltage, currents and channel status of the power supplies are continuously monitored and transmitted to the ECS. The ECS then acts accordingly, logging the events or raising an alarm in case of problems.
The neutron-shielded box surrounding the target system is equipped with sensors for temperature, humidity and smoke. The safety and environment monitoring system (SMS) monitors these environmental parameters inside the box, detects the presence of smoke and monitors the status of the cooling system. The monitoring and safety decison logic is implemented on a NUCLEO-H743ZI development board~\cite{nucleo_url}, featuring an ARM Cortex-M7 microcontroller.
A schematic illustration of the SMS is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:sms}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/daq/SND_SMS.jpg}
\caption{Schematic view of the safety and environment monitoring system. The items included in the dashed line are those physically installed inside the neutron-shielded box around the targe system.}
\label{fig:sms}
\end{figure}
Temperature and humidity are measured in five different locations, using digital sensors (Sensirion SHT31~\cite{sensirion_trh_url}) which guarantee an accuracy of \SI{\pm 0.2}{\celsius} and \SI{\pm 2}{\percent} respectively, and a reliable I2C communication with the host microcontroller.
The positions of the sensors have been chosen to minimize the interference with the emulsion replacement procedure. Three of them are positioned on the back metal plane, monitoring the temperature and humidity as close as possible to the emulsion boxes, while the remaining two sensors are placed on the opposite side, facing the cold box.
This configuration assures a comprehensive temperature and humidity mapping of the target system.
The SMS is also equipped with three smoke sensors with relay output.
They are used for fire and smoke detection and are connected to the microcontroller digital inputs with interrupt capability.
In addition, a signal from the cooling system is used to monitor its status.
The microcontroller firmware has been developed using the Mbed OS~\cite{mbed_os_url}, an ARM Real Time Operating System.
It continuously monitors its inputs, evaluates possible alarm conditions, takes the safety actions according to the alarm levels and manages the data communication with the DCS. The MQTT protocol~\cite{mqtt_url} is used to transmit data.
The DCS monitors and logs the temperature inside the neutron shield. If it exceeds \SI{18}{\celsius}, an alarm is raised and the power to the DAQ boards is cut, to protect the emulsion films.
Alarms are also raised if a failure is detected in the cooling plant, i.e.\ if it turns off and stays off for more than \num{10} minutes.
The SMS also acts as an interlock for the CAEN power supplies. If an alarm condition is detected, it can turn them off without relying on the DCS being functional.
The control algorithm is designed to classify alarms according to three levels referred to as low, medium and high.
A low level alarm occurs when the temperature or humidity readings of one sensor exceeds the set thresholds, or if only one of the three smoke sensors is triggered.
An alarm is posted but no further action is taken.
A medium level alarm occurs when the temperature or humidity readings of two or more sensors exceed the set thresholds or if the cooling system has been turned off for more than 10 minutes.
An alarm is posted and the power supplies are immediately turned off, to avoid the temperature inside the cold box to raise further and potentially affect the emulsion films.
A high level alarm occurs when two or more smoke detectors are triggered.
An alarm is posted and the power supplies are immediately turned off. In addition, it could be setup to trigger a response of the fire brigade.
\subsubsection{Data processing and quality monitoring}
The data quality monitoring (DQM) is fundamental to ensure that useful data is recorded and to verify that all the sub-systems of the experiment operate correctly.
The DQM process runs on the second computer server located at the surface and reads in real-time the data file that is being written by the DAQ server.
The process performs the conversion to the offline data format and makes this data available to the DQM agents, which process it and displays the results in the ECS.
Several levels of complexity of the processing have been implemented from simple hit maps to ensure that all detector channels work as expected, to full real-time reconstruction that allows high-lever quantities to be checked, such as efficiencies and resolutions.
\subsubsection{Experiment control system}
\label{subsec:ecs}
The ECS is the top-level control of the experiment online system, providing a unified framework to control the hardware and software components, and to sequence all data taking operations.
A hierarchical architecture has been implemented in which the ECS is a layer above the other online systems, preserving their autonomy to operate independently.
With this architecture, the various online components do not strictly require the ECS to operate, e.g. detector calibration and data taking are stand-alone processes. The ECS also performs the logging of the relevant detector information, either in ELOG or in databases depending on the type of information.
The ECS consists of two main software components: the ECS Process Manager (EPM) and the ECS Graphical User Interface (GUI).
The software is written in C++ and the inter-communication with the DAQ and the DCS system is done with Python scripts.
The EPM is a process which runs on the main server and acts as the communication link between the different online system components. It takes care of starting them and continuously monitoring their status.
The EPM process is kept alive by a cron-based watchdog. The status of the process is monitored at fixed time intervals, and restarted if it is not running.
The EPM and its slave processes are associated with state machines that are driven by the status of the process activities.
The information of these state machines is stored in a shared memory supervised by the EPM.
The ECS GUI has been designed to ensure a simple and compact view of the run control, status of the sub-detector and of the peripheral systems. The main windows of the ECS GUI is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ecs-gui}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/daq/ecs-gui.jpg}
\caption{The main window of the ECS graphical interface.}
\label{fig:ecs-gui}
\end{figure}
The ECS is designed to operate the online system automatically, controlled by a global finite-state machine that receives the status of the LHC and of the detector to perform predefined actions in order to run the data taking and recover from errors. The accelerator states are received from the LHC Data Interchange Protocol system, the power supply and environment conditions from the DCS, and the data acquisition status from the DAQ boards and the DAQ server. As an example, the ECS automatically starts the data acquisition when the LHC declares stable beams, stops it when the beams are dumped, and logs any event that can be useful to analyse the data.
Furthermore, it can reboot a board that has become unresponsive, stop the DAQ and cut the power to the boards in the neutron-shielded box if the temperatures rises above the thresholds, try to restore a tripped SiPM bias channel, etc.
\section{The Data Acquisition and Online systems}
\label{sec:daq}
As discussed in Sections~\ref{sec:veto}, \ref{sec:scifi} and~\ref{sec:muon}, the SND@LHC detector features two types of electronic sub-systems:
\begin{itemize}
\item Scintillator bars read out by SiPMs, used for the Veto, the hadronic calorimeter and muon system;
\item Scintillating fibres read out by SiPMs, used for the Target Tracker.
\end{itemize}
These sub-systems are read out with the same Data Acquisition (DAQ) electronics, based on a main DAQ board, featuring a Cyclone V FPGA, and four front-end (FE) boards, based on the TOFPET2 ASIC, by PETsys~\cite{tofpet2_url}.
The detector uses a total of 37 DAQ boards, which run synchronously with the LHC bunch crossing clock.
It is operated in a trigger-less fashion, i.e.\ all hits recorded by each board are transmitted to the DAQ server.
Noise reduction is performed at the front-end level by setting an appropriate threshold for each channel or disabling noisy channels, and on the DAQ server, after event building.
\subsection{DAQ architecture}
\label{subsec:daq-structure}
The DAQ system of the SND@LHC detector is composed of:
\begin{itemize}
\item 37 DAQ boards, with four FE boards each, described in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-electronics}. They read out the signals from the SiPMs, digitize them and send recorded data to a server.
\item One Trigger Timing Control (TTC) crate, described in Section~\ref{subsec:lhc-signals}, to receive the LHC clock and orbit signals from the Beam Synchronous Timing (BST) system and transmit them to the DAQ boards. This is necessary to have them run synchronously with the LHC bunch crossing.
\item Two servers, located on the surface: one receives data from the DAQ boards and combines it into events, as described in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-events}, which are then saved to disk; the other controls all aspects of the DAQ and performs data quality monitoring.
\end{itemize}
Details about each component are given in the following sections. A schematic representation of the DAQ system is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:daq-scheme}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/daq/snd-daq-scheme.pdf}
\caption{Simplified scheme of the SND@LHC DAQ system.}
\label{fig:daq-scheme}
\end{figure}
\subsection{DAQ electronics}
\label{subsec:daq-electronics}
The DAQ board, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:daq-board}, is based on the Mercury SA1 module from Enclustra~\cite{enclustra_mercury_sa1}, featuring an Altera Cyclone~V FPGA. The main characteristics of this board are:
\begin{itemize}
\item four high-speed connectors for the FE boards;
\item TTCrx ASIC~\cite{ttc_web} with an optical fibre receiver, used to receive the clock and synchronous signals from the TTC system;
\item \SI{1}{Gb} Ethernet port, used for data and command transmission;
\item LEMO connector to deliver the bias voltage to SiPMs.
\end{itemize}
Each DAQ board collects the data digitized by FE boards and transmits it to the DAQ server, running on a PC on the surface.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/daq/daq_board.jpg}
\caption{The DAQ board. The four FE board connectors are visible on the left, the TTCrx and optical receiver on the bottom-right, the Enclustra Mercury SA 1 module in the centre.}
\label{fig:daq-board}
\end{figure}
The FE board, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fe-board}, contains two TOFPET2 ASICs, used to read out the SiPMs, and has temperature monitoring capabilities of both the SiPMs and the board itself.
Each TOFPET2 ASIC can read out \num{64} channels, for a total of \num{128} channels per FE board and \num{512} per DAQ board.
The TOFPET2 records all the hits that exceed a predefined threshold and provides energy and timestamp information.
More details are given in the following section.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{images/daq/TOFPET.jpg}
\caption{The FE board. The two TOFPET2 ASICS (centre) and the SiPM connectors (left) are visible.}
\label{fig:fe-board}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The TOFPET2 ASIC}
\label{subsec:tofpet}
The TOFPET2 is a 64-channels readout and digitization ASIC, designed for time of flight positron emission tomography systems ~\cite{tofpet2_datasheet}.
It integrates signal amplification circuitry, discriminators, charge integrators, Analog to Digital converters (ADC, also indicated as QDCs, charge to digital converters) and Time to Digital converters (TDC).
It allows to measure signals produced by SiPMs and to record their timestamp and charge.
Each channel features a preamplifier and two amplifiers, one optimized for time resolution and the second for charge integration.
A combination of up to three discriminators with configurable thresholds can be used: the first one (identified with T1) is mainly used for timing measurements, and it is normally the lowest threshold one, while the other two (T2 and E) are used to reject low amplitude pulses and start charge integration.
TDCs feature a time binning of \SI{\sim 40}{ps} and QDCs have a linear response up to \SI{1500}{pC} input charge.
In addition, the gain of the QDC branch can be selected to have a value between \num{1.00} and \num{3.65}, to achieve the best resolution and dynamic range, depending on the signal generated by the SiPMs~\cite{tofpet2_datasheet}.
This ASIC requires to be calibrated before use, following the procedure described in the data sheet and summarized here:
\begin{itemize}
\item The input level of each amplifier is set just above the electronic noise produced by the detector;
\item the TDCs and QDCs are calibrated by injecting pulses with known duration and phase, relative to the clock, from the FPGA;
\item the dark count rate of the SiPM is measured as a function of the three thresholds, to determine the best settings to achieve an acceptable data rate and efficiency.
\end{itemize}
The first two steps are performed with the bias voltage of the SiPMs below the breakdown, while the last one at the nominal operating voltage.
The calibration is performed in an automated way and the parameters obtained from it are stored in configuration files for each DAQ board.
When data acquisition is started, these parameters are saved alongside the data, as they are needed to process the raw values of timestamp and charge associated to each hit.
\subsection{LHC signals and TTC system}
\label{subsec:lhc-signals}
The LHC clock (\SI{40.079}{MHz}, the bunch crossing frequency) and orbit (\SI{11.245}{kHz}, the revolution frequency of the LHC) signals are obtained from the Beam Synchronous Timing (BST) system, transmitted over an optical fibre using the TTC system, along with other information such as the machine mode, the beam type and energy, the GPS absolute time, etc.
A scheme of the system used in SND@LHC is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ttc-vme-scheme}.
The BST signal is received by a dedicated board, BST-TTC, that extracts the clock and orbit signals, cleans the clock using a PLL, and distributes them to the detector using the TTC system.
The board is the same used for the read-out of the detector, described in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-electronics}, with the addition of a mezzanine card to generate the correct signal levels for the TTC modules.
The clock and synchronous commands are distributed to the DAQ boards using the TTC system, consisting of a TTCvi and a TTCex modules~\cite{ttc_web}, housed in a VME crate.
The TTCvi receives the clock and orbit signals, and generates the A-channel (trigger) and B-channel (synchronous and asynchronous commands) signals, which are encoded and transmitted by the TTCex.
The TTCvi module can be programmed and controlled using the VME bus.
A USB-to-VME converter allows it to be programmed from the server.
Variations of several nanoseconds in the phase of the clock are to be expected due to temperature changes.
For this reason, the absolute timing offset will be calibrated with the timestamps of the muons generated by $pp$ collisions in the ATLAS interaction point and detected in SND@LHC.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/daq/ttc-vme-scheme.pdf}
\caption{Simplified scheme of the SND@LHC TTC system.}
\label{fig:ttc-vme-scheme}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Power supplies}
\label{subsec:psu}
The detector is powered using CAEN A2519 modules for the DAQ boards power (requiring \SI{12}{V} and \SI{2}{A} each) and A1539B modules for the bias voltage of the SiPMs (requiring up to \SI{60}{V} and up to \SI{300}{\micro A} per channel).
These modules are hosted in two SY5527 mainframes.
The control of power supplies is performed by the Detector Control system, discussed in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-dcs}, which also monitors the voltage and current draw (of both the LV and HV channels) and the presence of alarms.
\subsection{The safety and monitoring system}
\label{subsec:sms}
The Safety and Monitoring System (SMS) monitors the temperature and humidity inside the cold box, detects the presence of smoke and monitors the status of the cooling system.
It is based on the NUCLEO-H743ZI development board~\cite{nucleo_url}, featuring an ARM Cortex-M7 microcontroller.
A schematic illustration of the SMS is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:sms}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/daq/SND_SMS.jpg}
\caption{Schematic of the SMS. The items included in the dashed line are those physically installed inside the cold box.}
\label{fig:sms}
\end{figure}
Temperature and humidity are measured in five different locations, using digital sensors (Sensirion SHT31~\cite{sensirion_trh_url}) which guarantee an accuracy of \SI{\pm 0.2}{\celsius} and \SI{\pm 2}{\percent} respectively, and a reliable I2C communication with the host microcontroller.
The positions of the sensors have been chosen to minimize the interference with the emulsion replacement procedure: three of them are positioned on the back metal plane, monitoring the temperature and humidity as close as possible to the emulsion boxes, while the remaining two sensors are placed on the opposite side, facing the cold box.
This configuration assures a comprehensive temperature and humidity mapping of the target system.
The SMS is also equipped with three smoke sensors with relay output.
They are used for fire and smoke detection and are connected to the microcontroller digital inputs with interrupt capability.
The microcontroller firmware has been developed using the Mbed OS~\cite{mbed_os_url}, an ARM Real Time Operating System.
It continuously monitors its inputs, evaluates possible alarm conditions, takes the safety actions according to the alarm levels and manages the data communication to the Detector Control System (DCS), described in Section~\ref{subsec:daq-dcs}.
The MQTT protocol~\cite{mqtt_url} is used to transmit data: the SMS system acts as a publisher for sensors data and alarm messages, which are received by the DCS, while it can receive configuration messages from the DCS.
A watchdog has been implemented to strengthen the robustness and reliability of the system: if the microcontroller freezes for any reason, it is automatically reset by dedicated hardware.
The SMS acts as an interlock for the CAEN power supplies: if an alarm condition is detected, it can turn them off without relying on the DCS being functional.
More details about the alarm conditions are given below.
If the environmental conditions in the cold box do not meet some predefined requirements, an alarm is raised.
When an alarm occurs the SMS sends an alarm message to the MQTT broker and undertakes the needed action to secure the safety of the infrastructure according to the level of the alarm.
The control algorithm is designed to classify alarms according to three levels:
\begin{description}
\item[Low] It occurs when the temperature or humidity readings of one sensor exceeds the set thresholds, if one smoke sensor is triggered (this is considered a low-level alarm because if only one smoke sensor is triggered, it is most likely a fault in the sensor rather than the actual presence of smoke. This assumption is based on the fact that the three smoke sensors are all inside the cold box and smoke would trigger all of them) or if the cooling system turns off.
An alarm is posted to the broker and no further action is taken.
\item[Medium] It occurs when the temperature or humidity readings of two or more sensors exceeds the set thresholds or if the cooling system has been turned off for more than 10 minutes.
An alarm is posted to the broker and the power supplies are immediately turned off, to avoid the temperature inside the cold box to raise further, to protect the emulsions.
\item[High] It occurs when two or more smoke detectors are triggered.
An alarm is posted to the broker and the power supplies are immediately turned off. In addition, it could be setup to trigger a response of the fire brigade.
\end{description}
\subsection{Online software}
The SND@LHC online software features several components, to control different aspects of the experiment:
\begin{itemize}
\item the Data Acquisition software, which realises the data flow from the detector to the storage;
\item the DCS, which controls and monitors detector services, such as power supplies, cooling system, etc;
\item the LHC communication system (LHCS), which retrieves the status of the LHC beams;
\item the Data Quality Monitor (DQM) and Real Time Analysis (RTA) system, necessary to ensure a good quality of the collected data;
\item Logs and databases, to store the information of each run;
\item the Experiment Control System (ECS), $i.e.$ the top-level software that controls every aspect of the detector.
\end{itemize}
A scheme of the Online software, with the different components is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:online-scheme}.
The different components are described in more details in the following sections.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/daq/online-scheme.pdf}
\caption{Schematic drawing of the connections between different online software components.}
\label{fig:online-scheme}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{The Experiment Control System (ECS)}
\label{subsubsec:ecs}
The ECS is the top control level of the experiment readout system, coordinating the software components and controlling all data taking operations.
A hierarchical architecture is used, in which the ECS is a layer above the other online systems, preserving their autonomy to operate independently.
With this architecture, the various online programs do not strictly require the ECS to operate ($e.g$ detector calibration and data taking as a stand-alone process).
The ECS provides a unified framework to run the detector and the online systems, from which it is possible to control and to perform the data taking operation.
It also performs the logging of the relevant detector information, either in ELOG or in a database, depending on the type of information.
The ECS consists of two main software components: the ECS Process Manager (EPM) and the ECS Graphical User Interface (GUI).
The software is written in C++ and the inter-communication with the DAQ and the DCS system is done with Python scripts.
The EPM is a process which runs on the main server and acts as the communication link between different Online system components.
It takes care of starting them and continuously monitoring their status.
The EPM process is kept alive by a cron-based watchdog: the status of the process is monitored at fixed time intervals, and restarted if it is not running.
The EPM and its slave processes have a state machine associated with them, holding the status of the process activities.
The information of these state machines is stored in a shared memory supervised by the EPM.
The ECS GUI has been designed to ensure a simple and compact view of the run control, status of sub-detector and of the whole apparatus.
As an example, the main windows of the ECS GUI is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ecs-gui}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/daq/ecs-gui.jpg}
\caption{The main window of the ECS graphical interface.}
\label{fig:ecs-gui}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Data acquisition, event building and storage}
\label{subsec:daq-events}
Each DAQ board transmits all the recorded hits to the DAQ server, where event building is performed.
The hits are grouped into events, based on their timestamp, and saved to disk as a ROOT file.
The DAQ boards also transmit periodic triggers received from the TTC system, and the DAQ server verifies that all the boards are running synchronously.
In addition, these periodic triggers are used as a hearbeat signal, to verify that all the boards are responsive, even if they are not recording data.
This process is fully controlled by the ECS, from starting servers, to starting the data taking, sending periodic triggers, monitoring the status of each element etc.
The event building process is structured in three main steps, also shown in Figure~\ref{fig:evt-builder}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Hits collected by each board are grouped in ``board events'' if their timestamp is within \SI{25}{ns}. Board events contain all the hits from a given board in an event.
\item Board events are grouped into events if their timestamp is within \SI{25}{ns}. The event timestamp corresponds to the timestamp of the earliest board event.
\item Events are filtered and processed further, before being written to disk. The details of the processing depend on the chosen settings, but it always contains an online noise filter, described below.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/daq/daq-evt-builder.pdf}
\caption{Schematic representation of the event builder. The colored rectangles represent queues of data being processed and the numbers identify the steps of event building, discussed in the text.}
\label{fig:evt-builder}
\end{figure}
The noise filtering is performed in two steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Events are required to have a minimum number of DAQ boards that have detected a certain number of hits. This is fast and eliminates all the events generated by a single noise hit.
\item The hits are grouped by the plane that generated them and a more advanced requirement on the topology of the event can be imposed. This is slower, but allows for a finer control on the requirements to save an event.
\end{enumerate}
Additional data processors can be added to the software: for example, the FE calibration is applied during data acquisition.
The DAQ server writes the recorded data to a local disk and at the end of each run the data is converted in the format used by the reconstruction software and transferred to permanent storage.
\subsubsection{The Detector Control System (DCS)}
\label{subsec:daq-dcs}
The DCS controls and monitors all the detector services, namely:
\begin{itemize}
\item power supplies, turning them on and off, selecting desired voltages and monitoring their status;
\item the safety and monitoring system, discussed in Section~\ref{subsec:sms}
\end{itemize}
The voltage, currents and channel status of the power supplies are constantly monitored and transmitted to the ECS.
The ECS then acts accordingly, logging the events or raising an alarm in case of problems.
The temperature inside the cold box is constantly monitored and logged and, if it exceeds \SI{18}{\celsius}, an alarm is raised and the power to the DAQ boards is cut, to protect the emulsion films.
Alarms are also raised if a failure is detected in the cooling plant (i.e. if it turns off and stays off for more than \num{10} minuts) or if smoke is present in the cold box: in these cases the power supplies are immediately turned off.
\subsubsection{The LHC communication system}
\label{subsec:lhcs}
The LHC communication system continuously polls the status of the beam from the LHC DIP (Data Interchange Protocol) system.
The relevant information is transferred to the ECS, which can perform actions depending on them.
As an example, the ECS can automatically start the data acquisition when the LHC has stable beams, stop it when the beam is dumped and log any event that can be useful to analyse the data.
\subsubsection{The Data Quality Monitor (DQM) and Real Time Analysis (RTA) system}
\label{subsec:dqm}
The data quality monitoring is fundamental to ensure that useful data is recorded and to verify that all the sub-systems of the experiment operate correctly.
The DQM is based on a server-client pair.
The server, running on the same machine where data is being recorded, reads the written data and transmits it to the client, which, in turn, makes it available in a shared memory where several agents can read it, process it and show results in the ECS.
Several levels of complexity of the processing can be implemented: from simple hit maps, to ensure that all detector channels work as expected, to full real-time analysis, where events are fully reconstructed and a higher-level monitoring of the system can be performed (for example, a real time analysis of the detector efficiency).
\section{Infrastructure and detector installation in TI18}
\label{sec:installation}
The TI18 tunnel, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:map_snd}, was initially constructed for injection of positrons from the SPS to the LEP accelerator.
It is \SI{280}{m} long and has mostly a steep slope of about \SI{15}{\percent}, but levels out as it enters the LHC ring via the junction cavern UJ18 in the LHC Sector 12, about \SI{480}{m} from the ATLAS interaction point.
The LEP machine elements in TI18 were removed during the preparatory works for the LHC but the tunnel was left unused. All but the last short section of about \SI{20}{m} before entering UJ18 has been closed off.
At the level of the floor, this short section crosses the collision axis of IP1, making the location particularly suitable for the high pseudo-rapidity region sought by the experiment.
At this location, the tunnel has a slope of \SI{3.6}{\percent} and a \SI{2.9}{m}-wide floor.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/Integration/map_snd.png}
\caption{The location of the SND@LHC detector. SND@LHC is located in the TI18 tunnel, accessible from the LHC one via UJ18, \SI{480}{m} from the ATLAS interaction point. Access can be performed via the PM15 and PM18 shafts.}
\label{fig:map_snd}
\end{figure}
Detailed integration studies showed that the detector could be constructed on the floor without civil engineering.
Yet, the use of TI18 presented a number of challenges.
Firstly, TI18 is on the outside of the LHC ring while the \SI{450}{m} transport path from the access shaft PM15 at IP1 to UJ18 is on the inside, requiring preparation of dedicated transport paths above and under the machine for the infrastructure and detector components.
The transport path had to be made compatible with the machine cryogenics under helium pressure.
Secondly, TI18 was lacking all services in terms of ambient lighting, power, cooling and safety as required by the experiment.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/Integration/uj18b.PNG}
\caption{Principal modifications in UJ18 integration.}
\label{fig:UJ18}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:UJ18} shows the main modifications in UJ18.
The transport path over the machine is ensured by an added rail fixed to the UJ18 ceiling and carrying a manual hoist with a \SI{500}{\kilogram} capacity.
A protective table, capable of resisting against a fall of an object of up to \SI{1.3}{\tonne}, was produced and installed under the hoist and over the cryostat.
A transport volume of \SI[product-units=power]{75 x 90 x 170}{cm} was opened up by modifying the location of the existing cable trays.
Space below the machine was also freed to guarantee a path for transporting smaller objects with the help of low-profile trolleys.
The passage will also be used to pass the trolley for the exchange of the emulsion walls during the run (Figure~\ref{fig:wall}b).
Space for storage of detector components and assembly was freed by removing obsolete ventilation ducts in UJ18.
This allowed for detector components and infrastructures items to be brought in batches to avoid transport bottlenecks in the LHC access system.
The required detector electrical power of \SI{11}{kW} could be provided from the existing electrical grid in UJ18.
A dedicated circuit with an electrical box and associated emergency stop buttons were installed in TI18.
Figure~\ref{fig:TI18} shows an overview of the service and detector integration in TI18, together with detailed images of the experimental area.
To free additional space for the detector installation in TI18, a \SI{20}{\meter}-long and obsolete ventilation duct was removed.
The neutron-shielded box that surrounds the target region has dimensions of \SI[product-units=power]{2.19 x 1.76 x 1.86}{m} and is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:det_all}.
In order to provide the required shielding, the walls of the box are made of acrylic and \SI{30}{\percent} borated polyethylene panels, having a thickness of \SI{50}{mm} and \SI{40}{mm}, respectively.
The whole structure is sustained by a skeleton of aluminium profiles.
Doors on the upstream side and the corridor side of the detector provide easy access for maintenance and for emulsion wall replacements.
The neutron-shielded box is equipped with a closed circuit cooling system that guarantees a stable ambient relative humidity and temperature of \SI{45}{\percent} and \SI{15}{\celsius}, respectively, as required in order to prevent fading of the emulsion films.
Two racks were installed in TI18 to house the detector power supplies and readout system, and dedicated optical fibre tubes were installed over \SI{600}{m} in the LHC tunnel in order to connect with existing fibres up to the surface rack that is hosting the timing system, and the DAQ and control computer servers.
The eight iron walls of the muon system, each with dimension
\SI[product-units=power]{80 x 60 x 20}{cm} and a weight of \SI{750}{kg}, rest on horizontal steel base plates which were positioned at an accuracy of \SI{0.5}{mm} and grouted against the floor to compensate for the tunnel slope.
Together with a smaller iron block at the end, the walls are by themselves providing the support for the mechanical structure holding the eight muon detector planes.
The emulsion walls and the SciFi planes are carried by the target system structure that is grouted to the existing floor with custom-made wedges.
All detector components were aligned with an accuracy of \SI{0.5}{mm}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\vspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=.99\linewidth]{images/Integration/IntegrationTI18.PNG}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{ Overview of the SND detector integration in TI18}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.99\linewidth]{images/Integration/TI18up.PNG}
\caption{Detector services upstream in TI18}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.99\linewidth]{images/Integration/TI18middle.PNG}
\caption{Front view of the detector}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.99\linewidth]{images/Integration/TI18down.PNG}
\caption{Rear view of the detector}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Views of the SND@LHC experimental area in TI18, before the installation of the neutron-shielded box.}
\label{fig:TI18}
\end{figure}
The goal of being ready for data taking at the start of the LHC Run~3 in 2022 limited the entire schedule for the infrastructure, detector installation and commissioning to nine months.
The final phase of the LHC Long Shutdown~2 and the preparation of the machine for startup in 2022 set additional strict constraints on the planning.
A large part of the works had to be done with the machine cooled to \SI{4.5}{K}, requiring further attention on the procedures.
The main infrastructure modifications in UJ18 and TI18 were performed between the end of June and September 2021.
September and October were dedicated to detector assembly and beam tests on the surface in the North Area Hall EHN1, while LHC was closed for the pilot run.
The detector installation, including the iron blocks, cooling plants and the related electronics, was successfully carried out in November and December, allowing the start of global commissioning by the end of December 2021.
The neutron shield surrounding the target region was constructed in January and February 2022 and completed underground by March 15$^{th}$. On April 7$^{th}$, one-fifth of the target region was partially instrumented with emulsion films, together with a few independent small emulsion bricks to check machine-induced background during the LHC commissioning, as the very final step of the detector installation. The detector has been continuously taking cosmic ray data since the beginning of the year. A picture of the full detector installed in TI18 is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:det_all}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/Integration/det_all.png}
\caption{Global view of the detector in TI18 after the installation of the neutron shield.}
\label{fig:det_all}
\end{figure}
\section{Installation in TI18}
\label{sec:installation}
Particular effort has been paid on the studies for the integration of the needed services, to guarantee a cost efficient design of the SND detector and to evaluate the feasibility of its installation inside the TI18 cavern. The result have been a very successfully ending with a smooth installation inside TI18 and UJ18 (LHC regions) without any unexpected surprise.
The installation was approved in the LHC Machine Committee via two Engineering change Requests \cite{ECR2021} \cite{ECRNov2021} while the infrastructure was designed based on the detailed SND Engineering specification \cite{engspec}. Is to be noted that the planing was strictly respected adapted to the LHC schedule. Any delay due to external reasons, such us the delivery of raw material, was compensated by shifting activities due to the enormous flexibility both from the CERN groups and sub-detector teams. Another challenge was the development of the construction and installation under the COVID pandemic increasing the uncertainty of the teams available and transport difficulties. Anyway, the installation have been completed with great success.
Firstly, the main infrastructure modifications and updates were performed by the CERN groups along summer 2021 completing 98\% of the activities planned up for this period. Secondly, the detector installation together with the cooling plant were put inside TI18 between November and December 2021 while the neutron shield cold box and AUG cable are to be installed in March 2022. Figure \ref{fig:integration} shows a section cut of the integration inside TI18. The neutron shielded cold box is a closed volume maintained by the evaporator at \SI{15}{\celsius} with a 45\% of relative humidity.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/Integration/IntegrationTI18.PNG}
\caption{Detector integration in TI18}
\label{fig:integration}
\end{figure}
The infrastructure parts and the sub-components required to operate the detector were transported on trolleys from the surface level to the LHC tunnel through the PM15 elevator (\SI{3}{\tonne} load capacity) and, then, transported along the LSS1R section of the LHC tunnel to UJ18. Two paths, over or below the LHC machine, are now available to pass equipment from the corridor side to TI18 side. The latest is located next to the footbridge and marked on the floor.
Small components can pass below the machine with a low-profile trolley limited to a \SI{37}{cm}. The dimensions were sufficient to pass the iron blocks and the target emulsions bricks, and all other smaller components. The passage will be used to pass the trolley (see Figure \ref{fig:trolley}) for the exchange of the emulsions walls.
To pass the components above the LHC machine, a rail carrying a manual hoist with a \SI{500}{\kilogram} capacity is now fixed to UJ18 ceiling. A load test was performed on site once the structure is installed. In addition, a protective structure is in place over the cryostat and cryogenic line and bolted to the floor. The vertical beams design allows full access to the quench protection box QYCDA.13R1 and cryogenic box QYCDA.13R1. The volume of the largest item to be passed is W:75\,$\times$\,H:90\,$\times$\,L:170\,cm$^3$ being the cooling plant the most demanding components in terms of size. The design of the QRL protection is a revised version of the one designed and installed in TI12 for FASER which was designed for \SI{1.3}{\tonne} falling object.
There is a clear line of sight to link the detector position with the LHC machine coordinate system. To do so, a survey fiducials positions was distributed along the detector and a geodetic network was implemented in the TI18 tunnel. 3D scanning of the area after the installation is foreseen for integration purposes. The determination of transformation parameters between the CERN Coordinate System and the local CAD system for SND in TI18 can be found in Ref. \cite{alignsystem} while the final position measurements after alignment of the base plates, target structure and muon system are collected in the Geode database \cite{Geode_database}.
\subsection{Infrastructure installation}
Several services were installed close to cryogenics and vacuum equipment and when the LHC machine was already at cryogenic temperature. In consequence, detailed procedures were followed to manage the risks associated with the proximity to to critical LHC equipment which underwent an assessment by cryogenics and safety experts concluding that all infrastructure works were carried out after removing the liquid helium and leaving the machine floating at 20K. An agreement to perform the described activities at these conditions were agreed with the TE Departmental Safety Officer. As an example, the bellows of the cryogenic distribution line and the beam position monitors feed-through were protected by a \SI{10}{\meter} aluminium thick table and protective plastic boxes, respectively, during the installation and dismantling of the scaffolding. Several activities needed the support of scaffolding to complete the works. Therefore, three scaffolding (see Figures \ref{fig:UJ18} and \ref{fig:UJ18b}) were integrated inside between the challenging environment of the UJ18 cavern. In addition, storage and assembly areas, avoiding the transport corridors, were identified. Detector components and infrastructures item were brought in batches to these areas to avoid transport bottlenecks in the access system. Figure \ref{fig:UJ18b} shows the installation and modifications within UJ18 cavern.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/Integration/uj18b.PNG}
\caption{UJ18 prtective structure integration}
\label{fig:UJ18b}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item Infrastructure updates inside UJ18 cavern:
\begin{itemize}
\item Installation of the protective structure as shown in Figure \ref{fig:UJ18}, including drilling fixations in the floor and the ceiling. A scan of the floor were previously done to check that any service was crossing the drilling location.
\item Raising a section of the cable tray together with rerouting of cables to allow installing a hoist and making space for transporting over the LHC machine the largest components.
\item Displacement of a light to make space for the installation of a rail and manual hoist above the LHC machine.
\item Connect and route a power cable for the SND from the distribution box within UJ18 to a connection box to be installed in TI18. An 11kW power cable for the SND power supply is routed from the electrical box EVJ008/18.13R1 along the existing cable tray to be connected to the SND distribution box (EBJ1/18) within TI18.
\item Displace of a electrical box above footbridge (EN-EL-EWS). The electrical box EOJ308/18.13R1 located above the foot bridge was moved to free the personnel passage.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/Integration/uj18a.PNG}
\caption{UJ18 scaffolding installation}
\label{fig:UJ18}
\end{figure}
\item Pull the cables for AUG and lights installed in TI18. As the closest AUG is within UJ18 on the corridor side, a scaffolding was required to the cable routing over the LHC at the UJ18 IP1 end wall up to TI18. However, the emergency lights and normal lighting connections are on the TI18 side of UJ18, simplifying the connection to the LHC network.
\item Removal of the unused \SI{40}{\meter} ventilation duct within on the TI18 side wall up to the commended door inside TI18. The three 6m long section tubes were unbolted, therefore, no cutting on site was necessary nor the installation of a SAS. The evacuation of the duct was done via point 1. Samples of the duct are to be taken to check the radiation level being bellow the clearance levels.
\item Removal of obsolete green structure stairs to enlarge the access path towards TI18.
\item Barriers installation along the slope towards TI18 for safety reasons. They are fixed with two M16 anchors to the floors \cite{barriers} and their design complies with ISO 14122-3.
\item Cable tray rerouting at the footbridge location on the TI18 due to safety reasons.
\end{itemize}
\item Infrastructure activities inside TI18 experimental area:
\begin{itemize}
\item Installation of a closed circuit cooling system and a neutron shielded cold box. A closed circuit water cooling system is required by the detector to keep the temperature of the emulsion target at \SI{15}{\celsius} in order to avoid possible fading effects and refrigerate the SciFi electronics. The cooling plant was divided in three main parts and the chillers to respect the maximum transport size over the LHC. Then, it was reassembled directly in its final place. The cooling pipes were fixed to the wall running up to the detector location.
\item The insulated neutron shield box is composed of an aluminium profiles skeleton and two neutron shield layers. The design includes \SI{80}{\milli\meter} squared profiles and two layers of borated polyethylene and acrylic of \SI{40}{\milli\meter} and \SI{50}{\milli\meter} thickness, respectively. The result is a \SI{1.5}{\tonne} assembly which is divided in about 200 parts of less than \SI{40}{\kilogram} installed by hand, except for the \SI{150}{\kilogram} doors which required the support of a manual hoist anchored to the cavern ceiling. The full assembly of the cold box was performed on surface inside the EHN1 building.
\item New compressed air pipe routing. The compressed air line is connected to a T-valve of the general UJ18 line leaving a free general purpose connection.
\item Installation of an electrical distribution box for powering the experiment and power sockets.
\item Installation of racks for detector electronics together with its customised supports to compensate against the TI18 tunnel slope. Two 19 inch racks (XYFP01=TI18 XYFP02=TI18) are placed close to the cooling system to house the electronics of the optical fibre patch panels and SND detector. A ground distribution network was also installed and connected to the LHC ground network.
\item Installation of a cable tray along the TI18 wall for SND cabling routing.
\item A fire extinguisher at the entrance of the TI18 for safety requirements.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/Integration/ti18.PNG}
\caption{TI18 services installation}
\label{fig:TI18}
\end{figure}
\item Inside SR1 building surface
\begin{itemize}
\item Installation of detector electronics for control and readout inside the rack 4Y.02-10=SR1. A new socket strip was placed inside the rack and connected to the UPS system to power the SND equipment. A label is in placed to indicated the sockets which belong to SND and FASER.
\end{itemize}
\item From SR1 to TI18:
\begin{itemize}
\item Installation of optical fibre tubes from RE18 to TI18 over a \SI{600}{\meter} long distance. A 24SM cable including two sets of optical fibre connects the two SND racks in TI18 and the SND/FASER 4Y.02-10=SR1 rack. The optical fibre network and tubes were already in place from RE18 to SR1. Therefore, only tubes between TI18 and RE18 were installed on a low voltage cable tray close to the corridor side to easy the access. The installation of the blowing tube and fibres cable from TI18 to RE18 (rack CYFIB01=RE18) were to be carried out with the help of a rod and a ladder avoiding stepping on the LHC machine as it was at cryogenic temperature.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Detector installation}
The installation of all sub-detectors inside TI18 experimental area were carried of from the 1st of November up to the 8th of December including the alignment. Later on from 1st of March 2022 to 21st the cold box fitting completed the full installation of the SND detector. The plan agreed with the LHC operation and coordination teams was closely followed up to a +/-1 day tolerance. The sequence of installation of the detector together with the neutron shield cold box and services connection was the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Grouting of the base plates. The iron walls of the muon system rests on horizontal steel plates which are to be aligned by three screws with respect to IP1 nominal collision axis. The remaining space between the plate and the concrete floor was filled with grout. The grouted volume was less than \SI{0.1}{m^3}. Figure \ref{fig:TI18} shows the the grouting before the installation of the iron blocks. A wooden frame was located around each plate and the grout was poured through a \SI{80}{mm} hole located at the highest point (taking into account the slope). A cylinder-piston assembly on the hole helped to fill the full volume below the plate. The shimmed wooden frame between the plates ensured a minimum gap of \SI{25}{mm} among the first 4 plates and \SI{39}{mm} between the last small plate and the largest plate. The grout mixing was done in a bucket using an electric mixer and the TI18 was closed at the extremity with a plastic curtain to avoid spreading any dust inside the UJ18 cavern. Before any pouring the grout all plates were aligned up to a \SI{0.55}{mm} accuracy with respect to the nominal position.
\item Iron blocks installation. The iron blocks were passed bellow the LHC machine with a low trolley and finally installed on their final position by a transportable jib crane with a total capacity of \SI{1}{\tonne}. The individual positioning precision reached was \SI{5}{mm} considering their individual maximum weight of \SI{460}{\kilogram} and means available. However, the nominal gap between walls was respected introducing a jig with the nominal separation thickness between the walls during the installation.
\item Target and cold box feet floor marking by the survey team for a most accurate positioning of the supports. The face of the cold box base feet which is in contact with the floor is machined according to the slope tunnel. However, the target feet compensate the slope by filling the remaining space between the horizontal plate and the tunnel concrete with a resin.
\item Target structure assembly and refining of the walls compensators height for unloaded walls.
\item Alignment of target unloaded mechanics by the survey team to the nominal position. The position accuracy achieved was \SI{0.5}{mm} (to be confirmed) in two of the survey fiducials having the last \SI{0.5}{mm} offset up due to a supporting food reached the extremity adjustment end.
\item Unloaded dummy emulsions wall as support for the later SciFi planes placement.
\item Optical fibres patch cords and network switchers in TI18 and SR1 for the later connection of the cooling plant and SND electronics.
\item Cooling plant, PLC and piping followed by its stand alone commissioning.
\item Cold box feet floor and wall drilling and installation of M12 anchors for a rigid fixation of the structural frame.
\item Detector patch panel fixation to the floor and cabling from the electronics rack to the patch panel itself.
\item Cabling from patch panel to SciFi and Muon system.
\item First combined assembly among the unloaded wall boxes and SciFi inside the target structure in TI18.
\item DAQ in TI18 and SR1 racks
\item Grounding of the detector by the wall-fixation of two copper plates connected to the LHC ground network.
\item Veto and muon system mechanics, detector and cabling. The planes were easily inserted among the iron walls.
\item Muon planes alignment by the survey team. The accuracy of positioning of the planes achieved was \SI{2}{mm} setting the planes position according to the aligned target system.
\item Commissioning of the muon and SciFi system in parallel. To do so, a temporary connection between the SciFi and cooling plant was performed to turn on the detector. An alarm system was configured to stop the SciFi if the there is a current cut in the cooling system.
\item Global commissioning from end of December 2021 up to the closure of the LHC at the end of March 2022.
\item Loading of the target walls with tungsten. To do so, the SciFi is to be de-installed and the wall boxes extracted.
\item Neutron shield cold box and evaporator. Again, SciFi and target walls are de-installed from the target structure and cables retracted to avoid any damage. A scaffolding is installed over the muon system to carry out the insertion of the neutron shield panels between the last SciFi plane and the first iron wall. The assembly inside TI18 is expected to take 1 week.
\item SciFi and loaded wall boxes re-installation and re-commissioning of the full detector.
\item Target region position cross-check with the cold box in place and the loaded wall boxes.
\item Installation of an active wall with the first emulsion set at the very last moment before the LHC closure.
\end{enumerate}
Figure \ref{fig:TI18detector} shows the different services and sub-detectors installed inside TI18.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{images/Integration/TI18up.PNG}
\caption{Upstream TI18 installation}
\label{fig:TI18up}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{images/Integration/TI18middle.PNG}
\caption{Front view of the detector}
\label{fig:TI18middle}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{images/Integration/TI18down.PNG}
\caption{Side view of the detector}
\label{fig:TI18down}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{images/Integration/TI18coldbox.PNG}
\caption{neutron shield cold box}
\label{fig:TI18coldbox}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{SND detector integration in TI18}
\label{fig:TI18detector}
\end{figure}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
\subsection{Overview}
SND@LHC is a compact experiment proposed to exploit the high flux of energetic neutrinos of all flavours from the LHC~\cite{Beni:2019gxv,snd_technical_proposal}.
It covers the unexplored pseudo-rapidity range of ${7.2 < \eta < 8.4}$, in which a large fraction of neutrinos originate from charmed-hadrons decays.
Thus, neutrinos can probe heavy-flavour production in a region that is not accessible to other LHC experiments.
Together with the FASER$\nu$~\cite{Abreu:2019yak} experiment, SND@LHC will make the first observations of neutrinos produced by a collider, in an energy range which was inaccessible at accelerators so far.
SND@LHC is also sensitive to Feebly Interacting Particles (FIPs) through scattering off atoms in the detector target.
The direct-search strategy gives the experiment sensitivity in a region of the FIP mass-coupling parameter space that is complementary to other indirect searches.
In order to shield the detector from most of the charged particles produced in the LHC collisions, SND@LHC is located in the TI18 tunnel,
\SI{480}{m} downstream of the ATLAS interaction point (IP1).
The charged-lepton identification and the measurement of the neutrino energy are essential to distinguishing among the three flavours in neutrino charged-current interactions and to identify and study the corresponding neutrino source.
These features were the main drivers in the design of the SND@LHC apparatus, that had also to account for geometrical constraints of the selected location.
SND@LHC was installed in TI18 in 2021 during the Long Shutdown~2 and is expected to collect \SI{250}{fb^{-1}} of data in 2022--25, during Run~3 of the LHC.
The detector concept and the physics goals of the SND@LHC experiment have been described in the Technical Proposal~\cite{snd_technical_proposal}.
This document details the detector layout, construction and installation phases.
Sections~\ref{sec:veto} to~\ref{sec:daq} describe the sub-systems of the detector, starting with the veto system that flags events with charged particles entering the detector from the front.
It is followed by the emulsion target, which acts as a vertex detector, and the target trackers that provide the timestamp to the events reconstructed in the emulsion.
The combination of the emulsion target and the target tracker also acts as an electromagnetic calorimeter.
A shielding surrounding the target acts both as absorber for low-energy neutrons and as thermal insulation chamber.
The target system is followed by
a hadronic calorimeter and a muon identification system.
Section~\ref{sec:daq} describes the data acquisition and online systems.
Sections~\ref{sec:commissioning} and \ref{sec:installation} give details about the commissioning and installation of the detector.
Finally, in Section~\ref{sec:outlook} we give some ideas about a possible upgrade of the detector.
\subsection{The physics case}
\label{subsec:physics}
Neutrinos allow for precise tests of the Standard Model (SM)~\cite{Brock:1993sz,Conrad:1997ne,Formaggio:2013kya,Lellis:2004yn}. They are a probe for new physics~\cite{Marfatia:2015hva,Arguelles:2019xgp} and provide a unique view of the Universe~\cite{Ackermann:2019ows}.
The neutrino-nucleon cross section region between 350 GeV and 10 TeV is currently unexplored~\cite{pdg,PhysRevLett.122.041101}.
Indeed, measurements of neutrino interactions in the last decades were mainly performed at low energies for neutrino oscillation studies.
Neutrinos in $pp$ interactions at the CERN LHC arise promptly from leptonic $W$ and $Z$ decays, and $b$ and $c$ decays. They are subsequently also produced in the decays of pions and kaons.
The use of LHC as a neutrino factory was first envisaged about 30 years ago~\cite{DeRujula:1984pg,DeRujula:1992sn,Vannucci:253670}, in particular for the then undiscovered $\nu_{\tau}$~\cite{Jarlskog:215298}.
The idea suggested a detector intercepting the very forward flux (${\eta > 7}$) of neutrinos (about \SI{5}{\percent} have $\tau$ flavour) from $b$ and $c$ decays.
Recently, it was pointed out~\cite{Buontempo:2018gta} that at larger angles (${4 < \eta < 5}$) leptonic $W$ and $Z$ decays also provide an additional contribution to the neutrino flux, of which one third has $\tau$ flavour.
Today, two factors make it possible and particularly interesting to add a compact neutrino detector at the LHC.
The high intensity of $pp$ collisions achieved by the machine turns into a large expected neutrino flux in the forward direction~\cite{Beni:2019gxv}, and the high neutrino energies imply relatively large neutrino cross-sections.
As a result, even a detector with a relatively modest size to fit into one of the existing underground areas close to the LHC tunnel has significant physics potential.
Machine-induced backgrounds decrease rapidly while moving along and away from the beam line.
A detailed study of a possible underground location for a neutrino detector was conducted in 2018~\cite{Beni:2019gxv}, during the LHC Run~2.
Four locations were considered for hosting a possible neutrino detector: the CMS quadrupole region (\SI{25}{m} from the CMS Interaction Point (IP5)), UJ53 and UJ57 (\SI{90} and \SI{120}{m} from IP5), RR53 and RR57 (\SI{240}{m} from IP5), TI18 (\SI{480}{m} from IP1).
The potential sites were studied on the basis of expected neutrino rates, flavour composition and energy spectrum, predicted backgrounds, and in-situ measurements performed with a nuclear emulsion detector and radiation monitors.
TI18 emerged as the most favourable location.
Assuming a luminosity of \SI{250}{fb^{-1}} in the LHC Run~3, a detector with a mass of \SI{830}{kg} located in TI18 can observe and study about two thousand high-energy neutrino interactions of all flavours.
The role of an off-axis setup has been emphasised in a recent paper~\cite{Beni:2020yfy}.
The main physics goals of the SND@LHC experiment are summarised in the following sections.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{images/Introduction/neutrinos_snd.pdf}
\caption{Energy spectrum of the different types of incoming neutrinos and anti-neutrinos as predicted by the DPMJET~\cite{Roesler_2001,DPMJET}/FLUKA~\cite{Fluka2,Fluka3} simulation.
The result of the simulation has been normalised to produce neutrino spectra for \SI{250}{fb^{-1}}.}
\label{fig:neutrinos_snd}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Neutrino physics}
Figure~\ref{fig:neutrinos_snd} shows the energy spectrum of incoming neutrinos and anti-neutrinos in the pseudo-rapidity range covered by the SND@LHC detector, ${7.2 < \eta < 8.4}$, normalised to \SI{250}{fb^{-1}}.
About 1700 charged-current (CC) and 550 neutral current (NC) neutrino interactions are expected in the target volume, mainly from muon neutrinos (75\%) and electron neutrinos (23\%).
In the explored $\eta$ range, electron neutrinos and anti-neutrinos are predominantly produced by charmed-hadron decays.
Therefore, if one assumes that the deep-inelastic charged-current cross-section of the electron neutrino follows the SM prediction, as also supported by the HERA results in their SM interpretation~\cite{Chekanov:2003vw}, electron neutrinos can be used as a probe of the production of charm.
Taking into account uncertainties in the correlation between the yield of charmed hadrons in a given $\eta$ region with the neutrinos in the measured $\eta$ region, it was evaluated that the measurement of the charmed-hadron production in $pp$ collision can be done with a statistical uncertainty of about \SI{5}{\percent}, while the leading contribution to the uncertainty is the systematic error of \SI{35}{\percent}.
Furthermore, the measurement of the charmed hadrons can be translated into a measurement of the corresponding open charm production in the same rapidity window, given the linear correlation between the parent charm quark and the hadron.
The dominant partonic process for associated charm production at the LHC is the scattering of two gluons producing a $c\overline{c}$ pair~\cite{Gleisberg:2003xi}.
The average lowest momentum fraction ($x$) of interacting gluons probed by SND@LHC is around \num{e-6}.
The extraction of the gluon PDF at such low values of $x$, where it is completely unknown, could provide valuable information for future experiments probing the same low $x$ range.
It can also reduce uncertainties on the flux of very-high-energy (PeV scale) atmospheric neutrinos produced in charm decays, essential for the evidence of neutrinos from astrophysical sources~\cite{Bhattacharya:2016jce,Jeong:2021vqp}.
Since the three neutrino flavours can be identified, the lepton flavour universality can be tested in the neutrino sector by measuring the ratio of $\nu_e$/$\nu_\tau$ and $\nu_e$/$\nu_\mu$ interactions.
Both $\nu_e$ and $\nu_\tau$ are mainly produced by semi-leptonic and fully leptonic decays of charmed hadrons.
Unlike $\nu_\tau$s that are produced almost only in $D_s$ decays, $\nu_e$s are produced in the decay of all ground-state charmed hadrons, essentially $D^0$, $D$, $D_s$ and $\Lambda_c$.
Therefore, the $\nu_e/\nu_\tau$ ratio depends only on the charm hadronisation fractions and decay branching ratios. The systematic uncertainties due to the charm-quark production mechanism cancel out, and the ratio becomes sensitive to the $\nu$-nucleon interaction cross-section ratio of the two neutrino species.
The estimate of the branching ratios has a systematic uncertainty of about 22\% while the statistical uncertainty is dominated by the low statistics of the $\nu_\tau$ sample, which corresponds to a 30\% accuracy.
The situation is rather different for $\nu_e$s when compared to $\nu_\mu$s.
The $\nu_\mu$s are much more abundant but heavily contaminated by $\pi$ and $K$ decays, and therefore the production mechanism cannot be considered the same as in the case of $\nu_e$.
However, this contamination is mostly concentrating at low energies.
Above \SI{600}{GeV}, the contamination is predicted to be reduced to about 35\%, and stable with the energy. Moreover, charmed-hadrons decays have practically equal branching ratios into electron and muon neutrinos.
Therefore the $\nu_e/\nu_\mu$ ratio is not affected by the systematic uncertainties in the weighted branching fractions, but rather by uncertainties due to $\pi$ and $K$ production in this $\eta$ range and to their propagation through the machine elements along the beamline, that can be assessed thanks to the available measurements used to constrain the simulation.
The $\nu_e/\nu_\mu$ ratio provides a test of the lepton flavour universality with an uncertainty of 15\%, with an equal 10\% statistical and systematic contribution.
SND@LHC plans to measure the ratio between charged-current (CC) and neutral-current (NC) interactions as an internal consistency test.
Indeed, by summing over neutrinos and anti-neutrinos, the ratio between NC and CC deep-inelastic interaction cross-sections at a given energy can be written as a simple function of the Weinberg angle, with a correction factor accounting for the non-isoscalarity of the target~\cite{Alekhin:2015byh}.
In the approximation that the differential $\nu$ and $\bar{\nu}$ fluxes, as a function of their energy, are equal, the same formula also applies to the observed interactions since the convolution with the flux would bring the same factor everywhere, that then cancels out in the ratio.
The statistical uncertainty on the NC/CC ratio for observed events is expected to be lower than \SI{5}{\percent} while the systematic uncertainty on the unfolded ratio amounts to about \SI{10}{\percent}.
\subsection*{Feebly Interacting Particles}
The SND@LHC experiment is also capable of performing model-independent direct searches for FIPs. The background from neutrino interactions can be rejected by making a time-of-flight (TOF) measurement.
The hybrid nature of the apparatus, which combines emulsion trackers and electronic detectors, makes it possible to disentangle the scattering of massive FIPs and neutrinos, with a significance that depends on the particle mass.
FIPs may be produced in the $pp$ scattering at the LHC interaction point, propagate to the detector and decay or scatter inside it. A recent work \cite{Boyarsky:2021moj} summarises SND@LHC sensitivity to physics beyond the Standard Model considering the scatterings of light dark matter particles $\chi$ via leptophobic $U(1)_B$ mediator, as well as decays of Heavy Neutral Leptons, dark scalars and dark photons.
The elastic scattering was considered, showing an excess of neutrino-like elastic scatterings over the SM yield due to the $\chi+p$ process.
The excellent spatial resolution of nuclear emulsions and the muon identification system makes SND@LHC also suited to search for the decay of neutral mediators decaying in two charged particles.
\subsection{Detector layout}
\label{subsec:detector}
The detector layout was developed to allow for the identification of the three neutrino flavours and the direct search for FIPs.
This requires three detector elements: a vertex detector with a good enough resolution to disentangle the neutrino-interaction vertex from the one of the tau lepton decay, a calorimeter to measure both the electromagnetic and hadronic energy, with also a good time resolution, and a muon system to identify the muon produced in $\nu_\mu$ charged current interactions and in the muonic decay of the tau lepton.
The apparatus is composed of a target region followed downstream by a hadronic calorimeter and a muon identification system.
Upstream of the target region, two planes of scintillator bars act as a veto for charged particles, mostly muons coming from IP1.
The target region, with a mass of about \SI{830}{kg}, is instrumented with five walls of Emulsion Cloud Chambers (ECC), each followed by a Scintillating Fibre (SciFi) plane
The ECC technology alternates emulsion films, acting as tracking devices with micrometric accuracy, with passive material acting as the neutrino target.
Tungsten is used as a passive material to maximize the mass within the available volume.
The SciFi planes provide the timestamp for the reconstructed events and have an appropriate time resolution for the time-of-flight measurements of particles from IP1.
The combination of the emulsion target and the target tracker also acts as an electromagnetic calorimeter, with a total of 85 $X_0$.
Veto, emulsion target and target tracker are contained in a borated polyethylene/acrylic box which has the dual function of acting as a neutron shield from low energy neutrons and maintaining controlled temperature and humidity levels in order to guarantee optimal conditions for emulsion films.
The hadronic calorimeter and muon identification system are located downstream of the target and consist of eight iron slabs making up 9.5 interaction lengths $\lambda_{\mathrm{int}}$ in total, each followed by one or two planes of scintillating bars. The hadronic shower starts developing already in the target region, which adds on average 1.5 $\lambda_{\mathrm{int}}$, for an average total length of 11 $\lambda_{\mathrm{int}}$, thus providing a good coverage of the hadronic showers. The muon identification is mainly based on the last three planes of scintillator bars. These planes have double layers with narrower bars located both vertically and horizontally for higher granularity.
The layout of the detector, with the exclusion of the neutron shield, can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:layout}.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{images/Introduction/layout.png}
\caption{Layout of the SND@LHC experiment.}
\label{fig:layout}
\end{figure}
The detector exploits all the available space in the TI18 tunnel to cover the desired range in pseudo-rapidity.
Figure~\ref{fig:sideview} shows the side and top views of the detector positioned inside the tunnel.
The size of the tunnel, the tilted slope of the floor, as well as the distance of tunnel walls and floor from the nominal collision axis, imposed several constraints to the detector design since no civil engineering work could have been done in time for the operation in Run 3.
The detector layout was therefore optimised in order to find the best compromise between geometrical constraints and the following physics requirements: a good calorimetric measurement of the energy requiring about 10 $\lambda_{\mathrm{int}}$, a good muon identification efficiency requiring enough material to absorb hadrons, a transverse size of the target region having the desired azimuthal angular acceptance.
The energy measurement and the muon identification set a constraint on the minimum length of the detector.
With the constraints from the tunnel, this requirement competes with the azimuthal angular acceptance that determines the overall flux intercepted and therefore the total number of observed interactions.
The geometrical constraints also restrict the detector to the first quadrant only around the nominal collision axis.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{images/Introduction/Side_top_det_H.png}
\caption{Side and top views of the SND@LHC detector in the TI18 tunnel~\cite{snd_technical_proposal}.}
\label{fig:sideview}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The identification of the neutrino flavour is done in charged current interactions by identifying the charged lepton produced at the primary vertex (see Section \ref{sec:offline}).
Electrons will be clearly separated from neutral pions thanks to the micrometric accuracy and fine sampling of the emulsion cloud chambers, which will enable photon conversions downstream of the neutrino interaction vertex to be identified.
Muons will be identified by the electronic detectors as the most penetrating particles.
Tau leptons will be identified topologically in the ECCs, through the observation of the tau decay vertex, together with the absence of any electron or muon at the primary vertex, following the technique developed by OPERA~\cite{Agafonova:2010dc,Agafonova:2018auq}.
FIPs will be identified through their scattering off atoms of the emulsion target material.
In the case of a FIP elastic scattering off atomic electrons, the experimental signature consists of an isolated recoil electron that can be identified through the development of an electromagnetic shower in the target region.
For FIPs interacting elastically with a proton, instead, an isolated proton will produce a hadronic shower in the detector.
In both cases the background can be reduced down to a negligible level by topological and kinematic selections.
The timing information will be used to confirm any excess of events with the expected signature~\cite{snd_technical_proposal}.
\section{Hadronic calorimeter and muon system}
\label{sec:muon}
\subsection{Overview}
Downstream of the target region lies the hadronic calorimeter and muon system, shown in Figure \ref{fig:muon_tot}.
Its primary purpose is to identify passing-through muons and, together with the SciFi, it serves as a sampling hadronic calorimeter, enabling measurement of the energy of hadronic jets.
It comprises eight layers of scintillating planes interleaved with \SI{20}{cm}-thick iron slabs, which acts as passive material with a thickness of $9.5\lambda_{\rm int}$. This adds up to an average total of $11\lambda_{\rm int}$ for a shower originating in the target region.
Muons are identified as being the most penetrating particles through all eight planes.
The system is further divided in two sections: the first five upstream layers (US), made of \SI{6}{cm}-thick horizontal scintillating bars, and the last three downstream layers (DS), made of fine-grained horizontal and vertical scintillating bars, illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:muon_us_ds}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/muon_tot.pdf}
\caption{Picture of the hadronic calorimeter and muon system installed in TI18.}
\label{fig:muon_tot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/muon_sys.png}
\caption{Illustration of an upstream and a downstream planes.}
\label{fig:muon_us_ds}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Upstream system}
The first five US layers are similar to the veto planes, albeit with different dimensions. Each layer consists of ten stacked bars of EJ-200, each bar having dimensions \num{1 x 6 x 82.5} \SI{}{cm^3}.
The length was chosen to be longer than the iron blocks to allow the FE to be placed outside the gap between them, reducing the space needed for the gap and overall length of the muon system along the collision axis, a critical parameter in the apparatus design as described in Section~\ref{sec:introduction}. The bars are wrapped in aluminized Mylar foil in the same fashion as the veto system.
Every bar end is viewed by eight SiPMs; six Hamamatsu S14160-6050HS (\num{6 x 6} \SI{}{mm^2}, \SI{50}{\micro m} pitch) and two Hamamatsu S14160-3010PS~\cite{sipm_3010_url} (\num{3 x 3}\SI{}{mm^2}, \SI{10}{\micro m} pitch) SiPMs.
The SiPMs are arranged on a custom PCB as shown in Figure \ref{fig:PCB_US}, which is read out by a front-end TOFPET2 board (see Section~\ref{sec:daq}).
The placement of SiPMs along a bar can be seen on the left of Figure~\ref{fig:US_pcb_align}.
The two smaller-size SiPMs are used to increase the dynamic range for each bar, which has to cover the low light yield generated by minimum ionizing particles and the large light yield in case of hadronic showers created in the target region or iron blocks.
The latter can lead to large charged-particle fluxes through the bars, and hence to large signals, which can saturate the larger SiPMs but not the smaller ones.
Each SiPM is read out as a single channel, giving 80 channels per PCB totaling 800 channels for all US layers.
The PCBs are aligned to the bars within \SI{1}{mm}, as shown on the right in Figure~\ref{fig:US_pcb_align}.
The space between the SiPMs and bars on one side is filled with the same silicon epoxy gel (\SI{\sim 1}{mm} thick) as in the veto, while the PCB on the opposite end is pressed against the bars to minimize the air gap. This leads to a small asymmetry between left and right side signals for a given plane, which however does not affect the detection efficiency.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/pcb_us_front1.png}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/pcb_us_back.png}
\caption{The two sides of the PCB for the US muon system.}
\label{fig:PCB_US}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{images/us_align2.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{images/us_align1.jpg}
\caption{Placement (left) and alignment (right) of an US PCB.}
\label{fig:US_pcb_align}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Downstream system}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/barw2.png}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/DSbarstack.jpg}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/pcb_ds_front.jpg}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/pcb_ds_back.jpg}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/DSstackheads.jpg}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.4\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/DSPCBmount.jpg}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.55\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/DSHandV.jpg} \caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/DSH+V.jpg}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{DS fabrication overview. From top left to bottom right: a) stack of a few and b) a plane of \num{60} stacked scintillating bars, individually wrapped in aluminized mylar foils; c) the two sides of the PCB hosting the SiPMs, which are positioned at regular \SI{1.1}{cm} intervals; d) view of bar ends of a stack in its aluminum frame; e) SiPMs PCB covering the stack bar ends; f) and g) horizontal and vertical bar planes before and after assembly to form a DS muon station.}
\label{fig:DS}
\end{figure}
Muon identification is completed with three high-granularity DS stations, placed further downstream, for providing the muon position with a resolution of better than \SI{1}{cm}
(Figures~\ref{fig:muon_tot},~\ref{fig:muon_us_ds}).
Each station consists of two planes of thin scintillating (EJ-200) bars
(Figure~\ref{fig:DS}):
one of \num{60} horizontal bars (\num{1 x 1 x 82.5} \SI{}{cm^3} each), and one of \num{60} vertical bars (\num{1 x 1 x 63.5} \SI{}{cm^3} each). The third station has an additional plane of vertical bars.
Every horizontal bar is read out by one SiPM (Hamamatsu S14160-6050HS) on either end; verticals bar have one SiPM only on the top edge, since the bottom is end is located as close as possible to the floor in order to maximise the detector acceptance.
Sixty SiPMs are mounted at regular intervals of \SI{1.1}{cm} on a single PCB, placed at the edge of the bar stack. The total number of channels for DS part of the muon system is \num{600}.
Bars are individually wrapped in aluminized mylar foil.
Because of the bar shape, most of the light collected by the edge SiPM is indirect. Therefore a tool was developed in order to ensure that the aluminized mylar foil is very tightly wrapped around the scintillating bar, minimising the light loss because of multiple reflections. For vertical bars, the wrapping of the foil at the bar end without SiPM was terminated with an additional flat layer that optimises reflection.
Scintillating bars in the same plane can differ in dimensions and be out of square from one edge to the other within fabrication tolerances. Since the SiPMs are locked in position on the PCB, assembling tools have been developed to ensure that the one-to-one alignment of SiPMs and bar edges is preserved along the entire stack: \SI{6}{mm} wide SiPMs are centred on the \SI{10}{mm} wide bar edge with an uncertainty of \SI{1}{mm}.
The quality of the contact between SiPMs and bar edges can differ because of differences in bar lengths.
Thus it was decided to sort bars in groups of similar lengths, maximising uniformity in the same plane, and adjust the distance of the PCB, so that the SiPM-to-bar-edge gap was measured to be less than \SI{100}{\micro m} for all bars.
\subsection{Low voltage and SiPM bias voltage}
The low voltage for powering the DAQ boards and the bias voltage for the SiPMs are provided by CAEN power supplies, described in Section~\ref{subsec:readout}.
For the US system, two separate HV bias lines are used for the two types of SiPMs, connected with two LEMO connectors on each PCB, as seen in Figure~\ref{fig:PCB_US}, while for the DS a single LEMO connector is used to power all SiPMs.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.35\textheight]{images/align1.pdf}
\includegraphics[height=0.35\textheight]{images/align2.pdf}
\caption{Pictures indicating the location of the alignment spheres on a muon plane, circled in red.}
\label{fig:muon_align}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Mechanical support}
Bars and PCBs are housed in aluminum frames that provide light tightness.
The thickness of the frames is \SI{2}{mm} and the rectangular flanges are \SI{4}{cm} wide.
An aluminum cover shields the PCBs from outside light and protects it from heat generated in the FE board, located on the opposite side of the cover.
A Kapton gasket between the PCB and flange prevents electrical shorts between the electronics and frame.
The inside of the aluminum cover is also lined with Kapton to electrically isolate the PCB.
\subsection{Alignment}
Frame support mechanics are mounted on the iron blocks; adjustment screws allow for correcting the placement in position, rotation and tilt. Individual frames are installed in gaps between the iron blocks, and then fixed to the support mechanics. Three spherical alignment markers, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:muon_align}, are mounted on each frame for global survey measurements. Alignment was performed by the Geodetic Metrology Group within the Beams Department (BE-GM) at CERN, with each marker aligned with respect to the nominal positions within 1--\SI{2}{mm}.
\section{Offline software and simulation}
\label{sec:offline}
The offline software framework, \texttt{sndsw}, is based on the FairRoot framework~\cite{FAIRROOT},
and makes use of the experience gained with the FairShip software suite,
developed within the SHiP collaboration~\cite{Anelli:2015pba}. The reconstruction and analysis tools developed by the SHiP collaboration had been successfully applied to the SND@LHC use cases and further improved.
The offline software is developed, maintained, and distributed on Github. \texttt{sndsw} and its dependencies are built from source and are configured using the AliBuild tool, developed within the ALICE Collaboration for their upgrade software. The recipes for the dependencies are shared with ALICE and SHiP, where possible, to reduce the maintenance of the framework. Specific patches and recipes for software uniquely used by SND@LHC are added, where required. Container images with the dependencies as well as an installation on the CVMFS are provided for various use cases.
Raw and reconstructed data from testbeam and TI18 commissioning are available on EOS for analysis.
\subsection{Detector geometry}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{images/offline/snd_geant.png}
\caption{The SND@LHC detector layout and the TI18 tunnel geometry as implemented in the \textsc{Geant4} simulation.}
\label{fig:sw_geant4}
\end{figure}
The detector geometry is implemented using the TGeo package of ROOT and used in the simulation by \textsc{Geant4} as well as in the reconstruction. A model of the detector and the surrounding tunnel can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:sw_geant4}. Electronic detectors and emulsion films are implemented as sensitive volumes. For the electronic detectors, the full granularity is implemented, from scintillator bars to individual scintillating fibres. The \textsc{Geant4} simulation stops with the deposition of energy in the sensitive detectors. The digitisation step takes this energy and simulates an electronic signal, taking into account the transformation to photons, the light propagation and absorption along the scintillating fibre or bar, the photodetection efficiency of the SiPMs and the response of the front-end.
\subsection{Simulation}
Several simulation engines are available. Muons from IP1 simulated by FLUKA~\cite{Fluka2,Fluka3} and transported through the detector by \textsc{Geant4}~\cite{Geant4}, muon deep inelastic scattering using Pythia6~\cite{Pythia6}, DPMJET3 (Dual Parton Model, including charm)~\cite{Roesler_2001} or Pythia8~\cite{Sjostrand:2014zea} for neutrino production at IP1 and GENIE~\cite{cite:GENIE} for the neutrino interactions in the detector target. In addition, \textsc{Geant4} had been used to investigate the neutron shielding performance of various materials.
\subsection{Data reconstruction}
The event reconstruction is performed in two phases: the first one is performed during the data taking using the response of the electronic detectors. The second phase incorporates the emulsion data, that will be available about six months after the exposure.
First data became available from the testbeam campaign in H8 for the hadronic calorimeter and muon system, using a pion beam with different energies for the energy calibration studies. Data from a parasitic run in H6 with in addition the SciFi and Veto detector installed is also available.
Theis data was used to make a first internal space alignment of the SciFi detector, with a subsequent alignment of the other detectors with respect to the SciFi. This will be repeated with the first data in TI18. The data was also used to determine the light propagation speed in the scintillator bars as well as the absorption length, as reported in Section~\ref{sec:commissioning}.
During Run~3 operation, the upstream veto planes will tag incoming muons that will be used for fine alignment between detector planes. The occurrence of a neutrino interaction or a FIP scattering
will be first detected by the target tracker and the muon system. Electromagnetic showers are expected to be absorbed within the target region and will therefore be identified by the target tracker, while muons in the final state will be reconstructed by the muon system. In addition, the detector as a whole acts as a sampling calorimeter. The combination of data taken from both systems will be used to measure the hadronic and the electromagnetic energy of the event. A schematic representation of a $\nu_e$ and a $\nu_\mu$ charged-current interaction in the SND@LHC detector is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:event_reconstruction}.
\begin{figure} [hbtp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{images/offline/event_display.png}
\caption{Event display of a $\nu_\mu$ (a) and a $\nu_e$ (b) simulated charged-current interaction in the SND@LHC detector. Detectors are shown in top view on the top and in side view on the bottom.}
\label{fig:event_reconstruction}
\end{figure}
The reconstruction of the emulsion data begins during the scanning procedure. Optical microscopes \cite{Alexandrov:2016tyi,Alexandrov:2015kzs,Alexandrov:2017qpw} analyse the whole thickness of the emulsion, acquiring tomographic images at equally spaced depths.
After digitizing the acquired images an image processor recognizes the grains as \textit{clusters}, i.e.~groups of pixels of a given size and shape. Thus, the track in the emulsion layer (usually referred to as \textit{micro-track}) is obtained by connecting clusters belonging to different levels. Since an emulsion film is formed by two emulsion layers, the connection of the two micro-tracks through the plastic base provides a reconstruction of the particle's trajectory in the emulsion film, called \textit{base-track}.
The reconstruction of particle tracks in the full volume requires connecting base-tracks in consecutive films. In order to define a global reference system, a set of affine transformations has to be computed to account for the different reference frames used for data taken in different films. Muons coming from the IP will be used for fine film-to-film alignment. Once all emulsion films are aligned, \textit{volume-tracks} (i.e., charged tracks which crossed several emulsion films) can be reconstructed. The offline reconstruction tools currently used for track finding and vertex identification are based on the Kalman Filter algorithm and are developed in \mbox{FEDRA} (Frame-work for Emulsion Data Reconstruction and Analysis)~\cite{Tyukov:2006ny}, an object-oriented tool based on C++ and developed in the ROOT \cite{Brun:2000es} framework.
The topologies of some signal events that can be reconstructed in the SND@LHC brick are illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:neutrino_int}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.01\columnwidth]{images/offline/neu_int.png}
\caption{Event display of a $\nu_\mu$ (a) and a $\nu_e$ (b) simulated charged-current interaction in the emulsion target}.
\label{fig:neutrino_int}
\end{figure}
About twenty neutrino interactions are expected in each brick, given the replacement at every $\sim$25fb$^{-1}$. The matching with the adjacent target tracker plane will be performed by aligning the centre-of-gravity of events reconstructed in the two detectors, thus assigning timing information to interactions reconstructed in the brick. The emulsion data will be also used to complement the target tracker system for the energy measurement of electromagnetic showers.
\subsection{Emulsion scanning system}
The emulsion readout is performed in dedicated laboratories equipped with automated optical microscopes, as the one shown in the left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:microscope}.
The system analyses the whole thickness of the emulsion, acquiring tomographic images at equally spaced depths by moving the focal plane along the vertical axis.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{images/offline/microscope.png}
\caption{(Left) Optical microscope used for the SND@LHC emulsion film scanning. (Right) Schematic drawing of the scanning procedure.}
\label{fig:microscope}
\end{figure}
A recently developed upgrade of the European Scanning System (ESS) \cite{Armenise:2005yh, Arrabito:2006rv, DeSerio:2005yd} combines the use of a faster camera with smaller sensor pixels and a higher number of pixels, a lower-magnification objective lens and a new software LASSO \cite{Alexandrov:2016tyi,Alexandrov:2015kzs}, allowing to increase the scanning speed to 180\,cm$^2$/h \cite{Alexandrov:2017qpw}, more than a factor ten faster than before.
The lens of the microscope guarantees a sub-micron resolution and, having a working distance longer than 300\,$\upmu$m in the direction perpendicular to the film, allows for a scan of both sides of the emulsion film.
In order to make the optical path homogeneous in the film, an immersion lens in an oil with the same refraction index of the emulsion is used. A single field of view is 800$\times$600\,$\upmu$m$^2$.
Larger areas are scanned by repeating the data acquisition on a grid of adjacent fields of view.
The images grabbed by the digital camera are sent to a vision processing board in the control workstation to suppress noise.
An implementation of the scanning system with different objective lens and camera and with polarised light, profiting of the plasmon resonance effect~\cite{GarciadeAbajo:2009zz}, has achieved a resolution on the nanometric scale~\cite{Alexandrov:2020gra}.
The total emulsion-film surface to be scanned in SND@LHC is expected to be about $44\,$m$^2$ every six months, thus requiring at least five scanning systems fully devoted to this activity in order for the readout time to be approximately equal to the exposure time.
\section{Ideas for an HL-LHC upgrade}
\label{sec:outlook}
An advanced version of the SND@LHC detector is envisaged for the HL-LHC. It will consist of two detectors: one placed in the same $\eta$ region as SND@LHC, i.e.~$7.2 < \eta < 8.4$ and the other one in the region $4 < \eta < 5$. The first apparatus will have a similar angular acceptance as for the SND@LHC and will perform the charm production measurement and lepton flavour universality tests with neutrinos at the percent level; the second detector will benefit from the overlap with LHCb to reduce systematic uncertainties and will perform neutrino cross-section measurements. In order to increase the azimuth angle coverage of the second detector, the idea is to search for a location in existing caverns, closer to the interaction point. We consider this second module as a near detector meant for systematic uncertainty reduction.
Each detector will be made of three elements. The upstream one is the target region for the vertex reconstruction and the electromagnetic energy measurement with a calorimetric approach. It will be followed downstream by a muon identification and hadronic calorimeter system. The third and most downstream element will be a magnet for the muon charge and momentum measurement, thus allowing for neutrino/anti-neutrino separation for $\nu_\mu$ and for $\nu_\tau$ in the muonic decay channel of the $\tau$ lepton.
The target will be made of thin sensitive layers interleaved with tungsten plates, for a total mass of $\sim$ 5 tons. The use of nuclear emulsion at the HL-LHC is prohibitive due to the very high intensity that would make the replacement rate of the the target incompatible with technical stops. The Collaboration is investigating the use of compact electronic trackers with high spatial resolution fulfilling both tasks of vertex reconstruction with micrometric accuracy and electromagnetic energy measurement. The hadronic calorimeter and the muon identification system will be larger than 10~$\lambda$ which will bring the average length of the hadronic calorimeter above 11.5~$\lambda$, thus improving the muon identification efficiency and energy resolution.
The magnetic field strength is assumed to be about 1 T over a $\sim$2 m length.
The configuration of the detectors allows efficiently distinguishing between all three neutrino flavours and measure their energy. The SND@LHC upgrade will open a unique opportunity to probe physics of heavy flavour production at the LHC in a region inaccessible to other experiments.
\section{Target Tracker and electromagnetic calorimeter}
\label{sec:scifi}
\subsection{Overview}
The Target Tracker system is made of five scintillating fibre (SciFi) planes interleaving the five target walls.
The SciFi technology is well suited to cover large surfaces in a low track density environment\footnote{The expected number of tracks is less than one per LHC bunch crossing.}, where a \SI{\sim100}{\micro m} spatial resolution is required.
The role of SciFi trackers is two-fold: assign a timestamp to neutrino interactions reconstructed in the ECC walls and provide an energy measurement of electromagnetic showers.
Moreover, the combination of SciFi and scintillating bars of the muon detector will also act as a non-homogenous hadronic calorimeter for the measurement of the energy of the hadronic jet produced in the neutrino interaction and hence for the neutrino energy.
The matching with events reconstructed in the target walls is performed by connecting the centre of gravity of electromagnetic and hadronic showers, reconstructed in the SciFi immediately downstream of the ECC where the interaction occurred, with tracks reconstructed in emulsions. The large multiplicity of tracks produced in neutrino interactions and the high density of passing-through muons prevent a track-by-track matching between SciFi and ECC.
The measurement of electromagnetic shower energy is based on information provided both by ECC bricks and Target Tracker planes.
The five target walls (\SI{\sim 17}{X_0} each) interleaved with SciFi tracker modules, form a coarse sampling calorimeter.
The two main components employed in this SciFi tracker, the scintillating fibre mats and the multichannel SiPM photo-detectors, were developed by the EPFL group for the LHCb SciFi Tracker~\cite{LHCb_Tracker_TDR}.
The read-out electronics is different from the one used in LHCb and it has been optimised to have an improved time resolution and to detect electromagnetic showers.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{images/SciFi/SciFi_cosmics_lab.jpg}
\caption{The SciFi tracker detector setup in the lab for cosmic ray test. The active area of a tracker module is \SI{40 x 40}{cm} and consists of \num{5} $xy$ fibre planes.}
\label{fig:scifi_cosmics_lab}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The SciFi modules}
The SciFi modules for SND@LHC, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:scifi_cosmics_lab}, are closely following the design of the \SI{2.5}{m} long modules built for LHCb.
The double-cladded polystyrene scintillating fibres from Kuraray (SCSF-78MJ), with a diameter of \SI{250}{\micro m}, are blue emitting fibres with a decay time of \SI{2.8}{ns}.
The fibres are arranged in six densely-packed staggered layers, forming fibre mats of \SI{1.35}{mm} thickness. A picture of the cross section of such a mat is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:six_layer_mat}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{images/SciFi/OpticalScan.png}
\caption{The fibre mat is composed of six layers of fibres glued with a titan oxide loaded epoxy glue to suppress cross talk between fibres.}
\label{fig:six_layer_mat}
\end{figure}
The fibre winding and gluing process has been developed within the LHCb SciFi collaboration.
A dedicated winding machine, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fibre_machine}, with tension and position control as well as optical feedback has been engineered.
Fibre mats produced for the SND@LHC tracker are \SI{133}{mm} wide and \SI{399}{mm} long; they are integrated into a fibre plane with less than \SI{500}{\micro m} dead zones
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{images/SciFi/WindingMachine.png}
\caption{\label{fig:fibre_machine} The winding wheel with a circumference of \SI{2.5}{m} allows to wind five \SI{40}{cm} mats. The winding process has been refined and adjusted in order to obtain precise and regular fibre mats.}
\end{figure}
A polycarbonate end-piece is glued and an optical surface cut is applied to each end of the fibre mat.
One side of the mat is brought in direct contact with the epoxy entrance window of the photo-detector and the other end can optionally have a mirror or a light injection fibre coupling.
For the SND@LHC modules, a light-leaking fibre is inserted for calibration purposes.
\subsection{The SiPM photo-detectors and readout electronics}
The readout consists of the photo-detector (S13552 SiPM multichannel arrays by Hamamatsu) at the end of the fibre module, a short Kapton flex PCB holding the photo-detector and signal connectors and the front-end electronics board, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:scifi_sipm_flex}.
The light tightness of the module is ensured by a seal on the flat Kapton flex, the aluminium module frame and an opaque Tedlar sheet on both sides of the module.
This encloses the photo-detector and the entire fibre region. The light tightness is evaluated during the assembly phase and leaks closed with glue.
The photo-detectors are not actively cooled, as their heat dissipation is low and the expected noise is acceptable at the operation temperature of \SI{15}{\degreeCelsius}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.1\textwidth,angle=270]{images/SciFi/scifi-flex.jpeg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:scifi_sipm_flex}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/SciFi/sipm.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:scifi_sipm_details}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{SiPM arrays used for the light detection in the SciFi, mounted on the flex (a). The connector on the bottom mates to the front-end board, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fe-board}. Details of the SiPM array (b).}
\label{fig:scifi_sipm}
\end{figure}
The SiPM multichannel array is optimised for low light-intensity detection.
For application in SND@LHC, the SciFi performance has to be tuned for maximising the hit detection efficiency at an acceptable noise rate.
The array used in SND@LHC, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:scifi_sipm}, has an active channel area of \SI[product-units=power]{0.25 x 1.625}{mm}, a peak photo-detection efficiency (PDE) of \SI{47}{\%} and a gain of \num{3.6e6} at \SI{3.5}{V} over-voltage.
To obtain a high PDE, the choice of large pixels \SI{62.5 x 57.5}{\micro m}, leading to an array of \SI{26 x 4}{} pixels per channel, significantly limits the linearity and the dynamic range to about 50 photo-electrons per channel.
For this operation condition, the light yield (LY) for a minimum ionising particle (MIP) traversing the fibre plane in the center of the module, is \num{\sim 25} photo-electrons (PE).
The readout chip chosen for this tracker is the TOFPET2 ASIC~\cite{tofpet2_url,Schug:2018klm,Nadig:2019rjw}, described in Section~\ref{subsec:tofpet}.
Its power consumption is \SI{1.5}{W} per \num{64} readout channels, including the loss for linear voltage regulation.
A water cooling system has been chosen to counteract limited convection due to dense packing between modules.
To simplify the mechanical design of the water cooling, the FPGA of the DAQ boards is connected to the large aluminium support of the module and not to the water cooling.
The thermal design has been verified and the temperature lies within the required range during operation.
The heat dissipation of the electronics into the target enclosure is \SI{\sim 24}{W} per board or a total of \SI{\sim 720}{W} for the complete SciFi tracker.
\subsection{Low voltage and SiPM bias voltage}
The power supply for each DAQ board is provided with a CAEN 2519 module, hosted in one of the CAEN mainframes (see Section~\ref{subsec:readout}).
To optimise the cost for the bias voltage of the SiPMs, a single channel per DAQ board is used.
A group selection of SiPM arrays allows to minimise the break down voltage spread among SiPMs biased by the same bias voltage.
\subsection{Time resolution}
For the SciFi tracker, the time resolution is limited by the number of detected photons and the scintillator decay time.
A coincidence time resolution (CTR) of \SI{350}{ps} between two planes of the size \SI[product-units=power]{133 x 133}{mm} has been demonstrated with minimum ionizing particles: this corresponds to a single plane time resolution of about \SI{250}{ps}.
For multiple tracks or showers, the total number of photons is significantly larger and the time resolution better.
\subsection{Calibration}
The DAQ electronics provide an electrical injection signal, synchronous to all TOFPET2 FE chips on one board.
This allows for a first-order time calibration between channels on the same board.
Subsequently, a fine time calibration based on muon tracks among different boards and layers can be used to correct and verify the time calibration based on the collected data during the runs.
The studies from a DESY test beam in October 2019 show that, based on the initial time alignment, the time calibration for channels can be improved using data with single tracks producing multiple hits in all ten SciFi layers.
When detecting electromagnetic showers in a $x$-$y$ detector layout, a large number of tracks are produced in a small region of space and therefore only a projection of the shower profile can be obtained.
Additionally, the pixelised silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) suffers from non-linear amplitude response due to the limited number of pixels.
With a light yield of \SI{25}{PE} and a total of \num{104} pixels per channel, a pixel occupancy of almost \SI{50}{\percent} is expected for a shower track density of \num{2} tracks per channel (\SI{250}{\micro m}).
Beyond this track density, a strong non-linear response of the detector signal is expected.
The saturation is of statistical nature and can be corrected to make the detector response linear.
To obtain a correlation between the measured signal amplitude by the TOFPET2 electronics and the number of MIP tracks in the detector, a \textsc{Geant4} simulation will be used to model the EM shower development and the SiPM saturation.
\subsection{Alignment}
The mechanical alignment between the SciFi planes and the emulsion boxes is ensured with mechanical precision pins, constraining the relative position between the two objects.
Because of the large number of tracks from high-momentum muons traversing the target, an accurate spatial alignment between SciFi planes can be obtained by using the tracks themselves.
An online alignment is not required for data acquisition and noise suppression.
Each SiPM array of \num{128} channels is expected to have a constant shift relative to the nominal position
and each fibre mat (three per detection plane) has to be corrected for its constant rotation angle.
These corrections have been studied during the commissioning in the SPS H6 beam line, presented in Section~\ref{subsec:commissioning_h6}.
\section{Target and vertex detector}
\label{sec:target}
\subsection{Overview}
The emulsion target is based on the Emulsion Cloud Chamber (ECC) technique, that makes use of nuclear emulsion films interleaved with passive layers to build up a tracking device with sub-micrometric spatial and milliradian angular resolution, as demonstrated by the OPERA experiment~\cite{Acquafredda:2009zz}.
It is capable of detecting $\tau$ leptons~\cite{Agafonova:2018auq} and charmed hadrons~\cite{Agafonova:2014khd} by disentangling their production and decay vertices.
It is also suited for FIP detection through the direct observation of their scattering off electrons or nucleons in the passive plates.
The ECC technology alternates 300-micron thick emulsion films, acting as tracking devices with micrometric accuracy, with 1-mm thick tungsten plates acting as the neutrino target.
The reconstruction of track segments in consecutive films provide the vertex reconstruction with an accuracy at the micron level. The fine segmentation of active films interleaving tungsten plates is motivated by the longitudinal resolution required to observe the tau lepton track and by the need to keep the combinatorial background in the association of track segments sufficiently low over an integrated luminosity of about 25 fb$^{-1}$, after which the emulsion films are replaced. It also makes the emulsion-tungsten ECC a high-sampling electromagnetic calorimeter with more than three active layers every radiation length, $X_0$, essential for electron identification and discrimination against neutral pion decays~\cite{Agafonova:2018dkb}.
The emulsion target is made of five walls with a sensitive transverse size of \SI[product-units=power]{384 x 384}{mm}.
Each wall consists of four cells, called \emph{bricks} as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:emulsion_target}.
Each brick is made of 60 emulsion films with a transverse size of \SI[product-units=power]{192 x 192}{mm}, interleaved with 59 \SI{1}{mm}-thick tungsten plates.
The resulting brick has a total thickness of \SI{\sim 78}{mm}, making \SI{\sim 17}{X_0}, and a mass of \SI{41.5}{kg}.
The overall target mass with five walls of \num{2 x 2} bricks amounts to \SI{830}{kg}.
The layout of the target was optimised to fulfill conflicting requirements: overall dimensions that cover the desired pseudo-rapidity region and maximse the azimuthal angular acceptance, large emulsion surface to maximise the event containment in the brick and reduced number of bricks per wall to minimise the dead area between adjacent cells.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{images/Target/emulsion_target.png}
\caption{An emulsion wall is composed of four bricks, each consisting of 60 emulsion films interleaved with 59 tungsten sheets.}
\label{fig:emulsion_target}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Target walls}
Nuclear emulsion films are the most compact, thinnest and lightest three-dimensional tracking detectors with sub-micrometric position and milliradian angular resolution.
A nuclear emulsion film has two sensitive layers (\SI{70}{\micro m}-thick) on both sides of a transparent plastic base (\SI{170}{\micro m}-thick).
By connecting the two hits generated by a charged particle on both sides of the base, the slope of the track can be measured with milliradian accuracy.
The whole detector will contain 1200 emulsion films, for a total of \SI{44}{m^2}.
Emulsion films will be produced by the Nagoya University in Japan and by the Slavich Company in Russia.\footnote{Slavich Company, Yaroslavskaya Region, Peresavl-Zalessky, Russia.}
Emulsion films are analysed by fully automated optical microscopes~\cite{Arrabito:2006rv,Armenise:2005yh}.
The scanning speed, measured in terms of film surface per unit time, was significantly increased in recent years~\cite{Alexandrov:2015kzs,Alexandrov:2016tyi,Alexandrov:2017qpw}, reaching \SI{\sim 180}{cm^2/h}.
R\&D is still ongoing~\cite{Alexandrov:2019dvd} to further increase the scanning speed.
Tungsten was selected as target material in order to maximise the interaction rate per unit volume.
Its small radiation length (\SI{\sim 3.5}{mm}) allows for good performance in the electromagnetic shower reconstruction in the ECC.
The low intrinsic radioactivity makes tungsten a suitable material for an emulsion detector.\footnote{Tungsten supplied by Luoyang Sifon Electronic Material Co Ltd, China, through the INTENT Company, Torino, Italy.}
An ECC wall is contained in an aluminum box that hosts the four bricks, which are assembled one after the other by piling up 60 emulsion films and 59 tungsten sheets.
The box is then closed using a semi-automatic tool that keeps the necessary pressure to avoid relative displacements between emulsion films.
Once closed, the box is light tight.
Each wall is transported from the dark room where it is assembled to the TI18 tunnel by means of a custom trolley and, once there, inserted into the mechanical structure of SND@LHC.
The different phases of the wall assembly, transportation and installation are described in Figure~\ref{fig:wall}.\footnote{Design of wall structure, transportation trolley and assembly tools performed in collaboration with the KeyPlastic Company, Montale (MO), Italy.}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{images/Target/wall.png}
\caption{Target wall during the assembly with tungsten plates and emulsion films (a), on the transportation trolley (b) and suspended from the mechanical structure (c).}
\label{fig:wall}
\end{figure}
The emulsion target will be replaced every $\sim$\SI{25}{fb^{-1}}.
The exchange of target walls will be performed during LHC Technical Stops.
Since it is not assured that the integration of \SI{25}{fb^{-1}} will be in coincidence with Technical Stops, the Collaboration has developed a procedure for a fast brick replacement (about \SI{8}{hour} shift), that could fit within shorter accesses to the LHC tunnel.
\subsection{Target mechanics}
The mechanical structure of the SND@LHC target was designed to have a single support structure for both the five emulsion/tungsten walls and the five SciFi planes.
It is made of a vertical rectified aluminum plate, that guarantees a fine mechanical alignment of target walls, and of five aluminum horizontal profiles, each sustaining a target wall, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:structure}.
Each SciFi plane is fixed to the upstream wall box via three pins.
Wall boxes are suspended to two horizontal profiles by two rope tensioners, two springs and a pendulum link.
Each wall box is placed into the \emph{loading position} with the transportation trolley, it is then suspended to the structure and translated to the \emph{final position} via recirculating ball guides.
Finally, the wall box is secured to the vertical plate with two screws.
The whole structure is supported isostatically on three points.
Alignment feet are used to adjust the height of the structure, to compensate for the inclined floor.
Horizontal plates located below each foot are used for fine adjustment of the target position on the tunnel floor.
The alignment of the target system is performed via three alignment spheres located at the rear of the vertical plate.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{images/Target/structure.png}
\caption{Mechanical support of the target system after the installation (left) and fully loaded with wall boxes and SciFi planes (right).}
\label{fig:structure}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Neutron shield and cold box}
The interaction of proton beams with the residual gas inside the LHC beam pipe produces low energy neutrons, with a spectrum ranging from a few meV to a few hundreds of MeV, about half of them being thermal neutrons.
The neutron flux expected in the TI18 tunnel is predominantly produced by beam 2 that passes by TI18 while moving towards IP1.
In order to shield the emulsion target from thermal neutrons, a box made of \SI{4}{cm}-thick 30\% borated polyethylene and \SI{5}{cm}-thick acrylic layers was built around the target region, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:coldbox}.
The box acts also as an insulation chamber. For the long-term stability of emulsion films, a cooling system was installed to keep the temperature of the target at ($15\pm1$)\SI{}{\celsius} and the relative humidity in the range \num{40} to \SI{50}{\percent}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{images/Target/cold_box.png}
\caption{Neutron-shielded box surrounding the target region. On the left a picture, taken from upstream, of the assembled shield and on the right the top view of a schematic drawing.}
\label{fig:coldbox}
\end{figure}
\section{Veto system}
\label{sec:veto}
The veto system aims at rejecting charged particles entering the detector acceptance, mostly muons coming from IP1.
It is located upstream of the target region and comprises two parallel planes of stacked scintillating bars read out on both ends by silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs) as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:veto_parts}.
One plane consists of seven \SI[product-units=power]{1 x 6 x 42}{cm} stacked bars of EJ-200 scintillator~\cite{ej200}.
EJ-200 is found to have the right combination of light output, attenuation length (\SI{3.8}{m}) and fast timing (rise time of \SI{0.9}{ns} and decay time of \SI{2.1}{ns}).
The emission spectrum peaks at \SI{425}{nm}, closely matching the SiPMs spectral response.
The number of photons generated by a minimum-ionising particle crossing \SI{1}{cm} scintillator is of the order of \num{e4}.
Bars are wrapped in aluminized Mylar foil~\cite{foil} to ensure opacity and isolate them from light in adjacent bars.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{images/veto_parts_2.jpg}
\caption{A rendering of the veto system illustrating the different components of the frames.}
\label{fig:veto_parts}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/pcb_veto_front.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/pcb_veto_back.pdf}
\caption{The two sides of the PCB for the veto system.}
\label{fig:veto_pcb}
\end{figure}
Each bar end is read out by eight Hamamatsu S14160-6050HS~\cite{sipm_6050_url} (\num{6 x 6} \SI{}{mm^2}, \SI{50}{\micro m} pitch) SiPMs.
The SiPMs are mounted on a custom built PCB, seen in Figure \ref{fig:veto_pcb}, that covers all seven bars on each end of a plane.
A transparent silicone epoxy gel~\cite{silgel} fills the space of \SI{\sim 1}{mm} between the SiPMs and bars.
Each individual SiPM signal is read out by a single channel of the front-end (FE) board, containing two TOFPET2 ASICs (described in Section~\ref{subsec:tofpet}).
A DAQ board collects the digitized signals from four FE boards.
A CAEN mainframe, described in Section~\ref{subsec:readout}, which is shared with the muon system, houses low voltage (LV) and high voltage (HV) CAEN power supplies.
Details of the data acquisition (DAQ) system and of the boards are described in Section \ref{sec:daq}.
The total number of channels per PCB is 56, totaling 224 channels for the entire veto system.
The stacked bars for each plane are housed in an aluminum frame, with \SI{4}{mm} thick walls.
PCBs are mounted on \SI{4}{cm} wide rectangular flanges on both ends and act as end caps for the frame.
An aluminum cover on each end is used to ensure light tightness and also acts as a heat sink for the FE board, which generates \SI{\sim 3}{W} and is placed in a groove in the cover on the side opposite to the PCB.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.36\textheight]{images/veto_front.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.36\textheight, angle=90]{images/veto_top.jpg}
\caption{Front view of the veto system in the target region (left) and view from above (right) as seen in TI18.}
\label{fig:veto_support}
\end{figure}
The two frames of the veto system are held together by a small support structure.
This in turn is attached to the support of the target region within \SI{1}{mm} accuracy, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:veto_support}.
A vertical shift of \SI{2}{cm} between the two frames allows for \SI{100}{\percent} coverage of the target region, compensating for inefficiency due to the dead area between bars introduced by wrapping material (\SI{\sim 60}{\micro m}) and variations in bar height (\SI{\sim 250}{\micro m}).
The DAQ board is mounted on the support frame directly in front of the veto planes.
Fine alignment is performed as part of the target region alignment as mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:target}. |
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
CNNs have achieved superhuman performance on various computer vision tasks such as segmentation \cite{seg_sota}, classification \cite{voulodimos2018deep,he2016deep,vit_mlp}, object detection\cite{detect_sota}, etc. However, it has been observed that CNNs have a different understanding of images in contrast to humans \cite{geirhos2017comparing}. Specifically, in the case of classification, it has been observed that CNNs can be biased towards the background information instead of the foreground object \cite{zhu2016object, barbu2019objectnet, beery2018recognition, xiao2020noise, sehwag2020time}, high-frequency components \cite{freq_main,guille_freq,our_freq}, and textures rather than shapes \cite{geirhos2018imagenet,islam2021shape}. In particular, Kai et al.\cite{xiao2020noise} showed that CNNs tend to correlate class labels heavily with background information. Further, they showed that, when the foreground object is removed, CNNs still perform surprisingly well solely in the presence of the background of the image. The authors created the Background Challenge \cite{xiao2020noise} which measures models' robustness to various changes the background. They further showed that most state-of-the-art image classification models exhibit a poor generalization ability in this challenge due to large background bias.
These biases lead to an over-dependence of the model on irrelevant/spurious features. Further, such biases can be exploited to fool the classifiers by simply altering the background of the object \cite{rival_background_study} or adding different textures to the image \cite{geirhos2018imagenet}.
To mitigate such biases, conventional data augmentation is often used, wherein the model is exposed to additional training data, in order to decorrelate the spurious features and the class label. However, to completely eliminate bias and prevent memorization (overfitting) of data, the model usually requires a very large amount of data for augmentation. Also, previous works \cite{wang2019balanced, zhao2019inherent} have shown that conventional data augmentation is insufficient to discard spurious features and remains susceptible to small changes. Therefore, an effective data augmentation method has to be applied to ensure that the best features are extracted during training while introducing minimal computational overhead.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/intro_fig.png}
\caption{CLAD learns feature space which is robust against background variations and sensitive to foreground features.}
\label{fig:intro}
\end{figure*}
Here, we propose a \textbf{C}ontrastive \textbf{L}earning based \textbf{A}pproach for background \textbf{D}ebiasing (CLAD) model, where contrastive learning (CL) is introduced to mitigate the biases more effectively. In contrastive learning, for each data point (anchor), both positive samples (sharing anchor's distribution) and negative samples (carries different information as anchor) are generated. Then, CL minimizes the distances between the anchor and positive samples and maximizes the distances between the anchor and negative samples in feature space. To this end, in the latent embedding, attributes that belong to the same distribution (relevant features, e.g., foregrounds) are aggregated together, while unwanted biases (e.g., backgrounds) are separated from the anchor. Hence, our method, CLAD, uses contrastive learning to learn a background-robust feature space, by carefully constructing the positive and negative samples. Positive samples are generated by changing the anchor's background. The negative samples, on the other hand, contain distinctive foreground information but similar background as the anchor (Fig. \ref{fig:construct samples}). Moreover, instead of generating negative samples, we introduce a novel mechanism to sample negative samples without introducing extra costs, where we sample negative pairs during the training process from generated positive samples while ensuring the sampled negative samples share similar background information as anchor. Thus, our novel method allows for both the scalability of negative samples as well as having similar background as anchor. \\
We show that, our CLAD model \textbf{outperforms} the state-of-the-art methods on the Background Challenge dataset \cite{xiao2020noise}, while it has almost no accuracy drop on original images. It samples negative samples effectively without introducing heavy computational costs. Especially, CLAD outperforms on the random-background dataset (\textsc{Mixed-Rand}) by a margin of $4.1\%$, while all the other state-of-the-art methods showed a major performance drop. We also show that CLAD can be applied to mitigate the influence of other discriminative features apart from background, like object texture (in supplementary material), while improving model's shape bias.
\section{Related Work}
\label{seg:related_work}
Feature biases are thought to happen because of the data memorization (overfitting) and are exacerbated when training the over-parameterized models \cite{Khani2021spurious}. One effective way to mitigate these problems is to augment with samples emphasizing desirable features instead of irrelevant spurious ones. In background-biased settings, Kai et al.\cite{xiao2020noise} showed that training models on images with random unrelated backgrounds for a given foreground helped reduce the background bias of the model. However, this also significantly reduced performance on the original dataset (Table \ref{table:acc_benchmark}). Further, as mentioned in the previous section, conventional data augmentation is not optimal for debiasing; hence, we rather look at contrastive learning.
\textbf{Contrastive Learning (CL)} \cite{hadsell2006dimensionality} helps learn robust feature spaces that are close across a data distribution and attributes that set apart a data distribution from another. CL has shown great promise in self-supervised regimes \cite{chen2020simple, he2020momentum, grill2020bootstrap} while recently, it has also been applied to the supervised learning domain and achieved promising results \cite{khosla2020supervised, lo2021clcc, liu2021social}. CL has been used in a self-supervised manner to help debias models \cite{taghanaki2021robust, lee2022improving, ryali2021leveraging, mo2021object}.
In the fully supervised learning domain, previous works have shown that utilizing contrastive loss as an auxiliary loss can encourage learning more robust features with higher generalization abilities through careful contrastive pair construction \cite{lo2021clcc, liu2021social}. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to leverage contrastive learning as an auxiliary loss to improve the model's background robustness in a fully-supervised setting.
\section{Methodology}
\label{Sec:Methodology}
In this section, we go through the contrastive learning framework and then introduce our background-debiased contrastive pair sampling strategy, and finally present our overall learning framework.
\subsection{Contrastive Learning}
We use the popular InfoNCE \cite{gutmann2010noise, oord2018representation} loss as our contrastive loss term. This loss function can be viewed as an (N+1)-way cross-entropy classification loss to distinguish between one positive sample and N negative samples, and is written as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{con} = -log\left [\frac{e^{s(x, x^+)/\tau}}{e^{s(x, x^+)/\tau} + \sum_{i=1}^{N}e^{s(x, x_i^-)/\tau}} \right ]
\label{eq:contrastive loss}
\end{equation}
where \(s(x_1, x_2) = (x_1 \cdot x_2) / (\left\|x_1 \right\| \left\|x_2 \right\|\)) is the cosine similarity function and $\tau$ is the temperature parameter; $x, x^+, x^-_i$ represent the feature representations for the anchor, the positive sample and the multiple negative samples, respectively. It brings positive sample pairs closer in the feature space, while it pushes the anchor apart from negative samples.
\subsection{Background-debiased Sampling}
\label{sample_sec}
One crucial contribution of CLAD is an efficient sampling approach for contrastive pairs which are harder to discrminate from the anchor. Conventionally, in contrastive learning, positive samples are obtained by applying a combination of different data augmentations to the anchor. Negative samples, on the other hand, come from views of other images (see Fig. \ref{fig:construct samples} (a)). However, such sampling of contrastive pairs would lead to poor robustness on backgrounds due to two reasons: 1) increasing feature similarity between positive pairs would simultaneously encourage background bias due to their shared background information; 2) likewise, as negative samples carry different background information compared to the anchor, minimizing feature similarity between negative pairs would increase the model's sensitivity to background variations.
These problems are solved in CLAD's background-debiased contrastive pair sampling approach, where background information is no longer shared between positive pairs, and negative pairs share similar background information, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:construct samples} (b). The contrastive pairs are created as follows:
\textbf{Positive Samples} are created by replacing the background of the anchor with a different-class background (chosen randomly). Following the method in Background Challenge dataset \cite{xiao2020noise}, we use GrabCut \cite{rother2004grabcut} to separate the foreground and background of a given anchor image (see supplementary material for details). The foreground of the anchor is then placed in a background found in another random class (other than the anchor class).
\textbf{Negative Sample } It is crucial to have a large number of negative samples in contrastive learning \cite{chen2020simple, he2020momentum}. However, using the same method to create positive samples, i.e., replacing the foreground of the anchor image instead and keeping the background, needs to be repeated many times to create multiple negative samples. This leads to a high computational cost which linearly scales the cost per batch by the number of negative samples. To solve this issue, we introduce a negative sample dictionary.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.03\textwidth]{images/construct_samples.png}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\caption{Contrastive pair sampling strategies, (a) used in conventional contrastive learning, (b) CLAD's background-debiased sampling strategy}
\label{fig:construct samples}
\end{figure*}
We define our negative sample dictionary as a dictionary with queues for each class, containing the latent representation for each negative sample. Each queue, has samples whose background belongs to the class represented by the queue. The size of each queue is the same as the number of negative samples (\textit{N}). In each batch, we use the generated positive samples to update the queue. The old samples are dequeued (deleted) when new samples are enqueued (added) to the queue following a first in, first out order. Therefore, the negative samples are reused until they get replaced in the queue.
This differs from the commonly used memory bank \cite{he2020momentum} for storing negative samples in two ways:
\vspace{-0.45em}
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep-0.5em
\item It only stores features for background-augmented images where the foreground and background classes are decoupled.
\item As a dictionary, it contains keys for \textbf{background labels} of the stored samples. Samples are stored in the queue whose key corresponds to their \textbf{background labels}.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.45em}
We illustrate the mechanism in Fig. \ref{fig:dictionary}. The dictionary contains the keys of the background label, and we show two examples in the Figure. In the example for updating the dictionary with generated samples, the sample has a background of \texttt{Fish} class, so it will enter the queue within the \texttt{Fish} key (the foreground label is ignored in this process). The other example shows the sampling process for negative samples from the dictionary: the anchor is an image from \texttt{Dog} class; hence we draw all samples in the queue within the \texttt{Dog} key in the dictionary.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/dictionary.png}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\caption{Illustration of using dictionary to store negative sample candidates.}
\label{fig:dictionary}
\end{figure*}
Using the negative sample dictionary guarantees that similar background information is shared between negative pairs simultaneously. Hence, our method provides a memory-efficient way of scaling negative samples.
\subsection{Training Objective}
\label{sec:loss}
The overall loss function is composed of two terms: the conventional supervised classification loss (for learning distinguishable features) and contrastive loss (for improving background robustness). After we generate positive and negative sample pairs (as described in Sec \ref{sample_sec}), we calculate the contrastive loss using the InfoNCE loss function.
To enforce the correct classification of the positive samples, we can optionally include a classification loss for such samples and refer to the model with this additional loss term as CLAD+. For the supervised classification loss, we use the conventional cross-entropy loss. Specifically,
the overall loss for CLAD can be written as:
\vspace{-0.5em}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{CLAD} = \mathcal{L}_{class}(x) + \lambda * \mathcal{L}_{con}(x, x^+, x^-)
\label{eq:loss_clad}
\end{equation}
For CLAD+, the loss is written as:
\vspace{-0.5em}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{CLAD+} = \mathcal{L}_{class}(x) + \mathcal{L}_{class}(x^+) + \lambda * \mathcal{L}_{con}(x, x^+, x^-)
\label{eq:loss_clad+}
\end{equation}
Here, $\lambda$ is a hyperparameter for the weight that controls the importance of the contrastive term $\mathcal{L}_{con}$. Its magnitude controls the degree of background robustness learned by the model.
\subsection{Training}
\label{sec:training}
As illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:flow_chart}, for each batch, we generate positive samples. Then, the generated positive samples are used to update the negative sample dictionary. The classification loss is calculated for the anchor (and also for the positive sample for CLAD+). When calculating the contrastive loss, the negative samples are drawn accordingly from the negative sample dictionary based on the label of each anchor. The contrastive loss is finally calculated based on feature representations for the anchors, positive and negative samples.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/flow_chart.png}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\caption{Illustration of the proposed supervised learning with contrastive learning approach.}
\label{fig:flow_chart}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experiment}
In this section, we present the results for CLAD and CLAD+ on the Background Challenge dataset \cite{xiao2020noise}.
\subsection{Challenge Description}
Kai et al.\cite{xiao2020noise} initiated the Background Challenge \cite{xiao2020noise} dataset in 2020. The dataset aggregates a subset of images in ImageNet based on WordNet hierarchy \cite{miller1995wordnet} into 9 classes, creating the ImageNet-$9$ dataset. Several variations are made on the images' background or foreground in original ImageNet-$9$, as summarized in Table \ref{tab:dataset}.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.9\textwidth}{!} {
\begin{tabular}{@{}c|c|c|c@{}}
\toprule
Dataset & Foreground & Background & Summary \\ \midrule
\textsc{Original} & Original & Original & Original unaltered images \\
\textsc{Only-FG} & Original & None (Black) & Images with only the foreground (background removed) \\
\textsc{Only-BG-T} & None & Original & Images with only the background \\
\textsc{Mixed-Rand} & Original & Completely Random & Images with a random background \\
\textsc{Mixed-Same} & Original & Random-same-class & Images with a background from the same class \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Description of the variations of ImageNet-$9$\cite{xiao2020noise}}
\label{tab:dataset}
\end{table}
The goal of the Background Challenge is to achieve high accuracy on the \textsc{Mixed-Rand} dataset, where the background class is selected randomly and provides no information on image label. Intuitively, models with high background bias would suffer from low accuracy on this dataset. Additionally, the challenge also defines a metric to quantify the background bias: \textsc{BG-Gap}, which is defined as the accuracy gap between the \textsc{Mixed-Same} and \textsc{Mixed-Rand} datasets. The \textsc{BG-Gap} represents the performance drop due to background class signal change \cite{xiao2020noise}, or more intuitively, how much accuracy is actually gained by background bias.
\subsection{Experimental Settings}
\label{sec:experimental_details_background}
We adopt a ImageNet-pretrained ResNet-50 as our backbone \cite{xiao2020noise}. Adam \cite{kingma2014adam} is used as the optimizer with default settings ($\beta_1 = 0.9$ and $\beta_2 = 0.999$) and no weight decay is used. The total number of training epochs is 60, and the batch size is 64. The learning rate is set to be $1e^{-3}$ and decays to $1e^{-4}$ after 20 epochs. After trial and error, the hyperparameter $\lambda$ for the weight of the contrastive loss is set to $1$ (ablation in \ref{sec:analysis}) and the temperature parameter $\tau$ is set to 0.2. Data augmentations, including Random Resized Crop, Random Horizontal Flip, and Color Jitter, are used in our experiments. Note that for the generated positive samples, these conventional data augmentations are applied after the background augmentation. For each anchor, we construct one positive sample and draw 32 negative samples (details in supplementary material) from the negative sample dictionary.
In this section, we evaluate the performance of CLAD on the Background Challenge dataset. For comparison, we compare the performance of CLAD to three baselines, which are trained in conventional, fully supervised settings, which include:
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep-0.5em
\item \texttt{Base(IN)} ImageNet-trained ResNet-50 with prediction mapped to ImageNet-$9$.
\item \texttt{Base(IN9)} ResNet-50 trained on \textsc{Original} with a fully supervised setting.
\item \texttt{Base(MR)} ResNet-50 trained on \textsc{Mixed-Rand} with a fully supervised setting.
\end{itemize}
In addition we also compare to previous works on Background challenge dataset, the results of which are presented in Table \ref{table:acc_benchmark}.
\subsection{Accuracy}
CLAD and CLAD+ do not suffer any accuracy trade-off on the \textsc{Original} dataset compared to the baseline models (0.4\% and 0.1\% drop correspondingly).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{images/results.png}
\caption{Model performances on \textsc{Mixed-Same} (x-axis) and \textsc{Mixed-Rand} (y-axis) data. Models closer to the Identity dashed line has lower background bias.}
\label{fig:res}
\end{figure}
Our method outperforms all previous benchmarks by a large margin (4.1\% for CLAD+ and 2.3\% for CLAD) on \textsc{Mixed-Rand} dataset, which is the most important indicator for the model's generalization ability to varying-background images.
It is possible to have a very small \textsc{BG-GAP} as well as very low accuracy on both the \textsc{Mixed-Same} and \textsc{Mixed-Rand} datasets. However, that would not be reflective of the background bias or generalization ability of the model. Hence, we need high performance on both datasets along with a smaller gap between them, to have less background bias. We plot the accuracies of these datasets in Fig. \ref{fig:res}, wherein models that lie closer to the identity line have lower background bias. Additionally, the further right from the model's line, the higher its bias. We can see from the Figure that our models CLAD and CLAD+ have the best performance among all the models.
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!} {
\begin{tabular}{@{}llcccccc@{}}
\toprule
Type & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Model} & \textsc{Original}~$\uparrow$ & \textsc{Only-FG}~$\uparrow$ & \textsc{Mixed-Rand}~$\uparrow$ & \textsc{Mixed-Same}~$\uparrow$ & \textsc{Only-BG-T}~$\downarrow$ & \textsc{BG-Gap}~$\downarrow$ \\ \midrule
\multirow{3}{*}{Baselines} & Base (IN) \cite{xiao2020noise} & 96.2 & - & 76.3 & 82.3 & 17.8 & 6.0 \\
& Base (IN9) & 96.0 & 86.0 & 73.4 & 87.5 & 42.9 & 14.1 \\
& Base (MR) & 88.4 & 89.5 & 86.7 & 87.1 & 12.8 & 0.4 \\ \midrule
\multirow{11}{*}{Others} & CIM \cite{taghanaki2021robust} & 97.7 & - & 81.1 & 89.8 & - & 8.8 \\
& SCL\textunderscore E2E \cite{taghanaki2021robust} & \textbf{98.2} & - & 80.1 & \textbf{90.7} & - & 10.6 \\
& CIM+VIB \cite{taghanaki2021robust} & \textbf{97.9} & - & 82.2 & 90.2 & - & 8.0 \\
& SupCon+ShapeAug\cite{lee2022improving} & - & - & 72.3 & 79.2 & - & 6.89 \\
& MoCo-v2 (BG Swaps)\cite{ryali2021leveraging} & 95.2 & 87.5 & 85.2 & 89.6 & \textbf{11.4} & 4.4 \\
& BYOL (BG Random)\cite{ryali2021leveraging} & 96.1 & 88.3 & 85.2 & 90.2 & 12.9 & 5.0 \\
& SwAV (BG RM)\cite{ryali2021leveraging} & 95.3 & 86.8 & 77.1 & 87.0 & 18.2 & 9.9 \\
& AttMask-High\cite{kakogeorgiou2022hide} & 89.8 & 75.2 & 62.3 & 76.2 & 15.3 & 9.9 \\
& MoCov2+GT\cite{mo2021object} & 89.7 & 72,7 & 72.0 & 84.5 & 40.1 & 12.5 \\
& BYOL+GT\cite{mo2021object} & 91.0 & 72.6 & 70.5 & 84.9 & 41.2 & 14.4 \\
& DILEMMA\cite{sameni2022dilemma} & 91.8 & 77.8 & 67.6 & 79.4 & \textbf{9.3} & 10.2 \\ \midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{Ours} & CLAD+ & 95.6 & \textbf{94.6} & \textbf{89.3} & \textbf{90.5} & 22.6 & \textbf{1.2} \\
& CLAD & 95.9 & \textbf{93.8} & \textbf{87.5} & 90.1 & 31.3 & \textbf{2.6} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Accuracy ($\%$) comparison between CLAD, CLAD+ against baselines and benchmarks on the Background Challenge. `-' represents value missing in the references. Note that the models in this table are trained with different sizes of dataset and level of supervision, in this case the \textsc{BG-Gap} is the fairest comparison across all models indicating background bias.}
\label{table:acc_benchmark}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Analysis}
\label{sec:analysis}
\textbf{Feature Consistency}
We estimate the percentage of encoded foreground information by calculating the features' cosine similarity between image pairs sharing the same foreground. This metric can also be intuitively reflect as how much of the features are extracted from the foreground. We also define a more direct metric, decision consistency, which summarizes the fraction of consistent decisions after background change. This can be expressed as $ \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N} \mathbbm{1}(\argmax g(x_i) = \argmax g(\hat{x}_i)) $, where, $g(.)$ is the classifier, $(x_i, \hat{x}_i)$ represent image pairs with same foreground but different background. The higher the decision consistency, the smaller the effect of background changes on the models' decisions. For details, see Table \ref{table:cosine_similarity_background}.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\resizebox{0.5\textwidth}{!} {
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{Model} & Feature Similarity & Decision Consistency \\ \hline
Base (IN9) & 0.795 & 0.800 \\
Base (MR) & 0.864 & 0.864 \\ \hline
CLAD+ & \textbf{0.920} & \textbf{0.969} \\
CLAD & 0.914 & 0.915 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Feature similarity and decision consistency between \textsc{Original} and \textsc{Mixed-Rand} datasets. CLAD and CLAD+ can extract features over 90\% similar to the extracted features before background variation, meaning that a large amount of the features they learned from the original images are from the foreground, well explaining their performance on the background challenge dataset.}
\label{table:cosine_similarity_background}
\end{table}
\textbf{Interpretability: } Saliency map provides intuitive illustration for models' areas of focus in images. Fig.~\ref{fig:saliency} illustrates the SmoothGrad\cite{smilkov2017smoothgrad} saliency maps of the CLAD and CLAD+, compared with two baseline models. It shows that the saliency maps for CLAD+ and CLAD focus more on the foreground object with a much cleaner saliency map than \texttt{Base(IN9)} and even \texttt{Base(MR)}. An interesting observation is that, the saliency map of \texttt{Base(IN9)} and \texttt{Base(MR)} on the \texttt{wolf} image (second row) shows these baseline models rely on background snow for identifying wolf, which is a well-known example for CNN's background bias \cite{szegedy2015going}. CLAD+ and CLAD are able to identify \texttt{wolf} while ignoring background snow, relatively better than base models.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{images/saliency_map.png}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\caption{Saliency maps of CLAD+ and CLAD, compared with two baseline models.}
\label{fig:saliency}
\end{figure*}
\textbf{Importance of Contrastive Loss:} The hyper-parameter $\lambda$ is the weight of the contrastive loss term in our overall loss function. In Fig. \ref{fig:ablation_lambda} we show that the magnitude of $\lambda$ determines the background robustness of the CLAD model. This Figure presents the varying accuracy on \textsc{Mixed-Rand} dataset, as well as \textsc{Original ImageNet-$9$}, with increasing $\lambda$. The CLAD models do not have any performance deterioration when the contrastive loss is introduced with equal weight as the classification loss. Its performance on \textsc{Original} dataset remains the same while increasing on \textsc{Mixed-Rand}. However, if the value of $\lambda$ is further increased, i.e., the contrastive loss becomes more important than the supervised losses ($\lambda > 1$), then there is a performance deterioration. This indicates that we need a balanced mix of both supervised and contrastive losses for ideal performance.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/ablation_lambda.png}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\caption{Accuracy on \textsc{Mixed-Rand} dataset and Original \textsc{ImageNet-$9$} with respect to different values of $\lambda$}
\label{fig:ablation_lambda}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
Through our work, we present a novel contrastive learning-based approach for background debiasing called CLAD. It samples background-debiased contrastive pairs efficiently. Our work showcases state-of-the-art performance on the Background Challenge dataset. We also show an analysis of our model's features, which explain its superior performance compared to the standard trained model. Further, we empirically demonstrate the need for proper balance between contrastive and supervised losses for the effective debiasing of the model. As a result, training with the proposed contrastive learning method reduces the importance of image background and texture information in the decision-making process of CNN models. Theoretically, this approach works for any discriminative feature pairs, and we took \emph{foreground} vs. \emph{background} and \emph{shape} vs. \emph{texture} (in supplementary material) as an example. In future works, we could further investigate how to extend this approach to other pairs of discriminative features and hopefully guide the CNNs to make decisions based on similar features as humans, thereby improving generalization ability.
|
\section{#1}\cleqn\clth}
\newcommand{\nn}{\hfill\nonumber}
\def\Bbb{\mathbb}
\def\CC {{\mathbb C}}
\def\RR {{\mathbb R}}
\def\NN {{\mathbb N}}
\def\ZZ {{\mathbb Z}}
\def\PP {{\mathbb P}}
\def\QQ {{\mathbb Q}}
\def\FF {{\mathbb F}}
\def\CP {{\mathbb C}{\mathbb P}^{1}}
\def\be {\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\ben {\begin{eqnarray*}}
\def\ee {\end{eqnarray}}
\def\een {\end{eqnarray*}}
\def\KKK {\hfill\square}
\def\sc {\scriptstyle}
\def\scr {\scriptscriptstyle}
\def\ds {\displaystyle}
\def\la {\, \langle \,}
\def\ra {\, \rangle \,}
\def\AAA{\kern-0.3em}
\def\AA{\kern-0.18em}
\def\AC{\kern-0.14em}
\def\AB{\kern-0.22em}
\newcommand \nc {\newcommand}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}
\nc \bth[1] { \begin{theorem}\label{t#1} } \nc \ble[1] {
\begin{lemma}\label{l#1} } \nc \bpr[1] {
\begin{proposition}\label{p#1} } \nc \bco[1] {
\begin{corollary}\label{c#1} } \nc \bde[1] {
\begin{definition}\label{d#1}\rm } \nc \bex[1] {
\begin{example}\label{e#1}\rm } \nc \bre[1] {
\begin{remark}\label{r#1}\rm } \nc \bcon[1] {
\medskip\noindent{\it{Conjecture #1}} } \nc \bqu[1] {
\medskip\noindent{\it{Question #1}} }
\nc {\ethe} { \end{theorem} }
\nc {\ele} { \end{lemma} } \nc {\epr}
{ \end{proposition} } \nc {\eco} { \end{corollary} } \nc {\ede} {
\end{definition} } \nc {\eex} { \end{example} } \nc {\ere} {
\end{remark} } \nc {\econ} {\smallskip} \nc {\equ} {\smallskip}
\nc \thref[1]{Theorem \ref{t#1}}
\nc \leref[1]{Lemma \ref{l#1}} \nc \prref[1]{Proposition
\ref{p#1}} \nc \coref[1]{Corollary \ref{c#1}} \nc
\deref[1]{Definition \ref{d#1}} \nc \exref[1]{Example \ref{e#1}}
\nc \reref[1]{Remark \ref{r#1}}
\newcommand {\normprod}[1]{ {\textrm{:}}{#1}{\textrm{:}} }
\def \W {W_{1+\infty}}
\def \WN {\W(N)}
\def \a {\alpha}
\def \b {\beta}
\def \betha {\beta}
\def \A {{\mathcal A}}
\def \D {{\mathcal D}}
\def \H {{\mathcal H}}
\def \d {{\mathrm d}}
\def \M {{\mathcal M}}
\def \B {{\mathcal B}}
\def \T {{\mathcal T}}
\def \L {{\mathcal L}}
\def \Rset {{\mathbb R}}
\def \Cset {{\mathbb C}}
\def \Zset {{\mathbb Z}}
\def \Nset {{\mathbb N}}
\def \Vset {{\mathbb V}}
\def \ord { {\mathrm{ord}} }
\def \rank { {\mathrm{rank}} }
\def \span { {\mathrm{span}} }
\def \const { {\mathrm{const}} }
\def \card { {\mathrm{card}} }
\def \mult { {\mathrm{mult}} }
\def \mod { {\mathrm{mod}} }
\def \spec { {\mathrm{Spec}} }
\def \diag { {\mathrm{diag}} }
\def \res { {\mathrm{Res}} }
\def \Wr { {\mathrm{Wr}} }
\renewcommand \ker { {\mathrm{Ker}} }
\def\AA {\kern-0.1em}
\def\BB {\kern+0.1em}
\def\BBB {\kern+0.15em}
\def\K {\kern+0.05em}
\def\MK {\kern-0.07em}
\def\MKK {\kern-0.04em}
\def\ds {\displaystyle}
\def\scr {\scriptscriptstyle}
\def\sc {\scriptstyle}
\def\J {\AA {\scr J}\BB}
\def\S {\AA {\scr S}\BB}
\def\A {\AA {\scr A}\BB}
\def\bs {\boldsymbol{.}}
\begin{document}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\title[ Unfolding of the DCHE ]
{ The reducible double confluent Heun equation and a general symmetric unfolding of the origin }
\author[Tsvetana Stoyanova, <EMAIL>]{Tsvetana Stoyanova}
\maketitle
\begin{center}
{Department of Mathematics and Informatics,
Sofia University,\\ 5 J. Bourchier Blvd., Sofia 1164, Bulgaria,
<EMAIL>}
\end{center}
\date{}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{abstract}
The reducible double confluent Heun equation (DCHE) is the only DCHE whose general symmetric unfolding
leads to a Fuchsian equation. Contrary to the general Heun equation the unfolded Fuchsian equation has 5 singular points:
$x_L=-\sqrt{\varepsilon}, x_R=\sqrt{\varepsilon}, x_{LL}=-1/\sqrt{\varepsilon}, x_{RR}=1/\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ and
$x_{\infty}=\infty$. We prove that the monodromy matrix around the regular resonant singularity at the origin is realizable
as a limit of the product of the monodromy matrices around resonant singularities $x_L$ and $x_R$ when
$\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ while the Stokes matrix at the irregular singularity at the origin is a limit
of the part of the monodromy matrix around the resonant singularity $x_L$.
We also show that the reducible
DCHE possesses a holomorphic solution in the whole $\CC^*$ if and only if the parameters of the equation are
connected by a Bessel function of first kind and order depending on the non-zero characteristic exponent at the origin.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\footnotetext{ 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 34M35, 34M40, 34M03, 34A25}
\headsep 10mm \oddsidemargin 0in \evensidemargin 0in
\section{Introduction}
The double confluent Heun equation (DCHE) is a second order linear ordinary differential equation having
two irregular singular points of Poincar\'{e} rank 1 over $\CC\PP^1$. If we fix them at $x=0$ and $x=\infty$
the standard form of DCHE writes
\be\label{eq}
w'' + \left[\frac{\alpha}{x} + \frac{\beta}{x^2} + \gamma\right]\,w' +
\frac{\delta\,x-q}{x^2}\,w=0\,,
\ee
where $\alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta$ and $q$ are arbitrary complex parameters.
The DCHE belongs to the list of confluent Heun's equations. They were introduced and firstly studied by Decarreau
et al. in 1978 \cite{D1, D2}. All of them are obtained by different confluence procedures from the general Heun equation (GHE)
$$\,
w'' + \left[\frac{\alpha}{x-1} + \frac{\beta}{x} + \frac{\gamma}{x-a}\right]\,w'
+ \frac{\delta\,\epsilon\,x-q}{x\,(x-1)\,(x-a)}\,w=0\,,
\,$$
which is a second order Fuchsian equation with 4 singular points.
The DCHE is obtained by a coalescence of the regular singularities
$x=a,\,x=\infty$ and $x=0, x=1$ of the GHE. The first confluent procedure leads to the irregular singularity
at $x=\infty$ while the second leads to the irregular singularity $x=0$ of the DCHE (see \cite{SL}).
The double confluent Heun equation finds many applications in superconductivity \cite{B-T},
statistical mechanics \cite{GM}, gravity \cite{S-S}.
In this paper we apply a reverse procedure that is different from an anti-confluent procedure.
We start with the double confluent Heun equation.
By introducing a small complex parameter $\varepsilon$ we unfold the equation \eqref{eq} to
the second order equation
\ben
w'' &+&
\Big[\frac{\alpha}{2}\left(\frac{1}{x-\sqrt{\varepsilon}}
+ \frac{1}{x+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}\right) +
\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}
\left(\frac{1}{x-\sqrt{\varepsilon}} - \frac{1}{x+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}\right) \\[0.25ex]
&-&
\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}
\left(\frac{1}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}-x} +
\frac{1}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}+x}\right)\Big ]\,w' +
\Big[\frac{\delta}{2}
\left(\frac{1}{x-\sqrt{\varepsilon}} + \frac{1}{x+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}\right)\\[0.2ex]
&-&
\frac{q}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}
\left(\frac{1}{x-\sqrt{\varepsilon}}- \frac{1}{x+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}\right)
\Big]\,w=0\,.
\een
We call such an unfolding {\it a general symmetric unfolding}. Contrary to the
anti-confluent procedure the general symmetric unfolding of the DCHE does not lead to a Fuchsian equation in general.
The unfolded equation has 5 singular points. The points $x=\sqrt{\varepsilon}, x=-\sqrt{\varepsilon},
x=1/\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ and $x=-\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ are regular singularities. When $\delta$ and $q$ are together different
from zero the point $x=\infty$ is an irregular singularity for the unfolded equation. It becomes a regular singularity
if and only if $\delta=q=0$, i. e. when the DCHE is a reducible equation.
This fact is the main motivation for giving our attention to the unfolding of the reducible DCHE
\be\label{eq1}
w'' + \left[\frac{\alpha}{x} - \frac{\beta}{x^2} - \gamma\right]\,w'=0\,,
\ee
which is obtained from the equation \eqref{eq} with $\delta=q=0$ after the transformation $x \to -x$.
Without loss of generality (after a rotation of $x$) throughout this paper we assume that $\beta$ in \eqref{eq1} is a real non-negative parameter.
The corresponding
unfolded Fuchsian equation writes
\be\label{eq2}
w'' &+&
\Big[\frac{\alpha}{2}\left(\frac{1}{x-\sqrt{\varepsilon}}
+ \frac{1}{x+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}\right) -
\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}
\left(\frac{1}{x-\sqrt{\varepsilon}} - \frac{1}{x+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}\right) \\[0.25ex]
&-&
\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}
\left(\frac{1}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}-x} +
\frac{1}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}+x}\right)\Big ]\,w'=0\,.\nonumber
\ee
We denote the singular points of the unfolded equation by
$x_L=-\sqrt{\varepsilon}, x_R=\sqrt{\varepsilon}, x_{LL}=-1/\sqrt{\varepsilon}, x_{RR}=1/\sqrt{\varepsilon}$
and $x_{\infty}=\infty$.
Obviously the singular points $x_L$ and $x_R$ are obtained by the unfolding of $x=0$ while
$x_{LL}$ and $x_{RR}$ are obtained by the unfolding of $x=\infty$ of \eqref{eq1}. It is expected that $x_{\infty}$ is
also a result of the unfolding of $x=\infty$. In this paper comparing the analytic invariants of both equations
we confirm this conjecture. More precisely, we will show that the analytic invariants of the DCHE around the origin
are realizable as a limit when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ of the analytic invariants of the unfolded equation only
around resonant singularities $x_L$ and $x_R$. This phenomenon implies that the monodromy around $x_{LL}, x_{RR}$
and $x_{\infty}$ is responsible for the unfolding of the analytic invariants around the singularity $x=\infty$
of the DCHE. The study of the nature of the unfolding of $x=\infty$ is left to another project.
Similar kind of problems related to the unfolding and confluence of singularities of the differential equations
have been studied in the works of Bolibrukh \cite{B}, Glutsyuk \cite{AG, AG1, AG2}, Hurtubise, Lambert and Rousseau
\cite{HLR, CL-CR, CL-CR1, CL-CR2}, Klime\v{s} \cite{Kl-1, Kl-2}, Ramis \cite{R}, Stoyanova \cite{St1, St2}, Zhang {Z}.
In the works of Buchstaber and Glutsyuk \cite{B-G}, El-Jaick and Figueiredo \cite{EJ-F}, Roseau \cite{Ro}, Tertychniy \cite{T}
have been studied solutions
space and Stokes phenomenon of the families
of double confluent Heun equations.
The kind of singularity at the origin depends on the parameter $\beta$. When $\beta=0$ the origin is a regular
singular point and the DCHE \eqref{eq1} degenerates into a Bessel type of equation. We introduce the notion
of unfolded monodrmy (see \deref{unfolded-monodromy}) as an analog of the unfolded Stokes matrix introduced by
Lambert and Rousseay in \cite{CL-CR}. The unfolded monodromy measures geometrically the transformation
of the monodromy around the regular singularity at the origin after a general symmetric unfolding.
The reducibility allows us to prove in Section 3.3, \thref{an-mon}
that when $\beta=0$
the monodromy around the origin of the equation \eqref{eq1} is realizable as a limit when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ of the
unfolded monodromy which depends analytically on $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$.
The main result in Section 3 states
that the monodromy matrix around the resonant singularity at the origin is realizable as a limit of
product of the local monodromy
matrices of the unfolded equation around resonant singular points $x_L$ and $x_R$ when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$
(see \prref{main1}).
In Section 3.2, \leref{q-0} we demonstrate by a direct computation that the coefficients in the logarithmic terms
of the solution of the unfolded equation have limits when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ and both of the limits are equal to
$\infty$ whose sign depends on the parameter $\alpha$. It turns out that the sum of these coefficients has a finite limit
when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ which is equal to the monodromy around the origin of the solution of the DCHE
(see \coref{q}). \leref{q-0} together with \leref{d} in Section 4.1 fix the main
difference between the unfolding of a regular singularity and an irregular singularity. In \leref{d} we show
explicitly that when the origin is an irregular singularity the coefficient in the logarithmic term of the
solution of the unfolded equation has a finite limit when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$. Moreover, this limit
multiplied by $2\,\pi\,i$ is equal to the corresponding Stokes multiplier.
In \cite{St2} we have shown by a direct computation that when $\alpha=2, \beta\neq 0$ the Stokes matrices at $x=0$ and $x=\infty$
of the reducible double confluent Heun equation \eqref{eq1} are realizable as a limit of the part of the monodromy matrices
around a resonant singularity of the general reducible Heun equation \eqref{eq2}.
In Section 4.1 based on the recent works of Lambert, Rousseau, Hurtubise and Klime\v{s} \cite{HLR, Kl-2, CL-CR, CL-CR1}
we extend the result in \cite{St2} to an arbitrary reducible DCHE \eqref{eq1} without studying this equation.
In fact this theoretical result allows us to derive the Stokes multiplier at the origin from the unfolded equation.
In Section 4.2 we build explicit fundamental matrix solution at the origin with respect to which the
Stokes multiplier is equal to that one obtained in Section 4.1. It turns out that the reducible DCHE \eqref{eq1}
admits a solution which is holomorphic in whole $\CC^*$ if and only if
the parameters $\alpha, \beta$ and
$\gamma$ satisfy either the relation
\be\label{R1}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^k\,\beta^k\,\gamma^k}{k!\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+k)}=0,\quad
\alpha\notin \NN\,,
\ee
or
\be\label{R2}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^k\,\beta^k\,\gamma^k}{k!\,\Gamma(\alpha+k)}=0,\quad
\alpha\in \NN\,,
\ee
where $\Gamma(z)$ is the Euler Gamma function.
The relations \eqref{R1} and \eqref{R2} associate the parameters $\alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$ with the Bessel function
$$\,
J_{\alpha}(x)=
\left(\frac{x}{2}\right)^{\alpha}\,
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^n\,(x/2)^{2 n}}{n!\,\Gamma(n+\alpha+1)}
\,$$
of the first kind of order $\alpha$.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we introduce the fundamental matrix solutions with respect to which we
will compare the analytic invariants of both equations. We also determine the conditions on the parameters under which
the solution of the unfolded equation can contain logarithmic terms near the singular points $x_L$ and $x_R$.
In Section 3 we study the unfolding of the regular singularity at the
origin and the corresponding monodromy. The main result of Section 3 is \prref{main1} which states
that when both of the singular points $x_L$ and $x_R$ are resonant singularity the monodromy matrix around the origin
of the DCHE is realizable as a limit of the product $M_R(\varepsilon)\,M_L(\varepsilon)$ of the monodromy matrices
around $x_R$ and $x_L$ when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
In Section 4 we deal with the unfolding of the irregular singularity
at the origin and the corresponding Stokes phenomenon. The main result of Section 4.1 is \thref{limit}
which states that the Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$ at the origin of the DCHE is realizable as a limit of the part
of the monodromy matrix around resonant singularity $x_L$ of the unfolded equation when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
The main result of Section 4.2 is \thref{0-1} which provides an actual fundamental matrix solution at
the origin of the DCHE. The paper contains also an Appendix where we
confirm \coref{q} by a direct computation for lower values of the parameter $\alpha$.
Since this paper appears as an extension of \cite{St2} we use without any effort some definitions and facts
from \cite{St2}.
\section{Global solutions and logarithms, singular direction}
\bth{t1}
The equation \eqref{eq1} possesses a fundamental set of solutions $\{w_1(x, 0), w_2(x, 0)\}$ of the form
\be\label{fss}
w_1(x, 0)=1,\qquad
w_2(x, 0)=\int_{\Gamma(x, 0)}
z^{-\alpha}\,e^{-\frac{\beta}{z}}\,e^{\gamma\,z}\, d z\,.
\ee
The path of integration $\Gamma(x, 0)$ is taken in such a way that the function
$w_2(x, 0)$ is a solution of equation \eqref{eq1}.
\ethe
We have a similar result for the equation \eqref{eq2}.
\bth{t1-p}
The equation \eqref{eq2} possesses a fundamental set of solution $\{w_1(x, \varepsilon), w_2(x, \varepsilon)\}$
of the form
\be\label{fss-p}
& &
w_1(x, \varepsilon)=1,\\[0.1ex]
& &
w_2(x, \varepsilon)=\int_{\Gamma(x, \varepsilon)}
(z-\sqrt{\varepsilon})^{\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}-\frac{\alpha}{2}}\,
(z+\sqrt{\varepsilon})^{-\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}-\frac{\alpha}{2}}\,
\left(\frac{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}+z}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}-z}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}\,
d z\,,\nonumber
\ee
which depends analytically on $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$.
The path of integration $\Gamma(x, \varepsilon)$ such that $\Gamma(x, \varepsilon) \rightarrow \Gamma(x, 0)$ when
$\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$ is a path with the same base point $x$ as the path $\Gamma(x, 0)$
from \thref{t1} and taken in such a way
that the function $w_2(x, \varepsilon)$ is a solution of the equation \eqref{eq2}.
\ethe
The paths $\Gamma(x, 0)$ and $\Gamma(x, \varepsilon)$ will be determined more precisely below.
As a direct consequence of \thref{t1} and \thref{t1-p} we construct fundamental matrices of equations \eqref{eq1} and
\eqref{eq2}.
\bco{t2}
The equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2} possess a fundamental matrix solution $\Phi(x, \cdot)$ in the form
\be\label{fms}
\Phi(x, \cdot)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & w_2(x, \cdot)\\
0 & w'_2(x, \cdot)
\end{array}\right), \quad \cdot=\{0, \varepsilon\}\,,
\ee
where $w_2(x, \cdot), \cdot=\{0, \varepsilon\}$ is defined by \thref{t1} and \thref{t1-p}, respectively.
\eco
Let us determine when the solution $w_2(x, \varepsilon)$ of the unfolded equation can contain logarithmic terms near
the singular points $x_j, j=L, R$. Recall that from the local theory of the Fuchsian singularity such a singular point
is called a resonant singularity. When $\beta=0$ the points $x_L$ and $x_R$ are together
either non-resonant or resonant singularities for the unfolded equation. In particular, they both are resonant
singularities if and only if $\alpha\in 2 \NN$. In the next section we consider the equations \eqref{eq1} and
\eqref{eq2} under the restriction
\be\label{res1}
\beta=0,\qquad \alpha\in 2 \NN\,.
\ee
Note that under the restriction \eqref{res1} the origin is a resonant regular singularity too.
Using the rotation $x \to x\,e^{i \delta}$ where $\delta=\arg (\sqrt{\varepsilon})$ we always can fix $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$
to be a real and positive. Due to this property when $\beta=0$ we choose the path $\Gamma(x, 0)$ in \eqref{fss} to be
a path from
$1$ to $x$ approaching 1 in the direction $\RR^{+}$. The path $\Gamma(x, \varepsilon)$ is a path taken in the same direction
$\RR^{+}$
from $1+\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ to the same base poin $x$.
When $\beta > 0$ we choose the path $\Gamma(x, 0)$ in \eqref{fss} to be a path from $0$ to $x$ approaching $0$ in the direction
$\RR^{+}$. Then
the corresponding unfolded path $\Gamma(x, \varepsilon)$ is a path taken
in the same direction $\RR^{+}$ from $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ to the same base point $x$. This choice of the path
$\Gamma(x, \varepsilon)$ implies that $\varepsilon$ is a real positive parameter of unfolding and that $x_L$ will be the resonant singularity.
In particular in Section 4 we consider the unfolded equation under the restriction
\be\label{res2}
\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}} + \frac{\alpha}{2}\in\NN,\quad
\frac{-\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}} + \frac{\alpha}{2}\notin\NN\,.
\ee
We denote by $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ and $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ the fundamental matrix solutions from \eqref{fms}
corresponding to the so chosen paths $\Gamma(x, 0)$ and $\Gamma(x, \varepsilon)$.
From Definition 6.15 in \cite{St2} it follows that $\theta=\arg (0-\beta)=\arg(-\beta)=\pi$ is the only possible
singular direction at the origin of the DCHE.
\section{The unfolding of the monodromy around the origin}
In this section we deal with the equations \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2} when the parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ satisfy the
condition \eqref{res1}.
\subsection{The monodromy around the origin of the DCHE }
Since the origin is a regular point for the DCHE its unfolding causes an unfolding of the monodromy around it.
To compute this monodromy we rewrite the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ in an appropriate form.
Directly from \eqref{fss} and \eqref{fms} we have
\bth{local-0}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds. Then the fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ of the equation
\eqref{eq1} is represented in a neighborhood of the origin as
\be\label{sol-0}
\Phi_0(x, 0)=\exp(G x)\,\,H(x)\,x^{\Lambda}\,x^J\,,
\ee
where
$$\,
G=\diag (0, \gamma),\quad
\Lambda=\diag(0, -\alpha)\,.
\,$$
The matrix $H(x)$ is defined as
$$\,
H(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & x\,\varphi(x)\\
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)\,,
\,$$
where $\varphi(x)$ is a holomorphic function in a neighborhood of the origin.
The matrix $J$ is given by
$$\,
J=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
0 &\lambda\\
0 &0
\end{array}\right)\,,
\,$$
where
\be\label{a}
\lambda=
\frac{\gamma^{\alpha-1}}{(\alpha-1)!}\,.
\ee
\ethe
The monodromy of the fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ around the origin is described
by the local monodromy matrix $M_0\in GL_2(\CC)$
\be\label{mm-0}
M_0=e^{2 \pi\,i\,\Lambda}\,e^{2 \pi\,i\,J}=e^{2 \pi\,i\,J}=
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 2 \pi\,i\,\lambda\\
0 & 1
\end{array}
\right)\,,
\ee
where $\lambda$ is itroduced by \eqref{a}.
\subsection{The monodromy around $x_L$ and $x_R$ of the unfolded equation}
In this section we compute the local monodromy matrices of the equation \eqref{eq2} under the restriction \eqref{res1}.
In the next theorem we describe the local behavior of the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ near the singular points
$x_R$ and $x_L$ when both of them are resonant singularities.
\bth{F-B-0}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds.
Then the fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ of
the unfolded
equation depends analytically on $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ and it is represented in a neighborhood of the origin which contains only the singular points
$x_L$ and $x_R$ as
\ben
\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon) =
G(x, \varepsilon)\,H(x, \varepsilon)\,
(x-x_L)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda}\,
(x-x_R)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda}\,
(x-x_L)^{J_L(\varepsilon)}\, (x-x_R)^{J_R(\varepsilon)}\,,
\een
where
$$\,
G(x, \varepsilon)=(x-x_{LL})^{-\frac{x_{LL}}{2}\,G}\, (x_{RR}-x)^{-\frac{x_{RR}}{2}\,G}\,.
\,$$
The matrix $H(x, \varepsilon)$ is a holomorphic matrix-function at the both singular
points $x_L$ and $x_R$ such that $H(x_k, \varepsilon)=I_2, k=L, R$. The matrices $G$ and $\Lambda$ are introduced in
\thref{local-0}. The matrix $J_k(\varepsilon), k=L, R$ is given by
\be\label{J-B-0}
J_k(\varepsilon)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
0 &q_k\\
0 &0
\end{array}
\right)\,,
\ee
where the number $q_k$ is defined as
\be\label{q-B-0}
q_k=\res \left( w_2'(x, \varepsilon),\,x=x_k\right),\quad
k=L, R\,.
\ee
\ethe
\proof
Let us present the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$
in the form
\ben
& &
\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)=
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0\\
0 & w_2'(x, \varepsilon)
\end{array}
\right)
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 &\int_{1+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}^x w'_2(z, \varepsilon)\,d z\\
0 &1
\end{array}
\right)\\[0.2ex]
&=&
G(x, \varepsilon)\,\left[(x-x_L) (x-x_R)\right]^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda}
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 &\int_{1+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}^x w'_2(z, \varepsilon)\,d z\\
0 &1
\end{array}
\right)\,,
\een
where
$$\,
G(x, \varepsilon)=(x-x_{LL})^{-\frac{x_{LL}}{2}\,G}\, (x_{RR}-x)^{-\frac{x_{RR}}{2}\,G}\,.
\,$$
Consider the function
$ w_2 (x, \varepsilon)$. Since when $\alpha\in 2 \NN$ the function
$\frac{1}{[(z-\sqrt{\varepsilon})(z+\sqrt{\varepsilon})]^{\alpha/2}}$ is a rational function it can be splited into
a finite sum in $\alpha$ number simpler ratios $\frac{c_j}{(z-\sqrt{\varepsilon})^j}$ and
$\frac{d_j}{(z+\sqrt{\varepsilon})^j},\,1 \leq j \leq \alpha/2$ where the coefficients $c_j, d_j$ are uniquely
determined. Then the function $w_2(x, \varepsilon)$ can be written
as
\ben
& &
\int_{1+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}^x w'_2(z, \varepsilon)\,d z=
\int_{1+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}^x \frac{P(z, \varepsilon)}{(z -\sqrt{\varepsilon})^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}}
\left(\frac{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}-z}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}+z}\right)
^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
d z\\[0.25ex]
&+&
\int_{1+\sqrt{\varepsilon}}^x \frac{Q(z, \varepsilon)}{(z +\sqrt{\varepsilon})^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}}
\left(\frac{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}+z}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}-z}\right)
^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
d z\\[0.25ex]
&=&
q_R \log (x-x_R) + q_L \log (x-x_L) + (x-x_R)^{-\frac{\alpha}{2}+1}\,h(x-x_R) + (x-x_L)^{-\frac{\alpha}{2}+1}\,g(x-x_L)\,.
\een
Here $P(z, \varepsilon)$ and $Q(z, \varepsilon)$ are polynomials of degree at most $\alpha/2-1$.
The functions $h(x-x_R)$ and $g(x-x_L)$ are holomorphic functions at the both singular points $x_R$ and $x_L$ since the
function
$\left(\frac{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}+z}{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon}} -z}\right)
^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}$ is a holomorphic function at the both singular
points $x_j, j=L, R$.
Then we can present
$\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ as
\ben
& &
G(x, \varepsilon)
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 &(x-x_R)(x-x_L)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} h(x-x_R) + (x-x_L)(x-x_R)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} g(x-x_L)\\
0 &1
\end{array}\right)\\[0.25ex]
&\times&
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 &q_L \log (x-x_L) + q_R \log (x-x_R)\\
0 &(x-x_L)^{-\frac{\alpha}{2}} (x-x_R)^{-\frac{\alpha}{2}}
\end{array}\right)\\[0.25ex]
&=&
G(x, \varepsilon)
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 &(x-x_R) (x-x_L)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} h(x-x_R) + (x-x_L) (x-x_R)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} g(x-x_L)\\
0 &1
\end{array}\right)\\[0.25ex]
&\times&
[(x-x_L) (x-x_R)]^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda}
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 &q_L \log (x-x_L) + q_R \log (x-x_R)\\
0 &1
\end{array}\right)\\[0.2ex]
&=&
G(x, \varepsilon)
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 &(x-x_R) (x-x_L)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} h(x-x_R) + (x-x_L) (x-x_R)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}} g(x-x_L)\\
0 &1
\end{array}\right)\\[0.25ex]
&\times&
[(x-x_L) (x-x_R)]^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda}
(x-x_L)^{J_L(\varepsilon)} (x-x_R)^{J_R(\varepsilon)}=\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)\,.
\een
This ends the proof.
\qed
Consider the DCHE \eqref{eq1} and its fundamental matrix solution at the origin in the
punctured disk $D_R$ around the origin with a finite small radius $R$
$$\,
D_R:=\{x\in\CC\,|\, 0 < |x| < R\}\,.
\,$$
The radius $R$ is so chosen that the points $x_L$ and $x_R$ belong to $D_R$ while the points $x_{LL}$ and $x_{RR}$
do not belong to $D_R$.
Let $x_0\in D_R \backslash \RR$. Let $\gamma_L$ and $\gamma_R$ be two closed loops, starting and ending at the
point $x_0$. The loop $\gamma_L$ (resp. $\gamma_R$) encircles only the point $x_L$ (resp. $x_R$) in the positive sense
as it is shown in Figure \ref{fig:image}.
Thanks to \thref{F-B-0} we can fix explicitly the corresponding local monodromy matrices corresponding to the loops
$\gamma_L$ and $\gamma_R$.
\bth{M-B-0}
The local monodromy matrices $M_k(\varepsilon),\,k=R, L$ of the perturbed equation
with respect to the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$, introduced by
\thref{F-B-0} are
given by
\be\label{M-0-B}
M_k(\varepsilon)=e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_k(\varepsilon)}, \quad k=L, R\,.
\ee
\ethe
\proof
Analytic continuation of the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ along the loop $\gamma_L$ leads to the
new fundamental matrix $[\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)]_{\gamma_L}$. The connection between these two fundamental matrices
is measured geometrically by the monodromy matrix $M_L(\varepsilon)$
$$\,
[\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)]_{\gamma_L}=
\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)\,M_L(\varepsilon)\,.
\,$$
On the other hand thanks to the explicit local form of the matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ from \thref{F-B-0}
we find that
\ben
[\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)]_{\gamma_L}
&=&
G(x, \varepsilon)\, H(x, \varepsilon)\,
(x-x_L)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda }\, e^{\pi\,i \Lambda}\\[0.2ex]
&\times&
(x-x_R)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda }\,
(x-x_L)^{J_L(\varepsilon)} \,e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)}\, (x-x_R)^{J_R(\varepsilon)}\\[0.2ex]
&=&
G(x, \varepsilon)\,H(x, \varepsilon)\,
(x-x_L)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda}\\[0.2ex]
&\times&
(x-x_R)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda}
(x-x_L)^{J_L(\varepsilon)} e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)}
(x-x_R)^{J_R(\varepsilon)} \,,
\een
since $e^{\pi\,i \Lambda}=I_2$ when $\alpha\in 2 \NN$.
As a result we have
\ben
[\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)]_{\gamma_L}=
\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon) e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)} \,,
\een
since the matrices $e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)}$ and $(x-x_R)^{J_R(\varepsilon)}$ commute.
In the same manner one can derive the formula for the monodromy matrix $M_R(\varepsilon)$.
This ends the proof.
\qed
In what follows we compute the numbers $q_k, k=L, R$.
\bpr{q-0}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds.
Then the number $q_R$ is given by
\ben
q_R=\frac{1}
{\left(\frac{\alpha-2}{2}\right)!}
\sum_{k=0}^{\frac{\alpha-2}{2}}
\left( \left(\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\alpha-2}{2}\\
k
\end{array}\right)
(-1)^{\frac{\alpha-2}{2}-k}
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha-1-k)}{\Gamma(\frac{\alpha}{2})} (2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^{-\alpha+1+k}\right)\,A_R\,,
\een
where
$$\,
A_R=\left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^k\,
\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2\sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\sum_{s=0}^k \left(\begin{array}{c}
k\\
s
\end{array}\right)
\frac{\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}} + s)\,\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}+1)}
{\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}})\,\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}-k+s+1)}
\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^s\,.
\,$$
Similarly, the number $q_L$ is
given by
\ben
q_L=\frac{1}
{\left(\frac{\alpha-2}{2}\right)!}
\sum_{k=0}^{\frac{\alpha-2}{2}}
\left( \left(\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\alpha-2}{2}\\
k
\end{array}\right)
(-1)^{\frac{\alpha-2}{2}-k}
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha-1-k)}{\Gamma(\frac{\alpha}{2})} (-2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^{-\alpha+1+k}\right)\,A_L\,,
\een
where
\be\label{al}\qquad\quad
A_L=\left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^k
\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2\sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\sum_{s=0}^k \left(\begin{array}{c}
k\\
s
\end{array}\right)
\frac{\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}} + s)\,\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}+1)}
{\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}})\,\Gamma(\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}-k+s+1)}
\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^s\,.
\ee
\epr
It turns out the numbers $q_R$ and $q_L$ given by \prref{q-0} have a limit when $\sqrt{\varepsilon}\rightarrow 0$.
\ble{q-0}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds. Then for each fixed $\alpha$ the numbers $q_R$ and $q_L$ computed by
\prref{q-0} satisfy the limits
$$\,
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} q_R=-
(-1)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}\,\infty,\qquad
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} q_L=
(-1)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}\,\infty
\,$$
when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$.
\ele
\proof
Applying the limit
\be\label{l}
\lim_{|z| \rightarrow \infty}
\frac{\Gamma (z+a)}{\Gamma(z)\,z^a}=1
\ee
we find that
\ben
q_R &\to&
-\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\frac{(-1)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}}{(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^{\alpha-1}\,\Gamma(\frac{\alpha}{2})}
\sum_{k=0}^{\frac{\alpha-2}{2}}
\frac{(-1)^k\,\Gamma(\alpha-1-k)}{k!\,(\frac{\alpha-2}{2}-k)!}
\left(\frac{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}\,\gamma}
{1-\varepsilon^2}\right)^k,\\[0.2ex]
q_L &\to&
\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\frac{(-1)^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}}{(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^{\alpha-1}\,\Gamma(\frac{\alpha}{2})}
\sum_{k=0}^{\frac{\alpha-2}{2}}
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha-1-k)}{k!\,(\frac{\alpha-2}{2}-k)!}
\left(\frac{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}\,\gamma}
{1-\varepsilon^2}\right)^k
\een
when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
Now the statement follows from the observation that $q_R$ and $q_L$ are expressed as finite sums and from the
limits
\be\label{ll}
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0}
\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}=1,\quad
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0}
\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}=1\,.
\ee
\qed
From \leref{q-0} it follows that the sign of the limit of the number $q_k, k=L, R$ depends on the parameter
$\alpha$ but we always have that
$$\,
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} (q_R + q_L)=\infty - \infty\,.
\,$$
\bre{unfolded1}
The result of \leref{q-0} is the identification mark of the unfolding of a resonant regular point.
Recall that in our previous works \cite{St1, St2} all the coefficients place before the logarithmic terms in the solution
of the unfolded equation have a finite limit when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$.
But in all previous cases these logarithmic terms measure how the Stokes matrices of the initial equation are transformed
to the monodromy matrices of the unfolded equation. This time the logarithmic terms in the solution of the unfolded
equation correspond to an unfolding of the monodromy matrix of the initial equation to two monodromy matrices of the
unfolded equation.
\ere
\subsection{ The unfolded monodromy around the origin }
In this section we connect by a radial limit $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$ the monodromy
matrices $M_j(\varepsilon), j=R, L$ of the unfolded equation with the monodromy matrix $M_0$
of the DCHE.
The following proposition is a key for our study.
\bpr{con}
When $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ the fundamental set of solutions $\{w_1(x, \varepsilon), w_2(x, \varepsilon)\}$
of the unfolded equation fixed by \thref{t1-p} converges uniformly on compact sets of $D_R$ to the fundamental set of solutions
$\{w_1(x, 0), w_2(x, 0)\}$ of the DCHE fixed by \thref{t1}.
\epr
Thanks to \prref{con} we have the following property of the fundamental matrices
$\Phi_0(x, 0)$ and $\Phi(x, \varepsilon)$.
\bco{conver}
The fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ of the unfolded equation given by \thref{F-B-0} converges uniformly on compact
sets of $D_R$ to the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ of the DCHE given by \thref{local-0}
when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$.
\eco
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{minipage}[c][1\width]
{0.003\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{nloopg0}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c][1\width]
{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{nloopSS}
\end{minipage}
\caption{The loop $\gamma$ in $D_R$ and the loops $\gamma_L$ and $\gamma_R$ in $D_R(\varepsilon)$.}
\label{fig:image}
\end{figure}
Let $\gamma\in D_R$ be a closed loop starting and ending at the same point
$x_0\in D_R \backslash \RR$ as in Section 3.2,
encircling the origin and the points $x_R$ and $x_L$ and oriented counter-clockwise as in Figure \ref{fig:image}.
The fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ of the DCHE introduced in \thref{local-0}
is a holomorphic multi-valued function on $D_R$. The analytic continuation of $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ along
$\gamma$ leads to a new fundamental matrix solution $[\Phi_0(x, 0)]_{\gamma}$ of the DCHE.
The connection between these two fundamental matrix solutions is given by the monodromy matrix
$M_0=e^{2 \pi\,i\,\Lambda}\,e^{2 \pi\,i\,J}=e^{2 \pi\,i\,J}$ from
\eqref{mm-0}
$$\,
\left[\Phi_0(x, 0)\right]_{\gamma}=\Phi_0(x, 0)\,M_0\,.
\,$$
Let $D_R(\varepsilon)$ be a domain in $\CC\setminus \{x_L, x_R\}$ such that
$D_R(\varepsilon)$ tends to the disk $D_R$ when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ .
Let $\gamma(\varepsilon)\in D_R(\varepsilon)$ be a closed loop starting and ending with the same point $x_0$ and such that
$\gamma(\varepsilon)=\gamma_L \circ \gamma_R$ where the loops $\gamma_L$ and $\gamma_R$ are defined in Section 3.2 and in
Figure \ref{fig:image}.
Then when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ the loop $\gamma(\varepsilon)$ tends to a closed loop that
belongs to the homotopy class $[\gamma]$ of the loop.
Analytic continuation of the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ along $\gamma(\varepsilon)$
yields a new fundamental matrix $\left[\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)\right]_{\gamma(\varepsilon)}$.
The connection between these two fundamental matrices is measured geometrically by an invertible constant
matrix $M_0(\varepsilon)$
\be\label{unf-mon}
\left[\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)\right]_{\gamma(\varepsilon)}=\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)\,M_0(\varepsilon)\,.
\ee
\bde{unfolded-monodromy}
We call the invertible matrix $M_0(\varepsilon)$ defined by \eqref{unf-mon} the unfolded monodromy matrix
around the origin.
\ede
The reducibility ensures the connection by a limit $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ between the fundamental matrix solutions
$\Phi_0(x, 0)$ and $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$, which ensures such a connection between the monodromy around the origin
and the unfolded monodrmy
\bth{an-mon}
The unfolded monodromy matrix $M_0(\varepsilon)$ around the origin depends analytically on $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$
and converges when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$ to the monodromy matrix around the origin $M_0$
defined by \eqref{mm-0}.
\ethe
\proof
Since the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ converges uniformly on the compact sets
of $D_R$
to the fundamental matrix $\Phi_0(x, 0)$, so does the fundamental matrix
$\left[\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)\right]_{\gamma(\varepsilon)}$ to the fundamental matrix
$\left[\Phi(x, 0)\right]_{\gamma}$.
Then the matrix $M_0(\varepsilon)$ must converge to the monodromy matrix $M_0$ when
$\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$.
\qed
When the origin is a resonant singularity we find
that the unfolded monodromy matrix $M_0(\varepsilon)$ is expressed in terms of the monodromy
matrices $M_L(\varepsilon)$ and $M_R(\varepsilon)$.
\bth{un}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds.
Let $M_j(\varepsilon), j=L, R$ and $M_0(\varepsilon)$ be the monodromy matrices and the unfolded
monodromy matrix of the unfolded equation with respect to the fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$
Then they
satisfy the following relation
\be\label{M-hat}
M_0(\varepsilon)=M_R(\varepsilon)\,M_L(\varepsilon)=M_L(\varepsilon)\,M_R(\varepsilon)\,.
\ee
\ethe
\proof
The connection $M_0(\varepsilon)=M_R(\varepsilon)\,M_L(\varepsilon)$
follows from the definition $\gamma_L \circ \gamma_R=\gamma(\varepsilon)$, where $\gamma_L$ and $\gamma_R$ are the loops
from section 3.2.
The equality $M_R(\varepsilon)\,M_L(\varepsilon)=M_L(\varepsilon)\,M_R(\varepsilon)$ follows from the fact that
under the condition \eqref{res1} the matrices $M_{L}(\varepsilon)$ and $M_R(\varepsilon)$ commute.
\qed
As an immediate consequence we have
\bco{J}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds.
Then the unfolded monodromy matrix $M_0(\varepsilon)$ and the matrices
$e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_j(\varepsilon)}, j=L, R$ satisfy the following relation
$$\,
M_0(\varepsilon)=e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)}\,e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_R(\varepsilon)}=
e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_R(\varepsilon)}\,e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)}\,.
\,$$
\eco
\proof
The statement follows immediately from \eqref{M-hat} and \eqref{M-0-B}.
\qed
Combining \coref{J} and \thref{an-mon} we have that
\bpr{main1}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds. Then the matrices $J_k(\varepsilon), k=L, R$
of the unfolded equation and the monodromy matrix $M_0$ of the DCHE are connected
by the limit
$$\,
e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)}\,e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_R(\varepsilon)}=
e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_R(\varepsilon)}\,e^{2 \pi\,i\,J_L(\varepsilon)}
\longrightarrow M_0
\,$$
when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0$.
\epr
Thanks to \prref{main1} we find the limit of $q_R+q_L$ when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
\bco{q}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res1} holds. Then
\be\label{limit}
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0} q_R + q_L=\lambda\,,
\ee
where $\lambda$ is given by \eqref{a}.
\eco
In the Appendix we demonstrate by a direct computation that the limit \eqref{limit} is valid for lower values of the
parameter $\alpha$.
\section{Unfolding of the Stokes matrix at the origin }
Throughout this section we assume that $\beta \neq 0$ and therefore the origin is an irregular singularity for the DCHE.
In \cite{St2} we have shown by a direct computation, that when $\alpha=2$
the Stokes matrix at the origin of the DCHE \eqref{eq1} can be obtained by
a limit of this part of the monodromy matrices around resonant singular points
that governs the existence of the
logarithmic term in the solution of the unfolded equation.
In the section 4.1 we show that this result remains valid for every reducible DCHE \eqref{eq1}.
In fact the realization of the Stokes matrix as a limit of the part of the monodromy matrix of the unfolded equation
is an effect of the recent theoretical result of Hurtubise, Klime\v{s}, Lambert and Rousseau \cite{HLR, Kl-2, CL-CR, CL-CR1}.
Using the obtained connection between the analytic invariants of both equations we provide the
Stokes matrix at the origin without studying in details the DCHE. Instead we deal with the unfolded
equation and its monodromy matrix around a resonant singularity $x_L$.
In the section 4.2 we build explicitly an actual fundamental matrix solution of
the DCHE \eqref{eq1} at the origin with respect to which the Stokes matrix has the form obtained in the firs part.
\subsection{The Stokes matrix at the origin as a limit of the monodromy matrix around $x_L$}
Following Lambert and Rousseau \cite{CL-CR, CL-CR1} we consider both equations in the ramified domain
$\{x\in\CC\,:\, -\kappa < \arg (x) < \kappa\}$ where $0 < \kappa < \frac{\pi}{2}$. We cover this domain by two open sectors
\ben
\Omega_1=\Omega_1(\rho, \kappa) &=&
\left\{ x=r\,e^{i \delta}\,|\,
0 < r < \rho,\, -\kappa-\pi < \delta < \kappa \right\},\\[0.1ex]
\Omega_2=\Omega_2(\rho, \kappa) &=&
\left\{ x=r\,e^{i \delta}\,|\,
0 < r < \rho,\, -\kappa < \delta < \kappa + \pi \right\}\,.
\een
The radius $\rho$ is so chosen that
$x_{LL}, x_{RR} \notin \Omega_1 \cup \Omega_2$ while $x_L, x_R\in \Omega_1 \cup \Omega_2$.
Denote by $\Omega_R$ and $\Omega_L$ the connected components of the
intersection $\Omega_1\cap \Omega_2$, as $x_R\in \Omega_R,\,x_L\in \Omega_L$.
We have a proposition similar to \prref{con}.
\bpr{con-1}
When $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ the fundamental set of solutions $\{w_1(x, \varepsilon), w_2(x, \varepsilon)\}$
of the unfolded equation fixed by \thref{t1-p} converges uniformly on compact sets of $\Omega_R \cup \Omega_L$ to the fundamental set of solutions
$\{w_1(x, 0), w_2(x, 0)\}$ of the DCHE fixed by \thref{t1}.
\epr
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{minipage}[c][1\width]
{0.003\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{sectord0}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c][1\width]
{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{sectordE}
\end{minipage}
\caption{The sectors $\Omega_j$ and $\Omega_j(\varepsilon),\,j=1, 2$.}
\label{fig:sectorimage}
\end{figure}
Consider the DCHE \eqref{eq1} over $\Omega_1 \cup \Omega_2$.
From the sectorial normalization theorem of Sibuya \cite{S} and the theorem of Hukuhara-Turrittin\cite{W} it follows that
the actual fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ of the DCHE can be represented as
$$\,
\Phi_j(x, 0)=\exp (G x)\,H_j(x)\,\left[x^{\Lambda}\,\exp\left(-\frac{B}{x}\right)\right]_j
\,$$
on the sectors $\Omega_j,\,j=1, 2$, respectively. Here
\be\label{GLB}
G=\diag (0, \gamma),\quad \Lambda=\diag(0, -\alpha), \quad B=\diag(0, \beta)
\ee
and $[x^{\Lambda}\,\exp(-B/x)]_j$ is the branch of the matrix $x^{\Lambda}\,\exp(-B/x)$ on $\Omega_j, j=L, R$,
respectively.
The matrices $H_j(x)$ are holomorphic matrix functions on $\Omega_j$, respectively, as both of them are asymptotic
in the Gevrey 1 sense to the same formal matrix $\hat{H}(x)$ on $\Omega_j, j=L, R$. On the sector $\Omega_R$
the fundamental matrix solutions $\Phi_1(x, 0)$ and $\Phi_2(x, 0)$ coincide.
On the sector $\Omega_L$ the jump of the solution $\Phi_2(x, 0)$ to the solution $\Phi_1(x, 0)$ is measured geometrically
by the Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$, corresponding to the singular direction $\theta=\pi$
\be\label{s-m}
\Phi_2(x, 0)=\Phi_1(x, 0)\,St_{\pi}\,,
\ee
where
$$\,
St_{\pi}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \mu\\
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)\,.
\,$$
Consider now the unfolded equation. The next theorem describes the behavior of the fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$
near the singular points when $x_L$ is a resonant singularity.
\bth{f-p}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res2} holds. Then
the fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ of the unfolded equation depends analytically on $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ and it is represented
in a neighborhood of the resonant singularity $x_L$ which does not contain the point $x_R$ as
\be\label{r-F}
\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)=\left(I_L(\varepsilon) + \mathcal{O}(x-x_L)\right)\,
(x-x_L)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda + \frac{1}{2 x_L}\,B}\,(x-x_L)^{T_L(\varepsilon)}
\ee
and in a neighborhood of the non-resonant singularity $x_R$ which does not contain the point $x_L$ as
$$\,
\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)=\left(I_R(\varepsilon) + \mathcal{O}(x-x_R)\right)\,
(x-x_R)^{\frac{1}{2} \Lambda + \frac{1}{2 x_R}\,B}\,.
\,$$
The matrices $I_j(\varepsilon) + \mathcal{O}(x-x_j),\,j=L, R$ are holomorphic matrix functions there.
The matrices $\Lambda$ and $B$ are given by \eqref{GLB}. The matrix $T_L(\varepsilon)$ is defined as
$$\,
T_L(\varepsilon)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
0 & d_L\\
0 & 0
\end{array}\right)\,,
\,$$
where
$$\,
d_L=\res (w_2'(x, \varepsilon),\,x=x_L)\,.
\,$$
\ethe
\proof
The proof is similar to the proof of Proposition 4.7 in \cite{St1}.
\qed
With respect to the matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ from \thref{f-p} the local monodromy matrices
$M_j(\varepsilon)$
around the singular point $x_j, j=L, R$ have the form
$$\,
M_L(\varepsilon)=e^{2\pi\,i\,(\frac{1}{2}\,\Lambda + \frac{1}{2\,x_L}\,B)}\,e^{2 \pi\,i\,T_L(\varepsilon)}=
e^{2 \,\pi\,T_L(\varepsilon)},\qquad
M_R(\varepsilon)=e^{2\pi\,i\,(\frac{1}{2}\,\Lambda + \frac{1}{2\,x_R}\,B)}\,.
\,$$
Let $\Omega_1(\varepsilon)$ and $\Omega_2(\varepsilon)$ be the sectors obtained from the sectors $\Omega_1$ and $\Omega_2$
by making a cut between the points $x_L$ and $x_R$ through the real axis (see Figure \ref{fig:sectorimage}).
The origin belongs to this cut. When
$\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$ the sectors $\Omega_j(\varepsilon)$ tend to the sectors $\Omega_j, j=L, R$, respectively.
Consider the unfolded equation over $\Omega_1(\varepsilon) \cup \Omega_2(\varepsilon)$.
The fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ writes also as
\be\label{r-F-p}
\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)=G(x, \varepsilon)\,H(x, \varepsilon)\,
(x-x_L)^{\frac{1}{2}\,\Lambda + \frac{1}{2\, x_L}\,B}\,
(x-x_R)^{\frac{1}{2}\,\Lambda + \frac{1}{2\, x_R}\,B}\,,
\ee
where
$$\,
G(x, \varepsilon)=(x-x_{LL})^{-\frac{x_{LL}}{2}\,G}\,(x_{RR} -x)^{-\frac{x_{RR}}{2}\,G}\,
\,$$
and
$$\,
H(x, \varepsilon)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & (x-x_L)^{-\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}+ \frac{\alpha}{2}}\,
(x-x_R)^{\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}+ \frac{\alpha}{2}}\,w_2(x, \varepsilon)\\[0.1ex]
0 & 1
\end{array}
\right)\,.
\,$$
The next proposition that follows immediately from \prref{con-1} is a key for the extension of the results in \cite{St2}
\bco{im}
The fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, \varepsilon)$ from \eqref{r-F-p} converges uniformly on compact sets of
$\Omega_R \cup \Omega_L$ to the actual fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ at the origin of the DCHE when
$\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
\eco
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{monodromyS}
\caption{The monodromy operator $M_L(\varepsilon)$.}
\label{fig:stokes}
\end{figure}
As in \cite{St2} \coref{im} allows us to identify the so called unfolded Stokes matrix $St_L(\varepsilon)$ with the
matrix $e^{2 \pi\,i\,T_L}$ when the point $x_L$ is a resonant singularity.
\bpr{m-s}$($ Proposition 6.1 in \cite{St2}$)$
Let $M_L(\varepsilon)$ and $St_L(\varepsilon)$ be the monodromy matrices and the unfolded Stokes matrix of the
unfolded equation. Then when the condition \eqref{res2} holds they satisfy the relations
$$\,
M_L(\varepsilon)=St_L(\varepsilon)\,e^{\pi\,i (\Lambda + \frac{1}{x_R}\,B)}
\,$$
on the sector $\Omega_1(\varepsilon)$, and
$$\,
M_L(\varepsilon)=e^{\pi\,i (\Lambda + \frac{1}{x_R}\,B)}\,St_L(\varepsilon)
\,$$
on the sector $\Omega_2(\varepsilon)$.
\epr
\bco{c1}$($Corollary 6.2 in \cite{St2}$)$
Assume that the condition \eqref{res2} holds. Then
$$\,
St_L(\varepsilon)=e^{2\,\pi\,i\,T_L(\varepsilon)}\,.
\,$$
\eco
Let us compute the limit of the matrix $T_L(\varepsilon)$ when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
The next proposition and lemma gives us the number $d_L$and its limit when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
\bpr{d}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res2} holds. Then
\ben
d_L &=&
\frac{1}{\left(\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}+\frac{\alpha}{2}-1\right)!}
\sum_{k=0}^{\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}} + \frac{\alpha}{2}-1}
\left(\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}} + \frac{\alpha}{2} -1\\[0.1ex]
k
\end{array}\right)\,
\frac{\Gamma \left(\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}-\frac{\alpha}{2}+1\right)(-2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^{-\alpha+1+k}}
{\Gamma (2+k-\alpha)}\,A_L\,,
\een
where $A_L$ is given by \eqref{al}.
\epr
\ble{d}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res2} holds. Then
$$\,
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0} d_L=
(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}\,\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
(-1)^k\,\frac{\beta^k\,\gamma^k}{k!\,\Gamma(2+k-\alpha)}\,.
\,$$
\ele
\proof
Applying the limit \eqref{l} for $z=\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}$ we find that $A \to \gamma^k$
when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$. Again applying the limit \eqref{l} for $z=\frac{\beta}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}$ and using the limit
\eqref{ll} we obtain the limit of $d_L$.
\qed
In \cite{CL-CR1} Lambert and Rousseau prove that the unfolded Stokes matrix $St_L(\varepsilon)$ depends
analytically on $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ and tends to the Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$ when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
Then
\bth{limit}
Assume that the condition \eqref{res2} holds. Then the Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$ at the origin of the DCHE
and the matrix $e^{2 \pi\,i\,T_L(\varepsilon)}$ of the unfolded equation are connected as
$$\,
e^{2 \pi\,i\,T_L(\varepsilon)} \longrightarrow St_{\pi}
\,$$
when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
\ethe
In a consequence of \thref{limit} we have
\bco{stokes}
Assume that $\beta > 0 $. Then there exists an actual fundamental matrix solution at the origin of the DCHE
with respect to which the corresponding Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$ is given by
$$\,
St_{\pi}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \mu\\
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)\,,
\,$$
where
\be\label{sm}
\mu= 2\,\pi\,i\, (-\beta)^{1-\alpha}\,\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
(-1)^k\,\frac{\beta^k\,\gamma^k}{k!\,\Gamma(2+k-\alpha)}\,.
\ee
\eco
\subsection{Actual fundamental matrix solution at the origin of the DCHE }
In this paragraph we present explicitly the actual fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ at the origin of the DCHE
with respect to which the Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$ has the form fixed by \thref{stokes}.
When $\alpha\in\ZZ$ we apply the Borel-Laplace summation in order to build this actual solution (see \cite{LR, R2} for details).
When $\alpha\notin\ZZ$ we directly express the solution $w_2(x, 0)$ in terms of Laplace integrals without using the summability
theory. The second approach is more general and also can be used when $\alpha\in\ZZ$. But the first approach allows us to
distinguish special solutions of DCHE that are holomorphic in whole $\CC^*$ even when $\alpha\notin\ZZ$.
We start by building a formal fundamental matrix solution at the origin.
\bth{0}
Assume that $\beta > 0$. Then the DCHE \eqref{eq1} possesses an unique formal fundamental matrix solution $\hat{\Phi}_0(x, 0)$
at the origin in the form
$$\,
\hat{\Phi}_0(x, 0)=\exp(G x)\,\hat{H}(x)\,x^{\Lambda}\,\exp \left(-\frac{B}{x}\right)\,,
\,$$
where the matrices $G, \Lambda$ and $B$ are given by \eqref{GLB}.
The matrix $\hat{H}(x)$ is defined as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\,
If $\alpha\notin \ZZ$ then
$$\,
\hat{H}(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \frac{x\,\hat{\varphi}(x)}{\beta}\\[0.1ex]
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)
\,$$
where
\be\label{s1}
\hat{\varphi}(x)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^n\,S_n\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+n)}{\beta^n}\,x^{n+1}\,.
\ee
Here $S_n$ is the $n$-th partial sum of the absolutely convergent number series
$$\,
S=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^k\,\beta^k\,\gamma^k}{k!\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+k)}\,.
\,$$
In particular,
\begin{enumerate}
\item\,
If $S=0$ then the power series $\hat{\varphi}(x)$ is convergent.
\item\,
If $S \neq 0$ then the power series $\hat{\varphi}(x)$ is divergent.
\end{enumerate}
\item\,
If $\alpha\in\NN$ then
$$\,
\hat{H}(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \frac{x^{\alpha}\,\gamma^{\alpha-1}\,\hat{\psi}(x)}{\beta} + x^{\alpha}\,P\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)\\[0.1ex]
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)
\,$$
where
\be\label{s2}
\hat{\psi}(x)=
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^n\,W_n\,n!}{\beta^n}\,x^{n+1}
\ee
and $P\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)$ is a polynomial in $\frac{1}{x}$ of degree $\alpha-2$ for $\alpha \geq 2$ and
$P\equiv 0$ for $\alpha=1$.
Here $W_n$ is the $n$-th partial sum of the absolutely convergent number series
$$\,
W=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^k\,\beta^k\,\gamma^k}{k!\,\Gamma(\alpha+k)}\,.
\,$$
In particular,
\begin{enumerate}
\item\,
If $W=0$ then the power series $\hat{\psi}(x)$ is convergent.
\item\,
If $W\neq 0$ then the power series $\hat{\psi}(x)$ is divergent.
\end{enumerate}
\item\,
If $\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$ then
$$\,
\hat{H}(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \frac{x\,\hat{\phi}(x)}{\beta}\\[0.1ex]
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)
\,$$
where
\be\label{s3}
\hat{\phi}(x)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^n\,Q_n\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+n)}{\beta^{1-\alpha+n}}\,x^{n+1}\,.
\ee
Here $Q_n$ is the $n$-th partial sum of the absolutely convergent number series
$$\,
Q=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^k\,\gamma^k\,\beta^{1-\alpha+k}}
{k!\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+k)}\,.
\,$$
In particular,
\begin{enumerate}
\item\,
If $Q=0$ then the power series $\hat{\phi}(x)$ is convergent.
\item\,
If $Q\neq 0$ then the power series $\hat{\phi}(x)$ is divergent.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\ethe
\proof
The proof is similar to the proof of Proposition 4.2 in \cite{St2}. We only note that when $\alpha\notin\ZZ$ we reduce the solution
$w_2(x, 0)$ from \eqref{fss} to the integral $\int_0^x \frac{e^{-\frac{\beta}{z}}}{z^{\alpha}}\, d z$ while when $\alpha\in\ZZ$
to the integral $\int_0^x \frac{e^{-\frac{\beta}{z}}}{z}\,d z$.
\qed
The application of summability theory
to the differential equations ensures that the divergent power series $\hat{\varphi}(x), \hat{\psi}(x)$ and $\hat{\phi}(x)$ are 1-summable
in any direction $\theta$ except for the singular direction $\theta=\pi$.
\ble{sum}
1.\,Assume that $W \neq 0$. Then for any direction $\theta \neq \pi$ the function
$$\,
\psi_{\theta}(x)=\beta\,\int_0^{+\infty\,e^{i \theta}}
\frac{v(\xi)\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{\xi+ \beta}\,d \xi
\,$$
defines the 1-sum of the power series $\hat{\psi}(x)$ from \eqref{s2} in such a direction. Here
$$\,
v(\xi)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^n\,\xi^n}{n!\,\Gamma(\alpha+n)}\,.
\,$$
2.\, Assume that $Q \neq 0$. Then for every direction $\theta \neq \pi$ the function
$$\,
\phi_{\theta}(x)=
\frac{\beta}{x^{1-\alpha}}\int_0^{+\infty e^{i \theta}}
\frac{\xi^{1-\alpha}\,q(\xi)\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{\xi+\beta}\,d \xi
\,$$
defines the 1-sum of the power series $\hat{\phi}(x)$ from \eqref{s3} is such a direction.
Here
$$\,
q(\xi)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,\xi^k}{k!\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+k)}\,.
\,$$
The functions $\psi_{\theta}(x)$ and $\phi_{\theta}(x)$ are holomorphic functions in the open disc
\be\label{D}
\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)=\left\{
x\in\CC^*\,|\, Re \,\left(\frac{e^{i \theta}}{x}\right) > |\gamma|\right\}\,.
\ee
\ele
\proof
We will prove the second statement of the Lemma. The first is proved in a similar way.
Let $\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$. The formal Borel transform of order 1 of the series $\hat{\phi}(x)$ from
\eqref{s3} yields the convergent power series near the origin $\xi=0$ of the Borel $\xi$-plane
$$\,
\phi(\xi)=(\hat{\B}_1 \hat{\phi})(\xi)=
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (-1)^n\,Q_n\,\frac{(1-\alpha+n)!}{\beta^{1-\alpha+n}}\,\frac{\xi^n}{n!}\,.
\,$$
The series $\phi(\xi)$ can be regarded as the $1-\alpha$-th derivative of the series
$$\,
w(\xi)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} (-1)^n\,Q_n\,\frac{\xi^{1-\alpha+n}}{\beta^{1-\alpha+n}}\,.
\,$$
Then from Lemma 6.12 in \cite{St2} it follows that the Laplace transform of order 1 of the function
$\phi(\xi)$ is expressed by the Laplace transform of the function $w(\xi)$
$$\,
(\L_1 \phi)(x)=\frac{1}{x^{1-\alpha}}\,(\L_1 w)(x)
\,$$
since $\frac{d^k\,w}{d\, \xi^k}=0$ for $0 \leq k \leq -\alpha$. It turns out that the power series
$w(\xi)$ is the Maclaurin series of a well known function. More precisely,
$$\,
w(\xi)=(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}\,
\left(\frac{1}{1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}} - \sum_{k=0}^{-\alpha} (-1)^k\,\frac{\xi^k}{\beta^k}\right)\,
q(\xi)\,,
\,$$
where $q(\xi)$ is the analytic function in $\CC$ defined by the power series
$$\,
q(\xi)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,\xi^k}{k!\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+k)}\,.
\,$$
Since
$$\,
\sum_{k=0}^{-\alpha} (-1)^k\frac{\xi^k}{\beta^k}=
\frac{1-(-1)^{1-\alpha}\frac{\xi^{1-\alpha}}{\beta^{1-\alpha}}}{1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}}
\,$$
then
\ben
(\L_1 \phi)(x) &=&
\frac{(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}}{x^{1-\alpha}}\,
\left(\L_1 \frac{q(\xi)}{1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}}\right)(x) -
\frac{(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}}{x^{1-\alpha}}\,
\left(\L_1 \frac{q(\xi)}{1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}}\right)(x) \\[0.3ex]
&+&
\frac{1}{x^{1-\alpha}} \left(\L_1 \frac{\xi^{1-\alpha}\,q(\xi)}{1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}}\right)(x)=
\frac{\beta}{x^{1-\alpha}}\int_0^{+\infty e^{i \theta}}
\frac{\xi^{1-\alpha}\,q(\xi)\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{\xi+\beta}\,d \xi\,.
\een
Thus the function
$$\,
\phi_{\theta}(x)=
\frac{\beta}{x^{1-\alpha}}\int_0^{+\infty e^{i \theta}}
\frac{\xi^{1-\alpha}\,q(\xi)\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{\xi+\beta}\,d \xi
\,$$
gives the 1-sum of the power series $\hat{\phi}(x)$ in any direction $\theta \neq \pi$.
Since
$$\,
\left|\frac{q(\xi)}{\xi+\beta}\right| \leq A \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{|\gamma|^k\,|\xi|^k}{k!}=
A\,e^{|\gamma|\,|\xi|}
\,$$
for an appropriate constant $A > 0$ the integral $\phi_{\theta}(x)$ exists when $\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$
and defines a holomorphic function in the open disc $Re\,\left(\frac{e^{i \theta}}{x}\right) > |\gamma|$.
This ends the proof.
\qed
\bre{s1}
Unfortunately till now we can not derive the 1-sum of the power series $\hat{\varphi}(x)$ from
\eqref{s1} in an explicit way. The formal Borel transform of this series
$$\,
(\hat{\B}_1 \hat{\varphi})(\xi)=
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^n\,S_n\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+n)}{\beta^n}\,
\frac{\xi^n}{n!}
\,$$
is a convergent power series for $|\xi| < \beta$. But we can not specify explicitly the function
whose Maclaurin series is $(\hat{\B}_1 \hat{\varphi})(\xi)$. For this reason we use a slightly different
approach to build an actual solution of the DCHE when $\alpha\notin\ZZ$.
\ere
\bre{ex}
Let $I=(-\pi, \pi) \subset \RR$.
When we move the direction $\theta\in I$ the holomorphic functions
$\psi_{\theta}(x)$ (resp. $\phi_{\theta}(x)$) glue together analytically and define a holomorphic function $\tilde{\psi}(x)$
(resp. $\tilde{\phi}(x)$) on a sector $\widetilde{\mathcal{D}}$
with opening $> \pi$
\be\label{D}
\widetilde{\mathcal{D}}=\bigcup_{\theta\in I}\,\widetilde{\mathcal{D}}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)\,,
\ee
where $\widetilde{\mathcal{D}}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$ is the lifting of $\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$
on the Riemann surface of the natural logarithm. On $\widetilde{\mathcal{D}}$ the function $\tilde{\psi}(x)$ (resp. $\tilde{\phi}(x)$)
is asymptotic to
the power series $\hat{\psi}(x)$ (resp. $\hat{\phi}(x)$) in Gevrey 1 sense and defines the 1-sum of this series there. The restriction of
$\tilde{\psi}(x)$ (resp. $\tilde{\phi}(x)$) on $\CC^*$ is a multivalued function. In every direction $\theta\neq \pi$ the function $\tilde{\psi}(x)$ (resp. $\tilde{\phi}(x)$)
has only one value than coincides with the function $\psi_{\theta}(x)$ from \leref{sum}(1) (resp. $\phi_{\theta}(x)$ from \leref{sum}(2)). Near the singular direction
$\theta=\pi$ the function $\tilde{\psi}(x)$ (resp. $\tilde{\phi}(x)$) has two different values: $\psi^{+}_{\pi}(x)=\psi_{\pi+\epsilon}(x)$ (resp. $\phi^{+}_{\pi}(x)=\phi_{\pi+\epsilon}(x)$) and
$\psi^{-}_{\pi}(x)=\psi_{\pi-\epsilon}(x)$ (resp. $\phi^{-}_{\pi}(x)=\phi_{\pi-\epsilon}(x)$) for a small number $\epsilon > 0$.
\ere
Now we can present an actual fundamental matrix solution at the origin.
\bth{0-1}
Assume that $\beta > 0$.
Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item\,
Assume that one of the following conditions holds: $(\alpha\in\NN,\, W=0),\,(\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0},\,Q=0)$
or $(\alpha\notin \ZZ, S=0)$. Then the DCHE \eqref{eq1} possesses an unique actual fundamental
matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$ at the origin in the form
\be\label{sol}
\Phi_0(x, 0)=\exp(G x)\,H(x)\,x^{\Lambda}\,\exp \left(-\frac{B}{x}\right)\,,
\ee
where the matrices $G, \Lambda$ and $B$ are given by \eqref{GLB} and $H(x)$ is a holomorphic matrix function in whole $\CC$.
More precisely, when $\alpha\notin\ZZ$ and $S=0$ the matrix $H(x)$ coincides with the matrix $\hat{H}(x)$
from \thref{0}(1). When
$\alpha\in\NN$ and $W=0$ the matrix $H(x)$ coincides with the matrix $\hat{H}(x)$ from \thref{0}(2).
When $\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$ and $Q=0$ the matrix $H(x)$ coincides with the matrix $\hat{H}(x)$ from \thref{0}(3).
\item\,
Assume that $Q\neq 0,\,W\neq 0, \,S\neq 0$.
Then the DCHE \eqref{eq1} possesses an unique actual matrix solution $\widetilde{\Phi}_0(x, 0)$ at the origin in the form
\eqref{sol} which is a holomorphic matrix function on the sector $\widetilde{\mathcal{D}}$ from \eqref{D} whose opening is
$>\pi$. The restriction of $\widetilde{\Phi}_0(x, 0)$ on $\CC^*$ is a multivalued function.
For any direction $\theta\neq \pi$ this solution has only one value
$\Phi^{\theta}_0(x, 0)$ in the form
\be\label{afm}
\Phi^{\theta}_0(x, 0)=\exp(G x)\,H_{\theta}(x)\,x^{\Lambda}\,\exp \left(-\frac{B}{x}\right)\,,
\ee
where the matrices $G, \Lambda$ and $B$ are given by \eqref{GLB}.
The matrix $H_{\theta}(x)$ is defined as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\,
If $\alpha\notin \ZZ$ then
$$\,
H_{\theta}(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \frac{x\,\varphi_{\theta}(x)}{\beta}\\[0.15ex]
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)\,,
\,$$
where
\be\label{S}
\varphi_{\theta}(x)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}\,
\left(\int_0^{+\infty e^{i \theta}}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})^{2-\alpha+k}}\,d \xi\right)\,.
\ee
\item\,
If $\alpha\in\NN$ then
$$\,
H_{\theta}(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \frac{x^{\alpha}\,\gamma^{\alpha-1}\,\psi_{\theta}(x)}{\beta} + x^{\alpha}\,P\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)\\[0.1ex]
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)
\,$$
where $\psi_{\theta}(x)$ is defined by \leref{sum}(1) and extended by \reref{ex}.
\item\,
If $\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$ then
$$\,
H_{\theta}(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \frac{x\,\phi_{\theta}(x)}{\beta}\\[0.1ex]
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)
\,$$
where $\phi_{\theta}(x)$ is defined by \leref{sum}(2) and extended by \reref{ex}.
For the singular direction $\theta=\pi$ the DCHE \eqref{eq1} possesses two actual fundamental matrix solution at the
origin
$$\,
\Phi_0^{\pi\pm}(x, 0)=\Phi_0^{\pi \pm \epsilon}(x, 0)\,,
\,$$
where $\epsilon > 0$ is a small number and the matrices $\Phi_0^{\pi \pm \epsilon}$ are given by \eqref{afm}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\ethe
\proof
The proof of items $(1), (2.b)$ and $(2.c)$ follows directly from the theorem of Hukuhara-Turrittin-Martinet-Ramis \cite{JM-JR, R2}.
We give the proof of item $(2.a)$.
Let $\alpha\notin \ZZ$. The solution $w_2(x, 0)$ from \eqref{fss} becomes
$$\,
w_2(x, 0)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k}{k!}
\left(\int_0^x \frac{e^{-\frac{\beta}{z}}}{z^{\alpha-k}}\,d z\right)=
e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k}{k!}
\left(\int_0^x \frac{e^{-\frac{\beta}{z}+ \frac{\beta}{x}}}{z^{\alpha-k}}\,d z\right)
\,.
\,$$
By setting
$$\,
- \frac{\beta}{z} + \frac{\beta}{x}=-\frac{\xi}{x}
\,$$
we transform the solution $w_2(x, 0)$ into
$$\,
w_2(x, 0)=
\frac{e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}\,x^{1-\alpha}}{\beta}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}
\left(\int_0^{+\infty}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})^{2-\alpha+k}}\,d \xi\right)
\,.
\,$$
Now we will show that this infinite sum defines a holomorphic function on the open disc
$\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$ defined by \eqref{D}
for $\theta\in (-\pi, \pi)$.
Since
$1/|1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}| \leq 1$ for $\cos\, \theta \geq 0$ and
$1/|1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}| \leq 1/|\sin \,\theta|$ for $\cos\, \theta < 0$ we find that when $Re\,(\alpha) \leq 2$
\ben
\frac{1}{|(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})^{k-\alpha+2}|} \leq
\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}
A & \textrm{for} & \cos \,\theta \geq 0,\\[1.15ex]
\frac{A}{|\sin \,\theta|^{k + 2 - Re\,(\alpha)}} & \textrm{for} & \cos \,\theta < 0
\end{array}\right.
\een
where $A=e^{-(Im \,\alpha)\,\arg (1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})} > 0$.
Thus in this case each integral can be analytically continued along any ray $\theta\neq \pi$ from $0$ to $+\infty\,e^{i \theta}$ and
defines a holomorphic function in the open disc
$Re\, \left(\frac{e^{i \theta}}{x}\right) > 0$ whose opening is $< \pi$.
Let $x\in \mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$ and let $\kappa=\arg (x)$. Note that from $x\in\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$ it follows
that $|x| < \frac{\cos (\theta-\kappa)}{|\gamma|}$. Then we find that
when $\cos \,\theta \geq 0$ and $Re (\alpha) \leq 2$
$$\,
\left|\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}
\left(\int_0^{+\infty\,e^{i \theta}}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})^{2-\alpha+k}}\,d \xi\right)\right|
\leq \frac{A}{c}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{|\gamma|^k\,|x|^k}{k!} <
\frac{A}{c}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\cos^k (\theta-\kappa)}{k!} < \infty\,,
\,$$
where $c=Re \left(\frac{e^{i \theta}}{x}\right) > |\gamma| > 0$.
Similarly, when $cos \,\theta < 0$ and $Re (\alpha) \leq 2$ we have that
\ben
\left|\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}
\left(\int_0^{+\infty\,e^{i \theta}}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{(1 + \frac{\xi}{\beta})^{2-\alpha+k}}\,d \xi\right)\right|
&\leq&
\frac{A}{c\,|\sin \theta|^{2- Re (\alpha)}}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{|\gamma|^k\,|x|^k}{k!\,|\sin\, \theta|^k} \\[0.2ex]
&<&
\frac{A}{c\,|\sin\ \theta|^{2-Re (\alpha)}}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\cos ^k (\theta-\kappa)}{k!\,|\sin \theta|^k } < \infty\,.
\een
Thus from the Wiierstrass's theorem it follows that when $Re (\alpha) \leq 2$ the functional series
\be\label{ser}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}
\left(\int_0^{+\infty\,e^{i \theta}}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})^{2-\alpha+k}}\,d \xi\right)=
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}\,\varphi^{\theta}_k(x)
\ee
converges uniformly on the compact sets of the open disc $\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$.
Since for all $k \geq 0$ the functions $\frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}\,\varphi^{\theta}_k(x)$ are holomorphic functions
on $\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$ so the sum.
Assume now that there exists $k_1\in\NN_0$ such that
$k+2 - Re\,(\alpha) < 0$ for $0 \leq k \leq k_1$ while $k_1+1 +2 -Re (\alpha) \geq 0$.
Since $|(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})^{\alpha-k-2}| \leq A\,(1+\frac{|\xi|}{\beta})^{Re (\alpha) -k-2}$
where $A$ is above we find that for $0 \leq k \leq k_1$
\ben
& &
\left|\int_0^{+\infty e^{i \theta}}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{\left(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta}\right)^{2-\alpha+k}}\,d \xi\right| \leq
A\,2^{Re (\alpha) -k-2}
\int_0^{\beta e^{i \theta}}
e^{-|\xi|\,c}\,d \xi \\[0.2ex]
&+&
A\,\left(\frac{2}{\beta}\right)^{Re (\alpha) -k-2}
\int_{\beta\,e^{i \theta}}^{+\infty e^{i \theta}}
|\xi|^{Re (\alpha) -k-2}\,e^{-c\,|\xi|}\,d \xi \\[0.2ex]
&\leq&
\frac{2^{Re (\alpha) -k-2}\,A}{c} (1-e^{-\beta\,c})
+\frac{A}{c^{Re (\alpha)-k-1}}\,
\left(\frac{2}{\beta}\right)^{Re (\alpha) -k-2}
\,\Gamma(Re (\alpha)-k-1)\,.
\een
Therefore for $0 \leq k \leq k_1$ we also can continue analytically each integral along any ray $\theta\neq \pi$ and
define holomorphic functions $\varphi^{\theta}_k(x)$ in the open disc
$Re\, \left(\frac{e^{i \theta}}{x}\right) > 0$ whose opening is $< \pi$. Then for $x\in\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$
we have
\ben
& &
\left|\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}
\left(\int_0^{+\infty\,e^{i \theta}}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{(1+\frac{\xi}{\beta})^{2-\alpha+k}}\,d \xi\right)\right|
\leq
K \sum_{k=0}^{k_1} \frac{|\gamma|^k\,|x|^k}{2^k\,k!} \\[0.25ex]
&+&
\frac{A}{c^{Re (\alpha)-1}}\left(\frac{2}{\beta}\right)^{Re (\alpha)-2}
\sum_{k=0}^{k_1} \frac{|\gamma|^k\,c^k\,\beta^k\,\Gamma(Re (\alpha) - k-1)}{2^k\,k!}\,x^k+ |F_{k_1+1}(x)|\\[0.25ex]
&<&
K \sum_{k=0}^{k_1} \frac{\cos^k (\theta-\kappa)}{2^k\,k!} +
\frac{A}{c^{Re (\alpha)-1}}\left(\frac{2}{\beta}\right)^{Re (\alpha)-2}
\sum_{k=0}^{k_1} \frac{\cos^k (\theta-\kappa)\,c^k\,\beta^k\,\Gamma(Re (\alpha) - k-1)}{2^k\,k!}\\[0.25ex]
&+&
|F_{k_1+1}(x)|
\een
where $K=\frac{2^{Re (\alpha) -2}\,A}{c} (1-e^{-\beta\,c})$.
For the last addend we have that
$$\,|F_{k_1+1}(x)| \leq \frac{A}{c}
\sum_{k_1+1}^{\infty} \frac{|\gamma|^k\,|x|^k}{k!} <
\frac{A}{c} \sum_{k_1+1}^{\infty} \frac{\cos^k (\theta-\kappa)}{k!} < \infty
\,$$
when $\cos \,\theta \geq$ and
$$\,
|F_{k_1+1}(x)| \leq \frac{A}{c\,|\sin\, \theta|^{2- Re (\alpha)}}
\sum_{k_1+1}^{\infty} \frac{|\gamma|^k\,|x|^k}{k!\,|\sin \,\theta|^k} <
\frac{A}
{c |\sin \theta|^{2- Re (\alpha)}}
\sum_{k_1+1}^{\infty} \frac{\cos^k (\theta-\kappa)}{k!\,|\sin \,\theta|^k} < \infty
\,$$
when $\cos \,\theta < 0$.
As a result the functional series \eqref{ser}
defines a holomorphic function on the disc $\mathcal{D}_{\theta}(|\gamma|)$ whose opening is $< \pi$.
We denote this function by $\varphi_{\theta}(x)$.
When we move $\theta\in (-\pi, \pi)$ the holomorphic functions $\varphi_{\theta}(x)$ glue together
analytically and define a holomorphic function $\tilde{\varphi}(x)$ on an open sector
$\widetilde{\mathcal{D}}$ from \eqref{D} whose opening $> \pi$.
The restriction of $\tilde{\varphi}(x)$ on $\CC^*$ is a multivalued function.
For every direction $\theta\neq \pi$ it has only one value. Near the singular direction $\theta=\pi$ it has two different values:
$\varphi^{+}_{\theta}(x)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}\,
\varphi^{\theta+\epsilon}_k(x)$ and
$\varphi^{-}_{\theta}(x)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}\,
\varphi^{\theta-\epsilon}_k(x)$ where $\epsilon > 0$ is a small number.
This ends the proof.
\qed
\bre{dis}
It seems that the function $\varphi_{\theta}(x)$ from \eqref{S} plays the part of 1 sum of the formal series
$$\,
\hat{\varphi}(x)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}\,\hat{\varphi}_k(x)\,,
\,$$
where
$$\,
\hat{\varphi}_k(x)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^n\,(2-\alpha+k)_n}{\beta^n}\,x^{n+1}\,.
\,$$
Here $(a)_n$ is the Pochhammer symbol.
We are going to discuss in our next work the summation of such a series $\hat{\varphi}(x)$.
\ere
\bth{st}
Assume that $\beta > 0$. Then with respect to the actual fundamental matrix solution $\Phi_0(x, 0)$
defined by \thref{0-1} the DCHE \eqref{eq1} has a Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$ at the origin in the form
$$\,
St_{\pi}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \mu\\
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)\,,
\,$$
where $\mu$ is introduced by \eqref{sm}.
\ethe
\proof
Let $\epsilon > 0$ be a small number and let $\theta=\pi$. Let $\Phi_0^{+}(x, 0)=\Phi_0^{\pi+\epsilon}(x, 0)$ and
$\Phi_0^{-}(x, 0)=\Phi_0^{\pi-\epsilon}(x, 0)$
be the actual fundamental matrix solutions at the origin of the DCHE built by \thref{0-1}. To find the Stokes matrix $St_{\pi}$
we have to compare the solutions $\Phi_0^{+}(x, 0)$ and $\Phi_0^{-}(x, 0)$
$$\,
\Phi_0^{-}(x, 0)=\Phi_0^{+}(x,0)\,
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \mu\\
0 & 1
\end{array}\right)\,.
\,$$
When $\alpha\in\NN$ we find that
\ben
\mu &=&
\frac{\gamma^{\alpha-1}\,e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}}{\beta}\,
\left[\psi^{-}_{\pi}(x) - \psi^{+}_{\pi}(x)\right]=
2\,\pi\,i\,\gamma^{\alpha-1}\,e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}\,
\res \left(\frac{v(\xi)\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{\xi+\beta}\,;\,\xi=-\beta\right)\\[0.2ex]
&=&
2\,\pi\,i\,\gamma^{\alpha-1}\,v(-\beta)=
2\,\pi\,i\,\gamma^{\alpha-1}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^n\,\beta^n\,\gamma^n}{n!\,\Gamma(\alpha+n)}\,.
\een
Similarly, when $\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$ we find that
\ben
\mu &=&
\frac{x^{1-\alpha}\,e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}}{\beta}\,
\left[\phi^{-}_{\pi}(x) - \phi^{+}_{\pi}(x)\right]=
2\,\pi\,i\,e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}\,
\res \left(\frac{\xi^{1-\alpha}\,q(\xi)\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}}{\xi+\beta}\,;\,\xi=-\beta\right)\\[0.2ex]
&=&
2\,\pi\,i\,(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}\,q(-\beta)=
2\,\pi\,i\,(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^n\,\beta^n\,\gamma^n}{n!\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+n)}\,.
\een
Now we will show that the so found multipliers coincide. Indeed, let $\alpha\in\NN$. Then the multiplier
$\mu$ corresponding to $\alpha\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$ becomes
$$\,
\mu=2 \,\pi\,i\,(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}
\sum_{n=\alpha-1}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^n\,\beta^n\,\gamma^n}{n!\,(1+n-\alpha)}
\,$$
since $1/\Gamma(z)=0$ for $z\in\ZZ_{\leq 0}$. Then
$$\,
\mu=2\,\pi\,i\,(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}
\sum_{p=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^{p+\alpha-1}\,\beta^{p+\alpha-1}\,\gamma^{p+\alpha-1}}
{(p+\alpha-1)!\,p!}=
2\,\pi\,i\,\gamma^{\alpha-1}
\sum_{p=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^p\,\beta^p\,\gamma^p}{p!\,\Gamma(p+\alpha)}\,,
\,$$
which is the multiplier $\mu$ corresponding to $\alpha\in\NN$.
Let now $\alpha\notin \ZZ$ and let us compare the functions $\varphi^{\pi-\epsilon}_k(x)$ and $\varphi^{\pi+\epsilon}_k(x)$. We
have
$$\,
\varphi^{\pi-\epsilon}_k(x) - \varphi^{\pi+\epsilon}_k(x)=
(\beta)^{2-\alpha+k}\int_{\gamma} (\beta+\xi)^{\varepsilon-k-2}\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}\,d \xi\,,
\,$$
where $\gamma=(\pi-\epsilon) - (\pi+\epsilon)$. Without changing the integral we can deform the path $\gamma$ into a Henkel
type path going along the negative real axis from $-\infty$ to $-\beta$, encircling $-\beta$ in the positive sense and
backing to $-\infty$. Then
\ben
\varphi^{\pi-\epsilon}_k(x) - \varphi^{\pi+\epsilon}_k(x) &=&
\beta^{2-\alpha+k}\,\left(1-e^{-2 \pi\,i(\alpha-k-2)}\right)
\int_{-\beta}^{-\infty} (\beta+\xi)^{\alpha-k-2}\,e^{-\frac{\xi}{x}}\,d \xi\\[0.2ex]
&=&
\beta^{2-\alpha+k}\, \left(1-e^{-2 \pi\,i\,\alpha}\right)\,e^{\frac{\beta}{x}}
\int_0^{-\infty} u^{\alpha-k-2}\,e^{-\frac{u}{x}}\,d u\\[0.1ex]
&=&
\beta^{2-\alpha+k}\,\left(1-e^{-2 \pi\,i\,\alpha}\right)\,e^{\frac{\beta}{x}}\,x^{\alpha-k-1}\,
\int_0^{+\infty} \tau^{\alpha-k-2}\,e^{-\tau}\,d \tau\\[0.15ex]
&=&
\beta^{2-\alpha+k}\,\left(1-e^{-2 \pi\,i\,\alpha}\right)\,\Gamma(\alpha-k-1)\,x^{\alpha-k-1}\,e^{\frac{\beta}{x}}\\[0.15ex]
&=&
-\frac{2\,\pi\,i\,(-1)^k\,e^{-\pi\,i\,\alpha}\,\beta^{2-\alpha+k}}{\Gamma(2-\alpha+k)}\,
x^{\alpha-k-1}\,e^{\frac{\beta}{x}}\,,
\een
where we have used the Euler's reflection formula $\Gamma(1-z)\,\Gamma(z)=\frac{\pi}{\sin\,\pi z}$ for $z\notin\ZZ$.
Then for the multiplier $\mu$ we find
\ben
\mu &=&
\frac{x^{1-\alpha}\,e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}}{\beta}\,
\left[\varphi^{-}_{\pi}(x) - \varphi^{+}_{\pi}(x)\right]\\[0.2ex]
&=&
\frac{x^{1-\alpha}\,e^{-\frac{\beta}{x}}}{\beta}\,
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{\gamma^k\,x^k}{k!}\,
\left[\varphi^{\pi-\epsilon}_k(x) - \varphi^{\pi+\epsilon}_k(x)\right]\\[0.2ex]
&=&
2 \pi\,i\,(-\beta)^{1-\alpha}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^k\,\gamma^k\,\beta^k}{k!\,\Gamma(2-\alpha+k)}\,.
\een
This ends the proof.
\qed
\vspace{1cm}
{\bf Acknowledgments.} The author is grateful to L. Gavrilov for helpful discussions and comments.
\section*{Appendix}
In this paragraph we will show by a direct computation that for lower values of $\alpha$
$$\,
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} (q_R + q_L)=\lambda
\,$$
where
\be\label{a-a}
\lambda=
\frac{\gamma^{\alpha-1}}{(\alpha-1)!}\,.
\ee
Let ${\bf \alpha=2}$. Then the multipliers $q_R$ and $q_L$ become
\ben
q_R=\frac{1}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}
\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}\,
\quad
q_L=-\frac{1}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}
\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}\,.
\een
Note that in this case $ q_R \to +\infty$ and
$ q_L \to -\infty$ when $\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0$.
Next the functions
$\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}$ and
$\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}$ are
expressed as power series in $\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ as follows
\be\label{sqrt}
\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}} &=&
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\left(-2 \gamma \sum_{p=o}^{\infty} \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^{4 p +1}}{4 p+2}\right)^k \frac{1}{k!}=
1 - 2 \gamma \left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{2} + \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}{6} + \cdots\right)\nonumber\\[0.2ex]
&+&
\frac{4 \gamma^2}{2 !}
\left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{2} + \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}{6} + \cdots\right)^2 -
\frac{8 \gamma^3}{3!}
\left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{2} + \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}{6} + \cdots\right)^3 + \cdots\\[0.2ex]
\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}} &=&
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\left(2 \gamma \sum_{p=o}^{\infty} \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^{4 p +1}}{4 p+2}\right)^k \frac{1}{k!}=
1 + 2 \gamma \left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{2} + \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}{6} + \cdots\right)\nonumber\\[0.2ex]
&+&
\frac{4 \gamma^2}{2 !}
\left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{2} + \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}{6} + \cdots\right)^2 +
\frac{8 \gamma^3}{3!}
\left(\frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon}}{2} + \frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}{6} + \cdots\right)^3 + \cdots\nonumber
\ee
Then we find that when $\alpha=2$
\ben
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} (q_R+q_L)=
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0}
\frac{2 \gamma\,\sqrt{\varepsilon} + O (\varepsilon)}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}=\gamma\,,
\een
which coincides with \eqref{a-a}.
Let ${\bf \alpha=4}$. Then the multipliers $q_R$ and $q_L$ become
\ben
q_R &=& -\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\frac{1} {(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^3}
\left[\Gamma(3) - \Gamma(2)\,\frac{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}\,\gamma}{1-\varepsilon^2}\right],\\[0.2ex]
q_L &=& \left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\frac{1} {(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^3}
\left[\Gamma(3) + \Gamma(2) \frac{ 2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}\,\gamma}{1-\varepsilon^2}\right]\,.
\een
Note that in this case $\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} q_R=-\infty$ and
$\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} q_L=+\infty$. Again using the expressions \eqref{sqrt} we find
that
$$\,
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0} (q_R+q_L)=
\frac{4}{3}
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \rightarrow 0}
\frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^3 \,\gamma^3 + O (\varepsilon^2)}
{(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^3}=
\frac{\gamma^3}{3!}\,,
\,$$
which coincides with \eqref{a-a}.
Let ${\bf \alpha=6}$. Then the multipliers $q_R$ and $q_L$ become
\ben
q_R &=&
\left(\frac{1+\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\frac{1}{2!\,(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}
\left[\frac{\Gamma(5)}{2!} -\Gamma(4)\,\frac{2\sqrt{\varepsilon}\,\gamma}{1-\varepsilon^2}
+\frac{\Gamma(3)}{2!}\,\left(\frac{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}{1-\varepsilon^2}\right)^2 \right],\\[0.2ex]
q_L &=&-
\left(\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}\right)^{\frac{\gamma}{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}}
\frac{1}{2!\,(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}
\left[\frac{\Gamma(5)}{2!} +\Gamma(4)\,\frac{2\sqrt{\varepsilon}\,\gamma}{1-\varepsilon^2}
+\frac{\Gamma(3)}{2!}\,\left(\frac{2 \sqrt{\varepsilon}}{1-\varepsilon^2}\right)^2 \right]\,.
\een
Then $\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0} q_R=+\infty$ while $\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0} q_L=-\infty$.
For the sum $q_R + q_L$ we have
$$\,
\lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0} (q_R + q_L)=
\frac{4}{15} \lim_{\sqrt{\varepsilon} \to 0}
\frac{(\sqrt{\varepsilon})^5\,\gamma^5 + O (\varepsilon)^3}{(2 \sqrt{\varepsilon})^5}=\frac{\gamma^5}{5!}\,,
\,$$
which coincides with \eqref{a-a}.
\begin{small}
|
\section{Introduction}
The phenomenon of cosmic accelerating expansion is firstly indicated by observing the extra dimming of the high-redshift Type Ia supernovae (SNe)~\citep{SupernovaCosmologyProject:1997czu, SupernovaSearchTeam:1998fmf, SupernovaSearchTeam:1998bnz, SupernovaCosmologyProject:1998vns}. A widely accepted explanation of this mysterious phenomenon is that a hypothetical dark energy component with negative pressure drives the homogeneous and isotropic universe to accelerate. Interpreting dark energy as a cosmological constant $\Lambda$ and assuming the validity of general relativity at all scales and epochs, the standard $\Lambda$ cold dark matter ($\Lambda$CDM) model has achieved remarkable success in agreeing with a great majority of cosmological observational measurements~\citep{Pan-STARRS1:2017jku, eBOSS:2020yzd, Jimenez:2001gg, DES:2021wwk, Planck:2018vyg}. However, these modern cosmological measurements are restricted to either the low redshift range ($0\le z\le2.33$) or the high redshift range ($z\sim1100$). The cosmic expansion history is still poorly explored in the redshift interval ($2.33<z<1100$) which is very essential for studying the dark energy models beyond the typical $\Lambda$CDM physic.
As the most luminous and persistent energy sources in our Universe, quasars (QSOs) serve as a potential candidate for high-redshift cosmological tests which can be detected up to redshift $\sim7.64$~\citep{Yang:2021imt, Wang:2021}. Several empirical correlations between spectral features and luminosity have been proposed to enable QSOs as competitive cosmological tools ~\citep{1977ApJ...214..679B, Watson:2011um, LaFranca:2014eba, SEAMBH:2014nmr}. Particularly, the most investigated and best constructed QSO luminosity correlation is the observed non-linear correlation between ultraviolet ($L_{\rm UV}$ at 2500\AA) and X-ray ($L_X$ at 2 $\rm keV$) luminosity which is firstly proposed in ~\citet{1979ApJ...234L...9T,10.1007/978-94-010-9949-3_8,1986ApJ...305...57T} and subsequently developed in~\citep{Risaliti:2015zla,2016ApJ...819..154L,2017A&A...602A..79L,Risaliti:2018reu,Lusso:2018qor,Salvestrini:2019thn,Lusso:2020pdb,Bisogni:2021hue}. Although the detailed physical mechanism of the $L_{\rm UV}-L_X$ correlation still remains unknown~\citep{1991ApJ...380L..51H,1993ApJ...413..507H,Ghisellini:1994wx,2000ApJ...530L..65N,Merloni:2003dc,2019A&A...628A.135A}, the authors in~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb} have minimized all of the possibles systematic effects and proven the stability of this QSO luminosity correlation. Based on the $L_{\rm UV}-L_X$ correlation, \citet{Risaliti:2018reu} utilized a new technique to model-independently build the QSO Hubble diagram and extend it to $z\sim5.5$. A good agreement is found between the constructed QSO Hubble diagram and the $\Lambda$CDM model at $z<1.4$ while a $\sim 4\sigma$ deviation emerges at higher redshift range. Two follow-up works further confirm this significant deviation with more precise approaches and cleaner QSO samples~\citep{Lusso:2019akb,Lusso:2020pdb}. Since then, the deviation between the high-redshift QSOs Hubble diagram and the $\Lambda$CDM model arises heated debates~\citep{Melia:2019nev,Yang:2019vgk,Velten:2019vwo,Mehrabi:2020zau,Zheng:2021oeq,Lian:2021tca,Colgain:2022nlb,Li:2021onq,Khadka:2020tlm,Khadka:2021xcc}.
\citet{Velten:2019vwo} used a model-independent estimator to test the robustness of the QSO Hubble diagram. Their result suggests that the QSO data can not be used as a reliable cosmological tool because it even fails to state the cosmic accelerating expansion phase. \citet{Yang:2019vgk} claimed that the model-independent approach developed in~\citet{Risaliti:2018reu} failed to recover the high-z cosmic expansion history of the flat $\Lambda$CDM model, which undermined the $\sim 4\sigma$ deviation. Using the Gaussian process and a combination of SNIa, Quasars and gamma-ray burst data, \citet{Mehrabi:2020zau} found a less significant tension. They argued that the amount of the deviation might be affected by the choice of the kernel function. All these works challenge the claimed $\sim 4\sigma$ deviation. However, the main cause of the deviation is still not found.
Our aim in this present work is to search for the possible origins of the significant deviation between the $\Lambda$CDM model and the high-z Hubble diagram of SNe+QSOs. The key is to adopt model-independent approaches and independent samples. To avoid model dependence, we perform our analyses in PAge approximation (Parameterization based on cosmic Age) which is a general approximation of many late-time cosmological models and a nearly model-independent framework~\citep{Huang:2020mub,Luo:2020ufj,Huang:2020evj,Huang:2021aku,Huang:2021tvo,Cai:2021weh,Cai:2022dkh, Huang:2022txw}. In addition, we take the most up-to-date QSO samples compiled by~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb} as our data set.
Our work is organized as follows. We present the advantages of the PAge approximation in the next Section~\ref{Sec:cosmology}. The data and methodology are briefly introduced in Section~\ref{Sec:data-method}. The detailed results are shown in Section~\ref{Sec:results}. In the last Section~\ref{Sec:conclusion}, we conclude and discuss.
\section{Cosmological scene} \label{Sec:cosmology}
The logarithm polynomial parameterization was firstly proposed to quantify the deviation between the concordance $\Lambda$CDM cosmology and the high-z QSO Hubble diagram in~\citet{Risaliti:2018reu}. It defines the luminosity distance with a polynomial function of $\log_{10}( 1+z ) $
\begin{equation}
d_{L}(z)= \frac{c\ln(10)}{H_0}\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_i\log^{i}_{10}(1+z), \label{eq:logarithm-polynomial}
\end{equation}
where $a_i$ are free parameters, except $a_1=1$. $\rm c$ is the speed of light. $H_0$ is the Hubble constant.
Based on the Taylor expansion in $\log_{10}(1+z)$, this parameterization provides a model-independent exploration of the late-time cosmological expansion history and approximates many cosmological models accurately at low redshift ($z\lesssim1$). However, its approximation precision worsens considerably when $z$ exceeds 1, as shown in Table~\ref{tab:fitting_precision} ( here we take its 4th-order expansion as an example ). For the redshift range $[0, 8]$, the maximum relative errors in luminosity distance are more than $2\%$ for different $\Lambda$CDM models, which may cause biases in data fitting. Introducing higher orders in $\log_{10}(1+z)$ could certainly improve the fitting precision but also weaken the constraint power of data and complicate the procedure of comparing with the standard $\Lambda$CDM model.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{ Comparisons of maximum relative errors in luminosity distance ($d_L$) between 4th-order logarithmic polynomial expansion and PAge approximation. }
\label{tab:fitting_precision}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline\hline
fiducial cosmology&- &4th-order logarithmic polynomial expansion& PAge approximation\\
\hline
$\Lambda$CDM &redshift ranges& max$|\frac{\Delta d_L}{d_L}|$& max$|\frac{\Delta d_L}{d_L}|$\\ \hline
\\
\multirow{7}{*}{$\Omega_m=0.3$}&[0,1]& $7.33\times{10}^{-5}$ &$3.82\times{10}^{-4}$ \\ \\
&[0,2]&$1.74\times{10}^{-3}$ &$1.07\times{10}^{-3}$ \\ \\
&[0,4]&$1.04\times{10}^{-2}$ &$2.00\times{10}^{-3}$ \\ \\
&[0,8]&$3.72\times{10}^{-2}$ &$2.85\times{10}^{-3}$ \\ \\
\hline
\\
{$\Omega_m=0.5$}&[0,8]& $2.61\times{10}^{-2}$&$9.86\times{10}^{-4}$ \\ \\
\hline
\\
{$\Omega_m=0.7$}&[0,8]& $2.04\times{10}^{-2}$&$2.68\times{10}^{-4}$ \\ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
Compared to the logarithm polynomial approximation, the recently proposed PAge approximation displays many prominent advantages in blindly modelling the late cosmological expansion history~\citep{Huang:2020mub,Luo:2020ufj,Huang:2020evj,Huang:2021aku,Huang:2021tvo,Cai:2021weh,Cai:2022dkh, Huang:2022txw}. Faithfully obeying the asymptotic matter-dominated assumption $\frac{1}{1+z}\propto t^{\frac{2}{3}}$ at high redshift $z\gg1$ ( the radiation component is not taken into consideration), PAge models the Hubble expansion rate as a function of cosmological time t,
\begin{equation}
\frac{H}{H_0} = 1+\frac{2}{3} (1-\eta \frac{ H_{0}t}{p_{\rm age}} )(\frac{1}{ H_{0}t}-\frac{1}{ p_{\rm age}}),
\label{eq:Hubblerate}
\end{equation}
where the dimensionless parameter $p_{\rm age} \equiv H_{0}t_{0} $ measures the cosmic age $t_0$ (both t and $t_0$ are in unit of $H^{-1}_{0}$), and the dimensionless parameter $\eta$ characterizes the deviation from Einstein de-sitter universe (flat CDM model). We set a bound condition $\eta<1$ to guarantee the fundamental physical features, e.g. $\frac{\mathrm{d} d_{L}}{\mathrm{d} z}> 0$ and $\frac{\mathrm{d} H}{\mathrm{d} z}> 0$~\citep{Huang:2020mub}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Mapping_models.pdf}
\caption{Mapping the $\Lambda$CDM, $w$CDM and $w_0$-$w_a$CDM models into $(p_{\rm age}, \eta)$ plane. We map the cosmological models into $(p_{\rm age}, \eta)$ plane by matching the deceleration parameter $q_0$ at $z=0$~\citep{Luo:2020ufj}. The $\Lambda$CDM models are mapped into a sequence of discrete points ($\Omega_m\in[0.1,1]$ with step length 0.1). The $w$CDM models ($\Omega_m\in[0.1, 1]$, $w\in[-1.5, -0.5]$) and $w_0$-$w_a$CDM models ($\Omega_m\in[0.1, 1]$, $w_0\in[-1.5, -0.5]$, $w_a\in[0.5, 1.5]$) are mapped into yellow areas. The green dashed line divides the $(p_{\rm age}, \eta)$ plane into cosmic deceleration and acceleration regions. The black dotted line and grey region represent the cosmic age and its $3\sigma$ bound inferred in \citet{Valcin:2020vav}. The red point and blue point are the standard $\Lambda$CDM and CDM models.}
\label{fig:Mapping_models}
\end{figure}
Doing cosmological tests with PAge approximation has some distinct advantages, as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item [1)] The cosmic age $t_0$ absorbed in $p_{\rm age}$ parameter is easily applied to do astronomical tests~\citep{Luo:2020ufj}. More specifically, \citet{Valcin:2020vav} presented an independent inference of $t_0=13.5^{+0.16}_{-0.14}(\rm stat.)\pm 0.5(\rm sys.)$ from the full colour-magnitude diagram of the globular cluster. If a cosmological model predicts a significantly different $t_0$ compared to the above estimation, it can be ruled out safely. For instance, the flat CDM model corresponding to $p_{\rm age}=\frac{2}{3}, \eta=0$ in PAge approximation fails to accommodate this cosmic age inference, which is clearly shown in Figure~\ref{fig:Mapping_models}. \\
\item [2)] The cosmic deceleration and acceleration are easy to distinguish in PAge. According to $\eta=1-\frac{3}{2}p^{2}_{\rm age}(1+q_0)$~\citep{Luo:2020ufj}, the PAge universe is divided into decelerating and accelerating regions in Figure~\ref{fig:Mapping_models}. \\
\item [3)] As an almost model-independent framework, PAge is able to precisely approximate a broad class of physical models by matching the deceleration parameter $q_0$ or by doing a least-square fitting of cosmological observables~\citep[see][]{Huang:2020mub, Luo:2020ufj, Huang:2020evj, Huang:2021aku}. The maximum relative errors of luminosity distance ($d_L$) are controlled below $0.3\%$, and it is well held for both low redshift and high redshift, as indicated in Table~\ref{tab:fitting_precision}. \\
\item [4)] Utilizing PAge approximation to do Bayesian analysis is economical, effective, and concise. Generally, many typical physical models can be approximately mapped into the $(p_{\rm age}, \eta)$ plane, and some of them are superimposed onto one point (we visualize this unique feature in Figure~\ref{fig:Mapping_models}). Performing data analysis with PAge provides the Bayesian evidence for all the models which are included in the marginalized contour of $p_{\rm age}$ and $\eta$ parameters. This practice avoids the cumbersome and complex process of computing Bayesian evidence for all the models.
\end{enumerate}
Almost having the same advantages as the logarithm polynomial approximation~\citep{Yang:2019vgk}, PAge merely has two nuisance parameters ($p_{\rm age},\eta$) and simultaneously has reliable fitting precision at both low-z and high-z. Since PAge displays many superiorities and can accurately describe the expansion history of the high-z universe, we utilize it to do an independent analysis of QSO cosmology.
\section{Data And Methodology } \label{Sec:data-method}
A high-quality QSO sample is recently compiled in ~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb}. This new sample includes 2421 optically selected QSOs with spectroscopic redshift (span the redshift interval $0.009\le z\le 7.5413$) and X-ray observations. Systematic effects and low-quality measurements are largely removed by applying a couple of preliminary filters. For example, $30\%$ X-ray measurements are excluded by the conditions: $\Delta F_s/F_s<1$ and $\Delta F_H/F_H<1$. More detailed filter procedures are discussed in ~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb}. After an optimal selection of clean sources, this high-quality QSO sample is suitable for investigating the non-linear relation between the ultraviolet (at 2500 \AA, $L_{\rm UV}$) and X-ray (at 2$\rm keV$, $L_{X}$) luminosity of QSO:
\begin{equation}
\log_{10}{L_{\rm X}} =\gamma \log_{10}{L_{\rm UV}}+\beta ,
\label{eq:QSOluminositycorrelation}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma, \beta$ are free parameters. $L_{X}$ and $L_{\rm UV}$ are the rest-frame monochromatic luminosities which follow the standard luminosity-flux relation $L=4\pi d^2_{L}F$. Further expressing Eq.~\ref{eq:QSOluminositycorrelation} with flux, one obtains
\begin{equation}
\log_{10}{F_X}=\gamma\log_{10}{F_{\rm UV}}+(\gamma-1)\log_{10}{(4\pi d^2_L)}+\beta,
\label{eq:QSOfluxcorrelation}
\end{equation}
both $F_X$ and $F_{\rm UV}$ are the flux densities in the unit of $\rm erg/s/cm^2$. We quantify the uncertainties of $\gamma, \beta$ and the variability of cosmologies with the joint likelihood function~\citep{DAgostini:2005mth}:
\begin{equation}
\ln \mathcal{L} \propto -\frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{N} [\frac{(\log_{10}{F^{\rm obs}_{X,i}}-\log_{10}{F^{\rm th}_{X,i}})^2}{
\sigma^2_{\rm total}}+\ln{(2 \pi\sigma^2_{\rm total}})],
\label{eq:Likelihood}
\end{equation}
the total uncertainties $\sigma^2_{\rm total}=\sigma^2_{F^{\rm obs}_{X,i}}+\gamma^2\sigma^2_{F^{\rm obs}_{\rm UV,i}}+\delta^2$, where $\delta $ is a scatter parameter representing uncounted extra variability.
It is worth noting that the QSOs can not be used to do cosmological tests directly because they do not provide absolute distance values~\citep{Bargiacchi:2021hdp}. A cross-calibration procedure is needed to match the distance values between QSOs and SNe in the common redshift range. The detailed calibration procedure is to multiply the luminosity distance by a calibration parameter $k$, i.e. $d^{\bf calibration}_{L}(z)=k d^{\bf model}_L(z)$, and the $k$ parameter requires a simultaneous fitting of QSOs and SNe. In the cross-calibration procedure, $k$ degenerates with $H_0$. To avoid parameter degeneracy, we fix $H_0=70 \rm km/s/Mpc$ in the following analyses. We calibrate the QSO distances with the Pantheon SNe sample~\citep{Pan-STARRS1:2017jku} and use the combination data set of SNe+QSOs to build the QSO Hubble diagram.
As indicated in Table 2 of~\citet{Bargiacchi:2021hdp}, the spatial curvature has a great impact on the cosmological constraints when using QSO data. The joint analysis of SNe+QSO in non-flat $\Lambda$CDM background prefers a closed universe with spatial curvature $\Omega_k\simeq-0.6$, which is inconsistent with the Planck+CMB result $\Omega_k=-0.044^{+0.018}_{-0.015}$~\citep{Planck:2018vyg}. To not miss some important information, we consider both flat and non-flat cosmological cases in the following analyses.
\section{ Results}\label{Sec:results}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{ Marginalized $1\sigma$ constraints on parameters with SNe+QSOs samples in PAge backgrounds. }
\label{tab:constraints}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline\hline
model & $\Omega_k$& $p_{\rm age}$ & $\eta$ &$ \gamma$ & $\beta$ & $\delta$ \\ \hline
\\
flat PAge &-&$0.820^{+0.017}_{-0.02}$&$0.896^{+0.089}_{-0.038}$ & $0.642\pm0.0083$&$6.96^{+0.33}_{-0.29}$&$0.228\pm0.0034$\\
\\
non-flat PAge&$-0.946^{+0.017}_{-0.051}$ & $1.16\pm0.051$ & $0.540^{+0.17}_{-0.14}$ &$0.619\pm0.009$ &$7.68\pm0.33$&$0.226\pm0.0036$\\
\\ \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Contour.pdf}
\caption{Marginalized 1$\sigma$, 2$\sigma$ and 3$\sigma$ constraints on PAge parameters with SNe+QSOs samples. Both flat and non-flat PAge universes are taken into account. The red point represents the standard $\Lambda$CDM which corresponds to the point ($p_{\rm age}=0.964$, $\eta=0.373$) in PAge panel.}
\label{Fig:contour}
\end{figure}
In Table~\ref{tab:constraints}, we list the marginalized 1$\sigma$ constraints on parameters with SNe+QSOs data in PAge backgrounds. Both the flat and non-flat cases are taken into consideration. For better comparison with the standard $\Lambda$CDM model, we visualize the marginalized 1$\sigma$, 2$\sigma$ and 3$\sigma$ constraints on PAge parameters in Figure~\ref{Fig:contour}. We find both the marginalized contours on $p_{\rm age}$ and $\eta$ in flat and non-flat PAge cases significantly deviate from the standard $\Lambda$CDM model ( red point in Figure~\ref{Fig:contour} ) at $>3\sigma$ confidence level. The marginalized contours of the flat and non-flat PAge cases also show a $>3\sigma$ discrepancy, which indicates the inferences of PAge parameters are much affected by the addition of spatial curvature $\Omega_k$ freedom. Indeed, the spatial curvature $\Omega_k$ is found to be $-0.946^{+0.017}_{-0.051}$, which strongly supports a closed universe. And the exotic $\Omega_k$ inference is actually inconsistent with other measurements~\citep{Pan-STARRS1:2017jku, eBOSS:2020yzd, Jimenez:2001gg, DES:2021wwk, Planck:2018vyg}.
The SNe+QSOs constraints on PAge parameters in both flat and non-flat universes seem to suggest new physics beyond the $\Lambda$CDM. However, whether the QSOs can serve as a reliable cosmological tool still requires cautious research. As mentioned in~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb}, using the non-linear QSO luminosity correlation to build the QSO Hubble diagram may still have shortcomings. For example, the systematics in the QSO samples selection, the process used to fit the QSO Hubble diagram and the redshift evolution effect of QSO luminosity correlation may cause biases and lead to an unreliable QSO Hubble diagram. Possible systematics have been carefully checked in~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb} and we focus on the redshift evolution effect of the QSO luminosity correlation in this present work.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{ Marginalized $1\sigma$ constraints on parameters with SNe+low-z QSOs sample and SNe+high-z QSOs sample respectively.}
\label{tab:redshift_evolution}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline\hline
model &sample& $\Omega_k$ & $p_{\rm age}$ & $\eta$ &$ \gamma$ & $\beta$ & $\delta$ \\ \hline
\\
\multirow{3}{*}{flat PAge}&SNe+low-z QSOs& -&$0.940^{+0.033}_{-0.062}$ & $0.480^{+0.21}_{-0.13}$ & $0.637\pm0.013$ & $7.18\pm0.41$ & $0.237\pm0.0047$ \\ \\
&SNe+high-z QSOs& -&$0.875^{+0.025}_{-0.032}$ & $0.727^{+0.12}_{-0.096}$ & $0.585\pm0.014$ & $8.80^{+0.52}_{-0.43}$ & $0.207\pm0.0054$ \\ \\ \hline
\\
\multirow{3}{*}{non-flat PAge}&SNe+low-z QSOs& $-0.512^{+0.096}_{-0.35}$ &$1.21^{+0.28}_{-0.10}$ & $0.05^{+0.48}_{-0.35}$ & $0.635\pm0.013$ & $7.21\pm0.43$ & $0.237\pm0.0047$ \\ \\
&SNe+high-z QSOs& $-0.795\pm0.078$ &$1.24^{+0.057}_{-0.071}$ & $0.220^{+0.26}_{-0.19}$ & $0.561^{+0.0088}_{-0.013}$ & $9.49^{+0.49}_{-0.15}$ & $0.203\pm0.0053$ \\ \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
Different from the narrow redshift bins split in~\citet{Risaliti:2018reu,Lusso:2020pdb}, we divide QSO samples into the low-z ($z\le1.5$) bin and high-z bin ($z>1.5$) to test the redshift evolution, because the strong deviation from $\Lambda$CDM model roughly emerges at $z>1.5$. We analyze the SNe+low-z QSOs and SNe+high-z QSOs data sets in flat and non-flat PAge backgrounds, respectively. The marginalized $1\sigma$ constraints on the PAge parameters, QSO correlation coefficients and intrinsic dispersion are presented in Table~\ref{tab:redshift_evolution}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure{
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Contour_flatPAge.pdf}}
\subfigure{
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Contour_nonflatPAge.pdf}}
\caption{Marginalized $1\sigma$, $2\sigma$ and $3\sigma$ constraints on PAge parameters with SNe+low-z QSOs and SNe+high-z QSOs samples in flat and non-flat PAge universes, respectively. The red point represents the standard $\Lambda$CDM model.}
\label{fig:comparison_D}
\end{figure*}
Either in flat or in non-flat PAge cases, significant evolutionary trends emerge for the $\gamma, \delta$ parameters. For the $\gamma$ parameter, we find $\sim 2.7\sigma$ and $\sim 4\sigma$ discrepancies between the two data sets in flat and non-flat PAge universes respectively. For the $\delta$ parameter, the discrepancies are found to be $>4\sigma$ in different PAge backgrounds. These results indicate that the QSO luminosity correlation evolves with redshift and suffers from non-universal dispersion. In addition, we find the PAge parameters inferred from the SNe+low-z QSOs and SNe+high-z QSOs data sets, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:comparison_D}, coincide well. More importantly, the marginalized $3\sigma$ contour of SNe+high-z QSOs deviates from the $\Lambda$CDM significantly while the SNe+low-z QSOs case roughly accommodates it, which implies that the PAge parameter inferences are probably biased by the redshift evolution and non-universal dispersion.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{ Marginalized $1\sigma$ constraints on parameters with Reichart method.}
\label{tab:Reichart method}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline\hline
model &sample& $\Omega_k$ & $p_{\rm age}$ & $\eta$ &$ \gamma$ & $\beta$ & $\delta$ \\ \hline
\\
\multirow{3}{*}{flat PAge}&SNe+low-z QSOs& -&$1.05^{+0.051}_{-0.10}$ & $0.140^{+0.36}_{-0.18}$ & $0.750^{+0.013}_{-0.011}$ & $3.72^{+0.32}_{-0.46}$ & $0.244\pm0.0050$ \\ \\
&SNe+high-z QSOs& -&$0.919^{+0.033}_{-0.044}$ & $0.570^{+0.16}_{-0.11}$ & $0.681\pm0.016$ & $5.84\pm0.51$ & $0.213\pm0.0059$ \\ \\ \hline
\\
\multirow{3}{*}{non-flat PAge}&SNe+low-z QSOs& $-0.240^{+0.12}_{-0.44}$ &$1.20^{+0.29}_{-0.10}$ & $-0.096^{+0.52}_{-0.39}$ & $0.748^{+0.014}_{-0.012}$ & $3.76^{+0.35}_{-0.44}$ & $0.244\pm0.0050$ \\ \\
&SNe+high-z QSOs& $-0.638^{+0.081}_{-0.10}$ &$1.26\pm0.11$ & $-0.01^{+0.38}_{-0.26}$ & $0.660\pm0.017$ & $6.45\pm0.55$ & $0.210\pm0.0058$ \\ \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
In the Bayesian framework, performing a linear fit between two data sets with errors on both axes and with an extra variance is quite subtle. Different analysis methods may yield inconsistent results, as indicated in~\citet{Guidorzi:2006wb}. In our above analyses, we use the likelihood function~(\ref{eq:Likelihood}) derived by~\citet{DAgostini:2005mth} to estimate the parameters and find remarkable discrepancies for $\gamma, \delta$ parameters. To demonstrate the discrepancies are not dominated by the statistical analysis method, we further perform Bayesian analyses with the Reichart method~\citep{2001ApJ...553..235R, 2001ApJ...552...57R} and present the parameter inference results in Table~\ref{tab:Reichart method}.
According to Table~\ref{tab:Reichart method}, we find the $\gamma, \delta$ parameters derived from the Reichart method also show prominent discrepancies. The $\gamma$ parameters calibrated by SNe+low-z QSOs samples are in $\sim 3.4\sigma$ and $\sim 4.1\sigma$ tension with that calibrated by SNe+high-z QSOs samples in flat and non-flat PAge respectively. The $\delta$ parameters show $\sim4.0\sigma$ and $\sim 4.4\sigma$ discrepancies between different data sets and backgrounds. This suggests that the redshift-evolution effect and non-universal dispersion of QSO luminosity correlation are independent of the statistical analysis method.
\section{Conclusions and Discussion} \label{Sec:conclusion}
In this research, we provide an independent search for the origins of the $\sim4 \sigma$ deviation between the standard $\Lambda$CDM model and the constructed Hubble diagram of SNe+QSOs~\citep{Risaliti:2018reu, Lusso:2019akb, Lusso:2020pdb}. We adopt a nearly model-independent parameterization (PAge approximation) to visualize the standard $\Lambda$CDM model and marginalized $3\sigma$ constraints of SNe+QSOs data. To a certain degree, we have avoided the model dependence and the fitting errors of the assumed background cosmology~\citep{Yang:2019vgk}. According to the results shown in Figure~\ref{Fig:contour}, we confirm that the marginalized $3\sigma$ constraints of SNe+QSOs on PAge parameters are in remarkable tension with the standard $\Lambda$CDM model in both flat and non-flat universes. This result agrees with~\citet{Risaliti:2018reu, Lusso:2019akb, Lusso:2020pdb}.
We proceed to investigate the tension from the perspective of redshift evolution. By splitting QSOs into low-z and high-z samples, we find that there indeed exist remarkable discrepancies for the slope $\gamma$ parameter and intrinsic dispersion $\delta$ between low-z and high-z QSOs calibrated by SNe. And the remarkable discrepancies for $\gamma$ and $\beta$ parameters persist in the parameter inferences derived from the Reichart method. These results reveal that the QSO luminosity correlation suffers from the redshift-evolution effect and non-universal intrinsic dispersion.
Building a QSO Hubble diagram with a non-robust QSO luminosity correlation may provide unreliable results. As indicated in Figure~\ref{fig:comparison_D}, with the evolutions of the $\gamma$ and $\delta$ parameters, the marginalized contour of the SNe+low-z QSOs sample is consistent with the $\Lambda$CDM while significant deviation emerges for the SNe+high-z QSOs case. This indicates the PAge parameter constraints can be biased by the evolutions of $\gamma$ and $\delta$ parameters. Therefore, the significant deviation found in~\citep{Risaliti:2018reu, Lusso:2019akb, Lusso:2020pdb} may mainly originate from the redshift-evolution effect and the non-universal intrinsic dispersion of the QSO luminosity correlation instead of new physics beyond the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We gratefully thank the authors in~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb} for sharing the data used in this work. We thank Zhiqi Huang for the helpful discussions. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 12073088, National SKA Program of China No. 2020SKA0110402, National key R\&D Program of China (Grant No. 2020YFC2201600), and Guangdong Major Project of Basic and Applied Basic Research (Grant No. 2019B030302001).
\section{Data Availability}
The quasar data underlying this article are available in~\citet{Lusso:2020pdb} and in its online supplementary material. The supernova data underlying this article are publicly available in~\citet{Pan-STARRS1:2017jku}.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{Sec:Intro}
The fundamental interaction describing the microscopic coupling mechanism between the spin and orbital degrees of freedom of electrons in solids is the so-called spin-orbit coupling (SOC) \cite{Galitski2013,Winkler2003}. This interaction, which is a relativistic effect, is an essential ingredient for describing many emergent phenomena observed in condensed-matter systems. For instance, a large SOC in combination with other symmetry aspects can lead to the appearance of topological phases in solids.
Examples of this kind are the topological insulators, where a large SOC leads to the formation of the topologically protected surface states and spin momentum locking \cite{Moore2010,Hasan2010,Qi2011,Shen2017,He2018}.
Likewise in magnetically ordered solids SOC in the absence of inversion symmetry can result in the formation of topologically protected spin textures in the form of chiral domain walls, skyrmions, antiskyrmions, hopfions, etc. \cite{Zang2018}.
In order to figure out whether or not a material exhibits topological electronic states and to which topological classes these states belong, one requires to quantify the strength of SOC. Assuming that the symmetry considerations are fulfilled, the presence of a sufficiently large SOC would, in principle, give rise to the formation of nontrivial topological states in the system. Although the phenomenon of high temperature superconductivity is, by itself, a fascinating phenomenon, combined with topological aspects of matter it would lead to an even more exotic state of matter e.g., topological superconductivity and the formation of the Majorana states \cite{Leijnse2012,Beenakker2013,Sato2017}. These states which obey non-Abelian statistics can be used to realize topological quantum computers \cite{Nayak2008}. In most of the proposals for realizing these interesting concepts it is suggested to attach a low-dimensional superconductor to a topological material or semiconductor heterostructures with a large SOC \cite{Beenakker2013}. However, under some circumstances if SOC in a low-dimensional superconductor is sufficiently large, one expects to observe topological states in a single material \cite{Hao2018}. An ideal candidate for such an observation would be a single layer of FeSe grown on SrTiO$_3$(001), an ideal two-dimensional high temperature superconductor (HTSC) \cite{Wang2012a,Liu2012,Tan2013,He2013,Bozovic2014,Ge2014,Lee2014}.
In the case of ultrathin films the inversion symmetry in the direction perpendicular to the surface is broken. A large SOC together with the broken inversion symmetry can provide the necessary fundamental basis required for the observation of topological states in the system \cite{Kang2016, Hao2015}. Hence a direct probing of SOC in this class of materials is essential in connection with the possibility of the formation of topological states. Unfortunately, the strength of SOC in such two-dimensional superconductors is hitherto fully unknown.
Irrespective of the importance of SOC for the topological superconductivity, the presence of this interaction is of prime importance to understand the underlying physics of HTSC in general \cite{Borisenko2015,Kang2016}. In most theoretical approaches describing the microscopic mechanism of superconductivity and Cooper pairing of electrons SOC is assumed to be very small and, therefore, has been neglected. There are only a few theoretical models which include SOC in bulk HTSCs, showing that the presence of this interaction is essential in the determination of the symmetry of the order parameter as well as the electronic states involved in superconductivity \cite{Kang2016,Borisenko2015}. Generally the impact of SOC becomes increasingly important when reducing the systems' dimensionality. This is due to the emergence of new symmetry aspects in low-dimensional solids. Surprisingly, so far no direct signature of SOC and its impact in ultrathin (two-dimensional) HTSCs have been reported experimentally. A direct measure of SOC would, therefore, be extremely valuable in the context of microscopic physical mechanism behind high temperature superconductivity in low-dimensional HTSCs.
Here by performing high resolution spectroscopy of spin-polarized slow electrons on epitaxial FeSe monolayers grown on Nb-doped strontium titanate SrTiO$_3$(001), a prototypical two-dimensional superconductor, we demonstrate that the frequency and momentum dependent scattering cross-section depends strongly on the spin of the incoming electron. A careful analysis of the spectra reveals that the observed effect is due to the presence of a considerably large SOC in this system. Such a large SOC together with other symmetry aspects provides the required ingredients for the formation of topologically nontrivial states and would shed light on the mysterious origin of superconductivity in this system.
\section{Results}\label{Sec:results}
The epitaxial FeSe monolayer was grown by molecular beam epitaxy on Nb-doped SrTiO$_3$(001) (hereafter STO). The dynamic charge response of the system was probed by means of spin-polarized high-resolution electron energy-loss spectroscopy (SPHREELS) (see Sec.~\ref{Sec:Exp} of Materials and Methods for details on the substrate preparation, film growth and SPHREELS experiments). The scattering geometry is sketched in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Spectra}\textbf{a}. The scattering plane was chosen to be parallel to the [100]-direction of STO(001), as indicated in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Spectra}\textbf{b} and \textbf{c}. This would allow probing the dynamic response of the system along the high symmetry $\bar{\Gamma}$--$\bar{\rm X}$ direction of the surface Brillouin zone (SBZ). In order to be sensitive to the spin-dependent effects associated with the broken inversion symmetry in the direction perpendicular to the surface, we used a longitudinally spin-polarized electron beam with the spin orientation being parallel and antiparallel to the scattering's plane normal vector $\vec{n}$ (see Supplementary Note~1 for an explanation). These incoming spin states are denoted by $|+\rangle$ and $|-\rangle$, respectively.
Figure~\ref{Fig:Spectra}\textbf{d} shows the spin-resolved spectra recorded in the superconducting state of the sample and using an incident electron beam energy $E_i=4.07$~eV. The spectra were recorded at the $\bar{\Gamma}$--point of SBZ. Beside the so-called zero loss peak at the energy-loss $\hbar\omega=0$, one observes several features as a result of the excitation of several collective modes. The peaks with lower intensity at $\hbar\omega=11.8$, 20.5, 24.8 and 36.7~meV represent the various phonon modes of the FeSe film itself \cite{Zakeri2017,Zakeri2018,Zhang2018}. More obviously the so-called Fuchs-Kliewer (FK) phonon modes of the underlying STO substrate can also be recognized at the loss energies $\hbar\omega=59.3$ and 94.5~meV \cite{Zhang2016,Jandke2019}.
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\makeatletter
\renewcommand{\figurename}{\textbf{Figure}}
\renewcommand{\thefigure}{\textbf{\@arabic\c@figure}}
\makeatother
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Evidence of a large SOC in FeSe ML on STO.} \textbf{a} The scattering geometry used for probing the dynamic charge response. The electrons are represented by the blue and red balls. Their spin in the laboratory frame is shown by the red and blue arrows. The incident energy and wavevector are denoted by $E_i$ and $\vec{k}_i$, respectively. The energy and the wavevector after the scattering event are given by $E_f$ and $\vec{k}_s$, respectively. The laboratory frame is depicted by black arrows with x, y, and z labels. The incident and outgoing angles are called $\theta_i$ and $\theta_s$. The total scattering angle is $\theta_0$ and was set to 80$^\circ$. \textbf{b} The top view of STO(001) and the FeSe(001) film. The spin polarization of the beam is either parallel or antiparallel to the y-axis that is the [010]-direction of the STO(001) surface. These spin states are called $|+\rangle$ and $|-\rangle$, respectively. \textbf{c} Atomically resolved scanning tunneling microscopy topography image of the FeSe surface, showing the atomic resolution of the topmost Se atoms, indicated by the gray balls in \textbf{b}. The field of view is $7\times4.5$~nm$^2$. The constant current topography image was recorded at $T=0.9$~K and using a tunneling current of 180~pA and a bias voltage of 1.0~V. The corresponding reciprocal lattice is shown in the right side. The $\bar{\Gamma}$--point represents the SBZ center and the $\bar{\rm X}$ and $\bar{\rm M}$ points represent the edges of SBZ. \textbf{d} Blue upward and red downward triangles represent the experimental spectra recorded for the spin of the incoming beam being parallel and antiparllel to the y-axis, respectively. The open circles denote the spin asymmetry $A=\left(I_{|+\rangle}-I_{|-\rangle}\right)/\left(I_{|+\rangle}+I_{|-\rangle}\right)$. The spectra were recorded at the specular geometry i.e., the wavevector of $q=0$, at the $\bar{\Gamma}$--point. The error bars represent the statistical uncertainties.}
\label{Fig:Spectra}
\end{figure*}
Generally the spectral function $\mathcal{S}(q, \omega)$ measured by SPHREELS directly reflects the dynamic response of the collective charge excitations in the system. This quantity is proportional to the imaginary part of the dynamic charge susceptibility $\mathfrak{Im}\chi(q, \omega)$ \cite{Vig2017,Husain2019,Zakeri2021}. The electrons are scattered by the total charge distribution of the sample and, hence, the scattering intensity carries information regarding collective excitations of the lattice i.e, phonons, collective electronic excitations i.e., plasmons and any type of excitation representing a hybrid mode of these two \cite{Zakeri2021}.
The most interesting observation here is that $\mathcal{S}(q, \omega)$ depends strongly on the spin. The spin asymmetry defined as $A=\left(I_{|+\rangle}-I_{|-\rangle}\right)/\left(I_{|+\rangle}+I_{|-\rangle}\right)$ is shown in the lower part of Fig.~\ref{Fig:Spectra}\textbf{d}. Here $I_{|+\rangle}$ and $I_{|-\rangle}$ denote the intensity of the scattered electrons when the incoming electron's spin is parallel and antiparallel to $\vec{n}$, respectively.
In order to shed light on the origin of the observed spin asymmetry, its dependency on the physical variables e.g., temperature, incident energy, and wavevector transfer $q$ was measured and the results are summarized in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}. Data presented in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{a} clearly demonstrate that the spin asymmetry does not depend on temperature. In both superconducting and normal states one observes a value as large as 11\%. This fact indicates that the spin asymmetry is not related to the superconducting (or magnetic) phase transition and is due to the intrinsic SOC of the system. Next we check the dependence of the spin asymmetry on the incident beam energy $E_i$. Generally for very low incident energies ($E_i<3$~eV) the intensity may be influenced by the space charge effects. On the other hand for incident energies higher than 12~eV the intensity is determined by the multiple scattering and electron diffraction processes (the so-called low-energy electron diffraction or LEED states). Hence, the relevant energy window would be between 3 and 11~eV. Such data are presented in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{b}. For this set of measurements first the incident and scattered beam angles were fixed to $\theta_i=\theta_s=40^{\circ}$ (see Fig.~\ref{Fig:Spectra}\textbf{a}). The incident beam energy $E_i$ was precisely defined and the electrons with the final energy $E_f=E_i \pm \delta E$ were collected. Here $\delta E$ represents the energy width of the elastic scattering (the hatched area in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{a}). In order to make sure that all the elastically scattered electrons are collected, we recorded the intensity for $\delta E=8$~meV (this value is two times the energy resolution). The spin asymmetry shows a strong dependence on the incident beam energy and exhibits a maximum near 4~eV. As the next physical variable we check the dependence of the spin asymmetry on $q$. Spectra recorded for different values of $q$ near the zone center (in the vicinity of the $\bar{\Gamma}$--point) indicate that the spin asymmetry does not depend on $q$. This is demonstrated in Figs.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{c} and \textbf{d}, where the spin asymmetry recorded for different values of $q$ is presented. The data shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{c} were recorded with an incident beam energy of $E_i=6.0$~eV and those in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{d} were recorded with $E_i=7.25$~eV. A careful inspection of the data shown in Figs.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{c} and \textbf{d} indicates that although the spin asymmetry depends strongly on $E_i$, it does not depend on $q$. The strong $E_i$-dependence of spin asymmetry and its $q$-independence is an unambiguous evidence that the observed spin asymmetry is originating from a substantially large SOC at the surface (see the discussion below).
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{SOC as the origin of the observed spin asymmetry.} \textbf{a} Spin asymmetry measured below ($T=15$~K) and above ($T=300$~K) the superconducting transition temperature. The data are recorded at an incident beam energy of 4.07~eV and at the specular geometry ($q=0$). The error bars represent the statistical uncertainties. \textbf{b} Spin asymmetry as a function of the incident beam energy. The error bars represent the systematic uncertainties. \textbf{c},\textbf{d} The pattern of the spin asymmetry over the energy loss for different values of wavevector along the $\bar{\Gamma}$--$\bar{\rm{X}}$ direction. The graphs represent the spin asymmetry of the spectral function $\mathcal{S}(q, \omega)$. The data shown in \textbf{c} are recorded at an incident beam energy of 6.0~eV and those shown in \textbf{d} are recorded at 7.25~eV. }
\label{Fig:TandEdep}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion}\label{Sec:discussions}
It is well-known that when a beam of spin-polarized slow electrons is scattered from a free atom with a large atomic number, and consequently a large SOC, the scattering cross-section can be spin dependent \cite{Mott1929a,Kessler1985}. The effect is understood based on the fact that due to the relativistic effects the electrons with different spins feel different scattering potentials, while scattered off the atom. The apparent different scattering potentials are the direct consequence of the relativistic motion of electrons in the vicinity of the atom \cite{Kessler1985}. The same phenomenon has also been observed when such a beam is scattered from a surface i.e., an array of atoms ordered in a two-dimensional fashion \cite{Kessler1985,Kirschner1985,Feder1986, Wang1979}. The effect is attributed to the intrinsic SOC of the involved atomic orbitals. As a consequence of the broken translation symmetry at the surface, the largest effect is observed when the spin of the incoming electron beam is parallel and antiparallel to the scattering's plane normal vector $\vec{n}$ and hence the spin asymmetry is maximum in this case.
In a simplified version the spin dependent elastic scattering cross-section $dS/d\Omega$ may be written as
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{d S}{d \Omega}=\dfrac{d S_0}{d \Omega} \left\lbrace 1+ \sum_\gamma \delta_{l_\gamma} \left[\vec{\xi}\cdot\left( \vec{\hat{{k}}}_i \times \vec{\hat{{k}}}_s\right)\right] \right\rbrace,
\label{Eq:elasticcrosssection}
\end{equation}
where $dS_0/d\Omega$ is the scattering cross-section without considering SOC, $ \sum_\gamma \delta_{l_\gamma}$ represents the sum over all the possible scattering phase shifts $\delta_{l_\gamma}$ between partial waves with total angular momenta between $l-1/2$ and $l+1/2$ ($l$ is the orbital quantum number of the involved atomic orbitals), $\vec{\xi}$ represents the spin of the incoming beam, $\vec{\hat{{k}}}_i$ and $\vec{\hat{{k}}}_s$ denote the unit vectors of the momentum of the incoming and scattered beam, respectively \cite{Kessler1985,Feder1986,Sushkov2013}. Note that Eq.~(\ref{Eq:elasticcrosssection}) is valid for the energies above the so-called centrifugal barrier, which is on the order of 1--3~eV.
Equation~(\ref{Eq:elasticcrosssection}) indicates that the value of the spin asymmetry depends only on $\sum_\gamma \delta_{l_\gamma}$, which, in turn, depends on the incident energy $E_i$. The spin asymmetry does not depend on $q$, since different values of $q$ are achieved by changing the scattering geometry, keeping the total scattering angle $\theta_0=\theta_i+\theta_s=80^{\circ}$ fixed. For a longitudinally spin-polarized beam, since the asymmetry is given by the vector product $\vec{\hat{{k}}}_i \times \vec{\hat{{k}}}_s$, it does not change as long as the angle between $\vec{\hat{{k}}}_i$ and $\vec{\hat{{k}}}_s$ is unchanged. More importantly the maximum asymmetry is expected when the second term in Eq.~(\ref{Eq:elasticcrosssection}) is maximum. Such a condition is realized for a longitudinally spin-polarized beam in which the direction of spin polarization vector is parallel or antiparallel to the cross product $\vec{\hat{{k}}}_i \times \vec{\hat{{k}}}_s$ or the scattering's plane normal vector $\vec{n}$ (see Supplementary Note~1 for details).
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{Fig3.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Dependence of the spin asymmetry on the energy of the scattered beam}. Spin asymmetry $A$ versus scattered beam energy $E_f$, when the incident beam energy $E_i$ is kept constant. For each set of data the energy of the incident beam $E_i$ is also shown using the top axis; $E_i=4$ (teal color), 5 (blue color), 6.2 (red color), 7.3 (green color), 8 (brown color) and 9 (orange color) eV. The filled circles represent the elastic scattering i.e., cases in which $E_i=E_f$. The gray thick curve is a guide to the eye and describes the $E_i$-dependence of $A$ shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{b}. The data indicate that the $E_f$-dependence of $A$ is the same as its $E_i$-dependence. The error bars represent the systematic uncertainties.}
\label{Fig:Lossdep}
\end{figure*}
When electrons are scattered from a surface the scattering process near the specular angle is governed by the dipolar scattering mechanism \cite{Ibach1982}. In the so-called dipolar lobe, the electrons interact with the charge density fluctuations of the sample. The interaction is of the long range dipolar (Coulomb) nature. Hence, not only the charge density fluctuations near the surface region but also those located far below the surface can be observed in the spectra, depending on the kinetic energy of the incoming beam \cite{Ritz1984,Schaich1984,Lueth1988}. Since we are interested in the properties of the FeSe/STO interface, we use electrons with kinetic energies as low as 4 up to 10~eV. This choice of incident energy is also important to, on the one hand keep the incident electron energy above the centrifugal barrier and, on the other hand, avoid multiple scattering processes, whose presence would add to the complexity of the problem when one aims to understand the spin dependent scattering cross-section.
Beside the elastic part of the spectrum, an even more interesting part is the energy-loss region, where the collective excitations of the system show up. We, therefore, carefully analyzed the spin asymmetry as a function of electrons' energy in the final state after scattering $E_f$, while keeping the energy of the incident electrons constant. The data are presented in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Lossdep}. For this set of measurements we first optimized the incoming beam at a given energy $E_i$ and probed the spin asymmetry of the elastic scattering at $E_f=E_i\pm \delta E$. The results are shown by the filled circles in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Lossdep}. Then for each value of $E_i$ we probed the spin asymmetry as a function of $E_f$ over an energy range for which we could obtain reasonable count rates. The experiment was performed for various values between 4 and 9~eV. The results clearly demonstrate that the spin asymmetry versus scattered beam energy follows the same trend as that of the elastic scattering for different energies. For example for the electrons with the incident energy of $E_i=4$~eV the asymmetry decreases when decreasing $E_f$ from 4 to 3.5~eV. However, for the higher incident energies the spin asymmetry gradually increases when moving towards lower values of $E_f$. This means that the observed spin asymmetry in the energy loss region has the same origin as that of the elastic scattering. In simple words electrons contributing to the surface loss processes are then affected by the SOC potential before they are finally scattered out. In the limit of small energy losses ($\hbar\omega=E_i-E_f \ll E_i$) the spin asymmetry is almost entirely determined by the incident energy $E_i$.
Yet the question whether or not the dynamic charge response depends on the spin of the incident electron remains unanswered. In order to answer this question and shed light onto the origin of the observed spin asymmetry we developed a model to simulate the SPHREEL spectra. The simulation is based on the scattering theory of spin-polarized slow electrons from a surface with a nonnegligible SOC. The theory is an extension of the original theory of Evan and Mills \cite{Evans1972,Mills1975,Ibach1982}, which describes the scattering cross-section of an unpolarized electron beam. In our modeling of the scattering event and in the calculation of the scattering cross-section we further account for SOC and spin dependent electron reflection (in addition to the Hartree or Coulomb scattering, see Sec.~\ref{Sec:Theo} of Materials and Methods for details). Our theory indicates that for small values of momentum transfers the observed spin dependent asymmetry can be explained based on the spin dependence of electron reflectivity. Hence, the dynamic charge response itself is rather spin independent. The observed spin asymmetry is almost entirely due to the spin dependent electron reflection from the surface, which in turn is a result of SOC. In order to verify this hypothesis we simulated the SPHREEL spectra using the values of spin dependent reflection coefficient measured for the elastic scattering (data shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{b}). The results of simulation for two different values of $E_i$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:SpectraSimulation} together with the experimental spectra. Our theory is able to perfectly reproduce the experimental spectra. In the simulation we considered a system composed of an atomic layer of FeSe (Se-Fe-Se trilayer structure) on $17$ unit cells of charge free insulating STO(001) on top of a semi-infinite Nb-STO(001). In this model the Fe plane in FeSe ML is placed at $d_{\rm{FeSe}}=0.43$~nm above the insulating STO(001) surface \cite{Peng2020}. Only in this way both the peak position and amplitude of the excitations associated with the FK modes agree with those measured experimentally. The discovery of a charge depletion layer below the FeSe layer has been discussed in details in Ref.~\cite{Zakeri2022}. Both simulations and experiments reveal that the higher harmonics of the principal FK modes are strongly suppressed. This is mainly due to the presence of the free carriers in FeSe ML as well as in the interior part of the substrate, below the depletion region. As discussed in Ref.~\cite{Zakeri2022} the presence of a charge depletion layer, which is due to a considerably large charge transfer from the Nb-doped STO to the FeSe film, has several serious consequences on the system. One of the consequences is that it generates a rather large electric field and band bending near and below the interface. As a rule of thumb one may simply divide the value of the total band bending, probed by the experiment (2.1~V), by the depletion layer thickness (6.5~nm). This results in an electric field on the order of 0.3~GV/m. Such a large electric field greatly influences the electronic states in FeSe ML and boosts SOC at and near the surface region. The effect is very similar to the Rashba and Dresselhaus effects observed for semiconductor quantum-well states and two-dimensional electron gasses formed at the semiconductor surfaces and interfaces \cite{Winkler2003}.
Experiments performed on bulk FeSe using neutron scattering \cite{Ma2017} and on other Fe-based superconductors using angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) \cite{Borisenko2015} have shown that the Fe atoms possess a nonnegligible SOC. Since in the present case the FeSe monolayer is subject to a rather strong electric field as a result of the charge transfer and the dielectric depletion layer, we conclude that the observed large SOC in this system is, therefore, an additive effect. It includes the intrinsic SOC of FeSe ML as well as the electric field induced SOC, as discussed above. In order to provide an estimation of the strength of SOC one may compare the results to that of the W(110) surface. In the case of W(110) the largest spin asymmetry was observed for $E_i=4.7$~eV and was about 64\% with an electron beam with a polarization of about 72\% (this would mean a corrected value of about $A=62\%/72\% \approx 86\%$). For the case of Cu(001) the spin asymmetry is negligible (it is below 0.5\%) over the same range of incident energy. Comparing these results to the value of about 8\% for the same beam (or 11\% after correction), one may conclude that SOC in FeSe ML on STO is by a factor of about 8 smaller than that in W(110). The value is, however, sufficiently large to cause topological states \cite{Hao2014,Hao2015,Wang2016a}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Spin dependence of dynamic charge response.} \textbf{a} and \textbf{b} The measured and simulated SPHREEL spectra at an incident electron energy of $E_i=4.07$~eV. \textbf{c} and \textbf{d} The measured and simulated SPHREEL spectra at an incident electron energy of $E_i=6.0$~eV. Blue upward and red downward triangles represent the spectra recorded or simulated for the incoming spin states of $|+\rangle$ and $|-\rangle$ (spin polarization parallel and antiparallel to the y-axis in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Spectra}\textbf{a}), respectively. The open circles denote the spin asymmetry $A=\left(I_{|+\rangle}-I_{|-\rangle}\right)/\left(I_{|+\rangle}+I_{|-\rangle}\right)$. All the experimental spectra are recorded at $T=15$~K in the superconducting state of the sample and at the specular geometry i.e., the wavevector of $q=0$, at the $\bar{\Gamma}$--point. The error bars in spin asymmetry represent the statistical uncertainties.}
\label{Fig:SpectraSimulation}
\end{figure*}
The conditions under which FeSe ML on STO can exhibit topological characters have theoretically been examined in Refs.~\cite{Hao2014,Wang2016a}. It has been discussed that the appearance of a topological phase in this system is associated with (i) a trivial bandgap in the electronic band structure near the $\bar{\rm{M}}$-point, (ii) the parity-broken coupling at the interface, and (iii) a sufficiently large SOC \cite{Hao2014}. The presence of the bandgap near the $\bar{\rm{M}}$--point has already been well established by several ARPES experiments \cite{Lee2014,Wang2016,Tan2013,Zhang2017,Faeth2021,Rademaker2021,Liu2021}. The parity-broken coupling at the interface does exist in the system and, in addition, can be tuned by the interface engineering. Our results indicate that SOC in this system is large and hence one would, in principle, be able to realize the nontrivial topological states in the system. This would open an avenue for investigation of topological superconductivity and Majorana states in a model system with a rather high $T_c$. Evidence of topological states in FeSe ML has been reported by scanning tunneling spectroscopy \cite{Wang2016a}. However, the attribution of the observed peaks in the tunneling spectra to the topological states has entirely been based on the first-principles calculations, in which SOC was taken into account. An important piece of this puzzle i.e., a direct experimental probe of SOC has been missing. This is now provided by our experimental results.
In a similar system, namely bulk FeSe$_x$Te$_{1-x}$, the presence of topological surface superconductivity has been proposed to originate from a band inversion of the $p_z$ and $d_{xz}$ bulk bands. The resulting topological surface states have, therefore, been described to be Z$_2$ invariant (and hence be protected by time-reversal symmetry) \cite{Xu2016,Wu2016,Zhang2018a}. ARPES experiments have revealed that in addition to the superconducting gap in the vicinity of the Fermi level the surface states become gapped several mili-electron-volts below the Fermi level \cite{Peng2019,Rameau2019,Zaki2021}. This gap opening, which emerges together with the superconducting phase has been attributed to the appearance of a weak ferromagnetism at the surface. It has been discussed that the appearance of ferromagnetism breaks the time reversal symmetry, which is in contradiction to the picture of topological superconductivity induced by the band inversion. Recently, it has been discussed that the emergence of topological superconductivity on surfaces can be the consequence of the interplay between the $s_{\pm}$-wave symmetry of the superconducting order parameter, a Rashba type SOC and the emergent surface magnetism \cite{Mascot2022}. This mechanism explains several experimentally observed fingerprints of topological superconductivity at the surface of bulk FeSeTe superconductor \cite{Xu2016,Wang2018,Zhang2018a,Rameau2019,Zhu2020,Wu2021} and thin films \cite{Peng2019,Chen2019}. The proposed mechanism can also be important to either understand or to realize topological edge superconductivity in the FeSe ML on STO, by introducing magnetic impurities. However, such a realization would require a more detailed study of the involved states by means of ARPES or similar techniques \cite{Wang2016}.
Regarding the origin of superconductivity in FeSe ML on STO the main attention is paid to the so-called replica bands observed in ARPES experiments. They have been considered as an indication of a phonon-mediated superconductivity in this system \cite{Lee2014,Wang2016,Tan2013,Zhang2017,Faeth2021,Rademaker2021,Liu2021}. This suggestion is merely based on probing the quasiparticle band dispersions. However, no solid evidence, indicating a strong electron-phonon coupling, has been reported by probing the phononic excitations.
On the other hand it has also been discussed that the pairing mechanism can be of unconventional nature and be mediated by spin fluctuations \cite{Graser2009,Linscheid2016}. The signature of such a coupling has experimentally been observed by means of tunneling spectroscopy experiments \cite{Jandke2019, Liu2019}. Moreover, it has been suggested that a cooperative effect of several bosonic excitations may be the main reason for such a high transition temperature of this system \cite{Song2019,Schrodi2020a,Rademaker2021}.
Beside the mechanism discussed above, it has theoretically been shown that considering both, the effect of nematic fluctuations and SOC in the absence of inversion symmetry, a $s-$wave state is favored \cite{Kang2016}. More importantly, if SOC and the broken inversion symmetry are strong enough so that they overcome the mismatch between the electron pockets near the $\bar{\rm{M}}$-point, the gap function measured in the experiment can be well reproduced \cite{Kang2016}. Our result, indicating a large SOC in FeSe/STO, can now provide a clue to understand the gap function and the nature of gap opening in great details. Together with the observation of spin fluctuations, we have reported earlier \cite{Jandke2019}, we conclude that the superconductivity in the FeSe monolayer on STO is of $s_{\pm}$ character. Our results provide
critical insights into the symmetry of the paring and the origin of superconductivity in this system.
\section{Conclusions}\label{Sec:conclutions}
While probing the dynamic charge response of the FeSe superconducting ML on STO by means of SPHREELS, we observed that the scattering cross-section is strongly spin dependent. The observed spin asymmetry is attributed to a large SOC at and near the surface region. This large SOC, which very likely originates from the $d$ orbitals of the Fe atoms \cite{Kang2016} and the presence of a dielectric depletion layer below the FeSe ML, has several consequences on the properties of the system. One of the important consequences is the formation of topological states. The depletion layer is a result of charge transfer from the Nb-STO into the FeSe layer, which leads to a band bending and the generation of an electric field at the interface.
Since the charge transfer, the formation of a depletion layer at the interface and the associated electric field is a general phenomenon, we anticipate that the observed effect is also general and shall be observed for other Fe-based superconducting monolayers brought in contact with STO or other dielectric oxides. This would allow an interfacial engineering of the superconducting states by growing ML iron chalcogenides or other HTSC on dielectric oxides. Realization of topological states in superconducting MLs would provide a platform for investigation and realization of Majorana states in, structurally, very simple systems.
In addition to the facts mentioned above, our results suggest that the superconductivity in FeSe ML is very likely of $s_{\pm}$ nature and, therefore, shed light on the long-standing question regarding the nature of superconducting order parameter and the pairing symmetry in this system.
\section{Methods}\label{Sec:Methods}
\subsection{Experiments}\label{Sec:Exp}
\subsubsection{Sample preparation and characterization }
All the sample growth and characterizations were performed under ultrahigh vacuum conditions. FeSe ML was grown by means of molecular beam epitaxy technique on the Nb-doped STO(001) substrates in a separate chamber \cite{Jandke2019,Li2014}. The Nb-doping level was 0.6\%. Prior to the film growth, the substrate was annealed at temperatures up to about 1000~$^{\circ}$C and was then etched by a selenium flux for 20 minutes. The sample was kept at the elevated temperature for 30 minutes and then was gradually cooled down to 480~$^{\circ}$C. Fe and Se were co-deposited with a growth rate of 0.059~ML/min at 480~$^{\circ}$C at a flux ratio of Fe:Se $\equiv$ 1:10. The sample was post annealed at 500~$^{\circ}$C right after the deposition for several hours to ensure a good morphological quality. This also ensures desorption of the residual Se atoms on the surface. The film growth was monitored by reflection high energy electron diffraction.
For the further measurements, the sample was transferred using an ultrahigh vacuum suitcase to the scanning tunneling microscopy and spin-polarized high-resolution electron energy-loss spectroscopy chambers.
The morphological and electronic properties were investigated by means of scanning tunneling microscopy \cite{Jandke2019}. Our samples show a superconducting gap of about $\Delta=11\pm3$~meV at a temperature of about 0.9~K.
\subsubsection{Spin-polarized high-resolution electron energy-loss spectroscopy}
The dynamic response of the samples was investigated by means of spin-polarized high-resolution electron energy-loss spectroscopy \cite{Zakeri2014}.
A spin-polarized monochromatic electron beam with an energy resolution between 4 and 11~meV was used \cite{Zakeri2013,Zakeri2014}. The spin-polarized electron beam is generated by photoemission from a strained GaAsP photocathode. In order to observe maximum spin asymmetry according to Eq.~(\ref{Eq:elasticcrosssection}), a longitudinally spin-polarized beam was used, meaning that the polarization vector of the incoming electron beam was either parallel or antiparallel to the scattering's plane normal vector $\vec{\hat{n}}$. For the parallel case we call these incoming spin states $|+\rangle$ and for the antiparallel case we call them $|-\rangle$. The degree of the beam polarization was estimated by performing spin-polarized elastic reflectivity from a W(110) single crystal, resulting in a value of about $72\pm5$\%. The total scattering angle i.e., the angle between the incident and the scattered beam was kept constant ($\theta_0=80^{\circ}$). The scattering intensity was recorded simultaneously for the two possible spin polarizations of the incoming electron beam $|+\rangle$ and $|-\rangle$. This means that first the scattering geometry was adjusted and then the intensity of the scattered electrons was measured after energy analysis. When recording the intensity of the scattered beam two values for the intensity were recorded; one for electrons with $|+\rangle$ spin state and the other one for electrons with $|-\rangle$ spin state. Changing the incoming spin state from $|+\rangle$ to $|-\rangle$ was realized by reversing the helicity of the laser beam used for the excitation and emission of the spin-polarized electrons from the photocathode. The scattered electron beam was energy analyzed without any further spin analysis.
In order to collect the spectra in off-specular geometry at a certain wavevector transfer $q$ the scattering geometry was adjusted to realize the required wavevector transfer. The in-plane wavevector transfer is given by $q = k_{i} \sin\theta_i - k_{s} \sin(\theta_{0}-\theta_i)$, where $k_{i}$ ($k_{s}$) is the magnitude of the wavevector of the incident (scattered) electrons, and $\theta_i$ ($\theta_{0}$)
is the angle between the incident beam and sample normal (the scattered beam). Different wavevectors transfers were achieved by changing the scattering angles, i.e., by rotating the sample about its main axis. In the experiments $\theta_{0}$ was kept at $80^{\circ}$. The spectra were recorded along the $\bar{\Gamma}$--$\bar{\rm{X}}$ direction of the surface Brillouin zone. The wavevector resolution of the experiment is given by $\Delta q=\sqrt{2mE_{i}}/\hbar[\cos\theta_i
+\cos(\theta_{0}-\theta_i)]\Delta\theta_i$. $E_i$ denotes the energy of the incident beam and $\Delta\theta_i$ depends of the spectrometer design (in our case $\Delta\theta_i=2^\circ$). The resolution of the spectrometer in momentum space is about 0.03~\AA$^{-1}$.
\subsection{Theory}\label{Sec:Theo}
\subsubsection{Theory of spin dependent scattering cross-section}\label{Sec:scatteringtheo}
We define $|m\rangle$, $|n\rangle$ as many-body states of the sample with energies $E_m$, $E_n$ and $|i\rangle$, $|f\rangle$ as initial and final states of the electron with energies $E_i$, $E_f$. The general definition of the differential scattering cross-section is given by \cite{Berthod2018}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:crossgeneral}
\frac{d^2S}{d\Omega d\hbar\omega}=\left(\frac{2\pi}{\hbar}\right)^4m_e^2\frac{k_s}{k_i}\sum_{mn}
\frac{e^{-E_m/k_{\mathrm{B}}T}}{Z}|\langle n,f|\hat{T}(E_m+E_i)|m,i\rangle|^2\delta(E_m+E_i-E_n-E_f),
\end{equation}
where $m_e$ is the electron mass, $k_i=|\vec{k}_i|$ and $k_s=|\vec{k}_s|$ are the norms of the three-dimensional wavevectors of the incident and scattered electron, respectively, $k_{\mathrm{B}}$ is the Boltzmann constant, $Z=\sum_me^{-E_m/k_{\mathrm{B}}T}$ is the partition function, and $\hbar\omega=E_i-E_f$ is the energy-loss of electrons during the scattering process. $\hat{T}(E)$ is the many-body t-matrix given by $\hat{T}(E)=\hat{V}+\hat{V}(E+i0-\hat{H})^{-1}\hat{T}(E)$ with $\hat{H}$ the Hamiltonian of the sample and $\hat{V}$ the interaction energy of the incident electron with the sample. We use the first-order (Born) approximation, $\hat{T}(E)\approx\hat{V}$.
The interaction energy of the incident electron with the sample is written as $\hat{V}=\hat{V}_{\mathrm{H}}+\hat{V}_{\mathrm{SOC}}$, ignoring the exchange-correlation term. $\hat{V}_{\mathrm{H}}$ is the Hartree energy, i.e., the electrostatic interaction with the charge density in the sample. We define the total charge density operator $\hat{\rho}(\vec{R})$ given in the units of Coulomb per unit volume, where $\vec{R}$ is a three-dimensional position vector. For the given geometry it can be decomposed into the in- and out-of-plane components $\vec{R}=(\vec{r},z)$. Here $z$ represents the coordinate normal to the surface and the sample is placed in the $x$--$y$ plane at $z<0$ (the surface is located at $z=0$). Note that $\hat{\rho}(\vec{R})$ includes both negative as well as positive charges in the sample. This operator acts on the many-body states with matrix elements $\langle n|\hat{\rho}(\vec{R})|m\rangle$. The Hartree energy is
\begin{equation} \label{Hartree}
\hat{V}_{\mathrm{H}}(\vec{R})=e\int d\vec{R}'\,\frac{\hat{\rho}(\vec{R}')}
{4\pi\epsilon_0|\vec{R}-\vec{R}'|}\sigma_0,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_0$ is the identity matrix in spin space, since the Hartree potential conserves the spin of the electron during the scattering process. $\hat{V}_{\mathrm{SOC}}$ is the spin-orbit interaction given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{V}_{\mathrm{SOC}}(\vec{R})=\frac{e\hbar}{4m_e^2c^2}\vec{\sigma}\cdot
\left[\hat{\vec{E}}(\vec{R})\times\vec{p}\right].
\end{equation}
Here $\vec{\sigma}$ is the vector of Pauli matrices, $\hat{\vec{E}}(\vec{R})=-\vec{\nabla}\hat{V}_{\mathrm{H}}(\vec{R})/e$ is the electric field due to the charge distribution $\hat{\rho}(\vec{R})$, and $\vec{p}=-i\hbar\vec{\nabla}$ is the momentum operator.
In the next step we introduce the wavefunctions of the incident and scattered electrons, taking into account spin-dependent reflection coefficients
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:psi_new}\begin{align}
\psi_i(\vec{R})&=N_ie^{i\vec{k}_i\cdot\vec{r}}\left(\vec{i}e^{ik_i^zz}
+\mathcal{R}\vec{i}e^{-ik_i^zz}\right)\theta(z)\\
\psi_s(\vec{R})&=N_se^{i\vec{k}_s\cdot\vec{r}}\left(\vec{s}e^{ik_s^zz}
+\mathcal{R}\vec{s}e^{-ik_s^zz}\right)\theta(z).
\end{align}\end{subequations}
$N_i$ and $N_s$ are normalization factors, $\theta(z)$ denotes the Heaviside step function, $\vec{i}$ and $\vec{s}$ are two-component vectors representing the initial and final states in some spin-1/2 basis (for instance the $\{|+\rangle,|-\rangle\}$ basis), and $\mathcal{R}$ is the reflection matrix expressed in the same basis.
For definiteness, we note that a matrix $\mathcal{R}$ expressed in the usual basis $\{|\uparrow\rangle,|\downarrow\rangle\}$ with the spin quantization axis along $z$ can be rotated to a basis with quantization axis along a direction defined by the polar and azimuthal angles $(\vartheta,\varphi)$ by means of the unitary transformation $\mathcal{U}^{\dagger}\mathcal{R}\mathcal{U}$ with $\mathcal{U}=\begin{pmatrix}\cos\frac{\vartheta}{2}&-\sin\frac{\vartheta}{2}\\ \sin\frac{\vartheta}{2}e^{i\varphi}&\cos\frac{\vartheta}{2}e^{i\varphi}\end{pmatrix}$. The $\{|+\rangle,|-\rangle\}$ basis corresponds to $(\vartheta,\varphi)=(\pi/2,\pi/2)$ (see the Cartesian coordinates in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Spectra}\textbf{a}).
Inserting Eqs.~(\ref{eq:psi_new}) and (\ref{Hartree}) in Eq.~(\ref{Eq:crossgeneral}) we find that the scattering cross-section including only the Hartree term can be written as
\begin{multline}\label{eq:sigmaH}
\frac{d^2S_{\mathrm{H}}}{d\Omega d\hbar\omega}=\left(\frac{2\pi}{\hbar}\right)^4m_e^2\frac{k_s}{k_i}
\left(\frac{e}{2\epsilon_0q}\right)^2(N_sN_i)^2
\left|\frac{\vec{s}^{\dagger}\!\cdot\vec{i}}{q+iq_z^-}
+\frac{\vec{s}^{\dagger}\!\cdot(\mathcal{R}\vec{i})}{q+iq_z^+}
+\frac{(\mathcal{R}\vec{s})^{\dagger}\!\cdot\vec{i}}{q-iq_z^+}
+\frac{(\mathcal{R}\vec{s})^{\dagger}\!\cdot(\mathcal{R}\vec{i})}{q-iq_z^-}\right|^2 \\
\times\int_{-\infty}^0dzdz'\,\mathcal{S}(\vec{q},z,z',\omega)e^{-q|z+z'|},
\end{multline}
where $q_z^{\pm}=k_s^z\pm k_i^z$, $\mathcal{S}(\vec{q},z,z',\omega)=\frac{1}{Z}\sum_{mn}e^{-E_m/k_{\mathrm{B}}T}\langle m|\hat{\rho}(-\vec{q},z)|n\rangle\langle n|\hat{\rho}(\vec{q},z')|m\rangle\delta(\hbar\omega+E_m-E_n)$, and $\vec{q}$ is a two-dimensional vector with $|\vec{q}|=q$.
Likewise, the spin-orbit cross-section can be expressed as
\begin{multline}\label{eq:sigmaSOC}
\frac{d^2S_{\mathrm{SOC}}}{d\Omega d\hbar\omega}=\left(\frac{2\pi}{\hbar}\right)^4m_e^2\frac{k_s}{k_i}
\left(\frac{e}{2\epsilon_0q}\right)^2(N_sN_i)^2 |\alpha|^2
\left|(\mathcal{G_+})^{+-}q\left(k_i^x-ik_i^y\right)+(\mathcal{G_-})^{+-}\left(q_x-iq_y\right)ik_i^z\right.\\
\left.-(\mathcal{G_+})^{-+}q\left(k_i^x+ik_i^y\right)-(\mathcal{G_-})^{-+}\left(q_x+iq_y\right)ik_i^z+
\left[(\mathcal{G_+})^{++}-(\mathcal{G_+})^{--}\right]\left(q_xk_i^y-q_yk_i^x\right)\right|^2\\
\times\int_{-\infty}^0dzdz'\,\mathcal{S}(\vec{q},z,z',\omega)e^{-q|z+z'|},
\end{multline}
where ($\mathcal{G_{\pm}}$) is given by
\begin{equation}
(\mathcal{G_{\pm}})^{\sigma\sigma'}=\frac{s^*_{\sigma}i^{}_{\sigma'}}{q+iq_z^-}
\pm\frac{s^*_{\sigma}\left(\mathcal{R}_{\sigma'\sigma'}i_{\sigma'}
+\mathcal{R}_{\sigma'\bar{\sigma}'}i_{\bar{\sigma}'}\right)}{q+iq_z^+}
+\frac{\left(\mathcal{R}^*_{\sigma\sigma}s^*_{\sigma}
+\mathcal{R}^*_{\sigma\bar{\sigma}}s^*_{\bar{\sigma}}\right)i_{\sigma'}}{q-iq_z^+}
\pm\frac{\left(\mathcal{R}^*_{\sigma\sigma}s^*_{\sigma}
+\mathcal{R}^*_{\sigma\bar{\sigma}}s^*_{\bar{\sigma}}\right)
\left(\mathcal{R}_{\sigma'\sigma'}i_{\sigma'}
+\mathcal{R}_{\sigma'\bar{\sigma}'}i_{\bar{\sigma}'}\right)}{q-iq_z^-}.
\end{equation}
Here $\alpha=-i\hbar^2/(4m_e^2c^2)$, $\bar{\sigma}\equiv-\sigma$, and $\mathcal{R}_{\sigma\sigma'}$ represent the reflection coefficients when an electron with a spin $\sigma$ is impinged onto the sample and an electron with spin $\sigma'$ is detected in the final state after the scattering event.
Equations~(\ref{eq:sigmaH}) and (\ref{eq:sigmaSOC}) shall provide a description for the scattering intensities for any possible spin directions of the incoming and scattered beam, when the Hartree and SOC terms are treated separately. However, the quantities $\mathcal{R}_{\sigma\sigma'}$ are not known in practice. In order to overcome this problem simplifications are needed. As it is apparent from Eq.~(\ref{eq:sigmaSOC}) the spin-orbit cross-section is by a factor $\sim|\alpha qk_i|^2$ smaller than the Hartree cross-section and hence its contribution to the intensity may be neglected. The Hartree contribution by itself should, in principle, conserve the spin during the scattering process. In such a scenario no spin asymmetry is expected. In order to account for the spin dependent effects one may assume that the reflection coefficients are spin dependent even for the case of Hartree scattering. In this case one would observe a spin asymmetry. This means that the role of SOC is to break the spin degeneracy and thereby lead to spin-dependent reflection coefficients.
Our analysis showed that, indeed, in this case the asymmetry caused by the Hartree term introduced in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sigmaH}) does not depend, in first approximation, on $q$ and $\hbar\omega$ and is given by (for an extended discussion see Supplementary Note~2)
\begin{equation}\label{eq:asymmetry1}
\frac{I_{|+\rangle}-I_{|-\rangle}}{I_{|+\rangle}+I_{|-\rangle}}
\approx\frac{\mathcal{R}_{++}^2-\mathcal{R}_{--}^2}
{\mathcal{R}_{++}^2+|\mathcal{R}_{+-}|^2+|\mathcal{R}_{-+}|^2+\mathcal{R}_{--}^2}.
\end{equation}
We define the quantities $|\mathcal{R}_{|+\rangle}|^2= |\mathcal{R}_{++}|^2+|\mathcal{R}_{+-}|^2$ and $|\mathcal{R}_{|-\rangle}|^2= |\mathcal{R}_{--}|^2+|\mathcal{R}_{-+}|^2$, which represent the intensity of the scattered electrons when the spin of the incoming beam is of $|+\rangle$ and $|-\rangle$ character, respectively. Such quantities can be extracted from the spin-dependent elastic reflectivity data. The asymmetry strongly depends on the incident (scattered) energy as well as the scattering geometry, since $|\mathcal{R}_{|+\rangle}|^2$ and $|\mathcal{R}_{|-\rangle}|^2$ depend on these variables.
In our simulations we use exactly the same formalism introduced by Evan and Mills \cite{Evans1972,Mills1975} and implemented by Lucas and \v{S}unji\'{c} \cite{Sunjic1971,Lucas1972,Lambin1990}). In order to account for the spin dependent effects we use reflection coefficients measured by the elastic reflectivity measurements (see below).
\subsubsection{Simulation}\label{Sec:simulation}
Simulation of the spectra were performed by a numerical scheme based on the dipolar scattering theory. To calculate $P^{\mathrm{sl}}(\omega)$ we first calculate the single-loss probability
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:singleloss}
P(\omega) = \frac{e^2|\mathcal{R}_{| \sigma \rangle}(E_i)|^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0 \hbar v_{\bot}}\frac{4}{\pi^2}
\iint_{\Omega}d^2q\,\frac{|\vec{q}| (v_{\bot})^3}
{\left[(\omega-\vec{q} \cdot \vec{v}_{\parallel})^2 + (|\vec{q}| v_{\bot})^2\right]^2}
\mathfrak{Im}\left[\dfrac{-1}{g(\vec{q},\omega)+1}\right].
\end{equation}
Here $\epsilon_0$ is the vacuum permittivity, $\hbar$ is the reduced Planck constant, $e$ is the electron charge, $v_{\bot}$ ($v_{\parallel}$) represents the perpendicular (parallel) component of the velocity of the incident electron, $|\mathcal{R}_{| \sigma \rangle}|=|\mathcal{R}_{|+\rangle}|$ or $|\mathcal{R}_{| -\rangle}|$ denotes reflection coefficient of electrons with the incoming spin state $|+\rangle$ or $|-\rangle$ and strongly depends on the incident energy $E_i$. The integration range $\Omega$ denotes the range of momentum covered by the exit and entrance slits of the monochromator and analyzer. We emphasize that in Eq.~(\ref{Eq:singleloss}) $\vec{q}$ represents the two-dimensional vector of the momentum transfer parallel to the surface.
The most important entities in Eq.~\eqref{Eq:singleloss} are $|\mathcal{R}_{| \sigma \rangle}(E_i)|$ and the dielectric response function $g(\vec{q},\omega)$. The former is obtained from the experimental elastic reflection measured for different spin directions $|+\rangle$ and $|-\rangle$. For layered systems, such as our case, the latter can be related to the dielectric function of each individual layers $\varepsilon^{p}(q,\omega)$, where $p$ is the layer index (for details see Refs.~\cite{Sunjic1971,Lucas1972,Lambin1990,Lazzari2018}).
Equation~(\ref{Eq:singleloss}) describes only the single-loss probability for an electron having a wavevector $k_i$ and spin $|\sigma\rangle$ to be scattered from a semi-infinite slab system and loose the energy $\hbar\omega$ at $T=0$~K. The multiple scattering events, the elastic peak, and temperature effects were included using the approach introduced by Lucas and \v{S}unji\'{c} \cite{Sunjic1971,Lucas1972,Lambin1990,Lazzari2018}.
We first construct a multi-slab system by considering one unit cell of FeSe on 17 unit cells (about 6.5~nm) of insulating STO on a semi infinite Nb-doped STO(001) (a sketch of the structure is provided in Supplementary Figure~1). The dielectric function of each individual layer is then written in different contributions i.e., (i) a frequency independent background dielectric constant $\varepsilon^{p}_{\infty}$, (ii) a phononic contribution $\varepsilon^{p}_\mathrm{phonon}$, and (iii) an electronic contribution $\varepsilon^{p}_\mathrm{plasmon}$
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon^{p}(q,\omega) = \varepsilon^{p}_{\infty} + \varepsilon^{p}_\mathrm{phonon}
+ \varepsilon^{p}_\mathrm{plasmon}.
\label{eq:dielectric_function}
\end{equation}
We use the literature values of $\varepsilon^{\rm{FeSe}}_{\infty}=15$ and $\varepsilon^{\rm{STO}}_{\infty}=5.7$ for FeSe and STO, respectively \cite{Yuan2012,Gervais1993,Zhou2017,Zhou2016}.
The phononic contribution to the dielectric function of each layer can be expressed in terms of different phonon contributions
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon^{p}_\mathrm{phonon} = \sum_{j=1}^{m} \frac{Q_j \omega_{\mathrm{TO},j}^2}
{\omega_{\mathrm{TO},j}^2 -\omega^2 - i\gamma_{\mathrm{TO},j} \omega},
\label{eq:ph-oscillators-sum}
\end{equation}
where $m$ is the number of all transverse optical (TO) phonon modes with the oscillator strength $Q_j$, which depends on the splitting between TO and longitudinal optical (LO) modes
\begin{equation}
Q_j = \frac{\varepsilon_\infty}{\omega_{\mathrm{TO},j}^2} \frac{\prod\limits_{l}
\left(\omega_{\mathrm{LO},l}^2 - \omega_{\mathrm{TO},j}^2 \right)}
{\prod\limits_{l\neq j}\left(\omega_{\mathrm{TO},l}^2 - \omega_{\mathrm{TO},j}^2 \right)},
\label{eq:oscillators-strength}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_{\mathrm{TO},j}$ and $\omega_{\mathrm{LO},j}$ denote the frequency of the $j$-th TO and LO phonon modes, respectively. $\gamma_{\mathrm{TO},j}$ and $\gamma_{\mathrm{LO},j}$ represent their corresponding damping.
In addition, we consider a Drude-like term in the dielectric function of each layer, in order to account for the contribution of the charge carriers
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon^{p}_\mathrm{plasmon} = -\varepsilon_\infty
\frac{ \omega_{pl}^2-i(\gamma_{pl}-\gamma_0)\omega}{\omega(\omega+i \gamma_0)},
\label{eq:Drude}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_{pl}$ denotes the plasma frequency associated with the charge carriers and is directly related to the carrier density $n_c$ and carriers' effective mass $m_{\rm eff}$ by $\omega_{pl} =\sqrt{ \frac{n_c e^2}{\varepsilon_\infty \epsilon_0 m_{\rm eff}}}$. The quantities $\gamma_{pl}$ and $\gamma_0$ are the linewidth broadening of the plasmon peak and are determined by the plasmon relaxation time. For $\gamma_{pl} = \gamma_0$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Drude}) one arrives at the well-known Drude term.
For the Nb-STO we use $\omega_{pl}=83$~meV, $\gamma_{pl} =75$~meV and $\gamma_0=5$~meV. The values are estimated by extrapolating the values measured by optical techniques at liquid nitrogen temperature to our measurement temperature ($T=15$~K) \cite{Gervais1993,Eagles1996}. The extrapolation is based on the temperature dependence of effective mass as discussed in detail in Ref.~\cite{Collignon2020}. For FeSe ML we use a Drude term with $\omega_{pl} =334$~meV estimated based on $\omega_{pl} = \sqrt{\frac{n_c e^2}{\varepsilon_\infty \epsilon_0 m_{\rm eff}}}$, assuming $m_{\rm eff}\simeq3 m_e$ and $n_c=0.12$~$e^{-}$/Fe. The damping parameter was $\gamma_{pl}=\gamma_{0}=270$~meV.
The TO phonon frequencies and their damping as well as $|\mathcal{R}_{| \sigma \rangle}|^2$ serve as the input of the simulations. The values we used for our simulations are provided in Supplementary Table~1. The values of $|\mathcal{R}_{| \sigma \rangle}|^2$ depend on the incident energy. We take the values from Fig.~\ref{Fig:TandEdep}\textbf{b} based on the expression $|\mathcal{R}_{| + \rangle}|^2=\frac{1+A(E_i)}{2}$ and $|\mathcal{R}_{| - \rangle}|^2=\frac{1-A(E_i)}{2}$. For the data shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:SpectraSimulation}\textbf{b} the values are $|\mathcal{R}_{| + \rangle}|^2(E_i=4~ \rm{eV})=0.555$ and $|\mathcal{R}_{| - \rangle}|^2(E_i=4~ \rm{eV})=0.445$ for those shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:SpectraSimulation}\textbf{d} they are $|\mathcal{R}_{| + \rangle}|^2(E_i=6~\rm{eV})=0.53$ and $|\mathcal{R}_{| - \rangle}|^2(E_i=6~\rm{eV})=0.47$.
\section*{Data availability}
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
\section*{Code availability}
The codes associated with this manuscript are available from the corresponding
author on reasonable request.
\section*{Author contributions}
Kh.Z. initiated the idea of the study, supervised the project, conceived and planned the experiments, analyzed the experimental data, performed the simulations and wrote the paper. D.R. contributed to carrying out the SPHREELS experiments. F.Y., J.J. and W.W. prepared the samples and performed the STM experiments. C.B. carried out the theoretical modeling and derived all the analytical expressions for the spin-dependent scattering cross-sections.
\section*{Competing interests}
The authors declare no competing interests.
\section*{Additional information}
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to Kh.Z (<EMAIL>).
\section*{Acknowledgements}
Kh.Z. acknowledges funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) through the Heisenberg Programme ZA 902/3-1 and ZA 902/6-1 and the DFG Grant No. ZA 902/5-1. The research of J.J. and W.W. was supported by DFG through Grant No.
Wu 394/12-1. F.Y. acknowledges funding from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. Kh.Z. thanks the Physikalisches Institut for hosting the group and providing the necessary infrastructure. We thank Janek Wettstein and Markus D\"ottling for developing the first version of the simulation code.
|
\section{Introduction}
Reconstructing surfaces from 3D point clouds is vital in 3D vision, robotics and graphics. It bridges the gap between raw point clouds that can be captured by 3D sensors and the editable surfaces for various downstream applications. Recently, Neural Implicit Functions (NIFs) have achieved promising results by training deep networks to learn Signed Distance Functions (SDFs) \cite{park2019deepsdf, jiang2020local, michalkiewicz2019deep, duan2020curriculum} or occupancies \cite{mescheder2019occupancy, peng2020convolutional, mi2020ssrnet, chen2019learning}, and then extract a polygon mesh of a continuous iso-surface from a discrete scalar field using the marching cubes algorithm \cite{lorensen1987marching}. However, the NIFs approaches based on learning internal and external relations can only reconstruct closed surfaces. The limitation prevents NIFs from representing most real-world objects such as cars with inner structures, clothes with unsealed ends or 3D scenes with open walls and holes.
As a remedy, state-of-the-art methods \cite{chibane2020neural,zhao2021learning,venkatesh2021deep} learn Unsigned Distance Functions (UDFs) as a more general representation to reconstruct surfaces from point clouds. However, these methods can not learn UDFs with smooth distance fields near surfaces, due to the noncontinuous character of point clouds, even using ground truth distance values or large scale meshes during training. Moreover, most UDF approaches failed to extract surfaces directly from unsigned distance fields. Particularly, they rely on post-processing such as Ball-Pivoting-Algorithm (BPA) \cite{bernardini1999ball} to extract surfaces based on the dense point clouds generated from the learned UDF, which is very time-consuming and also leads to surfaces with discontinuity and poor quality.
To solve these issues, we propose a novel method to learn consistency-aware UDFs directly from raw point clouds. We learn to move 3D queries to reach the approximated surface aggressively with a field consistency constraint, and introduce a polygonization algorithm to extract surfaces from the learned unsigned distance functions in a new perspective. Our method can learn UDFs from a single point cloud without requiring ground truth distances, point normals, or a large scale training set. Specifically, given query locations sampled in 3D space as input, We learn to move them to the approximated surface according to the predicted unsigned distances and the gradient at the query locations. More appealing solutions \cite{atzmon2020sal,atzmon2020sald,gropp2020implicit,ma2021neural} have been proposed to learn SDFs from raw point clouds by optimizing the relationship between the query point and its closest point in raw data as a surface prior. However, since the raw point cloud is a highly discrete approximation of the surface, the closest point to the query location is always inaccurate and ambiguous, which makes the network difficult to converge to an accurate UDF due to the inconsistent or even conflicting optimization directions in the distance field.
Therefore, in order to encourage the network to learn a consistency-aware and accurate unsigned distance field, we propose to dynamically search the optimization target with a specially designed loss function containing field consistency to mimic the conflict optimizations.
We also progressively infer the mapping between 3D queries and the approximated zero iso-surface by using well-moved queries as additional priors for promoting further convergence.
To extract a surface in a direct way, we propose to use the gradient field of the learned UDFs to determine whether two queries are on the same side of the approximated surface or not.
In contrast to NDF \cite{chibane2020neural} which also learns UDFs but takes dense point clouds as output and depends on BPA \cite{bernardini1999ball} to generate meshes, our method shows great advantages in efficiency and accuracy due to the straightforward surface extraction.
Our main contributions can be summarized as:
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose a novel neural network that learns consistent-aware UDFs directly from raw point clouds. Our method gradually infers the relationship between 3D query locations and the approximated surface with a field consistent loss.
\item We introduce an algorithm for directly extracting high-fidelity iso-surfaces with arbitrary topology from the gradient field of the learned unsigned distance functions.
\item We obtain state-of-the-art results in surface reconstruction from synthetic and real scan point clouds under the widely used benchmarks.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Works}
Surface reconstruction from 3D point clouds has been studied for decades. Classic optimization-based methods \cite{edelsbrunner1994three, bernardini1999ball, kazhdan2006poisson, kazhdan2013screened} tried to resolve this problem by inferring continuous surfaces from the geometry of point clouds. With the rapid development of deep learning \cite{zhou2022-3DOAE, liu2022spu, wen20223d, zhang2022fast, Jiang2019SDFDiffDRcvpr, hutaoaaai2020, wen2021pmp, wen2022pmp, xiang2021snowflakenet, wen2021cycle4completion}, the neural networks have shown great potential in reconstructing 3D surfaces \cite{li2022learning, LPI, chen2021unsupervised, han2020reconstructing, darmon2022improving, fu2022geo, wang2021neus, oechsle2021unisurf, lindell2022bacon, wang2022improved}. In the following, we will briefly review the studies of deep learning based methods.
\subsection{Neural Implicit Surface Reconstruction}
In the past few years, a lot of advances have been made in 3D surface reconstruction with Neural Implicit Functions (NIFs). The NIFs approaches \cite{chabra2020deep, jia2020learning, peng2020convolutional, mescheder2019occupancy, erler2020points2surf, jiang2020local, liu2021deep, mi2020ssrnet, lombardi2020scalable, park2019deepsdf, martel2021acorn} use either binary occupancies \cite{mescheder2019occupancy, peng2020convolutional, mi2020ssrnet, chen2019learning} or signed distance functions (SDFs) \cite{park2019deepsdf, jiang2020local, michalkiewicz2019deep, duan2020curriculum} to represent 3D shapes or scenes, and then use marching cubes \cite{lorensen1987marching} algorithm to reconstruct the learned implicit functions into surfaces.
Earlier works \cite{mescheder2019occupancy, park2019deepsdf, jia2020learning, chen2019learning} use an encoder \cite{mescheder2019occupancy, chen2019learning} or an optimization based method \cite{park2019deepsdf} to embed the shape into a global latent code, and then use a decoder to reconstruct the shape. To obtain more detailed geometry, some methods \cite{genova2020local, genova2019learning, tretschk2020patchnets, chabra2020deep, chibane2020implicit, jiang2020local, mi2020ssrnet, PredictiveContextPriors, On-SurfacePriors} proposed to leverage more latent codes to capture local shape priors. To achieve this, the point cloud is first split into different uniform grids \cite{chabra2020deep, chibane2020implicit, jiang2020local} or local patches \cite{genova2020local, genova2019learning, tretschk2020patchnets}, and a neural network is then used to extract a latent code for each grid/patch. Some recent works propose to learn NIFs from a new perspective, such as implicit moving least-squares surfaces \cite{liu2021deep}, differentiable poisson solver \cite{peng2021shape}, iso-points \cite{yifan2021iso} , point convolution \cite{boulch2022poco} or predictive context learning \cite{PredictiveContextPriors}. However, the NIFs approaches can only represent closed shapes due to the characters of occupancies and SDFs.
\subsection{Learning Unsigned Distance Functions}
To model general shapes with open and multi-layer surfaces, NDF \cite{chibane2020neural} learns unsigned distance functions to represent shapes by predicting the unsigned distance from a query location to the continuous surface. However, NDF merely predicts dense point clouds as the output, which requires time-consuming post-processing for mesh generation and also struggles to retain high-quality details of shapes. In contrast, our method is able to extract surfaces directly from the gradient field of the learned UDFs. Following works use image features \cite{zhao2021learning} or query side relations \cite{ye2022gifs} as additional constraints to improve reconstruction accuracy, some other works advance UDFs for normal estimation \cite{venkatesh2021deep} or semantic segmentation \cite{wang2022rangeudf}. However, these methods require ground truth distance values or even a large scale meshes during training and are hard to provide smooth distance fields near the surface due to the noncontinuous character of point clouds. While our method does not require any additional supervision but raw point clouds during training, which allows us to reconstruct surfaces for real point cloud scans. In a differential manner, a concurrent work named MeshUDF \cite{guillard2021meshudf} meshes UDFs from the dynamic gradients during training with a voting schema. On the contrary, we learn a consistancy-aware UDF first and extract the surface from stable gradients during testing. Moreover, our surface extraction algorithm is simpler to use, which is implemented in the marching cube algorithm.
\subsection{Surface Reconstruction from Raw Point Clouds}
Learning implicit functions directly from raw point clouds without ground truth signed/unsigned distance values or occupancy values is more challenge. Current works introduce sign agnostic learning with a specially designed network initialization \cite{atzmon2020sal}, constraints on gradients \cite{atzmon2020sald} or geometric regularization \cite{gropp2020implicit} for learning SDFs from raw data. Neural-Pull \cite{ma2021neural} uses a new way of learning SDFs by pulling nearby space onto the surface. However, they aim to learn signed distances and hence can not reconstruct complex shapes with open or multi-layer surfaces. In contrast, our method is able to learn a continuous unsigned distance function from point clouds, which allows us to reconstruct surfaces for shapes and scenes with arbitrary typology.
\section{Method}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{overview.pdf}
\caption{Overview of our method. Given a 3D query $q_i \in {Q_1}$ as input, the neural network predicts the unsigned distance $f(q_i)$ of $q_i$ and moves $q_i$ against the direction of gradient at $q_i$ with a stride of $f(q_i)$. The field consistency loss is then computed between the moved queries $q'_i$ and the target point cloud $P$ as the optimization target. After the network converges in the current stage, we update $P$ with a subset of $q'_i$ as additional priors to learn more local details in the next stage. Finally, we use the gradient field of the learned UDFs to model the relationship between different 3D grids and extract iso-surfaces directly. }
\label{fig:overview}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Problem statement.} We design a neural network to learn UDFs that represents 3D shapes. Given a 3D query location $q = [x,y,z]$, a learned UDF $f$ predicts the unsigned distance value $s = f(q) \in \mathbb{R}$. Current methods depend on ground truth distance values generated from continuous surfaces and employ a neural network to learn $f$ as a regression problem. Different from these methods, we aim to learn $f$ directly from a raw point cloud $P = \{p_i, i \in [1,N]\}$. Furthermore, these methods require post-processing \cite{chibane2020neural} or additional supervision \cite{ye2022gifs} to generate meshes. On the contrary, we introduce an algorithm to extract surfaces directly from $f$ using the gradient field $\nabla f$. The overview of our method is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:overview}.
\subsection{Learn UDFs from Raw Point Clouds}
We introduce a novel neural network to learn a continuous UDF $f$ from a raw point cloud. We demonstrate our idea using a 2D point cloud $S$ in Fig. \ref{fig:overview}(a), where $S$ indicates some discrete points of a continuous surface. Specifically, given a set of query locations $Q=\{q_i, i \in [1, M]\}$ which is randomly sampled around $S$, the network moves $q_i$ against the direction of the gradient $g_i$ at $q_i$ with a stride of predicted unsigned distance value $f(q_i)$. The gradient $g_i$ is a vector that presents the partial derivative of $f$ at $q_i=[x_i, y_i, z_i]$, which can be formulated as $g_i = \nabla f(q_i) = [{\partial f} / {\partial x}, {\partial f} / {\partial y}, {\partial f} / {\partial z}] $. The direction of $g_i$ indicates the orientation of where the unsigned distance increases the fastest in 3D space, which points the direction away from the surface, therefore moving $q_i$ against the direction of $g_i$ will find a path to reach the surface of $S$. The moving operation can be formulated as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:move}
z_i = q_i - f(q_i) \times \nabla f(q_i)/||\nabla f(q_i)||_2,
\end{equation}
where $z_i$ is the location of the moved query $q_i$, and $\nabla f(q_i)/||\nabla f(q_i)||_2$ is the normalized gradient $g_i$, which indicates the direction of $g_i$. The moving operation is differentiable in both the unsigned distance value and the gradient, which allows us to optimize them simultaneously during training.
\begin{wrapfigure}[24]{r}{0.4\textwidth}
\centering
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{levelset3.pdf}
\caption{The level-sets show the distance fields learned by (a) Neural-Pull, (b) SAL, (c) NDF, (d) Ours. The color of blue and red represent positive or negative distance. The darker the color, the closer it is to the approximated surface.}
\label{fig:levelset}
\end{wrapfigure}
The four examples in Fig. \ref{fig:levelset} show the distance fields learned by Neural-Pull \cite{ma2021neural}, SAL \cite{atzmon2020sal}, NDF \cite{chibane2020neural} and our method for a sparse 2D point cloud $P$ which only contains 13 points.
One main branch to learn signed or unsigned distance functions for point clouds is to directly minimize the mean squared error between the predicted distance value $f(q_i)$ and the euclidean distance between $q_i$ and its nearest neighbour in $P$, as proposed in NDF and SAL. However, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:levelset}(c), NDF leads to an extremely discrete distance field. To learn a continuous distance field, NDF introduces ground truth distance values extracted from the continuous surface as extra supervision, which prevents it from learning directly from raw point clouds. SAL shows a great capacity in learning SDFs for watertight shapes using a carefully designed initialization. However, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:levelset}(b), SAL fails to converge to a multi-structure shape since the network is initialized as a single layer shape prior. Neural-Pull uses a similar way as ours to pull queries onto the surface, thus also learns a continuous signed distance field as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:levelset}(a). However, the nature of SDF prevents Neural-Pull from reconstructing open surfaces like the $``1"$ on the left of Fig. \ref{fig:levelset}(a). As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:levelset}(d), our method can learn a continuous level set of distance field and can also represent open surfaces.
One way to extend Neural-Pull directly to learn UDFs is to predict a positive distance value for each query and pull it to the nearest neighbour in $P$.
However, for shapes with complex topology, this optimization is often ambiguous due to the noncontinuous character of raw point clouds. We solve this problem by introducing consistency-aware field learning.
\begin{wrapfigure}[10]{r}{0.5\textwidth}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{GCLoss.pdf}
\caption{Demonstration case of different losses.}
\label{fig:loss}
\end{wrapfigure}
\subsection{Consistency-Aware Field Learning}
Neural-Pull leverages a mean squared error to minimize the distance between the moved query $z_i$ and the nearest neighbour $n_i$ of $q_i$ in $P$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:l2loss}
\mathcal{L} = \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i \in [1,M]} {||z_i-n_i||_2^2}.
\end{equation}
However, the direct optimization of the loss in Eq. (\ref{eq:l2loss}) will form a distorted field and lead some queries to get stuck due to the conflict optimization which makes the network difficult to converge. We show a 2D case of learning UDFs for a double-deck wall using the loss Eq. (\ref{eq:l2loss}) as in Fig. \ref{fig:loss}(b) and using our loss as in Fig. \ref{fig:loss}(c).
Assume $p_1$ and $p_2$ as two discrete points in two different decks of the wall, $q_1$ and $q_2$ are two queries whose closest neighbours are $p_1$ and $p_2$, respectively. Optimizing the network using $q_1$ and $q_2$ by minimizing Eq. (\ref{eq:l2loss}) or our proposed loss in Eq. (\ref{eq:gcloss}) will lead to an unsigned distance field as in Fig. \ref{fig:loss}(a).
Assuming in the next training batch, $q_3$ and $q_4$ are two queries whose closest neighbours are $p_3$ and $p_4$. If we use the loss in Eq. (\ref{eq:l2loss}), the optimization target of $q_3$ is to minimize $ \mathcal{L} = {||z_3-p_3||_2^2}$. Notice that the target point $p_3$ is located on the lower surface, however the opposite direction of gradient around $q_3$ is upward at this moment. Therefore, the partial derivative $\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial z_3}$ leads to a decrease in the unsigned distance value $f(q_3)$ predicted by the network. The case of $q_4$ is optimized similarly. An immediate consequence is that the inconsistent optimization directions will form a distorted fields that has local minima of unsigned distance values at $q_3$ and $q_4$ as in Fig. \ref{fig:loss}(b). However, this situation causes other query points around point $q_3$ or $q_4$ to get stuck in the distorted fields and unable to move to the correct location, thus making the network hard to converge.
To address this issue, we propose a loss function which can keep the consistency of unsigned distance fields to avoid the conflicting optimization directions.
Specifically, instead of strictly constraining the convergence target before forward propagation as Eq. (\ref{eq:l2loss}), we first predict the moving path of a query location $q_i$ and move it using Eq. (\ref{eq:move}) to $z_i$, then look for the surface point $p_i$ in $P$ which is the closest to $z_i$ and minimize the distance between $z_i$ and $p_i$. As shown in Fig. \ref{eq:gcloss}(c), after moving $q_3$ against the gradient direction with a stride of $f(q_3)$ to $z_3$, the closest surface point of $z_3$ lies on the upper deck, so the distance fields remain continuous and are optimized correctly.
In practical, we use chamfer distance as a suitable loss implementation, formulated as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gcloss}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm CD} = \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i \in [1,M]} \mathop{min}\limits_{j \in [1, N]}{||z_i-p_j||_2} + \frac{1}{N} \sum_{j \in [1,N]} \mathop{min}\limits_{i \in [1, M]}{||p_j-z_i||_2}.
\end{equation}
\begin{wrapfigure}[13]{r}{0.40\textwidth}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{lossexp.pdf}
\caption{Advantages of our loss.}
\label{fig:loss_exp}
\end{wrapfigure}
We also use toy examples as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:loss_exp} to show the advantage of our proposed field consistency loss. We learn UDFs for a raw point cloud of a double-deck wall as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:loss_exp}(a). Fig. \ref{fig:loss_exp}(b) denotes the randomly sampled query locations between two decks of the wall where the different colors mean the queries are closer to the upper or lower deck of the wall. Fig. \ref{fig:loss_exp}(c) and Fig. \ref{fig:loss_exp}(d) indicate the moved queries by loss in Eq. (\ref{eq:l2loss}) and Eq. (\ref{eq:gcloss}). It can be seen that our proposed loss can move most of the queries to the correct surface position, and Neural-Pull loss stops moving in many places or moves queries to the wrong places due to the field inconsistency in optimization. Fig. \ref{fig:loss_exp}(e) and Fig. \ref{fig:loss_exp}(f) show the learned distance field of a car with inner structure by the loss in Eq. (\ref{eq:l2loss}) and our loss.
\subsection{Progressive Surface Approximation}
Moreover, in order to predict unsigned distance values more accurately and learn more local details, we propose a progressive learning strategy by taking the intermediate results of moved queries as additional priors. Given a raw point cloud which is a discrete representation of the surface,
we have made a reasonable assumption: the closer the query location is to the given point cloud, the smaller the error of searching the target point on the given point cloud. We provide the Proof of this assumption in the appendix. Based on this assumption, we set up two regions: the high confidence region with small error and the low confidence region with large error. We sample query points in the high confidence region to help train the network and sample auxiliary points in the low confidence region to move to the estimated surface position by network gradient after network convergence at current stage, where the moved auxiliary points are regarded as the surface prior for the next stage. Notably, the auxiliary points do not participate in network training since these points with low confidence will lead to a large error and affect network training. Since the low confidence regions which are not optimized explicitly during training are distributed interspersed between the high confidence regions, according to the integral Monotone Convergence Theorem \cite{bibby1974axiomatisations}, the UDFs and gradient predicted by the low confidence region are a smooth expression of the trained high confidence region. We save the moved queries and auxiliary points and use them to update $S$. According to the updated point cloud, we re-divide the regions with high confidence and low confidence and re-sample the query points and auxiliary points for the next stage.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{multistep-v2.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of progressively approximating the surface.}
\vspace{-0.6cm}
\label{fig:multistep}
\end{figure}
We demonstrate our idea using a 2D case in Fig. \ref{fig:multistep}.(a). We divided the regions with high confidence (red region) and low confidence (yellow region) based on the given raw point cloud $S _{1}$ (black dots) and then sample query points $Q_{1}=\{q_i, i \in [1, M]\}$ (blue dots) and auxiliary points(green dots) $A_{1}=\{a_i, i \in [1, M]\}$. (b) We train the network to learn UDFs by moving the query locations $Q_{1}$ using Eq. (\ref{eq:move}), and optimize the network by minimizing Eq. (\ref{eq:gcloss}). (c) After network convergence at current stage, we move query points $Q$ and auxiliary points $A$ to the estimated surface position by the gradient of network, $S_{1}^{'} = p - f(p) \times \nabla f(p)/||\nabla f(p)||_2, p \subset Q _{1} \cup A_{1}$. (d) We save the moved points $S_{1}^{'}$ and use them to update $S$, $S _{2}= S _{1} \cup S_{1}^{'}$. According to the updated point cloud $S _{2}$, we re-divided the regions with high confidence and low confidence and re-sampled the query points $Q_{2}$ and auxiliary points $A_{2}$. (e) We continue to train the network by moving query points $Q_{2}$ to the updated $S_{2}$, and then update $S$ by combining the moved $Q_2$ and $A_2$ with $S_2$. (f) Because of the more continuous surface prior information, the network will learn more accurately and learn more local details of the UDFs.
\subsection{Surface Extraction Algorithm}
\begin{wrapfigure}[11]{r}{0.4\textwidth}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{mcubes_v2.pdf}
\caption{Surface extraction algorithm.}
\label{fig:mcubes}
\end{wrapfigure}
Unlike SDFs, UDFs fail to extract surfaces by marching cubes since UDFs cannot perform inside/outside tests on 3D grids. To address this issue, we propose to use the gradient field $\nabla f$ to determine whether two 3D grid locations are on the same side or the opposite side of the surface approximated by the point clouds $P$.
We make an assumption that on a micro-scale of the surface, the space can always be divided into two sides, where the 3D query locations of different sides denoted as $Q_{in} = \{{q_{in}}^i, i \in [1,L]\}$ and $Q_{out} = \{{q_{out}}^i, i \in [1,I]\}$. For two queries ${q_{in}}^i$ and ${q_{out}}^j$ in different sides of the surface, the included angle between the directions of the gradients $\nabla f({q_{in}}^i)$ and $\nabla f({q_{out}}^j)$ are always more than 90 degrees, which can be formulated as $\nabla f({q_{in}}^i) \cdot \nabla f({q_{out}}^j) < 0$. On the contrary, for two queries ${q_{in}}^i$ and ${q_{in}}^j$ in the same side, the formula $\nabla f({q_{in}}^i) \cdot \nabla f({q_{in}}^j) > 0$ holds true. So, we can classify whether two points are in the same or the opposite side using dot product of gradients, $cls(q_i, q_j) = \nabla f(q_i) \cdot \nabla f(q_j)$. Based on that, we divide the space into 3D grids (e.g. $256^3$), and perform gradient discrimination on the 8 vertices $v_i$ in each cell grid according to the gradient field $\nabla f$ using $cls(q_i, q_j)$. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mcubes}(a), the gradient field separates the vertices into two sets, where we can further adapt marching cubes algorithm \cite{lorensen1987marching} to create triangles for the grid using the lookup table. The complete surface is generated by grouping triangles of each grid together. To accelerate the surface extraction process and avoid extracting unexpected triangles in the multi-layers structures, we set a threshold $\theta$ to stop surface extraction on grids where $f(g_i)>\theta, i \in [0,7]$.
\textbf{Mesh refinement.} The initial surface extracted by marching cubes is only a discrete approximation of the zero iso-surface. To achieve a more detailed mesh, we propose to refine it using the UDF values. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mcubes}(b), given the predicted UDF values $UDF_A$ and $UDF_B$ of grid vertex $v_A$ and $v_b$, the mesh vertex $v_M$ can be moved to a finer position where $l_{A\rightarrow M} : l_{M\rightarrow B} = UDF_A : UDF_B$.
\section{Experiments}
We evaluate our method on the task of surface reconstruction from raw point clouds. We first demonstrate the ability of our method to reconstruct general shapes with open and multi-layer surfaces in Sec.\ref{section:sec4.1}. Next, we apply our method to reconstruct surfaces for real scanned raw data including 3D objects in Sec.\ref{section:sec4.2} and complex scenes in Sec.\ref{section:sec4.3}. Ablation studies are shown in Sec.\ref{section:sec4.4}.
\textbf{Implementation details.}
To learn UDFs for raw point clouds $P$, we adopt a neural network similar to OccNet \cite{mescheder2019occupancy} to predict the unsigned distance given 3D queries as input. Our network contains 8 layers of MLP where each layer has 256 nodes.
Similar to Neural-Pull and SAL, given the single point cloud $P$ as input, we do not leverage any condition and overfit the network to approximate the surface of $P$ by minimizing the loss of Eq. (\ref{eq:gcloss}). Therefore, we do not need to train our network on large scale training dataset in contrast to previous methods \cite{chibane2020neural, ye2022gifs, jiang2020local}. In addition, we use the same strategy as Neural-Pull to sample 60 queries around each point $p_i$ on $P$ as training data. A Gaussian function $\mathcal{N}(\mu, \sigma^2)$ is adopt to calculate the sampling probability where $\mu=p_i$ and $\sigma$ is the distance between $p_i$ and its 50-th nearest points on $P$.
For sampling auxiliary points in the low confidence region, the standard deviation is set to $1.1\sigma$. And we train our network for two stages in practice.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{comp_car.pdf}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{Visual comparisons of surface reconstruction on ShapeNet cars.}
\label{fig:vis_car}
\end{figure}
\makeatletter
\newcommand\figcaption{\def\@captype{figure}\caption}
\newcommand\tabcaption{\def\@captype{table}\caption}
\makeatother
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[h]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.072]{comp_mgd.pdf}
\figcaption{Visual comparisons on MGD dataset.}
\label{fig:mgd}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\resizebox{70mm}{20mm}{
\begin{tabular}{l|cc|cc}
\toprule
\multirow{1}*{} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Chamfer-L2} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{F-Score}\\
Method &Mean &Median & $F1^{0.005}$ & $F1^{0.01}$\\
\midrule
Input & 0.363 & 0.355 &48.50 &88.34 \\
Watertight GT & 2.628 & 2.293 & 68.82 & 81.60\\
GT & 0.076 & 0.074 & 95.70 & 99.99\\
NDF$_{BPA}$ \cite{chibane2020neural} & 0.202 & 0.193 &77.40 & 97.97\\
NDF$_{gradRA}$ & 0.160 & 0.152 &82.87 & 99.35\\
NDF$_{PC}$ & 0.126 & 0.120 & 88.09 & 99.54\\
GIFS \cite{ye2022gifs} & 0.128 & 0.123 & 88.05 & 99.31 \\
\midrule
Ours$_{BPA}$ & 0.141 & 0.138 & 84.84 & 99.33 \\
Ours$_{gradRA}$ & \textbf{0.119} & \textbf{0.114} & \textbf{88.55} & \textbf{99.82} \\
Ours$_{PC}$ & \textbf{0.110} & \textbf{0.106} & \textbf{90.06} & \textbf{99.87} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\tabcaption{Comparison on ShapeNet cars.}
\label{table:cars}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Surface Reconstruction for Synthetic Shapes}
\label{section:sec4.1}
\textbf{Dataset and metrics.}
For the experiments on synthetic shapes, we follow NDF \cite{chibane2020neural} to choose the ``Car" category of the ShapeNet dataset which contains the greatest amount of multi-layer shapes and non-closed shapes. And 10k points is sampled from the surface of each shape as the input. Besides, we employ the MGD dataset \cite{bhatnagar2019multi} to show the advantage of our method in open surfaces. To measure the reconstruction quality, we follow GIFS \cite{ye2022gifs} to sample 100k points from the reconstructed surfaces and adopt the Chamfer distance ($\times10^4$), Normal Consistency (NC) \cite{mescheder2019occupancy} and F-Score with a threshold of 0.005/0.01 as evaluation metrics.
\begin{wraptable}{r}{6.5cm}\small
\centering
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2mm}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c}
\toprule
Method &Chamfer-L2 &F-Score$^{0.01}$ & NC\\
\midrule
Neural-Pull \cite{ma2021neural} & 4.447 & 94.49 & 91.83\\
NDF \cite{chibane2020neural} & 0.658 & 76.11 & 92.84\\
Ours & 0.117 & 99.68 & 97.80\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Comparisons on MGD dataset.}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\label{table:mgd}
\end{wraptable}
\textbf{Comparison.}
We compare our method with the state-of-the-art works NDF \cite{chibane2020neural} and GIFS \cite{ye2022gifs}. We quantitatively evaluate our method with NDF and GIFS in Tab. \ref{table:cars}. We also report the results of points sampled from the watertight ground truth (watertight GT in table) as the upper bound of the traditional SDF-based or Occupancy-based implicit functions. To show the superior limit of this dataset, we sample two different sets of points from the ground truth mesh and report their results (GT in table). For a comprehensive comparison with NDF, we transfer our gradient-based reconstruction algorithm to extract surfaces from the learned distance field of NDF, and report three metrics of NDF and our method including generated point cloud ($*_{PC}$), mesh generated using BPA ($*_{BPA}$) and mesh generated using our gradient-based reconstruction algorithm ($*_{gradRA}$). As shown in Tab. \ref{table:cars}, we achieve the best results in terms of all the metrics. Moreover, our gradient-based reconstruction algorithm shows great generality in transferring to the learned gradient field of other method (e.g. NDF) by achieving significant improvement over the traditional method (BPA). We also provide the results of surface reconstruction on MGD \cite{bhatnagar2019multi} dataset as shown in Tab. \ref{table:mgd}, where we largely outperform other methods.
We further present a visual comparison with SAL and NDF in Fig. \ref{fig:vis_car}. Previous methods (e.g. SAL) take SDF as output and are therefore limited to single-layer shapes where the inner-structure is lost. NDF learns UDFs and is able to represent general shapes, but it outputs a dense point cloud and requires BPA to generate meshes, which leads to an uneven surface. On the contrary, we can extract surfaces directly from the learned UDFs, which are continuous surfaces with high fidelity.
We also provide a visual comparison with Neural-Pull in MGD dataset as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mgd}, where we accurately reconstruct the open surfaces but Neural-Pull fails to keep the original geometry.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{comp_spb2.pdf}
\caption{Visual comparisons of surface reconstruction on the SRB dataset.}
\label{fig:vis_spb}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Surface Reconstruction for Real Scans}
\label{section:sec4.2}
\textbf{Dataset and metrics.}
For surface reconstruction of real point cloud scans, we follow SAP to evaluate our methods under the Surface Reconstruction Benchmarks (SRB) \cite{williams2019deep}. We use Chamfer distance and F-Score with a threshold of 1\% for evaluation. Note that the ground truth is dense point clouds.
\textbf{Comparison.} We compare our method with state-of-the-art classic and data-driven surface reconstruction methods in the real scanned SRB dataset, including IGR \cite{gropp2020implicit}, Point2Mesh \cite{hanocka2020point2mesh}, Screened Poisson Surface Reconstruction (SPSR) \cite{kazhdan2013screened}, Shape As Points (SAP) \cite{peng2021shape}, Neural-Pull \cite{ma2021neural} and NDF \cite{chibane2020neural}. The numerical comparison is shown in Tab. \ref{table:srb}, where we achieve the best accuracy. The visual comparisons in Fig. \ref{fig:vis_spb} demonstrate that our method is able to reconstruct a continuous surface with local geometry consistence while other methods struggle to reveal the geometry details. For example, IGR, Neural-Pull and SAP mistakenly mended or failed to reconstruct the hole of the anchor while our method is able to keep the correct geometry.
\subsection{Surface Reconstruction for Scenes}
\label{section:sec4.3}
\textbf{Dataset and metrics.}
To further demonstrate the advantage of our method in surface reconstruction of real scene scans, we follow OnSurf \cite{On-SurfacePriors} to conduct experiments under the 3D Scene dataset \cite{zhou2013dense}. Note that the 3D Scene dataset is a challenging real-world dataset with complex topology and noisy open surfaces. We uniformly sample 100, 500 and 1000 points per $m^2$ at the original scale of scenes as the input and follow OnSurf to sample 1M points on both the reconstructed and the ground truth surfaces. We leverage L1 and L2 Chamfer distance to evaluate the reconstruction quality.
\textbf{Comparison.}
We compare our method with the state-of-the-arts scene reconstruction methods ConvONet \cite{peng2020convolutional}, LIG \cite{jiang2020local}, DeepLS \cite{chabra2020deep}, OnSurf \cite{On-SurfacePriors} and NDF \cite{chibane2020neural}. The numerical comparisons in Tab. \ref{table:scenes} show that our method significantly outperform the other methods under different point densities. The visual comparisons in Fig. \ref{fig:vis_scene} further shows that our reconstructions present more geometry details in complex real scene scans. Note that all the other methods have been trained in a large scale dataset, from which they gain additional prior information. On the contrary, our method does not leverage any additional priors or large scale training datasets, and learns to reconstruct surfaces directly from the raw point cloud, but still yields a non-trivial performance.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.63\textwidth}
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|cc|cc|cc|}
\hline
\multirow{2}*{Method} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{100/$m^2$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{500/$m^2$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1000/$m^2$}\\
\cline{2-7}
~ & L2CD & L1CD & L2CD & L1CD & L2CD & L1CD\\
\hline
ConvONet \cite{peng2020convolutional} & 7.859 & 0.043 & 13.192 & 0.052 & 14.097 & 0.052 \\
LIG \cite{gropp2020implicit} & 6.265 & 0.049 & 5.633 & 0.048 & 6.190 & 0.048 \\
DeepLS \cite{chabra2020deep} & 3.029 & 0.044 & 6.794 & 0.050 & 1.607 & 0.025 \\
NDF$_{PC}$ \cite{chibane2020neural} & 0.409 & 0.012 & 0.377 & 0.014 & 0.561 & 0.017 \\
NDF$_{mesh}$ & 0.452 & 0.014 & 0.475 & 0.016 & 0.872 & 0.022 \\
OnSurf \cite{On-SurfacePriors} & 1.154 & 0.021 & 0.862 & 0.020 & 0.706 & 0.020 \\
\hline
Ours$_{PC}$ & \textbf{0.144} & \textbf{0.010} & \textbf{0.078} & \textbf{0.009} & \textbf{0.072} & \textbf{0.010} \\
Ours$_{mesh}$ & \textbf{0.187} & \textbf{0.011} & \textbf{0.122} & \textbf{0.010} & \textbf{0.121} & \textbf{0.009} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\tabcaption{Surface Reconstruction under 3D Scene, L2CD$\times$1000.}
\label{table:scenes}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.36\textwidth}
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline
Method &Chamfer-L1 &F-Score\\
\hline
IGR \cite{gropp2020implicit} & 0.178 & 75.5 \\
Point2Mesh \cite{hanocka2020point2mesh} & 0.116 & 64.8\\
SPSR \cite{kazhdan2013screened} & 0.232 & 73.5\\
SAP \cite{peng2021shape} & 0.076 & 83.0\\
Neural-Pull \cite{ma2021neural} & 0.106 & 79.7\\
NDF$_{PC}$ \cite{chibane2020neural} & 0.185 & 72.2\\
NDF$_{mesh}$ & 0.238 & 68.6\\
\hline
Ours$_{PC}$ & \textbf{0.068} & \textbf{90.4}\\
Ours$_{mesh}$ & \textbf{0.073} & \textbf{84.5}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\tabcaption{Comparisons on SRB.}
\label{table:srb}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{comp_scene.pdf}
\caption{Visual comparison with different methods under 3D Scene. Inputs contains 1k points/$m^2$.}
\label{fig:vis_scene}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Ablation Study}
\label{section:sec4.4}
We conduct ablation studies to justify the effectiveness of each design in our method and the effect of some important parameters. We report the performance in terms of L2-CD under a subset of the ShapeNet Car dataset.
By default, all the experimental settings are kept the same as in Sec. \ref{section:sec4.1}, except for modified part described in each ablation experiment below.
\begin{wraptable}{r}{6cm}\small
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
$\times 10^4$ & NP loss & Exponent & Scratch & Ours\\
\hline
L2CD & 0.2381 & 0.1218 & 0.1497 & \textbf{0.1112}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Effect of framework design.}
\label{tab:ablation_settings}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{wraptable}
\textbf{Framework design.}
We first justify the effectiveness of each design of our framework in Tab. \ref{tab:ablation_settings}. We first directly use the loss proposed in Neural-Pull and find that the performance degenerates dramatically as shown by ``NP loss". We also use $g(x)=1-e^{(-x)}$ to replace $g(x)=|x|$ on the last layer of the network for $f$ before output, but found no improvement as shown by ``Exponent". We train the second stage from scratch as shown by ``Scratch" and prove that an end-to-end training strategy is more effective.
\begin{wraptable}{r}{6cm}\small
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
$\times 10^4$ & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4\\
\hline
L2CD & 0.1218 & \textbf{0.1112} & 0.1107 & 0.1107\\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Effect of stage numbers.}
\label{tab:ablation_step}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{wraptable}
\textbf{The effect of stage numbers.}
The number of stages during progressive surface approximation is also a crucial factor in the network training. We report the performance of training our network in different number of stages $St=[1,2,3,4]$ in Tab. \ref{tab:ablation_step}. We start the training of next stage after the previous one converges. We found that two stages training brings great improvement than training a single stage, and the improvements with 3rd and 4th stages are subtle.
\begin{wraptable}{r}{6cm}\small
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
$\times 10^4$ & 0.9 & 1.0 & 1.1 & 1.2\\
\hline
L2CD & 0.1133 & 0.1130 & \textbf{0.1112} & 0.1131 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Effect of low confidence range.}
\label{tab:ablation_scale}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{wraptable}
\textbf{The effect of low confidence range.}
We further explore the range of confidence region sample. Assume $\sigma$ as the range of high confidence region, we use 0.9$\sigma$, 1.0$\sigma$, 1.1$\sigma$ and 1.2$\sigma$ as the range of low confidence region. The results in Tab. \ref{tab:ablation_scale} show that a too small or too large range will degenerate the performance.
\begin{wraptable}{r}{6cm}\small
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
$\times 10^4$ & 64$^3$ & 128$^3$ & 256$^3$ & 320$^3$\\
\hline
w/o refine & 0.4169 & 0.1738 & 0.1294 & 0.1238 \\
refine & 0.1606 & 0.1174 & \textbf{0.1112} & 0.1105 \\
Time & 3.0 s & 21.9 s & 162.2 s & 307.6 s \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Ablations on surface extraction.}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\label{tab:ablation_mcubes}
\end{wraptable}
\textbf{Surface extraction.} We evaluate the effect of mesh refinement and the performance of different 3D grid resolutions. Tab. \ref{tab:ablation_mcubes} shows the accuracy and efficiency of different resolutions. We observe that the mesh refinement highly improves the accuracy and higher resolutions leads to better reconstructions at a cost of speed.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\section{Conclusion}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
We propose a novel method to learn continuous UDFs directly from raw point clouds by learning to move 3D queries to reach the approximated surface progressively. Our introduced reconstruction algorithm can extract surfaces directly from the gradient fields of the learned UDFs. Our method does not require ground truth distance values or point normals, and can reconstruct surfaces with arbitrary topology. One limitation of our method is that we use uniformly divided grids to extract surface, which can be improved with a coarse-to-fine paradigm.
\bibliographystyle{ieee_fullname}
|
\subsubsection{#1}}
\newcommand{\Sec}[1]{\S~\ref{#1}}
\newcommand{\rpt}[1]{\ref{#1}}
\newcommand{\newthm}[2]{\newtheorem{#1}[subsubsection]{#2}}
\newthm{theorem}{Theorem}
\newthm{claim}{Claim}
\newthm{cor}{Corollary}
\newthm{prop}{Proposition}
\newthm{lemma}{Lemma}
\newthm{fact}{Fact}
\theoremstyle{remark}
\newthm{rmk}{Remark}
\newthm{xmpl}{Example}
\newthm{qstn}{Question}
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newthm{defn}{Definition}
\newthm{notation}{Notation}
\newenvironment{remark}{\begin{rmk}}{\qed\end{rmk}}
\newenvironment{example}{\begin{xmpl}}{\qed\end{xmpl}}
\newenvironment{question}{\begin{qstn}}{\qed\end{qstn}}
\newcommand{\GGII}[1]{\cite[#1]{GGII}}
\newcommand{\HTT}[1]{\cite[#1]{HTT}}
\newcommand{\Kero}[1]{\cite[\href{https://kerodon.net/tag/#1}{#1}]{kerodon}}
\title{Higher internal covers}
\author[M. Kamensky]{Moshe Kamensky}
\address{
Department of Math \\
Ben-Gurion University \\
Be'er-Sheva \\
Israel
}
\email{\url{mailto:<EMAIL>}}
\urladdr{\url{https://www.math.bgu.ac.il/~kamenskm}}
\date{\today}
\subjclass{03C40}
\begin{document}
\begin{abstract}
We define and study a higher-dimensional version of model theoretic
internality, and relate it to higher-dimensional definable groupoids in the
base theory.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Introduction}
The model theoretic notions of \emph{internality} and the binding group came
up originally in work of Zil'ber on categorical theories (\cite{zilber}), and
shortly after by Poizat (\cite{poizat}) in the \(\omega\)-stable context, where
it was also noticed that differential Galois theory occurs as a special case.
The stability hypothesis was completely removed in~\cite[App.~B]{comp}, where
it was shown that the crucial hypothesis is \emph{stable embeddedness} of the
base theory.
Internality is a condition on a definable set \(\Dset{Q}\) in an expansion
\(\Th{T}^*\) of a theory \(\Th{T}\) to ``almost'' be interpretable in \(\Th{T}\): It
is interpretable, after adding a set of parameters to \(\Th{T}^*\). In this
situation, the theory provides a \emph{definable} group \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Th{T}^*\),
acting definably on \(\Dset{Q}\) as its group of automorphisms fixing all elements
in the reduct \(\Th{T}\). It is important here that the binding group \(\Dset{G}\) is
defined in \(\Th{T}^*\) rather than in \(\Th{T}\): In applications, one often
understands groups in \(\Th{T}\) better than in \(\Th{T}^*\). The group \(\Dset{G}\)
itself is also internal to \(\Th{T}\), and as a result can be identified with a
definable group \(\Dset{H}\) in \(\Th{T}\), but only non-canonically (and in general,
only after adding parameters). In the context of differential Galois theory,
this is related to the fact that the group of points of the (algebraic)
Galois group of a differential equation does not act on the set of solutions,
and its identification with the group of automorphisms is not canonical.
The non-canonicity was explained by Hrushovski in~\cite{GGII}, where it is
shown that the natural object that appears in this context is a definable
\emph{groupoid} in \(\Th{T}\), with the different groups \(\Dset{H}\) occurring as
the groups of automorphisms of each object. In fact, it is shown there that
there is a correspondence between groupoids definable in the base theory
\(\Th{T}\) and internal sorts in expansions of \(\Th{T}\). This correspondence is
reviewed in~\S\ref{sec:1d}. It is also suggested in~\cite{GGII} that sorts of
\(\Th{T}^*\) internal to \(\Th{T}\) should be viewed as generalised sorts of
\(\Th{T}\), obtained as a quotient by the corresponding definable groupoid, just
like an imaginary sort is obtained from a definable equivalence relation
(which is a special case). In the current paper we try to follow this
suggestion, by considering what should be the correct notion of internality,
after viewing these new sorts as ``legitimate'' definable sorts.
Our approach is motivated by topology. There, a typical example of a groupoid
arises as the fundamental groupoid \(\pi_1(X)\) of a space \(X\), i.e., the
groupoid whose objects are the points of \(X\), and whose morphisms are
homotopy classes of paths. For sufficiently nice \(X\), this groupoid can be
described in terms of the category of \emph{local systems} (locally constant
sheaves) on \(X\): each point of \(X\) determines a functor to the category
of sets, satisfying suitable properties (for example, it commutes with
products), and each path determines a map between such functors (which
depends only on the homotopy class since the system is locally constant). We
propose to view internality as analogous to this picture: definable sets in
the theory corresponding to a definable groupoid \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Th{T}\) can be
viewed as local systems (of definable sets) on \(\Dset{G}\), and conversely. This
point of view is explained in~\S\ref{sss:gsets} (the base theory \(\Th{T}\)
corresponds to a contractible space in this approach, so definable sets in it
correspond to constant systems).
By definition, the local systems on \(X\) do not tell us anything about the
homotopy type of \(X\) above homotopical dimension \(1\). To encode higher
homotopical information, we may try looking at families of spaces rather than
of sets. A space \(X\) is called \emph{\(n\)-truncated} if \(\pi_k(X,x)\) is
trivial for all \(k>n\) and base points \(x\in{}X\). Such spaces are
represented in homotopy theory by what we call in this paper \(n\)-groupoids
(Def.~\ref{def:ncath} in the definable setting; these are equivalent to
\(n\)-categories in the sense of~\HTT{\S2.3.4} which are groupoids). In the
case \(n=1\), these are usual groupoids, and the previous paragraph suggests
studying them by systems of \(0\)-truncated spaces, i.e., sets. Going one
dimension higher, one expects to recover \(2\)-groupoids from systems of
\(1\)-truncated spaces. In the definable context, we decided to identify such
spaces with internal sorts, we consider ``local systems'' of internal sorts,
i.e., internal sorts of an expanded theory.
Our main result, Theorem~\ref{thm:main}, shows one direction of the expected
correspondence: we associate to a \(2\)-groupoid \(\Dset{G}\) in the theory
\(\Th{T}\) a theory \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) expanding it, and a collection of internal sorts
of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\), which we view as ``higher local systems''. The statement is
that the canonical \(2\)-groupoid associated to this datum recovers (up to
weak equivalence) the original one (part of the other direction is indicated
briefly, but is mostly left for future work).
We mention that this result is one possible generalisation of the results
of~\cite{GGII} to higher dimensions. Other such generalisations include the
papers~\cite{goodrick},~\cite{rahim} and~\cite{wang}, but they all appear to
go in different directions. We also mention that in the context of usual
(rather than definable) homotopy theory, analogous results are well known
(for example, the main part of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} is really a version of
the higher dimensional Yoneda lemma), but the methods in the proof of these
results do not translate easily to the definable setting. In fact, the
situation here is more similar to the one described in~\HTT{\S6.5}, though
made simpler by the existence of models (i.e., we have ``enough points'').
\subsection{Structure of the paper}
It is very simple: in Section~\ref{sec:1d}, we review the situation in the
one dimensional case. This serves both as a motivating analogy and to
complete some background used later. Most of the material there appears in
some form in~\cite{GGII} (sometimes implicitly), but we include a few easy
remarks regarding morphisms and equivalence, interpretation in terms of
``local systems'', and a different description of the groupoid associated to
an internal cover (which already appeared slightly differently in~\cite{pv}).
In Section~\ref{sec:2d}, we expose the higher dimensional picture,
concentrate on dimension \(2\). We first define our higher internal covers,
then review the theory of (truncated) Kan complexes and \(n\)-categories,
with a few remarks special to the definable setting, and then prove the main
result mentioned above (Theorem~\ref{thm:main}).
\subsection{Conventions and terminology}
For simplicity, we assume our theories \(\Th{T}\) to admit elimination of
quantifiers. By a \Def{\(\Th{T}\)-structure} we mean a substructure of some
model of \(\Th{T}\). If \(A\) is such a \(\Th{T}\)-structure, by \(\Th{T}_A\) we mean
the expansion of \(\Th{T}\) by constants for the elements of \(A\), along with
the usual axioms describing \(A\). If \(A\) was not mentioned, we mean ``for
some \(A\)''.
We will also assume \(\Th{T}\) eliminates imaginaries (this could be included in
the general treatment, but would complicate the exposition). Our usage of
elimination of imaginaries will often be in the (equivalent) form of the
existence of internal \(\Hom\)s: For every two definable sets \(\Dset{X}\) and
\(\Dset{Y}\), there are ind-definable set \(\Dset{\iHom}(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y})\) and map
\(\Dset{ev}:\Dset{X}\times\Dset{\iHom}(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y})\ra\Dset{Y}\), identifying the \(A\)-points of
\(\Dset{\iHom}(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y})\), for each \(\Th{T}\)-structure \(A\), with the set of
\(A\)-definable maps from \(\Dset{X}\) to \(\Dset{Y}\). It follows that the subset
\(\Dset{\iIso}(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y})\) of definable isomorphisms is also ind-definable.
Finally, we assume that each theory is generated by one sort, and finitely
many relations. Similar to the case in~\cite{GGII}, it can be seen that this
assumption is not restrictive, since all our constructions commute with
adding structure.
\subsection{Acknowledgement and dedication}
I am delighted to thank Tomer Schlank's gang at the Hebrew University (aka
``Ha'arakya''), and particularly Asaf Horev, Shaul Barkan, Shai Keidar and
Tomer himself for answering what must have been rather bizarre and elementary
questions in homotopy theory. They form a very helpful and fun community.
This paper is a late expansion on some vague ideas that I presented in the
postponed online conference that Honoured Ehud Hrushovski for his 60th
birthday. It is a pleasure to thank Udi again for his guidance and dedicate
the paper (hopefully clearer than the talk!) to him.
\section{A review of the classical theory}\label{sec:1d}
\subsection{Internal covers}
We recall the following classical definition of internal covers:
\begin{defn}
An expansion \(\Th{T}^*\) of a theory \(\Th{T}\) is an \Def{internal cover} if
\(\Th{T}\) is stably embedded in \(\Th{T}^*\), and for some expansion \(\Th{T}^*_A\)
of \(\Th{T}^*\) by a set of constants \(A\), each definable set in \(\Th{T}^*_A\)
is definably isomorphic to a definable set in \(\Th{T}_{A_0}\).
\end{defn}
We recall that \emph{stably embedded} here means that for every definable set
\(\Dset{X}\) in \(\Th{T}\), every subset of \(\Dset{X}\) definable in \(\Th{T}^*\) with
parameters from \(\Th{T}^*\) is definable in \(\Th{T}\), with parameters from
\(\Th{T}\).
It was noted in~\cite{makkai} that this condition can be reformulated as
follows: If \(i:\Th{T}\ra\Th{T}^*\) is an expansion and \(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y}\) are definable
in \(\Th{T}\), there is a natural (\(\Th{T}^*\)-definable) map
\(i(\Dset{\iHom}_\Th{T}(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y}))\ra\Dset{\iHom}_{\Th{T}^*}(i(\Dset{X}),i(\Dset{Y}))\), and \(i\) is stably
embedded precisely if this map is a bijection (for all \(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y}\) definable
in \(\Th{T}\)). We note that in this case, the restriction of this map to the
subset \(\Dset{\iIso}(\Dset{X},\Dset{Y})\) of isomorphisms is also a bijection, and that
taking into account parameters, no new structure is induced on \(\Th{T}^*\). In
particular, for any \(\Th{T}\)-structure \(A\), the expansion \({\Th{T}^*}_A\) is
well defined.
As already done above, the expansion \(i\) can be viewed as a functor from
the category of definable sets in \(\Th{T}\) to those in \(\Th{T}^*\), which
preserves finite limits. In these terms, \(i\) is a stable embedding
precisely if it is Cartesian, in the terminology of~\cite{cwm}. We may apply
the same definition to a more general interpretation, so we say that an
interpretation \(i:\Th{T}_1\ra\Th{T}_2\) is \Def{stable} if it is Cartesian as a
functor. In these terms, the definition of internal covers can be
reformulated as follows:
\begin{prop}\label{prp:1intcov}
An expansion \(\Th{T}^*\) of a theory \(\Th{T}\) is an internal cover if it is
stable, and \(\Th{T}^*\) admits a stable interpretation \(p\) in \(\Th{T}_A\)
over \(\Th{T}\).
\end{prop}
By ``over \(\Th{T}\)'' we mean that the restriction of \(p\) to \(\Th{T}\)
coincides with the expansion by constants.
\begin{proof}
let \(\Dset{Q}\) be a definable set in \(\Th{T}^*\), generating it over \(\Th{T}\).
Assume first that \(\Th{T}^*\) is an internal cover of \(\Th{T}\), so there is a
sort \(\Dset{X}\) of \(\Th{T}^*\), an expansion by a constant symbol \(a\in\Dset{X}\), and
a definable bijection \(g_a:\Dset{Q}\ra\Dset{Q}_a\), with \(\Dset{Q}_a\) definable in
\(\Th{T}\). By stable-embeddedness, \(\Dset{Q}_a\) is definable by a parameter
\(a_0\) in \(\Th{T}\). The assignment \(\Dset{Q}\mapsto\Dset{Q}_a\) extends uniquely to an
interpretation \(x_{a_0}\) of \(\Th{T}^*\) in \(\Th{T}_{a_0}\), over \(\Th{T}\).
Since \(g_a\) determines a definable isomorphism between \(\Dset{Q}\) and
\(\Dset{Q}_a\) (and similarly for any definable set it generates), this
interpretation is stable.
Conversely, assume we have a stable interpretation \(p:\Th{T}^*\ra\Th{T}_{A_0}\)
over \(i\). We still denote by \(i\) the extension of \(i\) to the
expansion \(\Th{T}_{A_0}\ra\Th{T}^*_{A_0}\) which is the identity on \(A_0\) (it
is still stable). Denoting \(\Dset{C}=p(\Dset{Q})\), the set
\(\Dset{\iIso}(p(\Dset{Q}),p(i(\Dset{C})))=\Dset{\iIso}(\Dset{C},\Dset{C})\) is non-empty, since it contains
the identity on \(\Dset{C}\). Since \(p\) is stable, the left hand side admits a
definable bijection with \(\Dset{\iIso}(\Dset{Q},i(\Dset{C}))\), so is non-empty as well.
Any point \(a\) of this set shows that \(\Th{T}^*\) is an internal cover.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Definable groupoids}\label{sss:1grpd}
A definable groupoid will be denoted as \(\Dset{G}=\pp{\Dset{G}_0,\Dset{G}_1}\), with
definable set \(\Dset{G}_0\) of objects and a definable set \(\Dset{G}_1\) of
isomorphisms, where the domain and codomain maps are denoted
\(\Dset{d},\Dset{c}:\Dset{G}_1\ra\Dset{G}_0\), respectively, and composition denoted by
\(\circ\). For objects \(a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\), we write \(\Dset{G}(a,b)\) for the
\(a,b\)-definable set \({\pp{\Dset{d},\Dset{c}}}^{-1}(\pp{a,b})\) of morphisms from
\(a\) to \(b\). A map \(f:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\) of definable groupoids is a definable
functor: a pair of maps \(f_0:\Dset{G}_0\ra\Dset{H}_0\) and \(f_1:\Dset{G}_1\ra\Dset{H}_1\)
commuting with the domain, codomain and composition maps. We will say that
\(f\) is a \Def{weak equivalence}, denoted \(f:\Dset{G}\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{H}\), if it induces an
equivalence of categories on all models (this terminology will be generalised
in Def~\ref{def:whe}).
In \GGII{\S2}, a definable groupoid is attached to each internal cover. This
groupoid also admits two descriptions. The first as a definable groupoid
\(\Dset{G}^*\) in \(\Th{T}^*\): its objects are, in the notation of the proof of
Prop.~\ref{prp:1intcov}, complete types of elements \(a\in\Dset{X}\) over \(\Th{T}\),
along with an additional object \(*\). Since \(\Th{T}\) is stably embedded,
this set of types is definable in \(\Th{T}\). The set of isomorphisms from
\(*\) to such a type \(p\) to \(*\) is given by the realisations of \(p\).
Given another object \(q\), a morphism from \(p\) to \(q\) is given by a
\(2\)-type extending \(p\) and \(q\) (over \(\Th{T}\)). We denote by \(\Dset{G}\)
the full subgroupoid of \(\Dset{G}^*\) on the same objects excluding \(*\). Then
\(\Dset{G}\) is defined entirely in \(\Th{T}\).
\begin{comment}
To give a second description, it is convenient to first make the following
definition. A definable groupoid \(G=(G_0,G_1)\) in \(\Th{T}^*\) determines a
functor from \(\Th{T}^*\)-structures to groupoids. We define a \Def{definable
pre-stack} in \(\Th{T}^*\) as a functor \(H=(H_0,H_1)\) from \(\Th{T}^*\)-structures to
groupoids (where \(H_0(A)\) is the set of objects, and \(H_1(A)\) the set of
morphisms), such that each \(a\in{}H_0(A)\) is in the image of a map from a
definable set \(X\) to \(H_0\), and for each such map \(f:X\ra{}H_0\), the
groupoid on \(X\) obtained by pullback is definable (by~\GGII{\S2.5}, this
last condition is equivalent to: the automorphism group of each object
\(a\in{}H_0(A)\) is \(a\)-definable).
\end{comment}
\subsubsection{}\label{sss:1igrpd}
To give a second description, consider, for each \(\Th{T}\)-structure \(A\), the
groupoid \(I(A)=I_{\Th{T}^*/\Th{T}}(A)\) whose objects are stable interpretations
of \(\Th{T}^*\) in \(\Th{T}_A\), that are the identity on \(\Th{T}_A\), and whose
morphisms are isomorphisms of such interpretations, which are the identity
when restricted to \(\Th{T}\). Here again we may enlarge \(I\) to obtain
\(I^*\), by adding an additional object \(*\), which is described explicitly
as the identity interpretation of \(\Th{T}^*\), and again morphisms are given by
\(A\)-definable isomorphisms of interpretations over \(\Th{T}\) (where \(A\) is
now a \(\Th{T}^*\)-structure). The following statement appeared in a slightly
different form in~\cite{pv}:
\begin{prop}\label{prp:eqgrpd}
With notation as in~\ref{sss:1grpd}, for each \(\Th{T}\)-structure \(A\),
there is fully-faithful embedding \(i_A:\Dset{G}^*(A)\ra{}I^*(A)\), preserving
the vertex, and commuting with automorphism action on \(A\). If \(A\) is a
model, \(i_A\) is an equivalence of categories.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
This is essentially~\GGII{Thm~3.2}. The functor \(i_A\) was described in
the proof of Prop.~\ref{prp:1intcov}: to an object \(p\) of \(\Dset{G}(A)\),
viewed as a type over \(\Th{T}\) (definable over \(A_0\)), we attach the
interpretation \(x_b=x_p\) described there, with \(b\) any realization of
\(p\) (as explained there, \(x_b\) depends only on \(p\in{}A_0\) and not on
\(b\)). Each such realization determines an isomorphism \(g_b\) from
\(x_b\) to \(*\), again as above, which describes the functor on morphisms
from \(p\) to \(*\). If \(q\) is another object, with realization \(c\),
\(i_A\) assigns \({g_c}^{-1}\circ{}g_b:x_p\ra{}x_q\) to the type \(r\) of
the pair \((b,c)\). This depends only on \(r\), since the code for this
composition lies in \(\Th{T}\), by stable embeddedness. This code also
determines \(r\) completely, so the functor is fully faithful.
To prove the final statement, let \(i:\Th{T}^*\ra\Th{T}\) be any interpretation
over a model \(M_0\). The internality assumption implies that for some
\(p\in\Dset{G}(M_0)\), the set \(Y\) of isomorphisms between \(*\) and \(p\) is
non-empty. Since \(M_0\) is a model, there is a point \(b\) in
\(i(Y)(M_0)\). Then \(g_b\) is an isomorphism from \(x_b\) to \(i\).
\end{proof}
To summarise, to each stable embedding of \(\Th{T}\) in \(\Th{T}^*\), we had
attached a groupoid \(I_{\Th{T}^*/\Th{T}}\) classifying stable interpretations of
\(\Th{T}^*\) back in \(\Th{T}\). The embedding is an internal cover precisely if
the groupoid is non-empty, and in this case, the groupoid \(I\) is equivalent
to a definable one (and to the classical binding groupoid). Conversely,
starting with a definable groupoid \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Th{T}\), there is an internal
cover \(\Th{T}^*=\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) and an equivalence \(\Dset{G}\ra{}I_{\Th{T}^*/\Th{T}}\) (this
construction is recalled below).
\subsubsection{Definable \(\Dset{G}\)-sets}\label{sss:gsets}
If \(\Dset{G}=\pp{\Dset{G}_0,\Dset{G}_1}\) is a definable groupoid in \(\Th{T}\), by a (left)
\Def{\(\Dset{G}\)-set} we mean a definable set \(\Dset{X}\), a definable map
\(\pi:\Dset{X}\ra\Dset{G}_0\) to the set of objects \(\Dset{G}_0\) of \(\Dset{G}\), and an
``action'' map \(a:\Dset{G}_1\times_{\Dset{G}_0}\Dset{X}\ra\Dset{X}\), over \(\Dset{G}_0\), satisfying the
usual action axioms. Thus, a morphism \(g:a\ra{}b\) in \(\Dset{G}\) determines a
bijection \(a_g:\Dset{X}_a\ra\Dset{X}_b\), where \(\Dset{X}_t=\pi^{-1}(t)\), and we will
sometimes write \(gx\) in places of \(a_g(x)\) (a pair \(\pp{\Dset{G},\Dset{X}}\) as
above is called a \emph{concrete groupoid} in~\GGII{\S3}). We think of
\(\Dset{G}\)-sets as analogs of local systems over \(\Dset{G}\).
Let \(\Dset{X}\) be a \(\Dset{G}\)-set. If \(\Dset{H}=\pp{\Dset{H}_0,\Dset{H}_1}\) is another
groupoid, and \(i:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\) is a definable map of groupoids, we set
\[
i_!(\Dset{X})=\St{\pp{h,x}\in\Dset{H}_1\times\Dset{X}}{i(\pi(x))=\Dset{d}(h)}/\sim,
\]
where \(\pp{h,gx}\sim\pp{h\circ{}i(g),x}\) for \(g\in\Dset{G}_1\) satisfying
\(\Dset{d}(g)=\pi(x)\) and \(i(\Dset{c}(g))=\Dset{d}(h)\). This is an \(\Dset{H}\)-set, with
structure map induced by \(\pp{h,x}\mapsto\Dset{c}(h)\) and action induced by
\(\pp{h',\pp{h,x}}\mapsto\pp{h'h,x}\). On the other hand, if \(\Dset{Y}\) is an
\(\Dset{H}\)-set, we set \(i^*(\Dset{Y})=\Dset{G}_0\times_{\Dset{H}_0}\Dset{Y}\), with the projection to
\(\Dset{G}_0\) as the structure map, and action given by \(\pp{g,y}\mapsto{}i(g)y\)
for \(y\in\Dset{Y}\) with \(\pi(y)=i(\Dset{d}(g))\). As the notation suggests, \(i_!\)
is left adjoint to \(i^*\).
With this notion, we have the following description of definable sets in
\(\Th{T}^*\) as local systems over \(\Dset{G}\):
\begin{cor}\label{cor:gsets}
If \(\Th{T}^*\) is an internal cover of \(\Th{T}\), corresponding to the
definable groupoid \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Th{T}\), then the category of definable sets
in \(\Th{T}^*\) is equivalent to the category of \(\Dset{G}\)-sets in \(\Th{T}\).
Definable sets from \(\Th{T}\) correspond to themselves, with trivial action.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
To a definable set \(\Dset{X}^*\) in \(\Th{T}^*\) we assign the definable set
\(\Dset{X}=\coprod_{p\in\Dset{G}_0}p(\Dset{X}^*)\). It follows from the uniformity of
\(p\) that \(\Dset{X}\) is definable in \(\Th{T}\). By definition, \(\Dset{X}\) admits a
definable map to \(\Dset{G}_0\). The action is given tautologically by the
identification of the morphisms in \(\Dset{G}_0\) with maps of interpretations.
In the other direction, let \(\Dset{G}^*\) be the canonical extension of \(\Dset{G}\)
in \(\Th{T}^*\) (we identify \(\Dset{G}\) with its image in \(\Th{T}^*\)), let
\(i:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{G}^*\) be the inclusion, and let \(j\) be the inclusion of the
canonical object \(*\) of \(\Dset{G}^*\), along with its automorphism group
\(\Dset{H}\), into \(\Dset{G}^*\). A definable \(\Dset{G}\)-set \(\Dset{X}\) in \(\Th{T}\), viewed
again as embedded in \(\Th{T}^*\), corresponds then to \(\Dset{X}^*=j^*(i_!(\Dset{X}))\)
(and the resulting action by \(\Dset{H}\) is the natural action by
automorphisms.)
\end{proof}
We note that each definable set in \(\Th{T}^*\) comes equipped with an action of
the binding group \(\Dset{\iAut}(*)\), and with it, the first direction could
likewise be described as \(\Dset{X}=i^*(j_!(\Dset{X}^*))\).
\subsubsection{Pushouts}
Let \(g:\Dset{K}\ra\Dset{G}\) and \(h:\Dset{K}\ra\Dset{H}\) be maps of definable groupoids, and
assume that \(g\) is fully faithful. We construct another definable groupoid
\(\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H}\) that can be viewed as the pushout of \(\Dset{G}\) and \(\Dset{H}\)
over \(\Dset{K}\), as follows: For objects, we let
\({(\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H})}_0=\Dset{G}_0\coprod\Dset{H}_0\). If \(a,b\) are two such objects,
we define the morphisms as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If \(a,b\in\Dset{H}_0\), then \((\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H})(a,b)=\Dset{H}(a,b)\)
\item If \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\) and \(b\in\Dset{H}_0\), morphisms from \(a\) to \(b\)
are equivalence classes \(v\cop{}u\) of pairs \(\pp{v,u}\), where
\(u\in\Dset{G}(a,g(c))\), \(v\in\Dset{H}(h(c),b)\) for some \(c\in\Dset{K}_0\), and
\(\pp{v,g(w)\circ{}u}\) is equivalent to \(\pp{v\circ{}h(w),u}\) for
all \(w\in\Dset{K}_1\) for which the composition is defined. Morphisms
from \(b\) to \(a\) are defined analogously.
\item If \(a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\) are both in the essential image of \(g\), a
morphism from \(a\) to \(b\) is similarly defined as an equivalence
class \(u'\cop{}v\cop{}u\), with \(u,u'\in\Dset{G}_1\) and \(v\in\Dset{H}_1\).
\item If either of \(a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\) is not in the essential image of
\(g\), then morphisms are the same as in \(\Dset{G}\).
\end{enumerate}
The composition \((u'\cop{}v\cop{}u)\circ(u_1'\cop{}v_1\cop{}u_1)\) is
defined as follows: There are \(a,b\in\Dset{K}_0\) such that \(u\circ{}u_1'\) is
a morphism from \(g(a)\) to \(g(b)\). Since \(g\) is fully faithful, it has
the form \(g(w)\) for a unique morphism \(w\) from \(a\) to \(b\) in
\(\Dset{K}\). We define the composition to be
\(u'\cop(v\circ{}h(w)\circ{}v_1)\cop{}u_1\). It is clear that this is
independent of the choices of representatives. The composition in the other
cases is defined similarly.
There is an obvious map \(h':\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H}\), and we define
\(g':\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H}\) by sending each object to itself, each morphism
between objects not in the essential image of \(g\) to itself as well, and
for \(a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\) in the essential image of \(g\), and \(u\) a morphism
from \(a\) to \(b\), we set \(g'(u)=(u\circ{}u'^{-1})\cop\mathbf{1}_{h(c)}\cop{}u'\),
where \(u':a\ra{}g(c)\) is any morphism and \(c\in\Dset{K}_0\). We have an
isomorphism \(\alpha\) from \(h'\circ{}h\) to \(g'\circ{}g\), given on an
object \(c\in\Dset{K}_0\) by \(\mathbf{1}_{g(c)}\cop\mathbf{1}_{h(c)}\). It is routine to check
that everything is well defined, and also that the following statement holds.
\begin{prop}\label{prp:1pushouts}
Let \(g:\Dset{K}\ra\Dset{G}\), \(h:\Dset{K}\ra\Dset{H}\) and the rest of the notation be as
above.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Given definable maps of groupoids \(g_1:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{F}\) and
\(h_1:\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{F}\), and an isomorphism
\(\beta:h_1\circ{}h\ra{}g_1\circ{}g\), there is a unique map of
groupoids \(f:\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{F}\) that coincides with \(g_1\) and
\(h_1\) on the objects, \(f\circ{}g'=g_1\), \(f\circ{}h'=h_1\) and such
that \(f\cdot\alpha=\beta\).
\item \(h':\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H}\) is fully faithful. If \(g\) is a weak
equivalence, then so is \(h'\).
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{remark}
We could make a similar construction where the set of objects is
\(\Dset{G}_0\coprod_{\Dset{K}_0}\Dset{H}_0\) in place of the disjoint union, and with
\(\alpha\) the identity. The last proposition provides a map from
\(\Dset{G}\cop_\Dset{K}\Dset{H}\) to this variant, which is easily seen to be a weak
equivalence. We will use the two constructions interchangeably.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Without the assumption that one of the maps is fully-faithful, the pushout
need not be definable. For example, when all groupoids are groups, this is
the usual free product with amalgamation.
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Maps of groupoids and of interpretations}\label{sss:1mor}
With stable interpretations over \(\Th{T}\), the assignment
\(\Th{T}^*\mapsto{}I_{\Th{T}^*/\Th{T}}\) are contravariantly functorial in \(\Th{T}^*\), and
fully-faithful: a stable interpretation \(i:\Th{T}_1\ra\Th{T}_2\) over \(\Th{T}\)
induces a functor \(i^*:I_{\Th{T}_2/\Th{T}}\ra{}I_{\Th{T}_1/\Th{T}}\) by composition.
In the other direction, if \(f:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\) is a map of definable groupoids,
corresponding to internal covers \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) and \(\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\), \(f\)
determines a stable interpretation \(i^f:\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\ra\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) over \(\Th{T}\),
that can be described in at least two ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item An interpretation of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\) over \(\Th{T}\) is determined by its
value on the extended groupoid \(\Dset{H}^*\) defined in \(\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\). We set
\(i^f(\Dset{H}^*)=\Dset{G}^*\cop_\Dset{G}\Dset{H}\) (with respect to the given map \(f\)).
This makes sense since the inclusion of \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Dset{G}^*\) is a weak
equivalence, and is an interpretation since the embedding of \(\Dset{H}\) in
\(\Dset{G}^*\cop_\Dset{G}\Dset{H}\) is a weak equivalence that misses precisely one
object \(*\), and this completely determines its theory. To see that it
is stable, we may first choose a parameter in \(\Dset{G}^*\). But then \(i^f\)
is identified with one of the standard interpretations into \(\Th{T}\).
\item Alternatively, we may use Cor~\ref{cor:gsets} to identify definable
sets in \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) and in \(\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\) with \(\Dset{G}\)- and \(\Dset{H}\)-sets in
\(\Th{T}\). Then \(i^f\) is identified with \(f^*\) (in this approach, it is
less direct to see that one gets a stable interpretation).
\end{enumerate}
It is easy to verify that \({(i^f)}^*=f\) (after identifying \(\Dset{G}\) with its
image in \(I_{\Th{T}_G/\Th{T}}\) via~\ref{prp:eqgrpd}, and similarly for \(\Dset{H}\)).
However, not every stable interpretation \(i:\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\ra\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) (over
\(\Th{T}\)) is of the form \(i^f\) for some \(f:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\). The other source of
interpretations comes from the other operation described
in~\S\ref{sss:gsets}: when \(f\) is a weak equivalence, the composition of
\(f\) with the inclusion of \(\Dset{H}\) in \(\Dset{H}^*\) is a weak equivalence, so
restricting to the image of \(f\) (on the objects), we obtain an
interpretation \(i_f\) of \(\Dset{G}^*\) (hence of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\)).
\begin{prop}\label{prp:spans}
Let \(\Dset{G}\) and \(\Dset{H}\) be two definable groupoids, with associated covers
\(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) and \(\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\). Then every stable interpretation
\(i:\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\ra\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\) over \(\Th{T}\) is obtained as a composition
\(i=i^f\circ{}i_g\), for some definable groupoid \(\Dset{K}\), definable map
\(f:\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{K}\) and weak equivalence \(g:\Dset{G}\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{K}\).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
\(\Dset{H}\) embeds in \(I_{\Th{T}_\Dset{H}/\Th{T}}\) via Prop~\ref{prp:eqgrpd}, which maps
via \(i^*\) to \(I_{\Th{T}_\Dset{G}/\Th{T}}\). We set \(f:\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{K}\) to be the
restriction of \(i^*\) to \(\Dset{H}\), where \(\Dset{K}\) denotes any definable
weakly equivalent subgroupoid of \(I_{\Th{T}_\Dset{G}/\Th{T}}\), which also contains
\(\Dset{G}\). Then \(g\) is the inclusion of \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Dset{K}\).
\end{proof}
As in the construction of the pushout, we may choose \(\Dset{K}\) so that its
objects are the disjoint union of the objects of \(\Dset{G}\) and \(\Dset{H}\), and we
will always assume that this is the case. In the case when \(i\) is a
bi-interpretation, we recover the notion of equivalence from~\GGII{\S3}.
\subsubsection{Composition and isomorphisms}\label{sss:composition}
Assume that for groupoids \(\Dset{F}\), \(\Dset{G}\) and \(\Dset{H}\) in \(\Th{T}\), we are
given interpretations \(i:\Th{T}_\Dset{F}\ra\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) and \(j:\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\ra\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\),
represented by \(g_1:\Dset{F}\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{K}_1\), \(f_1:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{K}_1\),
\(g_2:\Dset{G}\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{K}_2\) and \(f_2:\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{K}_2\) as in~\ref{prp:spans}. Since
\(g_2\) is a weak equivalence, we may form the pushout
\(\Dset{K}=\Dset{K}_1\cop_\Dset{G}\Dset{K}_2\). By Prop~\ref{prp:1pushouts}, the map from
\(\Dset{K}_1\) to \(\Dset{K}\) is a weak equivalence, and therefore so is the composed
map \(g\). Hence, \(g\) along with the composed map \(f:\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{K}\) represent
a stable interpretation of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{F}\) in \(\Th{T}_\Dset{H}\). To conform with the
decision about the objects of the representing groupoid \(\Dset{K}\), we remove
the intermediate two copies of \(\Dset{G}_0\), and denote the resulting groupoid
by \(\Dset{K}_2\circ\Dset{K}_1=\Dset{K}_2\circ_{\Dset{G}}\Dset{K}_1\) (though it does depend on the
additional data). The following is a direct calculation.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:1comp}
In the above situation, the maps \(g:\Dset{F}\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{K}_2\circ\Dset{K}_1\) and
\(f:\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{K}_2\circ\Dset{K}_1\) represent the composed interpretation
\(j\circ{}i\).
\end{cor}
Finally, we consider isomorphisms of interpretations between (stable)
interpretations of internal covers over \(\Th{T}\).
\begin{cor}\label{cor:bimor}
Let \(i,j:\Th{T}_{\Dset{G}_1}\ra\Th{T}_{\Dset{G}_2}\) be two stable interpretations of
internal covers over \(\Th{T}\). Assume \(i\) is represented by groupoid maps
\(i_1:\Dset{G}_1\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{H}_1\) and \(i_2:\Dset{G}_2\ra\Dset{H}_1\), and \(j\) by
\(j_1:\Dset{G}_1\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{H}_2\), \(j_2:\Dset{G}_2\ra\Dset{H}_2\), where each set of objects of
\(\Dset{H}_n\) the disjoint union of the objects of \(\Dset{G}_1\) and \(\Dset{G}_2\)
(realized by the object parts of \(i_k\) and \(j_k\)).
Then there is a natural bijection between isomorphisms \(\alpha:i\ra{}j\)
(over \(\Th{T}\)) and isomorphisms \(\ti{\alpha}:\Dset{H}_1\ra\Dset{H}_2\) which are the
identity on the images of \(\Dset{G}_1,\Dset{G}_2\).
\end{cor}
As an example, if \(\Dset{G}_1\) and \(\Dset{G}_2\) are groups, then each \(\Dset{H}_i\)
corresponds to a \(\Dset{G}_1-\Dset{G}_2\) bi-torsor, and an isomorphism of the
corresponding interpretations corresponds to an isomorphism of such
bi-torsors.
\begin{proof}
Let \(\Dset{P}_l\) be the set of arrows in \(\Dset{H}_l\) with domain in \(\Dset{G}_1\)
and codomain in \(\Dset{G}_2\). This is a \(\Dset{G}_1\)-set, with structure given by
the domain map and composition. The interpretation \(i\) takes \(\Dset{P}_1\) to
the \(\Dset{G}_2\)-set given by viewing the arrows in \(\Dset{P}_1\) in the other
direction, and likewise with \(j\) and \(\Dset{P}_2\). So the map \(\alpha\)
maps \(\Dset{P}_1\) to \(\Dset{P}_2\), compatibly with the composition. This is the
same as giving an isomorphism \(\ti{\alpha}\) as in the statement. The rest
of the structure is induced by the \(\Dset{P}_i\), so \(\alpha\) is determined
by \(\ti{\alpha}\). Conversely, each \(\ti{\alpha}\) as in the statement
extends to an interpretation.
\end{proof}
The description above exhibits the groupoid associated to an expansion as
interpretations of \(\Th{T}^*\) in \(\Th{T}\). In~\cite{GGII}, it was suggested
that definable sets of an internal cover of \(\Th{T}\) can be viewed a
generalised imaginary sorts of \(\Th{T}\). With this point of view, it is
natural to ask for the structure classifying interpretations of such sorts as
well. However, such generalised sorts have more structure: in addition to the
sorts themselves and maps between them (interpretations), we also have maps
between maps. The notion of equivalence should be modified as well: it is no
longer reasonable to expect a bijection on the level of morphisms. In fact,
as the \(1\)-dimensional case already shows, it not reasonable to expect even
a map.
\section{Generalised imaginaries}\label{sec:2d}
We now suggest how internal covers can play the role of definable sets in the
above description, by going one dimension higher.
\subsection{Higher internal covers}
\begin{defn}
Let \(\Th{T}\) be a theory, \(\Th{T}_1\) and \(\Th{T}_2\) internal covers of
\(\Th{T}\). For every set of parameters \(A\) for \(\Th{T}\), we denote by
\(\Hom_\Th{T}(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2)(A)\) the groupoid whose objects are stable
interpretations of \(\Th{T}_1\) in \({\Th{T}_2}_A\), over \(\Th{T}_A\), and whose
morphisms are isomorphisms of interpretations over \(\Th{T}\).
\end{defn}
Thus, what we denoted above \(I\) is \(\Hom_\Th{T}(\Th{T}^*,\Th{T})\). Similar to that
case, \(\Hom_\Th{T}(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2)\) is definable in \(\Th{T}\): if
\(\Th{T}_i=\Th{T}_{\Dset{G}_i}\) for \(\Th{T}\)-definable groupoids \(\Dset{G}_1,\Dset{G}_2\), each
interpretation above can be described like in~\S\ref{sss:1mor} as given by
certain definable maps \(\Dset{G}_i\ra\Dset{H}\), a definable condition. Similarly,
isomorphisms between interpretations are given by the definable families of
maps as in Cor~\ref{cor:bimor}, uniform in the \(\Dset{H}_i\)
(cf.~\S\ref{sss:2gpd} for a more detailed description.)
An interpretation between theories extends to internal sorts: If
\(i:\Th{T}\ra\Th{S}\) is an interpretation, and \(\ti{\Th{T}}\) is an internal cover
of \(\Th{T}\), associated to the groupoid \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Th{T}\), we denote by
\(i(\ti{\Th{T}})\) the internal cover of \(\Th{S}\) associated to \(i(\Dset{G})\).
We now wish to define (slightly) higher analogs of stable embeddings and
internal covers. One discrepancy with the \(1\)-dimensional case occurs as
follows: If \(\Th{T}\) is an internal cover of \(\Th{T}_0\), we might be interested
in only part of the structure on \(\Th{T}\) when considering, for example, the
Galois group. As long as this partial structure includes the definable sets
witnessing the internality, this can be done be replacing \(\Th{T}\) with a
reduct including only those definable sets. In the higher version, definable
sets are replaced by definable groupoids in \(\Th{T}\) (equivalently, internal
covers), and again we may wish to restrict to a partial collection. However,
there is no reason to expect that this partial collection is the full
collection of definable groupoids in some reduct of \(\Th{T}\). Furthermore, the
internality condition for \(0\)-definable sets automatically implies it for
definable sets over parameters. Again, there is no reason to expect a similar
statement for groupoids. For this reason, our definition depends on the
auxiliary data \(\Gamma\) consisting of families of definable groupoids,
which are the groupoids we wish to preserve. More precisely, we have the
following.
\begin{defn}\label{def:distin}
Let \(\Th{T}\) be a theory. The data of \Def{distinguished covers} for \(\Th{T}\)
consists of the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A definable family \(\Gamma_0\) of internal covers of \(\Th{T}\)
(equivalently, of definable groupoids in \(\Th{T}\)).
\item A definable family of interpretations over \(\Th{T}\) between any two
covers \(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2\in\Gamma_0\), depending definably on
\(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2\) and closed under composition (the full definable family
is denoted by \(\Gamma_1\)).
\item For every two interpretations \(f,g:\Th{T}_1\ra\Th{T}_2\) in
\(\Gamma_1\), a definable family of isomorphisms from \(f\) to \(g\),
closed under composition and restricting to the identity on \(\Th{T}\).
Again we assume that the family of all such isomorphisms is uniformly
definable in \(f,g\), and denote it by \(\Gamma_2\).
\end{enumerate}
If \(\Th{T}_0\) is a reduct of \(\Th{T}\), we will say that
\(\Gamma=\pp{\Gamma_0,\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2}\) is over \(\Th{T}_0\) if the
parameters for the definable families above range over definable sets in
\(\Th{T}_0\).
\end{defn}
We note that in terms of definable groupoids, the closure under composition
translates to closure under the composition operation
from~\S\ref{sss:composition}.
If a theory \(\Th{T}\) is given with a collection \(\Gamma\) of distinguished
covers, we will often omit further explicit reference to \(\Gamma\), and call
them \Def{admissible covers}. We modify notions like bi-interpretation etc.,
to be with respect to \(\Gamma\). In particular, the notation \(\Hom_{\Th{T}}\)
will refer to admissible covers and admissible maps.
\begin{defn}\label{def:2stable}
Let \(i:\Th{T}\ra\Th{S}\) be an interpretation, and let \(\Gamma\) be a
collection of distinguished covers of \(\Th{T}\). We say that the
interpretation \(i\) is \Def{\(2\)-stable} (with respect to \(\Gamma\)) if
for every two internal covers \(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2\) in \(\Gamma\) over each
\(\Th{T}\)-structure \(A\), the natural map
\(i(\Hom_{\Th{T}_A}(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2))\ra\Hom_{\Th{S}_A}(i(\Th{T}_1),i(\Th{T}_2))\) is an
equivalence.
If \(\Gamma\) is omitted, we take it to be all definable groupoids in
\(\Th{T}\), and all definable morphisms among them.
\end{defn}
The expression \(i(\Hom_\Th{T}(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2))\) makes sense, since, as we had
noted above, \(\Hom_\Th{T}(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2)\) is definable in \(\Th{T}\).
We note:
\begin{prop}
A stable interpretation \(i:\Th{T}_1\ra\Th{T}_2\) is \(2\)-stable.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We may replace \(\Th{T}\) by \(\Th{T}_A\), and thus assume that \(A=\emptyset\).
Let \(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2\) be internal covers of \(\Th{T}\). The statement is
invariant when replacing each cover with a bi-interpretable one (over
\(\Th{T}\)). Hence, we may assume that \(\Th{T}_1=\Th{T}_{\Dset{G}_1}\) and
\(\Th{T}_2=\Th{T}_{\Dset{G}_2}\), the covers associated to definable connected
groupoids \(\Dset{G}_1,\Dset{G}_2\) in \(\Th{T}\).
According to \S\ref{sss:1mor}, we may choose \(\Dset{G}_1\) and \(\Dset{G}_2\) so
that a stable interpretation of \(i(\Th{T}_1)\) in \(i(\Th{T}_2)\) corresponds to
a definable map of groupoids from \(i(\Dset{G}_2)\) to \(i(\Dset{G}_1)\). Since \(i\)
is stable, this map comes from a map in \(\Th{T}\) (and similarly for
morphisms).
\end{proof}
The definition of a \(2\)-cover is analogous to that of an internal cover, as
formulated in~\ref{prp:1intcov}:
\begin{defn}\label{def:2intcov}
A \Def{\(2\)-internal cover} of a theory \(\Th{T}\) consists of a theory
\(\Th{T}^*\), a collection \(\Gamma\) of families of internal covers of
\(\Th{T}^*\) over \(\Th{T}\), and a stable embedding \(\Th{T}\ra\Th{T}^*\) such that
\(\pp{\Th{T}^*,\Gamma}\) admits a \(2\)-stable interpretation \(p\) in
\(\Th{T}_A\), over \(\Th{T}\).
\end{defn}
More explicitly, we require that each internal cover in \(\Gamma\) is
bi-interpretable, over parameters in \(\Th{T}^*\), with one coming from \(\Th{T}\),
in a manner coherent with interpretations over \(\Th{T}^*\). Or, via the
equivalence with groupoids, that for each family of definable groupoids in
\(\Gamma\) there is a set of parameters \(B\) in \(\Th{T}^*\) such that each
groupoid in the family is equivalent, over \(B\), to one coming from \(\Th{T}\)
(again, in a coherent manner).
As in the \(1\)-dimensional case, the typical examples will come from higher
dimensional groupoids, which we review next.
\subsection{Higher categories and higher groupoids}
We recall a few definitions from homotopy theory and higher category theory,
adapted to our language and setup. Though our main references are~\cite{HTT}
and~\cite{kerodon}, the ideas seem to originate in~\cite{joyal} (and in the
main case of groupoids, much more classically). We will be interested in the
notions of \(n\)-category and \(n\)-groupoid discussed in~\HTT{\S2.3.4}
(through most other parts of the paper we are interested in the case \(n=2\),
but here it is convenient and harmless to work in general.) There, they are
defined as special cases of quasi-categories and Kan simplicial sets,
respectively, but for us it will be more convenient to use terminology that
makes explicit the finite nature of these structures. The following
definitions are a variant of the description in~\HTT{\S2.3.4.9}, which gives
an equivalent condition (in the case of simplicial sets).
For each \(i\in\mathbb{N}\), we denote by \([i]\) the ordered set
\(\Set{0,\dots,i}\). For \(k\in{}[i]\), we identify \(k\) with the map
\([0]\ra{}[i]\) taking \(0\) to \(k\) (writing \(k_i\) if needed), and we let
\(\Omit{k}=\Omit{k}_i:[i-1]\ra{}[i]\) be the unique increasing map with \(k\) not in
the image. We fix a natural number \(n\) (one could also allow \(n=\infty\)
to obtain the usual definitions of quasi-categories and spaces, but we will
not use them).
\begin{defn}
The signature \(\Sigma_n\) of \(n\)-simplicial sets consists of:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A sort \(\Dset{G}_i\), for \(0\le{}i\le{}n+1\)
\item For each weakly increasing map \(t:[i]\ra{}[j]\), where
\(i,j\le{}n+1\), a function symbol \(d_t:\Dset{G}_j\ra\Dset{G}_i\).
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\subsubsection{Notation}
We define the following auxiliary notation. We let \(\Dset{G}_{-1}\) be the one
element set. For each \(0\leq{}m\le{}n+1\), and \(i\le{}m\), the map
\(d_\Omit{i}:\Dset{G}_m\ra\Dset{G}_{m-1}\) is called the \Def{\(i\)-th face map}. We denote
by \(\partial=\partial_m:\Dset{G}_m\ra\Dset{G}_{m-1}^{m+1}\) the Cartesian product of these
maps, and by \(\partial^\Omit{i}:\Dset{G}_m\ra\Dset{G}_{m-1}^m\) the Cartesian product with
\(i\) omitted. If \(g\in\Dset{G}_m\) and \(t:[k]\ra{}[m]\), we sometimes write
\(g_t\) in place of \(d_t(g)\) (in particular, for \(t=\Omit{i}\) or \(t=i\)).
For \(m\ge{}-1\), the set \(\Cyc{m+1}\) of \Def{\(m+1\)-cycles} is the
definable subset of \({\Dset{G}_m}^{m+2}\) given by the conjunction of the
equations \(d_\Omit{i}(x_j)=d_\Omit{k}(x_l)\) for all \(0\le{}j,l\le{}m+1\),
\(0\le{}i,k\le{}m\) satisfying \(\Omit{j}\circ\Omit{i}=\Omit{l}\circ\Omit{k}:[m-1]\ra{}[m+1]\)
(So no conditions when \(m=0\). Note that \(m+1\)-cycles are potential
boundaries of \(m+1\)-dimensional elements, but are themselves
\(m\)-dimensional. This is compatible with the notation in~\cite{HTT}.)
For each \(0\le{}i\le{}m+1\), the set \(\Horn{m+1}{i}\) of \Def{\(i\)-th
\(m+1\)-horns} is the subset of \({\Dset{G}_m}^{m+1}\) defined by the same
conditions, with \(x_i\) omitted. Hence, the projection
\(\pi_\Omit{i}:\Cyc{m}\ra\Dset{G}_{m-1}^m\) omitting the \(i\)-th coordinate takes
values in \(\Horn{m}{i}\).
We extend the notation by inductively setting \(\Dset{G}_m=\Cyc{m}\) for
\(m>n+1\), and \(d_\Omit{i}:\Dset{G}_m\ra\Dset{G}_{m-1}\) the \(i\)-th projection
(\(0\le{}i\le{}m\)). Consequently, all the above notation makes sense for
arbitrary natural number \(m\).
\begin{defn}\label{def:ncath}
Let \(n\ge{}1\). The theory \(\Th{C}_n\) of \(n\)-categories in this signature
says:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \(d_{t\circ{}s}=d_s\circ{}d_t\) for \(s,t\) composable, \(d_t\) is
the identity whenever \(t\) is. It follows that \(\partial_m\) takes values
in \(\Cyc{m}\) and \(\partial_m^\Omit{i}\) in \(\Horn{m}{i}\).
\item For each \(0<m\le{}n+1\) and each \(0<i<m\), the map
\(\partial_m^\Omit{i}:\Dset{G}_m\ra\Horn{m}{i}\) is surjective.
\item For \(m=n+1,n+2\), \(\partial_m^\Omit{i}\) is bijective for each \(0<i<m\).
\end{enumerate}
The theory \(\Th{G}_n\) of \(n\)-groupoids is the extension of \(\Th{C}_n\) where
the conditions above are required to also hold for \(i=0,m\).
\end{defn}
Note that by the third condition, the set \(\Dset{G}_{n+1}\) is completely
determined by the rest of the data. However, it is still convenient to have
it for the statement of the axiom. It follows from the axioms that the unique
map \(d_f:\Dset{G}_0\ra\Dset{G}_m\) is injective, and we will use it to identify
\(\Dset{G}_0\) with its image in each \(\Dset{G}_m\), writing \(a\) or \(a^m\) for
\(d_f(a)\) (this map assigns to each object \(a\) the \(m\)-dimensional
identity morphisms at \(a\)).
The first condition (when \(n=\infty\)) is the usual definition of a
simplicial set, the second is the definition of quasi-category (or space, in
the case of a groupoid, where it is called the Kan condition), and the third
specifies that the object is an \(n\)-category, rather than a quasi-category.
By a \Def{definable \(n\)-category} or a \Def{definable \(n\)-groupoid} in
\(\Th{T}\) we mean an interpretation in \(\Th{T}\) of the respective theory.
The intuition is, roughly, that the horns represent configurations of
(higher) composable arrows, but the composition (represented by the element
\(g\)) need not be uniquely determined, except on the highest dimension. We
refer to the first chapters of~\cite{HTT} for further explanations, but
explain how the case \(n=1\) of the formalism recovers usual categories and
groupoids:
\begin{example}\label{exa:1gpd}
A category can be viewed as a \(1\)-category in the above sense by taking
\(\Dset{G}_0\) the set of objects, \(\Dset{G}_1\) the set of morphisms, and \(\Dset{G}_2\)
the set of pairs of composable morphisms (as we are forced by the axioms).
The maps \(d_\Omit{0},d_\Omit{1}:\Dset{G}_1\ra\Dset{G}_0\) are the codomain and
domain maps, the unique map \(\Dset{G}_0\ra\Dset{G}_1\) assigns to each object its
identity, and the maps \(d_\Omit0,d_\Omit{2},d_\Omit{1}:\Dset{G}_2\ra\Dset{G}_1\) are
the two projections and the composition. The only non-trivial instances of
the third conditions are when \(m=2\) and \(i=1\), which asserts that any
two composable arrows have a unique composition, and when \(m=3\), which
corresponds to associativity of the composition.
Conversely, each \(1\)-category determines a category by reversing this
process (and likewise for groupoids).
\end{example}
As in the \(1\)-dimensional case, the axioms imply that for \(0<i<n+1\), the
relation \(\Cyc{n+1}\) is the graph of a ``composition'' function
\(c_i:\Horn{n}{i}\ra\Dset{G}_n\), by projecting to the \(i\)-coordinate. For
\(n\)-groupoids, we also have such maps for \(i=0,n+1\).
\begin{remark}
If \(\Dset{G}\) is an \(n\)-category, and \(m>n\), our extension of the notation
determines a canonical way of viewing \(\Dset{G}\) as a \(\Sigma_m\) structure,
and as such it is an \(m\)-category. Consequently, we will view \(\Dset{G}\) as
an \(m\)-category for each \(m>n\). If \(\Dset{G}\) was an \(n\)-groupoid, it
will similarly be an \(m\)-groupoid for \(m>n\).
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Homotopy sets}
The definition of homotopy sets admit a definable version. Let \(\Dset{G}\) be an
\(n\)-groupoid, and let \(b\in\Cyc{m}\) (\(m\ge{}0\)). We let
\(\Dset{S}(\Dset{G},b)=\partial_m^{-1}(b)\) be the set of elements of \(\Dset{G}_m\) with
boundary \(b\). For \(\alpha,\beta\in\Dset{S}(\Dset{G},b)\), we write
\(\alpha\sim\beta\) (or \(\alpha\sim_b\beta\)) if some \(h\in\Dset{G}_{m+1}\)
satisfies \(h_\Omit0=\alpha\), \(h_\Omit1=\beta\) and
\(h_\Omit{i}={d_t(\alpha)}_\Omit{i}\), where \(t:[m+1]\ra{}[m]\) is the surjective map
with \(t(1)=0\) (so \(h\) is a homotopy from \(\alpha\) to \(\beta\),
relative to the boundary \(b\)). This is an equivalence relation by the Kan
condition. Note that when \(m\ge{}n\), this relation coincides with equality.
For \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\) and \(k\ge{}0\), we write \(\Dset{S}_k(\Dset{G},a)\) for
\(\Dset{S}(\Dset{G},b)\), where \(b\) is the constant boundary with value \(a\) in
\(\Cyc{k}\). These are \(a\)-definable sets, whose elements correspond to
the set of pointed maps from the \(k\)-sphere to \(\Dset{G}\) with base point
\(a\) (note that \(\Dset{K}_0(\Dset{G},a)=\Dset{G}_0\) does not actually depend on \(a\)).
The \(k\)-th \Def{homotopy set} of \(\Dset{G}\) at \(a\) is the quotient
\(\pi_k(\Dset{G},a)=\Dset{S}_k(\Dset{G},a)/\sim\) (in the case of usual simplicial sets,
this is one of the equivalent definitions by~\Kero{00W1}).
If \(f:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\) is groupoid map, it commutes with all the structure above,
and therefore induces definable maps of sets
\(\pi_k(f,a):\pi_k(\Dset{G},a)\ra\pi_k(\Dset{H},f(a))\).
\begin{defn}\label{def:whe}
A definable map \(f:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\) of \(n\)-groupoids is a \Def{weak
equivalence} if \(\pi_k(f,a):\pi_k(\Dset{G},a)\ra\pi_k(\Dset{H},f(a))\) is a
bijection for all \(0\le{}k\le{}n\) and \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\).
\end{defn}
\begin{remark}\label{rmk:whe}
More explicitly, for non-empty \(\Dset{G}\), the map \(f:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\) is a weak
equivalence if and only if the following conditions are satisfied for each
\(n\ge{}k\ge{}0\) and each \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\):
\begin{enumerate}
\item For every \(g_0,g_1\in\Dset{S}_k(\Dset{G},a)\), if \(f(g_1)\sim{}f(g_2)\)
then \(g_1\sim{}g_2\).
\item For every \(h\in\Dset{S}_k(\Dset{H},f(a))\), there is \(g\in\Dset{S}_k(\Dset{G},a)\)
with \(f(g)\sim{}h\).
\end{enumerate}
Alternatively, \(f\) is a weak equivalence if and only if it induces a
surjective map on \(\Dset{S}\)-classes, i.e., for each \(\Dset{G}\)-cycle \(b\), and
each \(v\in\Dset{S}(\Dset{H},f(b))\), there is \(u\in\Dset{S}(\Dset{G},b)\) with
\(f(u)\sim{}v\). (To prove these equivalences, it suffices to show that
they hold in each model, where each of these conditions is equivalent to
homotopy equivalence,~\Kero{00WV}.)
\end{remark}
\begin{defn}\label{def:1eq}
The \(n\)-groupoids \(\Dset{G}_1\) and \(\Dset{G}_2\) are \Def{equivalent} if there
are weak equivalences \(f_1:\Dset{G}_1\ra\Dset{H}\) and \(f_2:\Dset{G}_2\ra\Dset{H}\) for some
\(\Dset{H}\).
\end{defn}
\begin{example}
Let \(\Dset{G},\Dset{H}\) be definable groupoids, identified with a \(1\)-groupoid as
in Example~\ref{exa:1gpd}. A map \(f:\Dset{G}\ra\Dset{H}\) is a functor. For \(k=0\),
the first condition for says that if \(a,b\) are objects of \(\Dset{G}\), and
there is a morphism between \(f(a)\) and \(f(b)\) in \(\Dset{H}\), then there is
a morphism from \(a\) to \(b\) in \(\Dset{G}\). The second condition says that
every object \(h\) of \(\Dset{H}\) has a morphism to an object in the image of
\(f\). Together, this part implies that \(f\) induces a bijection on
isomorphism classes.
For \(k=1\), the first condition says that if \(g_1,g_2\) are automorphisms
of \(a\) such that \(f(g_1)=f(g_2)\), then \(g_1=g_2\), i.e., that \(f\) is
faithful. The second condition says that \(f\) is full.
Hence, \(f\) is a weak equivalence if and only if it is a weak equivalence
in the sense of~\S\ref{sss:1grpd}. In particular, our notion of equivalence
coincides with~\GGII{\S3}.
\end{example}
As in~\S\ref{sss:composition}, equivalence of \(n\)-groupoids is an
equivalence relation: If \(\Dset{H}\) and \(\Dset{H}'\) witness that \(\Dset{G}_2\) is
equivalent to \(\Dset{G}_1\) and \(\Dset{G}_3\), respectively, the (suitably defined)
pushout \(\Dset{H}\cop_{\Dset{G}_2}\Dset{H}'\) witnesses the equivalence of
\(\Dset{G}_1,\Dset{G}_3\).\ToDo{make this precise}
\begin{remark}
The group operation on \(\pi_k(\Dset{G},a)\) (for \(k>0\)) is also definable,
but we will not use this.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The equivalence of our definitions of homotopy groups and weak equivalence
with other formulations that appear, for example, in~\Kero{00V2} does not
hold in the definable setting, in general. For example, the analogue of
Whitehead's Theorem (\Kero{00WV}) is usually false (as seen already in the
one-dimensional setting).
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Morphism groupoids}
Our next goal is to define the space of morphisms between two objects \(a,b\)
of an \(n\)-category \(\Dset{G}\), and obtain a (weak) version of the Yoneda
embedding that will make sense in the definable setting.
Let \(\Dset{G}\) be an \(n\)-category, and let \(a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\) be two objects. As
in~\HTT{\S1.2.2}, we define the \(\Sigma_{n-1}\)-structure \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,b)\)
by
\begin{equation}
{\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,b)}_k=\St{g\in\Dset{G}_{k+1}}{g_0=a,g_\Omit{0}=b^k},
\end{equation}
For \(k\le{}n\). The structure maps are given by \(t\mapsto{}{d^\Dset{G}}_{t^+}\),
where \(t^+:[u+1]\ra{}[k+1]\) is given by \(t^+(i+1)=t(i)+1\) for
\(i\in{}[u]\) and \(t^+(0)=0\). It is clear that \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,b)\) is
uniformly definable over \(a,b\) when \(\Dset{G}\) is definable. It follows
from~\HTT{\S\S4.2.1.8,2.3.4.18,2.3.4.19} that this structure is equivalent to
an \(n-1\)-groupoid, but since we are not working up to equivalence, we need
to prove that it is already an \(n-1\) by itself (which we do below).
If we fix a ``generic'' object \(v\in\Dset{G}_0\), the assignment
\(b\mapsto\dHom^L(v,b)\) looks like the object part of the Yoneda embedding for
usual categories. One could hope that this is part of a higher Yoneda
embedding in our situation as well. However, since there is no composition
function for morphisms in \(\Dset{G}\), such an embedding does not exist as a
functor (it exists non-canonically for set-theoretic quasi-categories, but not
definably). Instead, we have the following situation (explained
in~\HTT{\S2.1}): There is an \(n\)-category \(\Under{v}\) (\HTT{\S2.3.4.10}),
defined by \({(\Under{v})}_k=\St{g\in\Dset{G}_{k+1}}{g_0=v}\), and a map of
\(n\)-categories \(\pi:\Under{v}\ra\Dset{G}\), given by \(\pi(g)=g_\Omit{0}\). By
definition, the fibre of this map over \(b\in\Dset{G}_0\) is \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,b)\).
Moreover, this map is a \emph{left fibration} (\HTT{\S2.1.22}): Given
\(g\in\Horn[\Under{v}]{k}{i}\), for \(i<k\), any ``filling'' \(h\in\Dset{G}_k\) of
\(\pi(g)\) (so that \(\partial^\Omit{i}(h)=\pi(g)\)) can be lifted to a filling
\(\ti{h}\in\Under{v}\) with \(\partial^\Omit{i}(\ti{h})=g\) and \(\pi(\ti{h})=h\). It
follows from this that the association \(b\mapsto\pi^{-1}(b)\) behaves like a
functor of \(b\), but this is only precisely true in the homotopy category.
We will show that in the case that \(h\) above is invertible, the statement
above holds for our definable version of equivalence. To do this, we show that
the map \(\pi\) behaves like a local system: the fibres can be continued along
(suitable) contractible pieces. The pieces we have in mind, which we denote by
\(D^l\), for \(l\ge{}0\), are the simplicial sets defined by
\(D^l_k={\Set{0,\dots,l}}^{\Set{0,\dots,k}}\) (all maps, no necessarily
increasing, from \([k]\) to \([l]\)), and structure maps given by
composition. We will often write elements of \({D^l}_k\) as words of length
\(k+1\) in the ``digits'' \(0,\dots,l\). By the usual Yoneda lemma, maps
\(D^l\ra{}D^m\) correspond (via composition) to functions
\(\Set{0,\dots,l}\ra\Set{0,\dots,m}\) (via composition). Note that
homotopically, all these maps are weak equivalences, and in particular the
map to the point \(D^0\), so that all \(D^l\) are contractible.
We now extend the definition of morphisms as follows: for \(\Dset{G}\) a definable
\(n\)-category, let \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\) be an object, and let \(f:D^l\ra\Dset{G}\) be a
map of simplicial sets (perhaps over parameters). We define a
\(\Sigma_{n-1}\)-structure \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\) as follows: For each
\(k\le{}n\),
\begin{equation}
{\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)}_k=\St{\pp{g,e}\in\Dset{G}_{k+1}\times{D^l}_k}{g_0=a,g_\Omit{0}=f(e)}
\end{equation}
with structure maps given as before by
\(\pp{g,e}\mapsto\pp{d_{t^+}(g),e\circ{}t}\) for each weakly increasing function
\(t:[u]\ra{}[k]\). In other words, \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\) is the pullback under
\(f\) of the map \(\pi:\Under{v}\ra\Dset{G}\) above. For \(l=0\) and \(f\) mapping
the point \(D^0\) to \(b\), we recover the previous definition. In general,
the projection determines a map \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\ra{}D^l\) of simplicial
sets, which can be viewed as the ``restriction'' of \(\pi\) to \(D^l\). If
\(h:D^r\ra{}D^l\) is a map of simplicial sets, there is an induced map
\(\hat{h}:\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f\circ{}h)\ra\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\), given by
\(\hat{h}(\pp{g,e})=\pp{g,h(e)}\).
\begin{prop}\label{prp:hom}
Let \(\Dset{G}\), \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\) and \(f:D^l\ra\Dset{G}\) be as above.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The structure \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\) is an \(n-1\)-groupoid.
\item For any map \(h:\Set{0,\dots,r}\ra\Set{0,\dots,l}\) (identified
with the corresponding map \(D^r\ra{}D^l\)), the induced map
\(\hat{h}:\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f\circ{}h)\ra\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\) is a weak
equivalence.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let \(\Dset{H}=\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\). It is clear that \(\Dset{H}\) is a
simplicial definable set. To check the Kan condition, we prove a
stronger claim, namely, that the projection \(\pi:\Dset{H}\ra{}D^l\) is a
Kan fibration: given a horn element \(h\in\Horn[\Dset{H}]{m}{i}\) and a
pre-image \(d\in{}{D^l}_m\) with \(\partial_m^\Omit{i}(d)=\pi(h)\), there is
\(\ti{d}\in\Dset{H}_m\) with \(\pi(\ti{d})=d\) and \(\partial_m^\Omit{i}(\ti{d})=h\).
Let \(h\in\Horn[\Dset{H}]{m}{i}\) be a horn element as above, with
\(0\le{}i\le{}m\le{}n+2\). Such an element is given by a matching
sequence of element \(h^j=\pp{g^j,e^j}\), for \(j\in{}[m]\),
\(j\ne{}i\), with \(g^j\in\Dset{G}_m\) and with
\(\pi(h)=\pp{e^0,\dots,e^m}\) an element of \(\Horn[D^l]{m}{i}\). In
\(D^l\), each such horn element comes from a \emph{unique} element of
\({D^l}_m\). Let \(e\in{}{D^l}_m\) be this element, and let
\(g^{-1}=f(e)\in\Dset{G}_m\).
We claim that \(\ti{g}=\pp{g^{-1},g^0,\dots,g^m}\in\Dset{G}_m^{m+1}\) is in
\(\Horn{m+1}{i+1}\). To show that, we need to show that if
\(\Omit{b}\circ\Omit{a}=\Omit{d}\circ\Omit{c}:[m-1]\ra{}[m+1]\) for
some \(b,d\in{}[m+1]\), \(b,d\ne{}i+1\) and \(a,c\in{}[m]\), then
\({g^{b-1}}_\Omit{a}={g^{d-1}}_\Omit{c}\).
Assume first that \(a,b,c,d\ge{}1\). The assumption on \(h\) implies
that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:compath}
{h^{b-1}}_{\Omit{a-1}_{m-1}}={h^{d-1}}_{\Omit{c-1}_{m-1}}
\end{equation}
whenever \(a,b,c,d\) satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eq:compatm}
\Omit{b-1}_m\circ\Omit{a-1}_{m-1}=\Omit{d-1}_m\circ\Omit{c-1}_{m-1}
\end{equation}
Equation~\eqref{eq:compath} implies that
\({g^{b-1}}_{{\Omit{a-1}_{m-1}}^+}={g^{d-1}}_{{\Omit{c-1}_{m-1}}^+}\)
under this condition. But \({\Omit{j}_{m-1}}^+=\Omit{j+1}_m\) for all
\(j\in{}[m-1]\), so we find that
\({g^{b-1}}_{\Omit{a}_m}={g^{d-1}}_{\Omit{c}_m}\) whenever
eq.~\eqref{eq:compatm} holds. But eq.~\eqref{eq:compatm} is equivalent
to
\begin{equation}
\Omit{b}_{m+1}\circ\Omit{a}_m=\Omit{d}_{m+1}\circ\Omit{c}_m
\end{equation}
so we obtain the required condition when \(a,b,c,d\ge{}1\).
If \(b=0\) or \(d=0\), the corresponding element of \(\Dset{G}_m\) is
\(g^{-1}\). In this case, the condition follows from the definition of
\(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\): for example, if \(b=0\) we must have \(c=0\) and
\(d=a+1\), so we need to show that
\({g^a}_\Omit{0}={f(e)}_\Omit{a}=f(e_\Omit{a})=f(e^a)\), and we are
done. If \(a=0\) or \(c=0\), the condition forces \(b=0\) or \(d=0\),
so we are back to the same case.
This concludes the proof that \(\ti{g}\in\Horn{m+1}{i+1}\). If \(i<m\),
the Kan condition on \(\Dset{G}\) implies that that we may find
\(g\in\Dset{G}_{m+1}\) restricting to \(\ti{g}\). In follows that \(g_0=a\)
and \(g_\Omit0=f(e)\), so that \(\pp{g,e}\) solves the lifting problem.
It follows from~\HTT{\S1.2.5.1} that the case \(i<m\) is sufficient.
When \(m=n\) or \(m=n+1\), the injectivity follows similarly from
injectivity for \(\Dset{G}\) (and for \(D^l\)).
\item We use Remark~\ref{rmk:whe}. An element in
\({\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f\circ{}h)}_0\) is given by \(g\in\Dset{G}_1\) with \(g_0=a\)
and \(g_1=f(h(e))\), where \(e\in{}[u]\). Assume that
\(\pp{s,c},\pp{t,d}\in{\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f\circ{}h)}_k\) satisfy
\(s_\Omit0=t_\Omit0=f(h(c))=f(h(d))=h(e)\) and
\(s_\Omit{i}=t_\Omit{i}=g\) for \(k\ge{}i>0\), so that they are
elements of \(\Dset{S}_k(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f\circ{}h))\). Assume also that we are
given some \(w\in\Dset{G}_{k+2}\) satisfying \(w_\Omit1=s\), \(w_\Omit2=t\)
and \(w_\Omit{i}=g\) for \(i>2\), and some \(v\in{}{D^u}_{k+1}\) with
\(v_\Omit{0}=c\), \(v_\Omit1=d\) and \(v_\Omit{i}=e\) for \(i>1\), and
with \(f(h(v))=w_\Omit0\) (this is a homotopy from \(\pp{s,c}\) to
\(\pp{t,d}\)). Then \(\pp{w,h(v)}\) is a homotopy from \(\pp{s,h(c)}\)
to \(\pp{t,h(d)}\). The argument for \(k=0\) is similar (using that
\(D^u\) is connected).
For the second condition of Remark~\ref{rmk:whe}, let \(g\in\Dset{G}_1\) be
such that \(g_0=a,g_1=f(e)\) for some \(e\in{}[l]\), so that
\(b=\pp{g,e}\) represents a basepoint of \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\), and let
\(\pp{s,c}\in\Dset{S}_k(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f),b)\). Then \(c\in\Dset{S}_k(D^l,e)\) is
the constant function \(e\). Let \(e'\in{}[u]\), and let
\(\gamma\in{}D^l\) be some path from \(h(e')\) to \(e\). By the Kan
condition above, there is an element \(s'\) of \(\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,f)\) above
\(\gamma\), restricting to \(s\). This \(s'\) serves as a homotopy from
\(s\) to an element over \(h(e')\), which is thus in the image of
\(\hat{h}\).\qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:hom}
Let \(\Dset{G}\) be an \(n\)-category, \(v,a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\) objects. Each
isomorphism \(t\in\Dset{G}_1\) from \(a\) to \(b\) determines an equivalence
\(e_t:\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,a)\ra\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,b)\). Each isomorphism \(m:t\ra{}s\)
determines an isomorphism \(e_m:e_t\ra{}e_s\).
\end{cor}
We describe the equivalence explicitly in the \(2\)-dimensional case, which
will be most relevant for us:
\begin{example}\label{exa:hom2gpd}
Let \(\Dset{G}\) be a \(2\)-groupoid, \(v,a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\) and \(f\in\Dset{G}_1\) with
\(f_0=a\) and \(f_1=b\). Since \(\Dset{G}\) is a groupoid, there is \(h\in\Dset{G}_2\)
(not necessarily unique) with \(h_\Omit0=f\) and \(h_\Omit1=b\). We denote
\(f^{-1}=h_\Omit2\). By the \(2\)-groupoid axioms, \(h\) has a uniquely
determined inverse \(h^{-1}\). Let \(\gamma:D^1\ra\Dset{G}\) be the unique map
with \(\gamma(101)=h\), so that \(\gamma(01)=g\) and \(\gamma(10)=g^{-1}\).
Then \(\Dset{H}=\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,\gamma)\) can be described as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \(\Dset{H}_0={\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,a)}_0\coprod{}{\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,b)}_0\) (this is
just the union if \(a\ne{}b\), but if \(a=b\) we take disjoint copies).
\item
Let \(\Dset{X}=\St{g\in\Dset{G}_2}{g_0=v,g_\Omit0=f}\), and let
\(\Dset{X}^{-1}=\St{g\in\Dset{G}_2}{g_0=v,g_\Omit0=f^{-1}}\) (again taking
disjoint copies if \(f=f^{-1}\)). Then
\[
\Dset{H}_1={\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,a)}_1\coprod{}{\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,b)}_1\cup\Dset{X}\cup\Dset{X}^{-1}
\]
with \(d_\Omit0^\Dset{X}=d_\Omit1^\Dset{G}\), \(d_\Omit1^\Dset{X}=d_\Omit2^\Dset{G}\) and
vice versa for \(\Dset{X}^{-1}\) (and the structure coming from \(\dHom^L\) on
the other parts).
\item Composition is defined again as in \(\dHom^L\) on the corresponding
parts. The composition of \(h\circ{}g\) for \(g\in\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,a)\) and
\(h\in\Dset{X}\) is the composition in \(\Dset{G}\) of the three elements
\(g,h,i\in\Dset{G}_2\), where \(i\) is the identity morphism of the object
\(f\) of \(\dHom^R_\Dset{G}(a,b)\). Similarly for the compositions
\(g'\circ{}h\), \(h'\circ{}g'\), \(g\circ{}h'\), \(h\circ{}h'\) and
\(h'\circ{}h\), for \(g'\in\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(v,b)\) and \(h'\in\Dset{X}^{-1}\) (in
each case, the two elements of \(\Dset{G}_2\) along with \(i\) form three
faces of a \(2\)-horn, with vertices \(a,a,b,v\) or \(a,b,b,v\), and
the result is the uniquely determined fourth face)
\end{enumerate}
It is clear, by construction, that the inclusions of \(\dHom^L(v,a)\) and
\(\dHom^L(v,b)\) into \(\Dset{H}\) determine fully faithful functors. As in the
general proof, they are also essentially surjective by the Kan property.
\end{example}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:comp}
Let \(\Dset{G}\) be a \(2\)-groupoid, and let \(\gamma:D^2\ra\Dset{G}\) be a fixed
map, and \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\) a fixed vertex. Then
\(\dHom^L(a,\gamma)=\dHom^L(a,\gamma\circ\Omit2)\cop_{\dHom^L(a,\gamma\circ{}1)}\dHom^L(a,\gamma\circ\Omit0)\)
(canonical isomorphism), and
\(\dHom^L(a,\gamma\circ\Omit1)=\dHom^L(a,\gamma\circ\Omit0)\circ_{\dHom^L(a,\gamma\circ{}1)}\dHom^L(a,\gamma\circ\Omit{2})\)
\end{cor}
In other words, the composition of two morphism groupoids (in the sense
of~\S\ref{sss:composition}) is given by composition in the homotopy category.
\begin{proof}
By definition, both sides have the same sets of objects.
Prop.~\ref{prp:1pushouts} provides the required map, and since on both
sides we also have a weak equivalence (by the second part of
Prop.~\ref{prp:1pushouts} and by Prop.~\ref{prp:hom}), this map is an
isomorphism. The second part again follows directly from the definition, as
both sides are the restriction to the same set of objects.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The theory associated with a groupoid}
We continue to fix \(n\in\mathbb{N}\). To each definable \(n\)-groupoid in the
theory \(\Th{T}\) we define an associated expansion \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) of \(\Th{T}\),
directly generalizing (a variant of) the one-dimensional case.
\begin{defn}\label{def:tg2}
Let \(\Dset{G}\) be a definable \(n\)-groupoid in a theory \(\Th{T}\). The
expansion \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) of \(\Th{T}\) is obtained by adding additional sorts
\(\Dset{G}^*_i\) for \(0\le{}i\le{}n+1\), function symbols
\(e_i:\Dset{G}_i\ra\Dset{G}^*_i\), and a constant symbol \(*\in\Dset{G}^*_0\), and the
axioms expressing:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \(\Dset{G}^*\) is an \(n\)-groupoid, and \(e_*\) is a map of simplicial
sets (i.e., commutes with the structure maps). We identify \(\Dset{G}\) with
its image.
\item \(\Dset{G}^*_0=\Dset{G}_0\cup\Set{*}\).
\item The inclusion of \(\Dset{G}\) in \(\Dset{G}^*\) is a weak homotopy
equivalence (Remark~\ref{rmk:whe}), and an isomorphism onto the
sub-groupoid of \(\Dset{G}^*\) spanned by \(\Dset{G}_0\).
\end{enumerate}
For each natural number \(r\), there is a definable family
\(\Gamma_r=\dHom^L(*,f)\) of groupoids, parametrised by the definable set of
maps \(f:D^r\ra\Dset{G}^*\). This is our collection \(\Gamma\) of admissible
groupoids, in the sense of Def~\ref{def:2stable}.
\end{defn}
We note that our choice of \(\Gamma\) does satisfy the assumption on
composition, by Cor.~\ref{cor:comp}.
As in the one-dimensional case, each object \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\) determines an
interpretation \(\omega_a\), over \(\Th{T}_a\), determined by the requirement:
\(\omega_a(*)=a\), \(\omega_a({\Dset{G}^*}_i)=\Dset{G}_i\) for \(i=1,2\) and similarly for the
face maps. We would like to show that the \(\omega_a\) are objects in the
\(2\)-groupoid associated with \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) over \(\Th{T}\), namely:
\begin{prop}\label{prp:2int}
For every object \(a\in\Dset{G}_0\), the interpretation \(\omega_a:\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\ra\Th{T}_a\)
is \(2\)-stable. In particular, \(\pp{\Th{T}_\Dset{G},\Gamma}\) is a \(2\)-internal
cover of \(\Th{T}\).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We need to show that over some parameter \(u\), each admissible groupoid
\(\Dset{H}\) is equivalent to \(\omega_a(\Dset{H})\), over some parameters from \(\Th{T}\).
Let \(u\) be any element of \({\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,a)}_0\) (it is consistent
that such a \(u\) exists: for any model \(\mathpzc{Mod}{M}\) of \(\Th{T}\) such that
\(a\in\Dset{G}_0(\mathpzc{Mod}{M})\), \(\mathpzc{Mod}{M}\circ\omega_a\) is a model of \(\Th{T}_{\Dset{G}}\)
for which this set is non-empty).
Let \(f:D^r\ra\Dset{G}^*\) be a map, and assume first that for some
\(i\in{}[r]\), \(b=f(i)\in\Dset{G}_0\). By the second item of
Prop~\ref{prp:hom}, \(\Dset{H}=\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,f)\) is equivalent (over no
additional parameters) to \(\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,b)\), so we may assume that
\(f=b\). We may also assume that \(b\) is in the same connected component
as \(a\), because otherwise \(\Dset{H}\) is empty. According to
Cor~\ref{cor:hom}, it follows that \(\Dset{H}\) is equivalent
\(\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,a)\). Again according to (a dual version of)
Cor~\ref{cor:hom}, the fixed element \(u\) determines an equivalence from
\(\Dset{H}\) to \(\omega_a(\Dset{H})=\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,a)\).
The remaining case is when \(f\) is the constant map \(*\), so that
\(\Dset{H}=\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,*)\), and \(\omega_a(\Dset{H})=\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(a,a)\). The same
argument as above shows that both are equivalent to \(\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,a)\)
over \(u\).
\end{proof}
We would like to prove that the association \(a\mapsto\omega_a\) is the object part
of an assignment that recovers (up to equivalence) \(\Dset{G}\). To do that, we
need to define the \(2\)-groupoid which is the target of this assignment.
This will be the analog of \(I_{\Th{T}*/\Th{T}}\) from the one-dimensional case
(\S\ref{sss:1igrpd}).
\begin{defn}\label{def:2catintern}
Let \(\Th{T}^*\) be a stable expansion of a theory \(\Th{T}\), with admissible
family of distinguished internal covers \(\Gamma\). The \(2\)-groupoid
associated to this datum is defined as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Objects are \(2\)-stable interpretations of \(\pp{\Th{T}^*,\Gamma}\)
in \(\Th{T}\), over \(\Th{T}\).
\item If \(x,y\) are two objects as above, a morphism \(u:x\ra{}y\) is
given by a bi-interpretation \(u_{\Th{T}'}:x(\Th{T}')\ra{}y(\Th{T}')\) over
\(\Th{T}\), for each admissible internal cover \(\Th{T}'\in\Gamma\). These
bi-interpretations are given with isomorphisms
\(c_i:u_{\Th{T}_2}\circ{}x(i)\ra{}y(i)\circ{}u_{\Th{T}_1}\) for every
admissible interpretation \(i:\Th{T}_1\ra\Th{T}_2\) between admissible covers
\(\Th{T}_1,\Th{T}_2\) in \(\Gamma\) (uniformly in families).
The isomorphisms are required to satisfy:
\(c_{j\circ{}i}=y(j)(c_i)\circ{}c_j(x(i))\) for admissible
interpretations \(i:\Th{T}_1\ra\Th{T}_2\), \(j:\Th{T}_2\ra\Th{T}_3\) as above
(these make sense since, by definition, the \(c_i\) are definable maps
in \(y(\Th{T}_2)\), \(y(j)\) is an interpretation of \(y(\Th{T}_2)\) in
\(y(\Th{T}_3)\) and \(c_j\) is a map between interpretations of
\(x(\Th{T}_2\)), so can be applied to definable sets of the form
\(x(i)\).)
\item The \(2\)-morphisms with edges \(u:x\ra{}y\), \(v:y\ra{}z\) and
\(w:x\ra{}z\) are given by isomorphisms \(v\circ{}u\ra{}w\), all over
\(\Th{T}\).
\item The ``\(2\)-composition'' of the \(2\)-morphisms
\(\alpha:v\circ{}u\ra{}w\), \(\beta:s\circ{}v\ra{}r\) and
\(\gamma:r\circ{}u\ra{}t\) is given by
\[
s\circ w\ra[s\cdot\alpha^{-1}]s\circ(v\circ u)=(s\circ v)\circ
u\ra[\beta\cdot u]r\circ u\ra[\gamma] t,
\]
where \(\cdot\) stands for pointwise application (or \emph{horizontal
composition}) as above.
\end{enumerate}
Applying the definition with \(\Th{T}\) replaced by \(\Th{T}_A\), for a
\(\Th{T}\)-structure \(A\), we obtain a \(2\)-groupoid for each such structure
\(A\), which we denote \(I^2(A)={I^2}_{\Th{T}^*/\Th{T}}(A)\).
\end{defn}
Using the equivalence between internal covers and definable groupoids, this
can be described in terms of definable groupoids. We give an explicit
description in~\ref{sss:2gpd} below.
\begin{remark}
Let \(\Cat{C}\) be the category of definable groupoids in \(\Th{T}\), with weak
equivalences as morphisms. We may form its bi-category of \emph{cospans}
for this category, as in~\Kero{0084}. By Cor~\ref{cor:bimor}, it is
equivalent (as a bi-category) to the category of internal covers and
bi-interpretations. The \(2\)-category in Def~\ref{def:2catintern} can be
viewed as the \emph{Duskin nerve} (\Kero{009T}) of this bi-category (this
is clear from the description in~\Kero{00A1}). In particular, it follows
that this is indeed a \(2\)-category.
\end{remark}
\begin{prop}\label{prp:2gpdmap}
Let \(\Dset{G}\) be a definable \(2\)-groupoid in a theory \(\Th{T}\), and let
\(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}=\pp{\Th{T}_\Dset{G},\Gamma}\) be the corresponding \(2\)-internal cover.
The association \(a\mapsto\omega_a\) extends to a map
\(\omega:\Dset{G}(A)\ra{I^2}_{\Th{T}_\Dset{G}/\Th{T}}(A)\) of \(2\)-groupoids, compatible with
extensions of the structure \(A\).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Prop.~\ref{prp:2int} shows that for all \(a\in\Dset{G}_0(A)\), \(\omega_a\) is
indeed an object of \(I^2(A)\). Given \(t:a\ra{}b\) in \(\Dset{G}_1(A)\), we
define \(\omega_t:\omega_a\ra\omega_b\) as follows: Let \(\Dset{H}\) be an admissible
groupoid. As in the proof of~\ref{prp:2int}, we may assume that
\(\Dset{H}=\Dset{H}_c=\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,c)\) for some \(c\in\Dset{G}_0(A)\), so that
\(\omega_a(\Dset{H})=\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}}(a,c)\) and \(\omega_b(\Dset{H})=\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}}(b,c)\). By
Cor~\ref{cor:hom}, \(t\) induces an (admissible) equivalence from
\(\omega_a(\Dset{H})\) to \(\omega_b(\Dset{H})\), which we take to be \(\omega_t(\Dset{H})\). Our
definition (and construction) ensures the compatibility under admissible
maps \(\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{H}'\).
Similarly, let \(\alpha\in\Dset{G}_2(A)\), with edges \(r:a\ra{}b\),
\(s:b\ra{}c\) and \(t:a\ra{}c\). We need to construct an isomorphism (over
\(\Th{T}\)) from \(\omega_s\circ\omega_r\) to \(\omega_t\). Consider the map
\(f:D^2\ra\Dset{G}\) determined by \(\alpha\). We have \(f(01)=r\), \(f(12)=s\)
and \(f(02)=t\), so that for each object \(d\in\Dset{G}_0(A)\), the equivalence
\(\omega_r(\Dset{H}_d):\omega_a(\Dset{H}_d)\ra\omega_b(\Dset{H}_d)\) is given by
\(\dHom^L(f\circ{}h_{01},d)\), where \(h_{01}:[1]\ra{}[2]\) is the inclusion
(and similarly for \(s,t\)). Hence, \(\dHom^L(f,d)\) represents the
composition \(\omega_s\circ\omega_r\), and restriction to \(\omega_t\) provides the
required map.
This completes the construction of \(\omega\). The proof that this is a map of
\(2\)-groupoids (i.e., that it commutes with composition) is similar to the
above, using \(D^4\) in place of \(D^3\), and the fact that it commutes
with extension of scalars is obvious.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{}\label{sss:2gpd}
Our main goal is to prove that the map \(\omega\) constructed in
Prop~\ref{prp:2gpdmap} is a weak equivalence. Similarly to the
\(1\)-dimensional case, it will generally only be true in a model. As a
preparation, we consider more explicitly the structure of \(I^2\) from
Def.~\ref{def:2catintern}, from a definable groupoid point of view.
Let \(\omega_1\) and \(\omega_2\) be two objects of \(I^2_{\Th{T}^*/\Th{T}}\), i.e.,
\(2\)-stable interpretations of \(\Th{T}^*\) in \(\Th{T}\). An isomorphism over
\(\Th{T}\) is given, according to Prop~\ref{prp:spans}, by a family \(\Dset{K}(\Dset{H})\)
of groupoids in \(\Th{T}\), for each admissible groupoid \(\Dset{H}\) in \(\Th{T}^*\),
along with weak equivalences \(u_i(\Dset{H}):\omega_i(\Dset{H})\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{K}(\Dset{H})\), all
definable uniformly in \(\Dset{H}\). Given another admissible groupoid \(\Dset{H}'\),
an admissible interpretation from \({\Th{T}^*}_{\Dset{H}'}\) to \({\Th{T}^*}_\Dset{H}\) is
given, again by Prop~\ref{prp:spans}, by an admissible groupoid \(\Dset{X}\) and
admissible maps \(f:\Dset{H}\ra\Dset{X}\) and \(g:\Dset{H}'\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{X}\). According to the
definition, we are provided with a definable isomorphism (realising the
isomorphisms \(c_i\), via Cor.~\ref{cor:bimor})
\begin{equation}\label{eq:isostruct}
t_{\Dset{X},\Dset{K}}:\Dset{K}(\Dset{H})\circ_{\omega_1(\Dset{H})}\omega_1(\Dset{X})\ra[\sim]
\omega_2(\Dset{X})\circ_{\omega_2(\Dset{H}')}\Dset{K}(\Dset{H}')
\end{equation}
uniformly definable in \(\Dset{X},\Dset{K}\) (and the associated embeddings), and
restricting to the identity on \(\omega_1(\Dset{H}')\) and on \(\omega_2(\Dset{H})\). If
\(\Dset{Y}\) determines a map to \({\Th{T}^*}_{\Dset{H}'}\) from \({\Th{T}^*}_{\Dset{H}''}\) for a
further groupoid \(\Dset{H}''\), we have the maps
\begin{multline}
t_{\Dset{X},\Dset{K}}\cop_{\omega_1(\Dset{H}')}\mathbf{1}_{\omega_1(\Dset{Y})}:
\Dset{K}(\Dset{H})\circ_{\omega_1(\Dset{H})}\omega_1(\Dset{X})\circ_{\omega_1(\Dset{H}')}\omega_1(\Dset{Y})\ra[\sim]\\
\omega_2(\Dset{X})\circ_{\omega_2(\Dset{H}')}\Dset{K}(\Dset{H}')\circ_{\omega_1(\Dset{H}')}\omega_1(\Dset{Y})
\end{multline}
and
\begin{multline}
\mathbf{1}_{\omega_2(\Dset{X})}\cop_{\omega_2(\Dset{H}')}t_{\Dset{Y},\Dset{K}}:
\omega_2(\Dset{X})\circ_{\omega_2(\Dset{H}')}\Dset{K}(\Dset{H}')\circ_{\omega_1(\Dset{H}')}\omega_1(\Dset{Y})\ra[\sim]\\
\omega_2(\Dset{X})\circ_{\omega_2(\Dset{H}')}\omega_2(\Dset{Y})\circ_{\omega_2(\Dset{H}'')}\Dset{K}(\Dset{H}'')
\end{multline}
the groupoid \(\Dset{X}\circ_{\Dset{H}'}\Dset{Y}\) represents the composition of
interpretations, and
\(\omega_i(\Dset{X}\circ_{\Dset{H}'}\Dset{Y})=\omega_i(\Dset{X})\circ_{\omega_i(\Dset{H}')}\omega_i(\Dset{Y})\) (canonical
identification), since \(\omega_i\) is an interpretation. Under this
identification, we require that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:compat}
(\mathbf{1}_{\omega_2(\Dset{X})}\cop_{\omega_2(\Dset{H}')}t_{\Dset{Y},\Dset{K}})\circ
(t_{\Dset{X},\Dset{K}}\cop_{\omega_1(\Dset{H}')}\mathbf{1}_{\omega_1(\Dset{Y})})=t_{(\Dset{X}\circ_{\Dset{H}'}\Dset{Y}),\Dset{K}}.
\end{equation}
Finally, a \(2\)-morphism is determined by a natural isomorphism between two
maps as above (one a composition, which we already understand), so it is
enough to describe those. Let \(\omega_1\), \(\omega_2\) and \(\Dset{K}\) be as above, and
let \(\Dset{L}\) represent another morphism. A natural isomorphism is then given
by a uniform family of isomorphisms \(\alpha_\Dset{H}:\Dset{K}(\Dset{H})\ra\Dset{L}(\Dset{H})\) over
\(\omega_i(\Dset{H})\), which intertwine the maps \(t_{\Dset{X},\Dset{K}}\) and \(t_{\Dset{X},\Dset{L}}\)
whenever \(\Dset{X}\) represents an interpretation. The \(2\)-composition of three
such suitable maps is described as in Def~\ref{def:2catintern}, with
composition replaced by pushouts as appropriate.
\begin{remark}\label{rmk:2gpdmap}
By definition, internality means that there is a non-empty definable
\emph{set} (i.e., a \(0\)-groupoid) of isomorphisms between the internal
sorts and sorts of the base theory. Similarly, the structure described
above includes the description of a \(\Th{T}^*\)-definable \(1\)-groupoid
\(\Dset{\iIso}_\Th{T}(\ti{\Th{T}^8},\ti{\Th{T}})\) of weak equivalences between admissible
covers \(\ti{\Th{T}^*}\) of \(\Th{T}^*\) and covers \(\ti{\Th{T}}\) of \(\Th{T}\)
(non-empty for some \(\ti{\Th{T}}\) if \(\Th{T}^*\) is \(2\)-internal). In terms
of groupoids, the families \(\Dset{K}\) as in~\S\ref{sss:2gpd} are the objects,
and the morphisms are the natural isomorphisms \(\alpha\). Furthermore,
this groupoid itself is admissible.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}\label{ex:2gpdmap}
Let \(\Th{T}^*=\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) as in Prop~\ref{prp:2gpdmap}, and let \(\omega_1=\omega_a\)
and \(\omega_2=\omega_b\) for some \(a,b\in\Dset{G}_0(A)\). Let \(f:a\ra{}b\) be a
morphism in \(\Dset{G}(A)\) (identified with the corresponding map from
\(D^1\)). Given an admissible groupoid \(\Dset{H}=\Dset{H}_d=\dHom^L(d,*)\), we let
\(\Dset{K}_f(d)=\Dset{K}_f(\Dset{H}_d)=\dHom^L_\Dset{G}(d,f)\), with the canonical maps from
\(\omega_a(\Dset{H}_d)=\dHom^L(d,a)\) and \(\omega_b(\Dset{H}_d)=\dHom^L(d,b)\) (these are weak
equivalences by Prop~\ref{prp:hom}).
To give \(\Dset{K}\) the structure of an isomorphism from \(\omega_a\) to \(\omega_b\),
we need to supply the isomorphisms~\eqref{eq:isostruct}. If
\(\Dset{H}'=\Dset{H}_c=\dHom^L(c,*)\) is another admissible groupoid in \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\), an
admissible isomorphism from \(\Dset{H}_c\) to \(\Dset{H}_d\) is given by a groupoid
\(\Dset{X}_g=\dHom^L(g,*)\), with \(g:c\ra{}d\) in \(\Dset{G}\). Seeing as
\(\omega_x(\Dset{X}_g)=\dHom^L(g,x)\) for all \(x\), such a structure consists of a
definable family of maps
\begin{multline*}
t_{g,f}:\dHom^L(d,f)\circ_{\dHom^L(d,a)}\dHom^L(g,a)\ra[\sim]\\
\dHom^L(g,b)\circ_{\dHom^L(c,b)}\dHom^L(c,f)
\end{multline*}
Recall that \(t\) is the identity on objects, so we only need to define it
on morphisms. Let \(\pp{u,v}\) represent a morphism of
\(\dHom^L(d,f)\circ_{\dHom^L(d,a)}\dHom^L(g,a)\). Let \(h:c\ra{}a\) be the domain
of \(v\). By the Kan property, there is a morphism \(w\in\dHom^L(c,f)\) whose
domain is \(h\). Then \(u,v,w\) form an element of \(\Horn{3}{3}\), so
composition provides a fourth face \(y\in{\dHom^L(g,b)}_1\). We let
\(t_{g,f}(u\cop{}v)=y\cop{}w\). If \(w'\) is a different choice in place
of \(w\), then \(w'\circ{}w^{-1}\) is in \(\dHom^L(c,b)\), so the result
represents the same morphism of \(\dHom^L(g,b)\circ_{\dHom^L(c,b)}\dHom^L(c,f)\).
It is clear that \(t\) is well defined on the class \(u\cop{}v\), and
uniformly definable in \(g,f\).
To prove the identity~\eqref{eq:compat}, assume we are given another
morphism \(g':c'\ra{}c\), corresponding to an admissible interpretation
represented by \(\Dset{Y}=\dHom^L(g',*)\). Let \(v'\in\dHom^L(g',a)=\omega_1(\Dset{Y})\).
Proceeding with the notation above, we need to determine the image of
\(y\cop{}w\cop{}v'\) in
\(\dHom^L(g,b)\circ_{\dHom^L(c,b)}\dHom^L(g',b)\circ_{\dHom^L(c',b)}\dHom^L(c',f)\).
As above, it is given by \(y\cop{}y'\cop{}w'\), where
\(y'\in\dHom^L(g',b)=\omega_2(\Dset{Y})\) and \(w'\in\dHom^L(c',f)=\Dset{K}_f(\Dset{H}_{c'})\)
represent the other two faces of a partial simplex with faces \(w\) and
\(v'\) (this other simplex can be visualised as attached to the previous
one at the face \(w\)). On the other hand, \(\Dset{X}\circ_{\Dset{H}_c}\Dset{Y}\) was
identified (as in Cor.~\ref{cor:comp}) with \(\dHom^L(g\circ{}g',*)\), for
any composition \(g\circ{}g'\). After choosing such a composition \(h\),
\(v\cop{}v'\) is identified with an element of \(\dHom^L(h,a)\) and
\(y\cop{}y'\) with an element of \(\dHom^L(h,b)\), so that they become two
faces of the simplex with vertices \(a,b,c,d\), the other two being \(u\)
and \(w'\), so that \(u\cop{}w'=t_{h,f}(v\cop{}v',y\cop{}y')\), as
required.
Assume now that we are given a map \(\gamma:D^2\ra\Dset{G}\) corresponding to an
element \(w\in\Dset{G}_2\), with edges \(f=\gamma(01)\), \(g=\gamma(12)\) and
\(h=\gamma(02)\). Given element \(u\in\Dset{K}_f(\Dset{H}_c)=\dHom^L(c,f)\) and
\(v\in\Dset{K}_g(\Dset{H}_c)=\dHom^L(c,g)\) (for an arbitrary \(c\in\Dset{G}_0\)), the
\(2\)-composition applied to \(u,v\) and \(w\) provides an element of
\(\Dset{K}_h(\Dset{H}_c)=\dHom^L(c,h)\). This process assembles into a family of
isomorphisms
\(\alpha_\gamma:\Dset{K}_g(\Dset{H}_c)\circ\Dset{K}_f(\Dset{H}_c)\ra\Dset{K}_h(\Dset{H}_c)\), definable
uniformly in \(\gamma\) and \(c\). This completes the description (and a
reformulation of the proof) of the map in Prop.~\ref{prp:2gpdmap} in terms
of definable groupoids.
\end{example}
We are now ready to prove our main result.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
Let \(\Dset{G}\) be a \(2\)-groupoid defined in a theory \(\Th{T}\), and let
\(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) be the associated theory (and admissible covers), as in
Def.~\ref{def:tg2}. Then \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) is a \(2\)-internal cover of \(\Th{T}\),
and for every model \(\mathpzc{Mod}{M}\) of \(\Th{T}\), the \(2\)-groupoid of
\(\mathpzc{Mod}{M}\)-points \(I^2_{\Th{T}_\Dset{G}/\Th{T}}(M)\) is weakly equivalent to \(\Dset{G}(M)\).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The fact that \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) is a \(2\)-internal cover is
Prop.~\ref{prp:2int}. The map from \(\Dset{G}\) to \(I^2_{\Th{T}_\Dset{G}/\Th{T}}\) was
constructed in Prop.~\ref{prp:2gpdmap}, and described in terms of groupoids
in Ex.~\ref{ex:2gpdmap}. We will use this description to show that the map
is a weak equivalence, using Remark~\ref{rmk:whe}. We assume that we are
working over \(\mathpzc{Mod}{M}\), and proceed by considering the possible dimensions
\(0\le{}k\le{}2\).
\begin{description}
\item[\(k=0\)] We need to show that any \(2\)-stable interpretation
\(\omega\) of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) in \(\Th{T}\) admits a coherent collection of
bi-interpretations as in Def.~\ref{def:2catintern}.2 to some \(\omega_a\).
Since \(\omega\) is an interpretation over \(\Th{T}\), \(\omega(\Dset{G}^*)\) is a
definable \(2\)-groupoid in \(\Th{T}\), containing \(\Dset{G}\), with the
inclusion a weak equivalence. The proof now proceeds exactly as the
proof of Prop.~\ref{prp:2int}, with \(\omega(\Dset{G}^*)\) in place of
\(\Dset{G}^*\).
\item[\(k=1\)] This is the main case, which can be viewed as a definable
version of the Yoneda lemma. Let \(a,b\in\Dset{G}_0\), and assume we are
given an equivalence from \(\omega_a\) to \(\omega_b\). Hence, for every
\(c\in\Dset{G}_0\) (some parameters), we are given a groupoid \(\Dset{K}(c)\) in
\(\Th{T}\) and weak equivalences \(\dHom^L(c,a)=\omega_a(\Dset{H}_c)\ra\Dset{K}(c)\) and
\(\dHom^L(c,b)=\omega_b(\Dset{H}_c)\ra\Dset{K}_c\), uniformly in \(c\), along with
structure maps~\eqref{eq:isostruct}
\[
t_{g,\Dset{K}}:\Dset{K}(d)\circ_{\dHom^L(d,a)}\dHom^L(g,a)\ra
\dHom^L(g,b)\circ_{\dHom^L(c,b)}\Dset{K}(c)
\]
(all notation as in Ex.~\ref{ex:2gpdmap}, except \(\Dset{K}\) is no longer
known to be of the given form). We identify \(\omega_a(\Dset{H}_c),\omega_b(\Dset{H}_c)\)
with their images in \(\Dset{K}(c)\).
In particular, we have the identity morphism \(\mathbf{1}_a\) of \(a\) as an
object \(\mathbf{1}_a\in\omega_a(\Dset{H}_a)\), and by weak equivalence, an object
\(f:a\ra{}b\) in \(\omega_b(\Dset{H}_a)\subseteq{}\Dset{K}(a)\), along with a
morphism \(u:\mathbf{1}_a\ra{}f\) in \(\Dset{K}(a)\). We will show that \(\Dset{K}\) is
isomorphic to \(\Dset{K}_f\), by a unique isomorphism.
To do that, let \(c\in\Dset{G}_0\) be an arbitrary object, and let \(v\) be
a morphism of \(\Dset{K}_f(c)=\dHom^L(c,f)\) (so a \(2\)-morphism of \(\Dset{G}\)).
Denote by \(g\in{\dHom^L(c,a)}_0\) the domain of \(v\). Then \(v\) can
also be viewed as a morphism in \(\dHom^L(g,b)\), and on the other hand,
we have the canonical morphism \(w\) from \(g\) to \(\mathbf{1}_a\) in
\(\dHom^L(g,a)\). Applying \(t_{g,\Dset{K}}\) to the morphism
\(u\cop{}w\in\Dset{K}(a)\circ_{\dHom^L(a,a)}\dHom^L(g,a)\), we may write
\(t_{g,\Dset{K}}(u\cop{}w)\) as \(v\cop{}x\) for a unique \(x\in\Dset{K}(c)\),
which we take to be the image of \(v\). By construction this map
commutes with the structure maps \(t\), and is unique with this
property.
\item[\(k=2\)] We need to show that each isomorphism
\(\alpha:\Dset{K}_g\circ\Dset{K}_f\ra\Dset{K}_h\) with \(f:a\ra{}b\), \(g:b\ra{}c\)
and \(h:a\ra{}c\) arises from a unique \(\gamma:D^2\ra\Dset{G}\), with
boundary \(f,g,h\) (as in the end of Ex.~\ref{ex:2gpdmap}). Uniqueness
was already shown in the part \(k=1\). For existence, we apply
\(\alpha_b:\Dset{K}_g(b)\circ\Dset{K}_f(b)\ra\Dset{K}_h(b)\) to the element
\(\mathbf{1}_g\cop\mathbf{1}_f\) (where \(\mathbf{1}_g\) is the identity morphism of the object
\(g\) of \(\dHom^L(b,c)\), viewed as an element of \(\Dset{G}_2\), and
similarly for \(f\)), to obtain an element \(\gamma_b\in{\Dset{K}_h(b)}_1\),
again viewed as a \(2\)-morphism of \(\Dset{G}\). It is clear that the map
\(\alpha\) coincides with \(\alpha_\gamma\) on the given maps, and
then, again by the uniqueness statement, that \(\alpha=\alpha_\gamma\)
globally.\qedhere
\end{description}
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Recovering an definable \(2\)-groupoid}
The main statement of classical internality starts with the assumption of
internality, and produces a definable (non-empty) groupoid from it. The
general outline of this construction was recalled in~\S\ref{sss:1grpd}, and
in Cor.~\ref{cor:gsets} we indicated how this construction is useful in the
description of definable sets in the cover.
In our approach, the construction of the (\(2\)-) groupoid is almost
tautological: we defined a groupoid (or a \(2\)-groupoid) associated to every
stable expansion, and by definition, it is an internal cover if the groupoid
is non-empty. However, we still need to show that the groupoid is equivalent
to a definable one, which we sketch below. The other part, describing the
(admissible) \(1\)-groupoids in the cover in terms of suitable definable
fibrations in the base, is more involved, and we postpone most of the work
here to future work.
To recover definability, assume \(\Th{T}^*\) is a \(2\)-internal cover of
\(\Th{T}\), and let \(\omega:\Th{T}^*\ra\Th{T}_A\) be a \(2\)-stable interpretation. For
simplicity we assume that \(\Gamma\), the collection of admissible covers,
consists of one definable family. As in~\S\ref{sss:2gpd}, we have a fixed
parameter \(u_0\) and a uniform family \(\Dset{K}=\Dset{K}_c\) of groupoids in
\(\Th{T}^*\) defined over \(u_0\), along with (uniformly definable) weak
equivalences \(f_c:\Dset{X}_c\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{K}_c\) and \(g_c:\omega(\Dset{X}_c)\ra\Dset{K}_c\) for
\(\Dset{X}_c\) members of \(\Gamma\) (note that \(c\) ranges over a definable set
in \(\Th{T}\) by assumption). Like in Remark~\ref{rmk:2gpdmap}, as \(u_0\)
varies, we obtain a family \(\Dset{K}_{u,c}\) of objects of a definable
\(1\)-groupoid \(\Dset{P}_c\), along with a map \(\Dset{P}_c\ra\Dset{\iIso}(\Dset{X},\omega(\Dset{X}))\) for
each member \(\Dset{X}\) of \(\Gamma\). Furthermore, \(\Dset{P}_c\) itself is also in
\(\Gamma\). Applying the above map to \(\Dset{X}=\Dset{P}_{c'}\), we obtain a family of
definable maps of \(1\)-groupoids
\(a:\Dset{P}_c\ra\Dset{\iIso}(\Dset{P}_{c'},\omega_c(\Dset{P}_{c'}))\).
The \(2\)-groupoid \(\Dset{G}\) is constructed as follows: \(\Dset{G}_0\) is the
definable set of parameters \(c\) as above. Each groupoid \(\Dset{P}_c\) will be
isomorphic to \(\dHom^L(*,c)\) in the corresponding \(\Dset{G}^*\). Let \(c,d\) be
two elements of \(\Dset{G}_0\). Given an object \(u\) of \(\Dset{P}_c\), the map \(a\)
above produces a groupoid \(\Dset{K}_u\) as an object of
\(\Dset{\iIso}(\Dset{P}_d,\omega_c(\Dset{P}_d))\), along with weak equivalences
\(f:\Dset{P}_d\tstackrel{\scalebox{2.2}[1]{\(\!\scriptscriptstyle\sim\)}}{\(\dashrightarrow\)}\Dset{K}_u\) and \(g:\omega_c(\Dset{P}_d)\ra\Dset{K}_u\). Let \(\Dset{Q}_{u,v}\) be the
set of morphisms in \(\Dset{K}_u\) with domain \(f(v)\). We set the morphisms from
\(c\) to \(d\) to be the definable types space of \(\Dset{Q}_{u,v}\) over \(\Th{T}\)
(this is definable in \(\Th{T}\) by stability of the embedding). Note that each
such type includes, in particular, the information of the object of
\(\omega_c(\Dset{P}_d)\) which is the codomain of any realisation (as an element of
\(\Dset{Q}_{u,v}\)).
Similarly, assume \(e\) is another element of \(\Dset{G}_0\), and \(w\) an object
of \(\Dset{P}_e\). The elements of \(\Dset{G}_2\) with vertices \(c,d,e\) are defined
as the types over \(\Th{T}\) of triples \(\Dset{Q}_{u,v}\times\Dset{Q}_{v,w}\times\Dset{Q}_{u,w}\)
(over all such \(u,v,w\)). The \(2\)-composition is defined similarly, by
considering \(4\)-tuples. We skip the details of the construction, as well as
the proof that the map determined by \(a\) is a weak equivalence. We mention
also that this description can, in principle, be used to give an equivalent
combinatorial definition of \(2\)-internality (similar to the original
definition of internality), but I could not find one sufficiently pleasant to
write.
\subsection{Questions}
I mention a few natural questions that I hope to address in the future.
\subsubsection{Structure of admissible internal covers}
The definable version of the \(2\)-groupoid \(\Dset{G}\) associated to a
\(2\)-internal cover \(\Th{T}^*\) of \(\Th{T}\) was only sketched above. Assuming
it is properly described, it still needs to be seen that \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\) and
\(\Th{T}^*\) are, in some sense, equivalent. It will also be useful to describe
the admissible covers (in either) as suitably defined ``higher local
systems'' on \(\Dset{G}\). Both questions require that we name the precise closure
properties on the collection of admissible covers: we already assumed that
they are closed under finite inverse limit and definable mapping spaces, but
it is not clear, for example, if some closure under quantifiers is required.
\subsubsection{Lax interpretations}
We had not run into the questions above because we required to objects of the
\(2\)-groupoid \(I^2\) to be actual interpretations. This works well in the
example of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\), but for general expansions it might make more sense
to consider a larger class of ``lax interpretations'' that preserve only the
admissible covers (possibly up to weak equivalence).
\subsubsection{Internal covers of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\)}
The requirement for introducing admissible covers was motivated above.
However, it might still be the case in the case of \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\), essentially
all internal covers are the ones described (up to covers that come from the
base \(\Th{T}\)). Again, stating this precisely requires clarifying the
structure of the collection of admissible covers.
\subsubsection{Relation to analyzability}
The \(2\)-groupoid \(\Dset{G}^*\) in the theory \(\Th{T}\) provides an example of a
\(2\)-analyzable set over \(\Th{T}\). Can we describe (combinatorially) which
\(2\)-analyzable covers occur in this way?
\subsubsection{Generalization to higher dimensions}
This is rather clear: one continues by induction, defining an
\(i+1\)-groupoid associated to a stable expansion by taking into account
\(i\)-internal covers, and then defining the expansion to be an \(i+1\)-cover
if this groupoid is non-empty. However, some of the proofs given above will
be difficult to generalize, and it would interesting to look for a smoother
way. In any case, this only applies to each finite level, and it does not
seem reasonable to expect a generalization to arbitrary \(\infty\)-groupoids.
\subsubsection{Structure at \(*\)}
We did not consider the structure of the groupoid \(\dHom^L_{\Dset{G}^*}(*,*)\)
definable in \(\Th{T}_\Dset{G}\). On top of the groupoid structure, composition gives
it a structure of a monoidal category up to homotopy (i.e., the homotopy
category is monoidal). It also acts on all the admissible covers, so it is
really a higher analog of the binding group. However, we did not consider
what could be a version of the Galois correspondence or of descent, as in the
\(1\)-dimensional case.
\begin{comment}
\section{Additional comments and questions}
\subsection{Higher internal covers and their groupoids}
We suggest, without proofs, how the picture above could generalise to higher
dimensions.
Let \(\Th{T}_0\) be a theory. We consider stable expansions \(\Th{T}\) of
\(\Th{T}_0\), and for such expansions we define by induction:
\begin{enumerate}
\item An \(i+1\)-category \(E_i(\Th{T})\) of \(i\)-internal sorts of \(\Th{T}\),
for each \(i\ge{}-1\)
\item A g
\end{enumerate}
An object of \(E_{i+1}(\Th{T})\) consists of a stable expansion \(\Th{T}^*\) of
\(\Th{T}\), along with a definable family \(\Gamma\) of
\begin{defn}
For \(i\ge{}-1\), a collection \(E_i(\Th{T})\) for each stable expansion of
\(\Th{T}_0\). Assume \(E_i\) was already defined for all such \(\Th{T}\).
Whenever \(\Th{T}_1\) and \(\Th{T}_2\) are as above, there is a naturally defined
\(i+1\)-category
\(i\)-groupoid associated to \(\Th{T}\) as
\[
\Dset{G}^{i+1}(\Th{T})=\Dset{\iHom}(E_i(\Th{T}),E_i(\Th{T}_0))
\]
\end{defn}
Let \(\Th{T}\) be a theory. By a \Def{pseudo-definable set} of \(\Th{T}\) we mean a
functor from \(\Th{T}\)-structures to sets, which satisfies (usual) Galois
descent. We define inductively the following, for \(i\ge{}0\):
\begin{enumerate}
\item A pseudo-definable \(i\)-category \(E_i(\Th{T})\), and for each
expansion \(\Th{T}'\) a Cartesian functor \(E_i(\Th{T})\ra{}E_i(\Th{T}')\).
\item For each expansion \(\Th{T}'\) of \(\Th{T}\), a pseudo-definable
\(i\)-groupoid \(G_i(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\), functorial in \(\Th{T}\) (XXX in the sense
that any interpretation of \(\Th{T}\) in \(\Th{T}_1\) induces a functor
\(G_i(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\ra{}G_i(\Th{T}'/\Th{T}_1)\))
\end{enumerate}
Assume that \(E_i\) was defined, and let \(j:\Th{T}\ra\Th{T}'\) be an
interpretation. We define \(G_i(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\) as the \(i\)-groupoid of
Cartesian functors \(p:E_i(\Th{T}')\ra{}E_i(\Th{T})\) over \(E_i(\Th{T})\) (i.e., such
that \(p\circ{}j\) is the identity). If \(G_i(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\) is (locally)
non-empty, we say that \(\Th{T}'\) is an \Def{\(i\)-internal cover} of \(\Th{T}\).
We define \(E_{i+1}(\Th{T})\) as the opposite to the \(i+1\)-category of all
\(E_i(\Th{T}')\), for \(i\)-internal covers \(\Th{T}'\) of \(\Th{T}\), viewed as a
full subcategory of the category of \(i\)-categories over \(E_i(\Th{T})\)
(XXX:\@ why is this an \(i+1\)-category?)
We note that if \(\Th{T}_1\) is an expansion of \(\Th{T}\), the functoriality
condition on \(G_i\) implies that \(E_{i+1}(\Th{T})\) is a (Cartesian) full
sub-category of \(E_{i+1}(\Th{T}_1)\).
To bootstrap the process, we define \(E_0(\Th{T})=\dcl_{\Th{T}}(0)\). By
definition, a Cartesian functor is a map of structures in this case
(intuitively, we think of ``\(\spec(\dcl_\Th{T}(0))\)'', as a \(1\)-point
space).
We note that if \(\Th{T}'\) is an \(i\)-internal cover of \(\Th{T}\), then
\(G_i(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\) essentially coincides with \(G_{i+1}(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\), and so
\(\Th{T}'\) is also an \(i+1\)-cover. Hence, \(E_i(\Th{T})\) embeds in
\(E_{i+1}(\Th{T})\) (XXX)
\begin{example}
The definition implies that if \(\Th{T}'\) is a (stable) expansion of \(\Th{T}\),
a Cartesian functor from \(E_0(\Th{T}')\) to \(E_0(\Th{T})\) can exist only if
\(\Th{T}'\) is (equivalent to) an expansion of \(\Th{T}\) by constants,
\(\Th{T}'=\Th{T}_A\). We assume \(A\) is finite (otherwise consider systems), and
then \(G_0(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\) can be identified with the (realizations of the)
type of \(A\) over \(0\). Such types are isolated by our assumptions, so
\(E_1(\Th{T})\) is (equivalent to) the opposite to the category of definable
sets in \(\Th{T}\).
\end{example}
\begin{example}
In light of the previous example, Cartesian functors from \(E_1(\Th{T}')\) to
\(E_1(\Th{T})\) are precisely stable interpretations of \(\Th{T}'\) in \(\Th{T}\).
Hence, as explained elsewhere, \(G_1(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\) is precisely the groupoid
associated to an expansion \(\Th{T}'\) of \(\Th{T}\), and it is non-empty
precisely if \(\Th{T}'\) is an internal cover of \(\Th{T}\). Thus, \(1\)-internal
covers are internal covers in the classical sense, and \(E_2(\Th{T})\) is the
\(2\)-category of internal covers of \(\Th{T}\) (and interpretations over
\(\Th{T}\) between them).
\end{example}
\begin{example}
Let \(\Th{T}'\) be an expansion of \(\Th{T}\). We explicitly describe the
\(2\)-groupoid \(G_2(\Th{T}'/\Th{T})\). An object consists of a Cartesian
functor \(x:E_2(\Th{T}')\ra{}E_2(\Th{T})\) from the category of internal covers
of \(\Th{T}'\) to that of \(\Th{T}\), that are the identity on covers coming from
\(\Th{T}\). As explained above, each such functor determines, in particular,
an interpretation \(x_1\) of \(\Th{T}'\) in \(\Th{T}\) (over \(\Th{T}\)), by
restricting to the sub-category \(E_1(\Th{T}')\). In particular, to each
definable groupoid \(H'\) of \(\Th{T}'\) corresponds a definable groupoid
\(H=x_1(H')\) of \(\Th{T}\), and, on the other hand, an internal cover
\(\Th{T}'_{H'}\) of \(\Th{T}'\), an object of \(E_2(\Th{T}')\). The internal cover
\(x(\Th{T}'_{H'})\) corresponding to it is (canonically) equivalent to
\(\Th{T}_H\), since \(\Th{T}'_{H'}\) interprets \(H'\). Since every cover of
\(\Th{T}'\) has such a form, \(x\) is determined, up to isomorphism, by its
restriction \(x_1\).
Given two object \(x,y\in{}G_2\), an isomorphism \(u:x\ra{}y\) consists,
for each internal cover \(\Th{T}_1\) of \(\Th{T}\), of a bi-interpretation
\(u_{\Th{T}_1}:x(\Th{T}_1)\ra{}y(\Th{T}_1)\) of internal covers of \(\Th{T}_0\) (over
\(\Th{T}_0\)). For each interpretation \(i:\Th{T}_1\ra\Th{T}_2\), where \(\Th{T}_2\) is
an additional cover, an isomorphism is supplied from
\(u_{\Th{T}_2}\circ{}x(i):x(\Th{T}_1)\ra{}y(\Th{T}_2)\) to \(y(i)\circ{}u_{\Th{T}_1}\).
These isomorphisms are compatible when an additional interpretation
\(j:\Th{T}_2\ra\Th{T}_3\) is given.
Finally, given isomorphisms \(u:x\ra{}y\), \(v:y\ra{}z\) and \(w:x\ra{}z\),
a triangle with this boundary is given by a compatible system of
isomorphisms from \(v_{\Th{T}_1}\circ{}u_{\Th{T}_1}\) to \(w_{\Th{T}_1}\) (all over
\(\Th{T}_0\)).
\end{example}
\section{Groupoid determined by a cover}
Given a cover \(\ti\Th{T}\), define the groupoid \(G_{\ti\Th{T}}\) to have objects
(over \(A\)) interpretations (over \(A\)), and morphisms isomorphisms of
interpretations. If \(\ti\Th{T}\) corresponds to a groupoid \(G\), there is a
functor \(F\) from \(G_{\ti\Th{T}}\) to \(G\), defined as follows: For each
interpretation \(p\), \(F(p)=p(*)\), and for a map \(\alpha:p_1\ra{}p_2\),
\(F(\alpha)=\alpha(1_{p_1(*)})\) (this is compatible with parameters).
\begin{defn}
For a simplicial definable set \(G=(G_0,G_1,\dots)\), we denote by
\(G_n^{(i)}\), for \(0\leq{}i\leq{}n\), the \(i\)-th set of
\(n\)-dimensional horns (boundary of \(n+1\)-dimensional simplex, with
\(n\)-simplex opposite to vertex \(i\) missing). For any \(n\) and \(i\),
there is a map \(h_{n,i}:G_{n+1}\ra{}G_n^{(i)}\), and the \Def{Kan
condition} asserts that these maps are surjective. We call a \(G\)
satisfying this condition a \Def{definable space}. Such a definable space
is called a \Def{definable \(n\)-groupoid} if each \(h_{n,i}\) is a
bijection and the \(m\)-th boundary map is a bijection for \(m>n\).
\end{defn}
The condition for an \(n\)-groupoid implies that \(h_{n,i}\) determines an
embedding of \(G_{n+1}\) into \(G_n^{n+1}\), which determines a (partial)
composition function \(c_i:G_n^{(i)}\ra{}G_n\) for each \(i\). All the data
is encoded in the \(G_k\) for \(k\le{}n\), and the higher condition means
that the composition is associative, in a suitable sense. We this view an
\(n\)-groupoid as given by \((G_0,\dots,G_n)\), with the relevant face maps
and the composition maps above. In particular, it is a definable object.
\begin{rmk}
This is the groupoid case of the notion of an \(n\)-category, defined
in~\HTT{2.3.4.1}. Our definition is along the lines of~\HTT{2.3.4.9}.
\end{rmk}
\section{The theory associated with a definable groupoid}
Let \(G=(G_0,\dots,G_n)\) be a definable \(n\)-groupoid in a theory \(\Th{T}\).
We define \(\Th{T}_G\) to be the expansion of \(\Th{T}\) by the new sorts \(H_i\)
(\(0\leq{}i\leq{}n\)), such that \(H=(H_0,\dots,H_n)\) is a definable
\(n\)-groupoid, \(H_0=G_0\cup\Set{*}\), i.e., the set of objects includes a
name \(*\) for an object, each \(H_i\) contains \(G_i\), and the inclusion
forms a (weak) equivalence, and a bijection when restricted to \(G_0\). Thus,
the expansion is stable.
\begin{remark}
Note that \(*\) is a new constant \emph{symbol}, not necessarily a new
object. Thus, a model of \(\Th{T}_G\) consists of a model \(M\) of \(\Th{T}\), an
element \(*_M\) which may or may not belong to \(G_0(M)\), and associated
morphisms.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
When \(n=0\), a definable groupoid is a definable set \(G_0\), and
\(\Th{T}_G\) is the expansion of \(\Th{T}\) by an additional constant symbol
\(*\) for an element of \(G_0\). The requirement of weak equivalence (which
in this case is simply a bijection) forces it to be an element of \(G_0\).
Hence, \(G_0(\Th{T}_G,\Th{T})=G_0\) in this case.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
When \(n=1\) and \(G\) is connected, we obtain the cover associated to
\(G\) in~\cite{GGII} (in general, the definition in~\cite{GGII} adds
\(\pi_0(G)\) in place of just one point object). It is shown in~\cite{my}
that \(G_1(\Th{T}_G)\) is equivalent to \(G\) in this case (more precisely,
there is a map from \(G\) to \(G_1(\Th{T}_G)\) which is a weak equivalence).
\end{example}
\begin{example}
For \(n=2\), a definable \(2\)-groupoid is determined by definable sets
\(G=(G_0,G_1,G_2)\) and maps \(p_0,p_1:G_1\ra{}G_0\),
\(p_{0,1},p_{0,2},p_{1,2}:G_2\ra{}G_1\). We will call the sets objects,
morphisms and \(2\)-morphisms, respectively, with \(p_0,p_1\) domain and
co-domain, respectively. The Kan condition ensures that any two morphisms
with a common end-point have at least one composition. Any \(3\)
\(2\)-simplices with compatible edges have a unique ``composition''
(closing the tetrahedron).
The theory \(\Th{T}_G\) can be described as follows: it admits two additional
sorts \(P=H_1(-,*)\) and \(Q\), along with maps \(p:P\ra{}G_0\) and
\(q:Q\ra{}T\), where \(T\) is the subset of \((x,y,z)\in{}P\times{}P\times{}G_1\)
defined by \(p(x)=p_0(z),p(y)=p_1(z)\) (i.e., the set of compatible triples
of \(1\)-morphisms, with the first two having \(*\) in the co-domain). The
theory says that \(P\) is non-empty, and the compositions of \(q\) with the
maps to \(P\times{}P\), \(P\times_{G_0}G_1\) are surjective. There is also
``composition'' map \(c:V\ra{}G_2\), over \(G_1^3\), where \(V\) is the
equalizer of two maps \(Q^3\ra{}P^3\), satisfying suitable axioms.
Let \(a\in{}G_0\) be in the image of \(p\), and let \(P_a=p^{-1}(a)\) and
\(Q_a\) the inverse image of \(1_a\). The composition map restricts to
\(Q_a\times{}Q_a\times\Set{1_a}\ra{}Q_a\), defining a groupoid structure \(H_a\),
with objects \(P_a\) and morphisms \(Q_a\). This structure varies definably
with \(a\), producing a definable family of groupoids.
\end{example}
\begin{theorem}
Let \(G=(G_0,\dots,G_n)\) be a non-empty definable \(n\)-groupoid in the
theory \(\Th{T}\), and let \(\Th{T}_G\) be the associated theory. Then:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \(\Th{T}_G\) is an \(n\)-internal cover of \(\Th{T}\)
\item There is a canonical map from \(G\) to \(G_n(\Th{T}_G)\), which is an
equivalence over a model (XXX clarify equivalence)
\item The \(n\)-category \(E_n(\Th{T}_G)\) is equivalent to the category
\(G-E_n(\Th{T})\) of \(n-1\)-internal covers of \(\Th{T}\) equipped with an
action of \(G\)
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We first note that the first item follows from the second, since \(G\) is
non-empty. We prove the other two parts by induction on \(n\). For \(n=0\),
\(G\) is a non-empty definable set in \(\Th{T}\), \(\Th{T}_G\) is the expansion
of \(\Th{T}\) by a constant symbol in \(G\), and we had already mentioned that
\(G_0(\Th{T}_G)\) can be identified with \(G\). In particular, it is
non-empty, so \(\Th{T}_G\) is a \(0\)-internal cover of \(\Th{T}\). For the last
part, a definable set \(X_*\) in \(\Th{T}_G\) determines a family \(X_a\) for
\(a\in{}G_0\), and conversely.
Case \(n=1\): \(G\) is a usual groupoid, and \(\Th{T}_G\) is the theory
associated to it. The second item is Example~\ref{ex:tg1}. To prove the
third, let \(j:G\ra{}G_1(\Th{T}_G)\) be the equivalence from the second part.
We define a functor from the category \(E_1(\Th{T}_G)\) of definable sets in
\(\Th{T}_G\), to \(E_1(\Th{T})\) by sending a definable set \(Q\) to
\(s(Q)=\St{(q,a)}{q\in{}j(a)(Q),a\in{}G_0}\). The second projection
determines a definable map from \(s(Q)\) to \(G_0\), and the functor
structure determines an extension of this map to an action of \(G\). In the
other direction, given an action \(\pi:C\ra{}G\) in \(\Th{T}\)
we let
\(t(C)=C\otimes_G\ti{G}=\St{(c,h)}{c\in{}C,h\in{}Iso(*,\pi(c))}/\sim\),
where \((cg,h)\sim{}(c,gh)\) for \(g\in{}G_1\) with domain \(\pi(c)\). It
is clear that these maps are quasi-inverse to one another.
Assume the statement holds for all \(k\)-groupoids, for \(k<n\).
\end{proof}
\end{comment}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently, the AI community has witnessed the prosperity of Embodied AI where agents are required to perform tasks in various forms with egocentric vision. The success of embodied AI brings up the interest of researchers in the robot community to transfer methods in off-shelf Embodied AI tasks to robot platforms.
Currently, most of works in Embodied AI have revolved around the task of navigation – including position-goal, object-goal, and area-goal\cite{duan2022embodiedAIsurvey}. However, the ability to actively manipulate objects and physically interact with the environment becomes crucial in the embodied robot task, where agents need to perform complex tasks in the real world. As the studies on embodied tasks have surged in recent years, a wide variety of embodied tasks has been proposed. However, very few works have looked into a general framework for embodied tasks that involve most modular models of robot task in the real world: Visual reception, Language comprehension, Active navigation and Manipulation. In an embodied robot task, how to localize the target object precisely and effectively has always been a challenge. Since many objects in the real scene are similar in shape and appearance (e.g., books on shelf, cabinets in the kitchen).
Referring Expression (RE) is a widely studied cross-modal task in both computer vision and natural language processing fields as a vision and language task. In a RE task, the agent needs to localize a specific target object in the image in response to a given natural language referring expression. Most of current studies in referring expression focus on passive image datasets (e.g. RefCOCO, RefCOCO+\cite{2014ReferItGame}, RefCOCOg\cite{yu2016modeling}) where samples will not change with agent's decision. Recently, referring expression tasks in embodied scenarios has emerged. In an Embodied Referring Expression (ERE) task, the agent is required to navigate to the position mentioned in the given expression in a 3D environment and complete the REC task on the final scene. However, the process of navigating to the target object scene in most of above tasks merely consists of spatial movements without interaction with surrounding environments, such as opening closed objects or moving occlusion.
Therefore, we introduce a novel embodied task \textbf{Remote Embodied Manipulation Question Answering (REMQA)} where the agent is required to navigate to a remote position and manipulate the target object, which can be precisely localized by referring expression comprehension. Then, the agent infers the answer to the question from the post-manipulation layout of objects. As we illustrate in Fig. \ref{fig:task}, the input question consists of a referring phrase explicitly referring to the target object (drawer). After navigating to the goal position (toaster), the agent needs to localize it by distinguishing it from other drawers with referring expression comprehension and conducting manipulation action (open drawer) to get the answer.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{figures/task_illustration.png}
\caption{A demonstration of the Remote Embodied Manipulation Question Answering task. The agent needs to navigate to the goal position, localize the target object and perform manipulation to answer the question.}
\label{fig:task}
\end{figure*}
In this work, we focus on the referring expression comprehension problems for \textbf{Manipulation Question Answering (MQA)} task in a physically interactive environment. The main contributions of this work are listed below:
\begin{itemize}[itemsep=2pt,topsep=0pt,parsep=0pt]
\item \textbf{Problem.} a novel embodied robot task consists of vision perception, language comprehension and manipulation in an interactive environment, Remote Embodied Manipulation Question Answering.
\item \textbf{Dataset.} a benchmark dataset of proposed task with a set of indoor object arrangements of different rooms in an interactive environment and questions within referring expression about the objects in the environment.
\item \textbf{Method.} a framework to handle the proposed task in which Language Attention Network and 3D semantic memory prior-ed navigation are implemented. Experimental validation of the proposed model has been conducted in an interactive environment with the physical engine.
\end{itemize}
In the rest of the paper, Section \ref{sec:related work} presents a review of related works. Summary of data for pretraining and proposed benchmark dataset is introduced in Section \ref{sec:dataset}. Section \ref{sec:model} details our proposed model for the Remote Embodied Manipulation Question Answering task in an interactive environment. Section \ref{sec:exp} presents the experimental results and Section \ref{sec:future work} concludes this work.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related work}
\subsection{Referring Expression}
\textbf{Referring Expression on Static Dataset:} Most of works in referring expression comprehension focus on comprehension tasks in datasets built on classical static visual datasets (COCO, Flick et al.). Specifically, RE tasks can be categorized to two kinds with aspect to labels used for localization: 1) Referring Expression Comprehension (REC): a bounding box 2) Referring Expression Segmentation (RES): a segmentation mask. For REC task, Mao et al. \cite{mao2016generation}introduce the first CNN-LSTM method:MMI as a general solution to REC task. Yu et al. propose a visual comparative method (Visdif) to distinguish the target object from the surrounding objects rather than extracting features by CNN. Furthermore, Yu et al. \cite{yu2018mattnet} raise MAttNet: Modular Attention Network to decompose referring expressions into different modular channels for accurate matching. Besides CNN-LSTM methods, some works \cite{hu2017modeling,yang2019cross}present models of the relationship between images and expressions and some others\cite{li2021referring} utilize the pre-trained vision and language models for REC task. For RES task, Li et al.\cite{li2018referring} propose a multi-modal LSTM for vision and linguistic fusion. To obtain more accurate results for long referring expressions, Shi et al. \cite{shi2018key} employ an attention mechanism in raised keyword-aware network. Luo et al. \cite{2020Multi} introduce Multi-task Collaborative Network (MCN) as a joint learning framework of RES.
\textbf{Embodied Referring Expression:} Due to the absence of interaction in conventional referring expression tasks, researchers have recently tried to transplant referring expression tasks to embodied scenarios. Several ERE tasks and datasets have been released in recent years. Most proposed ERE tasks can be classified into two main categories with aspect to platform: 1) ERE task in manipulator scenario: INGRESS\cite{2020INGRESS} 2) ERE task in mobile navigation scenario: REVIERE\cite{qi2020reverie}, Touchdown-SDR\cite{2019TOUCHDOWN}, REVE-CE\cite{REVECE}, ALFRED\cite{2020ALFRED}
The community havs developed several methods that enable agents to tackle embodied tasks that require active interaction with the environment.
Wu et al.\cite{qi2020reverie} propose a Navigator-Pointer model as a baseline for REVIERE dataset. Gao et al. employ room object-aware attention mechanism and transformer architecture in REVIERE. Lin et al. \cite{lin2021scene} pre-train agent with cross-modal alignment sub-tasks for ERE task.
\subsection{Embodied Robot Task}
As an intersection of robotics, computer vision and natural language processing, the study of embodied robot tasks has gained much attention from all the above fields. A wide variety of embodied tasks has been formulated in recent years. The off-shelf embodied robot tasks can be categorized into two main types: Visual Navigation and Question Answering.
\textbf{Visual Navigation Task:} Visual Language Navigation(VLN)\cite{anderson2017visionandlanguage}, Visual Semantic Navigation (VSN)\cite{2014VSN} requires the agent to actively navigate to the goal position following linguistic information: language instructions for VLN semantic labels for VSN. Anderson et al.\cite{anderson2017visionandlanguage,anderson2018evaluation} introduce the seq-to-seq framework and evaluation metrics for VLN task.
\textbf{Question Answering Task:} Antol et al. \cite{2014VSN} firstly formulate Visual Question Answering (VQA). The agent needs to infer the answer from the image passively, which only relies on understanding questions and images. Many works\cite{das2017visual,le2020hierarchical} on VQA have been proposed in the past decade. In an EQA task\cite{EQA}, the agent is randomly spawned in a 3D environment and should explore the scenario with egocentric vision and answer the question with the final scene. Most of the methods proposed for EQA are based on Reinforcement Learning (RL)\cite{EQA,wijmans2019embodied}. Yu et al.\cite{yu2019multitarget} extend EQA to multi-target scenario. Tan et al. \cite{MultiEQA} employ a multi-agent system for EQA. Interactive Question Answering is an extension of EQA raised by Gordon et al.\cite{IQA}. In IQA, the agent needs to do some simple standard virtual interactions (\textbf{e.g.} open the fridge) with the environment. Deng et al. \cite{deng2020mqa} introduce Manipulation Question Answering (MQA), where a fixed-base manipulator is required to manipulate objects in the cluttered scene to render more information about objects initially unseen and answer the question better.
In following Table \ref{tab:cmp}, we compare the difference of several robot embodied tasks mentioned above. As we can see, only our proposed task has taken all 4 mentioned modules into consideration.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
&VSN/VLN& VQA& EQA & IQA & MQA & Ours \\ \hline
Language & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$& $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
Navigation & $\checkmark$ & - & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & -& $\checkmark$\\ \hline
Interaction & - & - & - & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
Manipulation & - & - & - & - & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\
\caption{Comparison of different embodied robot tasks}
\label{tab:cmp}
\end{table}
\section{Dataset}
\label{sec:dataset}
\subsection{Embodied Environment}
Training and evaluating an interactive agent in a real environment is temporarily uneconomic considering costs, time and generalizability. Therefore, we adopt AI2-THOR, a photo-realistic 3D environment simulator designed for embodied AI research\cite{kolve2017ai2}, as our learning framework. The AI2Thor simulator consists of 120 different room layouts of 4 categories (Bedroom, Living room, Kitchen, and Bathroom), with 30 layouts for each category. We choose an extension of the AI2-THOR simulator: ManipulaTHOR, which has the same scenes as AI2-THOR and a realistic Kinova 6-DOF arm added to the agent\cite{ehsani2021manipulathor}. ManipulaTHOR allows agents to interact physically with objects at a low control level via arm manipulators. Besides, several sensors including RGB-D frame, agent location, and arm configuration at the arm-joint level are also available, enabling us to render the metadata of agent to design embodied tasks.
\subsection{Pretraining Data}
\label{sec:pretrain}
We build our datasets for pretraining our instance segmentation and referring expression comprehension modules. The agent samples more than 10000 images from all scenes in AI2-THOR with the BFS strategy. Annotations including semantic labels, positions in the scene and ground-truth segmentation masks are automatically generated from the metadata of the simulator.
We build the corresponding semantic scene graph incrementally from metadata during the sampling for referring expressions used for REC module pretraining. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:scene-data}, scene frames and metadata of objects seen in the frame are sampled during navigation. By updating frames during sampling, we add new objects as nodes and spatial relationships between objects as edges into scene graph. Two metrics assign the spatial relationship between two objects: distance between central points $l$ and 3D IoU(intersection over union ) of ground-truth bounding boxes $S_{IoU}$.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{figures/scene-to-data.png}
\caption{An overview of our referring expression data generation pipeline}
\label{fig:scene-data}
\end{figure*}
Then, we build our referring expression set with node-edge-node pairs in scene graph in form of template.$RE: \quad \textit{the \quad \{OBJ1\} \quad \{RELATION\} \quad the \quad \{OBJ2\} }$, where $\textit{ \{OBJ1\},\{OBJ2\}}$ represent objects and $\textit{\{RELATION\}}$ represents spatial relationship between them.
\subsection{Summary of REMQA dataset}
We select 60 types of most frequently seen objects out of objects in AI2-THOR to build our REMQA dataset. Similar to the construction of dataset for REC module pretraining, we generate our questions using node-edge-node pairs from the scene graph. We designed three kinds of questions in our REMQA dataset: COUNTING, EXISTENCE, and SPATIAL questions. The templates of 3 kinds of questions are shown in Table. \ref{tab:questions}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Question Templates}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
EXISTENCE & \textit{Is there a \{OBJ1\} in the \{\textbf{RE}(OBJ2)\}?}\\\hline
COUNTING & \textit{How many \{OBJ1\} are there in the \{\textbf{RE}(OBJ2)\}?}\\\hline
SPATIAL & \textit{Is there a \{OBJ1\} \{RELATION\} the \{OBJ2\}?}\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:questions}
\end{table}
As the statistics of our proposed REMQA dataset shown in following Table. \ref{tab:dataset_split} , REMQA dataset is composed of 120 scenes. Among the dataset, we use 100 scene series for training and 20 for testing. There are altogether 4072 questions of three kinds.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{REMQA dataset split}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& Scenes & EXISTENCE & COUNTING & SPATIAL \\
\hline
train & 100 & 1653 & 647 & 1083 \\
\hline
test & 20 & 324 & 143 & 222 \\
\hline
all & 120 & 1977 & 790 & 1305 \\
\hline
avg. Length & - & 9.5 & 11.8 & 7.1 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:dataset_split}
\end{table}
Similar to off-shelf EQA datasets\cite{EQA,IQA}, each scene is associated with multiple scene configurations that result in different answers to the same question. For every task sample in the dataset, a question with a referring phrase, ground-truth answer, scene configuration, the initial scene of the target object and final scene after manipulation are included.
\section{Proposed Approach}
\label{sec:model}
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:model},we have proposed a general framework to for REMQA task which consists of three main parts: 1) Navigation module 2) Referring expression comprehension module 3) Manipulation Question Answering module.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/model.png}
\caption{The overall architecture of proposed framework: The referring expression in input question passes through LAN for REC. After the manipulation, the frames before and after manipulation along with embedded question are fused by CNN-LSTM QA part }
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Navigation}
To enhance the performance of the navigation module with information of task scenarios, we build a knowledge-prior visual semantic navigation model based on a scene graph and semantic map of a given indoor environment. The construction of the scene graph is mentioned in Section \ref{sec:pretrain}. To construct the semantic map, the agent first navigates in AI2THOR scenes with pre-designed sampling paths to incrementally build the 3D semantic memory structure of every room layout from metadata. The illustration of constructed structure is presented in Fig.\ref{fig:map1}. Every voxel and its color in the structure represents a tiny cubic space occupied by an object and the corresponding object type.
Meanwhile, the 3D memory with semantic labels is dynamically transformed into a 2D semantic map by dimensional reduction during the sampling. As shown in Fig.\ref{fig:map2}, the agent samples the RGB frames and metadata of environment when navigating along the given path in each room of AI2THOR. The semantic map of the task scene is updated at every time step.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/3D.png}
\caption{The illustration of 3D semantic memory structure consist of semantic voxels}
\label{fig:map1}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\hspace{0.2in}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.65\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{figures/scene-to-map.png}
\caption{The RGB frames of the agent and incremental semantic map during sampling. The room is a kitchen scenario provided in AI2THOR simulator}
\label{fig:map2}
\end{subfigure}
\label{fig:map}
\end{figure*}
Employing generated 2D semantic maps as prior knowledge, the agent first locates the target object's position by searching its semantic label in the map. Then the shortest path between the initial agent position and the target object is planned by the Floyd algorithm in the semantic map for the navigation task.
\subsection{Referring Expression Comprehension}
We build out referring expression comprehension module by adopting Language Attention Network (LAN) a modular design from MAttNet\cite{yu2018mattnet}. The LAN decomposes referring expressions in the form of word embedding into three modular components: subject attributes, location and spatial relationship to other objects. For every module, a phrase embedding is provided to calculate the matching scores of corresponding area in the given image without affecting each other. The overall matching scores weighted by modular weight are calculated to match objects with expressions.
\subsection{Manipulation Question Answering}
We implement a Manipulation Question Answering (QA) module based on LSTM network. The upstream REC module pass the semantic label of target object which is usually an occlusion (e.g. Fridge, Cabinet) to a classifier. The classifier will choose the manipulation type from the action set: $\mathcal{A}=\{\textit{Open},\textit{Move},\textit{Pickup}\}$ according to the type of target object (e.g. Open Fridge, Move chair,Pick up book). Then the agent moves its arm until the arm end reaches the vicinity of the target object by rendering the position from 3D semantic memory. Due to the incompleteness of the dynamic simulation of Manipulathor, the manipulation will be automatically conducted to objects within end sphere. Hence, our proposed manipulation module has no action generation and dynamic planning.
We denote the initial RGB frame before manipulations as $I_{start}$ and the frame after manipulations as $I_{end}$.
The answering module encodes $I_{start},I_{end}$ frames with CNN and the input question with a 2-layer LSTM network. Then, attention weights based on image-question similarity are computed to fuse the features of two images and
image features with an encoded question. A softmax classifier outputs predictions from the space of possible answers with the fused feature passed through.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Comparison of VSN methods}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{ Methods}&
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Max steps=25}&
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Max steps=50}\cr
\cmidrule(lr){2-3} \cmidrule(lr){4-5}
&Success&SPL&Success&SPL\cr
\midrule
Random &0.013&0.006 &0.035&0.013\cr
A3C &0.210&0.129 &0.241&0.152\cr
SAVN &0.283&0.121&0.396&0.178\cr
Scene Priors &0.264&0.117&0.376&0.164\cr
Ours &\textbf{0.566}&\textbf{0.461} &\textbf{0.729}&\textbf{0.595}\cr
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:nav_results}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Comparison of REC methods}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{Methods}&
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Pred@0.5}\cr
\cmidrule(lr){2-3}
&Val&Test\cr
\midrule
MCN &71.04&73.16 \cr
CGAN &73.18&76.94 \cr
BiLSTM\cite{hu2017modeling} + detectron2 &66.57&70.45 \cr
LAN+MaskRCNN & 70.27 & 74.12 \cr
LAN+detectron2(Ours) &\textbf{75.20}&\textbf{77.52} \cr
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:rec_results}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}[h]
\centering
\caption{Evaluations of QA models on REMQA dataset}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{ Methods}&
\multicolumn{3}{c}{EXISTENCE}&
\multicolumn{3}{c}{COUNTING}&
\multicolumn{3}{c}{SPATIAL}\cr
\cmidrule(lr){2-4} \cmidrule(lr){5-7} \cmidrule(lr){8-10}
&$S_{N}$&$S_{L}$&$S_{QA}$&$S_{N}$&$S_{L}$&$S_{QA}$&$S_{N}$&$S_{L}$&$S_{QA}$\cr
\midrule
EQA &0.509&0.389&0.330
&0.455&0.350&0.217
&0.468&0.396&0.131\cr
IQA &0.642&0.596&0.488
&\textbf{0.769}&\textbf{0.692}&0.510
&0.653&0.550&0.216\cr
Ours &\textbf{0.738}&\textbf{0.620}&\textbf{0.540}
&0.671&0.608&\textbf{0.559}
&\textbf{0.752}&\textbf{0.595}&\textbf{0.284}\cr
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:remqa_result}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{figures/example.png}
\caption{A qualitative example with the question. The trajectory of agent is presented on the left side and some rendered images of the agent egocentric view and third party camera on the right }
\label{fig:qualitative}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:exp}
In this section, we first introduce the experimental settings and evaluation metrics. Then, we present the analysis of the quantitative results of our proposed method and several baseline variants. Finally, an MQA task sample is selected to illustrate how the agent navigates, comprehends and answers the question as qualitative results.
\subsection{Embodied Referring Expression}
\textbf{Experimental settings:} To comprehensively illustrate the performance of our model on embodied referring expression task, we analyze the ERE results in two stages: the performance on VSN and the performance on REC toward ground-truth final scenes assuming that agent navigates successfully in the first stage.
Two kinds of metrics are raised for evaluation of VSN task: the success rate of navigation $s$ and Success rate weighted by
Path Length (SPL)\cite{anderson2018evaluation}. The SPL calculates the success rate of the VSN task weighted by the ratio of shortest path distance from the starting position to the goal by the path distance the agent actually takes. For REC performance, we adopt prec@X\cite{2020Multi} measures the percentage of test images with an intersection over union (IoU) score higher than the threshold $X$ and here we set $X=0.5$.
In the VSN stage, we compared our proposed semantic map priored navigation model with Random agent, traditional RL methods: A3C and other embodied navigation methods that use metadata of scene in AI2THOR as priors for navigation: SAVN\cite{2019SAVN}, Scene Priors\cite{prior}. All baselines are evaluated on seen objects and known objects. Results are summarized in following Table \ref{tab:nav_results}.Taking advantage of the 2D semantic map obtained from the 3D memory structural, our proposed navigation model outperforms all baseline methods by a large margin in terms of both success rate and SPL metrics. It is noted that the 2D semantic map only represents information of scenes seen before. Our proposed method can be improved in the generalization of novel scenes.
In the REC stage, a set of off-shelf models proposed for referring expression tasks are selected as baselines: MCN\cite{2020Multi}, CGAN\cite{luo2020cascade} and combinations of language parser and object detector with other backbones. The validation and test REC datasets are split from referring phrase set in Section \ref{sec:pretrain}. Results are summarized in following Table \ref{tab:rec_results}. Our proposed REC model outperforms all baseline models on both validation and test set. It is worth noting that there is no significant margin between our model and SoTA baseline models. However, the performance gap between two recombined baselines is much larger than SoTAs. We infer the reason that SoTAs and our model all adopt the modular module to process the referring expressions into multi-modal channels. The result can also validate the effectiveness of the modular module that BiLSTM + detectron2 baseline performs much lower than LAN+MaskRCNN since Bi-LSTM can only encode the referring expressions without modular extraction.
\subsection{MQA on REMQA dataset}
To validate the effectiveness of our proposed model, we separately compare our navigation and comprehension results with the state-of-the-art methods (SoTAs) on our proposed benchmark dataset. The results are presented in Table. \ref{tab:remqa_result}. The $S_{N}, S_{L}$ denotes the ratio of samples successfully navigated to the goal position and successfully localized at the goal position with REC. The $S_{QA}$ represents the rate of correctly answered questions out of all samples in the REMQA dataset.
The results show that our framework for the REMQA task outperforms EQA and IQA models in most metrics except $S_N$ and $S_L$ in COUNTING questions. Most of the objects mentioned in COUNTING questions are receptacles (e.g.cabinets, drawers) that are many individuals in the same scene. IQA model is trained on a larger dataset (IQUAD v1 with 75000 questions) and may better distinguish instances from the same type. We also can notice that EQA model performs far below IQA and our model due to the absence of the ability to interact with the environment. Therefore, the effectiveness of manipulations for the REMQA task can be validated.
\subsection{Qualitative Results}
To illustrate how our agent navigates and manipulate in proposed Embodied Environments, we select a task sample from proposed REMQA dataset as a qualitative example. As shown in following Fig. \ref{fig:qualitative}, the agent actively explores in kitchen scenarios to find the coffee machine mentioned in the input question. When successfully navigated, agent localizes the target cabinet with REC and move its arm to open it to find whether there is a cup for final answer.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:future work}
In this work, We have proposed a brand new embodied robot task Remote Embodied Manipulation Question Answering (REMQA) in a physically interactive environment. We build a benchmark dataset for the task by scene graph generation. To solve this problem, we propose a general framework consisting of a VSN module with scene semantic map as priors, a LAN for referring expression comprehension and manipulation decision, and a CNN-LSTM network for question answering. The experimental results on the new benchmark dataset validate the effectiveness of our proposed model. This task still challenges to our proposed method in more complicated question and multi-stage task. For the future study, a validation experiment in real robot platforms and physical environment is expected to validate the ability of to conduct more complex actions.
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Stars are opaque. Fortunately, deformations of the stellar surface depend on their interiors \cite{Cowling1941,Gough1993,Ledoux1958,Unno1979,CD1996,Aerts2010} and as such, asteroseismology is the Rosetta Stone to infer details of stellar structures \cite{CD1996,Aerts2010}. Stellar spectra consist principally of low-frequencies gravity (g-) modes and high-frequencies {pressure} (p-) modes, defining two bands separated by a finite interval of frequencies, also referred as a gap. The stellar spectrum may also be enriched by additional branches, such as surface wave modes confined in the outer regions. In recent years, a novel type of waves propagating in stratified compressible fluids has been discovered. This so-called \textit{Lamb-like} wave fills the gap between the p- and the g- band. Although this mode bears similarities with the Lamb wave \cite{Lamb1911,Iga2001}, it is confined around peculiar values specific of the stratification profile, and not at the boundaries. The key point is that these waves have been postulated using arguments from topology \cite{Perrot2019}. Modes in the original spatially homogeneous system can be predicted from the analysis of the topological invariant of a simpler dual wave problem with constant coefficients. Similar topological approaches were developed in condensed matter since the eighties, and flourished across all field of physics, including fluid dynamics and plasma over the last few years \cite{hasan2010colloquium,delplace2017topological,shankar2020topological,parker2020topological}.
The Lamb wave has been detected in the atmosphere, but the Lamb-like wave is hardly expected to propagate {on Earth, neither in the atmosphere nor in oceans. Stars were speculated to provide favourable conditions for it to propagate \cite{Perrot2019}. However, this study lacked the treatment of self-gravity, spherical geometry and variations of sound speed, three critical processes as we shall show.} We therefore adapt tools that have been originally developed by the topological insulator community to study the seminal case of adiabatic perturbations of a non-rotating, non-magnetic, stably stratified stellar fluid neglecting gravity perturbations (Cowling's approximation \cite{Cowling1941}). The physical quantities are first rescaled to express the evolution of linear perturbations under the form of a Schrödinger-like wave equation
\begin{equation}
i\partial_{t}{\mathbf{Y}} = {\mathcal{H}}{\mathbf{Y}}
\label{eq:schro5x5}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{H}=$ \\
\hspace{-0.5cm}$i$\scalebox{0.8}{
$\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -\frac{c_{\rm s}}{r}\partial_\theta\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -\frac{c_{\rm s}}{r\sin(\theta)}\partial_\phi\\
0 & 0 & 0 & -N & S - c_{\rm s}\partial_r - \frac{c_{\rm s}^\prime}{2}\\
0 & 0 & N & 0 & 0\\
-\frac{c_{\rm s}}{r\sin(\theta)}\partial_\theta(\sin(\theta)\cdot) & -\frac{c_{\rm s}}{r\sin(\theta)}\partial_\phi & -S - c_{\rm s}\partial_r - \frac{c_{\rm s}^\prime}{2} & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},$}\\
and the perturbation vector contains rescaled velocities, density and pressure
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{Y} = ^{\top}\!\! \left( \Tilde{u}, \Tilde{v}, \Tilde{w}, \Tilde{\Theta}, \Tilde{p} \right).
\end{equation}
See Appendix~\ref{app:schro} for details.
\noindent As such, the $5\times5$ wave operator $\mathcal{H}$ of the problem is explicitely Hermitian. $\mathcal{H}$ depends on the sound speed $c_\mathrm{s}$, the Brunt-Väisälä frequency $N$ and a characteristic frequency further referred \al{to} as the {\it acoustic-buoyant frequency} $S$ that emerges explicitly
\begin{equation}
S \equiv \frac{c_\mathrm{s}}{2g}\left( N^2 - \frac{g^2}{c_\mathrm{s}^2} \right) - \frac{1}{2} \frac{{\rm d} c_{\rm s}}{{\rm d} r} + \frac{c_\mathrm{s}}{r}.
\label{eq:S}
\end{equation}
All three parameters vary with radius $r$. Usually, these equations are combined into a single differential equation of high order. Instead, preserving the vectorial structure of the problem is better suited for a topological analysis.
\section{Acoustic-buoyant frequency $S$}
The acoustic-buoyant frequency $S$ is a coupling parameter for momentum exchange between buoyant and acoustic oscillations, and was called {\it stratification parameter} in \cite{Perrot2019}. {This role of mode coupling is shown in details below.} Two extra terms appear compared to the plan-parallel case \cite{Perrot2019}: $c_\mathrm{ s} / r$, which accounts for sphericity effects at small radii, and $\frac{1}{2}\dr{c_\mathrm{s}}$, which becomes important when the internal structure of the object varies strongly. $S$ combines the four physical processes responsible for mirror-symmetry breaking in the radial direction: gravity, density stratification, curvature, and radial variations of sound speed. The profile $S(r)$ varies between stellar objects ; however the sound speed is expected to go to 0 at the surface as a positive power law of the density \cite{Chandra1939,Horedt1987}. $S$ is then $-\infty$ at the surface. At small radii, the curvature term guarantees $S$ to reach $+\infty$. $S(r)$ being continuous, it must change sign in the bulk of the star at least once. We confirm this analytically on a stellar polytrope in Appendix~\ref{app:polytrope} and numerically on models of typical stellar objects computed with the \texttt{MESA} code \cite{mesa} (Fig.~\ref{fig:HR}).
The physical nature of the {acoustic-buoyant} frequency $S$ is disclosed by considering the equivalent of Eq.~\eqref{eq:schro5x5} in the 2D plane-parallel $(y,z)$ geometry. After performing a Fourier transform in time and space in the invariant direction $y$ and performing the rescaling $(u,w,\Theta,p) \mapsto c_{\rm s}^{1/2}(u,w,\Theta,p)$, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t u &=& i{c_\mathrm{s}k_y}p, \label{eqApp:sysReduit1}\\
\partial_t\Theta &=& Nw,\label{eqApp:sysReduit2}\\
\partial_t w &=& -N \Theta - c_{\rm s}\partial_z p + S p,\label{eqApp:sysReduit3}\\
\partial_t p &=& ic_\mathrm{s}k_y u - c_{\rm s}\partial_z w - S w.\label{eqApp:sysReduit4}
\end{eqnarray}
Combining the equations gives
\begin{eqnarray}
(\partial_{tt} + N^2)w = -\partial_t(c_{\rm s} \partial_{z}p - S p),\label{eq:coupledWaves1}\\
(\partial_{tt} + c_\mathrm{s}^2 k_y^2)p = -\partial_t(c_{\rm s} \partial_{z}w + S w),\label{eq:coupledWaves2}
\end{eqnarray}
a system where acoustic and buoyant vibrations are explicitly coupled (no Boussinesq or anelastic approximation is assumed). The first term of the right-hand side of Eq.~\eqref{eq:coupledWaves1} consists of local pressure forces that competes with buoyancy. The first term of the right-hand side of Eq.~\eqref{eq:coupledWaves2} comes from fluid compression in the direction $z$ and is generic from 2D purely acoustic waves. In the long wavelength limit in the stratification direction $z$, these two terms become negligible and
\begin{eqnarray}
(\partial_{tt} + N^2)w = S\partial_t p,\label{eq:Siscoupling_1} \\
(\partial_{tt} + c_\mathrm{s}^2 k_y^2)p = -S\partial_t w , \label{eq:Siscoupling_2}
\end{eqnarray}
showing that $S$ is the frequency of periodic exchanges of momentum between acoustic and buoyant vibrations. Non-Boussinesq contributions allow local densities to be affected by acoustic compression, providing an effect that compets with buoyancy when $S$ is large. Conversely, pressure increases not only through compression, but also through advection in a differential background. These two effects on coupling between g-modes and p-modes were identified by \cite{Lighthill78}. Multiplying Eq.~\eqref{eq:Siscoupling_1} by $\partial_{t}p$ and Eq.~\eqref{eq:Siscoupling_2} by $\partial_{t}w$ shows that the power transmitted by one mode to the other occurs without losses, as expected from the adiabatic assumption. Such a coupling has been widely studied in polariton physics, and shown to result in gap opening \cite{Lagoudakis}. The condition $S = 0$ is therefore associated to local mode decoupling (see Fig.~\ref{fig:local_gap}).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/gap_local2.pdf}
\caption{Local dispersion relation of the problem, as modelled by Eqs.~\eqref{eq:coupledWaves1}-\eqref{eq:coupledWaves2}. The p-mode and the g-mode (solid lines) result from the coupling of acoustic and buoyant oscillations (dashed lines for $k_z =0 $). Both $S$ and $k_{z}$ pull the bands away. For any mode, including $k_z = 0$, a gap exists as soon as $S \neq 0$.}
\label{fig:local_gap}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{figures/4S_N2_in_HR_carre.pdf}
\caption{{Profiles of $S$ for four different typical stellar objects. $N$ is plotted for comparison. Solid orange line indicates the region where the topological mode is trapped, as measured by the trapping length $\mathcal{L}$ defined by Eq.~\eqref{eq:trappingLength}. Stellar interiors are computed with \textsc{Mesa}. The High mass star is an $M=100M_\odot$ main-sequence star. The White Dwarf mass is $0.6M_\odot$, during its cooling phase. The Jupiter model has a solid core of 10 Earth masses. $S$ cancels always at least once, whether in the radiative or convective region. Light grey area indicates the convective zone.}}
\label{fig:HR}
\end{figure}
\section{Topological properties of the problem}
Eigenvalues of $\mathcal{H}$ are constrained by topology when varying the physical parameters. These constraints can be efficiently studied by associating a simple matrix to $\mathcal{H}$ that retains the topological constraints. The correspondence is established via a Wigner transform, which allows us to define rigorously a wave that is locally plane without any hypothesis of scale separation (Appendix \ref{app:wigner}). Here, topological properties of $\mathcal{H}$ can be characterised through the eigenvalue problem of the matrix
\begin{eqnarray}
M &\equiv &
\begin{pmatrix}
N^2 & -NS - iNc_\mathrm{s}k_r\\
-NS + i N c_\mathrm{s}k_r & L_\ell^2 + S^2 + c_\mathrm{s}^2 k_r^2
\end{pmatrix},\\
\omega \mathbf{X} &=& M \mathbf{X} ,\
\end{eqnarray}
where the Lamb frequency is $L_\ell \equiv c_\mathrm{s} \sqrt{\ell(\ell+1)}/r$. $M$ is Hermitian and parametrised by a radial wavenumber $k_{r}$ and parameters $L_\ell$, $c_\mathrm{s}$, $N$ and $S$ that are constant.
As expected, the two eigenvalues of $M$ correspond to the square of the frequencies of the local pressure and gravity modes. Interestingly, these two bands intersect when $k_r=0$, $L_\ell=N$, $S=0$ for any value of $c_\mathrm{s}$ and $N$, i.e. the two frequencies degenerate into a single one (see Appendix~\ref{app:wigner}). Such a degeneracy point behaves like a topological monopole in parameter space ($k_r,L_\ell,S$), which is {characterised by} an integer called the Chern number \cite{Chern1946}. A non-zero Chern number translates the topological obstruction to smoothly define the phase of the eigenvectors -- that describe the local polarization relations of $M$ -- all around the degeneracy point in parameter space. In that case, the eigenvectors can only be defined smoothly over patches in parameter space, corresponding to different gauge choices. The $U(1)$ gauge transformation that connects the different patches is a phase whose winding is the Chern number. In our case, we find the Chern numbers associated to the gravity and the pressure bands to be $\mathcal{C}^g = +1$ and $\mathcal{C}^p = -1$ respectively (see Appendix~\ref{app:chern} for computations).
These topological considerations can be back-connected to the original problem : any change of sign of the {acoustic-buoyant} frequency $S(r)$ is associated to the existence of a branch that transits from the g-band towards the p-band as $\ell$ increases. Mathematically, this correspondence is ensured by index theorems \cite{Atiyah1963,Chern1946,Perrot2019,Faure2019,notesPiR,Nakahara,esposito97}. {The transiting branch flows from the upper-band to the lower-band or \textit{vice-versa}, depending on the sign of $S'$ at the change of sign of $S$. In stars, $S'<0$ and the mode transits from the g- to the p- band: this mode is the Lamb-like wave} \cite{Perrot2019}. Fig.~\ref{fig:spectra} confirms the deep relation between a change of sign of $S(r)$ and the existence of a mode transiting from the g-band at small $\ell$ to the p-band at large $\ell$. {The physical validity of this mode is carefully verified in Appendix~\ref{app:CL}.}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/fig1_orangeBlack.png}
\caption{A mode develops between the gravity band and the pressure band (bottom) when the {acoustic-buoyant} frequency $S$ (top) of Eq.~\eqref{eq:S} changes sign. From left to right: toy profile that cancels in the bulk, decaying positive profile of $S$, polytrope with polytropic index $n = 3$ and a \textsc{Mesa} Solar-like profile. Physical values of the harmonic degree $\ell$ are integer, and plotted with large points, from 0 to 20. Non-integer values are plotted with small points for readability. Surface gravity waves are filtered out by appropriate boundary conditions. The mode transiting between bands is highlighted in black. These values are computed by solving Eq.~\eqref{eq:schro5x5} numerically using \texttt{Dedalus} \cite{dedalus}.}
\label{fig:spectra}
\end{figure*}
By analogy with similar modes encountered in a variety of other physical systems \cite{hasan2010colloquium,delplace2017topological,shankar2020topological,parker2020topological}, one may expect for the global stellar mode to have no node, and to transit between the bands at a value of $\ell$ such that $L_\ell \sim N$. One may also expect for the eigenfunctions to be located around the radius $r_0$ where $S(r_0) = 0$. These properties of the topological mode can be verified on a simple analytically solvable model presented in the next section.
\section{Topological mode in analytical model}
We present a simple analytical model featuring a cancellation in $S$, and show that the analytical solution of the wave equation include the topological mode. Consider a fluid where all quantities but $S$ are constant in space:
\begin{eqnarray}
S(r) &=& -\alpha(r-r_0),\label{eq:Slinear}\\
N(r) &=& N_0,\\
c_\mathrm{s}(r) &=& c_\mathrm{s,0},\\
L_\ell^2(r) &=& L_{\ell,0}^2 = c_\mathrm{s,0}\frac{\ell(\ell+1)}{r_0^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
This parametrisation mimics a situation where variations of $S$ would be infinitely more abrupt than the other quantities. {In this minimal model, $S$ vary linearly and cancels in $r_0$. This model} may {thus be} thought of as the compressible-stratified analogue to the equatorial shallow water model solved by Matsuno \cite{Matsuno1966}. Perform the transform $(u,v,w,\Theta,p) \mapsto c_{\rm s}^{1/2}(u,v,w,\Theta,p)$ in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:schro5x5}, then apply a time-Fourier Transform and project on spherical harmonics. The variables combine into a a single ODE on $p$
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d}r^2} -\left(\frac{S(r)}{c_\mathrm{s,0}}\right)^2 - \left(\frac{S(r)}{c_\mathrm{s,0}}\right)^\prime + k_{r,0}^2 \right)p = 0,
\label{eq:schroWell}
\end{equation}
where we denote
\begin{equation}
k_{r,0}^2 \equiv \frac{(L_{\ell,0}^2-\omega^2)(N_0^2 - \omega^2)}{c_\mathrm{s,0}^2\omega^2},
\end{equation}
and use the symbol ${}^\prime$ for derivatives with respect to $r$ for background quantities. Eq.~\eqref{eq:schroWell} holds for any $S(r)$, and can be seen as a Schrödinger equation describing a particle of energy $k_{r,0}^2$ in the potential $V = S^2/c_\mathrm{s,0}^2 + S^\prime/c_\mathrm{s,0}$. For the model of Eq.~\eqref{eq:Slinear}, this reduces to
\begin{equation}
\left[ \frac{\mathrm{d}^2}{\mathrm{d}x^2} - \left(\frac{1}{4}x^2 - \frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{c_\mathrm{s,0}}{\alpha} k_{r,0}^2) \right) \right]p = 0 ,
\label{eq:hermite}
\end{equation}
using the dimensionless quantity $x \equiv \sqrt{2}\sqrt{\frac{\alpha}{c_\mathrm{s,0}}}(r-r_0)$. The solution is a Parabolic Cylinder Function $U$ \cite{abramowitz1972}
\begin{equation}
p = U\left(-\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{c_\mathrm{s,0}}{\alpha}k_{r,0}^2),~ x\right).
\label{eq:paraCylFunc}
\end{equation} Regularity at infinity imposes the first argument to be negative half-integer, leading to the quantization
\begin{equation}
\frac{c_\mathrm{s,0}}{\alpha}k_{r,0}^2 = 2n+1,
\label{eq:quantifHermite}
\end{equation}
for any $n \in \mathds{N}$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/spectreHermite_andError_plt_horizontal.pdf}
\caption{Left: spectrum of the minimal model parametrized by Eq.~\eqref{eq:Slinear}. The topological mode is the $n=0$ mode, and transits between the bands. Right: Measure of the error a JWKB approximation of the solutions would make. The error on the $n=0$ mode is not small.}
\label{fig:spectre_hermite}
\end{figure}
Solutions reduce then to Hermite functions ${p = {\rm e}^{-x^2/2}H_n(x)}$, where $H_n$ denotes the $n$th Hermite polynomial. Fig.~\ref{fig:spectre_hermite} shows the spectrum associated to this problem. The values of $\omega$ can be inverted in Eq.~\eqref{eq:quantifHermite}. For $n \geqslant 1$, each value of $k_{r,0}$ give two eigenfrequencies, the $n$th g-mode and the $n$th p-mode. The expected topological mode corresponds to $n = 0$. One of the two eigenfrequencies associated with this solution is unphysical, since the eigenfunctions diverges quickly at infinity. The other verifies
\begin{equation}
\omega = L_{\ell,0},
\end{equation}
which transits between the bands as $\ell$ increases, as shown on Fig.~\ref{fig:spectre_hermite}. This property is associated to the fact that ${S'(r_0) = -\alpha< 0}$ at the cancellation point.\\
The topological mode has the profile
\begin{equation}
p(r) = p_0 \exp\left( - \frac{\alpha}{c_\mathrm{s,0}}(r-r_0)^2 \right),
\end{equation}
an expression that provides a definition of the length over which the mode has significant amplitude
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L} \equiv \sqrt{\frac{c_\mathrm{s,0}}{\alpha}} = \sqrt{{c_\mathrm{s,0}}/{\Big|\dr{S}\Big|_{S=0}}} ,\label{eq:trappingLength}
\end{equation}
which we call the {\it trapping length}. Denoting ${R(x)\equiv-\frac{1}{4}x^2+n+1/2}$ the second term of Eq.~\eqref{eq:hermite} that corresponds to a solution for a given $n$, we find for JWKB approximation of the solution to be valid when the condition $|R^{-3/2}\frac{\mathrm{d}R}{\mathrm{d}x}| \ll 1$ is satisfied \citep{daghigh12}. Fig.~\ref{fig:spectre_hermite} shows this quantity for the first modes. The topological mode $n=0$ breaks strongly this validity condition. As expected, JWKB techniques cannot capture the topological mode.
This analytical solution confirms that the topological mode is the mode with zero node of the system, and that this mode is not accessible with scale separation methods.
\section{Discussion}
Interestingly, the topological mode and the surface-gravity mode have both zero node and similar dispersion relations. Numerical experiments show that when they coexist, they hybridize to form a unique $n=0$ mode. {A comprehensive study including various boundary conditions is performed in Appendix~\ref{app:fmode}}. We interpret this hybridised mode as the {\it f-mode} of asteroseismology \cite{Gough1993,Rozelot2011}, revealing its previously unexpected hybrid nature. \\
{Finally, strong local gradients of thermodynamical quantities may give rise to peaks of acoustic-buoyant frequency where $S$ changes sign twice over a short scale, as in the White Dwarf model showed on Fig.~\ref{fig:HR}. This results in two modes of topological origin that may be used to probe fine details of the structure of the stellar object. The white dwarf is the canonical object for application of this study, as it is fully radiative. Its profile of $S$ cancels three times, two of them resulting from a phase transition close to the surface. For this model, we predict three topological modes, one for each cancellation. One crossing the gap, with long trapping length $\mathcal{L}$, as the slope of $S$ where it changes sign is low at the first cancellation. Two more modes with zero nodes are predicted close to the peak of $S$ just underneath the surface, with much smaller trapping lengths $\mathcal{L}$, as the slope of $S$ is high when $S$ changes sign. They potentially overlap each other, such that they would hybridise. This hybridisation could serve as a measure of the peak in $S$, meaning the modes could serve as probes for the associated phase transition. This hybridization is illustrated on Fig.~\ref{fig:type2}.}\\
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/fig2_orangeBlack_3panels_v2.png}
\caption{Peaks of $S$ through positive values imply the existence of two topological modes in the spectrum. The sharper the peak, the more the modes hybridize, and their branches avoid crossing in the spectrum.}
\label{fig:type2}
\end{figure}
The current study focuses on stably stratified stars, for which index theorems on Hermitian systems apply. However the effect of a convective zone on the Lamb-like wave remains to be investigated. Such a region, where $N^2$ vanishes, is indeed sustained by the convective circulation of the background. Fig.~\ref{fig:HR} shows that in the Sun, $S$ cancels in the radiative zone, close to the convective zone. The trapping length of the topological mode indicates interactions with the convective zone, although convection is out of the scope of this study. In High Mass stars, $S$ cancels within the convective core where the topological mode is not guaranteed by this study, as no background flow is considered in the wave equation Eq.~\eqref{eq:schro5x5}. The same conclusion applies to Jupiter, which is fully convective, and has interesting multiple cancellations of $S$.
{Lamb-like waves are neither Lamb waves, surface-gravity waves, nor mixed modes \cite{Dziembowski2001,Dupret2009,Deheuvels2010}. Mixed modes are linear combinations of g-modes and p-modes standing in different cavities in the star, due to spatial variations of $N$ and $L_\ell$ and can have a high number of nodes. The Lamb-like wave emanates as a mode $n=0$ of a single cavity hosting both g-modes and p-modes.}\\
We expect generic properties of stellar pulsations related to topology such as ray tracing to be encoded in $S(r)$ \cite{Perez2021}. Other discrete symmetries can be broken in the presence of rotation \cite{Perez2021b} and magnetic fields \cite{Cally2006,Parker2020}, and one should expect the emergence of new classes of topological waves when these additional ingredients are taken into account, potentially at the stellar tachocline where strong shear develops. The resilience of these topological modes on unstable stratification when $N^{2} < 0$, or with the inclusion of dissipative effects, is a highly promising avenue of research in the currently flourishing field of non-Hermitian topological waves \cite{Delplace2021,Gong2018,Yao2018,Bergholtz2021}.
\section{Conclusion}
In this study, we revisit the old field of stellar pulsations under the bright new prism of topology. By doing a novel parallel between stars and topological insulators, we establish for the first time the existence of a wave of topological origin in stars. We derive the expression of a novel key physical parameter, the acoustic-buoyant frequency. We demonstrate in a comprehensive analysis that topological modes are associated to zeros of this frequency, and show the ubiquitous existence of at least one topological mode across the entire spectrum of stellar object in the Universe. More importantly, we show that local phase transitions, which are key for understanding the evolution of stars within the cosmological context, may give rise to pairs of robust topological modes. The hunt of these modes may therefore become a critical target for future cutting-edge instruments such as the \textit{PLATO} mission.
\vspace{2cm}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
A.L. lead the derivation of the {acoustic-buoyant} frequency and performed numerical simulations. G.L. lead the astrophysical analysis and the writing of the manuscript. P.D. and A.V. lead the topological analysis and the analogy with the plane-parallel case. N.P. performed the numerical experiments on surface-gravity wave and topological mode hybridisation.\\
G.L. acknowledges funding from the ERC CoG project PODCAST No 864965. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sk\l odowska-Curie grant agreement No 823823. This project was partly supported by the IDEXLyon project (contract nANR-16-IDEX-0005) under the auspices University of Lyon. We acknowledge financial support from the national programs (PNP, PNPS, PCMI) of CNRS/INSU, CEA, and CNES, France. AV and PD were supported by the national grant ANR-18-CE30-0002-01 and Idex Tore. N.P. was funded by a PhD grant allocation Contrat doctoral Normalien. We thank S. Deheuvels, I. Baraffe, G. Chabrier, E. Jaupart, J. Fensch and E. Lynch for useful comments and discussions. The authors are grateful to the anonymous referee, whose thorough comments helped to improved the quality of this article significantly.
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
In a generic absorption imaging setup, the optical forward scattering $E_s$ from the sample under study is imaged together with the co-propagating probe light $E_p$ onto the imaging sensor arrays. The attenuation of the total intensity $I=|E_p+E_s|^2$ records the in-phase component of $E_s$ relative to $E_p$. Information on the out-of-phase $E_s$ component is lost. Similarly, in phase contrast imaging setups~\cite{Zernike1935, Maurer2008} where $E_p$ is phase-shifted by $\pi/2$, the information loss occurs to the in-phase $E_s$ quadrature. Digital holography~\cite{gabor1948new} recovers the full $E_s$ information by reconstructing the phase of $E_s$ relative to $E_p$ using holograms. For the case of inline holography~\cite{Greenbaum2012, Latychevskaia2019}, the holograms are simply out-of-focus interference fringes between $E_s$ and $E_p$. With the full wavefront knowledge at hand, both the $E_s$ and $E_p$ fields can be volumetrically reconstructed around the sample planes via digital back-propagation. Furthermore, with sufficient knowledge of the samples, the reconstruction support self-consistent characterization of sparse samples for precise 3D microscopy~\cite{Lee2007, Memmolo2015, Alexander2020}. During the process, to refocus each reconstructed sample image to its respective plane~\cite{Brady2009,Gao2012,Osten2013,ilhan2013autofocusing,wilson20123d,zhang2017edge,Fan2017, Wu2018a, pinkard2019deep} is crucially important. For the purpose, various refocus schemes are developed based on priori knowledge of the samples and their interaction with light. Examples include the methods based on the edge sharpness and sparsity~\cite{ilhan2013autofocusing, Brady2009,zhang2017edge,Fan2017}, the Gouy phase shift~\cite{wilson20123d}, by requiring imaging consistencies under multiple wavelength~\cite{Gao2012} and structured illumination~\cite{Osten2013}, or even by deep learning of complex features~\cite{Wu2018a, pinkard2019deep}.
The holographic advantages associated with 3D complex imaging of sparse samples can be highly useful for applications across fields~\cite{Cuche1999,2004microelectromechanical, Bjrn2005Investigation,2008Phase,Greenbaum2012,DeHaan2020}.
For atomic physics research, over the years efforts have been made for holographic imaging of cold atoms~\cite{Kadlecek2001,turner2005diffraction,Sobol2014,smits2020imaging,Altuntas2021}. In a recent work, we show that an improved holographic technique with suppressed aberration and speckle noises
supports simultaneous retrieval of atomic absorption and phase shift profiles with diffraction-limited spatial resolution and photon shot-noise limited sensitivity~\cite{Wang2022b}. As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a here, the technique uses a precisely pre-characterized probe wavefront $E_p$ to recover the coherent atomic forward scattering $E_s$ with the hologram data (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a(ii)). Then, both $E_s$ and $E_p$ are numerically propagated from the camera plane $z=z_{H}$ back to the sample plane $z=z_A$ where the 2D optical depth ${\rm OD}(x,y)=-2{\rm Re[log}(1+E_s/E_p)]$ and phase shift ${\phi}(x,y)={\rm Im[log}(1+E_s/E_p)]$ (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a(i)) are evaluated. Here, similar to the applications in other fields~\cite{Brady2009,Gao2012,Osten2013,ilhan2013autofocusing,wilson20123d,zhang2017edge,Fan2017, Wu2018a, pinkard2019deep}, to localize the atomic plane $z_A$ is crucially important for faithfully retrieving the generic atomic absorption and phase shift properties. However, unlike typical biological or solid samples with sharp boundaries, cold atoms in optical traps typically follow quasi-thermal distributions~\cite{MetcalfBook}, without much distinct features as a priori criterion to perfect the sample-plane refocus. Nevertheless, in early efforts for holographic imaging of cold atoms~\cite{Kadlecek2001,turner2005diffraction,Sobol2014}, the sample-plane localization is still largely based on optimizing certain characteristic spatial features of atomic distribution, with moderate accuracies.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{Fig1_v2.pdf}
\caption{Schematic of the inline holography and the spectroscopic refocus criterion. (a): Experimental setup. The imaging optics is with magnification $M=1$ and a numerical aperture ${\rm NA}=0.3$. The (a,i) subplots are typical reconstructed optical depth ${\rm OD}$ and phase shift $\phi$ images at the $z=z_A$ plane (experimental data, with peak OD$\approx 0.2$ and $\phi\approx -0.15$). The (a,ii) subplot gives the corresponding reduced hologram $\delta I$ recorded by the camera at $z=z_H$ (peak-to-peak $\delta I\approx 100$ in terms of counts, with photon shot noise at the 20-level~\cite{Wang2022b}.). The scale bars are with $R_{1}=30~{\rm \mu m}$ and $R_{2}=1~{\rm mm}$ respectively.
(b): A 4-level diagram to represent the light-atom interaction at the $^{39}$K D1 line ($\lambda_p=770~$nm) nearly resonant to the $|g\rangle$ (4S$_{1/2},~F=1$) and $|e\rangle$ (4P$_{1/2},~F'=2$) transition. (c): Simulated {\rm OD} and $\phi$ profiles associated with the D1 interaction under realistic experimental condition according to optical Bloch equations~\cite{Sievers2015}. As detailed in Sec.~\ref{sec:alpha}, the spectroscopic phase angle $\beta_0$ within the shadowed $|\Delta|\leq \Gamma$ follows Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}), even for strong pulses that saturate the transition. (d,i): Transmission $T(x=0,y,z)\equiv |E_s+E_p|^2/|E_p|^2$ (with the probe detuning $\Delta=10\Gamma$). (d,ii): Out-of-phase response $\varphi^{\bot}(x=0, y,z)$ (at arbitrary $\Delta$) for the simulated D1 sample with $\sigma_y=1.4\lambda_p$ Gaussian profile. Similar to $1-T$, $\varphi^{\perp}$ (Eq.~(\ref{eq:phiPerp})) vanishes at $z=z_A$ and evolves according to the Gouy phase (d,iii) near the $E_s$ center. With a prior $\beta_0$ knowledge by Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}), suppression of $\varphi^{\perp}(z)$ within $|y|\leq \sigma_y$ serves as refocus criterion to locate $z=z_A$ with the near-resonant probe.
}\label{Fig1}
\end{figure*}
In fact, while cold atomic samples usually lack distinctive spatial structures, there are unique features constrained by atomic physics available for calibrating coherent imaging. For example, in aberration-free in-focus imaging, the power spectrum density of atomic density correlations is expected to be flat for non-correlated atoms~\cite{Hung2011}. The criterion is applied in ref.~\cite{Altuntas2021} to achieve precise refocus of aberrated phase-contrast atomic images. Other than exploiting spatial structures or correlations, in ref.~\cite{smits2020imaging} the authors suggest that for far off-resonant imaging ({\it i.e.}, in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}b the probe detuning $\Delta$ is much larger than the atomic transition linewidth $\Gamma$), that atomic samples appear as phase objects with $|\phi(x,y)|\gg |{\rm OD}(x,y)|$ across the sample becomes a refocus criterion to precisely locate the sample plane. This idea shares the same underlying physics with the refocusing method based on Gouy phase anomaly for 3D localization of small transparent particles~\cite{wilson20123d}. As to be detailed shortly, relative to the uniform probe wavefront $E_p$, the propagation of spatially confined $E_s$ picks up an extra Gouy phase $\phi_{\rm G}$ in its center in the far field. Therefore, the known relative phase relation between $E_s$ and $E_p$ for phase objects holds sensitively in the near field, naturally serving as a refocus criterion for locating the sample plane. Obviously, this diffraction phase criterion can be generalized for localizing atomic samples probed at arbitrary detuning $\Delta$, if the phase angle $\beta_0={\rm arg}(\phi+i {\rm OD}/2)$ can be measured and compared with known values precisely.
In this work, we show that a recently demonstrated phase-angle spectroscopy~\cite{Wang2022b} leads to a robust criterion for locating the sample plane in holographic microscopy of cold atoms, with an achievable axial resolution $\delta z$ well below the diffraction limit. The prior spectral phase angle knowledge exploited in this method, the Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}) relation to be discussed shortly, is easily understood in the linear optics regime where both ${\rm OD}$ and $\phi$ for a dilute gas can be evaluated analytically~\cite{turner2005diffraction,Meppelink2010}. Practically, to achieve sufficient signals with short and nearly resonant exposures, saturation of atomic transitions can hardly be completely avoided. It is also known that the linear optical response of cold gases is prone to resonant dipole interactions~\cite{Morice1995,chomaz2012absorption,Zhu2016}. Interestingly, we find that far beyond the linear response regime, the Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}) relation can hold precisely for isolated atomic transitions probed with smooth and long pulses. Our method thus supports robust localization of atomic sample plane with flexible probe condition managements, for working with denser samples~\cite{chomaz2012absorption} and to achieve photon-shot-noise limited performances~\cite{Sobol2014,Wang2022b}. Experimentally (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}), we demonstrate the spectral refocus method by repeatedly probing an open hyperfine transition of $^{39}$K D1 line with $\tau_p=1~\mu$s pulses, to locate the atomic sample plane with sub-micron axial resolution.
Previously, the best refocus criterion for imaging cold atomic samples appears to be that based on the atomic shot-noise correlations~\cite{Altuntas2021}. In comparison, our method provides similar accuracy with a much stronger signal for rapid applications. In addition, instead of relying on regularizing contrast transfer functions~\cite{Paganin2002,turner2005diffraction,Altuntas2021}, our holographic method directly supports a large depth of view, with diffraction-limited resolution~\cite{Sobol2014}, for future 3D spectroscopic imaging of sparse atomic samples.
\section{Phase-angle spectroscopy for atomic sample plane localization}\label{sec:Atom}
\subsection{Measurement principles}
As schematically illustrated in the Fig.~\ref{Fig1} setup, we consider holographic imaging of an atomic sample subjected to a spherical probe light $E_p$ illumination at wavelength $\lambda_p$. The atomic sample is centered at ${\bf r}_A=(0,0,z_A)$ with spatial width $\{l_x,l_y\}\ll z_A$, so that the probe light propagates along $z$ through the sample with negligible wavefront curvature itself. We assume thin atomic samples. The length $l_z$ along the light propagation direction satisfies
\begin{equation}
l_z\ll z_{\sigma}\label{eq:RN}
\end{equation}
when compared to the Rayleigh distance
\begin{equation}
z_{\sigma}=\pi\sigma^2/\lambda_p, \label{eq:zS}
\end{equation}
associated with the smallest spatial feature of interest of the sample characterized by an effective Gaussian width $\sigma$. The spherical $E_p$ in this work is derived from a defocused Gaussian beam. The spherical wave illumination~\cite{gabor1948new} enhances the pixel-resolution and dynamic range of the camera sensors during holographic imaging~\cite{turner2005diffraction, Sobol2014}. Our method can be straightforwardly generalized to plane-wave illumination, as well as structured, complex illuminations.
The total field $E_{\rm tot}=E_s+E_p$ after interacting with the thin sample can be expressed as $E_{\rm tot}=E_p e^{i\varphi}$. The complex phase shift~\cite{Wang2022b}
\begin{equation}
\varphi(x,y,z)=-i {\rm log}(1+\frac{E_s(x,y,z)}{E_p(x,y,z)})\label{eq:varphi}
\end{equation}
is related to the optical depth and phase shift as $\varphi(z_A)=\phi+i{\rm OD}/2$. Notice here and in the following we may omit the $(x,y)$ variable in the 3D distribution functions if no ambiguity is induced. For a dilute sample of free atoms, the complex numbers are rotated from the real axis by the phase angle $\beta_0={\rm arg}(\varphi(z_A))$ according to the single-atom response. We re-write the complex phase during the backward propagation as
\begin{equation}
\varphi(x,y,z) =(\varphi^{//}(x,y,z)+i\varphi^{\perp}(x,y,z))e^{i\beta_0}.\label{eq:rot}
\end{equation}
so that, with $\beta(z)={\rm arg}(\varphi(z))$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\varphi^{//}(x,y,z)&= |\varphi(x,y,z)|{\rm cos}(\beta(z)-\beta_0),\\
\varphi^{\perp}(x,y,z)&= |\varphi(x,y,z)|{\rm sin}(\beta(z)-\beta_0).
\end{aligned}\label{eq:phiPerp}
\end{equation}
Clearly, the out-of-phase component $\varphi^{\perp}$ vanishes at $z=z_A$, just like that the attenuation by thin phase objects is zeroed in-focus~\cite{wilson20123d,smits2020imaging}. The effect is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}d(i-ii) for the D1 line of $^{39}$K in this work as to be detailed shortly, but is general for arbitrary atomic transitions as long as $\beta_0$ is known for evaluating $\varphi^{\perp}$ with Eq.~(\ref{eq:phiPerp}).
To simplify the following discussion on the propagation effect, we now model the atomic sample by the Gaussian profile with $\sigma_y=\sigma\ll \sigma_x$. Propagating away from $z=z_A$, the defocused $E_s$ near the imaging center (with $|y|\leq\sigma$ in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}c) picks up an additional phase, the Gouy phase $\phi_{\rm G}=-{\rm arctan}\frac{z-z_A}{z_{\sigma}}$ (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}d(iii)), relative to $E_p$~\cite{wilson20123d}. within a region of interest (ROI) defined by $|y|\leq\sigma$, we expect
\begin{equation}
\beta(z)\approx \beta_0-{\rm arctan}\frac{z-z_A}{z_{\sigma}}.\label{eq:beta}
\end{equation}
As to be detailed in the following, the Eqs.~(\ref{eq:varphi}-\ref{eq:beta}) relation can be exploited to locate the $z=z_A$ plane with a given $E_s,E_p$ data set, by minimizing the $\varphi^{\perp}$ components according to a prior $\beta_0$-knowledge.
\subsection{Holographic $E_{s}$, $E_{p}$ reconstruction}\label{sec:rec}
To experimentally evaluate $\varphi(x,y,z)$ according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:varphi}), we need to volumetrically reconstruct $E_{s,p}$ fields from experimental data first. The procedures to infer the probe wavefront $E_p$ from the pre-experimental characterizations, and $E_s$ from the single-shot atomic sample holograms, are detailed in our previous work~\cite{Wang2022b}. Briefly, the probe wavefront at the camera sensor plane $E_p(z_H)=\sqrt{I_p(z_H)}e^{i\phi_p(z_H)}$ is obtained first by a multi-plane Gerchberg-Saxton algorithm~\cite{Gerchberg1972} with multiple $\{I_p(z)\}$ probe intensity measurements as inputs, using a $z-$translating camera. The camera position is then fixed at $z=z_H$ for experimentally recording the holograms with and without the cold atomic samples under study. With careful numerical adjustments and subtractions, the digital images are reduced to represent $I=|E_s+E_p|^2$ and $I_0=|E_p|^2$ respectively. An iterative twin-image removal algorithm~\cite{Sobol2014} is then applied to retrieve $E_s$ from the reduced hologram $\delta I=E^*_p E_s+E_p E_s^*+|E_s|^2$ (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a(ii)).
With the full wavefront knowledge for $E_s$ and $E_p$ at hand, we numerically propagate both fields from the camera plane $z_H$ to locations $z$ around the sample plane, via the angular spectrum method~\cite{Wang2022b,Zhao2022},
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
E_{s,p}(z)=U(z-z_H)E_{s,p}(z_H),~{\rm with}\\
U(L)=\hat F^{-1} e^{i\sqrt{k_p^2-k_x^2-k_y^2}L} \hat F.
\end{array}\label{eq:ASM}
\end{equation}
Here $\hat F$, $\hat F^{-1}$ represents the 2D Fourier transform and the inverse transform respectively: $E(k_x,k_y,z)=\hat F E(x,y,z)$ and $E(x,y,z)=\hat F^{-1} E(k_x,k_y,z)$. $k_p=2\pi/\lambda_p$ is the wavenumber of the probe light.
\subsection{A robust spectroscopic phase angle relation for cold atoms\label{sec:alpha}}
Clearly, to construct a $z=z_A$ refocus criterion with Eqs.~(\ref{eq:rot}-\ref{eq:beta}), prior knowledge of the phase angle $\beta_0$ is essential.
With the thin sample condition by Eq.~(\ref{eq:RN}), the complex phase shift at $z=z_A$ for a dilute sample is expected to follow the Beer-Lambert law as~\cite{Wang2022b}
\begin{equation}
\varphi(x,y,z_A)=\frac{1}{2} \int dz \varrho(x,y,z) \alpha.\label{eq:varphi0}
\end{equation}
Here $\varrho$ is atomic density distribution and $\alpha$ is the complex atomic polarizability. We therefore expect $\beta_0={\rm arg}(\alpha)$, which is precisely known in the linear optics regime~\cite{Meppelink2010}. However, as suggested in the Introduction, the validity of the linear analysis is practically prone to saturation and resonant dipole interaction effects.
Beyond the linear analysis, here we generally consider a sample of multi-level atoms interacting with a probe pulse (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}b). We assume the probe is strong enough so that inter-atomic resonant dipole interaction can be ignored~\cite{chomaz2012absorption}. In light of the fact that the holographic data recorded by the camera is given by $\delta I=\int_0^{\tau_p}\delta I(t)dt$, the effective polarizability $\alpha$ for Eq.~(\ref{eq:varphi0}) is evaluated as
\begin{equation}
\alpha \approx \frac{\int_0^{\tau_p} d t {\bf E}_p^*\cdot \langle{\bf d}\rangle}{\int_0^{\tau_p} d t |{\bf E}_p|^2}.\label{eq:alpha}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, when the probe frequency $\omega_p$ is nearly resonant to an isolated $|g\rangle-|e\rangle$ transition, the induced complex dipole moment can be approximated as
\begin{equation}
\langle {\bf d}(t) \rangle\approx \rho_{eg}(t){\bf d}_{ge}e^{-i\omega_p t}. \label{eq:d}
\end{equation}
Here ${\bf d}_{eg}$ is the dipole matrix element of the $|g\rangle-|e\rangle$ transition. The coherence $\rho_{eg}(t)$ obeys the multi-level master equation for the atomic density matrix $\rho$~\cite{ScullyBook}, as detailed in Appendix~\ref{sec:secular}.
With the key Eqs.~(\ref{eq:alpha})(\ref{eq:d}) assumptions, in Appendix~\ref{sec:secular} we show that for a smooth pulse with duration $\tau_p\gg 1/\Gamma$ at detuning $|\Delta|\leq\Gamma$ , $\beta_0$ is approximated by
\begin{equation}
\beta_0 (\Delta)={\rm arccot}\left(2a \frac{\Delta}{\Gamma}+b\right) \label{eq:tanbeta}
\end{equation}
with very good accuracy. For example, for the D1 line probed in this work as to be detailed in Sec.~\ref{sec:exp} (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}c), deviation from Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}) within $|\Delta|\leq \Gamma$ is less than $1\%$ in terms of minimal $\varphi^{\perp}/|\varphi|$ by Eq.~(\ref{eq:phiPerp}). Here $a=-\frac{\Gamma}{\Gamma+\gamma}$ and $b=-\frac{\delta}{\Gamma+\gamma}$ parametrize the average Stark shift $\delta$ and optical pumping rate $\gamma$ induced by all the $|g\rangle -|e'\rangle$ and $|g'\rangle -|e\rangle$ couplings that off-resonantly mix the atomic states during the $\tau_p$ time. The spectral isolation here requires the transition frequency $\omega_{e g}$ to be far away from these ground- or excited-state sharing transitions, as well as all the other $|g'\rangle-|e'\rangle$ transitions: $|\omega_{e'g'}-\omega_{eg}|,|\omega_{e e'}|\gg \Gamma+\Gamma'$, $|\omega_{g g'}|\gg \Gamma$. The probe pulse can be fairly short and strong, as long as these other transitions are only excited perturbatively. The robustness of the phase-angle relation by Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}) makes it particularly convenient to constrain the sample plane $z_A$ of dilute atomic gases in digital holography.
\subsection{Spectroscopic sample plane localization}\label{sec:loc}
Experimentally, as to be detailed in Sec.~\ref{sec:exp}, a set of holograms for a standard, free-space sample of dilute atoms is recorded in repeated preparation-measurement cycles at various detuning $\{\Delta_j\}$ with $|\Delta_j|\leq \Gamma$. The complex phase shifts $\{\varphi_j\}$ are then evaluated according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:varphi}). To locate the atomic sample plane, we numerically propagate $E_{s,p}(z)$ according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ASM}) to minimize the cost function
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
L(z;\{\varphi_j,\Delta_j\})&=\sum_j (\overline{\varphi_j^{\perp}}(z))^2\\
&=\sum_j \left ({\rm sin}[\beta_0(\Delta_j)]{\rm Re}[\overline{\varphi}_{j}(z)]-{\rm cos}[\beta_0(\Delta_j)]{\rm Im}[\overline{\varphi}_j(z)]\right )^2
\end{aligned}\label{eq:cost}
\end{equation}
which implicitly depends on the lineshape parameters $a,b$ through Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}), as well as the sample plane $z_A$ through Eq.~(\ref{eq:beta}). Each out-of-phase component $\overline{\varphi^{\perp}_j}(z)$ by Eq.~(\ref{eq:phiPerp}) is averaged within the ROI defined by $|y|<\sigma$ (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}d). With the $L$-minimization, we expect a linear relation between ${\rm OD}$ and ${\phi}$ within $|\Delta|\leq \Gamma$:
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{{\rm Re}[\overline{\varphi}(z)]}{{\rm Im}[\overline{\varphi}(z)]}\right)_{z=z_A}=2 a\frac{\Delta}{\Gamma}+b.
\label{eq:odPhiL}
\end{equation}
To understand the accuracy of the $L-$minimization by Eq.~(\ref{eq:cost}), we notice the $\overline{\varphi^{\perp}}_j$ data entering the analysis is fundamentally limited by the uncertainty of the phase angle $\beta(z)={\rm arg}(\varphi(z))$ retrieved from the hologram data. In particular, with $\beta_j\approx \beta_0(\Delta_j)$, the noise in the inferred $\overline{\varphi^{\perp}_j}$ at each detuning $\Delta_j$ is photon-shot-noise-limited to $\delta\overline{\varphi^{\perp}_j}=|\overline{\varphi_j}|\times \delta\beta_j$ as~\cite{Wang2022b}
\begin{equation}
\delta\beta_j = \frac{1}{\sqrt{N_{s,j}}},\label{eq:db}
\end{equation}
with $N_{s,j}\propto \sum_{\rm ROI} |E_s^{(j)}|^2$ summing the elastically scattered photons from the ROI to the camera.
The photon shot noise affects the predictions to all the $a,b,z_A$ parameters. However, with $\Delta_j$ uniformly sampling $|\Delta|\leq \Gamma$ so that $a,b$ can typically be fixed quite precisely, we may simplify the analysis by ignoring the correlations so that $\delta L=0$ suggests $\sum_j\delta\overline{\varphi^{\perp}}_j+\delta z_A \partial_{z_A} \overline{\varphi^{\perp}_j}=0$. Together with Eq.~(\ref{eq:beta}), we arrive at photon-shot-noise limited axial resolution
\begin{equation}
\delta z_A= \eta \frac{z_{\sigma}}{\sqrt{N_s}}.\label{eq:res}
\end{equation}
Here $N_s=\sum_j N_{s,j}$ is the number of all the elastically scattered photons entering the data analysis. The $\eta$ is a sample shape dependent factor, with $\eta=1$ for the Gaussian shaped sample.
We now discuss the choice of ROI for the coherent signal averaging in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cost})(\ref{eq:odPhiL}). As shown numerically in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}d(ii) (Appendix~\ref{sec:simu}), the rapid sign inversion for $\varphi^{\perp}$ along the light propagation direction $z$ is most pronounced near the $E_s$ center with $|y|<\sigma$ in the plot. With a large $\Delta z=z-z_A$ to be comparable to $z_{\sigma}$ (Eq.~(\ref{eq:zS})), oscillatory $\varphi^{\perp}(y,z)$ is developed along $y$ due to the curvature mismatch between $E_s$ and $E_p$. Therefore, for the $\sigma$-sized atomic sample, $|y|\leq\sigma$ is a natural ROI choice to isolate the uniform $\varphi^{\perp}(z)$ center for the $\overline{\varphi^{\perp}}(z)$ average. A too large ROI would reduce the $z$-dependence of $\overline{\varphi^{\perp}}(z)$ comparing to Eqs.~(\ref{eq:phiPerp})(\ref{eq:beta}). Conversely, a too small ROI would reduce the total number of elastically scattered photons $N_s$ entering the data analysis, compromising the photon shot noise limit (Eq.~(\ref{eq:res})). Practically, the atomic samples cannot always be approximated by Gaussian profiles. The size $\sigma$ may not always be assumed as prior knowledge either.
For the small samples to be discussed in this work (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a), the ROI should in principle be refined toward $|y-y_0|<\sigma$ with a suitable central position $y_0$ and width $\sigma$ to balance the $z-$sensitivity of the $L$-function in Eq.~(\ref{eq:cost}) with the amount of ROI-photons $N_s$. Practically, with the sample plane emphatically determined, we find that simply by thresholding the approximately refocused $|E_s|^2$ intensity, {\it e.g.} ROI=1 for $|E_s|^2>\epsilon |E_s|^2_{\rm max}$, $\epsilon\sim 0.1$, then nearly optimal $\delta z$ sensitivity for the Eq.~(\ref{eq:cost}) minimization can be achieved.
\subsection{Correcting high-order aberrations}\label{sec:aber}
From Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cost})(\ref{eq:res}), the high quality atomic sample plane localization relies on high quality minimization of the $L-$function toward the photon shot noise limit. The fit quality is affected by the imperfect optical system itself. For lensless holographic imaging~\cite{Sobol2014}, the optical transfer function according to free-space propagation is easily modeled. However, in most cold atom experiments, the imaging system usually requires an optical train to relay the coherent wavefronts from the samples in vacuum to the camera outside the vacuum~\cite{Alexander2020, Wang2022b,Altuntas2021}, as schematically illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a. Even for perfect optics, high-order aberration correction is required for volumetric imaging across a large depth of view.
Here, the high-order aberration correction can be achieved simultaneously with the $z=z_A$ sample plane localization, through the minimization of $L-$function by Eq.~(\ref{eq:beta}). For example, this can be achieved by setting up numerical Zernike plates~\cite{Altuntas2021} at $z=z_H$ with coefficients entering the $L-$function for the optimization. This is a step left for future work.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{Fig2_v3.pdf}
\caption{Holographically reconstructed images of a free $^{39}$K gas during the sample-plane refocus. The probe detuning is $\Delta=\Gamma$ in this example. The out-of-phase $\varphi^{\bot}(z)$ and the in-phase $\varphi^{//}(z)$ are displayed in (a)(b) respectively. A color domain plot of $\varphi$ is given in (c), with the $|\varphi|$ strength and the phase angle $\beta={\rm arg}(\varphi)$ encoded by brightness and color respectively. The images in (i)(ii)(iii) are evaluated at $z=z_A^-,z_A,z_A^+$ planes respectively, with $z_A^{\pm}=z_A \pm 20~{\rm \mu m}$. The $\varphi^{\perp}$ plot in (d) is similar to Fig.~\ref{Fig1}(d,ii), but is reconstructed from the experimental data.}
\label{Fig:single}
\end{figure}
\section{Experimental demonstration}\label{sec:exp}
\subsection{Methods}
Our experiment demonstration is based on a $^{39}$K holographic microscope on the D1 line. To facilitate the following discussions, in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}b we refer the $4S_{1/2}$, $F=1,2$ hyperfine ground states as $|g\rangle,|g'\rangle$, and $4P_{1/2}$, $F'=1,2$ excited states as $|e'\rangle,|e\rangle$ respectively~\cite{Weller2015}. As schematically illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a, an ${\rm NA}=0.3$ optical train with magnification $M=1$ relays the probe wavefront $E_p$ and the forward scattering $E_s$ by the cold atomic sample to the digital camera.
The probe wavelength {$\lambda_p=770~$nm} is nearly resonant to the $|g\rangle-|e\rangle$ hyperfine transition with a natural linewidth $\Gamma=2\pi\times 5.96$~MHz. The transition is spectrally isolated from $|g\rangle-|e'\rangle$ and $|g'\rangle-|e\rangle$ transitions by $\omega_{e,e'}=2\pi\times 55.5~$MHz and $\omega_{g,g'}=2\pi\times461.7~$MHz respectively. Up to $10^3$ atoms are laser-cooled to a temperature of tens of micro-kelvin~\cite{Sievers2015} and loaded into a microscopic optical dipole trap (ODT) composed by a focused $\lambda'=780~$nm laser along $x$. The approximately Gaussian-shaped atomic sample is with $\sigma_x = 15~{\rm \mu m}$ along $x$. The width $l_{y,z}$ estimated to be less than 1~${\rm \mu m}$ is below the $(\delta y)_{\rm res}=\lambda_p/{\rm NA}= {2.6\ \mu m}$ diffraction limit~\cite{Sobol2014a} of the NA=0.3 holographic microscope~\cite{Zhao2020}. In absence of imaging aberrations, we expect the diffraction-limited sample images to have an apparent Gaussian width $\sigma_y\approx (\delta y)_{\rm res}/2\sqrt{2}$ along $y$ of about $\sigma_y= {1.0~{\rm \mu m}}$. The associated diffraction distance $4 z_{\sigma}\approx 16~{\rm \mu m}$ (Eq.~(\ref{eq:zS})) is close to the diffraction-limited imaging axial resolution $(\delta z)_{\rm depth}=2\lambda_p/{\rm NA}^2$.
To spectroscopically locate the atomic sample plane, a sequence of two images $I_{1,2}^{(j)}$ are recorded at each probe detuning $\Delta_j$ with and without the atomic sample in repeated measurements. The CCD camera with $1040\times 1392$ pixels, each $6.45\times 6.45~{\rm \mu m}$$^2$ in size, is effectively placed at $z_H =10.4$~mm to record holograms of the atomic sample at $z_A=0.7$~mm. The camera exposure is set as $\tau_e=1$~ms. As detailed in Appendix~\ref{sec:expDetail}, to avoid inhomogeneous light shifts that tend to invalidate Eq.~(\ref{eq:odPhiL}), these ``standard samples'' are released from ODT before the holographic imaging. Notice the $|g\rangle - |e\rangle$ transition is open: during the probe excitation, spontaneous $|g\rangle\rightarrow |e\rangle~{\rm or}~|e'\rangle \rightarrow |g'\rangle$ Raman scattering tends to quench the atomic population into the dark $|g'\rangle$. Therefore, instead of probing the atoms continuously, we interleave a train of $\tau_p=1~\mu$s probe pulses with 4~$\mu$s of trapping+cooling pulses composed of the ODT beam with a D1 molasses~\cite{Sievers2015} blue detuned from $|g'\rangle-|e\rangle$ transition, which not only help to maintain the samples' shape, location, and temperature, but also depump the internal states back to $|g\rangle$ for the nearly resonant imaging. The probe pulse is set at a moderate $I\approx 3$~mW/cm$^2$ intensity in this work so that the near-resonant ${\rm OD}$ and $\phi$ are significant for the microscopic and dilute samples. Since the completion of this work, we have verified that our method works well at higher intensity, both numerically (Appendix~\ref{sec:secular}) and experimentally~\cite{Wang2022b}.
We follow the procedure outlined in Sec.~\ref{sec:rec} to reconstruct $E_{s,p}^{(j)}$ at each probe detuning $\Delta_j$, using the $I_{1,2}^{(j)}$ hologram data taken from repeated measurements. Depending on the desired signal to noise ratio, $N_{\rm ave}=2\sim 15$ holograms obtained at a same measurement condition are averaged to $I_{1,2}^{(j)}$ before proceeding the $E_{s}^{(j)}$ reconstructions. We then propagate both fields according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ASM}) to retrieve $\varphi_j(z)$ across the sample plane $z_A$, for the $L$-function minimization (Eq.~(\ref{eq:cost})). The performance of the spectroscopic refocus method is evaluated by repeating the measurements, typically within an hour of measurement time, to check the consistency of the predicted $z=z_A$ values. In addition, the results are compared with the more traditional method based on minimizing the apparent sample width, given by
\begin{equation}
l_y(z)=4\sqrt{\overline{y^2}-\overline{y}^2}.\label{eq:ly}
\end{equation}
Here $\overline {y}, \overline {y^2}$ are the 2D average of $y,y^2$ in the $x-y$ plane, weighted by the the 2D complex phase magnitude $|\varphi(x,y,z)|$ within a large enough ROI$'$, during the numerical $z-$scan of $E_{s,p}$. Experimentally we retrieve $l_y(z)$ by fitting $x-$ averaged $|\varphi(x,y,z)|$ with 1D Gaussian profiles. The factor of 4 is chosen so that $l_y=2\sqrt{2}\sigma_y$ for the Gaussian beam model.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{fig3_v3.pdf}
\caption{Spectroscopic signature of the ROI-averaged complex phase shift $\overline{\varphi}(z)$ during the refocus to the atomic sample plane. The insets of (a,b,d,e) provide the ${\rm Im}(\varphi(z))$ and ${\rm Re}(\varphi(z))$ images close to $z=z_A$, with ROI marked with dashed circles. (a-c) are according to numerical simulation of 2-level atoms (Appendix~\ref{sec:simu}), with sample parameters adjusted according to the experimental situation detailed in Sec.~\ref{sec:exp}. The experimental data are presented in (d-f) with scattered symbols, where the solid lines are from 2-level atom model with $a=-0.84, b=0.08$. Here $z_A^{'\pm}=z_A\pm10~{\rm \mu m}$. In both (c)(f), the ${\rm Re}[\varphi(z)]/{\rm Im}[\varphi(z)]$ ratio appears straight only at $z=z_A$ (Eq.~(\ref{eq:odPhiL})). }
\label{Fig:spec}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Results}
We first present typical 2D $\varphi(z)$ profiles in Fig.~\ref{Fig:single} around the sample location $z=z_A$. The probe detuning is chosen as $\Delta=\Gamma$ in this example with substantial optical peak depth ${\rm OD}\approx 0.2$ and peak $\phi \approx -0.15$ respectively (see Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a(i)). To improve the display, the holographic data is averaged over $N_{\rm ave}=14$ images (see Fig.~\ref{Fig1}a(ii)). We rotate the complex $\varphi$ with the known $\beta_0(\Delta)$ according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:rot}), which, according to the $L$-minimization to be described shortly, is adjusted to be ${\rm arctan}(2a+b)$ with $a=-0.84, b=0.08$ (fit from experiment data, see Table.~\ref{Table:cost} "average" column). In Fig.~\ref{Fig:single}a we see the $\varphi^{\perp}$ almost vanishes at $z=z_A$ while some weak fringes are still seen, due to the uncompensated high-order aberrations (Sec.~\ref{sec:aber}). On the other hand, substantial $\varphi^{\perp}(z)$ are developed at $\Delta z=\pm 20~{\rm \mu m}$. In Fig.~\ref{Fig:single}d the $\varphi^{\perp}(x=0,y,z)$ similar to Fig.~\ref{Fig1}d(ii) is given, where we see the experimental data matched very well with the theoretical expectation. The complex phase shift $\varphi(z)$ is given in Fig.~\ref{Fig:single}c with the color-domain plots. At the precisely refocused $z=z_A$, the $\varphi(z)$ becomes ``monomorphous'' with a uniform $\beta={\rm arg}(\varphi(z_A))$ distribution~\cite{turner2005diffraction}, as expected.
Next, the highly $z$-sensitive Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cost})(\ref{eq:odPhiL}) criterion is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig:spec} with the ROI-averaged $\overline{\varphi}(z)-\Delta$ curves. Here we still have $N_{\rm ave}=14$. The 2D $\varphi(z)$ distribution around $z=z_A$ as those in Fig.~\ref{Fig:single} are reproduced in the inset plots of Fig.~\ref{Fig:spec}(a,b,d,e). We evaluate $\overline{\varphi}(z)$ as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:loc}, within the ROI that are marked with dashed circles in the insets. The Fig.~\ref{Fig:spec}(a-c) data are according to the experimental geometry, but for linear response of ideal 2-level atoms ($a=-1,b=0$). The solid curves in Fig.~\ref{Fig:spec}(d-f) are instead numerically generated by adjusting the saturation of the 2-level model (Appendix~\ref{sec:simu}) together with $a=-0.84, b=0.08$ parameters to fit the experimental data. In Fig.~\ref{Fig:spec}(c,f) we see the linearity of the phase angle is strongly impacted by the deviation from the sample plane $z_A$ by a distance as small as $\Delta z\approx \pm 10~\mu$m to be comparable to $2 z_{\sigma}$, in agreement with Eq.~(\ref{eq:beta}).
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig4_v2.pdf}
\caption{(a) Refocus $^{39}$K sample to $z=z_A$ plane by minimizing the spectroscopic $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z)$ (Eq.~(\ref{eq:Lr}), blue) and apparent width $l_y(z)$ (Eq.~(\ref{eq:ly}), orange) with $z-$scan near $z_A$. Five data sets, with $N_{\rm ave}=3,3,3,3,2$ hologram-average respectively, are shown with dot symbols. The solid lines give average $\overline{L}_{\rm min}$ and $l_y$. The shadows provide standard deviations. (b) A typical in-focus $|E_s|$ image with $N_{\rm ave}=14$ hologram-average, where the red circle suggests the diffraction limit $(\delta y)_{\rm res}=\lambda_p/{\rm NA}$. }
\label{Fig:cost}
\end{figure}
Having introduced the general spectroscopic features of the reconstructed $\varphi(z)$ near $z=z_A$, we now present details of the $z_A$-plane localization by minimizing the $L-$ function in Eq.~(\ref{eq:cost}). Specifically, for a set of 25 $\{\varphi_j,\Delta_j\}$ data with $\Delta$ scanning from -6~MHz to 6~MHz by 0.5~MHz steps, we globally minimize $L$ to obtain the $a_{\rm opt},b_{\rm opt},z_{A}$ parameters. We then plot the normalized cost function,
\begin{equation}
\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z)\equiv L(z,a_{\rm opt},b_{\rm opt})/\sum_j|\overline{\varphi}_j|^2,\label{eq:Lr}
\end{equation}
in Fig.~\ref{Fig:cost}a vs $z$. To check the consistency of the localization, the same procedure is repeated with five data sets, with holograms in each set averaged by a moderate $N_{\rm ave}=2\sim 3$. The $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z)$ curves are compared with the apparent width $l_y(z)$ according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ly}) evaluated with the same data set. The detailed numbers are given in Table~\ref{Table:cost}. For a clear comparison, in both Fig.~\ref{Fig:cost}a and Table~\ref{Table:cost} the distance $z$ is evaluated relative to the average-$z_A$ from the five $L_{\rm min}-$based predictions.
Experimentally, from Fig.~\ref{Fig:cost}a we see $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z)$ on the displayed vertical scale almost vanishes. Indeed, $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A)\approx 0.2\%$ (Table~\ref{Table:cost}) is less than a tenth of $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A\pm \Delta z)$ by a slight defocusing distance $\Delta z=5~{\rm \mu m}$. For comparison, $l_y(z)$ hardly changes by $30\%$ by the same defocus. As by Line~2 of Table~\ref{Table:cost}, the $z=z_A$ localization in repeated measurements show remarkable consistency with an estimated standard deviation of $\delta z_A=0.3~\mu$m. For comparison, the sample width method in Fig.~\ref{Fig:cost}a (orange lines) and Line~(5-6) of Table~\ref{Table:cost} show a substantially larger $\delta z_A=2~\mu$m. The much better performance by the spectroscopic method is associated with the aforementioned strong $z-$dependence of the cost function $L_{\rm min}(z)$, due to the Gouy phase anomaly (Eq.~(\ref{eq:beta})), which makes the spectroscopic method substantially more resilient to imaging noises.
Ideally, according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:db}), we expect $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A)=1/N_s$ in the photon-shot-noise limit. for the Fig.~\ref{Fig:cost}a and Table~\ref{Table:cost} results, the total number of elastically scattered photons in each data set of holograms at the 25 $\Delta_j$ detuning is estimated to be $N_s\sim 10^6$, taking into account the $\sim 20\%$ quantum efficiency of our camera (Pico Pixelfly). However, as in Fig.~\ref{Fig:single}a our imaging system is not ideal so that the observed $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A)\approx 2\times 10^{-3} \gg 1/N_s$ is instead limited by high-order aberrations.
The observed $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A)$ is also substantially larger than those caused by deviation from the Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}) relation, due to transient and multi-level effects (Appendix~\ref{sec:secular}) which is numerically estimated at a $10^{-5}$ level~\cite{foot:XH}. In other words, there is an intrinsic uncertainty to the phase angle $\delta \beta_0\approx (\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A))^{1/2}\approx 0.05$, due to the imaging system smearing itself. With $\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A+\Delta z)=\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A)+\xi \Delta z^2/2$ in quadratic form, we attribute the observed ${\overline L}_{\rm min}(z_A)$ as unreliable modeling that limits the absolute axial resolution to $\delta z_{A}=\sqrt{\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A)/\xi}\approx 1.0~{\rm \mu m}$. Finally, it is useful to remark that although the data in Table~1 suggests any optical drifts between the atomic sample and camera is small in repeated measurements, practically any drifts during the $\Delta_j$-scan measurements effectively increase the sizes of the ``average samples'' entering the data analysis. In that case, our $L_{\rm min}$ method should still operates to find the average $z_A$ planes.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}
{
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c}
\hline\hline
& repeat1 & repeat2 & repeat3 & repeat4 & repeat5 & average & std
\\ [0.5ex]
\hline
$\overline{L}_{\rm min}(z_A)\times 10^{-3}$ & 2.79 & 1.55 & 2.41 & 1.98 & 1.79 & 2.10 & 0.44 \\[1ex]
$z_A$ [$\mu$m] & -0.6 & 0.1 & 0.3 & 0.2 & -0.1 & -0.02 & 0.32 \\[1ex]
$a_{\rm opt}$ & -0.86 & -0.85 & -0.86 & -0.83 & -0.84 & -0.84 & 0.017 \\[1ex]
$b_{\rm opt}$ & 0.048 & 0.088 & 0.090 & 0.111 & 0.075 & 0.083 & 0.021 \\[1ex]
\hline
$l_{y} (z_A) $ [$\mu$m] & 2.96 & 2.78 & 2.62 & 3.37 & 3.38 & 3.02 & 0.31 \\[1ex]
$z_A$ [$\mu$m] & 2.5 & -2.6 & -3.3 & -2.1 & -2.2 & -1.54 & 2.06 \\[1ex]
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Comparison of the spectroscopic $L-$minimization (top) and sample-width $l_y$-minimization (bottom) for the $z=z_A$ localization. std= standard deviation.}
\label{Table:cost}
\end{table}
\section{Discussions}\label{sec:summary}
The last twenty years witness rapid developments of quantitative imaging techniques in digital holographic microscopy, with applications across fields~\cite{Cuche1999,2004microelectromechanical, Bjrn2005Investigation,2008Phase,Greenbaum2012,DeHaan2020}. In comparison, holographic imaging for atomic physics research has been underdeveloped. A list of unique technical challenges needs to be addressed~\cite{Sobol2014a,Wang2022b}, before the holographic method can be applied with sufficient accuracy for imaging the highly fragile ultra-cold atomic samples. This work aims to resolve a particular challenge: the precise localization of the sample plane for retrieving the generic optical response of the atoms. The difficulty arises from the fact that typical atomic samples are spatially featureless. Previously, the only effort to address the problem appears to be exploiting atomic shot-noise correlations in phase-contrast imaging~\cite{Altuntas2021}.
In this work, instead of relying on spatial information to form refocus criterion, we propose to utilize characteristic spectroscopic features of atomic transitions for precise refocus in holographic microscopy. The underlying principle is to exploit the additional diffraction phase in the forward direction picked up by small objects, known as Gouy phase anomaly~\cite{wilson20123d}, that leads to deviation of apparent spectroscopic responses from those predicted by theory. The idea has already been demonstrated for localizing transparent objects~\cite{wilson20123d,smits2020imaging}. We combine the diffraction phase idea with the unique ability of holographic microscopy for resolving the complex phase shift~\cite{Wang2022b}, and propose a spectroscopic criterion to robustly localize the atomic sample plane. The proposal not only utilizes the fact that for dilute, thin samples the spectral phase angle is insensitive to atomic density fluctuation~\cite{Wang2022b}, but also exploit an interesting phase-angle relation (Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta})) which holds precisely for multi-level atom driven by strong optical pulses (Appendix~\ref{sec:secular}).
Experimentally, this work demonstrates super-resolved sample plane localization during digital holography of a diffraction-limited, laser-cooled $^{39}$K sample with sub-micron repeatability. This axial resolution is improved from the traditional method based on fitting the sample widths (Fig.~\ref{Fig:cost}a) by nearly an order of magnitude, in presence of imaging noises in our system. The absolute axial resolution of $\delta z_A\approx 1~\mu$m is yet limited by high-order aberrations of the imaging system itself (Sec.~\ref{sec:exp}), that can be minimized in future work (Sec.~\ref{sec:aber}). With the improvements, we expect the absolute axial resolution to reach the sub-micron level too, to be even smaller than the sample size itself. Our method can be applied to larger samples, where the atomic density fluctuations~\cite{Hung2011,Altuntas2021} lead to the required diffraction phase shifts. By properly choosing a set of ROIs (Eq.~(\ref{eq:cost})) (Sec.~\ref{sec:loc}), spectroscopic signatures of density-fluctuating features at various length scales of interest can be exploited to efficiently locate the central planes of the samples with the holographic microscope. Finally, it is important to note that in our experiment, the peak atomic density of about $10^{13}{\rm cm}^{-3}\ll 1/k_p^3$ is quite dilute, while the peak optical depth ${\rm OD}_{\rm max}<0.5$ is still small. To exploit our method for localizing samples with higher OD and density, stronger pulses should help to suppress contribution of resonant dipole interactions that would otherwise modify the line shape~\cite{chomaz2012absorption, Zhu2016} to compromise the Eq.~(\ref{eq:tanbeta}) criterion.
With the precise knowledge of the sample plane location, the complex spectroscopy method in this work can be uniquely powerful for resolving the phase angle information of ultra-cold samples next~\cite{Wang2022b}. In particular, to infer nontrivial, correlated optical responses of high OD, high density gases~\cite{chomaz2012absorption, Zhu2016}, the atomic sample plane can be spectroscopically located by probing a strong, isolated atomic transition with strong enough pulses first, as in this work. The phase-angle spectroscopy of the cooperative responses of the denser samples can then be reliably retrieved, in presence of density fluctuations generic to cold atomic samples which typically prevent regular imaging methods from obtaining accurate spectroscopic information in single-shots~\cite{Marti2018,
Li2020Wu}. Our spectroscopic method can also be extended to locate multiple samples in digital holography, where the highly precise sample plane localization forms an excellent starting point for complex spectroscopic imaging~\cite{Wang2022b,foot:XH} of sparsely distributed cold atomic samples in 3D~\cite{Nelson2007, Barredo2018}.
\section*{Funding information}
The authors acknowledge support from National Key Research Program of China under Grant No.~2017YFA0304204; NSFC under Grant No.~12074083; and the Original Research Initiative at Fudan University.
\section*{Disclosures}
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
\section*{Data availability}
Data underlying the results presented in this paper are not publicly available at this time but may be obtained from the authors upon reasonable request.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Dr. Liyang Qiu for helping on numerical calculations in this project.
|
\section*{Abstract}
Usually, clinicians assess the correct hemodynamic behavior and fetal well-being during the gestational age thanks to their professional expertise,
with the support of some indices defined for Doppler fetal waveforms. Although this approach has demonstrated to be satisfactory in the most of the cases, it can be largely improved with the aid of more advanced techniques, i.e. numerical analysis and simulation. Another key aspect limiting the analysis is that clinicians rely on a limited number of Doppler waveforms observed during the clinical examination. Moreover, the use of simple velocimetric indicators for deriving possible malfunctions of the fetal cardiovascular system can be misleading, being the fetal assessment based on a mere statistical analysis (comparison with physiological ranges), without any deep physio-pathological interpretations of the observed hemodynamic changes. The use of a lumped mathematical model, properly describing the entire fetal cardiovascular system, would be absolutely helpful in this context: by targeting physiological model parameters on the clinical reliefs, we could gain deep insights of the full system. The calibration of model parameters may also help in formulating patient-specific early diagnosis of fetal pathologies.
In the present work, we develop a robust parameter estimation algorithm based on two different optimization methods using synthetic data. In particular, we deal with the inverse problem of recognizing the most significant parameters of a lumped fetal circulation model by using time tracings of fetal blood flows and pressures obtained by the model. This represents a first methodological work for the assessment of the accuracy in the identification of model parameters of an algorithm based on closed-loop mathematical model of fetal circulation and opens the way to the application of the algorithm to clinical data.
\vspace{2pc}
\noindent{\it \bf Keywords}:
\noindent{Fetal circulatory system, lumped parameter model, Differential algebraic equations, Simulation and numerical modeling, Parameter estimation techniques, Inverse problem.\\}
\noindent{MSC:}
\noindent{65L80; 81T80; 78M50; 70F17}
\section*{Introduction}
The mathematical study of the adult human blood circulation is a quite consolidated subject, since the first work about it dates back in the late nineteenth-century \cite{frank}. On the contrary, the investigation of fetal (i.e. in utero) blood circulation is much more recent, with the modeling of sheep fetal cardiovascular system based on animal studies \cite{huike} and the first modeling studies of Doppler waveforms in the human umbilical placental circulation, about a century later \cite{thom, thom2}.\\
Doppler techniques are a powerful tool to assess fetal blood circulation as they allow for identification of characteristic blood velocity profiles in the fetal arterial and venous tree during gestation. Abnormal velocity waveforms have been associated with adverse perinatal outcome or cardiovascular diseases \cite{Hecher}. A complete understanding of fetal hemodynamics and circulatory patterns is necessary for the correct application and interpretation of Doppler findings \cite{canadilla, scaling} and for their best diagnostic use.\\
It is worth noting that most of the techniques typically adopted for the
postnatal circulation cannot be applied to investigate in utero blood circulation, and ultrasound based approaches, such as Doppler velocimetry and echographic imaging, are the only ones applicable in the routine fetal surveillance and prenatal diagnosis. Indeed, catheter-based measurements are completely unsuitable because they are too invasive for a fetus (they are applied in few situations, as the only diagnostic possibility for specific
pathological cases), thus practically preventing blood pressure measurements.
Furthermore, magnetic resonance imaging, that is readily used for quantification of blood flow in adult circulation is highly compromised in utero by spontaneous fetal motions. In turn, these limitations hinder the possibility of evaluating important fetal parameters like vascular resistances and compliances or ventricular and atrial elastances. These parameters significantly evolve during gestation and their values can be indicative of a proper or abnormal fetal development and growth.\\
In comparison with the information deducible from the individual Doppler velocimetric tracings that can be only indirectly related to fetal vascular conditions, computational models have the advantage of providing a more global view on hemodynamics and, when applied to patient-specific cases, could allow the quantification of circulatory parameters that are currently not measurable in the fetus.\\
A number of existing models have contributed significantly to our understanding of the fetal circulation, because they allowed the investigation of the influence of various parameters on the flow pulse waveforms in fetal districts, with reference to a generic blood circulation.
Different mathematical approaches were adopted to model the whole human fetal cardiovascular system or an individual portion, and they can be classified as zero-dimensional open-loop \cite{canadilla, oluf, pennati3}, zero-dimensional closed-loop \cite{munneke,pennati,yigit}, one-dimensional open-loop models \cite{guett, guiot, raines, vandenwij}, three-dimensional models \cite{chen, pennati4, pennati5, wilke}.\\
As mentioned above, the study of the fetal blood circulation is quite complicated because of the impossibility in obtaining clinical measurements of blood pressures and flow rates. The correct hemodynamic behavior at the different stages of the gestation are usually assessed referring to some descriptive indices (e.g. pulsatility indices) defined for each Doppler waveform, compared with existing normal standard ranges \cite{ciobanu}.\\
The use of mathematical models of the human fetal circulation may help to improve the understanding of the hemodynamic factors determining the index values and, most importantly, the development of non-invasive
mathematical-based forecasting tools based for the early diagnosis of fetal pathologies. Indeed, mathematical models predicting Doppler tracing are of interest for clinicians: unusual shapes of velocimetric waveforms may indicate abnormal values of vascular parameters, due to a direct influence of a specific disease (e.g. placental disease) or as a compensatory effect of another disease (e.g. brain-sparing effect during fetal growth retardation). Nevertheless, the diagnostic significances of the various suggested indices is often limited, as the anomalies of Doppler indices cannot be uniquely associated to a clear cause, with the risk that the pathological state in the vascular system is not detected at very early stages of disease development.
According to the specific scale of the phenomenon to be studied, various degrees of simplification at some levels have been proposed. One of them concerns the geometrical dimension of the model. In the current study, we focus onto zero-dimensional models, or lumped parameters models, where different regions of the vascular system are grouped in blocks and connected together, in analogy with the electrical circuits. The number of blocks is related to the desired degree of detail, and, often, the blocks form a closed loop where both blood circulation and cardiac chambers are modeled with suitable lumped parameters to describe the whole cardiovascular system. \\
The main advantage of closed-loop model approach is the possibility to describe the entire circulatory system and the blood pressure-velocity relationship in each block with a relatively simple and computationally effective model.
Here, in particular, we refer to a closed-loop lumped model of the fetal circulation developed and validated by Pennati et al. \cite{pennati}, able to predict the values for a large number of Doppler indices in a healthy human fetus. The model, originally set for a fetus at term of the gestation, was then extended to other gestational months \cite{scaling}. \\
Although the clinical informations provided by blood flow Doppler measurements are very useful to assess the status of the examined fetus,
they are still limited to few measuring sites and then provide a quite partial description of the cardiovascular system. The main goal of
the methodology proposed in \cite{pennati, scaling} is to assist the clinicians with a computational tool able to interpret the
collected data (blood flow Doppler velocities), estimate blood pressures
(always not measurable) and flows in the fetal vascular regions not
examined and, more generally, assess the vascular status of fetus
across gestational ages. Namely, the main strength of using a closed-loop lumped model is the possibility to build what-if scenarios by investigating the impact of vascular modifications or adaptations due to a disease. For instance, it allows the investigation of the hemodynamic changes when some model parameters are modified (e.g. resistances and compliances, as during a peripheral vasodilation or vasoconstriction occurring in intra-uterine growth retardation), without directly imposing any flows or pressures. On the contrary, open-loop circuits, which describe a limited part of blood
circulation (e.g. the arterial tree) see \cite{canadilla}, imply to assume fixed boundary conditions to the model, when instead they should modify due to parameter changes. Hence, if a lumped parameter model of the fetal cardiovascular system is conceived to be significantly applied in fetal diagnosis, the use of a closed-loop circuit is mandatory.
An additional important step towards a clinical use of the model is to obtain
patient-specific parameters able to describe individual fetal circulations.
This implies the capability of identifying the specific values of all the
parameters based on few clinically available information. In fact, a number
of studies suggesting various approaches to estimate patient-specific
lumped parameters can be found into the literature, applied to either open-
\cite{Canuto, DeVault} or closed-loop \cite{Pant, Schiavazzi} models of the blood circulation. Nevertheless,
these models are generally devoted to the investigation of the postnatal
blood circulation (neonatal or adult, where more and complete clinical data
can be collected), with a single study by Garcia-Canadilla et al. that focuses
on the in utero circulation \cite{canadilla2}. Namely, the fetal arterial circulation was
described in an-open loop configuration where two patient-specific bloodflow
inputs (ventricular outflows) and a reference downstream pressure are
imposed as boundary conditions. A constrained nonlinear optimization
algorithm, minimizing the mismatch between computed and measured
blood velocity waveforms in three fetal vessels, was employed to estimate 13
model parameters. The methodology was applied to 37 real cases (22
healthy and 15 growth-retarded fetuses), and a good the matching of the
target functions was reported.
Nevertheless, when the number of unknown parameters is high, and the
available patient-specific data are limited and affected by uncertainties (e.g., variable heart rates can be observed across the various time tracings), a preliminary analysis is suggested to verify the identifiability of the
parameters, before applying the method to real patients \cite{Schiavazzi}.
For this reason, as a first step, a virtual patient should be considered, where the clinical targets consisting in time tracings of blood flows and pressures are generated through a forward model solution (for the sake of simplicity,
in the following we will indicate these targets as \emph{synthetic data}).
A deep check of the ability of the identification
methodology to properly estimate the vascular and biomechanical model parameters is crucial before the model can be used as a descriptive tool of the fetal circulatory system and as a predictive tool for an early detection of fetal pathologies.
The use of synthetic data rather than clinical ones is motivated by the
necessity of verifying the accuracy of the parameter estimation algorithm.
As a matter of fact, when clinical data were used, even in presence of a satisfactory
superposition between real and simulated data, we could not establish the
correctness of the identified parameters. Indeed, as quite similar
(considering also the measurement uncertainties) velocity tracings could be
obtained using different sets of parameters, the knowledge of the vascular
parameters associated to the flow or pressures curves used as targets is
crucial in the verification phase.
%
The plan of the paper is as follows.
In Section \ref{model} we describe the forward mathematical model of the fetal circulation we adopted and its numerical approximation.
Sections \ref{sec:Optimization} and \ref{sec:enkf} are devoted to the
description of the optimization techniques used to the solve the inverse problem of parameter identification, while Section \ref{par:TestProblems} describes the logic and the details of the implemented test problems. In Section \ref{sec:results} the results obtained with the adopted methods are presented and a compared and a detailed discussion is contained in Section \ref{discussion}. Finally, in Section \ref{concl} we comment on the potential of the proposed parameter-estimation algorithm and we present the future developments of our work.
\section{Materials and Methods}\label{sec:methods}
The present section is devoted to the description of:
\begin{itemize}
\item the mathematical model adopted for the simulation of the cardio-vascular
fetal system;
\item the methods used for the estimation of fetal cardiovascular parameters;
\item the definition of the objective function and the selection of the
initial guess.
\end{itemize}
In the current study, we assume the parameters of the fetal model presented in
\cite{pennati} as reference values: some random perturbations of these parameters are produced, with an increasing level of variability, and a blind search is then attempted in order to get back the target values.
The search algorithm is based on two different methods: one is
represented by a combination of global and local search, where a global
optimization algorithm, namely Parameter Space Investigation ({\tt PSI})\cite{Peri, Torn} is applied in combination with the Levenberg-Marquardt ({\tt LM}) \cite{L, M}
algorithm for a refinement of the results; the other one is the Ensemble
Kalman Filter ({\tt EnKF}), originally developed for data assimilation into
dynamical models for numerical weather forecasting \cite{Eversen}. Although {\tt EnKF} represents a self-consistent solution of the identification problem, the {\tt LM} will be also considered for a further improvements of the results obtained with {\tt EnKF}.
\subsection{The model of fetal circulation \cite{pennati}} \label{model}
The closed-loop lumped parameter model of fetal circulation is the forward model in our problem and it was introduced and studied in \cite{pennati}.
The simulation algorithm, based on the mentioned lumped model, was developed in order to have a simple tool that is able to describe and investigate the physiology of whole human fetal circulation. Such model is able to reproduce all the fetal sites usually monitored by Doppler analysis and it consists of two major parts: the heart compartment, divided in four blocks, i.e. the right and left ventricles and atria and the vascular beds (arteries and veins). The vascular bed is divided into 19 compliant vascular districts connected by a network of rigid pipes:
\begin{itemize}
\item the upper part of fetal body includes the cerebral (CA and BR) and brachial (UB) circulation;
\item the lower part includes renal (KID), hepatic (HE), intestinal (IN), lower members (LEG) and umbilical-placental (PLAC) circulations;
\item five blocks for aorta (AA, AO1, AO2, AO3, AO4) and two blocks (PA1, PA2) for pulmonary arteries;
\item a lung block (LUNG) for pulmonary circulation;
\item inferior (IVC) and superior vena cava (SVC) and the umbilical vein (UV).
\end{itemize}
See Figure \ref{fig:distretti} for a scheme of the lumped model.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figure1.png}
\caption{Scheme of the lumped parameter model of the fetal cardiovascular system.
Arrows show the normal direction of the flow. Legend: AA: ascending aorta, AO1: aortic
arch, AO2: thoracic descending aorta, AO3: abdominal descending aorta, AO4: femoral bifurcation, BR: brain,
CA: cerebral arteries, HE: liver, INTE: intestinal circulation, IVC: inferior vena cava, KID: kidney, LA: left atrium, LEG: lower limbs, LUNG: lungs, LV: left ventricle, PA1: main pulmonary artery, PA2: pulmonary
arteries, PLAC: placenta, RA: right atrium, RV: right ventricle, SVC: superior vena cava, UB: upper body, UV: umbilical vein. Shunts (indicated as red bold lines): ADUC: ductus arteriosus; VDUC: ductus venosus; FO: foramen ovale. Blue filled circles: monitored blood flows. Red filled circle: umbilical vein pressure, measured in pathological cases.}\label{fig:distretti}
\end{figure}
Here we briefly describe the blocks of heart model. Ventricles are
modeled using three components which are related to the
contractile ($U_0$), the elastic ($E_{dia}$ and $E_{sys}$) and the
dissipative viscous ($R_v$) characteristics of the myocardium.
The instantaneous pressure $p(t)$ of the ventricular
model depends on the instantaneous ventricular volume
$V(t)$ and on its derivative $dV(t)/dt$, with an expression based on
the linearization of the pressure-volume-flow characteristics
of a ventricle model including passive and active
myocardial properties, see \cite{pennati} for more details.
Atria are described by a compliance $C_a$ connected
to a time-varying term $U_a(t)$ accounting for the atrial contraction.
For the four (mitral, tricuspidal, pulmonary, aortic) valves, the instantaneous pressure drop across each valve is computed as the sum of dissipative $K Q(t))^2$ and
inertial $L dQ(t)/dt$ terms, where $Q(t)$ is the instantaneous volumetric flow rate, and $K$ and $L$ are valvular dissipative and inertial flow coefficients. Moreover, the valve flow is one-directional.\\
Each block of the vascular bed is described by
means of a constant compliance $C$, expressing the elastic properties of the vessels. Using the
mass conservation law, the instantaneous
local pressure $p(t)$ is related to the volumetric flow rates
at the inlet and the outlet of the compartment:
$C dp(t)/dt = \sum Q_{in}(t) - \sum Q_{out}(t)$, where $\sum$ indicates
the sum of the flow rates since more than one vessel may enter or exit a compartment,
and the momentum conservation for each interconnection line holds:
\begin{equation}
\Delta p= R Q + K Q^{\beta} + L {d Q \over dt},
\end{equation}
with $R$ the resistance and $L$ the inertance. In particular, $R Q(t)$ represents the viscous losses along the vessels, $L dQ(t)/dt$ the inertia of the flow, taken into account only for the large arteries close to the heart; the additional term $K Q^{\beta}$, with $\beta \in R^+$, takes into account the local hemodynamics for the fetal shunts i.e., the ductus arteriosus DA, the ductus venosus DV, and the foramen ovale FO.
However, for the sake of brevity, we report in detail the full algebraic-differential set of equations of the model only in the Appendix.\\
By looking at the hydraulic scheme of Figure \ref{fig:distretti}, some interesting peculiarities of the fetal cardiovascular system can be figured out. Indeed, compared to the adult blood flow system which consists of a number of vascular parts arranged as a perfect serial circuit (left heart/systemic arterial circulation/systemic organs/systemic venous circulation/right heart/pulmonary arterial circulation/lungs/pulmonary venous circulation/left heart), in the fetal circulation three important vascular shunts exist which create a hybrid serial-parallel system.
Namely, the shunts are: i) the foramen ovale which directly connects the
systemic venous system with the left heart, ii) the ductus arterious
which directly connects the pulmonary with the systemic circulation and
iii) the ductus venosus which directly links the umbilical vein with
the heart.
Hence, in addition to the normal interconnections between adjacent vascular compartments, these shunts makes the model highly sensitive
even to small perturbations of parameters occurring in quite far blocks,
increasing the complexity of the identification process.
\subsubsection{Numerical solutions of the forward model}
The differential-algebraic equation system describing the model is solved by the explicit Euler method (first order) (together with the Collatz method of second order for the {\tt EnKF}) to integrate the ODE system, see \cite{butcher} for a description of the numerical methods for ODEs, while the algebraic equations are solved using as known data the solutions of the ODE system obtained at the previous time step. The simulation, with an integration step of $\Delta t=4\times 10^{-4} \ s$ and with a fixed set of parameters, is carried out in Matlab$^{\textcircled{c}}$ until the regime configuration is reached (20 cardiac cycles), in about 2 seconds on an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3630 QM CPU 2.4 GHz.
We remark that we decided not to use the ODE Matlab packages to solve the ODE system since in that case the integration step $\Delta t$ would be variable across the time of the simulation. However, the {\tt EnKF} method used for parameter estimation need to have a fixed integration step in the time window.
Moreover, to get the code simpler, we implemented explicit Euler's method in the simulation algorithm. Due to the stiffness of the problem, we applied a small time step $\Delta t$ so that to avoid numerical instability of the solutions.
\subsection{Definition of the objective function}\label{sec:obj}
For our optimization problem the objective function is represented by the distance between the target curves and the curves obtained by using the trial set of parameters.
In order to carry out our methodological study we need a convergent and stable value of the simulation. After preliminary tests, we observed that the simulation achieves stability and periodicity after about 20 cardiac periods. Then, in order to compare target curves with those obtained by a trial set of parameters, we compare the curve profiles at the 20-th simulated period. The distance between two curves is measured by two different approaches:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Direct measure of the distance - $L^2$:} the more intuitive approach is represented by the sum of squares of the difference between trial and target solutions. Since both the data are produced using the same implementation of the mathematical model, using the same time discretization, we can compare easily the samples, one by one, over a single cardiac period. All the regions where the local solution is naturally zero have been excluded from the analysis, and only one tenth of the points are compared in order to reduce redundancies. We will refer hereafter to this objective function as $L^2$.
\item {\bf Indirect measure of the distance - Analysis in the frequency domain - FFT:} another possible approach is represented by frequency spectrum analysis of the two curves to be compared. Since the observed phenomena are periodic, we can compute the frequency content of the last computed period of the signal by a Fourier analysis, and then compare the amplitude of the first 5 components. We will refer hereafter to this objective function as FFT.
\end{itemize}
The use of different metrics could produce an easier identification of the basin of attraction of the global minimum of the function, hopefully reducing also the multimodality of the problem: for this reason, we tried two different approaches, in order to verify this eventuality.
Actually, we found the two metrics to be almost equivalent for our purposes, as shown in Section \ref{sec:results}, with a small preference for the $L^2$: in the following we will use the $L^2$ approach, being simpler to compute than FFT.
\subsection{Selection of initial guess for identification using our synthetic data}\label{par:init}
Both {\tt PSI} and {\tt EnKF} methods require an initial guess of the parameters to be estimated. Since the choice of the starting point may have an influence in the final parameters estimation, 10 different sets of initial guess are selected. The random variation of each parameter with respect to the target values is fixed inside a prescribed range (30 $\div$ 40\%): this corresponds to the variability in the curve profiles observed in clinical measurements on healthy fetuses.
The forward lumped model is solved for all the perturbed sets of parameters, and the pulsatility index (PI) is computed in some crucial sites, see Table \ref{tab:PI}. In more detail, in order to describe the flow velocity in the arterial vessels, the pulsatility index $PI=(V_s-V_d)/V_{mean}$ is calculated using the maximum systolic $V_s$ and minimum diastolic $V_d$ velocities and the mean value of the velocity in the cardiac cycle ($V_{mean}$). The PI index is typically computed by using the flow speed because it represents, in practice, the only direct measure available, see \cite{Arduini}. However, from the fluid dynamic standpoint, we have a conservation
law for the mass flow, and not for the speed. The mass flow is linked to the speed by the section area of the blood vessel:
if the section area can be considered as a constant, the formulation of the PI in terms of mass flow and speed are numerically identical. Since our formulation provides the mass flow, we applied the same formula using the mass flow ($Q$) instead of velocity values, thus we have $PI=(Q_s-Q_d)/Q_{mean}$.
In Table \ref{tab:PI} the average values of the PI of all 15 equations (including test $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{C}$) for the 10 sets of initial guess are reported together with their normalized variance, which results to be greater than 50\%. This corresponds, approximately, to consider in the optimization procedure for the identification of the target model parameters in \cite{pennati} (referring to the average, i.e. the 50-th percentile), an initial guess value at $5$-th or $95$-th percentile of the normal range. Then we can conclude that the targets are far enough from each set of initial guess both in the parameter space and in the solution space, thus validating our methodology.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l||l|l|l} \hline
Target time tracings & E[X] & $\sigma$ & 100*$\sigma$/E[X] \\ \hline
Q$_{ADUC}$ (N. 1) & 32.1 & 22.4 & 69.8 \\
Q$_{AA}$ (N. 2) & 12.8 & 7.6 & 59.5 \\
Q$_{APOL}$ (N. 3) & 22.1 & 18.2 & 82.4 \\
Q$_{TRIC}$ (N. 4) & 10.6 & 8.5 & 80.0 \\
Q$_{MITR}$ (N. 5) & 8.6 & 8.8 & 102.9 \\
p$_{UV}$ (N. 6) & 59.4 & 75.7 & 127.3 \\
Q$_{FO}$ (N. 7) & 99.2 & 75.8 & 76.4 \\
Q$_{IVC}$ (N. 8) & 53.4 & 31.8 & 59.5 \\
Q$_{VDUC}$ (N. 9) & 45.6 & 33.3 & 73.0 \\
Q$_{AOM}$ (N. 10) & 23.0 & 26.4 & 115.0 \\
Q$_{KID}$ (N. 11) & 41.3 & 26.6 & 64.4 \\
Q$_{AODT}$ (N. 12) & 20.0 & 11.7 & 58.4 \\
Q$_{ARCO}$ (N. 13) & 29.0 & 26.0 & 89.9 \\
Q$_{SVC}$ (N. 14) & 49.0 & 44.1 & 90.1 \\
Q$_{MCA}$ (N. 15) & 23.6 & 18.2 & 77.2 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{Percentage variation of the PI values for the 10 sets of initial guess with respect to the corresponding value for the target point. A percentage variation of the variance larger than 50\% is indicating the good degree of coverage. Note that the numbering of the target measurements corresponds to the number of the clinical site reported in Fig. \ref{fig:distretti}.}\label{tab:PI}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{{\em Black box} optimization}\label{sec:Optimization}
As mentioned above, our approach to calibrate the model
parameters is to consider the mathematical model of the fetal cardiovascular
system as a {\em black box}: some outputs are produced once a set of parameters is given as input, no matter about how they are obtained.
The black box algorithm is characterized by the following features:
\begin{itemize}
\item outputs are represented by curve profiles for the different elements of the cardiovascular system;
\item for a given set of target curves, the objective function (to be minimized) is defined as a measure of the distance between the target curve profiles and
those actually provided by the model;
\item using this objective function a mathematical programming problem, whose
solution can be obtained by an appropriate optimization algorithm of the class of the non-linear constrained optimization, is defined.
\end{itemize}
Note that no further information are exploited: the output is not linked with any particular feature of the different parameters, neither special considerations are applied, i.e. the dependence or the connection between two different compartments and their local data,
or the possibility of the identification of a parameter from a restricted number of outputs. An example is reported in
\cite{goulet}, where a number of different optimization algorithms, all included in the {\tt Matlab} toolbox, are shown and applied,
but a critical review is here missing. A more complete analysis of the potentialities of the application of optimization algorithms
for the inverse-problem solution are discussed in \cite{Schiavazzi}, where different original algorithms are presented together with some basic considerations about the nature of the optimization problem, including the necessity of different techniques to be combined together. In fact, we have to consider the specificity of this problem: in particular, the fact that every parameter is acting on a specific region, but it is also influencing all the other regions.
The cardiovascular system is here considered as a closed circuit, and the variation of a model parameter is reflected (sooner or later) on the full system, with variable strength depending on both the specific weight in the equations where it directly appears and the induced weight on other equations. Thus, the sensitivity of each equation to the variations of parameters is also influenced by those not appearing in it.
Moreover, the influence of some of them can be large in absolute terms on the only compartment where another parameter is directly included: this situation can make it difficult to identify weaker ones.
This is probably the reason why by applying standard minimization algorithms without any particular precaution large and unnatural variations of some parameters are observed: if their local influence is small compared to the others, this is the only
way to produce a sensible effect. \\
For the same reasons, a procedure for the reduction of the number of parameters by linear combination, i.e. using the Principal Components Analysis (PCA), is doomed to failure: due to the excessive difference (sometime larger than one or two orders of magnitude) between the assigned weights, together with a strong dependence of the space location (in the parameter space), we can end up merging together a group of parameters where few of them are largely dominating, so that a small variation of some parameters is also forcing
a very large variation of another, or {\em viceversa}, hindering the optimization procedure based on PCA (or recombination in general).
Such dependence from the position in the parameter space is also requiring a frequent recalibration, thus making the optimization
time even longer. \\
For the same reason, a local search algorithm, based on information of the first or second derivative of the objective function
(gradient vector and/or Hessian matrix), becomes very difficult to apply without limitations or special assessments.
The line search along the descent direction could be limited to speed up the convergence; however, the great imbalance between the components of the gradient would slow down the process until it becomes unenforceable. \\
A different approach, still involving a classical gradient-based optimization algorithm, is depicted in \cite{Paun}. Here a combination of a Gradient-based algorithm and Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) is applied to the identification of the parameters of a 1D fluid-dynamic model of the pulmonary circulation. Although the procedure is promising and results are encouraging, we have also to stress how the number of involved parameters is significantly smaller (4 instead of 72) than the present case. \\
For the aforementioned reasons, similarly to \cite{Schiavazzi}, we applied the {\tt PSI} \cite{Torn,Peri} global search method combined with a {\tt LM} local search algorithm, tipically used in applications for curve fitting problems \cite{L,M}, to refine the obtained results, described in the following.
\subsubsection{Global search - Parameter Space Investigation ({\tt PSI})}
The adopted global search algorithm is inspired to a very simple concept depicted in \cite{Torn}: since every point of the design space has, in absence of further informations, the same probability to be the global minimum, the only way to find the global minimum is to sample regularly the design parameter space. Once a first set of measures is available, and one of the point shows the smaller value in the sample set, we can increase the density of the search around the promising point.
For this application, due to the small computational cost of the mathematical model, this strategy is viable, also considering the possibility of parallel computations. We sample regularly a rectangular subset of the design parameter space in a prescribed number of points: all the selected points are evaluated. Such method is known as Improved Distributed
Hypercube Sampling, see \cite{Beach}. Once the best point is selected, a new box (with reduced amplitude) is centered on it. This procedure is repeated as soon as the box dimension is not too small. The parameter space is also bounded, so that each search box is limited to lie into a prescribed region, avoiding extreme shifts.
In Fig. \ref{alg:PSI} is reported a pseudocode describing how PSI method works.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[scale=0.75]{figure7.png}
\caption{Schematization of PSI\, algorithm.}\label{alg:PSI}
\end{figure}
We recall here how we are dealing with a complex fetal model, producing 59 outputs (pressure and blood flows of the fetal circulation system). Our implementation of the model depends on 72 parameters\footnote{the atrial and ventricular systolic times and the time displacement between atrial and ventricular activation are here imposed, as they can be considered known on the basis of the heart rate, that is a value clinically measurable. Indeed, given the heart rate, some semi-empirical relationships between those parameters do exist.}, all interconnected to each other.
Due to this very large number of parameters, the spatial density of the investigation cannot be large as soon as the box is not small enough: the absence of clear limits on the variables is a further obstacle to the analysis, so that the reduction of the dimensions of the investigated space represents an outcome of the procedure, and cannot be imposed elsewhere. To give some elements, we can consider how the corner point of a $\Re^k$ space are $2^k$: in case of $\Re^{72}$ they are about $5 \times 10^{21}$, and with this number of points we are only selecting the corner points, without putting a single point in the internal part of the box. Consequently, the global analysis cannot be sufficiently dense to identify the target point with a reasonable precision, and this is the reason why the investigation is performed by a sequence of searches and, as a last step, a local search is needed after the global one. The best we can get from this global analysis is a good initial guess for the following local search.
\subsubsection{Local search - Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm ({\tt LM})} \label{LM_algo}
For the local search procedure, the Levenberg-Marquardt \cite{L,M} implementation available in the FORTRAN library {\tt MinPack} \cite{More} is adopted. This methodology requires an estimate of the objective function and its Jacobian. The original subroutine provides a built-in forward-differences scheme for the Jacobian computation, inappropriate for the use in this context due to the presence of rounding error and numerical noise in general. As a consequence, the required derivatives are approximated by using a 9 points central difference scheme, where a Gaussian filter is applied in order to smooth out the noise: after filtering the data, the extremal points are excluded from the gradient computation. The local search starts from the solution provided by the global search algorithm.
\subsection{Ensemble Kalman Filter algorithm ({\tt EnKF})}\label{sec:enkf}
A completely different approach in parameter identification problem is represented by
sequential filtering methods that take advantage of time varying
measurements. Unlike global methods, where the data are used in a
single batch, sequential methods estimate the unknowns with increasing accuracy
as the measurements arrive over time. When applied to parameters
identification problem, the main idea is to estimate the unknown parameters of a dynamical system from noisy measurements of some component of the state vector.\\
A possible generalization of Kalman Filtering in case of non-linear problem is represented by the Ensemble Kalman Filter ({\tt EnKF})
algorithm \cite{Eversen}. In \cite{DeVault} {\tt EnKF} was applied in hemodynamics to estimate tissue/wall material properties or Windkessel parameters. Here, instead, we apply the {\tt EnKF} method to address the parameters identification problem of the lumped model, also in combination with an {\tt LM} local search method to refine the obtained estimates.
Here we briefly recall the main concepts of the Ensemble Kalman Filter algorithm following the formulation of \cite{Arnold}.
In general, given a system of differential equations:
\begin{equation}
\frac{dx}{dt} = f(t, x, \theta), \ \ x(0) = x_0,
\end{equation}
with $x = x(t) \in \Re^d$ the state vector containing the states of the
system (the $d$ solutions of the system) and $f: \Re \times \Re^d \times \Re^k \rightarrow \Re^d$ a known model function, interpreting the unknown vector parameters $\theta \in \Re^k$ as static state components we can define an augmented state vector:
$$ z(t) = \left[x(t), \theta \right] \in \Re^{d+k}, \ \ \
\frac{dz}{dt} =
\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
f(t, x, \theta) \\
0 \\
\end{array}
\right]
= F(t, z).
$$
The problem of estimating $z(t)$ from noisy measurements $y(t)$ of some
component of the state vector $x(t)$ belongs to the class of filtering problem that can be addressed by using a Bayesian statistical approach opportunely defining an evolution--observation model.
First, we have to characterize an evolution model equation for the state vector
$z(t)$.
Let $y_j$ be the numerical approximation of measurements $y(t)$, $x_j$ the numerical approximation of $x(t_j)$ and $\psi$ a numerical integrator performing the propagation step from time $t_j$ to time $t_{j+1}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
x_{j+1} = \psi(x_j, \theta) + \nu_{j+1},
\end{equation}
where $\nu_{j+1}$ is the numerical approximation error which we model as a random variable whose probability density is a zero mean Gaussian process.
If $\hat{\psi}$ is a numerical integrator of higher accuracy, the quantity
\begin{equation}
\label{error_est}
\gamma_{j+1} = \hat{\psi}(x_j, \theta) - \psi(x_j, \theta)
\end{equation}
represents an estimate of the error in numerical integration and we can assume for $\nu_{j+1}$ a covariance matrix $\Gamma_{j+1}$ based on it, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\label{inn_cov}
V_{j+1} \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \Gamma_{j+1}), \ \ \ \Gamma_{j+1} = \tau^2\mbox{diag}(\gamma^2_{j+1})
\end{equation}
with $\tau > 1$ a safeguard factor introduced to compensate for the omission of the higher order terms.
Under the assumption that the estimated error (\ref{error_est}) represents the
standard deviation of an innovation term $v_{j+1}$, the evolution model
equation for the augmented state vector $z(t)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{ev_eq}
z_{j+1} =
\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
\psi(x_j, \theta) \\
\theta \\
\end{array}
\right]
+
\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
v_{j+1}\\
0 \\
\end{array}
\right]
= \Psi(z_j) + V_{j+1},
\end{equation}
where we assume that the propagation scheme for the static parameter is perfect, i.e. $\theta = constant$.
Let $y_{j+1} \in \Re^m$ be the observed data at time $t_{j+1}$. Assuming that the measurements consist of direct noisy observations of some components
of the state vector $x(t)$ we obtain the following observation model equation:
\begin{equation}
\label{obs_eq}
y_{j+1} = Bz_{j+1} + w_{j+1}, \ \ \ B= [P \ \ 0_{m \times k}],
\end{equation}
where $P \in \Re^{m \times d}$ is a projection matrix and the observation noise $w_{j+1} \in \Re^m$ is a zero mean Gaussian process with known covariance matrix,
$w_j \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \mbox{D})$, and independent of $z_{j+1}$.
Given the evolution-observation model defined by equations
(\ref{ev_eq}--\ref{obs_eq}), Bayesian filtering methods allow to sequentially
compute the posterior probability density of the the unknowns $(x_j, \theta)$ in a sequential way:
\begin{equation}
\pi(x_j, \theta | C_j) \rightarrow \pi(x_{j+1}, \theta | C_{j}) \rightarrow \pi(x_{j+1}, \theta | C_{j+1}),
\end{equation}
where $C_j = \{y_1,...,y_j\}$ is the data accumulated up to time $t_j$. In other words, the increasing information is integrated gradually as the data arrive.
Here we use the Ensemble Kalman Filter ({\tt EnKF}) algorithm based on the use of Monte Carlo techniques and ensemble statistics. Indeed, the main idea of {\tt EnFK} is to approximate the covariance matrices of innovation and observation noise with sample covariance matrices computed using the sample mean of a random sample of realizations of the state variable.
\\
The main steps of the implemented {\tt EnKF} algorithm are summarized in (\ref{enkf_appendix}). We also combined the {\tt EnKF} algorithm with the Levenberg-Marquardt ({\tt LM}) local search method described in \ref{LM_algo} to refine the obtained estimates.
\subsection{Definition of the test problems (synthetic data)}\label{par:TestProblems}
First, we preliminarily tested the algorithm in an ideal situation represented by a target of all 59 time tracings (blood flows and pressures), named set $\mathcal{A}$, to check the applicability of our estimation algorithm. Although this is an ideal and unachievable situation in practice (due to the impossibility of physically obtain pressure measurements in utero and to necessity of minimizing the time for clinical examination), test $\mathcal{A}$ serves to see the applicability of the methodology in presence of the maximum content of information.\\
Then, two different test cases have been defined with increasing difficulties, in order to check the ability of the algorithms in the identification of model parameter having less and less measurements available, and also provide a quantification of the correctness of the estimate. In particular, we consider as target:
\begin{itemize}
\item 15 time tracings, named set $\mathcal{B}$, i.e. 14 synthetic curves of blood flows profile: descending aorta,inferior and superior vena cava, middle cerebral artery, renal artery, umbilical artery, aortic isthmus, ductus venosus, ductus arteriosus, pulmonary, aortic, mitral and tricuspidal valves) and the quasi-steady pressure profile of umbilical vein;
\item 6 time tracings (a subset of test $\mathcal{B}$), indicated as set $\mathcal{C}$, i.e. ductus arteriosus, pulmonary, aortic, mitral and tricuspidal valves, plus the quasi-steady pressure profile of the blood pressure of umbilical vein.
\end{itemize}
The motivation for the choice of these sets will be discussed in detail below.\\
The reference curves used as target solution are produced using the model described in \ref{model}. These parameters refer to the final gestational period, when fetal body is about 3 kg. Numerical values can be found in \cite{pennati} (Tables 1 and 2).
In all the cases above, the reference curves are obtained solving numerically the forward lumped model in a time window composed by 20 cardiac cycles as explained more deeply in Section \ref{sec:obj}.\\
In producing the synthetic data, we fix the initial value for each equation of the system, in order to reduce the possible instabilities in the solutions of the forward model due to a change of the parameters; for this reason the same initial values are preserved also during the identification phase.\\
The choice of the compartments of fetal circulation analyzed in the clinical practice may vary significantly, depending on the screening protocol adopted by medical centers. To our knowledge, in the usual clinical practice the number of clinical measurements of healthy fetuses can be around 3-5 curve profiles of blood flows, while in the presence of pathologies the number of measurements can potentially increase until 14. In addition, we may refer
to the pressure values in the umbilical vein taken from the literature, or, in few cases for pathological fetuses, obtained by villocentesis (also known as percutaneous umbilical cord blood sampling).
Following these considerations, in order to reproduce realistic situations, we define two other tests, much more in line with the clinical diagnostics. In these tests, a limited number of equation solutions is adopted. Test $\mathcal{B}$ uses as target measurements the following 15 time tracings: $Q_{AA}, Q_{ADUC}, Q_{APOL}, P_{UV}, Q_{MITR}, Q_{TRIC}, Q_{ARCO},\\ Q_{AODT}, Q_{MCA}, Q_{SVC}, Q_{IVC}, Q_{KID}$, $Q_{AOM}, Q_{VDUC}, Q_{FO}$, while test $\mathcal{C}$ with uses as target solutions 6 time tracings: $Q_{AA}, Q_{ADUC}, Q_{APOL}$, $P_{UV}, Q_{MITR},\\ Q_{TRIC}$, see Figure \ref{fig:distretti} for a schematization of the clinical sites indicated with filled blue dots (blood flows) and red dot (blood pressure). As previously recalled, pressure data cannot be measured: for this reason, we are using a single pressure data (the pressure in the umbilical vein - the only fetal blood vessel that can be catheterized), while all the others are flow data. Selection of the equations for test $\mathcal{B}$ has been driven by the more indicative compartments from the diagnostic standpoint, while test $\mathcal{C}$ is a subcase of test $\mathcal{B}$ composed by a pressure profile and 5 blood flows profiles representative of the circulation in the heart compartment. In the Appendix we indicated by "*" symbol the equations involving the 15 measurements representing the target time tracings, as reported in Table \ref{tab:PI}.\\
\section{Results}\label{sec:results}
The different algorithms presented in Section \ref{sec:methods} are here applied to the test cases $\mathcal{A, B, C}$ to estimate the 72 parameters of the lumped model. We remark that we are using in the target curves, for the 72 unknown parameters, the values reported in Pennati et al. \cite{pennati} (see Section (\ref{par:init}) and the Appendix for more details) as our target. \\
For each test case, starting from the synthetic measurements, we apply {\tt PSI+LM} and {\tt EnKF+LM} by using 10 different set of initial guess as described in \ref{par:init}.
\subsection{Estimates of time tracings}
When all 59 measurements of the different sites of the lumped model are available (test case $\mathcal{A}$), the curve profiles
computed by using the estimated parameters are matching perfectly the target
curves for all 10 runs for both methods.
This shows the effectiveness of the optimization algorithm when the information content is the maximum available.
Test cases $\mathcal{B, C}$ are more significant under a clinical standpoint, since we consider only 15 and 6 measurements, respectively: in particular, while 15 measurements are hardly available in practice, 6 measurements represent a situation pretty typical in the current gestational monitoring. In the case of test $\mathcal{B}$ the target and optimal curves are nearly identical for both methods. More interestingly,
in Figure \ref{fig:curve6} we depict the last 2 out of 20 cycles of the target
curves of test cases $\mathcal{C}$ with those obtained by solving the lumped model with the set of the parameters estimated by {\tt EnKF+LM} and {\tt PSI+LM} methods for one set of initial guess. The districts of time tracings in test $\mathcal{B}$ are also included in order to observe the model outcomes for uncontrolled equations. Looking at Fig. \ref{fig:curve6} it is worth noting that the identification of the time tracings is correct even for the districts where no measurements are available. Moreover, the reconstruction of time tracings {\em not included in the group of the target curves} is slightly more accurate with {\tt EnKF+LM}, althought differences with the target are still evident.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{figure2.png}
\caption{Plot of the time tracings for test case $\mathcal{C}$. The boxes of the 6 target time tracings are depicted in purple. The results obtained with {\tt PSI+LM} are reported with black lines, the results obtained with {\tt EnKF+LM} in green and the target ones are in red.}\label{fig:curve6}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Estimates of target parameters}\label{estimate}
When all 59 equations are available (test case $\mathcal{A}$), the convergence of the objective functions of the different methods takes place regularly, with negligible differences between estimated and target parameters, thus we do not report in the tables the numerical values of the results obtained in this case.
In order to analyze the results obtained in the parameter identification we depict in Figure \ref{fig:corr} test cases $\mathcal{A}$, $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{C}$ on the left, middle and right images, respectively.
On top, the results from the {\tt PSI} method, before and after the application of the local search are depicted, while {\tt EnKF} is reported on bottom.
Red dots stand for the results before the local search by {\tt LM}, purple after {\tt LM}.
The normalized variance (variance divided by the averaged value, here multiplied by 100 in order to compare with percentage difference) of the 10 different results, is reported against the percentage difference between the mean values (over 10 results) of the estimated parameters and the corresponding target values.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.05\textwidth]{figure3.png}
\caption{Variance and averaged percentage differences of the 72 parameters provided by {\tt PSI+LM} (top) and {\tt EnKF+LM} (bottom). Results for test $\mathcal{A}$ (left), test $\mathcal{B}$ (middle) and test $\mathcal{C}$ (right).}\label{fig:corr}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The remarkable result revealed by these plots is the substantial correlation
between normalized variance and percentage difference, particularly for test
cases $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$: this means that, if the variance is low,
the identification of the parameter is also correct, and {\em viceversa}. This
is not a trivial result, since we could have a small variance but a completely
wrong value of the parameter: this would be the case in which all the searches
are pointing to the same incorrect value. Moreover, looking at the results
obtained for test case $\mathcal{B}$ it is evident that the informations brought
by the 15 time tracings are enough to guide the local search method {\tt LM}.
Indeed, after applying it to the results achieved by both {\tt PSI} and {\tt
EnKF} methods, the identification improves and the variance diminishes for all
the 72 parameters, see top pictures in Fig. \ref{fig:corr}. However for test
case $\mathcal{C}$ we do not observe a strong correlation
between normalized variance and percentage difference even after the application of {\tt LM} step.
Figures \ref{fig:caseB} and \ref{fig:caseC} show histograms of the $L^2$ percentage differences between the mean values of the estimated parameters and the corresponding target values for the 12 most relevant (in the clinical analysis) parameters for the methods: {\tt EnKF} (in purple), {\tt EnKF+LM} (in green), {\tt PSI} (in cyan) and {\tt PSI+LM} (in yellow), for test cases $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{C}$, respectively.
For test case $\mathcal{B}$ where 15 target time tracings are used, we can observe that both {\tt EnKF} and {\tt PSI} estimates are improved after applying {\tt LM} local search, see Fig. \ref{fig:caseB} and the related Table \ref{tab:erroriB}. Indeed, both {\tt EnKF+LM} and {\tt PSI+LM} perform well than {\tt EnKF} and {\tt PSI}, respectively, and are able to estimate most of the parameters with a difference around or below 5\% (except for $KDV$, that show a worst estimate, in particular for {\tt PSI+LM}).
Having only 6 target time tracings (test case $\mathcal{C}$) increases the uncertainty on the estimates, thus causing a loss of accuracy respect to the previous case $\mathcal{B}$. Moreover, having less data also makes more complex the analysis and the discussion of the results achieved, as can be observed in Fig. \ref{fig:caseC} and in the related Table \ref{tab:erroriC}. In this case, in fact, we can observe that the $L^2$ percentage differences between estimated and target values is not always improved by applying the local search with {\tt LM}. If we look at the results obtained by {\tt EnKF}, the percentage difference stays below 10\% for 4 parameters ($RBR, KDV, ULO, EsysL$) and between 10-20\% for 8 parameters ($RPLAC, RDV, CBR, CPLAC, URO, EsysR, EdiaR, EdiaL$).
After applying {\tt LM} to {\tt EnKF} results, i.e. {\tt EnKF+LM}, the situation improves significantly for 4 parameters ($EsysR, EdiaR, EsysL, EdiaL$), but, on the other hand, the estimates get worst for 4 of them ($RBR, RDV, KDV, CBR$).
{\tt PSI} method it is able to produce estimates of 7 parameters with a percentage difference below 5\%, i.e. $RBR, RDV, ULO, URO, EsysR, EdiaR, EsysL$, while the other 4 parameters are estimated with a percentage difference ranging in $13-22\%$. In the present case with few data available, also for this method the application of the local search with {\tt LM}, i.e. {\tt PSI+LM}, is not so effective, since the estimates are improve significantly only for 2 parameters ($CBR, CPLAC$), and, on the contrary, get much worse for 4 of them.
If we consider that, in a realistic case, we have no information about the target value of the parameter, in
Fig. \ref{fig:caseB} and \ref{fig:caseC} a last column has been added, reporting the solution, among all the
available ones, with the minimum variance. Particularly for $\mathcal{B}$, this check provides significant information, since the selected solution never overcomes the value of 10\% of percentage difference, and the best solution is picked up correctly in most of the cases. Good indications are also obtained for test $\mathcal{C}$; however, in some cases the best solution is not identified.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.1]{figure4.png}
\caption{Histograms of the $L^2$ percentage differences between target and estimated values obtained with {\tt PSI}, {\tt EnKF} and by {\tt PSI+LM}, {\tt EnKF+LM} using 15 target curves (test case $\mathcal{B}$).}\label{fig:caseB}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.1]{figure5.png}
\caption{Histograms of percentage $L^2$ differences between target and estimated values obtained with {\tt PSI}, {\tt EnKF} and by {\tt PSI+LM}, {\tt EnKF+LM} using 6 target curves (test case $\mathcal{C}$).}\label{fig:caseC}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Tables \ref{tab:erroriB} and \ref{tab:erroriC} report the numerical value of the percentage difference between the target value and the identified value of 12 most relevant parameters for the clinical analysis. In the mentioned tables, both average value and its variance, on a sample set of 10 solutions (obtained from 10 different sets of initial guess), are reported. The two different algorithms, {\tt PSI} and {\tt EnKF}, are reported, and the subscript is indicating the adopted metrics, $L^2$ of FFT (as described in section \ref{sec:obj}). The metric does not apply to {\tt EnKF}, that is not dealing with the same objective function as {\tt PSI} and {\tt LM}.\\
In test case $\mathcal{B}$, the best value of the average of the percentage difference between target and identified values is of about 4\% for both {\tt PSI+LM} and {\tt EnKF}, and the best metric is $L^2$. Worst case is around 20\% for {\tt PSI+LM} and 7\% for {\tt EnKF+LM}, then, the maximum error is smaller for {\tt EnKF+LM}.
In conclusion, the results reported in Table \ref{tab:erroriB} validate the choice of $L^2$ as metrics for the objective function.
For test case $\mathcal{C}$ in Table \ref{tab:erroriC} we only report the results obtained by $L^2$ metrics. Note that
the average difference is smaller for {\tt EnFK+LM}, indicating clearly a greater uncertainty for the results provided by {\tt PSI+LM}.
A clearer indication about the effect of a reduced number of target curves is obtained by observing Table \ref{tab:erroriC}, particularly looking at the parameters $ULO$ and $URO$. The variance associated with the identification of
these parameters by {\tt PSI} is significantly larger than for {\tt EnKF}: this is an indication about the larger scattering of the {\tt PSI} data. Once the local search by {\tt LM} is performed, this effect is further amplified
due to the limited number of target curves, and the variance spikes up to 400\% and more.
Since the local search by {\tt LM} algorithm is the same for both {\tt PSI} and {\tt EnFK}, the different results are only connected with the scattering of the starting points, and a larger dispersion of the solutions occurs due to the multiplicity of the solutions.
This situation is not observed in the results from test $\mathcal{B}$, where the higher number of target curves is probably reducing this multiplicity problem.
The effect of the number of target curves can be also clearly observed in Fig. \ref{fig:corr}. Looking at the results of test
$\mathcal{A}$, after the application of {\tt LM} the points are shifted towards the lower left corner of the graph: this
means that the percentage difference is improved as well as the accuracy of the identification (lower variance). This
situations changes gradually when the number of target curves is decreased: for test $\mathcal{B}$ a similar behavior can still be observed, while for $\mathcal{C}$ this group shift is not so evident.
\begin{table}
{\tiny
\begin{tabular}{l|ab|ab|ab|ab|ab|ab} \hline
&
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries PSI$_{L2}$} &
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries PSI$_{FFT}$} &
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries PSI$_{L2}$+LM$_{L2}$} &
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries PSI$_{FFT}$+LM$_{FFT}$} &
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries EnKF} &
\multicolumn{2}{|c }{\bfseries EnKF+LM$_{L2}$} \\ \hline
\rowcolor{DarkCyan}
Parameter & $\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ \\ \hline
RBR & -12.0 & 34.1 & -10.5 & 4.7 & -2.7 & 5.2 & -10.1 & 6.5 & -12.2 & 5.9 & -5.2 & 5.1 \\
RPLAC & -15.1 & 32.8 & -20.5 & 21.0 & -6.7 & 17.5 & -19.7 & 12.4 & -21.3 & 14.0 & -6.6 & 5.9 \\
RDV & 10.6 & 26.2 & 6.0 & 18.9 & 7.4 & 9.7 & -1.7 & 18.9 & -3.9 & 21.6 & -3.8 & 18.8 \\
KDV & -12.4 & 44.5 & -14.3 & 42.2 & -19.9 & 32.3 & -26.3 & 40.4 & -7.5 & 40.4 & 7.2 & 30.5 \\
CBR & -11.7 & 27.5 & -15.3 & 42.1 & 2.3 & 4.4 & -17.3 & 46.7 & -15.1 & 26.5 & 6.1 & 5.9 \\
CPLAC & 10.2 & 34.6 & -2.8 & 44.1 & 1.7 & 10.5 & -7.7 & 26.2 & 0.7 & 26.2 & 1.9 & 7.6 \\
ULO & 5.2 & 32.4 & -14.8 & 19.6 & -5.3 & 8.9 & -17.9 & 12.8 & -2.4 & 21.9 & -5.2 & 6.3 \\
URO & -17.8 & 51.3 & -18.9 & 27.1 & -5.4 & 9.2 & -21.6 & 17.6 & -8.1 & 24.1 & -5.2 & 5.6 \\
EsysR & 3.6 & 27.7 & -21.2 & 17.9 & -2.1 & 4.1 & -18.1 & 14.4 & -17.0 & 13.9 & -4.6 & 5.0 \\
EdiaR & -17.9 & 39.6 & -19.1 & 8.4 & -1.0 & 1.6 & -10.1 & 7.9 & -5.2 & 14.9 & 0.5 & 1.8 \\
EsysL & -10.1 & 34.5 & -25.4 & 17.1 & -1.7 & 3.7 & -19.8 & 17.9 & -17.7 & 18.8 & -4.4 & 4.9 \\
EdiaL & 6.2 & 27.8 & -19.3 & 14.2 & -1.1 & 1.6 & -9.3 & 4.2 & -4.4 & 11.9 & 0.6 & 2.0 \\ \hline
\rowcolor{LightViolet}
Average & 11.1 & 34.4 & 15.7 & 23.1 & 4.8 & 9.1 & 15.0 & 18.8 & 9.6 & 20.0 & 4.3 & 8.3 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{$L^2$ percentage differences in the estimates of model parameters most significant for clinicians. The grey columns indicate the best results obtained. Test case $\mathcal{B}$.}\label{tab:erroriB}
}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
{\tiny
\begin{tabular}{l|ab|ab|ab|ab} \hline
&
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries PSI$_{L2}$ } &
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries PSI$_{L2}$ + LM$_{L2}$ } &
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bfseries EnKF } &
\multicolumn{2}{|c }{\bfseries EnKF + LM$_{L2}$ } \\ \hline
\rowcolor{DarkCyan}
Parameter & $\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ &
$\overline{x}$ & $\sigma$ \\ \hline
RBR & 3.8 & 42.8 & 21.7 & 127.2 & 1.4 & 3.8 & 17.7 & 4.2 \\
RPLAC & -21.7 & 66.1 & -17.1 & 46.2 & 11.6 & 1.1 & 7.3 & 1.2 \\
RDV & 1.5 & 47.9 & 26.0 & 22.6 & 20.5 & 0.6 & 34.5 & 0.6 \\
KDV & -19.3 & 71.2 & 28.5 & 6.2 & 6.4 & 0.1 & 11.7 & 0.2 \\
CBR & -13.2 & 42.1 & -2.0 & 3.6 & 14.0 & 0.1 & 17.7 & 0.1 \\
CPLAC & 13.9 & 47.1 & 3.6 & 22.8 & 16.9 & 0.7 & 12.8 & 0.6 \\
ULO & 3.3 & 36.3 & 8.1 & 485.2 & 8.2 & 9.1 & 8.9 & 5.2 \\
URO & -3.4 & 21.2 & 2.0 & 419.7 & 14.0 & 12.7 & 11.1 & 7.7 \\
EsysR & 0.9 & 10.8 & -0.9 & 30.0 & 10.2 & 0.4 & 0.3 & 0.1 \\
EdiaR & -0.8 & 14.6 & -0.4 & 3.1 & 15.6 & 0.1 & 8.8 & 0.0 \\
EsysL & -4.5 & 26.8 & -8.4 & 28.8 & 9.9 & 0.6 & 3.1 & 0.1 \\
EdiaL & 9.6 & 33.1 & 13.8 & 3.8 & 13.0 & 0.1 & 1.9 & 0.0 \\ \hline
\rowcolor{LightViolet}
Average & 8.0 & 38.3 & 11.0 & 99.9 & 11.8 & 2.4 & 11.3 & 1.7 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{$L^2$ percentage differences and variances in the estimates of model parameters most significant for clinicians. Test case $\mathcal{C}$.}\label{tab:erroriC}
}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion}\label{discussion}
As reported in the previous Section, the differences between estimated parameters and target values are of the same order of magnitude as the expected experimental errors.
The obtained results satisfy the main requirement for the applicability of our algorithm to real data, represented by Doppler profiles collected by clinicians, if a sufficient number of time tracings is provided.
Regarding the algorithmic point of view, we deduce that both {\tt PSI+LM} and {\tt EnKF+LM} work fine with the largest number of available time tracings. Predictions are still quite accurate in test case $\mathcal{B}$ (15 measurements), with a difference between target parameters and estimated ones around 4-5\% in the average, see Table \ref{tab:erroriB}. The use of only 6 measurements (test case $\mathcal{C}$) makes the identification of model parameters less accurate, with the difference between target parameters and estimated ones around 11\% in the average, but with the presence of estimates with a difference higher than 10\% for some parameters, see Table \ref{tab:erroriC}.
These results can represent an indication for clinicians that collecting more informations during the Doppler clinical exam of fetuses can contribute to set up an effective mathematical predictive tools of fetal well-being across gestational ages. \\
We also derived a possible strategy to assess the quality of parameter estimation also in absence of target parameters for the error computation (in the case of clinically measured curve profiles). This methodology is based on correlation between normalized variance and percentage difference, thus allowing to assess that the identification of the parameter is correct when the variance is low: if the normalized variance is too high, the parameter is not considered for the classification of the fetus.\\
However, looking at the results in the crucial parameters of fetal circulation (regarding heart, ductus venosus, placenta and brain) reported in Tables \ref{tab:erroriB} and \ref{tab:erroriC}, we can conclude that the parameter estimation procedure was successful.
and that the {\tt EnKF+LM} method seems to be more appropriate to provide accurate parameter estimates of crucial model parameters if a limited number of data is available, while {\tt PSI+LM} is substantially equivalent if the number of target curve profiles is higher.
Regarding the computational time of the procedure, the algorithmic structure of {\tt PSI+LM} is largely parallel: {\tt PSI} is currently fully exploiting the {\tt MPI} protocol, while {\tt LM} actually not. On a parallel machine with 36 CPU, the {\tt PSI} analysis takes about 1 hour and 15 minutes. A similar CPU time is required for the
{\tt LM} search. Since we assume 10 different sets of initial guess for the minimal statistical analysis, considering also that the
10 {\tt LM}s can be performed in parallel, the overall time for the analyses is of the order of 12 hours. For this reason, we
cannot apply this methodology {\em on-line}, but the computational time is still compatible with the clinical activity,
considering the approach as a warning for further examinations to be completed the day after. By the way, the measured
curves provided by modern electrocardiograph are ready to use, without the necessity of a digitalization.
On the other side, up to know {\tt EnKF} was implemented without parallelization and
requires less than one hour. The implementation of multiprocessing makes the
algorithm suitable also for a preliminary screening of results.\\
As already mentioned, is of particular relevance to highlight that the proposed approach, requiring only a small amount of data, can provide a picture of all the curve profiles (blood flows and pressures) and the related model parameters (impedances, compliances and resistances) for which we cannot have available measurements, thus enabling the monitoring of the entire fetal circulation system.
The model, indeed, allows to have informations about locations of the cardiovascular system difficult or even impossible to reach or examine, but it also represents
the prerequisite to attempt, in the next future, a categorization of patients
into pathological and healthy classes according to the statistics obtained from
the estimates of model parameters of a sufficiently large database number of
patients belonging to both classes (pathological and healthy). Moreover, the mathematical algorithm can be seen as a supporting tool to clinicians to simulate what-if scenarios.\\
On the other hand, we have also to mention that the manifold interconnections between the vascular compartments make the problem highly sensitive even to small perturbations of model parameters. In addition, it is also important to say that dealing with clinical data, represented by velocimetric blood profiles, will add further difficulties to be considered in the simulation algorithm. In particular, we will need to:
\begin{itemize}
\item add the informations about diameters of blood vessels;
\item deal with different fetal cardiac frequencies of curve profiles during the Doppler exam to be reconstructed using the same set of model parameters;
\item consider suitable initial conditions to the ODE-algebraic system.
\end{itemize}
Thus, further investigations are required to make the algorithm applicable to real data, with the final goal of constructing a high-fidelity predictive model of fetal circulation.
\section{Conclusions}\label{concl}
Mathematical models for cardiovascular system are largely used to simulate blood flow in arteries and to quantitatively predict dynamical patterns in physiological and pathological conditions.
The principal feature of the present work has been the development of a simulation algorithm for the parameter estimation of lumped fetal circulation model. Indeed, the problem of identifying the unknown parameters of the model generating a given set of flow and pressure profiles represents a non-trivial inverse problem.
To our knowledge, this work is the first rigorous study on the estimation techniques of model parameters for fetal circulation models. In the existing literature on fetal circulation, see for instance \cite{canadilla2, Canuto}, the errors in the estimation procedure are not quantified, since the algorithms are directly applied to clinical measurements, thus it is also impossible to verify if the reconstructed solution represents the right one among the infinite possible ones. Here, instead, using artificial data as target solutions of the estimation algorithm it was possible to quantify very accurately the errors in the parameter estimation.\\
To summarize, here we develop a robust calibration algorithm able to perform the accurate fitting of given target curve profiles, even in case of few measurements available, together with a correct identification of target model parameters.
The present work paves the way for future directions of research, as:
\begin{itemize}
\item testing the algorithm synthetic unhealthy patients, in order to check the ability of reproducing more complex situations;
\item applying the calibration procedure on clinical data and building a database with model parameter classification of healthy patients, i.e. normal range for circulation parameters and of pathological patients;
\item using the model as forecasting tool to predict the effects of physiological alterations associated with pharmacological interventions, changes in the environment such as physiological stresses and disease processes;
\item in general, apply the presented methodology to reproduce clinical measurements and of a particular patient (patient-specific) in order to develop a non-invasive forecasting tool to describe the healthy state of the fetal circulatory system across the gestational period.
\end{itemize}
\section*{Credits.}
\noindent G. Bretti: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data curation, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review \& Editing, Supervision.\\
\noindent R. Natalini: Conceptualization, Methodology.\\
\noindent A. Pascarella: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data Curation, Formal analysis, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review \& Editing, Visualization.\\
\noindent G. Pennati: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data curation, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review \& Editing, Supervision.\\
\noindent D. Peri: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data Curation, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review \& Editing, Visualization.\\
\noindent G. Pontrelli: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - Original Draft.\\
All authors have read and agreed to the final version of the manuscript.
\include{bib}
\section{Supplementary material}\label{appendix}
\subsection{Full algebraic-differential set of equations of the lumped model \cite{pennati}}
Let us now describe in detail the equations of the model characterized by a differential - algebraic set of 59 equations. We have 29 differential equations:
\begin{align*}
(D1) \quad & {dp_{AO1} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{A01}} (Q_{AA} - Q_{ARCO} - Q_{AO1,2} - Q_{AO1,3}), \nonumber \\
(D2)^* \quad & {dQ_{AA} \over dt} = \frac{1}{L_{AA}} (p_{AA}-p_{AO1} - R_{AA} Q_{AA}),\nonumber
\\
(D3) \quad & {dp_{AO2} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{A02}} (Q_{ARCO} + Q_{ADUC}- Q_{AODT}), \nonumber \\
(D4) \quad & {d Q_{AO1,2} \over dt} = \frac{1}{L_{CARO} } (p_{AO1}-p_{CA}-R_{CARO} Q_{AO1,2}),\nonumber \\
(D5) \quad & { dp_{AO3} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{A03}}(Q_{AODT} - Q_{VRE}- Q_{AO3,2}-Q_{AO3,3}-Q_{AO3,4}), \nonumber \\
(D6) \quad & { dp_{AO4} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{A04} } (Q_{AO3,4} - Q_{AO4,1} - Q_{AOM}), \nonumber \\
(D7) \quad & { dp_{PA2} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{PA2}} (Q_{APOL} -Q_{PA2,1} - Q_{ADUC}), \nonumber \\
(D8)^* \quad & {d Q_{APOL} \over dt} = \frac{1}{L_{PA}}(p_{PA1}-p_{PA2} -R_{PA} Q_{APOL}), \nonumber \\
(D9) \quad & { dp_{LUNG} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{LUNG}} (Q_{PA2,1} -Q_{LUNG}), \nonumber \\
(D10)^* \quad & {d Q_{ADUC} \over dt} = \frac{1}{L_{DA}}(p_{PA2}-p_{AO2}-R_{DA} Q_{ADUC} - K_{DA} Q^2_{ADUC}), \nonumber \\
(D11) \quad & { dp_{BR} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{BR}}(Q_{MCA} -Q_{BR}), \nonumber \\
(D12) \quad & { dp_{SVC} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{SVC}} (Q_{BR} + Q_{UB}-Q_{SVC}), \nonumber \\
(D13) \quad & { dp_{UB} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{UB}} (Q_{AO1,3} - Q_{UB}), \nonumber\\
(D14) \quad & { dp_{IVC} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{IVC}} (Q_{HE} +Q_{VRE} + Q_{LEG} + Q_{VDUC}-Q_{IVC} - Q_{FO}),\nonumber \\
(D15) \quad & { dp_{HE} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{HE}} (Q_{UV,1} +Q_{AO3,2} + Q_{INTE} -Q_{HE}),\nonumber \\
(D16) \quad & { dp_{INTE} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{INTE}}(Q_{AO3,3} - Q_{INTE}), \nonumber \\
(D17) \quad & { dp_{VRE} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{VRE}}(Q_{KID} - Q_{VRE}), \nonumber \\
(D18) \quad & { dp_{PLAC} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{PLAC}} (Q_{AOM} - Q_{PLAC}), \nonumber
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
(D19) \quad &{ dp_{LEG} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{LEG} } (Q_{AO4,1} - Q_{LEG}), \nonumber \\
(D20)^* \quad & { dp_{UV} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{UV}} (Q_{PLAC} - Q_{UV,1} -Q_{VDUC}),\nonumber \\
(D21) \quad &{ dp_{CA} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{CA} } (Q_{AO1,2} -Q_{MCA}), \nonumber \\
(D22) \quad & { dp_{AA} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{AA}}(Q_{LV} -Q_{AA}), \nonumber \\
(D23) \quad & { dp_{PA1} \over dt} = \frac{1}{C_{PA1}} (Q_{RV} -Q_{APOL}), \nonumber \\
(D24) \quad & {dV_{LV} \over dt} = Q_{LA}- Q_{LV}, \nonumber \\
(D25) \quad & {dV_{LA} \over dt} = Q_{LUNG} + Q_{FO} - Q_{LA}, \nonumber \\
(D26)^* \quad & {d Q_{MITR} \over dt} = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
0 \ \textrm{ if } p_{LA}<p_{LV} \textrm{ and } Q_{MITR}<0, \nonumber \\
\frac{1}{L_{Li}} (p_{LA}-p_{LV} -K_{Li} Q^2_{MITR}), \textrm{ otherwise, }
\end{array}\right.\nonumber\\
(D27) \quad & {dV_{RV} \over dt} = Q_{RA}- Q_{RV}, \nonumber\\
(D28) \quad & {dV_{RA} \over dt} = Q_{SVC} + Q_{IVC}- Q_{RA},\nonumber\\
(D29)^* \quad & {d Q_{TRIC} \over dt} = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
0 \ \textrm{ if } p_{RA}<p_{RV} \textrm{ and } Q_{TRIC}<0, \nonumber \\
\frac{1}{L_{Ri}} (p_{RA}-p_{RV}-K_{Ri} Q^2_{TRIC}), \textrm{ otherwise. }
\end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
The equations above are coupled with the following 30 algebraic equations:
\begin{align*}
(A1)^* \quad & Q_{ARCO} = \frac{1}{R_{ISTHM} }(p_{AO1}-p_{AO2}),\nonumber \\
(A2)^* \quad & Q_{AODT} = \frac{1}{R_{DTAO} }(p_{AO2}-p_{AO3}),\nonumber \\
(A3) \quad & Q_{AO3,4} = \frac{1}{R_{DAAO}}(p_{AO3}-p_{AO4}),\nonumber \\
(A4) \quad & Q_{PA2,1} = \frac{1}{ R_{LUNG} }(p_{PA2}-p_{LUNG}), \nonumber \\
(A5) \quad & Q_{LUNG} = \frac{1}{ R_{LA}}(p_{LUNG}-p_{LA}), \nonumber \\
(A6)^* \quad & Q_{MCA} = \frac{1}{R_{MCA}}(p_{CA}-p_{BR}), \nonumber \\
(A7) \quad & Q_{BR} = \frac{1}{R_{BR}}(p_{BR}-p_{SVC}), \nonumber \\
(A8)^* \quad & Q_{SVC} = \frac{1}{R_{SVC}}(p_{SVC}-p_{RA}), \nonumber \\
(A9) \quad & Q_{AO1,3} = \frac{1}{R_{UBA}}(p_{AO1}-p_{UB}), \nonumber \\
(A10) \quad & Q_{UB} = \frac{1}{R_{UBV}}(p_{UB}-p_{SVC}), \nonumber \\
(A11) \quad & Q_{HE} = \frac{1}{ R_{HV}}(p_{HE}-p_{IVC}), \nonumber \\
(A12)^* \quad & Q_{IVC} = \frac{1}{R_{IVC}}(p_{IVC}-p_{RA}), \nonumber
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
(A13) \quad & Q_{UV,1} = \frac{1}{R_{HA}}(p_{UV}-p_{HE}), \nonumber \\
(A14) \quad & Q_{AO3,2} = \frac{1}{R_{ELG}}(p_{AO3}-p_{HE}), \nonumber \\
(A15) \quad & Q_{AO3,3} = \frac{1}{R_{MEA}}(p_{AO3}-p_{INTE}), \nonumber \\
(A16) \quad & Q_{INTE} = \frac{1}{R_{PORV}}(p_{INTE}-p_{HE}), \nonumber \\
(A17)^* \quad & Q_{KID} = \frac{1}{R_{REA}}(p_{AO3}-p_{VRE}), \nonumber \\
(A18) \quad & Q_{VRE} = \frac{1}{R_{REV}}(p_{VRE}-p_{IVC}), \nonumber \\
(A19)^* \quad & Q_{AOM} = \frac{1}{ R_{UA}}(p_{AO4}-p_{PLAC}), \nonumber \\
(A20) \quad & Q_{PLAC} = \frac{1}{R_{PLAC}}(p_{PLAC}-p_{UV}), \nonumber \\
(A21) \quad & Q_{AO4,1} = \frac{1}{ R_{FA}}(p_{AO4}-p_{LEG}), \nonumber \\
(A22) \quad & Q_{LEG} = \frac{1}{R_{FV}}(p_{LEG}-p_{IVC}), \nonumber \\
(A23)^* \quad & R_{DV} Q_{VDUC} + K_{DV} Q^2_{VDUC} = p_{UV}-p_{IVC}, \nonumber
\\
(A24)^* \quad & Q_{FO} =\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\left(\frac{1}{ K_{FO}}(p_{IVC}-p_{LA})\right)^{1/\beta_{FO}}, \textrm{ if } p_{IVC}>p_{LA},\\
0 \ \textrm{ otherwise, }
\end{array}\right.\nonumber \\
(A25) \quad & p_{LV} (t)= U_{LO} A(t) + (E_{diaL} + E_{sysL} A(t)) V_{LV} (t) - Q_{LV} R_{vL},\nonumber \\
(A26) \quad & K_{LO} Q^2_{LV} +R_{vL} Q_{LV}= p_{LV}-p_{AA}, \textrm{ if } p_{LV} >p_{AA}, \nonumber \\
& Q_{LV}=0 , \textrm{ otherwise,}\nonumber \\
(A27) \quad & p_{LA} (t) = U_{aLO} A_a(t) + \frac{1}{C_{aL}} V_{LA},\nonumber \\
(A28) \quad & p_{RV} (t) =
U_{RV}(t) + E_{RV}(t) V_{RV}(t) - Q_{RV} R_{vR},\nonumber \\
(A29) \quad & K_{RO} Q^2_{RV} +R_{vR} Q_{RV}= p_{RV}-p_{PA1}, \textrm{ if } p_{RV}-p_{PA1}>0, \nonumber \\
&Q_{RV}=0 , \textrm{ otherwise,}\nonumber \\
(A30) \quad & p_{RA} (t)= U_{RA}(t) + \frac{1}{C_{aR}} V_{RA}.\nonumber
\end{align*}
Note that we indicated by "*" symbol the equations involving the 15 measurements representing the target time tracings reported in Table \ref{tab:PI}.
As mentioned above, the model parameters in the equations of the differential-algebraic system are 72, plus the cardiac times fixed as reported below.
Regarding the unit measure of the model parameters, we have: $U$, isovolumic pressure generator $(mmHg$); $E$, ventricular elastances ($mmHg/ml$); $R_v$, dissipative myocardial resistances ($mmHgs/ml$); $K$ valvular coefficients, ($mmHg s^2/ml^2$), $L$, valvular inertances ($mmHg s^2/ml$); $C$, atrial compliances ($ml/mmHg$).
Note that $A(t)$ and $A_a(t)$ are, respectively, the ventricular and atrial activation functions defined in (\ref{A}) and (\ref{Aa}):
\begin{align} \label{A}
A(t)= \left\{\begin{array}{lcc}
&\left(1/2 \left[1- \cos \left({2 \pi t \over t_s} \right) \right]\right)^\alpha & 0 \leq t < t_s \\
& 0 & t_s \leq t < t_c,
\end{array}\right.
\end{align}
with $\alpha=0.3$, $t_s$ the systolic period (duration of the miocardic contraction), $t_c$ the cardiac period.
We also define the normalized sinusoidal activation function $A_a(t)$ for the left and right atria:
\begin{align} \label{Aa}
A_a(t)= \left\{\begin{array}{lcc}
\left(1/2 \left[1- \cos \left({2 \pi (t+\tau) \over t_{sa}} \right) \right]\right)^\alpha & -\tau \leq t < t_{sa} -\tau \\
0 & t_{sa} -\tau \leq t < t_c-\tau,
\end{array}\right.
\end{align}
with $\alpha=0.3$, $t_{sa}$ and $\tau$, respectively, the duration and the anticipation of the fetal atrial contraction.
Supposing a cardiac frequency of 140 beat/min for a heart model of a normal fetus of 3 kg \cite{pennati}, we assume:
$$
t_s=0.22, t_c=0.43, \tau=0.1, t_{sa}=0.13.
$$
\subsection{EnKF algorithm}\label{enkf_appendix}
We apply the EnKF algorithm to the three different test cases described above with different sets of initial guess values.
We remind that in our case the state system $x$ is given by the $d=59$ equations described in \ref{model} and the parameter vector $\theta$ is the set of $k=72$
parameters of the lumped model. The main steps of the algorithm are described
in Table \ref{enkf_tab}. \\
We propagate the system with the one-step Euler method and use the Heun
method to estimate the integration error (\ref{error_est}) and assign the
covariance of the innovation with a fixed time step $\Delta t = 4 \times 10^{-4} s$ and
a sample size of $N=500$. For the initial state $\mathcal{S}_0$, we generate an
initial cloud
$$\theta_0^n = (1 + 0.05 u^n + 0.5 \Delta t \epsilon^n)\theta, \ \ \ n=1, \ldots, N$$
where $u^n \sim \mathcal{U}(0,1), \epsilon^n \sim \mathcal{N}(0,1)$ and $\theta$
of the 10 different sets of initial guess of the three different test cases. To
generate a cloud of initial values for the state system, for each parameter
vector $\theta_0^n$ we propagate the system for 20 cardiac cycles at get the
last state to obtain the initial ensemble $\mathcal{S}_{0|0} = \{ (x_{0|0}^1,
\theta_0^1), \ldots, (x_{0|0}^N, \theta_0^N)\}$. The observations $y_{j+1}$
belong to different space based on the test case we are working on, i.e.
$y_{j+1} \in \Re^m, \ m=59, 15, 6$.
\begin{table*}[h]
\centering \scriptsize
\scalebox{0.8}{
\begin{tabular}{|p{16cm}|}
\hline
\vspace{.1cm} \textit{Initialization:} Draw the initial combined state and parameter ensemble $ \mathcal{S}_0 = \mathcal{S}_{0|0} = \{ (x_{0|0}^1,
\theta_0^1), \ldots, (x_{0|0}^N, \theta_0^N)\} $ from the initial prior distribution $\pi(x_0, \theta_0)$.
Set $j=0$
\vspace{.2cm} \\
\hline
\vspace{.1cm} \textit{Prediction step:} Using the current ensemble $S_{j|j}$
\begin{enumerate}
\item Propagates the states using a numerical integrator $\psi$ with specified time step $\Delta t$
$$ x_{j+1|j, \psi}^n = \psi(x_{j|j}^n, \theta_j^n, h), \ \ \ n = 1, \ldots, N$$
\item Compute the innovation covariance matrix for each ensemble $n$
$$ C_{j+1}^n = \tau^2\mbox{diag}(\gamma^2_{j+1}), \ \ \gamma_{j+1} = x_{j+1|j, \hat{\psi}}^n - x_{j+1|j, {\psi}}^n$$
where $\tau > 1$ is a safeguard factor and $\hat{\psi}$ is a higher order numerical integrator
\item Draw $v_{j+1}^n \sim \mathcal{N}(0, C_{j+1}^n) $ for each $n$
\item Generate the prediction states via the evolution equation \ref{ev_eq}
$$ x_{j+1|j}^n = x_{j+1|j, \psi}^n + v_{j+1}^n, \ \ \ n=1, \ldots, N$$
\item Combine the predicted state and parameter vectors to form the augmented prediction ensemble
$$ \mathcal{S}_{j+1|j} = \{ z_{j+1|j}^1, \ldots, z_{j+1|j}^N \}, \ \ \ z_{j+1|j}^n = (x_{j+1|j}^n, \theta_j^n), \ \ \ n=1, \ldots, N$$
\item Compute the prior mean and covariance of the augmented prediction ensemble using the ensemble statistics
$$ \bar{z}_{j+1|j} = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^N z_{j+1|j}^n
, \ \ \ \Gamma_{j+1|j} = \frac{1}{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^N (z_{j+1|j}^n -
\bar{z}_{j+1|j})(z_{j+1|j}^n - \bar{z}_{j+1|j})^T $$
\item Optionally inflate the prior covariance $\Gamma_{j+1|j} = (1 + \delta)\Gamma_{j+1|j}, \delta > 0$
\end{enumerate} \\
\hline
\vspace{.1cm} \textit{Observation update:} If an observation $y_{j+1}$ arrives,
\begin{enumerate}
\item Generate the observation ensemble $ \{ y_{j+1}^1, y_{j+1}^2, \ldots,
y_{j+1}^N\}$ via the formula
$$ y_{j+1}^n = y_{j+1} + w_{j+1}^n, \ \ \ n=1, \ldots, N \ \ \ \mbox{where} \
\ \ w_{j+1}^n \sim \mathcal{N}(0, D)$$
\item Compute the Kalman Gain
$$ K_{j+1} = \Gamma_{j+1|j}B^T(B\Gamma_{j+1|j}B^T + D)^{-1} = (\Gamma_{j+1|j}^{-1} + B^T D^{-1} B)^{-1} B^TD^{-1}$$
\item Generate the posterior states and parameters using the updating formula
$$ z_{j+1|j+1}^n = z_{j+1|j}^n + K_{j+1}(y_{j+1}^n - Bz_{j+1|j}^n), \ \ \ n=1,$$
to obtain the combined posterior ensemble
$ \mathcal{S}_{j+1|j+1} = \{ (x_{j+1|j+1}^1, \theta_{j+1}^1), \ldots, (x_{j+1|j+1}^N, \theta_{j+1}^N)\} $
\end{enumerate}
Otherwise set $\mathcal{S}_{j+1|j+1} = \mathcal{S}_{j+1|j}$
\\
\hline
\vspace{.1cm} \textit{Posterior ensemble calculations:} Compute the posterior state mean and error covariance using the ensemble statistics
$$ \bar{x}_{j+1|j+1} = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^N x_{j+1|j+1}^n, \ \ \
\Gamma_{j+1|j+1} = \frac{1}{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^N (x_{j+1|j+1}^n -
\bar{x}_{j+1|j+1})(x_{j+1|j+1}^n - \bar{x}_{j+1|j+1})^T $$
Similarly, compute the parameter mean and covariance using the ensemble statistics
$$ \bar{\theta}_{j+1} = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{n=1}^N \theta_{j+1}^n, \ \ \
\Theta_{j+1} = \frac{1}{N-1} \sum_{n=1}^N (\theta_{j+1}^n -
\bar{\theta}_{j+1})(\theta_{j+1}^n - \bar{\theta}_{j+1})^T $$ \\
\hline
\vspace{.1cm} If $j < T$, set $j = j+1$ and repeat from Step $2$; otherwise, stop. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Schematization of the EnKF algorithm.}
\label{enkf_tab}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Sensitivity analysis - completeness of the data}
The large number of parameters adopted in the mathematical model represents a great obstacle for their correct identification. Unfortunately, each parameter is typically characterizing a small part of the whole cardiovascular system: if the area of influence is not included, the measure of the corresponding parameter is obtained only in an indirect manner, and a large variability for that parameter is to be expected.
In order to give an idea about the real influence of a parameter on a specific equation, a sensitivity analysis has been produced. In this test, each parameter is increased of 1\%, and the influence on the parameter is measured by means of the Pulsatility Index (PI), defined in Section \ref{par:TestProblems}. The results of the sensitivity analysis are reported in Figure \ref{fig:sensi}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{figure6.png}
\caption{Non-dimensional sensitivity of each parameter on each equation. Black is for a very weak influence of a parameter on the corresponding equation.}
\label{fig:sensi}
\end{figure}
We can see how a very limited number of parameters have a large influence on a subset of the equations. Tipically, the influence of the other parameters is one or two order of magnitude smaller. This situation represent a great obstacle if we try to merge some parameters together, in order to reduce the total number of variables to be considered in the identification problem. On the other side, also the selection of the minimal number of equations necessary for the parameter identification cannot be obtained starting from considerations about the sensitivity. For this reasons, the selection of the equations has been performed on the base of the clinical experience and on the measurements reasonably available.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Recent advances in deep learning technology have fueled to research on situation understanding in which images, signals, and various other observations are understood through language~\cite{vinyals2016show,you2016image}.
Systems can provide interpretations of data in a form comprehensible to humans by adding explanations to data through language for a variety of applications~\cite{dou2018data2text,ishigaki2021generating}.
There are various applications for such systems, one of which is systems that operate in human living spaces, such as life-support robots.
Since these systems operate in a symbiotic space with humans, the systems must understand the situation in a form that can be interpreted by humans, such as natural language.
Such language-based situational understanding has been discussed in a variety of situations, including human behavior analysis~\cite{takano2015statistical}, describing robot behaviors~\cite{yamada2018paired,yoshino2020caption}, and robot observations~\cite{yuguchi2022butsukusa}.
Correctly understanding and explaining a situation from observations is the first step in building a system that can work in human living spaces.
However, systems are expected to provide cooperative assistance to human users.
In other words, they must recognize both the current situation and the necessary actions (help) for solving it.
For example, robotics research has proposed to accurately identify the expected robot action class given the current robot observation as input~\cite{soans2020sa,ahn2022can}.
Another study defined the problem of estimating the robot's action class that should be performed between the current and target states~\cite{chatila2018toward}.
One of the most critical issues of these proposals is that there is a wide variety of life support systems that resemble those of robots, and the actions conducted for such support are also diverse.
In other words, achieving a flexible understanding of a situation is challenging with only predefined robot action classes.
Thus, in this study, we propose an operative action captioning task, which describes what action is to be done between the current to the target state by captioning for a better understanding of the surrounding human situation.
In this task, we assume that the current state (observation) and the target state are given by cameras.
Then the system generates a caption that explains the expected actions to change the current state to the target state.
Using this method, such human-assisting systems as robots can interact with users for mutual understanding.
Situation understanding by captioning has been actively studied in computer vision, which requires a certain amount of training data~\cite{kim2019image}.
Therefore, we used crowdsourcing to construct a dataset of about 17,000 cases for operative action captioning.
Existing research on captioning suggests the importance of using auxiliary information that can be recognized from images to improve the accuracy of captioning with limited training data~\cite{gan2017semantic,yao2017incorporating,li2019pointing}.
We focus on scene graphs~\cite{li2017scene}, which represent events on images as auxiliary information.
The scene graph represents some events in the image, which are strongly related to the actions conducted in the images.
A scene graph describes the situation in detail as a set of triplets: subject-relationship-object.
By taking information from the scene graph for both the current and target states, we can acquire the differences or the conducted events between two states, which is critical information to acquire the action between them.
Our research contribution follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We defined a new task, operative action captioning, toward building a robust robot action generation system.
\item We built a new dataset for the defined task by extending the existing dataset at home, Home Action Genome Dataset.\footnote{We will open the data in camera ready.}
\item We proposed a strong baseline based on change captioning and an auxiliary task of scene-graph prediction.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{overview_e.eps}
\caption{Overview of proposed task: operative action captioning.
In the dataset, an assistant worked in a role of human assisting robot has a head-mount camera and images are captured by the camera.
First-person viewpoint indicates images from the assistant.
Third-person viewpoint indicates images from fixed-point cameras.
Such information can also be used by systems if cameras are available.
Red squares indicate rectangles, which contain target objects for the operation.}
\label{fig:overview}
\end{figure}
\section{Operative Action Captioning}
\label{sec:task}
Figure~\ref{fig:overview} overviews the operative action captioning task.
{\sf (A)} is the current state observed by the life support system, such as robots, and {\sf (B)} is the target state when the support action is completed.
In this case, ``opening the toilet seat lid'' is the expected support action, and the system has to distinguish it from both the current and target states.
In this study, images {\sf (A)} and {\sf (B)} are used as input, and the action that changes the state {\sf (A)} to {\sf (B)} is estimated by generating explanatory sentences (caption).
In a general scenario for robots, the problem is defined as selecting an action class from pre-defined action classes, given these two inputs~\cite {chatila2018toward}.
In other words, the problem is predicting an action class that can change current state {\sf (A)} to target state {\sf (B)}.
However, a wide variety of actions must be performed in daily life support.
This diversity makes it difficult for systems to estimate the support actions that are required for life support systems.
We apply a generative approach based on captioning to estimate the necessary support actions from both pre-defined action classes and undefined actions.
Recognition of such operative actions has been researched in the field of possible action recognition from observations~\cite{tran2018closer,soans2020sa,ahn2022can}.
Such studies define the problem by estimating the action class contained in images or videos.
More complicated event representation, such as scene graphs~\cite{li2017scene}, is used to predict actions or events in observations~\cite{ji2020action,rai2021home}.
In this study, we introduce captioning using natural language as a more flexible estimation of operative actions.
The use of scene graphs also generates accurate and clear captions~\cite{chen2020say}.
Our study is inspired by such works and uses scene-graph prediction as an auxiliary task to improve the generated caption.
Another advantage of using auxiliary learning compared with input representation integration is that we do not need to prepare labels in the test phase.
Captioning differences is another related research direction that focuses on the different descriptions of two images~\cite{park2019robust,qiu20203d}.
In contrast, in this study, our task captions the actions that should be conducted between two states (images).
The difference information is useful to predict the operative actions; thus, we use a captioning system of difference as our baseline.
Raw-level robot action estimation from two such observations is another research avenue~\cite{kim2021fixmypose}.
A robot's physicality strongly constrains such an approach.
Our captioning approach can express the expected action by language, even if the target robot cannot conduct the generated operative action.
This point is critical for robots working in human living space.
\section{Data Collection}
\label{sec:data}
We collected texts that describe operative actions for pairs of the current and target states (images) for operative action estimation based on captioning.
We extended the Home Action Genome Dataset~\cite{rai2021home} to achieve operative action captioning for developing a robot that works in human living spaces.
In this section, we describe the Home Action Genome Dataset, our data collection method using crowdsourcing, and our collection results.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{HAG_e.eps}
\caption{Annotation example of Home Action Genome Dataset}
\label{fig:HAGdataset}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Home Action Genome Dataset}
\label{sec:data:hagenome}
The Home Action Genome Dataset~\cite{rai2021home} consists of videos of various human actions in the home with their annotations (Fig.~\ref{fig:HAGdataset}): subjects, objects, and relationships.
Relationship contains relations, events, and actions.
The videos are recorded by head-mount cameras for a first-person viewpoint and fixed point cameras for a third-person viewpoint.
The third-person videos have annotations in the form of scene graphs that describe events or actions with object names, subject names, and rectangles.
Scene graphs indicate ``subject-relationship-object'' connections.
``Activities'' are defined as events related to operative actions.
These annotations are given with a time stamp in the video's time series.
Since both the third- and first-person videos are recorded in all the sessions and are time-synchronized, these labels can be used for both videos even though we cannot use a rectangle of the object area in the first-person video.
Some specific annotation examples are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAGdataset}.
Here scene graphs are annotated to corresponding events and relationships to the action: putting the forks on the table by the plate.
In the actual annotation, although such relationships as ``person-in\_front\_of-table'' are comprehensively annotated, the example in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAGdataset} only shows the graphs related to the target operative action.
\subsection{Caption Annotation by Crowdsourcing}
\label{sec:data:crowd}
To achieve operative action captioning, we used frames in the Home Action Genome Dataset videos.
The current state is defined as an observation just before an actual operative action, and the target state is defined as an observation just after it.
The current and target states are defined by extracting image frames before and after the point in a time sequence when the relationship changed that corresponds to the activity in the scene graph.
For example, in the example in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAGdataset}, we extracted the frames before and after the ``person-holding-fork'' scene graph changed to ``person-putting-fork.''
We automatically extracted approximately 69,000 pairs of candidate frames using scene graph annotation from the Home Action Genome Dataset from both first- and third-person viewpoint videos.
For each of these pairs, we added by crowdsourcing a natural language description of what kind of operative action was performed between the paired images.
We presented both images and the target object name's label extracted from the scene-graph annotation to the crowd workers and asked them to explain what kind of action was performed by the target object between the images.
The crowd workers received the following instructions.
\begin{screen}
What did the worker in the images do to change the state in the first image to the one in the second image?
If you can explain using the ``OBJECT'', check the ``I can explain'' box and describe it using the object name.
If you cannot explain, check the ``I cannot explain'' box and describe why.
\end{screen}
OBJECT is the name of an object, which is related to the target activity.
For example, in Fig.~\ref{fig:overview}, we used ``toilet'' as the OBJECT for the upper example and ``fork'' as the OBJECT for the lower example.
Fig.~\ref{fig:overview} also indicates examples of collected captions as ``description.''
Finally, we gathered 16864 pairs with operative action captions and split them into 14335/843/1686 as train/dev/test.
We checked the quality of the captions and the reasons for being unable to explain and recollected if the checking rejected the sample.
The image pairs that were finally judged as unable to be annotated included the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item The target object is too far away to be identified by the third-person viewpoint camera.
\item The position or state of the target object did not change between the current and target images.
\item Since the target object is obstructed by a person or other objects, distinguishing it from the image is difficult.
\item The first-person viewpoint image is blurred.
\item The target object is not shown in the current image, in the target image, or in either image.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{DUDA_e.eps}
\caption{Dual dynamic attention (DUDA) model and its extension in the proposed system}
\label{fig:DUDA}
\end{figure*}
\section{Operative Action Estimation Based on Natural Language Generation Model}
\label{sec:method}
Using the collected data, we constructed a model to estimate the operative actions performed (or to be performed) from the images of the current and target states.
We used the dual dynamic attention (DUDA) model as our baseline scheme and improved it by adding a scene-graph prediction module as an auxiliary task.
In this section, we describe the outline of the DUDA model, the scene-graph prediction used as the auxiliary task, and the training setup.
The overall model overview is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:DUDA}.
\subsection{Dual Dynamic Attention (DUDA) Model}
\label{sec:method:duda}
The DUDA model~\cite{park2019robust}, which focuses on the change between two images, was proposed to explain the change itself.
Thus, it has an image-difference detection mechanism.
We use this model because the part of the image change extracted by difference detection corresponds to an object that changes due to the operative action, which is our task's main focus.
In the model, images before and after the operative action are converted into feature vectors by an image encoder using ResNet~\cite{he2016deep} to perform difference detection.
The extracted feature matrices of images $X_{\sf (A)}$ and $X_{\sf (B)}$ calculate the difference matrix as $X_{\sf diff} = X_{\sf (A)} - X_{\sf (B)}$.
The difference matrix is concatenated with the original matrices as $X'_{\sf (A)}$ and $X'_{\sf (B)}$ to compute spatial attentions $a_{\sf (A)}$ and $a_{\sf (B)}$~\cite{mascharka2018transparency}.
The elemental unit multiplication between the attention weights and feature matrices $X_{\sf (A)}$, $X_{\sf (B)}$, and $X_{\sf diff}$ are used as resultant feature vectors $l_{\sf (A)}$, $l_{\sf (B)}$, and $l_{\sf diff}$, which focus on the changes between images.
The change is also related to the operated action.
Weighted feature vectors $l_{\sf (A)}$, $l_{\sf (B)}$, and $l_{\sf diff}$ are fed to the captioning network that has dynamic attention to generate captions.
Here our target caption indicates the conducted operative action between two images.
Softmax cross-entropy loss $L_{cap}$ for the reference caption is used as the loss function of network training.
The original DUDA model does not contain the ``auxiliary task'' part in Fig.~\ref{fig:DUDA}.
\subsection{Auxiliary Task: Scene-Graph Prediction}
\label{sec:method:auxiliary}
The actions performed between the current and target images are given as captions, which contain various expressions.
Some captions do not explicitly contain the names of the target actions or the target objects.
The auxiliary tasks that predict the scene graphs force the network to maintain the information of the operative actions to improve the caption quality.
We accomplished this idea by adding a model for the auxiliary tasks that predicts scene graphs with the baseline DUDA model.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:DUDA}, we constructed a model to predict the triples in scene graphs given the same image features to the captioning model: $l_{\sf (A)}$, $l_{\sf (B)}$, and $l_{\sf diff}$.
Although many scene graphs are obtained from the images, we built a sequential prediction model that repeatedly outputs ``subject-relationship-object'' by the network.
Since this auxiliary task performs sequential prediction, we defined the network that uses the softmax cross-entropy loss as in the main task.
Let $L_{sgr}$ denote the loss function of the auxiliary task.
\subsection{Loss Function and Experimental Setup}
\label{sec:method:loss}
We used the DUDA model without a scene graph as the baseline to capture the operative actions performed between both images.
We used the original implementation of the DUDA model\footnote{\url{https://github.com/Seth-Park/RobustChangeCaptioning}}.
The initial learning rate was 0.01, which was multiplied by 0.1 every 20 epochs.
The loss function is defined as,
\begin{align}
L_{\theta} = L_{cap} + \lambda_{L_{1,cap}} L_1 - \lambda_{ent} L_{ent,cap}. \label{Eqn:DUDA}
\end{align}
Here $L_{1,cap}$ and $L_{ent,cap}$ are regularizations based on L1 and entropy.
$\lambda_{L_{1,cap}}$ and $\lambda_{ent,cap}$ are the hyperparameters of the weights for each regularization.
We use the same hyperparameters from the original DUDA implementation and denote this setting as {\sf Baseline}.
When we trained the proposed model that has an auxiliary task to predict scene graphs, we extended the original DUDA implementation (Eq.~(\ref{Eqn:DUDA})):
\begin{align}
L(\theta) =& \alpha (L_{cap} + \lambda_{L_{1}} L_{1,cap} - \lambda_{ent} L_{ent})\nonumber\\
&+ (1 - \alpha) (L_{sgr} + \lambda_{L_{1,sgr}} - \lambda_{ent} L_{ent,sgr}).
\end{align}
Here $\alpha$ is a weight that integrates the weights for operative action captioning and scene-graph prediction.
We used the same hyperparameters for the baseline for $\lambda_{L_{1}}$ and $\lambda_{ent}$.
We implemented two integration methods for the main and auxiliary tasks.
The first is a linear interpolation that uses a fixed $\alpha$.
We set $\alpha=0.9$ based on a trial on the development dataset.
We call this setting {\sf Linear Int. (0.9)}.
Another method is a fluctuating update, which alternatively uses two $\alpha$s every ten epochs.
We tried two $\alpha$s patterns, $[0.0, 1.0]$ and $[0.1, 0.9]$, and called these settings {\sf Alternative (1.0)} and {\sf Alternative (0.9)}.
In the alternative method, we trained the scene-graph prediction task and then the captioning task.
In addition, we utilized two scene graph sets to investigate the best usage.
Since there are several scene graphs in the current state {\sf (A)} and the target state {\sf (B)}, we determined two setups: {\sf all} and {\sf diff}.
The {\sf all} method predicts any scene graphs contained in both {\sf (A)} and {\sf (B)}.
The {\sf diff} method predicts only the discrepancies between scene graphs {\sf (A)} and {\sf (B)}.
The former corresponds to using features from both images, and the latter corresponds to using the changes in the images.
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{Automatic evaluation results}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|ll|c|c|c|c|c|c} \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Model} &
\multirow{2}{*}{Condition} &
& \multicolumn{4}{c|}{BLEU} & \multirow{2}{*}{ROUGE-L} & \multirow{2}{*}{CIDEr} \\
\cline{4-7}
& & & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & & \\
\hline \hline
{\sf Baseline} & - & & 0.389 & 0.238 & 0.151 & 0.0998 & 0.375 & 0.871\\
\hline
\multirow{6}{*}{\sf +Scene Graph}
& \multirow{2}{*}{\sf Alternative (1.0)} & {\sf all} & 0.350 & 0.194 & 0.113 & 0.0686 & 0.330 & 0567 \\
\cline{3-9}
& & {\sf diff} & 0.359 & 0.205 & 0.126 & 0.0815 & 0.339 & 0.649 \\
\cline{2-9}
& \multirow{2}{*}{\sf Alternative (0.9)} & {\sf all} & 0.396 & 0.244 & 0.156 & 0.105 & 0.383 & 0.921 \\
\cline{3-9}
& & {\sf diff} & 0.392 & 0.245 & 0.158 & 0.107 & 0.389 & 0.913 \\
\cline{2-9}
& \multirow{2}{*}{\sf Linear Int. (0.9)} & {\sf all} & {\bf 0.405} & {\bf 0.260} & {\bf 0.167} & {\bf 0.114} & {\bf 0.392} & {\bf 1.001} \\
\cline{3-9}
& & {\sf diff} & 0.396 & 0.246 & 0.160 & 0.109 & 0.387 & 0.971 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:autoeval_overall}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{Content word accuracy}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|ll|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c} \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Model} &
\multirow{2}{*}{Condition} &
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Noun} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Verb} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Verb-independent} \\
\cline{4-12}
& & & P & R & F & P & R & F & P & R & F\\
\hline \hline
{\sf Baseline} & - & & 0.378 & 0.385 & 0.381 & 0.156 & 0.169 & 0.162 & 0.122 & 0.131 & 0.126 \\
\hline
\multirow{4}{*}{\sf +Scene Graph}
& \multirow{2}{*}{\sf Alternative (0.9)} & {\sf all} & 0.393 & 0.406 & 0.399 & 0.168 & 0.186 & 0.177 & 0.139 & 0.153 & 0.146\\
\cline{3-12}
& & {\sf diff} & 0.387 & 0.406 & 0.396 & 0.164 & 0.173 & 0.168 & 0.129 & 0.138 & 0.133\\
\cline{2-12}
& \multirow{2}{*}{\sf Linear Int. (0.9)} & {\sf all} & {\bf 0.398} & {\bf 0.414} & {\bf 0.406} & {\bf 0.176} & {\bf 0.190} & {\bf 0.183} & {\bf 0.144} & {\bf 0.158} & {\bf 0.151}\\
\cline{3-12}
& & {\sf diff} & 0.387 & 0.413 & 0.400 & 0.165 & 0.180 & 0.172 & 0.140 & 0.153 & 0.146\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:autoeval_term}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Human evaluation results}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|ll|c|c} \hline
Model & Condition & &
Natur. & Infor. \\
\hline \hline
{\sf Baseline} & - & & 3.89 & 3.05 \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\sf +Scene Graph}
& \multirow{2}{*}{\sf Linear Int. (0.9)} & {\sf all} & 4.42 & 3.45 \\
\cline{3-5}
& & {\sf diff} & {\bf 4.53} & {\bf 3.48}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:humaneval}
\end{table}
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:exp}
To evaluate each model described in the experimental setup, we conducted an automatic evaluation based on a comparison with the reference and a human evaluation in which the generated results were evaluated manually.
The evaluation criteria and results are described below.
\subsection{Evaluation Criteria}
\label{sec:exp:criteria}
The automatic evaluation criteria are based on a systematic comparison with the annotated caption reference of the test set.
We used BLEU-1\_4~\cite{papineni2002bleu}, which is based on the n-gram match rate, ROUGE-L~\cite{lin2004rouge}, which is based on the maximum match length, and CIDEr~\cite{vedantam2015cider}, which is based on weighted-term matching.
We expect to add the information from the scene-graph prediction to the captioning results of the motion behavior estimation; thus, we focused on nouns and verbs.
We calculated precision (P), recall (R), and harmonic mean (F) of ``nouns,'' ``verbs,'' and ``independent verbs'' extracted from the references.
We also performed human evaluations because the correlations are limited between the automatic evaluation criteria and the human evaluation results.
In the human evaluation, one human evaluator was given state images (images (A) and (B)) and generated captions that described their operative actions.
The evaluator rated the caption's naturalness and informativeness~\cite{wen2015semantically} on a five-point scale.
Another annotator checked the first evaluator's result to improve the consistency.
This process was done blindly; the evaluators did not know the method names.
Because human evaluation is expensive, we evaluated 200 pairs randomly from the test set for the three systems with the best scores in the automatic evaluation: {\sf baseline}, {\sf all}, and {\sf diff} for {\sf linear completion}.
\subsection{Automatic Evaluation Results}
\label{sec:exp:result:auto}
Tables~\ref{tab:autoeval_overall} and \ref{tab:autoeval_term} show the automatic evaluation results.
Both tables show a primary trend, where using scene-graph predictions as auxiliary tasks improved each score compared to the baseline.
The result suggests that linear interpolation with a small weight on the auxiliary task outperforms alternative training.
Based on Table~\ref{tab:autoeval_term}, our proposed method successfully generated content words, including nouns and verbs, than the baseline.
This is because the scene-graph contents represented by ``subject-relationship-object'' forced the network to keep these contents.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fluency.eps}
\caption{Distribution of naturalness score of each method}
\label{fig:fluency}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{contents.eps}
\caption{Distribution of informativeness score of each method}
\label{fig:contents}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{diff.eps}
\caption{Distribution of naturalness (left) and informativeness (right) scores between {\sf Scene-Graph (diff)} and {\sf Baseline}}
\label{fig:diff}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{example_e.eps}
\caption{Case study indicating generated samples}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Human Evaluation Results}
\label{sec:exp:result:human}
Table~\ref{tab:humaneval} shows the human evaluation results, which indicate that using scene-graph prediction as the auxiliary task improved the informativeness and contributed significantly to the naturalness of either our proposed method ({\sf all} or {\sf diff}).
This is probably because the auxiliary task suppressed the over-generation of content words, which are not contained in the scene graphs.
It might also suppress repetition, which is a typical problem of sentence generation, as shown in the case study analysis.
Figures~\ref{fig:fluency} and \ref{fig:contents} show the score distribution of each criterion.
The naturalness was improved by focusing on the differences in scene graphs.
Few differences exist between {\sf all} and {\sf diff} in informativeness, although they outperformed the {\sf Baseline}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:diff} shows the distribution of the differences between the baseline and proposed methods ({\sf Scene graph (diff)}) for each case.
4 denotes where the proposed method scored 5 points and the baseline scored 1, and -4 denotes where the proposed method scored 1 point and the baseline scored 5.
The overall trend is that the proposed method improved the informativeness in many cases, although sometimes the proposed method decreased it.
Naturalness was improved by the proposed method in many cases.
\subsection{Case Study}
\label{sec:exp:example}
As a case study, Fig.~\ref{fig:example} shows four examples of the current state ({\sf A}), the target state ({\sf B}), and the captions from three methods: {\sf Baseline}, {\sf Scene Graph (all)}, and {\sf Scene Graph (diff)}.
In the first example, the baseline describes a meaningless and redundant action of ``move the clothes in the basket to the basket,'' although the proposed methods with scene-graph prediction as an auxiliary task generated actual actions.
{\sf All}, which looks at the entire scene graph, generated action ``wash,'' and {\sf diff}, which looks at the differences in the scene graphs, generated a more detailed action: ``take out.''
Although both are correct, the former described the overall action in which the target action was included; the latter which focused on the differences described a specific action included in the idea of washing.
In the second example, the baseline generated an action that rarely occurs in reality, ``put dishes with vegetables in bowls,'' which was improved in the proposed methods.
However, when we focused on the differences ({\sf diff}), the proposed method generated an opposite action (``remove'') instead of the actual action (``place'').
Since opposite actions tend to be placed near each other in the embedding space, we must consider how to deal with such cases in future work.
In the third example, the baseline caused a repetition problem, which was suppressed by the proposed methods.
Focusing on the difference might generate an object name ``clothesline.''
In the fourth example, both proposed methods successfully generated actions corresponding to using a dishwasher; however, they explained with different granularity.
In particular, {\sf diff} explained the ``pull out the dishwasher basket'' action, which is included as part of the overall ``put the cup in the dishwasher'' action.
When we apply these methods to a human-assisting scenario at home, we must discuss the controllability of the granularity of the captions.
In the fifth example, only the baseline successfully captioned the action of ``make coffee.''
This is probably because the proposed models tried to use objects in scene graph and failed.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conc}
We constructed a framework to verbalize the required operative actions given both the current and target (ideal) states by captioning networks to estimate the operative action of such human-assistive systems as robots.
We constructed a dataset by crowdsourcing that consists of triplets of a current state, a target state, and a caption that describes the operative action to change the current state to the target state.
We proposed a captioning model that uses scene-graph prediction as an auxiliary task by focusing on object names and the relationships represented in scene graphs.
We investigated the effect of our proposed method through both automatic and human evaluations, especially on human evaluation results on naturalness and informativeness.
Our future work will include the proposed system in our human-assisting robot at home~\cite{yuguchi2022butsukusa}.
|
\section{Introduction}
Fake human speech recordings have recently proved significantly harmful with respect to misinformation, fake news widespreading, frauds, and ID replacement\cite{ceoscam}. Such results are the outcome of the recent evolution of computing facilities and deepfake technologies, which has allowed the generation of more and more credible synthetic images, videos, and speech audio signals. As a matter of fact, this development has urged the need for accurate fake audio detection strategies that help human listeners in discriminating fraudulent audio samples from bonafide ones.
Several fake audio detection strategies were proposed in literature targeting different types of acoustic features that are present in a real signal and, at the same time, are difficult to synthesize.
Traditional methods rely on estimating fake audio peculiarities from audio transform coefficients like MFCC or LPC \cite{kamble_sailor_patil_li_2020}. More recently, such coefficients have been replaced by learned feature representations generated with CNN or RNN architectures \cite{zhang2017investigation}.
Some other strategies rely on the effects of the physical acquisition environment on the signal (e.g., reverberation, noise, etc.) \cite{6854466,lieto2019hello,capoferri2020speech} or on prosodic and emotional characteristics \cite{conti2022deepfake}.
Other solutions rely on statistics and symmetry properties of speech signals \cite{9565457}. Among these, it is worth mentioning the First Digits (FD) statistics computed on signal transform coefficients\cite{bianchimp3,4512175,4378977}, whose applications have been widely exploited in other multimedia contents \cite{bonettini2021use}.
Although these solutions aim at detecting the peculiar characteristics of a fake audio signal, more recent works \cite{silencegold} have highlighted how synthetic speech algorithms prove to be effective in spoken parts but fail in generating realistic silence. The work by Muller \emph{et al.} shows that the length of trailing silenced parts\footnote{Silent intervals at the end and at the beginnning of the audio sequence.} in synthetic speech samples from ASVSpoof dataset \cite{yamagishi2021asvspoof} prove to have different statistics with respect to bonafide samples. Indeed, removing such parts dramatically reduces the detection efficiency of most algorithms.
The current paper aims at investigating this eventuality more in depth by analyzing the discriminative potentialities of silenced parts in ASVSpoof dataset. More precisely, we show that FD statistics prove to be effective in discriminating fake audio samples since they allow catching irregularities in silenced parts between the different words of the speech. Tests were run both on the full audio sequence, on the silenced parts, and on the voiced segments (regardless of their lengths). Experimental results show that the statistical characteristics of silence prove to be a discriminative feature since the performance on silent sections matches the detection performance on the full sequence (while this result is not verified for voiced sections). This implies that silence extraction is no longer needed, allowing to avoid parameter tuning and arbitrary set-ups. The final performance has proved to be higher than previous state-of-the-art approaches with a limited computational effort.
It is possible to summarize the novel contributions of the current paper as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item We analyzed the role of silent parts in detection showing that most of the classification accuracy derives from the difficulty in synthesizing statistically-realistic silence intervals.
\item We evaluated the efficiency of MFCC FD statistics in detecting audio fake samples generated by a set of different heterogeneous algorithms. Such features have proved to be extremely useful in highlighting the statistics of silenced parts.
\item We designed a lightweight classifier whose efficiency can cope with more complex detectors.
\end{itemize}
The code developed to produce the results presented in this work can be found at \href{https://github.com/Dan8991/The-Sound-Of-Silence}{https://github.com/Dan8991/The-Sound-Of-Silence}.
In the following, the paper is organized as follows. Section~\ref{sec:related} overviews some audio forgery detection algorithms that have been proposed in the literature. Section~\ref{sec:algo} describes the proposed approach, Section~\ref{sec: dataset} illustrates the dataset and the experimental setup, while Section~\ref{sec:results} reports the final accuracy on different types of datasets. Final conclusions are drawn in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions}.
\section{Related Works}\label{sec:related}
Generative audio speech approaches can mainly be divided in two branches i.e. text to speech (TTS) and voice conversion (VC) algorithms. The former starts from a textual representation and aims at producing the corresponding waveform, while the latter modifies the signal to change the perceived identity of the speaker in the audio.
Early TTS approaches were based on waveform concatenation \cite{black1995optimising, panda2017waveform} where diphones from large datasets are concatenated seamlessly. More recently researchers have started to design techniques that produce audio features from text representations using an acoustic model (usually a hidden markov model) \cite{reddy2017robust, tokuda2002hmm} that are then processed with a vocoder synthesizer such as STRAIGHT \cite{kawahara2006straight}, WORLD \cite{morise2016world} or VOCAINE \cite{agiomyrgiannakis2015vocaine} to produce the corresponding waveform. To improve upon this, neural networks have also been used to substitute either the acoustic model \cite{wang2016first} or the vocoder \cite{oord2016wavenet, valin2019lpcnet} later leading to the first end to end TTS generation algorithms \cite{wang2017tacotron, ping2017deep}.
On the other hand, VCs pipelines usually extract an intermediate representation of the audio signal (feature extraction step), this is then mapped to a representation that matches the target characteristics (feature mapping step) which is finally used to obtain the final waveform (reconstruction step).
Most feature extraction techniques are usually based on pitch synchronous overlap and add (PSOLA) \cite{arslan1999speaker} that represents the input as the parameters required by a vocoder synthesizer to reproduce it. This is a useful intermediate characterization of the signal because it allows performing reconstruction with a vocoder, which is convenient since these algorithms are well tested and efficient. On the other hand, the mapping function is usually implemented with parallel training methods by using a gaussian mixture model \cite{stylianou1998continuous} or neural networks \cite{ming2016deep, tanaka2019atts2s}. The mapping can also be performed by means of Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) since the task is similar to image to image translation allowing similar techniques to be adopted \cite{kaneko2018cyclegan, kaneko2019cyclegan}.
Classic audio forgery detection algorithms usually perform classification
by relying on hand crafted features such as Constant-Q Cepstral Coefficients \cite{todisco2017constant}, Log Magnitude Spectrum or phase-
based features like Group Delay \cite{xiao2015spoofing} and Linear Frequency Cepstral Coefficients (LFCC) or MFCCs \cite{sahidullah2015comparison}. More discriminative representations have been recently proposed by exploiting the bicoherence matrix \cite{albadawy2019detecting}, long-short term features computed in an autoregressive manner \cite{borrelli2021synthetic}, environmental cues \cite{capoferri2020speech}, and even emotions \cite{conti2022deepfake}.
Also in this case neural network based techniques have proven very effective. Some examples are \cite{lieto2019hello}, where the frequency representations of the signals are fed to simple convolutional neural networks (CNNs), and in \cite{zhang2017investigation} where the convolutional filters are just used for feature extraction while a recurrent neural network is exploited for classification. Some approaches have also been directly applied to the raw input signal (i.e. in the time domain) \cite{tak2021end}. In particular, Rawnet2 \cite{tak2021end} has achieved impressive results both for synthetic speech detection and user identification. For this reason, it has been proposed as the baseline for the ASVSpoof 2021 challenge \cite{yamagishi2021asvspoof} i.e. where the dataset considered in this paper for training and testing was proposed.
\section{First digit features for synthetic audio tracks.}\label{sec:algo}
First digit law has proved very effective in the detection of multiple compressed data \cite{7084313,ben12:jpeg,milani_tagliasacchi_tubaro_2014}. More recently, it has also been shown its effectiveness in detecting GAN generated images\cite{bonettini2021use}. Following this trend, it is possible to verify that any synthetic signal generated by a set of FIR filters with limited support fits Benford's law with a different accuracy with respect to a natural signal.
Audio waveforms $x(t)$ are represented in the frequency domain by computing the MFCC coefficients $m_{w}(f)$, where $f$ is the considered frequency and $w$ is the index of the frame. This representation has already proved very effective in highlighting the more meaningful frequency elements in audio signals and in detecting forged waveforms \cite{sahidullah2015comparison}.
Since the original samples in the considered dataset sometimes contain long sequences of zeros (which result in zero-valued MFCCs coeffiecients) and since computing FD statistics requires processing non-zero signals, zero values were removed from the input data. This operation does not compromise the final results because this eventuality was verified on both training and test sets, as well as on both natural and synthetic audio.
In order to obtain rich features that can highlight irregularities in the data, MFCC coefficients were quantized with different step values $\Delta$ as
\begin{equation}
m_{w, \Delta}(f) = \frac{m_{w}(f)}{\Delta}.
\end{equation}
At this point, first digits were computed on $m_{w, \Delta}(f) $ as
\begin{equation}
d_{w, \Delta}(f) = \left\lfloor \frac{|m_{w, \Delta}(f)|}{b^{\lfloor log_b|m_{w, \Delta}(f)| \rfloor}} \right\rfloor
\end{equation}
where $b$ is the considered integer representation base (e.g. 10 for decimal).
For each distinct cepstral coefficient and for each quantization step, we computed the probability mass function
\begin{equation}
p_{f, \Delta}(d) = \sum_{w=1}^{n_w}\frac{\mathbb{1}_d(d_{w, \Delta}(f))}{n_w}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbb{1}_d(d_{w, \Delta}(f))$ is the indicator function for digit $d$, and $n_w$ is the number of windows in the signal whose value depends on the duration of the audio and on the window overlap.
Several previous studies show that this p.m.f. can be approximated by the generalized Benford's law, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\hat{p}_{f, \Delta}(d) = \beta log_b \bigg( 1 + \frac{1}{\gamma + d^\delta} \bigg)
\end{equation}
\noindent and the approximation accuracy highly varies if we are considering bonafide w.r.t. forged data \cite{4512175,4378977}. As a matter of fact, such accuracy was measured using different distance and divergence measures to quantify the proximity of $p_{f, \Delta}(d)$ w.r.t. $\hat{p}_{f, \Delta}(d)$. In the rest of the paper, we will omit indexes $\Delta$ and $f$ for the sake of simplicity although in the creation of the final set of features multiple values of $f$ and $\Delta$ were considered.
A first traditional divergence metric is the Shannon divergence
\begin{equation}
D^{JS}(p|\hat{p}) = D^{KL}(p|\hat{p}) + D^{KL}(\hat{p}|p).
\end{equation}
\noindent which can be seen as a symmetrized version of the Kullbak-Leibler divergence $D^{KL}(p|\hat{p})$.
Additionally, since such metric proves to be unstable for biased pmfs, so we computed Reny $D_\alpha^R(p|\hat{p}) $ and Tsallis $D_\alpha^T(p|\hat{p}) $ ($\alpha \in [0, 1]$) divergences as well
\begin{equation}
D_\alpha^R(p|\hat{p}) = \frac{1}{1-\alpha}\big(logS_\alpha(p, \hat{p}) + logS_\alpha(\hat{p}, p)\big)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
D_\alpha^T(p|\hat{p}) = \frac{1}{1-\alpha}\big( 2 - S_\alpha(p, \hat{p}) - S_\alpha(\hat{p}, p)\big)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
S_\alpha(p, q) = \sum_{d=1}^{b-1}\frac{p(d)^\alpha}{q(d)^{\alpha - 1}}
\end{equation}
Additionally, since Reny, Tsallis, and Shannon divergences can be highly correlated for certain values of $\alpha$ (in this work $\alpha = 0.3$ is used), we also added
the mean square error
\begin{equation}
D^{MSE}(p, \hat{p}) = \frac{1}{b - 1} \sum_{d=1}^{b-1} (p(d) - \hat{p}(d))^2
\end{equation}
This addition was supported by some preliminary tests where the divergences of original and voice converted audios were compared: it was possible to deduce that Reny Tsallis and Shannon divergences often agree, meaning that the three divergences in the original sample are always smaller than those in the forged sample or vice-versa. This statement does not always hold for MSE.
In the end, the total number of features $n_f$ is equal to $n_f = n_d n_c n_b n_q$ where $n_d$ is the number of divergences, $n_c$ is the number of chosen cepstral coefficients, $n_b$ is the number of basis for the first digit extraction and $n_q$ is the number of different $\Delta$ parameters.
\subsection{A FIR-oriented interpretation of FD statistics for synthetic speech}
In the past literature, several works have provided different explanations for the effectiveness of FD statistics in detecting forgeries (on images, audio files, etc.) \cite{4378977}. Most of the proposed works were focusing on the original data statistics on which FDs were computed. Indeed, Benford's law and its generalized version can be verified for any set of data $m$ such that their probability mass function (pmf) has an exponentially-decreasing behavior (this has been largely verified on images, where coefficients can be modeled with a Laplacian or a generalized Gaussian distribution)\cite{4512175}. Whenever the image or the set of data are altered, the property is not verified anymore since the modification redistributes data among the bins of the quantizer. Indeed, the final pmf presents some oscillating probability values that deviate from the ideal distribution.
Anyway, such oscillations can be also related to the ripples in the frequency response of small FIR filters (like those used in GAN-based or VOCODER-based speech synthesizers) that propagates to the statistics of MFCC coefficients. After these multiplications, the values $|m_{w,\Delta}(f)|$ belonging to the same quantization bin are re-distributed unevenly among the other bins. Instead, whenever the gain is perfectly flat, all the MFCC coefficients are rescaled with the same factor, and as a matter of fact, the whole statistics is simply stretched.
From these considerations, it is possible to conclude that the flatness of filter gain is deeply connected to the verification of Benford's law. Fig.~\ref{fig:div}a,~\ref{fig:div}b report the values of the Jensen-Shannon divergence $D^{JS}\left(\hat{p}_{f,\Delta}(d)|p_{f,\Delta}(d) \right)$ between $\hat{p}_{f,\Delta}(d)$ and $p_{f,\Delta}(d)$ obtained on a $1$-D Gaussian i.i.d. signal $x(t)$ filtered by an FIR filter $h(t)$. The filter $h(t)$ is a standard low-pass FIR filter with normalize cut-off frequency $0.2$, stop-band frequency $0.7$, and $N_c$ coefficients. Filter coefficients were computed using the Parse-McLellan algorithm.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{tabular}{c}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.7\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/div_fir2c.pdf}
\end{minipage} \\ \centerline{(a)} \\
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.7\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/div_fir2b.pdf}
\end{minipage} \\
\centerline{(b)}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Jensen-Shannon divergence values between computed and fitted \textit{fd} statistics. Data were computed with (a) $\Delta=0.008$ and (b) $\Delta=0.01$.}\label{fig:div}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
Divergences have been computed from the statistics of quantized MFCC coefficients computed at frequencies $2$ and $3$. It is possible to notice that $D^{JS}\left(\hat{p}(d)|p(d) \right)$ decreases as $N_c$ increases; however, such behavior can be more or less enhanced depending on coefficient frequency and the quantization parameter $\Delta$. As a matter of fact, it is necessary to use different frequency values and quantization set-ups.
\section{Dataset preparation and experimental setup}
\label{sec: dataset}
The dataset used to validate the proposed approach is ASVSpoof \cite{yamagishi2021asvspoof} since it provides a great variety of synthetic speech samples generated by heterogeneous algorithms (see Tables~\ref{tab:on set},\ref{tab:off set}). In fact, ASVSpoof covers both text to speech (TTS) and voice conversion (VC) scenarios including samples generated by algorithms based on waveform concatenation (WC), transfer function (TF), non parallel voice conversion systems (NP), and neural networks (NN).
Data can be divided in three main parts: training, development, and evaluation datasets. The former was used in training and selecting the final classification model. Samples were randomly decimated to ensure that every generated class has the same number of audio traces and that the total amounts of bonafide and synthetic data are balanced (the adopted classifier is a random forest which has lower overfitting problems so the data used for training is plenty).
Development and evaluation datasets were used for closed-set and open-set testing, respectively. More precisely, the former includes newly generated samples (not seen before) generated by the same set of algorithms of the training set, while the latter includes samples generated by different strategies not included in the training set.
The work by Muller et. al. \cite{silencegold} shows that a bias can be found in the distribution of the lengths of leading and trailing silences in bonafide and synthetic speeches. Authors argue that most detectors are just probably discriminating between forged and bonafide samples by using this information. In order to bypass this problem, silent parts were removed from the signal, as suggested in \cite{silencegold} but this led to a big loss in performance.
Therefore, we have decided to analyze the effectiveness of FD features on the silent (without considering leading and ending silences) and voiced parts of the signals, independently. This allowed us to understand which speech elements proved to be the most discriminative and whether the proposed approach was reliably effective. For this purpose, we selected signal windows of $101$ samples with energy $E(s, t)$ higher than $-40$ dB (assuming energy is normalized).
From this filtering, only a few samples (less than 1\%) were then removed since the number of silent values was not enough to obtain meaningful statistics. Arguably, this is not an issue since as shown in \cite{silencegold}, the very low amount of silence in the audio track allows an easy detection of synthetic audio samples. Moreover, computing FD statistics on a limited amount of signal windows would lead to highly irregular statistics: this implies strong divergences/distances with respect to Benford's law (and therefore, a correct classification).
Starting from the original samples, three datasets have been generated, one called \textit{Full} containing the whole waveform, one referred as \textit{Silence} made with the silent parts of the signals, and one called \textit{Voiced} with the remaining samples.
On these samples, cepstral analysis was carried on in order to generate a feature array for each sample. In this process, the following parameter values were selected after an extensive set of optimizations.
\begin{itemize}
\item In the computation of MFCCs, a filter bank of 26 filters was adopted: only coefficients from the second to the fourteenth frequency were considered. Computation was carried out on window sizes of 1024 samples with an overlap of 512 in the case of \textit{Full} and \textit{Voiced}. Overlap was set to 128 in the case of \textit{Silence} to have a sufficient number of signal windows (and therefore stable FD statistics).
\item The base for the first digit was chosen as $b \in \{10, 20\}$ since higher values would imply only a few samples (or no samples at all) for many FD values.
\item The quantization factor $\Delta$ varied in the set $\{1, 2, 3, 4\}$.
\end{itemize}
At the end of the generation process, feature arrays were made of $n_f = 420$ features.
Given the number and the statistical independence of features (as well as the need for a low complexity classifier), we avoided the adoption of complex neural network architectures. For this reason, a simple random forest classifier was selected as it proved well suited for tabular data processing and highly robust w.r.t. overfitting problems and unbalancing.
The best configuration was selected by running a grid search over the number of trees in the random forest ($n_{trees} \in \{10, 100, 500, 1000\}$) and the criterion for the split quality ($criterion \in \{gini, entropy\}$).
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\textbf{Dataset}} &\multicolumn{6}{c|}{\textbf{Development}}\\
\hline
\textbf{Algorithm} &\textbf{A01} & \textbf{A02} & \textbf{A03} & \textbf{A04} & \textbf{A05} & \textbf{A06} \\
\textbf{Type} & TTS & TTS & TTS & TTS & VC & VC\\
\textbf{Approach} & NN & NN & NN & WC & NN & TF\\
\hline
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1} & 0.944 & 0.962 & 0.961 & 0.819 & 0.949 & 0.471\\
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1-2} & \textbf{0.953} & 0.972 & 0.970 & 0.829 & 0.961 & 0.472\\
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1-3} & 0.951 & 0.972 & 0.972 & 0.836 & \textbf{0.964} & 0.466\\
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1-4} & 0.952 & 0.973 & 0.972 & 0.838 & 0.963 & 0.456\\
\textbf{Silence b=10} & 0.945 & 0.959 & 0.961 & 0.830 & 0.924 & 0.468\\
\textbf{Silence b=20} & 0.866 & 0.973 & 0.881 & 0.796 & 0.957 & 0.434\\
\textbf{Full $\Delta$=1-4} & 0.951 & \textbf{0.982} & \textbf{0.949} & \textbf{0.871} & 0.956 & 0.424\\
\textbf{Voiced $\Delta$=1-3} & 0.755 & 0.708 & 0.713 & 0.548 & 0.574 & \textbf{0.532}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{0.5em}
\caption{On-set results and ablation studies for the proposed algorithm}
\label{tab:on set}
\vspace{-3em}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\textbf{Dataset}} &\multicolumn{13}{c|}{\textbf{Evaluation}}\\
\hline
\textbf{Algorithm} & \textbf{A07} & \textbf{A08} & \textbf{A09} & \textbf{A10} & \textbf{A11} & \textbf{A12} & \textbf{A13} & \textbf{A14} & \textbf{A15} & \textbf{A16} & \textbf{A17} & \textbf{A18} & \textbf{A19}\\
\textbf{Type} & TTS & TTS & TTS & TTS & TTS & TTS & TTS+VC & TTS+VC & TTS+VC & TTS & VC & VC & VC \\
\textbf{Approach} & NN & NN & NN & NN & NN & NN & NN & NN & NN & WC & NN & NP & TF \\
\hline
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1} & 0.946 & 0.948 & 0.955 & 0.947 & 0.947 & 0.952 & 0.953 & 0.931 & 0.876 & 0.860 & 0.597 & 0.615 & 0.592 \\
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1-2} & 0.953 & 0.953 & 0.965 & 0.954 & 0.956 & 0.959 & 0.960 & 0.939 & \textbf{0.888} & 0.861 & 0.598 & 0.626 & 0.597 \\
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1-3} & \textbf{0.955} & \textbf{0.957} & \textbf{0.968} & \textbf{0.956} & \textbf{0.957} & \textbf{0.962} & \textbf{0.962} & 0.941 & \textbf{0.888} & 0.864 & 0.600 & 0.629 & \textbf{0.599} \\
\textbf{Silence $\Delta$=1-4} & 0.951 & 0.955 & 0.965 & 0.952 & 0.956 & 0.960 & 0.959 & \textbf{0.942} & 0.887 & 0.864 & \textbf{0.601} & 0.625 & 0.598\\
\textbf{Silence b=10} & 0.925 & 0.933 & 0.944 & 0.927 & 0.929 & 0.936 & 0.928 & 0.912 & 0.860 & 0.846 & 0.598 & \textbf{0.642} & \textbf{0.599}\\
\textbf{Silence b=20} & 0.919 & 0.897 & 0.929 & 0.924 & 0.924 & 0.903 & 0.945 & 0.889 & 0.842 & 0.820 & 0.590 & 0.579 & 0.593\\
\textbf{Full $\Delta$=1-4} & 0.941 & 0.942 & 0.952 & 0.939 & 0.940 & 0.915 & 0.951 & 0.896 & 0.853 & \textbf{0.866} & 0.597 & 0.581 & 0.596\\
\textbf{Voiced $\Delta$=1-3} & 0.656 & 0.796 & 0.798 & 0.629 & 0.648 & 0.628 & 0.687 & 0.720 & 0.709 & 0.640 & 0.526 & 0.533 & 0.580\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{0.5em}
\caption{Off-set results and ablation studies for the proposed algorithm}
\label{tab:off set}
\vspace{-2.1em}
\end{table*}
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Algorithm} & \textbf{Development} & \textbf{Evaluation} \\
\hline
\textit{Silence} & 0.869 & 0.819 \\
\textit{Full} & 0.871 & \textbf{0.820} \\
STLT + Bicoherence 128 & \textbf{0.942} & 0.735\\
STLT + Bicoherence 512 & 0.907 & 0.741\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{0.5em}
\caption{Classification accuracy of the proposed algorithm and of some state of the art approaches}
\label{tab:total accuracies}
\vspace{-3em}
\end{table}
Given the three testing scenarios (\textit{Full}, \textit{Voiced}, \textit{Silence}), various ablation studies were carried out to verify the efficiency of the classification in the different set-ups and identify the most discriminative elements in the FD divergences. In order to guarantee a fair comparison between the various configurations, we run an independent grid search for each features configuration.
Table~\ref{tab:on set} reports the one-vs-one on-set results obtained by performing binary classification between bonafide and samples generated with a single algorithm. Table~\ref{tab:off set} reports the one-vs-one off-set accuracy.
Full ablation studies are reported only for \textit{Silence} for the sake of conciseness, while for \textit{Full} and \textit{Voiced} only the best results are reported. Considering the impact of base selection, keeping the features generated by both $b=10$ and $b=20$ (with all the selected values of $\Delta$) turned out to be more effective than choosing only one base value. Indeed, we verified that the statistics generated for $b=10$ are not very correlated with those obtained for $b=20$, and therefore, merging them provides additional information to the system.
With respect to the quantization parameter $\Delta$, in Table~\ref{tab:on set} and~\ref{tab:off set} the features related to different $\Delta$s were incrementally concatenated one at a time in order to measure how much they affected the final performance. It is possible to see that having only one $\Delta$ value is usually not enough to maximize performance. Experiments show that in general $3$ or $4$ different quantization values allow to achieve the best performance.
In both on-set and off-set accuracies, it is possible to see that performing classification over the features computed on \textit{Silent} leads to performance that is comparable to or even better w.r.t. the one obtained for \textit{Full}. In particular, when considering off-set tests, silences provide a higher detection accuracy for almost all the algorithms.
On the other hand, removing silences from the signals leads to very poor performance (see results on \textit{Voiced} sections). This might suggest that algorithms reconstruct realistic voices more easily (low-pass regular signal), while the noise present in silent sequences can not be easily modeled. The slightly lower performance achieved on \textit{Full} w.r.t. \textit{Silence} might be explained by the presence of spoken parts that might be skewing the FD statistic towards the ideal FD distribution.
It is possible to see that this approach has a lower performance when referred to algorithms A06, A17, A18, A19. It is worth noticing that all these approaches perform a voice conversion task starting from real audio samples as input and converting them into voiced samples for a desired speaker. On the contrary algorithm A05 is also a VC algorithm but the task is carried out by a neural network that processes the full sequence (silence included) leading to FD statistics that are detected by our approach. Additionally, voice converted samples generated starting from TTS outputs (see results referred to algorithms A13, A14, and A15) are also easily classified with high accuracy.
A possible explanation for this evidence is that VC algorithms do not change significantly silenced sections as they are not relevant in characterizing speaker ID and present a completely different statistics w.r.t. voiced parts. In these cases, the statistics of the original silenced intervals are not altered leading to a higher misclassification probability. Note that this outcome is not verified whenever VC is applied after TTS since in that case also the generated nature of silence leads to non-conventional FD statistics (thus leading to higher divergences/distances).
On top of that, it is worth spending a few comments on A16 and A04 approaches. These are based on waveform concatenation, i.e., signals are obtained by concatenating real samples from big databases of diphones (realistic ones). Such composite nature makes the synthetic speech FD statistics closer to that of bonafide samples (and further from the generated audio) leading to a higher misclassification probability.
In the end, we compared our approach with a similar state-of-the-art algorithm (i.e. with separate feature extraction and classification steps). The work by Borrelli et. al. \cite{borrelli2021synthetic} exploits short-term and long-term (STLT) cues and the bicoherence matrix to extract a discriminative representation between forged and bonafide samples. In Table~\ref{tab:total accuracies} the results of the two best configurations proposed in the aforementioned work, i.e. using both STLT and bicoherence features computed with window sizes 128 and 512, are compared with the results obtained with the best configurations in the \textit{Silence} and \textit{Full} datasets. It is possible to see that while the proposed approach is less accurate in the detection of forged data in the development dataset, it achieves better performance in off-set evaluation proving more robust when presented with unseen algorithms.
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusions}
In this paper, we analyzed the impact of voiced and silenced parts in synthetic speech detection. Following some preliminary studies on trailing silences, we showed that silenced parts within the speech contain most of the discriminative information. From these results, we proposed a method for forged audio detection based on first digit statistics that achieves good detection performance against a variety of algorithms and that has very low computational complexity. Empirical results showed that most audio forging algorithms are able to produce statistically meaningful voice signals but (especially neural networks) often fail at creating realistic silences. Future works should try to tackle the problem of detection in a voice conversion scenario (possibly by integrating this with other well working state of the art approaches) since the transformation of a naturally acquired signal could retain most of the statistics for the silenced parts thus leading to a higher misclassification probability.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEbib}
|
\section{Introduction}
Pre-trained language models \cite{devlin-etal-2019-bert} have been found to capture a surprisingly rich amount of knowledge about the world \cite{DBLP:conf/emnlp/PetroniRRLBWM19}. Focusing on commonsense knowledge, \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19} used BERT to predict whether a given concept (e.g.\ \emph{teddy bear}) satisfies a given commonsense property (e.g.\ \emph{is dangerous}). To this end, they convert the input into a simple sentence (e.g.\ ``\emph{A teddy bear is dangerous}'') and treat the task as a standard sentence classification task. Remarkably, they found this approach to surpass human performance.
\citet{shwartz-choi-2020-neural} moreover found that language models can, to some extent, capture commonsense properties that are rarely expressed in text, thus mitigating the issue of reporting bias that has traditionally plagued initiatives for learning commonsense knowledge from text \cite{DBLP:conf/cikm/GordonD13}.
Despite these encouraging signs, however, modelling commonsense properties remains highly challenging. A key concern is that language models are typically fine-tuned on a training set that contains the same properties as those in the test set. For instance, the test data from \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19} includes the question whether \emph{peach} has the property \emph{eaten in summer}, while the training data asserts that \emph{apple}, \emph{banana}, \emph{orange} and \emph{pear} all have this property. To do well on this task, the model does not actually need to capture the knowledge that peaches are eaten in summer; it is sufficient to capture that \emph{peach} is similar to \emph{apple}, \emph{banana}, \emph{orange} and \emph{pear}. For this reason, we propose new training-test splits, which ensure that the properties occurring in the test data do not occur in the training data. Our experiments show that the ability of language models to predict commonsense properties drops dramatically in this setting.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{lp{160pt}p{120pt}p{120pt}}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{ConceptNet}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{COMET-2020}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Ascent++}}\\
\midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{3}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\textbf{banana}}}} & yellow, good to eat & one of the main ingredients, eaten as a snack, one of many fruits, found in garden, black & rich, ripe, yellow, green, brown, sweet, great, black, useful, safe, delicious, healthy, nutricious, ...\\[0.5em]
\midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{3}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\textbf{lion}}}} & a feline & found in jungle, one of many animals, one of many species, two legs, very large & free, extinct, hungry, close, unique, active, nocturnal, old, dangerous, great, happy, right, ...\\[0.5em]
\midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{3}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\textbf{airplane}}}}& good for quickly travelling long distances & flying, air travel, flying machine, very small, flight & heavy, new, important, white, safe, unique, full, larger, clean, slow, low, unstable, electric, ...\\[2.5em]
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Properties of some example concepts, according to three commonsense knowledge resources.\label{tabPropertiesIntro}}
\end{table*}
Our aim is to develop a strategy for modelling the commonsense properties of concepts. Given the limitations that arise when language models are used directly, a natural approach is to pre-train a language model on some kind of auxiliary data. Unfortunately, resources encoding the commonsense properties of concepts tend to be prohibitively noisy. To illustrate this point, Table \ref{tabPropertiesIntro} lists the properties of some everyday concepts according to three well-known resources: ConceptNet \cite{DBLP:conf/aaai/SpeerCH17}, which is a large commonsense knowledge graph, COMET-2020\footnote{We used the demo at \url{https://mosaickg.apps.allenai.org/model_comet2020_entities}.} \cite{DBLP:conf/aaai/HwangBBDSBC21}, which predicts triples using a generative language model that was trained on several commonsense knowledge graphs, and Ascent++ \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2112-04596}, which is a commonsense knowledge base that was extracted from web text. Given the noisy nature of such resources, we rely on a database with hypernyms instead. The underlying intuition is that hypernyms can be extracted from text relatively easily, while fine-grained hypernyms often implicitly describe commonsense properties. For instance, Microsoft Concept Graph \cite{DBLP:journals/dint/JiWSZWY19} lists \emph{potassium rich food} as a hypernym of \emph{banana} and
\emph{large and dangerous carnivore} as a hypernym of \emph{lion}.
We also experiment with GenericsKB \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2005-00660}, a large collection of generic sentences (e.g.\ ``\emph{Coffee contains minerals and antioxidants which help prevent diabetes}''), to obtain concept-property pairs for pre-training.
Given such pre-training data, we then train a concept encoder $\Phi_\mathsf{con}$ and a property encoder $\Phi_\mathsf{prop}$ such that $\sigma(\Phi_\mathsf{con}(c)\cdot \Phi_\mathsf{prop}(p))$ indicates the probability that concept $c$ has property $p$.
In summary, our main contributions are as follows: (i) we propose a new evaluation setting which is more realistic than the standard benchmarks for predicting commonsense properties; (ii) we analyse the potential of hypernymy datasets and generic sentences to act as pre-training data; and (iii) we develop a simple but effective bi-encoder architecture for modelling commonsense properties.
\section{Related Work}
Several authors have analysed the extent to which language models such as BERT capture commonsense knowledge. As already mentioned, \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19} evaluated the ability of BERT to predict commonsense properties from the McRae dataset \cite{mcrae2005semantic}, which we also use in our experiments.
The same dataset was used by \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/WeirPD20} to analyse whether BERT-based language models could generate concept names from their associated properties; e.g.\ given the input ``\emph{A $\langle \textit{mask} \rangle$ has fur, is big, and has claws}'', the model is expected to predict that $\langle \textit{mask} \rangle$ corresponds to the word \emph{bear}. Conversely, \citet{apidianaki-gari-soler-2021-dolphins} considered the problem of generating adjectival properties from prompts such as ``mittens are generally $\langle\textit{mask}\rangle$''. Note that the latter two works evaluated pre-trained models directly, without fine-tuning, whereas the experiments \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19} involved fine-tuning the language model on a task-specific training set first. When the main motivation is to probe the abilities of language models, avoiding fine-tuning has the advantage that any observed abilities reflect what is captured by the pre-trained language model itself, rather than learned during the fine-tuning phase.
However, \citet{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2111-00607} argue that the extent to which pre-trained language models capture commonsense knowledge is limited, suggesting that some form of fine-tuning is essential in practice. Interestingly, this remains the case for large language models. For instance, their model had 7 billion parameters, while \citet{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2110-07178} report that the predictions from GPT-3 \cite{brown2020language} had to be filtered by a so-called critic model when distilling a commonsense knowledge graph.
The strategy taken by COMET \cite{bosselut-etal-2019-comet} is to fine-tune a GPT model \cite{GPT} on triples from commonsense knowledge graphs. Being based on an autoregressive language model, COMET can be used to predict concepts that take the form of short phrases, which is often needed when reasoning about events (e.g.\ to express motivations or effects). However, as illustrated in Table \ref{tabPropertiesIntro}, COMET is less suitable for modelling the commonsense properties of concepts.
Other approaches have focused on improving the commonsense reasoning abilities of general purpose language models. For instance, \citet{DBLP:conf/iclr/ZhouLSL021} introduce a self-supervised pre-training tasks to encourage language models to better capture the commonsense relations between everyday concepts.
A final line of related work concerns the modelling of hypernymy. Several authors have proposed specialised embedding models for this task \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2106-14361,le-etal-2019-inferring}. Most relevant to our work, \citet{takeoka-etal-2021-low} fine-tune a BERT-based language model to predict the validity of a concept--hypernym pair. Inspired by the effectiveness of Hearst patterns \cite{hearst-1992-automatic}, they use prompts of the form ``[HYPERNYM] such as [CONCEPT]'' (and similar for other Hearst patterns). The extent to which the pre-trained BERT model captures hypnernymy has also been studied. For instance, \citet{hanna-marecek-2021-analyzing} use prompts where the prediction of the $\langle\textit{mask}\rangle$ token can be interpreted as the prediction of a hypernym, to avoid the need for fine-tuning the model.
\section{Methodology}\label{secMethodology}
Let a set of concept--property pairs $\mathcal{K}$ be given, where $(c,p)\in\mathcal{K}$ means that concept $c$ is asserted to have the property $p$. We write $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{P}$ for the sets of concepts and properties in $\mathcal{K}$, i.e.\ $\mathcal{C}=\{c \mid (c,p)\in \mathcal{K}\}$ and $\mathcal{P}=\{p \mid (c,p)\in \mathcal{K}\}$. We use the term ``property'' in a broad sense, covering both semantic attributes, as in the pair $(\emph{banana},\emph{sweet})$, and hypernyms, as in the pair $(\emph{banana},\emph{fruit})$. This is motivated by the fact that hypernyms often encode knowledge about semantic attributes, as in the pair $(\emph{banana},\emph{sweet fruit})$. In particular, our hypothesis is that, by treating hypernyms and semantic attributes in a unified way, we can pre-train a model on readily available hypernym datasets and use it to predict semantic attributes.
We want to train a model that can predict for a given pair $(c,p)$ whether $c$ has property $p$. Two general strategies can be pursued when developing such models. The first strategy is to use a so-called cross-encoder, which amounts to fine-tuning a single language model to predict whether a given input $(c,p)$ represents a valid pair or not. The second strategy is to use a so-called bi-encoder, which amounts to the idea that $c$ and $p$ are separately encoded, with the resulting vectors then being used to predict whether $(c,p)$ is a valid pair. In this paper, we pursue the latter strategy. This is primarily motivated by the fact that the concept and property encoders enable a wider range of applications. A cross-encoder can only be used to predict whether a given pair $(c,p)$ is valid or not. In contrast, a bi-encoder model can also be used to efficiently find the properties $p$ of a given concept $c$. Moreover, the resulting concept and property embeddings may themselves be useful as static representations of word meaning, e.g.\ as label embeddings for zero-shot or few-shot learning \cite{DBLP:conf/nips/SocherGMN13,ma-etal-2016-label,DBLP:conf/nips/XingROP19,DBLP:conf/cvpr/Li0LFLW20,DBLP:conf/mir/YanBWJS21}. Finally, bi-encoders can be trained more efficiently than cross-encoders.
\paragraph{Datasets}
To train our model, we need a large set of concept--property pairs $\mathcal{K}$. Unfortunately, high-quality knowledge of this kind is not readily available. Part of the underlying issue is that properties of concepts are rarely explicitly stated in text, which is why directly using information extraction techniques is not straightforward. However, initiatives for extracting hypernyms from text have been much more successful, starting with the seminal work of \citet{hearst-1992-automatic}. A key observation is that fine-grained hypernyms often express commonsense properties, typically as a mechanism for refining hypernyms that would otherwise be too broad. For instance, Microsoft Concept Graph \cite{DBLP:journals/dint/JiWSZWY19} lists \emph{vitamin C rich food} as a hypernym of \emph{strawberry}, as a refinement of the more general hypernym \emph{food}. By pre-training our model on concept--hypernym pairs, we may thus expect it to learn about commonsense properties as well. To directly test this hypothesis, we use a set of such concept--hypernym pairs as our pre-training set $\mathcal{K}$. Specifically, we collect the 100K concept--hypernym pairs from Microsoft Concept Graph\footnote{\url{https://concept.research.microsoft.com/Home/Download}} with the highest confidence score\footnote{Specifically, we used those pairs maximising the \emph{Relations} frequency.}
We will refer to this dataset as \textsc{MSCG}.
As a second strategy, we attempt to convert the MSCG dataset into a set of concept--property pairs. To this end, we look for pairs $(c,h_1)$ and $(c,h_2)$ where $h_2$ is a suffix of $h_1$. Specifically, if $h_1 = m h_2$ and $m$ is an adjectival phrase, then we assume that $m$ describes a property of $c$. For instance, MSCG contains the pairs (\emph{strawberry}, \emph{vitamin C rich food}) and (\emph{strawberry}, \emph{food}). Based on this, we would include the pair (\emph{strawberry}, \emph{vitamin C rich}) in $\mathcal{K}$. Clearly this is a heuristic strategy, which may produce non-sensical or misleading pairs. For instance, according to \textsc{MSCG}, strawberry is a \emph{low-sugar berry}, but this does not entail that strawberry has the property \emph{low-sugar} in general. However, we may expect most of the pairs that are generated with this strategy to be meaningful. A total of 8186 concept--property pairs were obtained in this way. We refer to the resulting dataset as \textsc{Prefix}.
Finally, going beyond concept-hypernym pairs, we derive a dataset from GenericsKB \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2005-00660}, which contains generic sentences such as ``\emph{Bananas are an important food staple in the tropics}''. Due to the regular structure of such sentences, we can easily convert them into concept--property pairs; e.g.\ the aforementioned sentence would become (\emph{banana}, \emph{important food staple in the tropics}). We collect a set of 100K such pairs, by processing the sentences with the highest confidence (i.e.\ the ones which are most likely to be generic sentences) whose length is at most 7. The reason why we focus on shorter sentences is because they are more likely to capture salient information. We refer to this dataset as \textsc{GKB}.
\paragraph{Training Objective}
Given the pairs in $\mathcal{K}$, we pre-train two encoders, $\Phi_\mathsf{con}$ and $\Phi_\mathsf{prop}$, using binary cross-entropy. In particular, the loss function for a given mini-batch is defined as follows:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}\, {=} & -\sum_{(c,p)\in \mathcal{K}_{\mathsf{batch}}} \log \sigma\big(\Phi_\mathsf{con}(c)\cdot \Phi_\mathsf{prop}(p)\big)\\
& - \sum_{(c,p)\in \mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{batch}}} \log\big(1- \sigma\big(\Phi_\mathsf{con}(c)\cdot \Phi_\mathsf{prop}(p)\big)\big)
\end{align*}
Here $\mathcal{K}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ represents the subset of $\mathcal{K}$ that is in the current mini-batch. For efficiency reasons, we sample these mini-batches as follows. First, we sample a subset $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ of $K$ concepts from $\mathcal{C}$. Then, for each concept $c$ in $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ we sample one property $p\in\mathcal{P}$ such that $(c,p)\in\mathcal{K}$. Let $\mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ be the set of properties that are thus obtained.
The sets of positive examples $\mathcal{K}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ and negative examples $\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ are then defined as follows:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{K}_{\mathsf{batch}} &= (\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}} \times \mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{batch}})\cap \mathcal{K}\\
\mathcal{N}_{\mathsf{batch}} &= (\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}} \times \mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{batch}})\setminus \mathcal{K}
\end{align*}
In other words, the positive examples are the pairs from $\mathcal{K}$ that involve a concept from $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ and a property from $\mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{batch}}$. The negative examples are all the other pairs that we can form by taking a concept from $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}}$ and a property from $\mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{batch}}$. This in-batch negative sampling strategy ensures that after encoding $|\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}}|$ concepts and $|\mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{batch}}|$ properties, we can take $|\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{batch}}| \times |\mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{batch}}|$ training examples into account. Given that the encoders $\Phi_\mathsf{con}$ and $\Phi_\mathsf{prop}$ correspond to fine-tuned language models, and the encoding steps are thus time-consuming, in-batch negative sampling enables a significant speed-up compared to naive strategies in which positive and negative examples are sampled independently. Similar strategies are commonly used in neural information retrieval \cite{gillick-etal-2019-learning}.
\paragraph{Concept and Property Encoders}
The encoders $\Phi_{\mathsf{con}}$ and $\Phi_{\mathsf{prop}}$ correspond to fine-tuned encoder-only language models, such as BERT \cite{devlin-etal-2019-bert}. An important design decision is how the input to these language models is presented. For the concept encoder, the input corresponds to a string of the form ``[prefix] $c$ [suffix]'', which is usually referred to as the prompt. How this prompt is chosen often has a substantial impact on the performance of a model. For instance, language models have been reported to under-perform if the input is too short \cite{bouraoui2020inducing,jiang-etal-2020-know}. Given the importance of the choice of prompt, several strategies for automatically learning a suitable prompt have been proposed \cite{shin-etal-2020-autoprompt,liu2021gpt}. In practice, however, carefully chosen manually designed prompts often outperform such automatically learned prompts \cite{ushio-etal-2021-distilling, DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2106-13353}. For this reason, we have manually generated a number of templates and evaluated their performance on a held-out portion of the \textsc{MSCG} dataset. Based on this analysis\footnote{Details can be found in Appendix~\ref{appendix:prompt_analysis}.}, we use the following prompt:
\begin{quote}
$\langle\textit{cls}\rangle$ [CONCEPT] means $\langle\textit{mask}\rangle\langle\textit{sep}\rangle$
\end{quote}
where $\langle\textit{cls}\rangle$, $\langle\textit{mask}\rangle$ and $\langle\textit{sep}\rangle$ are special tokens from the BERT vocabulary, while [CONCEPT] represents the concept to be modelled. The embedding of the concept is taken to be the contextualised vector of the $\langle\textit{mask}\rangle$ token, i.e.\ the representation of this token in the final layer of the language model. We use the same prompt for concepts and properties. However, note that concepts and properties are encoded using different encoders.
Intuitively, we think of $\Phi_{\mathsf{con}}(c)$ as a representation of a prototypical instance of concept $c$, while we view $\Phi_{\mathsf{prop}}(p)$ as a representation of the property $p$ itself. This is why, even when $p=c$, we would expect $\Phi_{\mathsf{con}}(c)$ and $\Phi_{\mathsf{prop}}(c)$ to be different. Under this view, $\sigma(\Phi_{\mathsf{con}}(c) \cdot \Phi_{\mathsf{prop}}(p))$ captures the probability that a prototypical instance of $c$ would have the property $p$. In other words, by using different encoders for concepts and properties, we can capture the default nature of the pairs in $\mathcal{K}$ in a natural way.
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{ll ccc c ccc}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{\textbf{Language Model}} & \multirow{2}{*}{\textbf{\textbf{Pre-training dataset}}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{McRae}} && \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{CSLB}} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-5}\cmidrule(lr){7-9}
& & \textbf{Con} & \textbf{Prop} & \textbf{C+P} & & \textbf{Con} & \textbf{Prop} & \textbf{C+P} \\
\midrule
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Random baseline} & 26.0 & 26.5 & 26.0 && 8.6 & 8.4 & 8.6 \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Always true} & 30.3 & 30.0 & 30.0 && 9.1 & 9.1 & 9.1 \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{BERT-large sentence classifier \cite{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19}} & 74 & - & -
&&- &- &- \\% CSLB
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Human performance \cite{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19}} & 67 & - & -
&&- &- &- \\% CSLB
\midrule
BERT-base & No pre-training &77.7 & 30.7 & 25.2
&& 51.8 & 34.1 & 22.4\\
\midrule
BERT-base & \textsc{MSCG} & 79.9 & 46.6 & 41.6
&& 54.0 & 36.8 & 28.9 \\% CSLB
BERT-base & \textsc{Prefix} & 78.3 & 44.8 & 41.0
&& 52.2 & 33.2 & 24.3 \\% CSLB
BERT-base & \textsc{GKB} & 79.3 & \textbf{50.7} & \textbf{46.0}
&& 52.1 & 37.2 & 30.2 \\% CSLB
BERT-base & \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix} & 80.2 & 47.8 & 43.2
&& 53.6 & 37.3 & 29.7 \\% CSLB
BERT-base & \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{GKB} & 80.4 & 50.3 & 43.6
&& 54.8 & 37.1 & 28.9 \\% CSLB
BERT-base & \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB} & 79.8 & 49.6 & 44.5
&& 54.5 & 39.1 & 32.6 \\% CSLB
\midrule
BERT-large & No pre-training & 75.3 & 36.6 & 25.5
&&54.3 & 36.4 & 17.7 \\% CSLB
RoBERTa-base & No pre-training &41.0 & 9.4 & 0.0
&&38.1 & 28.7 & 9.6 \\% CSLB
RoBERTa-large & No pre-training & 73.7 & 26.9 & 9.4
&& 55.3 & 37.8 & 24.8 \\% CSLB
\midrule
BERT-large &\textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB}& \textbf{80.5} & 49.3 & 45.5
&&57.7 & 41.8 & 36.4 \\% CSLB
RoBERTa-base & \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB} &75.6 & 42.4 & 38.1
&&49.9 & 36.4 & 24.3 \\% CSLB
RoBERTa-large & \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB} &80.1 & 46.5 & 42.5
&& \textbf{59.0} & \textbf{42.5} & \textbf{36.0} \\% CSLB
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results in terms of F1 score (percentage) for commonsense property prediction.\label{tabMainResults}}
\end{table*}
\section{Experiments}
In our experiments, we primarily focus on commonsense property classification, i.e.\ predicting whether some concept has a given property. We also demonstrate the usefulness of the concept and property encoders on the task of hypernym discovery. Finally, we also present a qualitative analysis.
\paragraph{Training Details}
We pre-train the concept and property encoders on the datasets introduced in Section \ref{secMethodology}. We also consider variants in which these datasets are combined; e.g.\ we write \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix} for the dataset combining the pairs from \textsc{MSCG} and \textsc{Prefix}. To pre-train our model, we construct separate validation data in the same way. In particular, for \textsc{MSCG}, we select the validation split by taking the next 10K most confident pairs from Microsoft Concept Graph (i.e.\ after removing the pairs from the \textsc{MSCG} dataset itself), and similar for the other datasets. We train the model for 100 epochs, using early stopping with a patience of 20. We use the AdamW optimizer \cite{Loshchilov2019DecoupledWD} with a learning rate of $2e{-}6$ and set the batch size to 8. We use BERT-base-uncased as our default language model \cite{devlin-etal-2019-bert}, although we have also experimented with BERT-large-uncased, RoBERTa-base and RoBERTa-large \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1907-11692}.
\subsection{Commonsense Property Classification}
\paragraph{Datasets}
For commonsense property classification, we use the extended version of the McRae dataset \cite{mcrae2005semantic} that was introduced by \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19}. This dataset involves a set $\mathcal{C}$ of 514 concepts and a set $\mathcal{P}$ of 50 properties. For each concept $c$ and property $p$, the dataset specifies whether $c$ has property $p$. The set $\mathcal{C}$ is split into a training set $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{train}}$ and a test set $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{test}}$\footnote{The split is available at \url{https://github.com/mbforbes/physical-commonsense}.}. During training, the models have access to the ground truth of every pair in $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{train}}\times \mathcal{P}$. The models are then tested on all pairs in $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{test}}\times \mathcal{P}$. We report the results in terms of the F1 score of the positive label.
As argued in the introduction, by training and testing on the same set of properties, we may not be able to faithfully test a model's ability to predict commonsense properties. For this reason, we consider an alternative setting where the set of properties is instead split into a training set $\mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{train}}$ and a test set $\mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{test}}$. During training, the model then gets access to the ground truth for the pairs in $\mathcal{C}\times \mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{train}}$, while the model is evaluated on the pairs in $\mathcal{C}\times \mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{test}}$. We use 5-fold cross-validation for this setting. Our hypothesis is that this setting will be more difficult, as it would be harder to find properties in the training data that are similar to those from the test set. However, there are nonetheless some similarities between these properties. We therefore also consider a setting in which both the concepts and properties are split into train and test fragments. The model is then trained on the pairs in $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{train}}\times \mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{train}}$ and evaluated on the pairs in $\mathcal{C}_{\mathsf{test}}\times \mathcal{P}_{\mathsf{test}}$. We again use a form of cross-validation. In particular, we split $\mathcal{C}$ into three folds: $\mathcal{C}_1$, $\mathcal{C}_2$ and $\mathcal{C}_3$. We similarly split $\mathcal{P}$ into three folds: $\mathcal{P}_1$, $\mathcal{P}_2$ and $\mathcal{P}_3$. In the first iteration, we train on the pairs in $(\mathcal{C}_1\cup\mathcal{C}_2)\times (\mathcal{P}_1\cup\mathcal{P}_2)$ and test on the pairs in $\mathcal{C}_3\times \mathcal{P}_3$. This process is repeated nine times (as we have three ways to choose the concept test split and three ways to choose the property test split).
We have also used the CSLB Concept Property Norms\footnote{\url{https://cslb.psychol.cam.ac.uk/propnorms}}, as a second benchmark for commonsense property classification. This dataset covers 638 concepts and 3350 properties. Similar as for McRae, the dataset indicates which concepts have which properties, but there are no standard splits. Moreover, the dataset does not explicitly contain negative examples. For this reason, for each positive example $(c,p)$, we introduce 20 negative examples by replacing $p$ with another property $p'$ (such that $(c,p')$ is not a positive example). This strategy is imperfect, as there will inevitably be some false negatives, but it should still allow us to compare the relative performance of different models. Mirroring the settings from the McRae dataset, we consider a concept-based training-test split (\textit{Con}), a property-based split (\textit{Prop}), and a setting where both concepts and properties are split into training and test sets (\textit{Con+Prop}). For consistency, we use the same cross-validation strategies as for the McRae dataset. In particular, for \textit{Con} we use a fixed split (with 90\% of the concepts used for training and 10\% for testing). For \textit{Prop}, we use 5-fold cross-validation, while for \textit{Con+Prop} we used the $3\times 3$ fold cross-validation strategy.
\paragraph{Results}
The results for commonsense property classification are summarised in Table \ref{tabMainResults}. We include the following baselines.
First, the \emph{Random} baseline predicts the positive label with 50\% chance. Similarly, \emph{Always true} predicts the positive label in all cases.
Next, for the concept-split of the McRae dataset, we compare with the method from \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19}, where each pair $(c,p)$ was converted into a natural language sentence. For instance, (\emph{apple}, \emph{is electrical}) is converted to the sentence ``\emph{An apple requires electricity}'', which is then fed to a BERT classifier. Due to its manual nature, this method cannot be applied to new properties. We also include the estimate of human performance that was reported by \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19}. Finally, we consider a variant of our model which is directly trained on the McRae and CSLB training data, without the pre-training step.
The next set of results compare the performance of the different pre-training datasets. For these results, all models were initialised with BERT-base. We can clearly see that the pre-trained bi-encoder models outperform the variant without pre-training in nearly all settings (with the results for \textsc{Prefix} on the CSLB property-split the only exception). This confirms our hypothesis that Microsoft Concept Graph and GenericsKB capture useful information about commonsense properties. Comparing the different corpora, \textsc{Prefix} achieves the weakest results, which can be explained by the much smaller size of this dataset. However, combining \textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{MSCG} outperforms \textsc{MSCG} in all but one case. Furthermore, as expected, the property-split (\textit{Prop}) is considerably harder than the standard concept-split (\textit{Con}), with the \textit{C+P} setting being even harder. In fact, for the latter setting, the BERT-base model without pre-training cannot outperform the random classifier for McRae. Note that for CSLB, outperforming the random classifier is easier, given that more training data is available for that dataset. Crucially, while the best baselines only slightly underperform the pre-trained models for the concept-split, much larger differences are seen for the other splits. Overall, these findings confirm our hypothesis that predicting commonsense properties remains a highly challenging problem.
Finally, the table also shows results for some other language models. While the large models generally outperform their base counterparts, the differences are relatively small, and the improvements are not consistent. This finding is in accordance with the conclusion from \citet{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-2111-00607} that even large language models are limited in the amount of commonsense knowledge they capture, and in particular that finding the right pre-training task is crucial. The RoBERTa results without pre-training are particularly disappointing, with learning failing completely in some cases. Even with the pre-training datasets, BERT-base outperforms RoBERTa base, and BERT-large outperforms RoBERTa-large.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
& \textbf{Con} & \textbf{Prop} & \textbf{C+P} \\
\midrule
Skip-gram ($k=1$) & 70.8 & 25.0 & 17.5 \\
Skip-gram ($k=3$) & 53.4 & 9.5 & 5.7 \\
GloVe ($k=1$) & 68.8 & 20.3 & 21.7 \\
GloVe ($k=3$) & 51.4 & 6.8 & 4.9 \\
BERT-base ($k=1$) & \textbf{72.0} & \textbf{28.2} & \textbf{27.0} \\
BERT-base ($k=3$) & 55.6 & 14.6 & 19.1 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Evaluation of a nearest neighbour strategy for the McRae dataset (F1 score percentage).
\label{tabNNClassifier}}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Analysis}
As we have argued, models can perform well on the \textit{Con} setting by simply transferring knowledge about similar concepts from the training data. This is analysed in more detail in Table \ref{tabNNClassifier}, which shows the performance of a nearest neighbour classifier. To classify a test pair $(c,p)$ we find the $k$ concepts $c_1,...,c_k$ from the training split that are most similar to $c$ in terms of cosine similarity. Then we predict the positive label for $(c,p)$ if the majority of $(c_1,p),...,(c_k,p)$ are assigned the positive label. We test this approach for $k=1$ and $k=3$, using embeddings from GloVe \cite{pennington-etal-2014-glove} and Skip-gram\footnote{We used the 300 dimensional Skip-gram vectors trained on Google News and GloVe vectors trained on Common Crawl, available from \url{https://radimrehurek.com/gensim/models/word2vec.html}.} \cite{mikolov-etal-2013-linguistic}, and using the embeddings predicted by our BERT-base encoder pre-trained on \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB}.
For the \textit{Prop} setting, we similarly predict the label of $(c,p)$ based on the labels of the training pairs $(c,p_1),...,(c,p_k)$, with $p_1,...,p_k$ the $k$ properties from the training data that are most similar to $p$. Finally, for $\textit{C+P}$, we predict the majority label among the training pairs $(c_i,p_j)$ with $i,j\in\{1,...,k\}$, where $c_1,...,c_k$ are the training concepts most similar to $c$ and $p_1,...,p_k$ are the training concepts most similar to $p$.
The results in Table \ref{tabNNClassifier} clearly support our hypothesis about the concept-split. In particular, the nearest neighbour classifier is highly effective for the concept-split (for $k=1$), outperforming the estimate of human performance from \citet{DBLP:conf/cogsci/ForbesHC19} for all embedding types, and approaching the performance of the language models without our pre-training task. In contrast, for the \textit{Prop} and \textit{C+P} settings, the nearest neighbour classifier performs, at best, similarly to the random classifier.
\begin{table}[t]
\footnotesize
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{7pt}}l@{\hspace{7pt}}ccc}
\toprule
& & MAP & MRR & P@5 \\
\midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{5}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\textbf{General}}}} & APSyn & 1.7 & 3.7 & 1.7 \\
& balAPInc & 1.7 & 3.9 & 1.7 \\
& SLQS & 0.7 & 1.7 & 0.7 \\
& Apollo & 2.7 & 6.1 & 2.8 \\
& Ours & \textbf{3.8} & \textbf{7.0} & \textbf{3.1} \\
\midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{5}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\textbf{Music}}}} & APSyn & 1.1 & 2.6 & 1.3 \\
& balAPInc & 1.4 & 3.6 & 1.6 \\
& SLQS & 0.6 & 1.3 & 0.7 \\
& ADAPT & 1.9 & \textbf{5.3} & 1.9 \\
& Ours & \textbf{2.3} & 5.1 & \textbf{2.6} \\
\midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{5}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\textbf{Medical}}}} & APSyn & 0.7 & 1.4 & 0.7 \\
& balAPInc & 0.9 & 2.1 & 1.1 \\
& SLQS & 0.3 & 0.7 & 0.3 \\
& ADAPT & \textbf{8.1} & \textbf{20.6} & \textbf{8.3} \\
& Ours & 4.0 & 9.0 & 3.9 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Result of the hypernym discovery experiment.
\label{TabHypDiscResults}
}
\end{table}
\subsection{Hypernym Discovery}
Given an input word (e.g.\ \textit{cat}), the aim of the \textit{hypernym discovery} task is to retrieve a set of valid hypernyms (e.g.\ \textit{animal}, \textit{mammal}, \textit{feline}, etc.).
We use this task to analyse the quality of the pre-trained concept and property encoders when used without any fine-tuning on task-specific training data. We use the data from the SemEval 2018 Hypernym Discovery task \cite{semeval2018task9}, focusing on the concept-only split (i.e.\ without considering named entities). There are three variants of this task: an open-domain setting (referred to as \emph{general}) and two domain-specific settings, focusing on the \emph{music} and \emph{medical} domains. Each variant is associated with a large vocabulary of candidate terms, consisting of 218,753 terms for \emph{general}, 69,118 terms for \emph{music} and 93,888 terms for \emph{medicine}. To solve this task, each word from the vocabulary is encoded using $\Phi_{\mathsf{prop}}$. We then use maximum inner product search to efficiently find those words $w$ from the vocabulary that maximise $\Phi_{\mathsf{con}}(t)\cdot \Phi_{\mathsf{prop}}(w)$ for a given target word $t$. From the retrieved list of words, we remove those that contain the term $t$ itself and those that end with an adjective. For this experiment, we use BERT-large encoders pre-trained on \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB}. We compare our method with the following baselines for this task: APSyn \cite{santus2016unsupervised}, balAPInc \cite{kotlerman2010directional}, SLQS \cite{santus2014chasing}, ADAPT \cite{maldonado-klubicka-2018-adapt} and Apollo \cite{onofrei-etal-2018-apollo}. We report the published results from the SemEval task \citet{semeval2018task9} (where ADAPT only participated in the \emph{general} setting and Apollo only participated in the \emph{music} and \emph{medical} settings). The latter systems achieved the best performance among the unsupervised methods\footnote{The hypernym discovery datasets are strongly biased in which hypernyms were preferred by the annotators. Such biases can only be learned from the task-specific training data, which is why we do not compare with supervised methods.}. Following \citet{semeval2018task9}, we report Mean Average Precision (MAP), Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR), and Precision at $5$ ($P@5$), in percentage terms. Table \ref{TabHypDiscResults} shows that our method outperforms all baselines for \emph{General}, performs similar to ADAPT for \emph{Music} and worse than ADAPT for \emph{Medical}. This is remarkable, given that our method was not designed or tuned for this task. The under-performance on \emph{Medical} can be explained by the lack of training examples from this domain in the pre-training data. As can be observed, the results for all models are low. An error analysis, presented below, revealed that this is largely due to the fact that many correct hypernyms are not included in the ground truth.
\paragraph{Error Analysis}
Table \ref{tabHypernymDiscErrorAnalysis} shows some of the predictions of our model for the \emph{General} setting of the hypernym discovery task. The first set of results shows examples where many of the predicted hypernyms are intuitively correct. However, only few of these hypernyms are covered by the ground truth; ground truth predictions are shown in bold. This illustrates the rather noisy nature of the dataset, and serves as an explanation for the low overall F1 score of the different unsupervised models. The second set of results in Table \ref{tabHypernymDiscErrorAnalysis} covers cases where most of the predictions are incorrect. In some cases, e.g.\ for \emph{children}, the model predicts semantic properties rather than hypernyms, which shows that simply filtering predictions that end with an adjective is not always sufficient. The case of \emph{broiler chicken} shows that the model sometimes predicts terms that are semantically related, but which are clearly not hypernyms (nor semantic attributes). As a variant of this observation, the case of \emph{sigma} shows that the model sometimes tends to predict co-hyponyms.
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\toprule
\textbf{Hyponym} & \textbf{Top-5 Predicted Hypernyms} \\
\midrule
liberty & principle, notion, ideal, universal value, humanitas \\
longbow & hunting weapon, \textbf{weapon}, bow and arrow, wieldy, choptank\\
wine & \textbf{drink}, \textbf{beverage}, liquidity, alcoholic beverage, drinking alcohol\\
manslaughter & culpable homicide, murder charge, offence, justifiable homicide, first-degree murder\\
shopping & chore, specific activity, everyday, simple interest, pursuit\\
running & aerobic, cardio, endurance training, aerobic exercise, sport\\
computer industry & sector, sunrise industry, growth industry, field of operation, game industry\\
learner & understander, student, realizer, know-all, nonjoinder\\
snow & weather condition, weather, cold weather, bad weather, wet-weather\\
bounty hunter & vigilante, hired gun, bandit, bondman, trail boss\\
metre & \textbf{unit of length}, unit of measure, measuring unit, quantity unit, derived unit\\
hero & protagonist, archetype, archetypic, personage, literaty character\\
website & resource, e-resource, information source, \textbf{medium}, source\\
violin & \textbf{string instrument}, \textbf{musical instrument}, second fiddle, \textbf{bowed instrument}, \textbf{stringed instrument}\\
\midrule
arms & head and shoulders, legs, straighten, stiffen, bare bones\\
cooking ingredient & composition, culinary, adjunct, importune, condiment\\
children & learn, memorize, make fun, come to life, lose track\\
broiler chicken & chicken cordon bleu, chicken stock, hot chicken, kung pao chicken, chicken broth\\
observation & qualitative, empirical research, qualitative analysis, data collection, qualitative research\\
sigma & lambda, upsilon, fraternity, epsilon, alpha and omega\\
apartment & tenantless, adjacent, low-rent, homeplace, residential building\\
wetsuit & drysuit, nonsuit, life-jacket, diving equipment, diving suit\\
yesterday & thisday, tomorrow, timea, timeless, evermore\\
taxi & off-license, car rental, bus service, bike rental, cab fare\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Error analysis for hypernym discovery on the general dataset. Correctly predicted hypernyms are shown in bold.\label{tabHypernymDiscErrorAnalysis}}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Qualitative Analysis}
As a qualitative analysis, we use our pre-trained models to predict which properties are associated with a given concept. We consider the set of all properties that appear at least 10 times in an extended version of the
\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB} dataset\footnote{This extended dataset involves 500K pairs from Microsoft Concept Graph and 500K sentences from GenericsKB; analysis about this extended dataset is provided in Appendix~\ref{appendix:size_pretrain_corpus}.}, leading to a set of 5223 candidate properties. We again use maximum inner product search to efficiently identify the properties whose embeddings are closest to the concept embedding $\phi_{\mathsf{con}}(c)$. Table \ref{tabQualitativeAnalysis_large} shows the seven nearest properties for a number of selected concepts, where we used BERT-base pre-trained on \textsc{MSCG}+\textsc{Prefix}+\textsc{GKB}. Specifically, the table first revisits the examples from Table \ref{tabPropertiesIntro}. Subsequently, the table lists physical concepts, for which we expected predicting properties to be easier, and abstract concepts, for which we expected the task to be harder. Finally, we included adjectives to explore whether our model can be used for learning property entailment.
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{5pt}}p{380pt}}
\toprule
\textbf{Concept} & \textbf{Predicted properties} \\
\midrule
banana & food, fruit, fresh, plant, edible, tropical, commercially important \\
lion & animal, mammal, wildcat, carnivore, species, very territorial, mammalian\\
airplane & vehicle, aircraft, stationary, application, object, military vehicle, automotive\\
\midrule
straw & material, combustible, porous, stuff, fibrous, located in wood, has sections \\
ice & cold, has temperature, has surfaces, located in freezers, has density, authorization, albums \\
yacht & boat, vehicle, vessel, recreational, ship, expensive, aircraft\\
coffee & beverages, drinks, beverage, drink, liquid, liquids, located in supermarkets \\
steel & material, non-ferrous, non ferrous, rigid, product, industrial, heavy \\
fire & causes burns, creates heat, produces heat, causes damage, can have effects, generates heat, produce crops \\
beer & beverage, drink, alcoholic, liquor, liquid, beverages, drinks\\
\midrule
democracy & principle, idea, democratic, ideology, concept, morality, value, moral \\
disappointment & negative, feeling, emotion, emotional, feelings, positive, depression \\
promotion & marketing, achievement, activity, corporate, factor, acts, activities\\
celebration & event, festivity, occasion, social events, parties, events, activities \\
forgiveness & moral, value, love, virtue, emotion, benign, principle\\
lawyer & professional, adult, allied, profession, consultant, closely related, expert\\
\midrule
stressful & situation, factor, emotional, difficult, unexpected, uncomfortable, traumatic \\
poisonous & poison, harmless, harmful, dangerous, toxin, aggressive, sharp\\
sugary & dessert, taste, food, delicious, chocolate, frozen dessert, candy \\
rewarding & activities, clocks, happiness, treatments, approval, actions, human activities \\
modern & style, genre, contemporary, fashion, broad, musical style, english \\
alcoholic & alcoholic, liquor, drink, beverage, mixed, alcohol, addictive, aggressive\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Qualitative analysis, showing the top neighbours of the embeddings of selected concepts.\label{tabQualitativeAnalysis_large}}
\end{table*}
The results contain a mixture of hypernyms and semantic attributes, which is a reflection of how the model was trained. For physical concepts, the results are generally meaningful, with a few exceptions. For instance, \emph{military vehicle} is incorrectly listed as a hypernym of \emph{airplane}.
Regarding the abstract concepts, the top predictions are mostly meaningful, but we can also see terms that are semantically related but are neither hypernyms nor semantic attributes; e.g.\ we see \emph{parties} as a property of \emph{celebration}. Finally, for the adjectives, we see several instances where the entailment direction is reversed, for instance when \emph{dessert} is mentioned as a property of \emph{sugary}.
\section{Conclusions}
We studied the problem of modelling the commonsense properties of concepts. We argued that the standard evaluation setting does not faithfully assess the extent to which models capture knowledge about commonsense properties, and proposed two new evaluation settings. These new settings were found to be highly challenging for language models, with performance being close to random. We furthermore found that pre-training a bi-encoder model on hypernymy data or generic sentences can lead to substantial performance gains. However, there remains a lot of room for further improvements, which will likely require novel insights.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work has been supported by EPSRC grant EP/V025961/1. We acknowledge the support of the Supercomputing Wales project, which is part-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) via Welsh Government.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.